Over half a century later, the slit scan effect is reportedly still the most laborious and expensive film process. Now, with film replaced by digital, it's on its way to being the cinematic equivalent of the daguerreotype: outdated but still amazing to see. Best wishes from Vermont! ❄️💙❄️
I made some slit-scan animations myself, and it is indeed very laborious (using a rostrum I made out of Lego and a digital camera with long exposure!). After producing only a handful of frames, I instead turned to C++ to reproduce the process faithfully, but entirely digitally.
If the BBC Announced the Complete Series (1-14) Of Doctor Who, Maybe They Could Release The Full, Extended Version of the Howlround Back in 1963 on the Series 2 Bonus Features.
The people at GSE deserve much more credit. The only time I ever spoke to Bernard Lodge about it (when he visited Pearce Studios in the 1980s), he couldn't really properly explain how slit-scan was achieved. As a BBC Graphics Designer, he got the *gist* of it, but clearly the boys at GSE (who actually did the work) knew a LOT more.
Really, the idea can be easy to understand when you look at old 35mm photographs, taken in low-light conditions, that didn't pass muster. If you bump the camera or don't keep it still while taking the picture, you get these "phantom" streaks of light across the film. Usually these are from lights *in* the picture, but sometimes it can be from other things that didn't stay still long enough to be recorded. Anyways, that same process happens here. We're just controlling the streaks of light, by controlling the motion of the camera, and, like they show in the video, the shape of those streaks of light.
As of this post, Bernard Lodge is still with us (90 years old). Assuming he is still clear of mind, I wonder how he feels about the "diamond" logo returning as the current branding scheme?
Bernard has expressed his surprise and delight about his old logo returning. You can read about his reaction in the brilliant new book, 'Adventures in Type and Space', along with a deeper dive into the logo, the slit-scan technique and the titles going back to the first ever episode. It's published by Ten Acre Films.
As a film maker this is one of the aspects of film that I love. The creativity that comes up with these things is so inventive. It is an astonishing thing that people can look to do something fairly simply like a title sequence and come up with a complex solution to create an iconic look. Film and TV production particularly in fantasy and sci-fi makes us think more fully about how things work and the potentials of what can be created by use of ordinary things. Where in that design process did someone say, "look, if you tear up polythene bags and look at them through a polarising filter you get this rainbow effect and if you add another polariser and rotate it 90 degrees you can turn the whites into blacks which makes a great background for titles". ? And here we are today looking at one of the most iconic title sequences ever created.
Probably cuz he was sick to death seeing the titles with the Doctor's face lol "Why can't the show ever be called 'Master Who' so I can have my face appear in the titles just to piss the Doctor off?"
the rebooted modern intro was clearly inspired by the 90s tv movie intro, it even had the red/blue color switch. but the point of origin for both is ofc the 70s intro which introduced the time-vortex tunnel sequence.
The “scary face” at 3:06 would be perfect if this guy was cast as the Master: he could have shown up in an episode title sequence to scare the viewer partway through a serial with the master in it.
Dunno if you guys gives a damn but if you are bored like me during the covid times you can watch all the new series on Instaflixxer. I've been streaming with my girlfriend for the last couple of weeks :)
Mr Lodge was very generous at 6:44 to say the Sid Sutton title sequence "worked very well". I thought the grinning Tom Baker head looked rather naff. The Peter Davidson version was slightly better, but still not a patch on the Fourth Doctor's time tunnel opening.
It *is* a French name. IIRC, the actual spelling of his name on his birth certificate was "Perthuis". I guess he figured anglicising it to "Pertwee" gave people a better idea of it was pronounced, even if they tend to put the stress on the first syllable
When listening to the opening music of the first Jon Pertwee titles, I wonder if Bernard Lodge had future foresight that the Tom Baker sequence would match the music 🤔
One curious thing about this absolutely iconic title sequence which I would love to get clarity on is whether Bernard Lodge in fact did 'surgery' on the scarf area of the photo of Tom Baker to make it more symmetrical...It's a virtual impossibility for a scarf to 'sit' like that, and if you study carefully any non-title-sequence version of the same photo, such as the cover of the BBC's own glossy exported promo brochure for the series made in the late 70's, you will see instantly the difference on the left hand side (Baker's right): a segment of scarf is missing where it meets the hair on that side. It's a highly skilful job in any event, but I would love confirmation either way... I narrowly missed meeting Bernard at the Bristol International Animation Festival in 1989; he was scheduled to appear, but at the very last minute pulled out; a terrible pity, as such legends as Ray Harryhausen were there; and I would put Lodge's genius on a par with his.
I'm curious as to why you think it's impossible for Tom Baker's scarf to look the way it did in the photo. It was a long, wide and heavy scarf and I really don't see anything unusual about the way it sits.
