A Company Called Matte Effects
The Work of Ken Marschall & Bruce Block
Part Two
Welcome fellow matte painting enthusiasts to another edition of NZPetes Matte Shot, where today we will continue our in depth interview and tribute to the incredible and largely unheralded matte work of artist Ken Marschall and visual effects cameraman Bruce Block. I am sure those of you who found last month's article both fascinating and revealing will not in the least be disappointed with what I have in store for you here today. Once again we will be treated to scores of Ken's wonderful hand painted mattes that worked on screen so successfully thanks to Bruce's pragmatic camera savvy and strong adherence whenever possible to the 'original negative' methodology to bring Ken's exquisite art to life, largely unnoticed. The results speak for themselves.
Today we will carry on where we left off with some astounding matte work from films such as James Cameron's THE TERMINATOR, Rob Reiner's coming of age classic STAND BY ME and many more trick shots that I am certain nobody ever realised were mattes. Gene Warren jr from Fantasy II Visual effects will be joining us as well for a frank discussion on the glory days at Fantasy II with Ken and Bruce. Also we will take a real life journey beneath the waves to the darkest of depths of the vast Atlantic ocean with Ken as he tells us about the coming to fruition of his lifelong passion for all things Titanic. Again I owe more than a debt of gratitude to Ken and Bruce for their generous input in bringing this article to fruition. To Ken I applaud not only his astonishing talents as an artist, but his sincere archival efforts which have seen the vast majority of his original matte art, along with conceptual sketches, layouts, 35mm trims and tests all stored safely for more than two decades. To Bruce I extend my thanks and appreciation for his remarkable knowledge of practically each and every matte shot made by the Matte Effects company over the years, even though there still remain a couple of mystery shots that baffle both gentlemen. This blog would not have been possible without Ken and Bruce's monumental input, where no 'ask' on my part was too great. On behalf of my readers and all interested parties, I thank you both.
Now, for the bad news. I had hoped to wrap up Ken and Bruce's story with this second part, but due to successive and unrelenting technical problems with Google Blogger's site I have no choice but to reserve the remaining interview material and imagery as an unplanned but now necessary 'Part Three' - depending of course whether the 'system' will cooperate. As much as I take a certain degree of pride and pleasure in writing these matte shot blog posts and sharing the wonderful world of 'hand made movie magic' with you, the technical web based process of actually bringing each blog to cyber-life has been an uphill battle. Just when I thought I had tamed the beast that is 'Google Blogger' - itself a vengeful and unforgiving behemoth of a publishing platform - the constant difficulties that arise when assembling and laying out these articles just makes the process less and less user friendly with each and every blog post. The reader would not believe the stumbling blocks faced by your humble editor just on the last few posts alone. It seems the Google Blogger platform is intent on having NZPete bodily hurl himself under a bus in a fit of sheer and utter hopeless despair, it's gotten that bad folks. Given the monumental issues I've experienced lately, this post may well be the last one and I may be forced to call it a day.
Pete
...............................................................................................................
 |
| One of a pair of unused matte shots from the Diane Keaton picture BABY BOOM. Your humble editor incorrectly added the wrong painting for this shot in part one, so here it is rectified. |
BB: We were able to avoid the age of the
interfering visual effects supervisor.
On all of the Fantasy II work, Gene was the supervisor and we saw
eye-to-eye on everything. On non-Fantasy II shows I always worked directly with
the director, producer, the DP, the production designer or art director. I had long-standing working relationships
with them, they trusted me, and we never had a middle-level supervisor between
us.
 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
STAND BY ME: A series showing the
development of the original-negative matte I did for this Rob Reiner film, all
rather self explanatory. Unfortunately I have no image of the original scene
before the matte was placed. The second
image shows the first color test
on November 11, 1985. The third photo shows the painting. And
finally, the finished
composite. I had to meet with someone at an editing facility to pick up
information for this matte job, or perhaps run a
test loop through through a
Moviola, and Rob Reiner was there. I was about to meet Rob Reiner!
I recall that this small
editing room was next to his office or
something. He seemed preoccupied with editing or talking with an editor and
paid
little or no attention to the matte artist who had arrived. My
memory of that brief meeting, if he even acknowledged
me (a sort of dismissive
"And who are you?" comment), is that he struck me as a stern, grumpy
guy.
Maybe he was just having a rough day.
Q:
I’m interested to know about the gags you employed to sell some of your
mattes. Albert Whitlock was the master
of adding in subtle soft splits with moving clouds and many other small gags to
breathe life into his paintings. I’ve
noticed some especially nice gags in some of your shots such as cloud movement
in that lovely final shot from THE TERMINATOR, smoke elements in those
immaculately painted factories by the pier in the second NAKED GUN picture and
so on. That cockroach crawling up the debris in the jaw dropping opening matte
from the less than impressive Jean Claude Van Damme actioner CYBORG. There’s a great shot you did at the end of
the marvellously insane KILLER KLOWNS FROM OUTER SPACE with the rollercoaster
where the explosion flash interacts with your extensive painting. Can you describe your methods in achieving
these effects.
KM: The moving clouds in the TERMINATOR scene were done with two layers in two
separate passes. One layer of clouds was
painted on thin Mylar and laid directly on the background painting, both
exposed at the same time, of course.
These mid-ground clouds were moved slightly over the background, frame
by frame, by turning a wheel that was very down-geared so that turning it a
notch moved the Mylar only afraction of a millimeter. You could hear the camera gate clicking,
about one frame per second, so it wasn’t too hard to turn the wheel one slight
notch every click (or every two or three clicks). As mentioned earlier, rubbing the Mylar with a soft cotton cloth before starting held the “cel” surprisingly snugly
against the background art with no need for a platen. The static charge may have remained
throughout the entire final production shoot, but Bruce might remember having
to “recharge” it once or twice. I don’t
think so, though; once the production take was rolling, you didn’t want to mess
with the camera. You had to keep going,
on the fly, until it was done.
