Indiana Jones Trilogy - Page 28

I watched all three, Raiders of the Lost Arc does have * some teal and orange going on.
Edited by Fanboyz - 9/16/12 at 2:21pm

Yes it does- though most people watching this (and reviewing it , and lauding it) lack an artists eye to be able to distinguish the difference between endless variations in shade and saturation of one or two hues, and a broader more natural range of hues.
While the Bd may indeed look 'warmer' than the DVD and HDTV transfers- the latter two were more naturally balanced in terms of color. The Bd to the contrary has clearly had digital gymnastics performed to eek out teal shadings while at the same time increasing the orange tones in the skin.

This is just as unnatural and inorganic as going in and scrubbing out the grain.
The difference is, it doesn't necessarily take an artists eye to detect the difference between a slight granular texture to an image and one that is shiny, waxy and missing the finest detail. Which is why every layman seems to seize on this one metric when evaluating how true to a film-like look a given Bd is.

OTOH it takes someone who is more tuned into color to notice there is a difference between an image containing both ultramarine and cobalt blues (two completely different hues), and one that just has varying degrees in vividness and shade of a solitary aqua blue.

I doubt it. Compare this one to the shot from the same scene in the Blu-ray.com review, yours is missing a ton of grain.

Those pics are not direct screen captures, they are processed nonsense. I wish people would stop doing this, unless they know what they're doing. This is in no way representative of what's on the disc. Again, please stop.

Seen the movie a thousand times and never noticed this before today

Might not help that this is the first time watching it in 1080p on a ten foot wide screen. It was so glaringly obvious this time that I thought my system was acting up and I came right over to the boards to see if this was an issue with the movie or with my playback...guess it is the movie. It's pretty bad, I was going to show the movie off to some family but that bad focus won't make for a good demo.

Do Last Crusade and Temple deserve marks above 4/5 when they've been sharpen filtered this bad? You be the judge.







Hey look, I can ruin stuff the same way without millions of dollars and fully paid staff. Just needed 30 seconds with Photoshop.


Edited by FitzRoy - 9/16/12 at 7:24pm

Amen... an easy way to spot post-coloring issues is when the shadows get tinted whatever color their trying to bump.

eveyone should rise up and call for a Gladiator type of remaster!...either way I love the Indy movies so much I'm still going to buy this flawed or not boxset

Guaranteed they do this in 12 months time and just like Gladiator they will do it discreetly (no official announcements) to avoid the same type of embarrasment that Paramount endured in the Gladiator blu ray picture quality fiasco. That's why I'm not buying this set, even if they sell it for $1.

the Gladiator exchange program was a free replacement so it's not like you paid extra for it...so if they end up doing the same thing for Indy then at least I'll still get to watch the 4 movies in the time being looking a lot better then the DVD

Thank you for providing exactly the type of flagrant over-reaction that I talked about in order to better illustrate my prior post.

Last Crusade is effectively the same as Temple. Still some sharpening, but the effect isn't as damaging to the film as a whole. Exteriors simply appear more precise in their definition. Colors are rich (the stained glass window is excellent), and detail is consistently high. This is arguably the tightest shot film of the first three. It's a looker, but a shame that it wasn't left alone:

http://www.doblu.com/2012/09/17/indiana-jones-and-the-last-crusade-review/

The argument over Raiders' color timing is one worth having despite some persistence otherwise. I don't think it's enough to warrant a boycott of the this, and there's not a chance Paramount will re-release this. It's not Gladiator. BUT, Raiders looks digital, almost glowing because of the changes. The appearance of Temple and Crusade offer a relative base point to compare saturation and color timing. Raiders does stick out.

From the details on this restoration, it sounds as though the color timing was approved by Spielberg. Without having seen the Blu Ray just yet, I don't have a strong opinion on it. My first reaction is that I wish he'd left it alone. But if this is Director approved, I seriously doubt we'll see a remaster/replacement. Still, I'm looking forward to seeing Raiders on the big screen tomorrow evening

Whilst it may be the studios movie to do with what they want, it's our money to do with what we want, that they are after, and they need to keep that in mind.

I think the Indiana Jones Collection may just become the equivalent of the Lord Of The Rings Trilogy to those that care about Bluray quality and film transparency.

Voting with the wallet is the only power the consumer has been given in these matters.

Life is too short. I will have the set tomorrow, and will be very pleased.

Raiders Is fine.

Fine is good enough?

