The Time Machine (1960) on Blu - AVS Forum
Forum Jump: 
 4Likes
Reply
 
Thread Tools
post #1 of 48 Old 07-29-2014, 09:12 AM - Thread Starter
AVS Special Member
 
Shaded Dogfood's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Terminus and the Lake of Light
Posts: 4,852
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 35 Post(s)
Liked: 36
The Time Machine (1960) on Blu

It's actually been out a while, but I didn't notice it until a month or so ago.


What the other sites say seems to be true: It is not much of an improvement in the video department. The colors are darker, warmer and tinged with magenta compared to the DVD (which was always a superb transfer). It's not much sharper.


On the audio side, it does seem to reproduce Russ Garcia's beautiful score better, and that's a big plus.


All I have watched is up to the miniature machine, but the DVD seemed to have color truer to the way the film looked (and I have seen it many times). Those who love the film probably have the original DVD, and you could probably just stick with it, though the music does sound great.

CW Hinkle
Shaded Dogfood is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #2 of 48 Old 07-29-2014, 11:19 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
DavidHir's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 10,450
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 184 Post(s)
Liked: 434
I watched this last weekend on my front projection set-up (pro cal'd JVC RS4810) and thought it looked a bit softer and less detailed than it should. I have a 108" wide scope screen, so I view 1:85 material close to 100" diagonally. With that said, I felt everything else looked excellent: warm, natural color, good shadows, nice grain structure, and fine overall image. I don't have the DVD any longer, but it looks far more film-like than any DVD I've ever seen. Perhaps the softness is just related to the original source material, or perhaps Warner didn't feel the need to spend the money to do a full blown restoration (ala Wizard of Oz, Gone with the Wind, etc.). Either way, I definitely recommend the disc.

DavidHir is online now  
post #3 of 48 Old 07-29-2014, 03:26 PM
Advanced Member
 
inspector's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Menifee, CA , USA
Posts: 958
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 14 Post(s)
Liked: 14
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shaded Dogfood View Post
It's actually been out a while, but I didn't notice it until a month or so ago.


What the other sites say seems to be true: It is not much of an improvement in the video department. The colors are darker, warmer and tinged with magenta compared to the DVD (which was always a superb transfer). It's not much sharper.


On the audio side, it does seem to reproduce Russ Garcia's beautiful score better, and that's a big plus.


All I have watched is up to the miniature machine, but the DVD seemed to have color truer to the way the film looked (and I have seen it many times). Those who love the film probably have the original DVD, and you could probably just stick with it, though the music does sound great.

So true CW!!! I watched the SD last year and I said on another site that the SD was a really good print.


I flipped between the two and the BD was very good looking, but if the SD was the only way to view it...then the SD is a keeper.

...finally retired and spending time in my HT!!!

My equipment consists of: Epson 9500 UB Projector(Avical ISFd); 110" JKP Affinity Screen; Panny BD30 Player, Tosh HDA1 Player; Definitive Speakers (Center, Towers, Rear); Onkyo 608 A/V Receiver; Nevo Q50 Remote; TWC DVR-HD Cable Box; 5 Bello chairs.
inspector is offline  
post #4 of 48 Old 07-30-2014, 09:43 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Mr.G's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 3,514
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 105 Post(s)
Liked: 118
Quote:
Originally Posted by DavidHir View Post
I watched this last weekend on my front projection set-up (pro cal'd JVC RS4810) and thought it looked a bit softer and less detailed than it should. I have a 108" wide scope screen, so I view 1:85 material close to 100" diagonally. With that said, I felt everything else looked excellent: warm, natural color, good shadows, nice grain structure, and fine overall image. I don't have the DVD any longer, but it looks far more film-like than any DVD I've ever seen. Perhaps the softness is just related to the original source material, or perhaps Warner didn't feel the need to spend the money to do a full blown restoration (ala Wizard of Oz, Gone with the Wind, etc.). Either way, I definitely recommend the disc.
Would have to agree with the softness on my projector setup and even my Darbee Darblet did not help much. Glad to have it on Blu-ray, just wish they had put a little more effort into mastering and producing this release. Single 25GB Blu-ray disc. The SD extras ported over from the DVD were disappointing as was the cheap eco-case that was cracked in a few places when it arrived. Didn't bother to return to Amazon, just changed the case out with a spare I had on hand. Recommended for die-hard fans.

