Quote:
Originally Posted by MichaelRyerson
and from one of my favorite films of the forties, but even more interesting, since the first picture is doctored. From the house that was used, and the physical address of the house, you cannot see Malibu Pier, as it is tucked behind two points of land. Also the shape of the coast in the first picture is not what you would see from this address. I wonder how they did it (pre-photo shop) and why. I guess the image of Malibu Pier gave them an atmosphere that the simple coastline would not, still for the time kind of an interesting special effect for little more than atmospherics. In the second shot, the coastline appears to be the genuine article and you'll notice no pier (and distinctly different bluffs and palisades).
|
I'm very sure they used a matte; it's an old movie trick. Matte shots were even used during the Silent era, I believe. Sometimes I'll watch an old movie where they use an outside shot of a real building downtown or somewhere else that I know exists, but then surrounding buildings are different (because it's supposed to be set in New York or Chicago or something); then I know that it's a matte shot. This is also how early filmmakers created fictional settings by combining backlot sets with mattes.