"Despicable" Patton comparison *PIX* - Page 19 - AVS Forum
Forum Jump: 
Reply
 
Thread Tools
post #541 of 930 Old 06-27-2008, 08:10 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Lawguy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 5,709
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4 Post(s)
Liked: 11
Quote:
Originally Posted by RobertR View Post

All that's being asked is that they not do the EXTRA processing that scrubbed away the high frequency detail and grain.

How do you know that this is what happened? All that I am saying is that it is easy to stand on the outside of a creative process and judge its outcome without knowing the particular choices and compromises that had to be made.

Affable Nitwit
Lawguy is online now  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #542 of 930 Old 06-27-2008, 08:15 AM
AVS Special Member
 
RobertR's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: California
Posts: 6,119
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 143 Post(s)
Liked: 386
Quote:


How do you know that this is what happened?

Robert Harris bet someone dinner that there was nothing about the condition of the Patton elements that made it necessary to process away the detail and grain the way it was done. We know this "look" is the result of such overprocessing.
RobertR is offline  
post #543 of 930 Old 06-27-2008, 08:32 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Lawguy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 5,709
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4 Post(s)
Liked: 11
Quote:
Originally Posted by RobertR View Post

Robert Harris bet someone dinner that there was nothing about the condition of the Patton elements that made it necessary to process away the detail and grain the way it was done. We know this "look" is the result of such overprocessing.


Could be. There is no question that Robert Harris is an authority on restoration but he appears not to have seen the source material.

If it could have been done better, it should have been done that way.

Affable Nitwit
Lawguy is online now  
post #544 of 930 Old 06-27-2008, 08:44 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
Matt_Stevens's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: NYC
Posts: 13,818
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 48
You seem to be on a mission here, Lawguy. You've made it clear that you will not accept any proof at all, so maybe you should just find something better to do. Robert Harris is familair with this film and the processes in which film is being brought to BD. He has stated numerous times now that this is not what PATTON loks like. He's gone into detail about it. But it is not good enough for you.

Many of us here are not very familiar with what DVNR looks like and clearly PATTON and LONGEST DAY suffer from it. So does PAN'S LABYRINTH.

Vimeo is the home of the Super8 Shooter...

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
Matt_Stevens is offline  
post #545 of 930 Old 06-27-2008, 08:50 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Jgatie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 1,566
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lawguy View Post

How do you know that this is what happened? All that I am saying is that it is easy to stand on the outside of a creative process and judge its outcome without knowing the particular choices and compromises that had to be made.

We don't have to watch a lion being born to know it isn't an elephant. Anyone familiar with the look of 65mm film from that period can tell the BD does not replicate that look, and they don't have to have spent time watching the "creative process" to know it.
Jgatie is offline  
post #546 of 930 Old 06-27-2008, 08:56 AM
Advanced Member
 
sperron's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 847
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 11
Lawguy, they are still showing Patton in 70mm regularly. Xylon the original poster stated that he had seen Patton in 70mm recently. So at the very minimum there is atleast one set of 70mm prints that look tremendously better then this BD. Do you really believe that the source elements that Fox keeps for archival purposes are poorer then a 70mm print regularly used for exhibition? Something happened to remove all the high frequency detail somewhere between the source elements and the final encode for the Blu-Ray.

At the very least edge enhancement was added to the Blu-Ray as can clearly be seen here:


That edge enhancement did not exist in the source elements and was added digitally at some point. Knowing that they tampered with the image to add edge enhancement, why is it such a large step for some to take to admit that they also performed DNR?
sperron is offline  
post #547 of 930 Old 06-27-2008, 09:09 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Lawguy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 5,709
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4 Post(s)
Liked: 11
Quote:
Originally Posted by Robert Harris View Post

Restoration does not in any way alter the original. Any restoration that may have been performed to Patton has no negative affect on the look of the Blu-ray.

RAH

How not? If the original is damaged or in poor condition, how can fixing it not be an alteration of the original?