http://www.blu-ray.com/movies/The-Ti...Blu-ray/56158/

All I Really Need to Know I Learned in Movies

Mr.G is offline  
post #5 of 48 Old 07-30-2014, 03:28 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
R Harkness's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Toronto, Ontario, Canada
Posts: 12,033
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 133 Post(s)
Liked: 359
The Time Machine has always been one of my favorite SD DVDS - quite sharp, detailed, rich. The Blu-Ray is somewhat improved all around, though I haven't done a direct comparison. Maybe I'll try to...
R Harkness is offline  
post #6 of 48 Old 07-31-2014, 12:49 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: 49
Still hoping for the other George Pal films yet to see the light on BD:


When Worlds Collide
Atlantis the Lost Continent
Conquest of Space
War of the Worlds

Art

My HT


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 offline  
post #7 of 48 Old 07-31-2014, 03:50 PM
AVS Special Member
 
wuther's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 1,453
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 126 Post(s)
Liked: 34
Quote:
Originally Posted by Art Sonneborn View Post
Still hoping for the other George Pal films yet to see the light on BD:


When Worlds Collide
Atlantis the Lost Continent
Conquest of Space
War of the Worlds

Art
How could you forget Destination Moon, The Naked Jungle, Tom Thumb, 7 Faces of Dr. Lao, The Power and The Wonderful World of the Brothers Grimm (however unlikely Grimm may be)? Or are some on blu-ray already?

I am greedy so I also want the Puppetoons and The Great Rupert.
wuther is offline  
post #8 of 48 Old 07-31-2014, 08:50 PM - Thread Starter
AVS Special Member
 
Shaded Dogfood's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Terminus and the Lake of Light
Posts: 4,852
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 35 Post(s)
Liked: 36
Quote:
Originally Posted by wuther View Post
How could you forget Destination Moon, The Naked Jungle, Tom Thumb, 7 Faces of Dr. Lao, The Power and The Wonderful World of the Brothers Grimm (however unlikely Grimm may be)? Or are some on blu-ray already?

I am greedy so I also want the Puppetoons and The Great Rupert.

Here ya go (though it's not cheap):


http://b2mp.net/products/the-puppetoon-movie-blu-ray/


http://cartoonresearch.com/index.php...lu-ray-update/


(I wouldn't have known about this had I not stumbled on its existence in a forum for dvdsavant or one of the other review sites).

CW Hinkle

Last edited by Shaded Dogfood; 07-31-2014 at 08:53 PM. Reason: another link
Shaded Dogfood is offline  
post #9 of 48 Old 07-31-2014, 09:48 PM
AVS Special Member
 
wuther's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 1,453
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 126 Post(s)
Liked: 34
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shaded Dogfood View Post
Here ya go (though it's not cheap):


http://b2mp.net/products/the-puppetoon-movie-blu-ray/


http://cartoonresearch.com/index.php...lu-ray-update/


(I wouldn't have known about this had I not stumbled on its existence in a forum for dvdsavant or one of the other review sites).
Yeah I think I read something about this months back but was confused as to what it actually was or b2mp's competence. Guess nobody has bought this here?
wuther is offline  
post #10 of 48 Old 07-31-2014, 10:10 PM
Senior Member
 
Marc Wielage's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Hollywood, USA
Posts: 458
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 234 Post(s)
Liked: 125
It's a 1960 movie -- it's never gonna be sharp.

I'm surprised there's much of a color difference, because usually for the last 10 years when a new HD (or 4K) version is made, the colorist is generally told to match the color of the original 1990s/1980s standard-def version. We generally drag along a copy of that version as a reference, just to make sure we're in that ballpark.

On the other hand, I think 99.9% of the people who made that film have been dead for 20 years (with the exception of Alan Young, who is still alive!), so it's unlikely anybody would be around to make a judgement call on color. You can always pull up a studio print and use that for comparison, but my experience is that 1960s prints tend to fade to the point where they're not very accurate.

No question, it's a great, great film. The remake was incredibly bad and lost a bundle of money, which is a shame; I think it's a rare idea that might have done well if the remake had been well-done.
Marc Wielage is offline  
post #11 of 48 Old 07-31-2014, 10:29 PM
Advanced Member
 
TK Doom's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Sun Diego
Posts: 892
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2 Post(s)
Liked: 16
The beginning of the remake wasn't that bad, it was the ending that was bad.

TK Doom

Unreal Tournament Forever
Project Gotham Racing too!
 