Then, the film was rewound and DXed with
lighter
foreground clouds, drifting in front of all the others and moving at a slightly faster pace. These closest
clouds were just airbrushed white painted on black. Testing had determined the best exposure and color filtration for them.
We originally had two lightning bolts with
corresponding glows/reflections in the clouds, but despite them looking quite believable, Jim Cameron opted against them during the testing. The overall painting, following a concept
sketch he had done, was already rather out of context for a scene shot in the
flat, featureless desert near Palmdale, California, on a cloudless day. No preceding scenes showed anything like the
dramatic mountains and looming storm in that final shot of the film. So I guess Jim decided that the lightning was
a bit too much of a continuity departure.
 The filming of this plate is described on Fantasy II’s
website:
“One day towards
the end of filming THE TERMINATOR, James Cameron realized they needed a missing
crucial wide shot of Sarah Connor’s jeep driving down the road to end the
movie. He went to the outskirts of
Lancaster, California, with VFX Supervisor Gene Warren, Jr., VFX DP Chris
Warren, Producer Gale Ann Hurd, and Ms. Hurd’s secretary, along with the hero
jeep to grab the shot guerilla-style.
They were in such a remote location without traffic, the group even
built scaffolding onto one lane of the road to capture the iconic drive-away
scene. Moments before the first take,
the first car to appear in 20 minutes was a California Highway Patrolman who
stopped to inquire if they had a filming permit. Flustered, Gene told the policeman they were
shooting a student film, and amazingly they got away with it, as long as they
promised to move the scaffolding to the road shoulder!
The shot (with the secretary doubling as
Linda Hamilton) appears in the final cut of the 1984 movie –– composited with a
brooding sky matte painting and blowing dust elements.”
Returning to your original question about
movement gags, we sometimes added undulations and sparkles to water and even
simulated the effect of fluttering tree leaves or palm fronds, DXing using
backlit moirés that were cranked along using thathat same motorized wheel. The moirés were positioned behind or in front
of a black card which had areas of Mylar taped on and that were painted with
the very opaque black Cel-Vinyl with the paint scratched away where I wanted
waves, sparkles or leaves to shimmer in the front-lit painting.
The refinery smoke in NAKED GUN 2 1/2 and the
foreground debris with cockroach in CYBORG were added optically by Fantasy
II. The explosion flash on the objects
and the ground in KILLER KLOWNS was a simple DX job, a separate white-on-black
painting for the reflected light of the explosion on the amusement park. It might have been added optically, as I
don’t seem to have a test clip for it.
(When I don’t have a final test clip, that usually means that when the
artwork was finished we filmed it and handed the film over to the optical
department, and I never saw it again.)
  
Q: So it was very much a case of adapting tried and true gags to suit each requirement.
BB: Yes, I’ve described these mechanical rigs
already, but I had drawers full of all kinds of motors, gears, belts, pulleys,
etc. that I’d use to build rigs to move moiré patterns, acetate sheets with
artwork or other odd mechanical devices to animate the matte paintings. Since
we never used glass, I had large, clear Lexan discs that would rotate and
activate the moiré patterns. Depending
on the pattern, we could add vertical, horizontal, diagonal or circular
movement to anything.
Q:
What would be the average timeframe for one of your mattes from initial
sketch through to
final composite. I
gather this would vary depending upon the complexity of the shot.
KM: Oh sure, it was all dependent upon on the
complexity of the artwork, animation (if any) and,
rarely, even the vagaries of
the processing labs. Once, a lab “ate”
the test footage Bruce had dropped
off the night before, so we had to redo the
test. But if we were lucky, I think we
might have had a few
mattes done and shot in less than a week. Conversely, there were some that we worked
on, then put
aside for several weeks, then later finished off, taking two
months or more.
Q:
I’m always curious on this one; what would your dream project have been
in as far as a
traditional matte painted exercise. Perhaps a period picture or a certain historical
timeframe – the
Civil War perhaps - which you may not have had the opportunity
to paint for on other assignments.
I
know as an example that Al Whitlock always wanted to paint mattes for Time and
Again – a period novel with late 19th Century New York depicted vividly through
glass shots. I even have a wonderful
photo of one of Alberts’ mattes he’d done as a test for that never to be
realised project.
KM: I’m with Whitlock on this one –– definitely
a scene from the past, not some mundane, present day fill-in. Although naturally more challenging, the more
you can recreate something that is no longer there, the more valuable and
memorable the scene. It’s important to a film, not just some
throw-away
fix or patch job. Of course,
viewers will immediately be suspect of such shots. This goes with the territory. With anything out of the ordinary and
unusual, which the audience knows
can’t be real, you have the ultimate challenge on your hands. Matte painting is supposed to be the
“invisible art;” if your painting attracts attention to itself, you have
usually failed. So, futuristic space
cities and that sort of thing are obviously the ultimate hopeless causes. No matter what kind of a photorealistic
miracle worker you may be, you just can’t win; viewers will always know it’s
fake no matter how realistically you paint it.
But with historical recreations you at least have a chance of giving an
audience pause.
With my interest in archeology I always
hoped for a matte job involving ancient Egyptian,
Greek or Roman architecture…
Karnak or Abu Simbel in sunset light or at magic hour. Oh yeah.
I finallygot to do a few Roman scenes for ATTILA THE HUN, among the
very last mattes I did.
 
 
 
Q:
So, was work steady throughout the 80’s and into the 90’s. At which point did ‘the craft’ of hand made
matte shot production begin to lose favour with studios and producers.
KM: We were kept almost continually busy during
the ‘80s and ‘90s. There were times when
we were working on two or more films at once, and I didn’t like that. I’m a very focused linear thinker, start to
finish, not a multitasker. I much prefer
not bouncing around from one project to another before finishing one first.
Q: With the traditional techniques largely
having been thrown out industry wide by the early to mid nineties, I was
surprised to learn that you and Bruce were still making mattes using
conventional hand made means as late as 2001.