Affable Nitwit
Lawguy is online now  
post #548 of 930 Old 06-27-2008, 09:35 AM
AVS Special Member
 
apodaca's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 1,173
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
I keep hearing 'directors intent' thrown around and that applying any 'digital processing to a film degrades it' etc.

How come the same people hate George Lucas for updating the original trilogy ? He is the creator, he is the director - it is his intent. So whats the deal here ? In the old versions of the film the emperor looked nothing like he does now and the missing CGI made the movies seem out of place with the new ones.

I also point the 'accuracy' and 'original presentation' proponents to Star Trek The Original Series. It looks fantastic on the HD DVD release and I thank all of the people involved for not releasing the original version. If they do this with all of the other series they will sell pretty well.

Sometimes too much grain is distracting and if some picture quality has to give in order to make it less so than it is fine. I think of grain as noise and when noise reduction is used (not excessive) the signal to noise ratio is higher to my eyes. (more detail with too much grain is more distracting than a bit less detail and no grain). Pans Labyrinth is a good example where I have seen the comparison shots and I much prefer the BD release with less grain.
apodaca is offline  
post #549 of 930 Old 06-27-2008, 09:42 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Jgatie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 1,566
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by apodaca View Post

I keep hearing 'directors intent' thrown around and that applying any 'digital processing to a film degrades it' etc.

How come the same people hate George Lucas for updating the original trilogy ? He is the creator, he is the director - it is his intent. So whats the deal here ? In the old versions of the film the emperor looked nothing like he does now and the missing CGI made the movies seem out of place with the new ones.

I also point the 'accuracy' and 'original presentation' proponents to Star Trek The Original Series. It looks fantastic on the HD DVD release and I thank all of the people involved for not releasing the original version. If they do this with all of the other series they will sell pretty well.

Sometimes too much grain is distracting and if some picture quality has to give in order to make it less so than it is fine. I think of grain as noise and when noise reduction is used (not excessive) the signal to noise ratio is higher to my eyes. (more detail with too much grain is more distracting than a bit less detail and no grain). Pans Labyrinth is a good example where I have seen the comparison shots and I much prefer the BD release with less grain.

Because most people who are careful when discussing this topic use the term "original intent" just to stave off the inevitable "BBBBut Lucas changed Star Wars!!!" strawman.

Lucas made changes that differed greatly from the original = BAD!!

BD of Patton has chnages that differ greatly from the original = BAD!!

And personally, I'm no fan of the spruced up HD DVD version of Star Trek either, for the same reasons.

Call me anything you like, just don't call me a hypocrite.
Jgatie is offline  
post #550 of 930 Old 06-27-2008, 09:43 AM
AVS Special Member
 
robertc88's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Central NJ
Posts: 3,639
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
The short of it as far as I'm concerned, if there are even a few people who learned something from this will not just blind buy titles regardless of how much they like the content of a movie, I will say at least something in the near term was accomplished.

Long term? We'll see what happens with future titles.
robertc88 is offline  
post #551 of 930 Old 06-27-2008, 09:45 AM
AVS Special Member
 
RobertR's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: California
Posts: 6,119
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 143 Post(s)
Liked: 386
Quote:


keep hearing 'directors intent' thrown around and that applying any 'digital processing to a film degrades it' etc.

How come the same people hate George Lucas for updating the original trilogy ? He is the creator, he is the director - it is his intent.

Anyone can criticize ANY director for his creative choices, including George Lucas. What ISN'T ok is saying "I don't give a damn how the original film looks, when it comes out on BR I want the thing altered to make it look like the shiny HD video I prefer". Apparently you don't understand the difference.
RobertR is offline  
post #552 of 930 Old 06-27-2008, 09:52 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Jgatie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 1,566
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by RobertR View Post

Anyone can criticize ANY director for his creative choices, including George Lucas. What ISN'T ok is saying "I don't give a damn how the original film looks, when it comes out on BR I want the thing altered to make it look like the shiny HD video I prefer". Apparently you don't understand the difference.

