THE BACKLOT
By William Kallay
Harrison Ellenshaw has had the pleasure of working
with some of the biggest names in the movie business. Darth Vader.
Herbie the Love Bug. Tron. Dick Tracy. Captain EO. Xena. In a roundabout
way, he's even worked with the Academy Award-winning visual effects
artist, Peter Ellenshaw. Incidentally, Peter is his father. The younger
Ellenshaw is no slouch when it comes to having an impressive roster of
credits. He has worked in and supervised the matte painting and visual
effects departments on many films, including "Star Wars: Episode IV - A
New Hope" (1977), "Pete's Dragon" (1977) and "The Black Hole" (1979).
It was on the film "The Black Hole" in which I first saw Harrison
Ellenshaw's name during the end credits. As one of many children of the
visual effects era of the late '70s, I used to scan the credits for who
did the effects on a particular sci-fi or fantasy film. There were the
usual suspects. John Dysktra was a hero, due to his work on the original
"Star Wars." Douglas Trumbull sounded familiar at the time, though I
couldn't pinpoint who he was exactly. Turns out, he worked on "Close
Encounters Of The Third Kind" (1977). He was a hero, too. But who was
this Harrison Ellenshaw?
Ellenshaw, as I learned, worked in the medium of matte painting.
Combining the artistry of painting on glass and live-action photography,
mattes could create the illusion of a swirling, ominous black hole in
outer space, or the vast Cloud City chamber in which Luke Skywalker
confronts Darth Vader in "Star Wars: Episode V - The Empire Strikes
Back" (1980). His work, and the work of other matte artists like his
father ("20000 Leagues Under The Sea," 1954) and Albert Whitlock ("The
Birds," 1963), was photo-realistic, yet, had a human touch. I found it
amazing that such detail and realism could be made from the hand of a
skilled artist. Ellenshaw's signature work includes the Death Star's
seemingly miles-deep power shaft, the Mos Eisley spaceport and Rebel
Throne Room mattes, all featured in "Star Wars: Episode IV - A New
Hope."
During the 1980s and 1990s, Ellenshaw worked as a visual effects
supervisor on a number of films, including the afore mentioned "Tron"
and "Captain EO." It should be noted that Disney, for a number of years,
experimented with a variety of film formats in feature and special venue
filmmaking. CircleVision-360, in which nine 35mm cameras shot images and
then projected them via nine projectors in a theatre, a specially
modified 65mm 3-D format, VistaVision, Technirama and Super Panavision
70. With the exception of CircleVision-360, Disney often made 70mm
prints from those formats.
After his work on "Dick Tracy" in 1990, Ellenshaw took over Disney's
effects facility, Buena Vista Visual Effects (BVVE) until 1996. In
addition to feature effects work on over 40 films, BVVE also maintained
the Park Films division and Library Restoration program for the studio.
This gave Ellenshaw an opportunity to work in a number of varied film
formats. He recently spoke about his involvement not only in visual
effects, but work in large format and digital cinematography. He was
also kind enough to give FSTD readers an insight into his background in
visual effects.
William Kallay, From Script To DVD: How did you become
involved with being a visual effects supervisor?
Harrison Ellenshaw: I started many, many years ago as
an apprentice matte artist at Disney Studios, working for Alan Maley, a
gifted artist, who became my mentor. Alan had a tremendous enthusiasm
for the movies, and during the four years that I worked for him I not
only learned a lot about painting and visual effects, but I developed a
great appreciation for the power of the narrative film. In the '50s,
Disney had begun to use VistaVision for effects plates. So when I went
to work there in the '70s, they were the only studio in town using this
large format. When Alan retired, I took over as matte department head.
The department continued to work on Disney films and television shows,
but considering the rather mediocre quality of the Disney product in the
'70s (they were still doing “Herbie” sequels and some rather uninspired
and insipid family films), I yearned to do effects for outside films. In
1975, I got my first chance to work on a non-Disney film, “The Man Who
Fell To Earth,” directed by Nicolas Roeg and starring David Bowie. This
was followed by an incredible bit of luck as I was asked to do some
matte paintings for a highly speculative science-fiction film called
“Star Wars.” Ironically, the decision had already been made by
[writer-director] George Lucas to shoot the visual effects plates in
VistaVision. That was the good news; the bad news was the old converted
Technicolor cameras were notoriously unsteady. This unsteadiness was not
an issue with most of the blue screen photography, but for compositing
with paintings this created a real problem, since one could easily see a
misregistration of the live-action plate with the held painting. We had
to go to great lengths to disguise this jiggle. In the end, I suppose we
were relatively successful. I never got any letters, and the film seemed
to do okay at the boxoffice!