TK Doom is offline  
post #12 of 48 Old 08-01-2014, 04:05 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
R Harkness's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Toronto, Ontario, Canada
Posts: 12,033
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 133 Post(s)
Liked: 359
Quote:
Originally Posted by Marc Wielage View Post
It's a 1960 movie -- it's never gonna be sharp.

Whoa. A well preserved film shot in the 60's and before that (given certain stock, lighting, camera etc) can look amazing. Some 60's productions shot on film, off the top of my head: Lawrence Of Arabia, Dr. No, The Twilight Zone series and even lots of the original Star Trek are some of sharpest and most detailed images I've seen in my home theater.
DavidHir likes this.
R Harkness is offline  
post #13 of 48 Old 08-01-2014, 04:51 PM
Senior Member
 
Marc Wielage's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Hollywood, USA
Posts: 458
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 234 Post(s)
Liked: 125
Quote:
Originally Posted by R Harkness View Post
Whoa. A well preserved film shot in the 60's and before that (given certain stock, lighting, camera etc) can look amazing. Some 60's productions shot on film, off the top of my head: Lawrence Of Arabia, Dr. No, The Twilight Zone series and even lots of the original Star Trek are some of sharpest and most detailed images I've seen in my home theater.
It depends. The problem is the emulsions in those era are inherently soft and don't have the MTF to resolve enough line pairs. I've been through this thousands of times as a colorist here in LA.

Remember that apparent sharpness is as much defined by contrast and lenses as it is film stock, so there's a lot of factors that go into how sharp (or how soft) a piece of film is. I agree, if you can get to the original negative and focus is properly and scan it on a pin-registered scanner -- as all those titles were -- the results can often be fantastic. But even then, there are limits.
Marc Wielage is offline  
post #14 of 48 Old 08-02-2014, 09:34 AM - Thread Starter
AVS Special Member
 
Shaded Dogfood's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Terminus and the Lake of Light
Posts: 4,852
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 35 Post(s)
Liked: 36
I've long wondered what they use for sources for The Time Machine. It's simply 35mm masked- 16mm rental prints were academy ratio, and you could see the workbench in the decomposing Morlock (I believe this was the case in the videotape version too).


35mm prints released in the eighties had a brown cast, and I feared a good color version might not be possible any more. But two decades later came the DVD, which was beautiful. Comparing the Blu to the DVD makes me think the DVD still looks truer, though I've only watched the first twenty minutes or so.


The print recently shown on TCM is brown brown brown (ditto Seven Faces of Dr. Lao), which was not the way it used to look on the station. It makes me think the negative is unusable but there are well-stored positives, possibly in the hands of collectors, that they use for the optical media releases.

CW Hinkle
Shaded Dogfood is offline  
post #15 of 48 Old 08-02-2014, 12:51 PM
AVS Special Member
 
wuther's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 1,453
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 126 Post(s)
Liked: 34
Quote:
Originally Posted by Marc Wielage View Post
It depends. The problem is the emulsions in those era are inherently soft and don't have the MTF to resolve enough line pairs. I've been through this thousands of times as a colorist here in LA.
More like ancient masters usually equals mediocre or poor pq. If you need WB examples the first HD releases of Caddyshack and Fugitive were not the fault of the commonly used 'inherently soft' excuse just too old masters. There of course a lot more examples from other the studios/distributors.
wuther is offline  
post #16 of 48 Old 08-02-2014, 04:35 PM - Thread Starter
AVS Special Member
 
Shaded Dogfood's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Terminus and the Lake of Light
Posts: 4,852
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 35 Post(s)
Liked: 36
Quote:
Originally Posted by wuther View Post
Yeah I think I read something about [The Puppetoon Movie] months back but was confused as to what it actually was or b2mp's competence. Guess nobody has bought this here?

I ordered it Thursday from b2mp through amazon ($10 more, but I really, really wanted it and I wanted to be sure of things with amazon return policies); it arrived today. Haven't watched any of it yet, but I'll get back once I do.

CW Hinkle
Shaded Dogfood is offline  
post #17 of 48 Old 08-02-2014, 05:04 PM
 
NorthSky's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Canada - West Island: Vancouver, South Direction: Go East
Posts: 3,966
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1708 Post(s)
Liked: 522
I watched this sci-fi flick on Blu about three weeks ago or so. ...My fave sci-fi flick when I was a young child.

* The Blu-ray beats my DVD version; but this is not 'Avatar'.
...So don't look for a polished picture & sound (55-years old flick with limited budget).

It is the content here that counts, and in that regard it's an awesome film! ...It makes me feel young, even if I'm still am.