KM: Our
old-fashioned paintbrush matte work dried up rather suddenly, really. Within about four years, 1997-2001, it was
all over. The five mattes we did for
ATTILA, July-October 2000, was just about the last hurrah. In early
2001 I did a painting for a European Visa commercial of a futuristic city and
roadway on which cars were added digitally.
I took the scene so far as a painting and then scanned it in sections on
my desktop scanner, then mosaiced the pieces together and carried on,
completing the scene digitally in Photoshop.
In the end I replaced my own painted sky with a digital photo that made
the scene much more believable, not that it was the least bit believable
anyway, being an obviously futuristic vision.
So that job was definitely sort of half painted, half digital. I knew right then that to try to do an
old-fashioned matte painting entirely with paint and airbrush, having to clean
out brushes and so forth, was hopelessly obsolete.
|
My last movie artwork was in 2006, a
completely digital retouch of a house for THE HOLIDAY, done entirely in
Photoshop. It appears on a character’s
laptop or computer monitor as she’s searching potential real estate for a brief
rental. Turned out great, but much of my
work was cropped out around the sides, and it’s on screen for all of maybe 1-2
seconds.
 |
|
A comparison of the
original image I was given (left) and the final widened and altered image, for
THE HOLIDAY, completed in November 2006. My task was to make the Northern
California house and location look much less appealing –– make the windows much
smaller, add staining and dirt, make it winter, make the asphalt road all
cracked and old, add ugly power lines, and so forth. I enjoyed it. No airbrush,
no paint to mix or brushes to clean. Bruce would show the progress to Director
Nancy Meyers and get back to me with further suggestions until it met
everyone’s satisfaction. The whole thing was done via e-mail.
|
BB: We worked almost constantly from the day we
opened until we closed up. It was a great ride.
Ken and I saw the end coming, and
without any hysterics we told Gene Warren we were closing up shop.
Q:
I raise the question because of first hand information I’ve had where
producers in the early 90’s pulled the plug on some matte providers for using
“old” methods whereas the mentality of “if it ain’t done on a computer then it
can’t possibly be any good” seemed to pervade the business.
KM: I guess we were lucky for a while, or the
producers who approached Fantasy II had used them before, knew the quality of
their/our work and stayed with something they knew and were comfortable with.
 |
| We were called upon to do two mattes for DRUG WARS: THE CAMARENA STORY, a miniseries broadcast on NBC in January 1990. For this shot a plate was photographed in the Californian semi-desert with fake marijuana plants lining a dirt road. My painting considerably extended the limited location set into a vast Mexican drug plantation. Although admittedly this is a fairly simple, straightforward shot, I thought it turned out rather well. The painting and close detail is shown below. |
 |
 |
| The other painting is an aerial view of the marijuana crops. No matte for this scene, just a full painting. |
 |
| Close up detail of the above painting. |
 | ||
|
Q:
Interestingly, I know of a couple of situations as we speak where a
producer has approached a matte man specifically with the intent to use the
“old” glass shots methodology. So do you
see a future in conventional matte painting applications, or is it largely a
forgotten dinosaur.
KM: I think we’ve crossed that bridge and burned
it behind us. And then gathered up all
the ashes and fired them into the sun.
I never liked doing glass shots. I don’t think I ever did any outdoors; they
would have been nerve-wracking as hell because of the complete loss of control
over lighting –– the sun angle and sky conditions are always changing, a
hopeless, maddening situation for someone who doesn’t paint particularly
quickly. Glass shots set up on a stage
were far easier, but even then the painting, which is much larger and
infinitely heavier than our usual “card” paintings, had to stay clamped in
place throughout the whole process, and there was always the risk of someone
accidentally poking a C-stand or something into it. Unlike on someone’s active sound stage, in
our small matte room we exerted complete control.
The only application or benefit to using the
old, cumbersome matte-painting or glass-shot methods would be to deliberately
give a quaint, period look to a film.
But even that is so much more easily accomplished today digitally. The painting could be done by hand with brushes,
then digitally inserted with ease, especially if a film is shot digitally or
has been transferred, of course. And at
the rate cameras and theaters are not using film any more, it won’t be long
before film is a very rare niche commodity.
I can hardly believe the rate of change
we’ve witnessed. It reminds me of the
sudden change we saw in trans-Atlantic travel during the mid-‘60s. After a century of passenger ships crossing
the Atlantic, the arrival of the commercial jet age extinguished the reign of
the great ocean liners within about half a decade. Just 15 short years ago every camera store
offered a wide variety of films, optical printers were whirring away and
multiple labs were cranking out negative and film. Now look at it. It’s all nearly as extinct as the buggy whip
and rotary-dial telephones.
BB: There were a couple of commercial directors who contacted us after we closed. We did a lot of work for them in the ‘80s and
‘90s, and they preferred the older technique, but we were done, our equipment
was packed up or sold, and it was over. I sold the matte camera to a private
collector, and he’s got it sitting next to one
of the original Paramount elephant-ear VistaVision cameras (and it is a fully
working camera).
 |
For the made-for-TV/video JOURNEY TO THE CENTER OF THE EARTH,
released in the U.S. in July 1989, one matte shot called for a wide view of a
huge cavern interior. Here is the small bit of live action. Image 2 -- The painting.
Image 3 -- Final composite, completed in Oct. 1987, with small, flickering, distant fires DX'd on a second pass. |
 |
Another scene in JOURNEY TO THE CENTER OF THE EARTH called for a wide view looking up at an underground
city. At left is my basic layout for it. The full painting, also finished in Oct. 1987, is shown at right, which I believe
was shot or timed much darker for the movie.
|
 |
My hand touching the painting shows the scale of the artwork. We
may have DX'd a few blinking lights or something, or perhaps hovering vehicles
or other movement was added optically. I don't remember.
|
Q:
Did either of you gentlemen ever enter the world of digital matte shots. If so, your impressions please. I’m interested in how easily that realm was
to adapt to for a traditionally trained brush & oils artist.