FSTDVD: I can imagine that “Star Wars” was probably a
nice addition to your resume.
Ellenshaw: Working on “Star Wars” was a big boost to my
career, even though I worked on only a small number of shots. Though I
had expanded responsibilities on the next picture, “The Black Hole,” I
was only a department head. My father, Peter Ellenshaw, was the visual
effects supervisor on that film and it was very exciting to work for and
with him. We had never really worked directly together before, although
he was the production designer on Disney's “Island At The Top Of The
World” (1974). At that time I was still a very lowly assistant in the
matte department washing brushes, and trying to soak up as much as I
could about matte painting and visual effects from Alan Maley. I didn't
even get a credit on "Island," but all things considered, that's
something I certainly don't regret. After “The Black Hole,” I was again
very fortunate to be asked to be matte department head for “The Empire
Strikes Back.” This turned out to be the last film for which I would do
matte paintings exclusively.
FSTDVD: How did you go from supervising mattes to
supervising visual effects?
Ellenshaw: When I started as an apprentice matte
artist, the artist always went to the set or location to supervise the
plate photography for the shot. Alan Maley would sometimes take me along
when he went to supervise the live action. It was an incredible
experience. You had to know enough to know what lens to use, where to
put the camera, how to stage the action for continuity, how to back up
the action with something “safe” to paint to, etc. There were so
many things to think about it was very intimidating. Within a year
or two I got my first chance to supervise a plate shot on my own.
Sure enough the camera assistant had loaded the VistaVision camera with
the film emulsion facing away from the lens. This made the shot
unusable and I was pretty embarrassed at dailies. Needless to say
the shot had to be reshot. But I had tasted my first experience of
taking the responsibility for the plate and ultimately the shot.
There was a rush of satisfaction when everything finally worked.
Probably made all the better by the fact that not every shot did work
perfectly. But when it did I just wanted to feel that sense of
accomplishment again and again. It was addictive, so becoming a
visual effects supervisor seemed the natural thing to do.
And my first visual effects supervisor job was “Tron.” Talk about
being thrown into the deep end!
FSTDVD: What are some of the duties you performed in
the position of visual effects supervisor?
Ellenshaw: The role of a visual effects supervisor is
basically two-fold: (1) to understand the director's/writer's vision,
and (2) to find effective ways to implement this vision. Establishing a
trust with the filmmakers is key, but not always easy to achieve. Few
people understand visual effects. Sometimes the trial and error aspects
of the process can lead to misunderstandings and a high level of anxiety
while waiting for the first shots to come together. Thankfully, the
immediacy and flexibility of digital image processing has made this all
a lot easier. But it still takes some patience (on the part of all
parties) as the visual effects supervisor is usually told at the
beginning, "We want to see something no one has ever seen before? Just
don't spend a lot of money!"
FSTDVD: Which large format film systems have you worked
with during your visual effects career?
Ellenshaw: VistaVision, 65mm and Dual 65mm-3D. For
Disney Park Films, we were involved in lot of formats including Imax,
CircleVision and a custom format developed by Ub Iwerks for the “Hall of
Presidents.”
FSTDVD: How was your experience on “Captain EO?”
Ellenshaw: “Captain EO” was an incredible experience.
It was a real pleasure to once again work for [executive producer]
George Lucas. It had been five years since I had worked on “The Empire
Strikes Back,” and I was thrilled to be asked to supervise the effects
on this very ambitious project starring Michael Jackson. Our intrepid
director, Francis Ford Coppola, was also quick to embrace the 3D medium,
stating that he wasn't going to just push the envelope of 3D effects; he
was going to break it! When I heard that, I knew it was going to be an
entertaining project in more ways than one. The cameras that were used
were on a rig that had been modified and improved since its initial use
on a previous Disney 3D park film, “Magic Journeys” [1982]. The effects
on that show were remarkable, and we were fortunate enough to build on
their experience.
FSTDVD: What were some of the challenges working with
the twin 65mm-3D cameras?
Ellenshaw: Well, in addition to many other effects
challenges due to large format 3D photography, a huge amount of 3D
effects animation was required on “Captain EO.” So it was with great
anticipation that we waited to see if the first test done by our
animation supervisor, Barry Cook, would have any 3D to it. Well, it did!
