 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Ray, I'm glad you remembered this thread, because I had forgotten about it until your post today. I've just enjoyed re-reading the entire thread -- and correcting all my typos's.
One thing leapt out at me, Ray, upon which I somehow had neglected to remark originally. Hence, now:
RAY -- ! You know how I look up to your expertise and span of knowledge in all matters cinematic and theatrical. But even with all that as a given, you've taken it to a new, almost supernatural level and blown me away with your speculation about the third Sam Harris photo. Please, you've got to share with me and everybody else what you see in that photo which indicates that, based on make-up and lighting (!), it's from a particular studio -- in this case, Columbia.
Thanks!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Okay, thanks, now I know what it is about the lighting. Fascinating, as I knew your explanation would be, and from now on, I fear that I'll no longer be looking at Rita and Glenn or Rita and Fred but at the walls behind them.
But, what is it about the make-up which declares Campbell's signature? How did you know it was him, and not Bob Schiffer?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Dear Sue -- did you ever make it to Hollywood?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
Posted: |
Apr 1, 2018 - 8:27 AM
|
|
|
|
By: |
Ray Faiola
(Member)
|
Okay, thanks, now I know what it is about the lighting. Fascinating, as I knew your explanation would be, and from now on, I fear that I'll no longer be looking at Rita and Glenn or Rita and Fred but at the walls behind them.
But, what is it about the make-up which declares Campbell's signature? How did you know it was him, and not Bob Schiffer?
Well, I meant the Columbia staff. Heavy theatrical-style base, generally darker flesh tones. Less realistic look than the other studios (again, combo with lighting style).
|
|
|
|
|
|
I'm still impressed all to hell just that you knew it was Columbia!
thnx
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
} 