Besides, their argument is backwards. They'll go to their death defending the original original trilogy's sacrosanct holiness, repeating the mantra of "Han shot first" like a Gregorian chant, but they get all giddy if a film like Patton comes out on Blu-ray looking like a scrubbed video game. They are the ones who should be asked about hypocrisy when defending changes to the original art.
Jgatie is offline  
post #553 of 930 Old 06-27-2008, 09:56 AM
Super Moderator
 
markrubin's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Jersey Shore
Posts: 22,904
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 95 Post(s)
Liked: 360
Greetings

I hope everyone will take the high road in every post...or leave this thread

Thanks
markrubin is offline  
post #554 of 930 Old 06-27-2008, 10:00 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
Matt_Stevens's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: NYC
Posts: 13,818
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 48
Mr. Harris, you cannot be any more direct or truthful. It is just that when dealing with the internet there will always be a few voices that refuse to listen to reason or deal with the truth, even if it slaps them in the face.

Thank you for your contributions to this forum. I hope you will continue to be a member here and not be pushed away by a few... well... I cannot say what I really want to say.

Nuff said.

Vimeo is the home of the Super8 Shooter...

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
Matt_Stevens is offline  
post #555 of 930 Old 06-27-2008, 10:36 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Lawguy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 5,709
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4 Post(s)
Liked: 11
Quote:
Originally Posted by Robert Harris View Post

Two facts.

1. "There is no crying is baseball."

2. Archivists are not in competition with one another. Information is generally shared, and all are generally open to answer questions or give aid, if and when needed.

There is no problem with Patton.

Any work performed on it toward restoration or preservation of the elements has been both superbly crafted and transparent to the original.

That work, performed by Fox's Schawn Belston and his team has been perfect to each and every detail.

It is inviolable!

The discussion consuming these pages has nothing to do with restoration.

It is solely in regard to the way that the preservation elements have been handled, or misused, in their replication toward Blu-ray.

I don't believe that I can be any more direct.

RAH

I have misunderstood your role in this process and my McDonalds/Burger analogy is inapposite. I am sorry for getting that wrong. That's what happens when you read things too quickly.

Affable Nitwit
Lawguy is online now  
post #556 of 930 Old 06-27-2008, 10:51 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Jgatie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 1,566
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lawguy View Post

I have misunderstood your role in this process and my McDonalds/Burger analogy is inapposite. I am sorry for getting that wrong. That's what happens when you read things too quickly.

This isn't something you see on the internet too much. Kudos to you for stepping up.
Jgatie is offline  
post #557 of 930 Old 06-27-2008, 11:06 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Lawguy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 5,709
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4 Post(s)
Liked: 11
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jgatie View Post

This isn't something you see on the internet too much. Kudos to you for stepping up.

No. I don't deserve any special credit. I was wrong about RH's role in the process and he corrected me. It is only proper that I apologize. Had I been right (which I was not) I would have stood by what I wrote.

I have written all along that those responsible for the bluray should have made it as true to the original as possible. I only questioned whether those people were faced with some choice that led them to choose the direction that they did. I still have that question but will live with it being unanswered because it is clear that people here are not receptive to this kind of discussion.

Affable Nitwit
Lawguy is online now  
post #558 of 930 Old 06-27-2008, 11:11 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
Matt_Stevens's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: NYC
Posts: 13,818
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 48
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lawguy View Post

I have written all along that those responsible for the bluray should have made it as true to the original as possible. I only questioned whether those people were faced with some choice that led them to choose the direction that they did. I still have that question but will live with it being unanswered because it is clear that people here are not receptive to this kind of discussion.

Lawyguy, but the thing is, discussion here is welcome, when it is constructive. That is not the discussion that was taking place. Not at all, hence the reaction to what you and a few others were saying.

