AVS › AVS Forum › Blu-ray & HD DVD › Blu-ray Software › Indiana Jones Trilogy
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Indiana Jones Trilogy - Page 30

post #871 of 1228
9/18/12 at 2:15pm
I wonder just how involved most directors are in the 'restoration' process. Do they sit in for several hours each day or at least weekly, discussing and directing each step of the process... or do they have an initial meeting and then sign off on the restoration after it's basically finalized? (obviously this changes based on director and project)

There's a bit of subtext to my question... most (or at least 'many') directors are not necessarily tech experts. As in, not all of them could light a set or tell you the difference between an HMI and a tungsten lamp. Many may not know the difference between CTO and CTB, or to what that even refers without using google. They guide the ship, not necessarily know how to physically keep it afloat.

Point being, I wonder if Speilberg even fully understands/was shown just how much color change was done to Raiders. He may have seen a before/after image/scene and just picked up on how much clearer and better defined it was... and the crazy color shift may have gone unnoticed by him if not pointed out directly. He's gone on record as saying he wants his films to be presented as faithfully as possible now, flaws and all (learning a lesson after the guns-to-walkies fiasco in ET) as a way to preserve the original 'art'.... so it seems odd that he'd knowingly sign off on such a radical color temp shift.
Reply
Reply

Gear mentioned in this thread:

post #872 of 1228
9/18/12 at 2:24pm
I see no radical color temp shift. Radical from what? The DVD/HDTV? Maybe. But who cares? Are you telling me that the magenta HDTV picture is representative of what the movies looked like during the 80s? Not even close! If anything, this new color grading is closer to what was put out in the 80s.
Reply
Reply
post #873 of 1228
9/18/12 at 2:25pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by JP32 View Post

I wonder just how involved most directors are in the 'restoration' process. Do they sit in for several hours each day or at least weekly, discussing and directing each step of the process... or do they have an initial meeting and then sign off on the restoration after it's basically finalized? (obviously this changes based on director and project)
There's a bit of subtext to my question... most (or at least 'many') directors are not necessarily tech experts. As in, not all of them could light a set or tell you the difference between an HMI and a tungsten lamp. Many may not know the difference between CTO and CTB, or to what that even refers without using google. They guide the ship, not necessarily know how to physically keep it afloat.
Point being, I wonder if Speilberg even fully understands/was shown just how much color change was done to Raiders. He may have seen a before/after image/scene and just picked up on how much clearer and better defined it was... and the crazy color shift may have gone unnoticed by him if not pointed out directly. He's gone on record as saying he wants his films to be presented as faithfully as possible now, flaws and all (learning a lesson after the guns-to-walkies fiasco in ET) as a way to preserve the original 'art'.... so it seems odd that he'd knowingly sign off on such a radical color temp shift.
I doubt Spielberg compared it to the DVD transfer.
Watching a movie projected in a dark room is much different than flipping between screenshots in your web browser, I imagine the difference is less striking in that situation.
Reply
Reply
post #874 of 1228
9/18/12 at 2:35pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by NagysAudio View Post

I see no radical color temp shift. Radical from what? The DVD/HDTV? Maybe. But who cares? Are you telling me that the magenta HDTV picture is representative of what the movies looked like during the 80s? Not even close! If anything, this new color grading is closer to what was put out in the 80s.

Nobody noticed orange flags until this release came out. Not in the theatre, not on any home video format. They were red before because, well, they were red. Of all of the home video releases, this is the big outlier. Your are correct that maybe this means all previous home video releases were wrong and this one is right. But then there's the orange flags nobody saw in the theatre, and, well, that settles it. What props department has these orange flags? Didn't they have a historian on staff?

This has been CLEARLY manipulated from the theatrical version. Color timing aside, there's also the brightening in the opening sequence and the reflection removal, but of which were admitted going into the thing. If what you want is to see it as it was in the theatre, you have every right to be disappointed with this release.

Nevertheless, I side with the group that says the digital manipulations performed on this release, while wrong, unjustified, and thoroughly unnecessary, aren't really that awful. It still ends up looking pretty good, even if it doesn't look like it did theatrically (and seriously, is there really even any arguing this point anymore?).

I'll probably buy once the individual releases are out, especially if there's an AviSynth script out there by then to bring the colors under control.
Reply
Reply
post #875 of 1228
9/18/12 at 2:37pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by NagysAudio View Post

I see no radical color temp shift. Radical from what? The DVD/HDTV? Maybe. But who cares? Are you telling me that the magenta HDTV picture is representative of what the movies looked like during the 80s? Not even close! If anything, this new color grading is closer to what was put out in the 80s.

