diff --git a/authored/timing.json b/authored/timing.json
index e19f31db..c6f40ed4 100644
--- a/authored/timing.json
+++ b/authored/timing.json
@@ -128,5 +128,31 @@
   "`tools/port/verify-dwell` compares a transition INTERVAL against the oracle's",
   "visible SPAN plus that hold. What is deleted is the port's need to invent a",
   "duration the disc now states."
+ ],
+ "black_hold_units": 12,
+ "black_hold_why": [
+  "MEASURED, not on the disc for these screens, so it is authored with a why.",
+  "",
+  "HANDOFF Q7: a screen transition is a fade THROUGH BLACK, and the pure-black",
+  "plateau between one screen leaving and the next arriving was measured at",
+  "0.17-0.23 s. The transition quad on the menus declares black for 12 units, and",
+  "12/60 = 0.200 s sits in the middle of that range -- so 12 units is the number,",
+  "and it is the disc's own where a screen carries such a quad.",
+  "",
+  "THE BOOT SPLASHES DO NOT CARRY ONE. `publisher_logo` and `developer_logos`",
+  "each hold a single `palogo_eff0`, a 1280x720 primitive with ONE keyframe at",
+  "t=0 -- static, not a transition ramp. So on the boot path the hold is",
+  "sequencer behaviour and there is nothing to read it from.",
+  "",
+  "🔴 IT HAD NEVER BEEN IMPLEMENTED, and this is what the publisher_logo residual",
+  "was. Filmed at 0.05 s, the port fades the publisher out to a mean of 0.317 at",
+  "t=4.20 s and the developer logos are already at 5.65 by t=4.25 -- NO BLACK",
+  "FRAME AT ALL. The oracle measures a 0.17-0.23 s plateau there. I had recorded",
+  "the miss as '0.03 s, probably an artefact of the bound I composed', and the",
+  "Decoder agreed; we were both wrong. The bound was fine and the port was",
+  "missing a fifth of a second of black.",
+  "",
+  "Delete this the day a screen's own transition quad supplies it on the boot",
+  "path too."
  ]
 }
diff --git a/docs/port/DECISIONS.md b/docs/port/DECISIONS.md
index f52ab86b..b86a97b3 100644
--- a/docs/port/DECISIONS.md
+++ b/docs/port/DECISIONS.md
@@ -4552,3 +4552,66 @@ sample large shared pages. Matching on texture dimensions told them first that n
 flash is ever drawn, then that `ptbase2` and `pteff04` are drawn in frames 75–105
 — which are the intro movie, whose YUV planes are 640×360 targeting 1280×720.
 Two errors, opposite directions, one pass, neither loud.
+
+## ✅ The `publisher_logo` residual was a missing black hold, and we had both dismissed it
+
+I had carried this as *"0.03 s outside a composite bound, probably a property of
+the bound rather than the game"*, and the Decoder agreed. **We were both wrong,
+and the way it was settled is the point: I stopped reasoning about the bound and
+filmed the transition.**
+
+At 0.05 s the port fell straight out of the publisher's fade into the developer
+logos — mean 5.06 → 0.32 at t=4.20, then **5.65 at t=4.25**. There was **no black
+frame at all**, where the oracle measures a 0.17–0.23 s pure-black plateau
+(HANDOFF Q7). The bound was fine. The port was missing a fifth of a second of
+black, and had been since P3.
+
+**Authored at 12 units**, because on the boot path there is nothing to read it
+from: `publisher_logo` and `developer_logos` each carry a single `palogo_eff0` —
+a 1280×720 primitive with **one keyframe at t=0**, static, not a transition ramp.
+The menus' quad declares black for 12 units and 12/60 = **0.200 s** sits in the
+middle of the measured range, so the number is the disc's where a screen has one.
+
+Filmed after: **t=4.25, 4.30, 4.35, 4.40 all at mean 0** — four black frames,
+0.20 s — then the developer logos at 4.45.
+
+| | before | after |
+|---|---|---|
+| publisher interval | 4.26 s, **DIFFERS** | **4.47 s, agrees** |
+| developer interval | 3.62 s, agrees | 3.73 s, agrees |
+
+The settled-frame comparisons are untouched, as they should be — this is pacing,
+not pixels.