@@jkkay477 Well now, I can understand your mystification regarding the point I'm making, however gravity just wouldn't allow a downward-tumbling scarf to 'sit' like that! I would politely refer you to the cover of the 1970's BBC Enterprises Doctor Who Promotional A4 Folder, which probably best shows the difference between the 'amended' title sequence scarf and the original still shot. This RU-vid site doesn't seem to give the option to add attachments (or perhaps I just can't find the button!) so I'll post a link to one of the folders currently on sale below. In that unamended still (which is available on many other products from US badges to facsimile autographs), you can see a clear asymmetry in the two sides of the scarf: its left, from Tom Baker's head (as you look at the picture) is noticeably less wide than it is in the title sequence version, hence my suspicion that in order for the composition to look more balanced (and arguably ultimate) in the titles, the absolute legend that is graphic designer Bernard Lodge must have done some very skilful doctoring (get it?!) to make the scarf width more equal both sides! The proof something was tweaked lies in the positioning of the darker purplish band towards the top of the left side scarf: in the original still as seen on the promo folder, that purple area sits just below Tom's shoulder, whereas in the title sequence, it has been moved visibly upwards above the shoulder, check it out - it's irrefutable! (tho only someone as OCD as myself would waste precious life moments debating it!) I did in fact raise this very point with the writers of the wonderful recent charity bookazine 'Adventures In Type and Space,' a volume entirely devoted to the Classic Dr Who title sequences; re: my disappointment that there was no explanation of that photo's alteration in the book, and I did get an affirmative response that, although it didn't make it into the book itself, they felt sure the point was indeed covered in their original interview/discussions with Bernard. www.ebay.co.uk/itm/126594656451?_nkw=Dr+Who+promotional+folder&itmmeta=01J5TKQYQ7GJ1DG9A5BYM116TK&hash=item1d79a128c3:g:4RYAAOSwY9plxid1&itmprp=enc%3AAQAJAAAA8HoV3kP08IDx%2BKZ9MfhVJKmThosTL7PZD5HCLcIs%2FERrrcJ3wFqype%2BkgXVT%2BF%2BI7kwzL%2FPzbW7Jbuq4Ozdzvzmw0RF9Hi9wzE2KNDkKZNM5hlQscy7Dkg4uFi0QFZNdEIEl8mghOVPhHBXxk5iZgU6XUUeCFjMEmgfhEXZsMZ5%2FjqgYq6oHe9AU%2FRhWTCqG9NWuquH9ef%2FQ6LyP4kNzpd74UQHH7DYvGYGwL%2BKoU3AiE1x6dthH%2Bsm2Jd%2FSg74tXXMGPym2Ojii%2F%2BRSVcp8tj1mQoFYP5CdfjG1TDlSPscu%2FjskUTbnCqrNz6m%2FxxllRw%3D%3D%7Ctkp%3ABk9SR9zr39OuZA
@@guynewmountain1909 Ah, I see what you mean now. I didn't realise there was an original still that was different from the one in the title sequence. You are quite correct! They would have copied a portion of Baker's scarf hanging from his right shoulder, rotated it, moved it upwards, and pasted it down. I've done a quick recreation of it, but RU-vid won't let me post the link.
For the first 2 Doctors title sequences, when the logo emerges from the howlround, why does it first appear as Doctor OHO, then has the letter W superimposed at the front of the word as the letters come more into focus? Was this done to achieve a more symmetrical effect with the howlround? It's like initially the logo appears reversed and then it is corrected and placed on top of the reversed image. How did they even do that? More questions...
Im pretty sure its for the symmetry as bernard mentions during the tom baker one he couldnt get symmetry with the hair or something to that effect. youll also notice that the individual elements are mirrored in all the howlaround, im not sure if thats part of the feedback but youll notice alot of symmetry in all of the howlaround stuff. if you look at the pertwee one on the end swirls and freeze frame youll notice the swirls are mirrored too and there is a line in the image through the middle which has some effect on the rest of the feedback. most of the stuff he did was layered up alot from what I can see
My guess is by using some kind of graded, tinted filter that is moved gradually upwards with each frame, and adjusting the exposure in such a way that the white lettering and outline is unaffected by said filter.
Probably more strips of plastic bags placed horizontally across the diamond logo with a polarising filter behind it and another polarising filter placed on the rotoscopic camera at 90° and remember, the camera scans in 2 directions, from the bottom up and across the base at 1/10 inch per frame, a minuscule amount but the result would be to create a horizontal prismic light fade on the background of the logo as it travels deeper into the tunnel. And don't forget that the actual tunnel and the diamond logo are two different pieces of footage superimposed onto each other. Omg did I just describe the process? I don't know where that came from 🤔😅
Explanation of slit-scan starts at about 8:28. I used a similar time-displacement (slit-scan) effect, with very different results, for a music video I made, but all done in software. ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-Nez5dxzNkS0.html
@@bananamustard1151 they're basically the same thing, although you could argue that rolling shutter generally refers to the unwanted effect produced by cameras on things like propellors. Slit scan can be used in different ways. How do you think they differ?
The narrator says that this title was first seen in 1974 this is to an extent true but also to an extent not true Jon pertwee's final season first featured this slitscan version with a few differences of course and allthrougth we the viewers didn't go through it with the tardis it is also the first that we went througth the time vortex. From Michael from Yorkshire and proud of it.
The title the narrator was referring to was the Tom Baker titles for his first episodes 'Robot', first seen in 1974. The last Jon Pertwee season has the best title sequence of all in my opinion, slit scan imaging very similar streaks of light to 2001: A Space Odyssey
@@davidmckirdy4063. Thanks for the reply and the info. I really love Bernard 's work (even though the Sid Sutton titles caught my 4 year old eyes and I was hooked from there on). ☺
7:36: "it [the title sequence without a face] will last through quite a few permutations of doctors" no it didn't mate - they buggered about with it every season until it ended up looking like a Masters of the Universe cartoon starting. Bloody awful.