You do not get teal tones sprouting up (especially in the shadows) by 'warming up' an image. So- No. This is not closer to what was seen in the 80's. Simply being warmer than the DVD isn't what the image was about in the 80's. There was a tonal balance there with the warmer timing that is not there with this new digital grading, because this new digital grading is accomplishing complex color gymnastics that are unnatural and impossible to replicate in nature.
Reply
Reply
post #876 of 1228
9/18/12 at 2:41pm
I never said that this new color grading was exactly what was shown in the 80s. All I said was that what was shown on the DVD/HDTV is definitely not what was shown theatrically. Therefore it doesn't really matter one way, or another. None of the home releases are accurate. But if I had to guess, I bet the new color grading is overall closer to the theatrical presentation than the DVD/HDTV masters (except for the orange flags of course).
Reply
Reply
post #877 of 1228
9/18/12 at 2:47pm
...and the yellow sunset? Didn't they have a meteorologist on staff?

But apart from better sanitation and medicine and education and irrigation and public health and roads and a freshwater system and baths and public order... what did they alter in this film? Nothing!
Reply
Reply
post #878 of 1228
9/18/12 at 2:51pm
Dooode, don't buy the Blu-ray!
Reply
Reply
post #879 of 1228
9/18/12 at 2:54pm
Finally saw the discs for myself. Raiders is undoubtedly too warm. I've seen this film a zillion times, even saw it projected in 70mm several years back and this is a different look. I can live with it as the image is great otherwise, and I was able to correct it somewhat by pushing my projector cooler. I was even starting to think some were being too hard on it until I popped in Temple of Doom, which looks perfect to my eyes and exactly as I remember it. The sound is a MASSIVE improvement on Raiders though. Raiders always had shrill and canned sound and the remix made it sound brand new...I think the box set is worth it just for the new hour long, fly on the wall making of Raiders doc, which has a ton of outtakes I hadn't seen, all in HD.
Reply
Reply
post #880 of 1228
9/18/12 at 2:59pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by NagysAudio View Post

Dooode, don't buy the Blu-ray!

Why, I've already said I will. Is there a problem?
Reply
Reply
post #881 of 1228
9/18/12 at 3:01pm
how on Earth are people still remembering the exact color details from a movie they saw in the theater over 30 years ago and comparing it to the Blu-ray??...no way can anyone remember such details
Edited by TitusTroy - 9/18/12 at 3:17pm
Reply
Reply
post #882 of 1228
9/18/12 at 3:02pm
CatBus, yeah there's a major problem! The color temp is all jacked up!
Reply
Reply
post #883 of 1228
9/18/12 at 3:08pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by TitusTroy View Post

how on Earth are people still remembering the exact color details from a movie they saw in the theater over 30 years ago??...no way can anyone remember such details

I'm not. I'm remembering what things like Nazi flags and the sky on planet earth look like, and the fact that I never noticed before how this film's version looked nothing like the real world's version until the Blu-ray came out. Which may very well just mean the film was digitally manipulated back in 1981 too look artificial, hey, what do I know?

The fact that it looks pretty good, even good enough to buy, is NOT the same as saying it looks like it did in the theatre. I can like this home video release, like it better than any other home video release on resolution alone, and wish it were better at the same time, can't I? I'll buy it. I'll recommend it. But I won't say it looks like it did in the theatre.
Reply
Reply
post #884 of 1228
9/18/12 at 3:10pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by NagysAudio View Post

CatBus, yeah there's a major problem! The color temp is all jacked up!

That's not a major problem in my opinion. If you read my posts you'd already know that.
Reply
Reply
post #885 of 1228
9/18/12 at 3:11pm
There was no digital manipulation in 1981.

P.S. I'm watching Raiders again right now, what an incredible movie and awesome Blu-ray!
Reply
Reply
post #886 of 1228
9/18/12 at 3:14pm
I just picked up my set from Wal-Mart. All five discs are scratched to $%^&! Thank you, Paramount, your quality control is outstanding!
Reply
Reply
post #887 of 1228
9/18/12 at 3:14pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by TitusTroy View Post

how on Earth are people still remembering the exact color details from a movie they saw in the theater over 30 years ago??...no way can anyone remember such details

I can, as it's my favorite film, and when I lived in Los Angeles, anytime it screened somewhere I made an effort to see it in the theater. It's only been a few years since I last saw it projected on film and it didn't look like this. It has definitely been altered. That being said I don't find it THAT objectionable. I personally am more bothered by things like DNR and edge enhancement, which have not been abused here.
Reply
Reply
post #888 of 1228
9/18/12 at 3:14pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by NagysAudio View Post

There was no digital manipulation in 1981.

Ah, then it's the Blu-ray that was manipulated then. Thanks for pointing that out.
Reply
Reply
post #889 of 1228
9/18/12 at 3:15pm
It's impossible for these discs to get scratch in this style of packaging. Especially all five of them. Picture, or it didn't happen.
Reply
Reply
post #890 of 1228
9/18/12 at 3:17pm
Batutta, would you say the DVD/HDTV is representative of what you saw in all of those theater experiences?
Reply
Reply
post #891 of 1228
9/18/12 at 3:18pm
Disappointing.