+
+⚠️ **The lesson is about the shape of the dismissal, not the number.** *"A 0.03 s
+miss against a bound composed from two measured ranges plus jitter slack is more
+likely a property of the bound"* is a **plausible** explanation, it was offered
+and accepted by both of us, and it was wrong. The composite bound was the reason
+the miss looked small — the underlying gap was 0.2 s — and a plausible
+explanation for a small number is exactly how a real defect stays hidden. **The
+film cost one command.**
+
+## `ptlogo_back2eff3` — recorded, deliberately not acted on
+
+The Decoder has reproduced across two independent build-ins that the console
+**never draws `eff3`**: 0 draws against ~5 expected, while `eff1` gets 4, `eff2`
+3 and `eff4` 6. Three explanations are ruled out — sampling phase (`eff3` is
+non-zero over six units against a 2.23-unit step, and frames at t=60.1 and 62.3
+sit inside it drawing `eff2` and `eff4` instead), a draw the log cannot see, and
+a bad position guess (no quad anywhere is within ±30 of the expected 408 width;
+the spectrum jumps 262 → 748).
+
+❔ **But *why* is not established** — nothing in `eff3`'s record differs from its
+neighbours: same kind `0x0`, same keyframe shape, same `u4`/`u8`, same scale.
+
+🔴 **So the port keeps drawing it, and that is a decision rather than an
+oversight.** Dropping an element the disc declares, on a measurement with no
+mechanism behind it, is authoring a behaviour neither agent can derive — and
+**nothing this port gates on would notice either way**: the flashes live only in
+the build-in, and `verify-capture` compares the settled frame at t=198 where none
+of the five is drawn. Acting would buy no measurable fidelity and cost an
+unexplained exception in `authored/`.
+
+**What would change it:** a mechanism in the record, or a gate that measures the
+build-in against a capture. Until then the port is visibly wrong for two frames
+during a build-in nobody compares, which is the cheaper of the two wrongs.
diff --git a/port/scripts/boot.gd b/port/scripts/boot.gd
index 7ebb6a2c..3734db4e 100644
--- a/port/scripts/boot.gd
+++ b/port/scripts/boot.gd
@@ -197,6 +197,7 @@ func _ready() -> void:
 	# authored, and both of ScreenView's uses are dead branches kept only so an
 	# older export still loads.
 	view.exit_ramp_units = float(timing.get("exit_ramp_units", 24.0))
+	_black_hold = float(timing.get("black_hold_units", 0.0))
 	# Which focus records draw unconditionally and loop. Kept out of ScreenView's
 	# own logic on purpose -- see `looping_focus` there for the census that says
 	# this cannot be a rule.
@@ -290,6 +291,8 @@ var _script: PackedStringArray = PackedStringArray()
 var _shots := ""
 ## `--skip-at=SECONDS`: when to send a synthetic (A) during a movie, or 0.
 var _skip_at := 0.0
+## Units of pure black between one screen leaving and the next arriving.
+var _black_hold := 0.0
 ## `--focus=<id>`: draw this element's focus record in a `--screen` run.
 var _force_focus := ""
 var _skip_sent := false
@@ -374,7 +377,17 @@ func _process(delta: float) -> void:
 				_menu_enter(String(_sequence[_step].get("screen", "")), true)
 			elif _film == "" and _overlay_spec.is_empty():
 				get_tree().quit(0)
-	elif not view.holding and view.time_units >= view.exit_time():
+	elif not view.holding and view.time_units >= view.exit_time() + _black_hold:
+		# 🔴 THE BLACK HOLD, which this port had never implemented. A transition
+		# is a fade THROUGH black (HANDOFF Q7), and the pure-black plateau
+		# between one screen leaving and the next arriving was measured at
+		# 0.17-0.23 s. Filmed at 0.05 s the port fell straight from the
+		# publisher's fade-out into the developer logos with NO BLACK FRAME.
+		#
+		# The menus' transition quad declares black for 12 units and 12/60 =
+		# 0.200 s sits in the middle of the measured range -- but the boot
+		# splashes carry no such quad (`palogo_eff0` is one static keyframe), so
+		# on this path it is authored. See `authored/timing.json`.
 		_advance()