Last edited by NorthSky; 08-02-2014 at 05:08 PM.
NorthSky is offline  
post #18 of 48 Old 08-02-2014, 05:21 PM
Senior Member
 
Marc Wielage's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Hollywood, USA
Posts: 458
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 234 Post(s)
Liked: 125
Quote:
Originally Posted by wuther View Post
More like ancient masters usually equals mediocre or poor pq. If you need WB examples the first HD releases of Caddyshack and Fugitive were not the fault of the commonly used 'inherently soft' excuse just too old masters. There of course a lot more examples from other the studios/distributors.
A lot depends on the elements used to make the scans, the resolution of the scans, and whether the scans were pin-registered.

If they're doing it from an IP run on a real-time Spirit telecine, it's not going to be as sharp as the original negative on a pin-registered scanner. So there are "it depends" aspects of where and how the scans were obtained.

Having said all that: I can promise you anything made before about 1970 ain't gonna be that sharp to begin with, no matter what you do. The difference would be if you applied a lot of processing to the scanned material, as Lowry Digital routinely does, and in that case you can squeeze more apparent sharpness from the final transfers.

They did that to the 2K work I did on Star Wars Episode 4 and Episode 6, and trust me, those started off as very sharp. I was very glad to see how sharp Lowry could make the images after we worked on them at ILM. Inherently, what was on the film wasn't nearly that sharp.
Marc Wielage is offline  
post #19 of 48 Old 08-02-2014, 06:09 PM
AVS Special Member
 
wuther's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 1,453
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 126 Post(s)
Liked: 34
Quote:
Originally Posted by Marc Wielage View Post
Having said all that: I can promise you anything made before about 1970 ain't gonna be that sharp to begin with, no matter what you do.
You going to include 65mm/70mm in that? I saw a 70mm print of 2001 and it was more detailed then my BD even with the sharpening the BD obviously had. Besides I never used the word sharp and never will, properly done masters should be crisp like Wizard of Oz and Larger Then Life not sharp.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Marc Wielage View Post
The difference would be if you applied a lot of processing to the scanned material, as Lowry Digital routinely does, and in that case you can squeeze more apparent sharpness from the final transfers.

They did that to the 2K work I did on Star Wars Episode 4 and Episode 6, and trust me, those started off as very sharp. I was very glad to see how sharp Lowry could make the images after we worked on them at ILM. Inherently, what was on the film wasn't nearly that sharp.
I do not care for Lowry (now defunct) masters with their revisionist attitude and signature frozen film grain so I am not surprised they over processed them and the ST films are a good example of too old masters. The automatic filtering you are referring too was used to make it look 'good' on DVD rather then HD where the artifacts stand out like sore thumbs.

Last edited by wuther; 08-02-2014 at 06:25 PM.
wuther is offline  
post #20 of 48 Old 08-02-2014, 08:22 PM
Senior Member
 
Marc Wielage's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Hollywood, USA
Posts: 458
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 234 Post(s)
Liked: 125
Quote:
Originally Posted by wuther View Post
You going to include 65mm/70mm in that? I saw a 70mm print of 2001 and it was more detailed then my BD even with the sharpening the BD obviously had.
Well, 35mm can be technically sharper than Blu-ray, but again, it depends on how you measure it and how big the screen size is. Even then, the emulsions and lenses of 40 years ago don't hold up well, not even in a contact print.

Quote:
I do not care for Lowry (now defunct) masters with their revisionist attitude and signature frozen film grain so I am not surprised they over processed them and the ST films are a good example of too old masters.
Let's agree to disagree. BTW, the grain does move.
Marc Wielage is offline  
post #21 of 48 Old 08-02-2014, 09:07 PM
AVS Special Member
 
wuther's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 1,453
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 126 Post(s)
Liked: 34
Quote:
Originally Posted by Marc Wielage View Post
Let's agree to disagree. BTW, the grain does move.
In sky and similar shots? No and I am not the only one to have noticed this Lowry signature, not counting the ones where Lowry removed the film grain altogether but I am sure it was not noticeable on crt monitors probably used at the time. Thank goodness Lowry stopped doing masters at least a few years ago as far as I can tell.