I just shake my head to so called reviewers that don't even realize how egregious the Orange and Teal bias on this transfer. Then again Orange and Teal has been a popular look on movies recently that they expect catalog releases to look the same. After all these years those online reviewers still has no clue. And . . . and . . . whatever.
Reply
Reply
post #892 of 1228
9/18/12 at 3:21pm
So Xylon, do you like the new Raiders transfer, or not?
Reply
Reply
post #893 of 1228
9/18/12 at 3:27pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Xylon View Post

Disappointing.
I just shake my head to so called reviewers that don't even realize how egregious the Orange and Teal bias on this transfer.

And in keeping with my tradition of arguing out of both sides of my mouth, I don't think I'd call it egregious... unless, of course, you'd call any orange-teal shift egregious, in which case it's just redundant. Yes, they did it, yes, they didn't need to, yes, it does on occasion screw up the look of the film in a noticeable way. But compared to past orange-and-teal-fests, this is tame. It doesn't ever look like Harrison Ford fell into a vat of self-tanner. It never looks like there's a nearby tornado making the sky turn green. All in all, it's watchable. Good, even. But lord, not perfect.
Reply
Reply
post #894 of 1228
9/18/12 at 3:30pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by NagysAudio View Post

Batutta, would you say the DVD/HDTV is representative of what you saw in all of those theater experiences?

Yes...Maybe a touch on the cool side but much closer than the blu-ray. Really, all you need to do is pop in Temple of Doom and Last Crusade to see that they look more faithful to their original versions. They just look right. Raiders looks...different. There's no getting around it. How much that bothers you in the end is up to you...Ultimately, it doesn't rob my enjoyment of the film in the least...I mean, to make a crude analogy, when I make love to my wife, I'm not sitting there pointing out how her skin tone is off, and what is that small bump on her shoulder, and why isn't her hair quite as soft as it was the other day. That kind of misses the point of the whole endeavor. This is still Raiders, and it's still an awesome film.
Reply
Reply
post #895 of 1228
9/18/12 at 3:32pm
Can someone tell me where people are seeing these vast quantities of teal in this transfer?
Yes, it's rather orange... but teal?
Reply
Reply
post #896 of 1228
9/18/12 at 3:34pm
There are no vast quantities of teal, or orange...
Reply
Reply
post #897 of 1228
9/18/12 at 3:34pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by jimbotron View Post

So does Raiders have the original matte painting or the CGI seen in some cable broadcasts?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e_sFW8grQtU

That shot will never be in the movie again. It was a mistake that it ever got out in the first place. Spielberg did not approve it.
Reply
Reply
post #898 of 1228
9/18/12 at 3:46pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by 42041 View Post

Can someone tell me where people are seeing these vast quantities of teal in this transfer?
Yes, it's rather orange... but teal?

every swatch in this image is some form of teal. The only differences between them are saturation (vividness) and shading (the addition of white or black).



People look at the images from this Bd and think they are seeing a full spectrum of colors- but they aren't. Most of the 'blues' you think you are seeing are some variation of the tones above. They all represent the same specific point on the color wheel, midway between blue and green.

In the 80's (as you can see with TOD and TLC) we had movies that offered a full range of hues( separate distinct colors), along with a multitude of variations within each. You also didn't see orange Nazi flags.

It also amazes me that people think that every past release of these films on previous formats just sort of snuck out there into the marketplace without Spielberg's awareness or approval and that the Blu-ray is the first time they've made a big deal about remastering and presenting the films with attention to detail and loving care.
Edited by Paulidan - 9/18/12 at 3:56pm
Reply
Reply
post #899 of 1228
9/18/12 at 3:53pm
But as far as where it's really noticeable, I thought I noticed too much teal in the Paramount logo and never felt I saw it again. I think it's fair to say that the orange-teal push in this disc is weighted heavily toward the orange (I'd even say more gold or yellow in some places). In my opinion, of course.
Reply
Reply
post #900 of 1228
9/18/12 at 3:56pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Paulidan View Post

It also amazes me that people think that every past release of these films on previous formats just sort of snuck out there into the marketplace with Spielberg's awareness or approval and that the Blu-ray is the first time they've made a big deal about remastering and presenting the films with attention to detail and loving care.
There's the matter of technological limitations when the master was created.
The DI process has been in wide use for what, 10 years? Many of these old transfers predate modern film mastering.
I see a lot of old (read: pre-digital) films projected in 35mm and occasionally 70mm. They often don't look like any home video release out there.
Which is not to say that the new transfer is accurate. I just don't trust old transfers.
Reply
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Blu-ray Software

Gear mentioned in this thread:

AVS › AVS Forum › Blu-ray & HD DVD › Blu-ray Software › Indiana Jones Trilogy