KM: I could have adapted well, I think, although
it would have certainly been a learning curve.
I’ve always enjoyed Photoshop and seem to spend most of my time at the
computer these days, one way or another.
But I’m only using a fraction of what Photoshop can do. I know absolutely nothing of Maya or other
programs that digital effects techies use.
I have understood the principles of stereo photography since I was in
high school, having had much fun with it with friends and doing amazing
things. But that’s another learning
curve, having to be proficient in digital camera moves, etc. etc., to bring
life to today’s effects shots. There’s
no such thing as a stationary matte shot anymore.
If I were 25 years younger I probably would
have graduated into the digital effects world.
But while working on Jim Cameron’s TITANIC in ’96-’97 I saw how digital
artists lived, the pressure they seemed to routinely suffer, and I didn’t like
what I saw. I didn’t want to live like
that –– the commute, the long hours, going days without sleep as deadlines
loomed. I was used to working at home, setting my own hours… our little system with Matte Effects. Today, at age 64, such employment isn’t even an option. What company would hire someone my age when there are hundreds of young, computer-savvy effects buffs
beating down their doors?
BB: In producing studio movies, I’ve continued
to deal with visual effects houses for all kinds of shots. I adapted to CG effects and am comfortable
using them in movies. I’m not interested
in running a CG FX company, but the computer has obviously moved visual effects
to areas that were once unattainable and even unimaginable.
KM: Sure, there are a bunch. Right out of the gate, the “day” scene of the
huge underground facility in HANKY PANKY (1982) turned out very well, and since it was the first matte I ever did for a major
motion picture, and you can see me working on it at left, I must say I was quite proud of it.
 |
|
The first of two mattes
painted for HANKY PANKY in January 1982. Both were from the same camera
location inside a large facility of some type, one scene with overhead lights
on, the other dark. I had to make this place look like it’s gigantic and
underground, extending endlessly off into the distance, cavern after cavern.
The snapshot shows me working on it the painting, and the one with my hand on
it illustrates the compact scale of the artwork. The overhead lights were DXed
with backlight for greater brightness, and red lights were made to blink on and
off over the red “Restricted Area” sign. The last image is the final scene.
|
 |
|
Here’s the “lights off”
version of the HANKY PANKY underground facility. The slate is prominent in the foreground of
the first image. Lights are on in the far distant cave, and again an additional backlit element was DXed for this. |
Q: What other mattes stick in your mind Ken.
KM: TERMINATOR is
memorable for three reasons: First, we had an oddly difficult time with
the soft matte line. Every test came
back with a slightly different alignment. The matte line first showed as a dark fuzzy line across the scene, then
in the next test it was actually slightly double-exposed, and back and forth we
went as I tried to get the thing to match up.
There was no noticeable jitter between the live action and the painting
when projecting test loops for Cameron.
It must have just been my inexperience.
Out of desperation I think I finally repegged the thing at one point,
raising or lowering the whole painting by 1/8 inch or so. That was easier than repainting all along the
matte line.
Second, the length of time we dickered with
it –– over two months. No director or
art director we ever worked with was so intent and involved with a painting,
and as the testing proceeded he wanted to see a change, then another, and then
back again. He’s a perfectionist like
myself, this was his first big feature, and today I fully understand it. But back then, in the late summer of ‘84,
Bruce and I were pulling our hair out.
Only so much test footage was shot on location for me to play with, and then two production takes were shot, as usual,
so that one could be held as an insurance backup (in this case, the scene of a
Linda Hamilton stand-in driving her jeep down the highway into the distance). Gene Warren shot
the live-action plate. Bruce wasn’t there,
so it’s possible Gene only shot 100 feet of test footage (Bruce always shot at
least 200 feet).
All the changes and adjustments we were making at Cameron’s
direction were using up the available test footage, and if we didn’t settle for
something very soon we’d have to eat into the first of the production takes,
using that for further tests. And if the
second production take had some
unforeseen flaw in it (light leak or gate jitter), we were all screwed. This was fine with him; he was okay taking a
chance on the quality of the second take.
Fortunately that second take was indeed without any problems. But it was a close call. And it was my first baptism in how the man
thinks and works. Twelve years later I
would spend over a year serving as his visual historian on TITANIC, then
participate in his GHOSTS OF THE ABYSS 3-D film project and Titanic exploration in 2001, his
follow-up dives to the wreck in 2005 for Discovery Channel (LAST MYSTERIES OF
THE TITANIC), the two-hour TITANIC: THE FINAL WORD for the National Geographic
Channel, airing in 2012, and, the latest, working with him on a hefty coffee
table book about his three Titanic
explorations, entitled Exploring the
Deep: The Titanic Expeditions, published in 2013. In all cases that same intense focus and
determination harked back to that first experience with him on TERMINATOR. The guy likes to take it to the very
edge. His maxim: Set your goals higher
than you think you can achieve; if you fall short, you’re still ahead of where
you’d be if you had set a comfortable goal.
 |
|
Standing next to the
massive 44-foot miniature built by Digital Domain in 1996 for James Cameron’s
TITANIC, during the shooting of National Geographic’s TITANIC: THE FINAL WORD
in October 2011.
|
 |
|
The cover of the thick,
heavy volume Exploring the Deep: The
Titanic Expeditions, for which I did much image enhancement and mosaic work
and contributed several paintings, including the dust jacket. It was published
around June of 2013.
|
And third,
TERMINATOR is memorable because, having not read the script and knowing nothing
of Cameron, I expected the film, just from the title alone, to be another
typical, dime-a-dozen teen-pandering movie full of gratuitous violence and
little substance. When I saw it in a theater
shortly after its release, I was stunned. It was nothing like I had expected.
There was a deeply involving story, taut writing and direction, not to
mention gripping tension, great effects and the perfect score. It was an instant classic, a watershed film
that launched Cameron’s career and, coming shortly after Bruce and I shared in
an Emmy for THE WINDS OF WAR as part of Fantasy II’s visual effects team, was a
huge feather in our caps. So, because of
the painting’s long “pregnancy,” the classic that the film quickly became, and
my enduring relationship with and respect for Cameron since, that matte means a
lot to me today.