Last edited by wuther; 08-02-2014 at 09:12 PM.
wuther is offline  
post #22 of 48 Old 08-02-2014, 10:18 PM
Senior Member
 
Marc Wielage's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Hollywood, USA
Posts: 458
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 234 Post(s)
Liked: 125
Quote:
Originally Posted by wuther View Post
In sky and similar shots? No and I am not the only one to have noticed this Lowry signature, not counting the ones where Lowry removed the film grain altogether but I am sure it was not noticeable on crt monitors probably used at the time.
They actually use Christie DLP projectors and also broadcast plasma monitors at Lowry, when I last walked through the building a couple of years ago. The degree of grain removal is a creative and client-driven decision, and many restoration companies are told what to do -- they don't necessarily get to make the choice on enhancement, noise reduction, or color. In fact, I'd say most of the time, the client makes those decisions. If the person paying the bill says "turn it up to 11," it goes to 11.
Marc Wielage is offline  
post #23 of 48 Old 08-03-2014, 04:27 AM
AVS Special Member
 
wuther's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 1,453
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 126 Post(s)
Liked: 34
Quote:
Originally Posted by Marc Wielage View Post
They actually use Christie DLP projectors and also broadcast plasma monitors at Lowry, when I last walked through the building a couple of years ago.
According to a New York Times article Lucas said the SW masters you were writing about was done in 2004 not two years ago and I suspect the other masters Lowry did were not much younger. But I digress.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Marc Wielage View Post
The degree of grain removal is a creative and client-driven decision, and many restoration companies are told what to do -- they don't necessarily get to make the choice on enhancement, noise reduction, or color. In fact, I'd say most of the time, the client makes those decisions. If the person paying the bill says "turn it up to 11," it goes to 11.
As the proverb goes victory has a thousand fathers, defeat is a orphan. In articles with Lowry himself he expressed a disdain for film grain and then backtracks somewhat.

Last edited by wuther; 08-03-2014 at 04:31 AM.
wuther is offline  
post #24 of 48 Old 08-03-2014, 07:58 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
DavidHir's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 10,450
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 184 Post(s)
Liked: 434
It's true the Star Wars Blus stem from 10 year-old masters at 2K and it really shows. They have a "digital" look them as a result of excessive edge enhancement, frozen grain in some scenes, noise reduction, as well as color inconsistencies. I'm hoping Disney gives these the restoration the movies deserve especially compared to how good other 4K restorations from this era look.

DavidHir is online now  
post #25 of 48 Old 08-03-2014, 08:16 AM
AVS Special Member
 
wuther's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 1,453
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 126 Post(s)
Liked: 34
Quote:
Originally Posted by DavidHir View Post
It's true the Star Wars Blus stem from 10 year-old masters at 2K and it really shows. They have a "digital" look them as a result of excessive edge enhancement, frozen grain in some scenes, noise reduction, as well as color inconsistencies. I'm hoping Disney gives these the restoration the movies deserve especially compared to how good other 4K restorations from this era look.
At the risk of going too off topic Fox owns the first film (aka A New Hope) but I guess Disney could get some cash induced arrangement.

Anyway this dovetails nicely to what I wrote before that it is more likely old or even ancient masters are the reason for mediocre or poor pq rather the commonly used 'inherently soft' excuse.
wuther is offline  
post #26 of 48 Old 08-03-2014, 06:19 PM
Senior Member
 
Marc Wielage's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Hollywood, USA
Posts: 458
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 234 Post(s)
Liked: 125
Quote:
Originally Posted by wuther View Post
According to a New York Times article Lucas said the SW masters you were writing about was done in 2004 not two years ago and I suspect the other masters Lowry did were not much younger. But I digress.
I agree, you do. The work I did for ILM was in the first half of 2004, and then the last time I walked through Lowry to say hello to some old friends (who are no longer there) was in 2012. No confusion. I had no contact with Lowry when I was working on Star Wars and Jedi -- the new files just showed up, we'd load them in, show them to George and Rick, and move on.

Quote:
As the proverb goes victory has a thousand fathers, defeat is a orphan. In articles with Lowry himself he expressed a disdain for film grain and then backtracks somewhat.
The Lowry Process won an Oscar in the last couple of years, unfortunately right as John Lowry himself passed away, but I think his idea was a good one. The problem with film grain is more a problem with grain management: keeping the level of grain consistent and reasonable throughout the project. Completely taking the grain out to zero is not an option. There always has to be some grain in there, or else the image becomes a little too artificial looking (particularly from film-based projects).

http://dearcinema.com/article/relian...cal-oscar/3742

Every D.I. I've been part of in the last 10-12 years has always employed grain management, just so that certain multi-generation shots don't jump out as being excessively grainy, and also digitally-derived shots don't jump out as having zero grain at all. There's a happy medium between the two where you have a little grain throughout the whole thing.