Vimeo is the home of the Super8 Shooter...

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
Matt_Stevens is offline  
post #559 of 930 Old 06-27-2008, 11:19 AM
Advanced Member
 
dargo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: USA
Posts: 712
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 10 Post(s)
Liked: 42
Quote:
Originally Posted by Robert Harris View Post

Two facts.

1. "There is no crying is baseball."

2. Archivists are not in competition with one another. Information is generally shared, and all are generally open to answer questions or give aid, if and when needed.

There is no problem with Patton.

Any work performed on it toward restoration or preservation of the elements has been both superbly crafted and transparent to the original.

That work, performed by Fox's Schawn Belston and his team has been perfect to each and every detail.

It is inviolable!

The discussion consuming these pages has nothing to do with restoration.

It is solely in regard to the way that the preservation elements have been handled, or misused, in their replication toward Blu-ray.

I don't believe that I can be any more direct.

RAH

would be nice if bill hunt or home theater forum could interview fox about this problem of
dnr abuse and clear the air
dargo is offline  
post #560 of 930 Old 06-27-2008, 11:46 AM
AVS Special Member
 
jigesh's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Hopewell Junction, NY
Posts: 1,080
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lawguy View Post

...whether those people were faced with some choice that led them to choose the direction that they did. I still have that question...

I was about to ask a similar question as what incentive studios would get in coming up with such release (and more are coming), but then I came across the following and got some self-education:

Earlier post by Robert Harris and his web-link, which if I am not mis-reading, suggests (a) partly at fault is blu ray for not having any "protective mechanism in place to weed out questionable work" and (b) partly "wrong people adding their thoughts to what a film should look like." Perhaps, understanding (a) involves more familiarity (which I don't have; and frankly I don't know if this was within their scope) with blu-ray specs and (b) arguably could be subjective.
jigesh is offline  
post #561 of 930 Old 06-27-2008, 11:55 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
Matt_Stevens's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: NYC
Posts: 13,818
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 48
Quote:


would be nice if bill hunt or home theater forum could interview fox about this problem of dnr abuse and clear the air

dargo, believe it or not, some higher up FOX reps have told HTF that no DVNR was used on PATTON at all. None.

Of course, this is a joke. We know this not to be the case. FOX also denied any EE was on PHANTOM MENACE. They denied the TS track for MOULIN ROUGE was out of sync. With this case it is likely one hand isn't talking to the other.

It will take quite some time for FOX to deal with this and it will be a surprise if they ever come clean. Admiting fault would mean they are released a defectiveproduct, one they would have to replace at a great deal of cost. Costs that could not be made up for years to come. Maybe even decades.

Vimeo is the home of the Super8 Shooter...

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
Matt_Stevens is offline  
post #562 of 930 Old 06-27-2008, 02:05 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Oliver Klohs's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Leipzig, Germany
Posts: 2,534
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 13 Post(s)
Liked: 12
Quote:
Originally Posted by Matt_Stevens View Post

dargo, believe it or not, some higher up FOX reps have told HTF that no DVNR was used on PATTON at all. None.

Of course, this is a joke. We know this not to be the case. FOX also denied any EE was on PHANTOM MENACE. They denied the TS track for MOULIN ROUGE was out of sync. With this case it is likely one hand isn't talking to the other.

It will take quite some time for FOX to deal with this and it will be a surprise if they ever come clean. Admiting fault would mean they are released a defectiveproduct, one they would have to replace at a great deal of cost. Costs that could not be made up for years to come. Maybe even decades.