Q: Any other memorable mattes that you are able to
recall from your 'golden era'.
KM: Of
the other paintings and experiences that stand out, the two “stereo” ones for
SPACEHUNTER (1983) are memorable, the first matte paintings ever created to
appear in 3D, I believe. We placed
various elements on Mylar layers and shifted them slightly left or right for
each “eye.”
The following
description of the mattes done for SPACEHUNTER, by George E. Turner, Nora Lee & Gene Warren, Jr., appeared in the July 1983 issue of American Cinematographer:
“There were two
matte paintings in SPACEHUNTER done by Ken Marshal [sic] and Bruce Bloch [sic].
One depicted the silos –– the home of the Bat People –– and the other was a
distant shot of the Graveyard City. [Gene] Warren explained that the matte
paintings were done, in effect, twice. They were painted to match the right eye
camera first. After the desired effect was attained and the right half of the
shot was okayed, the painting would be altered slightly to reflect the
perspective of the left eye. Some
detailing would be added and other details would be removed.
“One of the matte painting shots is no mere
matte painting. It contains at least two other elements, as well. It occurs in
the last third of the picture as Wolff, Nikki and Washington are making their
way to the Graveyard (a painting). Warren calls it a three way split screen.
‘On the left there was one of the icons, which I shot here [at Fantasy II] and
split in on the left. The reason for that was the plate wasn’t shot the way we wanted and there wasn’t enough room on the top to do the painting. So we had to
reduce the live action in order to get more room on the top to do the painting.
But when you did that you lost the left so we had to split in the model. So
it’s a three way spilt –– a painting across the top, the model on the left and
the live action center and right.’  |
|
Mike Minor’s concept
rendering for the “Graveyard” matte shot, followed by later renditions and
Mike’s notes to me.
|
 |
|
The “Graveyard” painting
for SPACEHUNTER, from original photography (before the matte was added
optically) to final composite. The 3-D effect was created by simply shifting
the painting slightly laterally behind a black foreground matte. The sun and
clouds were separate burn-ins. I can’t explain now, 32 years later, why the sun
appears in two places and two sizes and the mountain “fortress city” is
considerably different between the test clips. Maybe a drastic change was made
to the entire concept, and I had to repaint almost the whole thing. But here’s
the mystery: The final film, which can be found online, has the large sun, yet
my final paintings have the small sun. The background painting and cloud DX art
that I have today are obviously what we shot in the end; I don’t have two
different sets of paintings. Very strange. In any case, the clouds were really
needed on the right side to help confuse and hide the very hard matte line.
That line was a bitch.
|
Q: Yes, that looked great on screen in an otherwise tedious
film.
KM: The
painting of the collapsed Hoover Dam for CHERRY 2000 (worked on from 1985 to
‘86) was a big deal –– literally. It was
a VistaVision shot, as were several in the movie, and the painting is among the largest I ever did (although no more than about three feet wide). We animated the waterfalls at the bottom of the dam and the flowing water in the river.
I was quite proud of the results and still am. Although the scene was unfortunately
flat-lighted with the sun directly behind the camera, it should have been a spectacular,
classic matte shot. I never saw the
finished film, which I think went straight to video, until recently online, as
I mentioned earlier, and I was quite surprised and disappointed to see
virtually the entire scene inexplicably cut out. Only a cropped optical close-up of a small
area around the live action remains, and the colors of the
painting and live action don’t match at all. It’s ghastly. As I said before, I don’t know what happened. It looked fantastic when we turned it in.
painting and live action don’t match at all. It’s ghastly. As I said before, I don’t know what happened. It looked fantastic when we turned it in.
 |
|
Two concept sketches for
the Hoover Dam scene in CHERRY 2000, done by another artist. The second one
indicates an old vermilion-colored Mustang that would hang by a crane cable in
the foreground.
|
 |
|
Hoover Dam location
reference photos mosaiced into a wide panorama; the original VistaVision plate,
before matte; then the matted area; and the painting, showing the unusually
“large” size.
|
 |
|
A close-up of the
painting, with my hand, to show the scale of the work; two backlight elements
used to create water movement and faint sparkles; final composite; and the last
image is a recent grab off YouTube showing as much of my painting as survives,
at least in that edit. Not only is this disappointing, but to add insult to
injury, the color of the painting and the action isn’t matched at all. Utterly
baffling.
|
KM: ‘NIGHT, MOTHER, worked on from Feb.-June 1986, was interesting because, in addition to a few regular daytime mattes, we shot scenes at twilight that I had to turn into night and, amazingly, one scene at twilight that needed to appear like full daylight.
 |
| Above, a blueprint of a series of storyboards for a few of the matte shots for ‘NIGHT, MOTHER. |
 |
The images shown here from NIGHT MOTHER are
self explanatory. In this scene the distant hills needed to be made
lower and the trees changed to late fall. |
 | ||
|
 |
Now, here’s a switch:
Dusk photography needed to be turned into broad daylight. What original
exposure the house
had needed to be augmented and tinted warmer and the
negative printed much lighter. I’ve added sun shadows against
the house.
|
In this one, again
missing the original photography, I just had to add the new upper part, lights
in the windows and
an extension on the house.
|
 one where the background needed to be altered. Again, unfortunately I'm missing an image of the original plate before the matte. |
  | ||
| For this scene dusk
photography needed to be changed to a later time, skyline and trees altered,
and glow added to the windows.
Q:
Those NIGHT MOTHER shots truly qualify as‘The Invisible Art’ – or as
Albert
Whitlock phrased it ‘the true special effect is one that nobody
notices’. I do wonder why the production went to so much trouble in post production whereas those shots could easily have been achieved 'live'. What else can you share with us Ken.