I know of some recent digitally-sourced productions where they chose to render a subtle layer of film grain throughout the entire movie, just to give it a little more texture. You'd be surprised how often this is done, and it's neither expensive nor is it time-consuming.
Marc Wielage is offline  
post #27 of 48 Old 08-03-2014, 06:41 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
DavidHir's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 10,450
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 184 Post(s)
Liked: 434
Quote:
Originally Posted by Marc Wielage View Post
I agree, you do. The work I did for ILM was in the first half of 2004, and then the last time I walked through Lowry to say hello to some old friends (who are no longer there) was in 2012. No confusion. I had no contact with Lowry when I was working on Star Wars and Jedi -- the new files just showed up, we'd load them in, show them to George and Rick, and move on.


The Lowry Process won an Oscar in the last couple of years, unfortunately right as John Lowry himself passed away, but I think his idea was a good one. The problem with film grain is more a problem with grain management: keeping the level of grain consistent and reasonable throughout the project. Completely taking the grain out to zero is not an option. There always has to be some grain in there, or else the image becomes a little too artificial looking (particularly from film-based projects).

http://dearcinema.com/article/relian...cal-oscar/3742

Every D.I. I've been part of in the last 10-12 years has always employed grain management, just so that certain multi-generation shots don't jump out as being excessively grainy, and also digitally-derived shots don't jump out as having zero grain at all. There's a happy medium between the two where you have a little grain throughout the whole thing.

I know of some recent digitally-sourced productions where they chose to render a subtle layer of film grain throughout the entire movie, just to give it a little more texture. You'd be surprised how often this is done, and it's neither expensive nor is it time-consuming.
Hi Marc,

Would you happen to know if work at the 4K level has been done for Star Wars recently?


Last edited by DavidHir; 08-03-2014 at 08:05 PM.
DavidHir is online now  
post #28 of 48 Old 08-03-2014, 06:57 PM
AVS Special Member
 
wuther's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 1,453
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 126 Post(s)
Liked: 34
Quote:
Originally Posted by Marc Wielage View Post
The problem with film grain is more a problem with grain management: keeping the level of grain consistent and reasonable throughout the project.
The problem is (or was) the studio/distributor/mastering management who have wildly different ideas of what the 'modern' home video consumers want. These are the same geniuses that thought home video should only be pan & scan. Most of them thought in the beginning of the HD format the consumers wanted high cleaning in short to just be a higher resolution with the dvd look. They got a lot of blow back from the film fans just like they got over pan & scan which is why most of the newest made masters are much closer to full film grain then the older masters plus better scans.

It does not help there are still film grain haters demanding HD be clean though. For over a hundred year film goers have paid to watch productions with different levels of grain consistently and you will not find them complaining about it coming out the theater. Lowry had a thing about it sure and he was wrong, not that there is any film grain consistently between the Bond film masters which is want he really should of been worried about but I am sure the pressure to knock them out fast had partly to do with it.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Marc Wielage View Post
I know of some recent digitally-sourced productions where they chose to render a subtle layer of film grain throughout the entire movie, just to give it a little more texture. You'd be surprised how often this is done, and it's neither expensive nor is it time-consuming.
Since I have been writing in this forum for years about fake film grain being applied to digitally recorded productions it comes as no surprise to me at all.
Marc Wielage likes this.
wuther is offline  
post #29 of 48 Old 08-03-2014, 07:59 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: 49
Quote:
Originally Posted by Marc Wielage View Post
It's a 1960 movie -- it's never gonna be sharp.

Incredibly ignorant comment I'm afraid.


Art

My HT


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 offline  
post #30 of 48 Old 08-04-2014, 12:32 AM
Senior Member
 
Marc Wielage's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Hollywood, USA
Posts: 458
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 234 Post(s)
Liked: 125
Quote:
Originally Posted by Art Sonneborn View Post
Incredibly ignorant comment I'm afraid.
Sadly, my ignorance is backed up by being a video mastering engineer for 35 years. 20 of those were for Technicolor in Hollywood; 3 of them were for Kodak, also in Hollywood. I have 400 credits on IMDB, and have mastered more than 250 feature films and been involved with about 40 network TV series.

None of them are as sharp as I would like, especially the ones as old as The Time Machine (which is one of my favorite films). Perhaps we have different ideas of what sharpness is.
Phantom Stranger likes this.
Marc Wielage 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