I'd take the color timing of Raiders on TOD and Last Crusade if it meant new masters for those two without all the edginess. They look fine, but they're not as good as they could've been.

The most disappointing aspect of DVD, and now Blu-ray, is that all the tinkering and poor processing caused the format not to reach its full potential. Most DVDs could've looked way better than they did, and the trend has continued with Blu-ray. Makes me wonder if there's any point at all in a home 4K format.

I'll probably pick this one up when it's on sale over the holidays. I'm holding out on a lot of big stuff this month that I'd normally buy on release day.

Sharpness or no there is more detail in the old scans

No, as no visible EE or DNR and not as teal/ orange as most remasters.

As far as discs paramount has released it is the best.

The effects shots DNR is very visible

More detail in the old Raider's scan? I'm going to call that rubbish.

The studios have already well and truly demonstrated their attitude to the home video format and I fully expect this to continue in any future format, 4K included.

However, you can sort of understand why they do it: once you give the consumer the best practical quality, there is little incentive to keep spending and sadly $ is what it is all about. If you dangle a carrot in front of a donkey, it will want to keep stepping forward, even when the carrot remains out of reach.

I think 4K will eventually become mainstream by default, because that is the hardware the manufacturers will provide, not because the consumer actually wants it: IMO the same thing has happened with 3D. 4K does have advantages of providing greater passive 3D resolution, but beyond that I don't think the average consumer will care.

But bringing discussion back to the Indiana Jones Collection, I think all this tinkering disrespects the original art and that really needs to be preserved above everything else: tinkering can be done during playback, if necessary, but you can't properly reverse tinkering once it has been imposed.

If this is the color timing that Steven Spielberg envisioned for home video, I will reserve my judgement until after I have watched the first three movies. From the screencaps, I am not sure how feel about it. Certainly cannot judge a movie by a few screenshots...

Those of you with Costco stores nearby (they'll have Indy for $61.99), keep in mind Costco's liberal return policy! If, for instance, the set goes on sale on Black Friday, you could buy a second set and return it unopened to Costco for the $61.99 refund.

Just sayin'!

I won't be doing that because, one, I feel $61.99 is a fair price and, two, I seriously doubt the set is going to be much cheaper anytime soon.

Mark

So does Raiders have the original matte painting or the CGI seen in some cable broadcasts?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e_sFW8grQtU

Yes, Raiders has all original matte paintings and effects, nothing has been changed except for the reflection in the glass between Ford and the cobra.

My rather quick review. In one word the set is AMAZING.

Let's get some stuff out of the way first...

- NONE of the effects in any of the movies are DNRed. Not sure what Mike is trying to accomplish here, but his statements are 100% false.
- The sound in all of the movies is state of the art, better than ever. The 5.1 mixes all use original sound elements. Nothing has been added, or deleted.
- None of the films have been digitally altered except for the said reflection.
- On my set-up, using PS3 with 24P set to off, there's virtually ZERO aliasing in Temple of Doom (specifically looked for the cage which was lowered down into the lava) and only visible on the opening credits font in The Last Crusade. I again specifically looked for the scenes from Capsaholic and looked at the chairs and also the wires between the wings on the biplane. Nothing, zero aliasing. This has been COMPLETELY blown out of proportion. 90% of this aliasing is caused by the equipment used to take the screen captures.
- Raiders of the Lost Ark has great new color timing, which match the rest of the series.
- All four movies look awesome and as good as they ever did and most likely ever will.
- Temple of Doom and The Last Crusade are very consistent. They have a nice layer of film grain (the structure is nicely intact) throughout. Both of these movies remind me of the excellent work that Lowry has done on Aliens and Titanic.
- Raiders of the Lost Ark has a marvelous brand new 4K scan, with excellent detail.
- Gorgeous colors in the first three movies.

Now a couple of small concerns (all are regarding Raiders), nothing that should prevent anyone from owning these masterpieces.

- Raiders of the Lost Ark is not as consistent grain wise as its sequels. Some of the effect shots have heavy grain.
- The opening scene seemed a little washed out, but everything quickly became normal as we land in Nepal. There, the blacks are rich and deep, etc. and they stay that way for the remainder of the movie.
- There was very little restoration done here, other than a standard clean-up of dirt, damage, etc.
- The 4K scan is so detailed that it's now scary how low budget this movie looks. Film speed up, matte paintings, dozens of out of focus shots, etc. are all clear as day. This was a real eye opener for me.
- I understand why Spielberg wanted a new 4K scan for Raiders. Other than a slightly new color grading to match the other movies, he wanted to give us Raiders of the Lost Ark EXACTLY how it is on 35mm film. This is one of the most raw presentations of an older film that I have ever seen. This is the complete opposite of Jaws, which had perfect grain management and heavy restoration. And I loved every second of it.