KM: The burned-out house for PSYCHO IV: THE BEGINNING was nice. I enjoyed that one. We presented the painting to the director.
|
 |
The matte painting,
showing the original plate, the matte and the final composite. Light smoke
drifts up from the burned-
out house, added optically by Fantasy II’s optical
department. The black and white image is a DX element to flash over
a pre-fire
plate to simulate lightning. I can see that although the house and trees appear
to be at the exact same angle,
there are no foreground steps in the painting,
so I’m not sure what’s going on there. The paintings were done in July 1990.
|
KM: I had fun doing the ROSWELL project, too, no doubt because of the subject matter.
 |
| For ROSWELL: A conceptual render, artist unknown, and instructions for the saucer. |
 |
We start with the
original plate; then with the matte in place; my first color-chip test (notice
the large white square to gauge pure white, which was standard); the painting,
done in January and February 1994, and a closeup; the final composite; and below,
another 2015 shot of me holding the painting to convey the size of the artwork.
|
 |
The initial concept
render for the other matte shot I painted for ROSWELL (artist unknown) showing
bombers parked
on a tarmac, and a second copy of it with notes.
|
 |
Here’s the progression
of the final scene, beginning with the matte in place (I don’t have a frame
showing the
original location photography, sans matte). Next is the roto,
traced on the back of the card stock used to do the painting.
The matte line is
drawn in green pencil here. Next is my first color test, followed by the
painting. The last image is the
final composite, with an extra burn-in for the
sun.
|
KM: And the “orange-base” paintings are memorable for
their challenging and sometimes maddening nature.
Q: Yes, you outlined that quite complex process in Part 1. It reminds me of the difficulties that
Matthew Yuricich used to experience with Clarence Slifer back at MGM and later with Doug Trumbull at Future General/EEG with a similar photographic process that was anything but 'artist friendly'.
 |
An orange-base painting
for FLIGHT OF THE NAVIGATOR, done in mid-1986. As I remember, animated or
stop-motion
steps appear from nowhere and descend, one by one from the alien
craft.
|
 |
Another orange-base
painting done for THE BURNING SEASON in mid-1994. Once again, I unfortunately
don’t have
an image of the original plate without matte.
|
 |
| CYBORG: Director Albert Pyun's notes and a very preliminary diagram together with my proposal/concept rendering with Bruce's notes. |
 |
An orange-base matte was
painted for CYBORG. The scene was to be an
elevated view over a freeway, looking toward Atlanta, years after the
apocalypse. Being orange-base (the odd green hues), the painting’s obviously
intended to be an optical job of some sort, and Bruce’s note indicates that the
artwork was to be extra tall to allow for a slow upward tilt. But the final
painting doesn’t show any unusual height, so the tilt must have been a small
one. The original
plate, shot from the roof of Fantasy II looking across North Varney Street at
the small area of live action set up in the parking lot opposite. The last two images are self explanatory.
|
 |
A page in Bruce’s “Matte
Log” binder details the extensive filmed tests for the CYBORG Atlanta freeway
matte in
the summer of 1988.
|
 |
This painting for DANGER
ISLAND, a.k.a. THE PRESENCE, and is all I have from this project. Not a single
clip of test
footage was found. We called it “The Habitat.” The last image is a
low-res grab off YouTube showing the final composite
with the action. The
artwork was done in mid-1992.
|
KM: I can only imagine that we were handling a
large number of jobs at the time, were under pressure, and/or I was less
interested. I don’t know why it wasn’t
more memorable because the painting turned out really nice. I should have been proud of it at the
time. Since I can’t seem to find any
film test clips for that job, perhaps it was an optical situation, and I never
saw the end result. I was probably
quickly on to the next job, and the painting got filed away and forgotten.
 |
| Argentia Bay -- The original plate for a scene for THE
WINDS OF WAR, shot in the miniatures tank at Paramount. The painting and final composite as completed on Sept. 1, 1982, and broadcast by ABC television in the mini-series in Feb '83. The "sun" reflection and vessel positions vary somewhat from the original plate, so perhaps the plate was for a different scene, but it's the best match I have for this matte shot.  |
 | ||||
THE WINDS OF WAR - Image 1: Red Square Concept painting for scene where Robert Mitchum
stands in a large archway
with his back to us, then walks off into the
snow-covered square below Spasskaya Tower. Barrage balloons float over
the Kremlin. The original idea was to have clouds in the sky, but this
was later changed to a clear sky. Image 2: Getting ready
to shoot the archway which would be optically composited with several other elements. The date on the slate looks like Feb. 28, 1982. Image 3:A suitable building was dressed to represent the lower part of Spasskaya Tower, and all action was shot in this scene. Image 4: My rotoscope tracing of the relevant edges of the filmed building, upon which I drew my layout for the tower. Other distinctive Kremlin buildings can be seen in the distance behind the wall, evidently later dropped from the final painting.
|
 | ||||||
THE WINDS OF WAR - Convoy1 -- Horribly faded/color shifted after 33 years, here's a
raw scan of a film clip showing a convoy of miniature ships, shot at the
Paramount tank with a large painted sky backdrop. Convoy2 -- The same setup
after color-correcting. The miniatures
have moved closer to the camera.
|
 | ||
Convoy8 - Close-ups of the two lightning elements
employed in the above matte shot which were backlit and DX'd during a second & third pass through the camera.
|
 | ||||||
1 -- The original scene, shot at the Paramount Studios tank in 1982,
for the ABC television miniseries THE WINDS OF WAR (1983), with large
miniatures of U.S. and British cruisers depicting the naval rendezvous in
Ship Harbour at Argentia, Newfoundland, for the meeting between President
Roosevelt and Prime Minister Churchill on August 10, 1941. This scan
shows the very faded state of the 33-year-old film I had to work with, despite
its having been carefully stored all this time in darkness and away from the
elements.
While
many of the old film clips have turned magenta, others have not and remain
remarkably stable. It has to do with the type of film and the chemistry
used to process it, I'm sure.