In fact, it was spectacular. He had designed a grid system for the
effects animators to utilize so that they could draw the left eye
animation to correspond to the right eye animation in proper
perspective. Shooting miniatures in 3D can also be complicated, since
the very small interocular distance required on the camera can be so
small, that a slight wobble in the projection of the film may result in
an overlapping of the image, causing it to flatten out. But since
“Captain EO” would be presented only in Disney park venues, the
custom-designed Disney projectors projected a very steady image. I was
adamant about using 65mm for all effects shots. But this meant that we
could not use most motion control systems in town, as they were set up
with VistaVision cameras. So we modified the Disney ACES motion control
system using the camera platform as the model mover, while placing a
65mm camera on a motion control tilt and pan tied-off head. However, the
model mover became so loaded up with heavy lights and a very large model
(needed to maintain depth of field and a reasonable interocular
distance), that it literally bogged down, and would stall during the
long exposures required during hours and hours of shooting with very
small aperture settings on the lens. We had also decided not to use blue
screen, since no aerial head 65mm optical printers were available.
Therefore, many extra passes of motion control photography were required
to shoot backlight mattes for compositing. And all passes had to be done
twice, with slight offset for left eye and right eye.
FSTDVD: The production had a few hurdles to overcome,
didn't it?
Ellenshaw: There was a lot of pressure with such
high-powered luminaries associated with the film. Michael Eisner and
Frank Wells had just taken over Disney; Jeffrey Katzenberg was in charge
of the studio. So there was a lot at stake with this project. And the
scope of effects work kept growing. Originally, the 16-minute film was
going to have 40 effects shots, but we ended up doing over 160, and all
for original budget, I might add. Then deep into post-production, George
Lucas indicated that he was unhappy with the design of Captain EO's
spaceship (this, after models had been built and photographed), and so a
new ship had to be designed and built. Running out of time, we asked ILM
to shoot the new ship and composite the related shots. This they did,
using VistaVision, since they had no 65mm equipment available, but by
using fine grain film stock and careful optical printing, they managed
to closely replicate the resolution of 65mm.
FSTDVD: Over the years since the release of “Tron,”
there have been different reports on which format the principal
photography and visual effects were shot. Do you mind clarifying which
formats were used for the live action and visual effects sequences?
Ellenshaw: Original photography for “Tron” -- both the
real world and electronic world -- was shot in 65mm. In the electronic
world, EACH frame of 65mm black-and-white (Double-X) negative was
enlarged onto 16 x 20 Kodalith cels. There were about 75,000 of these
enlargements made. Then, each of these enlargements were used to make
additional contact (same size) Kodalith cels and from these, hundreds of
artists rotoscoped onto 16 x 20 clear animation cels thousands of
isolation mattes. All these Kodaliths and rotoscoped mattes (over half a
million) were photographed on animation stands with VistaVision cameras.
Hence, the cut original negative for “Tron” consists of BOTH 65mm AND
VistaVision. From this cut original negative, an interpositive [IP] and
internegative [IN] were made in both 65mm and 35mm anamorphic formats
for the production of theatrical prints. By the way, the special 20th
anniversary DVD of “Tron” is a transfer I helped supervise directly from
the 65mm and VistaVision original negative.
FSTDVD: Why was it decided to shoot “Tron” in 65mm?
Ellenshaw: For two reasons: (1) the larger negative
area, and considering that we still had to blow up each frame onto 16 x
20 Kodaliths, we needed the extra resolution. (2) We didn't go with
VistaVision because none of those cameras were blimped for sound; the
65mm Super Panavisions were.
FSTDVD: Was VistaVision used for the effects work in
“The Black Hole?”
Ellenshaw: You bet. Disney had a VistaVision production
camera that they had bought from Paramount; the big ones with the
2,000-foot magazines that Mitchell had built in the early '50s. My
father had it for the matte department when he was running that in the
'50s and early-'60s. Though the purchase and idea of using VistaVision
and rear projection of separation masters was probably Eustace Lycett's.
Anyway, when I first got in the business Alan Maley had upgraded the
existing VistaVision camera with Leitz 9Leica lenses. I remember testing
them in the early-'90s and they were better than Nikkors or Canons and
we got a Leicaflex body to use with the Leitz lenses for taking stills
for reference. For “The Black Hole” we used the VistaVision camera a LOT
with those fabulous Leitz lenses to shoot plates. We had it on the set
all the time and shot at least one or two set-ups a day with it.