What a year 2012 has been for us film fans. Run, do not walk to buy this set!

My top 10 movies of all time:

The Terminator
Terminator 2: Judgment Day
Aliens
The Abyss
Jaws
Raiders of the Lost Ark
Star Wars
Ben-Hur
It's a Wonderful Life
Jurassic Park

- The 4K scan is so detailed that it's now scary how low budget this movie looks. Film speed up, matte paintings, dozens of out of focus shots, etc. are all clear as day. This was a real eye opener for me.

I thought this one was low budget sounding and looking from the start. I can barely watch it without laughing these days but I'm not a HUGE fan of the series. It will be fun to see the film with a nice restoration though.

This is incorrect as Raiders most definitely has been 'digitally altered'. I realize that you are probably using the phrase with a very narrow set of attributes in mind (I'm guessing- EFX shots changed with Cg or overzealous DNR which changes the surface texture) but the new color grading, and the specific look it now imposes on the film, could not be achieved with anything but digital software and some tech sitting at a terminal. I agree that the film was slightly 'warmer' in original release compared to the all the previous director overseen, 'painstakingly remastered' DVD, LDs, VHS releases- but teals don't manifest themselves organically when you push the color to emphasize orange faces and golden hues.

So, people need to understand the fundamental fact that Raiders HAS been digitally altered for this release.


Yes, apparently it was important for this release that the visual look of Raiders be shifted slightly to match the look of Crystal Skull (which is the only other film in the series that pushes the golden haze, orange faces, and ...teals).
Ironically, as was the case with SW, the only film in the series that is truly worth a damn is the one that must be altered to fit better with most recent, and least worthy entry.
TOD and TLC both have color balances and hues that look authentic to their 80's made origin.

I saw the film many times over the years, the first being a sneak preview weeks before it's initial release. shadows and black levels were always deep, moody, and a big reason the opening has always packed such a whallop.
This new effort doesn't have anything on how this used to or should look. And while the DVD could have stood to be timed a little warmer- it wasn't that far off, imo (in terms of overall color relationships, black levels, contrast, etc). The Bd is two steps forward in this regard, and a big step back.

This is not how Raiders looked originally on 35 mm. Right off the bat, the teal (in all it's various shades and intensities) is a dead give away this is not the 'genuine' article. There are other lame quirks to the image here and there as well, but you really don't need to go any farther than that to classify this effort just as inauthentic and revisionist as if Spielberg has chose to DVNR all the grain out of the film, or replace matte paintings with seamless digital recreations.
It's six of one and half dozen of another.

Doesn't matter a whole lot though since a whole generation of people have grown up watching some of the ugliest, most ridiculously stylized looking films of all time in the last decade- and now find this aesthetic completely natural. When something like this comes along, that isn't as in your face obnoxious about it's T&O agenda as something like a Michael Bay movie, people are apt to wrongly concluded it must be reverential and faithful to the source, when it really isn't.
Edited by Paulidan - 9/18/12 at 3:22am

Is it really the only film worth a damn in the series? I find the first one to be terribly hammy and low budget as said before. I haven't viewed it on Bluray though and have no idea how the series looks and sounds in high-def. I can't imagine that awful sound design is much better than it was on DVD through headphones. I was literally laughing out loud at the effects in the forest both visually and sonically. I know it's old but this ain't no Blade Runner that is for damn sure.

Now saying that I really wish someone great would have directed the Newer Indiana because this series always had the template for a great film I just don't think it ever went past a childhood fancy for me and yeah that newer one was purely awful in all ways.

"color balances and hues that look authentic to their 80's made origin."

Also, I would have to very strongly disagree that color timing in this age is all bad. I cannot even watch Blade Runner's old color timing without thinking it's just awful. The new one sets the film in stone for me as a futuristic film that is hardly dated at all where as that 80s red push is beyond hideous IMO. I am glad they left it alone for the old ones but would have been shattered if they hadn't changed it for The Final Cut. Not everyone wants to live in the 80s forever. Many of these directors had no choice in these matters during that time.