Using my Epson scanner, step number one was either to scan
using its "Color Restoration" option or to manually try to shift and
adjust hues and colors. Sometimes the Color Restoration setting performed
miracles without much further color massaging, while at other times it
produced an unacceptable result requiring complete manual adjustment instead. The adjustment settings in the scanning software get you in the
ballpark, but the resulting scan must invariably be further adjusted in color
hue, brightness and contrast. I sharpen the scan as far as I can before
it takes on any "fringey" look. The film grain then becomes
apparent, so I sometimes back off the sharpening a bit.
I crop to the
edges of the frame and clean the image of dust and scratches using Photoshop's
Healing and Smudge tools.
2 -- The color-corrected, cleaned scan.
3 -- This, I believe, was an optical matte, and here we see the
matte applied. Its edges formed an unexpected and disturbing
"fringe" that was difficult to deal with.
4 -- The finished painting. During the numerous tests trying
to make the matte line go away or at least be less obvious, a lot
of airbrushed
"fog" was added here and there to double expose over the original
photography and help disguise the matte
line or add to the atmosphere of the
scene.
|
---------------------------
Gene Warren, Jr., head of Fantasy II Film
Effects,
contributes the following:
“Bruce Block and Ken Marschall asked me if I
wanted to offer any reflections of the almost two decades their company, Matte
Effects, was based at Fantasy II in Burbank. First, let me say, the experience
was one of the many highlights of my career.
As I recall, I first met Bruce and Ken on a shot brought to us by Larry
Butler. Then, not long after, also with a Butler connection, I/we (Fantasy II)
and Matte Effects developed and cemented a long-lasting relationship while
working on the eighteen-hour mini-series THE WINDS OF WAR.
 |
Gene Warren Jr. on the
scaffold built to shoot one of the plates for the HBO movie THE BURNING SEASON
in southeastern Mexico, 1994 (see matte painting earlier in this interview).
|
“Sometime around then a 12 x 12-foot room
was built in the corner of Fantasy II’s main
stage and remained there until
I/we closed the optical department and that particular facility
in 2002. Bruce and Ken developed a unique system in that room. The camera (4 perf and
in 2002. Bruce and Ken developed a unique system in that room. The camera (4 perf and
8 perf
capabilities) was fixed on a pedestal about six feet from a fixed stand where
the paintings were mounted on an animation peg bar (male) and photographed.
Two baby spots (1000-watt quartz bulbs) were fixed about seven feet away at a 45-degree angle on both sides of the stand. The lights and camera lens were polarized.
Two baby spots (1000-watt quartz bulbs) were fixed about seven feet away at a 45-degree angle on both sides of the stand. The lights and camera lens were polarized.
“Ken’s photorealistic paintings
(approximately 24 x 18 inches) were, to my knowledge,
among the smallest matte
paintings ever used in the film industry.
In the Matte Effects
era they were the smallest I ever encountered.
era they were the smallest I ever encountered.
“The paintings were rendered on glossy
black, Exeter type card stock primarily with
acrylics. A cardboard animation peg bar (female) was
taped on one side of the card stock
and slipped over the male peg bar mounted
on the stand mentioned above. The other
side
painting at home, and he and Bruce would meet about half way
of the painting was taped down at the corners. “Ken would use brushes, airbrushes,
fingers
and anything else that delivered the desired results. He did almost all of the painting at home, and he and Bruce would meet about half way
between the beach where Ken lived
and Fantasy II in Burbank where the paintings were
photographed. I would occasionally make the exchange when
Bruce was busy or out
of town.
of town.
If there
was a new film test, a clip was included in the drop when the painting was
returned to Ken for more work. He used a light table and loop at home to view the film
clip.
returned to Ken for more work. He used a light table and loop at home to view the film
clip.
 |
Examining a test for one
of the matte shots we did for MOBSTERS in February 1991 using a small
magnifying glass given to me by my maternal grandmother when I was a young
teen. I used it constantly for every matte painting I ever did.
Foolishly never
writing down the family history of it, the best that I can vaguely recollect is
that it may have belonged to
her father who was also an artist and that it
dates to the Civil War period or even earlier. My grandmother died in 1987 at
the age of 95. As you can imagine, I am hugely disappointed in myself that I
didn’t record the story when I had the chance. In any event, I treasure this
thoughtful little gift from Grandma, and to this day it is never out of reach.
|
The paintings
were placed in a makeshift cardboard folder for protection during transport
because the shiny black card stock was floppy. If the tape stretched or something else
caused misalignment, Ken would travel to Burbank and study the error, and then with one
or two tests that took an hour two (a short piece of test footage [color] was developed in a
can), he would realign the painting. Bruce did the entire camera work and color film
development and probably realigned a few times himself. I know I developed a color test
negative in a can at least once.
because the shiny black card stock was floppy. If the tape stretched or something else
caused misalignment, Ken would travel to Burbank and study the error, and then with one
or two tests that took an hour two (a short piece of test footage [color] was developed in a
can), he would realign the painting. Bruce did the entire camera work and color film
development and probably realigned a few times himself. I know I developed a color test
negative in a can at least once.
“Of course, once the color pallet was
determined and lab-printing lights were set, most
testfootage went to the lab. I mentioned all of the above only to point out that there were
sometimes multiple paintings at different stages being painted by Ken and photographed by
Bruce in the one small room on the same camera and matte stand.
testfootage went to the lab. I mentioned all of the above only to point out that there were
sometimes multiple paintings at different stages being painted by Ken and photographed by
Bruce in the one small room on the same camera and matte stand.