FSTDVD: Before the release of “The Watcher In The
Woods” in 1980, Disney News magazine ran a short promotional article on
the film. In the text, it included a reference to 70mm. Were any 70mm or
large formats used for any portions of the production, and do you recall
if there were any 70mm release prints struck in 1980, or for the 1981
re-release?
Ellenshaw: I cannot recall if 70mm prints were made,
but they probably were. In those days, the big benefit from 70mm was
related more to the improved sound quality than the picture. 70mm had
magnetic stereo sound applied individually to each print; a real
improvement over the optical tracks on 35mm prints. I was only involved
in the re-shoot of the end sequence of “Watcher In The Woods” for the
re-release. All effects shots were originated in full aperture 35mm
[commonly known today as Super-35].
FSTDVD: As a matte artist on films such as “Star Wars”
and “The Black Hole,” did you have to compose your mattes for large
format and/or widescreen photography?
Ellenshaw: Yes, I had to compose my matte paintings for
widescreen 2.40:1 aspect ratio [aka 2.35:1 and 2.39:1], which is the
aspect ratio George Lucas has used for the “Star Wars” series. “The
Black Hole” was also shot in 35mm anamorphic with a 2.40:1 aspect ratio.
It is much easier to compose for this aspect ratio than it is for
1.85:1. The 2.40:1 aspect ratio, when projected properly, shows the
audience the 35mm frame in its entirety. Since many TV versions are
broadcast letterboxed, this also allows the viewer to see all of the
image. With 1.85:1, the theatrical audience may see only a portion
(albeit a large percentage) of the image, even though it is composed for
this aspect ratio. This is because these films record more image top and
bottom for use in foreign theatrical presentations, as they utilize a
1.66:1 aspect ratio. Therefore, international viewers usually see more
image area than those in the U.S. and Canada. However, the same logic
doesn't apply to the TV aspect ratio of 1.33:1, since that is typically
a much-reduced TV safe extraction from within the 1.66:1 area.
FSTDVD: “Dick Tracy” was
considered to have been filmed in 65mm. Some tests were filmed by
Vittorio Storaro, ASC, AIC, as I recall, but ultimately, the film was
shot in 35mm, then released with a number of 70mm prints. Still, was
there any large format visual effects work in this film?
Ellenshaw: I didn't begin my work on “Dick Tracy” until
the film was in post-production. At that time, I was told that it was
the intent to compose all shots for 1:33:1 AND 1:85:1. No one could
explain to me how such impossibility would be achieved. But since Disney
had no interest in spending extra money to create special 1:33:1 aspect
ratio release prints (something the filmmakers probably should have
considered when they discussed film formats initially), the issue
appeared resolved. Most of the plates for the effects were shot in
VistaVision, except for a few shots which utilized sodium vapor
traveling matte photography, a dual film strip 35mm system for which
Disney owns exclusive U.S. rights. It was a huge challenge to composite
matte paintings and opticals using elements shot without a definitive
and clear idea of what the final aspect ratio should be. In addition,
Storaro had convinced Warren Beatty and the studio that all the prints
should receive an ENR treatment, which makes the blacks richer, but
desaturates the color. With such a vibrant color design created for the
film, this along with the wacky aspect ratio decision seemed to make
little sense to me. I do not recall if there were any 70mm prints made
of “Dick Tracy,” I don't believe so. I think I would remember, as that
would have only made matters worse if we would have had to consider a
third aspect ratio.
FSTDVD: Indeed, there was quite a large run of 70mm
prints made for “Dick Tracy.” Some were even combined with the first
commercial use of digital sound, Cinema Digital Sound (CDS).
Ellenshaw: Thanks for refreshing my memory. I wonder if
those 70mm prints were "ENR'd" or not? I just don't remember seeing any
of them. If they were not "ENR'd," then the color must have been really
spectacular.
FSTDVD: My recollection is that the blow-ups were in a
side-matted 1.85:1 ratio and that the color was quite vivid. Do you
think 65mm and VistaVision should be used in today's visual effects
films, or has digital technology rendered them obsolete?
Ellenshaw: There will always be a place for large
format photography. Film as an image-recording medium will eventually be
completely replaced by CCD chips and then even newer technology. But
just like pieces of halide crystal, the more pixels you can assign to an
image, the better. Hence, large formats will always yield better
resolution and quality than small formats.
FSTDVD: Do you have a preference of which format to use
when you're involved with a film project?
