beatlegdb.com

skynet wrote: ↑Thu Dec 02, 2021 7:14 pm

Davenicks wrote: ↑Thu Dec 02, 2021 4:59 pm "Sometimes the camera rolls themselves had audio." Could you clarify what you mean by this?

Thanks!

Dave in Nashville

my 2 cents here:

16mm film (correct me if i am wrong but "Get Back" was originally scoped to be a TV special, then the afterthought from the Beatles themselves was that this to be filmed in rather 35 millimeters for movie theaters) have its own "optical" sound-track, is my understanding (my knowledge is mostly empirical) is to record ambient sound. Although most 16mm movies were shot without sound, there is a way to tell if film has audio. If 16mm film has sprockets on both sides, it is a silent film. If it has sprockets on one side and a rust colored strip that runs along the edge of the reel, it have sound; This strip denotes the magnetic portion where the audio is stored and it will run alongside the reel. For the 16mm, the magnetic strip will be on the opposite side of the sprockets. hence it is possible that the sweeping sound is not just and "add-on" that PJ did, it is actual audio from that day, just enhanced, it is quite possible.

Regards

Doug wrote: ↑Fri Dec 03, 2021 9:29 pm

DVWerks wrote: ↑Fri Dec 03, 2021 2:32 am It's most likely that audio was created for the documentary. There are definitely moments throughout the documentary where sound effects not present on the Nagras or studio tapes are heard.

I noticed that. I think it's a trick to help disguise the fact that so much of what we're seeing isn't synched at all. Adding sound onto images of George striking a match, or Ringo blowing out cigarette smoke helps fool the viewer into thinking the surrounding shots are also in sync.

Doug wrote: ↑Sat Dec 04, 2021 1:11 am The match strike I was thinking of is in the dialogue following DDSI 2.21, as John says "I think we should rehearse in a room, or in a corner or something." The sound isn't on the Nagra, but is heard in the PJ documentary. Needless to say, there are probably a lot of instances of them lighting up during the sessions. It's a little sad to see George smoking so much, when you realize that cancer would eventually kill him (and he doesn't look healthy even in the GB sessions).

jpgrcat wrote: ↑Tue Nov 30, 2021 8:53 pm If anyone listened to the nearly 4 hour Interview with Peter Jackson
He thinks about 40 Nagra Rolls are missing & not bootlegged,
he say's that's about 10 Hours...
He found out Apple had some Safety Copies, for 3 hours, so 7 hours are still Missing

jpgrcat wrote: ↑Mon Dec 06, 2021 9:25 am

This is the Interview you all should check out

enriquelu wrote: ↑Wed Dec 01, 2021 1:05 pm Ok. If the majority think New Blue Soap is preferable to Sulpy 2001, we will follow that criteria.

Just point out that New Blue Soap is not exactly the same as Sulpy 2007. It is true that some errors have been corrected.

I understand that we can use the NEW BLUE SOAP nomenclature, but some problems need to be fixed.

Let us ignore the differences that exist in the tunings, dialogues, silences, etc ..., because they are not very relevant for the numbering.

Problems to solve:

Day 6 - 2.60 should be 6.60
Day 21 - Foul 21.54
I understand that on day 21 - 074 - 21.65P it must be DDSI.21.54 P
I understand that on day 21 - 075 - 21.51P it must be DDSI.21.49 P
I understand that on day 21 - 078 - 21.51P it must be DDSI.21.49 P
Day 22 - DDSI.22.58 and DDSI.22.59 are missing
Day 25 - We should study where the 25.38P leaves

I don't have studied New Blue Soap STUDIO because I understand it's no relevant for numbering.

Here there is a cross reference to Help us
NBS 1.png
NBS 2.png
NBS 3.png
NBS 4.png
NBS 5.png