“I’ll end with five examples of the most
amazing accomplishments of Ken Marschall and
BruceBlock:
BruceBlock:
“First, quite often, in order to maintain
quality I asked Matte Effects to paint in IP colors
[the ‘orange-base’ process]
and photograph the paintings on IP stock, which would then go
into one of Fantasy II’s optical printers to add the live action and then be taken to the lab
for development. The same cycle of testing, similar to original negative (latent image)
process was employed. I don’t have an exact count, but I think Ken did at least a dozen IP
paintings over the years. He had an incredible eye and color sense. Most often he found the
pallet and finished the paintings with only a few more tests than it took on original negative.
into one of Fantasy II’s optical printers to add the live action and then be taken to the lab
for development. The same cycle of testing, similar to original negative (latent image)
process was employed. I don’t have an exact count, but I think Ken did at least a dozen IP
paintings over the years. He had an incredible eye and color sense. Most often he found the
pallet and finished the paintings with only a few more tests than it took on original negative.
“Second, he rendered several anamorphic
paintings, such as in FRIGHT NIGHT PART II.
I think they were both latent image original negative. A third anamorphic painting was a
retouched photographic print used as a background for a bluescreened falling werewolf.
I think they were both latent image original negative. A third anamorphic painting was a
retouched photographic print used as a background for a bluescreened falling werewolf.
 |
One of three anamorphic
paintings I did for FRIGHT NIGHT PART II between Dec. 1987 and Feb. 1988, the frame seen
below showing roughly how the image was projected at 2.35:1 ratio for cinema audiences.
|
 |
The second anamorphic
painting for FRIGHT NIGHT II. As this was so long ago, I cannot explain why the
sky in what is obviously the final painting is entirely different from the
final production shot. A moving cloud element must have been
added, along with
the moon burn-in.
|
 |
| The final unsqueezed 'scope' matte shot(s) as seen in two separate cuts in the film FRIGHT NIGHT II. Two skies were painted to represent two different nights, one with a full moon and one without. For the one with the moon a moving cloud element was added, if I recall, along with the moon burn-in.. |
 |
This was merely a
photographic print enlargement that I extended and retouched and was used as a
background under
a bluescreened falling werewolf.
|
“Fourth, in order to save a generation on a very complicated and difficult shot, I asked Ken to paint in negative. He pulled it off brilliantly.
“Fifth, for the film BLUE STEEL I asked Ken to paint 8 frames (moving camera) in IP colors to remove a very visible handgun that flew out of a stuntman’s hand when a car hit him. In the next cut he still had the gun. This was before a computer solution (wire/gun removal) was possible. The director, Kathryn Bigelow, and her editor couldn’t figure out how we did it. I never told her.
“I hope this will to bring more attention and recognition of the amazing contributions of Bruce and Ken. Unfortunately, Matte Effects and Fantasy II were always busy doing the work and failed to blow our own horns. Maybe now we can partially remedy that lapse on our part and help update the historical record.”
Gene Warren Jr.
.........................................................................................................
Q: So Bruce, I understand you are these days tenured at a University. Are you involved with teaching cinema/media related courses.
BB: I’ve actually been teaching at USC since 1977. Besides producing movies and doing matte painting photography, I developed and taught courses in the relationship between the visual structure of a film and the story structure of the script. I wrote a book about it called The Visual Story. It’s published in seven languages and is used all over the world by working
Q: Sadly, in my ongoing research into this fascinating artform, it seems so much original matte art from the past has been lost or destroyed. It was common practice in many studios to scrape off old glasses and reuse these for other paintings, and some studios such as 20th Century Fox would routinely dump Masonite matte art into incinerators I’m told. So much has gone forever. Did you manage to save many of your own painted mattes.
One of the lecturers during that USC course I took told of how he was walking through a studio lot one day and heard what sounded like the deliberate shattering of glass. It was a man methodically breaking up old matte paintings and tossing the shards into a dumpster. He’d been told to do so. I believe the one relating the story said that he intervened and either able to put a stop to it or save a few paintings for himself. All of us in the class were aghast at the very thought, of course. At Fox Studios Baja in Mexico, after the full “ship” set (Stage 1) was no longer needed for TITANIC and only the forward part of the set remained to be filmed for the final sinking scenes, I was horrified, during a visit to the lot, to find that the whole aft (rear) part of the exquisite set had been dismantled and was in bulldozed piles of debris on the south side of the lot, awaiting transport to a landfill.
 |
| I had to paint a cavernous interior full of Cray computers, inside a large bank in New York, for REMO WILLIAMS: THE ADVENTURE BEGINS, released in Oct. '85. I don't have a clip showing the original scene without the matte in place, so this first view shows the matte, with the bank lobby in the foreground where the actors would walk through. 2 -- My rotoscoped layout for the painting. (The original working title for the project was REMO THE DESTROYER.) 3 -- My tracing of the layout, which I used to transfer it to the card stock before painting. |
 |
| REMO WILLIAMS -- The design for two massive Art Deco light fixtures that would hang above the marble lobby corridor. Right, the design for an elaborate Deco bronze sconce, drawn by someone else. |
 |
| At left a final (or late) test, undated. At right: I believe this is the last test, with two actors beginning to enter the scene at bottom, although I notice that most of the lights in the computer room are missing. These were added again in the final production shot. Obviously we have another mystery here: What happened to the prominent light fixture in the center? I remembered having to add the large chandelier -- or take it away -- at the art director's request, but it's there in the actual painting today, which is of course the final version that was filmed. So how the hell does it disappear in the movie?! As mentioned earlier, Bruce usually shot two production takes with the actors so that we had an extra one as insurance. Some 30 years later I can only guess that we shot (used) both production takes, one before I added the chandelier and one after, and the director ultimately decided against the light fixture and used the take without it. I double-checked the movie, and there is no center chandelier in the scene. It's just been too long since I worked on these projects; I have no memory of how some of these "mystery mattes" went down. In any event, this painting has always been a favorite of mine. I think the scene works wonderfully. |
 |
| The painting. The illuminated parts of the lights would be DX'd on a second pass, and various lights, some blinking, were DX'd in the computer room. |
 |
| REMO WILLIAMS - close detail view of art. |
 |
| REMO WILLIAMS composite |
 |
| The book Titanic: An Illustrated History, authored by Don Lynch, was inspirational to Cameron in the conception of his 1997 epic movie TITANIC |
End of Part Two.