Ellenshaw: It all depends on the presentation of the
piece. What will be the type of screen? CRT? LED? LCD? White canvas?
Perforated screen? Or...? What will be the aspect ratio? What will be
the size of the screen? But if cost were no object, I would use a 60
frame-per-second, progressive scan digital camera with the biggest CCD
chip available. And with digital projection, of course.
FSTDVD: You’ve worked in nearly every filmmaking format
available. But you’re also a forward thinker in terms of new technology.
What do you like about digital cinematography and digital projection?
Ellenshaw: I won't miss the dirt and scratches that are
all too common with film. Digital storage is getting cheaper and smaller
all the time, as opposed to film that will remain the same physical size
indefinitely and the cost of film will always rise over time. With
digital, there’s no more reloading (unless you're using tape and that's
almost gone). There is no waiting for dailies with digital like there is
with film. To have to send in your storage/recording media and have it
developed and printed in order to see an image will seem almost insane
in a very short period of time. Think of still cameras. Do you know
anyone who goes to the camera store or drug store and orders prints from
film anymore? And digital projection? What's not to like about a steady
clean image that is equal in film in terms of color fidelity and
resolution? And it will only get better.
FSTDVD: A lot of matte painting today is done on a
computer. Are any mattes done via hand and brush today, and have you
worked with digital mattes?
Ellenshaw: After the live-action plate has been shot I
believe the best way to create a good matte painting composite is to
layout/block in the painting with brush and paints first around the
plate. Not many people do this because they lack the ability to paint
and a true understanding of perspective -- which can take years to
master. Regretably, digital has provided the means to skip this step.
However, the problem with skipping the "blocking in with paint" step is
that the matte artist never gets a sense of the geography of the image.
An effective image in a narrative sequence of moving imagery is a result
of many things including composition. Often misunderstood and usually
underrated, composition is an important key to great art. Most artists
spend their life struggling to create good composition. It is what
guides the eye; it is what gives weight to certain areas of the image;
it is what tells the story. The process of drawing or painting is
nothing like cutting and pasting. There is a flow, a rhythm --
unconscious choices of how to block in the image -- a kind of zen-like
push and pull of elements that if done properly creates a successful
image. It is impossible to describe fully in words. A mouse and a
monitor do not adequately allow the artist to create his or her
composition with the same organic flow that doing a painting does.
What the digital aspect of matte painting does today is provide the
means to make perfect matches of color and texture between the live
action plate and the painting. As well as composite and render the final
image with high resolution. These are all very good things and I do not
mean to minimize their importance. But to create a really excellent
matte painting composite all the tools must be used properly.
FSTDVD: If you’ve worked with digital mattes, was there
a difficult learning curve for you coming from painting on glass to
painting with a mouse?
Ellenshaw: I haven’t found it too difficult to work on
matte shots in digital. Photoshop is an amazingly powerful and friendly
piece of software.
FSTDVD: You directed a film in 1989 called “Dead
Silence.” Can you tell us a little about your experience on that film?
Ellenshaw: I learned that being a director can be the
loneliest job on earth. I don’t think I’ll ever direct again; too much
waiting and too frustrating, especially for a control freak.
FSTDVD: Can you tell our readers about some of the
painting you’ve done recently?
Ellenshaw: I still enjoy painting outside of visual
effects. My work is shown in different galleries in a number of
different cities. I have just returned from Japan, where I am fortunate
enough to have gained a following. I sometimes collaborate on paintings
with my father. We do paintings of scenes from Disney films and publish
giclées of these paintings which have become quite popular. We’ve been
very fortunate.
FSTDVD: Thanks, Harrison.
Ellenshaw: My pleasure.
Special Thanks to Harrison Ellenshaw
*Ellenshaw was nominated for an Academy Award for his work. The other
Visual Effects nominees on "The Black Hole" were Peter Ellenshaw, Art
Cruickshank, Eustace Lycett, Danny Lee and Joe Hale.
Bibliography
Houston, David. The Magical Techniques Of Movie And TV Special Effects;
Part IX; The Matte Artist: An Interview With P.S. Ellenshaw, Series
Edited by David Hutchison, Starlog Magazine, June 1978
Smith, Thomas G. Industrial Light & Magic: The Art of Special Effects,
Del Rey, 1987
This is a revised version of an interview originally posted in 2002 at
www.widescreenreview.com.
Originally posted here on September 27, 2004
Photos courtesy of Harrison Ellenshaw