While that reaction is a bit strange (sometimes it is better not to comment at all), Fox seems to have a history of reacting that way.
So I am not surprised about their answer and I am not even interested in Fox admitting fault, I am interested in:

1. no more transfers like Patton and The Longest Day
2. Fox doing a regionfree re-release of Patton that actually looks like it should have looked in the first place

As SW EpII and III were not plagued by the atrocious EE that made Ep I unwatchable I have reason to hope that even though they deny in public they get the message and act accordingly.
Oliver Klohs is online now  
post #563 of 930 Old 06-27-2008, 02:20 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
Josh Z's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Planet Boston, source of the spice, Melange.
Posts: 20,091
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 296 Post(s)
Liked: 358
Quote:
Originally Posted by Matt_Stevens View Post

dargo, believe it or not, some higher up FOX reps have told HTF that no DVNR was used on PATTON at all. None.

Of course, this is a joke. We know this not to be the case. FOX also denied any EE was on PHANTOM MENACE. They denied the TS track for MOULIN ROUGE was out of sync. With this case it is likely one hand isn't talking to the other.

Not that I have any faith in that Fox statement, but I do wonder if it's possible that the detail filtering we see on this disc may not be the result of intentional DNR, but some other fault during the film-to-video transfer or digital compression?

Sort of like Sony claiming that they didn't add edge enhancement to their DVD masters for years and years, because they didn't do it knowingly, yet their telecine equipment invariably caused edge ringing until they replaced it recently.

Josh Z
Writer/Editor, High-Def Digest (
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
)
Curator,
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.


My opinions are my own, and do not necessarily reflect those of my employers.

Josh Z is offline  
post #564 of 930 Old 06-27-2008, 02:29 PM
Advanced Member
 
sperron's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 847
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 11
Someone at the home theater forum mentioned that the Fox exec might be speaking the literal truth. They may not have used "DNR", but instead used some, possibly proprietary, tool that accomplishes the same thing but called by a different name.
sperron is offline  
post #565 of 930 Old 06-27-2008, 02:36 PM
AVS Special Member
 
rlsmith's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Palo Alto, CA
Posts: 5,618
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 11
I just watched Patton on my 720P DLP projector (8 ft screen).

I saw this film in 70MM during its initial release in a theater specifically built to the specifications of the D150 process. I only saw it once in that format, the rest of the showings have all been in video. I will be trying to see the new Fox 70MM print of this film as soon as I can (it has shown in LA).

In many ways the picture on the Blu-ray is excellent. Spotless etc. The color (which was not originally a strong point and has been poor in many video versions) is good. Many of the reds and greens have looked washed out in recent years.

As to the digital processing, I suspect that some DNR/grain reduction was applied. I do not see EE. As to whether or not this helps or hurts, I really cannot say.

I do believe that the fact that processing was applied (if it was) is not in and of itself damning. It depends.

This is not like Sony's original Fifth Element, which was a slam-dunk to be labelled a miserable effort (which I did on these pages). Universal's Spartacus HD DVD is another example of clarity (the Criterion DVD is better).

I have seen too many times where memory fails us (yes, even me!) in terms of what we remember something looked or sounded like. I am not 100% sure how much better Patton would or could have looked. I think it is not optimal and I suspect we will see another attempt.

I have gone on record as saying that The Longest Day looks fine. I saw this only a few years ago on an archive 35mm print with optimal exhibition and feel comfortable in making this. I also saw this film about 30 times during its original run (I was a union projectionist).

I think we have to be careful with words like "despicable" on this one. I think I would have to have more information to make such a judgment.
rlsmith is offline  
post #566 of 930 Old 06-27-2008, 02:39 PM
Advanced Member
 
sperron's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 847
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 11
Quote:
Originally Posted by rlsmith View Post

I do not see EE.

What edge enhancement?
sperron is offline  
post #567 of 930 Old 06-27-2008, 03:09 PM
Advanced Member
 
giggle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 519
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by sperron View Post

What edge enhancement?

I honestly thought that whole post was a joke at first. I will admitt that I didn't think it was as bad as some however to say there was no EE??? I noticed the EE 7 feet back from my 50" plasma.
giggle is offline  
post #568 of 930 Old 06-27-2008, 03:13 PM
AVS Club Gold
 
Art Sonneborn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Battle Creek,MI USA
Posts: 22,307
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 13 Post(s)
Liked: 48
Quote:
Originally Posted by rlsmith View Post

I just watched Patton on my 720P DLP projector (8 ft screen).

I saw this film in 70MM during its initial release in a theater specifically built to the specifications of the D150 process. I only saw it once in that format, the rest of the showings have all been in video. I will be trying to see the new Fox 70MM print of this film as soon as I can (it has shown in LA).

In many ways the picture on the Blu-ray is excellent. Spotless etc. The color (which was not originally a strong point and has been poor in many video versions) is good. Many of the reds and greens have looked washed out in recent years.

As to the digital processing, I suspect that some DNR/grain reduction was applied. I do not see EE. As to whether or not this helps or hurts, I really cannot say.

I do believe that the fact that processing was applied (if it was) is not in and of itself damning. It depends.

This is not like Sony's original Fifth Element, which was a slam-dunk to be labelled a miserable effort (which I did on these pages). Universal's Spartacus HD DVD is another example of clarity (the Criterion DVD is better).

I have seen too many times where memory fails us (yes, even me!) in terms of what we remember something looked or sounded like. I am not 100% sure how much better Patton would or could have looked. I think it is not optimal and I suspect we will see another attempt.

I have gone on record as saying that The Longest Day looks fine. I saw this only a few years ago on an archive 35mm print with optimal exhibition and feel comfortable in making this. I also saw this film about 30 times during its original run (I was a union projectionist).

I think we have to be careful with words like "despicable" on this one. I think I would have to have more information to make such a judgment.

Being a projectionist and seeing that several here used grain as a technique to focus where is it in these presentations ?

I've personally never seen film projected that had no grain. This includes every IMAX I've ever seen.

I believe that these films both are poster children for similar heavy handed work as Citizen Kane.

Art


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.



iRule rules my theater
 

"If she's amazing she won't be easy,if she's easy she won't be amazing"

 

Bob Marley

Art Sonneborn is online now  
post #569 of 930 Old 06-27-2008, 03:21 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
DavidHir's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 10,394
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 159 Post(s)
Liked: 424
I too noticed EE on my 60" A3000 SXRD sitting about 8 feet back.

DavidHir is offline  
post #570 of 930 Old 06-27-2008, 03:26 PM
AVS Special Member
 
rlsmith's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Palo Alto, CA
Posts: 5,618
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 11
Quote:
Originally Posted by Art Sonneborn View Post

Being a projectionist and seeing that several here used grain as a technique to focus where is it in these presentations ?

I've personally never seen film projected that had no grain. This includes every IMAX I've ever seen.

I believe that these films both are poster children for similar heavy handed work as Citizen Kane.

Art

Citizen Kane is very unacceptable no doubt about it. Even the folks who did it will agree with you. I actually prefer my Criterion LD to the offending DVD in terms of being like the 35mm prints I have seen. [Beware: everything that we have for Kane is several generations from the original. The camera negative was destroyed in a fire.]

As to Patton, I am not sure, I would have to take another look. I hope to see the film in 70mm again soon, the new Fox print has been very well received. My recollection is that the grain was mimimal and there was more detail by a long shot. But I like some things about the Blu-ray.

As to The Longest Day, I stand by my claim that I like the Blu-ray and that it may well be close to the best-possible just as it is.

This grain issue is complicated. Many older films just have a lot of grain, especially when it is inconsistent. Certainly in some films (e.g., the gritty 70's dramas) grain is part of the presentation, but not always.

As an example, The Robe (the first CinemaScope picture released) was very grainy in its original theatrical release (which I saw 1 year late), it is well known that Fox was very unhappy with the film stocks at the time. Should we improve The Robe if it can be done or leave it as it is? I don't know.
rlsmith is offline  
Reply Blu-ray Software

User Tag List

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page


Forum Jump: 

Posting Rules  
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off