or Connect
AVS › AVS Forum › Blu-ray & HD DVD › Blu-ray Software › Bram Stoker's Dracula comparison *PIX*
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Bram Stoker's Dracula comparison *PIX* - Page 25

post #721 of 763
Quote:
Originally Posted by 42041 View Post

An answer print is made to be projected. That is, it's very high-contrast compared to negatives and inter-positives (which are the usual source for video transfers), with clearer whites and denser blacks. Scanning it would likely exceed the dynamic range the scanner is designed for and yield a problematic transfer. Maybe that's what they did

Thank you for pointing that out. That's the whole point of a forum. It should be a valuable learning tool in the education of film. Though I am no expert, one thing I do know is that I am enthusiastic.

I know people do not always agree on a subject and that is healthy from a debate perspective, but the majority consensus here and elsewhere is this new transfer was way below expectation and a revision of the film's look.
post #722 of 763
Quote:
Originally Posted by BIG ED View Post

Sony is a company that loses money hand over foot!
So(ny) I don't know bout the "clearly are no fools" part!!
However, they have been doing some of the finest HD transfers for quite a while now!!!

I believe its the cinematographer's fault.

The "No Fools" part refers to the fact that on the whole, Sony have a good reputation when it comes to transfers and that they have excellent knowledge and facilities. When they did the original 1997 DVD and then 2001 Superbit, they owned this film and knew what they were doing and no doubt knew how it originally looked.

My point was also referring to the criticism by Zoetrope that the earlier Sony transfers were inaccurate and not sanctioned/approved.

Dracula 1992 is owned by Sony hence they would have a vested interest at the time to be faithful to the work and those earlier transfers at the time were handled to the highest standard possible. They were praised unanimously for their effort.

I wonder how would have this film looked on Blu Ray if Sony had worked on this new transfer exclusively without Zoetrope's involvement as well as suggestions?


Whoa! I know Sony are losing money now, but years back, the motion picture arm of the company was profitable and cash rich. They overall reported losses of $6.4 billion the other week.
post #723 of 763
Quote:
Originally Posted by WarrenD View Post

But Sleepy Hollow it was not and that film I cannot count how often I went to the pictures. Sleepy Hollow is a faithful rendition on Blu Ray objectively to what was shown at the picture house. The main criticism it got on Blu Ray is that it looked too grainy which it always was.

Perhaps, but the Blu-ray uses an older scan and the grain is not well compressed via MPEG-2 giving a "noisy" look. I would love to see a new Sleepy Hollow transfer and encode. The film grain would look much more natural even if it was a grainy movie, but not holding my breath with Paramount.
post #724 of 763
Quote:
Originally Posted by DavidHir View Post

Perhaps, but the Blu-ray uses an older scan and the grain is not well compressed via MPEG-2 giving a "noisy" look. I would love to see a new Sleepy Hollow transfer and encode. The film grain would look much more natural even if it was a grainy movie, but not holding my breath with Paramount.

I understand and a new transfer with new special features would be a bonus.
But, at least Sleepy Hollow has no changes to the film's look itself and I would sooner have this old transfer from Paramount then a new revisionist one.

In the same token, I would have preferred Sony to have used the older HD Dracula master rather than what we have now. I would imagine so would others knowing what unfortunatley transpired.

What concerns me these days, is that directors are more tempted to fix their old films with the advances in new technology.

I remember an interview with Roman Polanski about 12 years ago from Scene By Scene which is on Youtube now in four parts, where he said with new technology he could make the effects in Rosemary's Baby so much better. But thankfully so far he has avoided that.

Worst scenario, I would only agree with a revision if the original was included. Not that a revision is something ideal, because they set a bad precedent in the industry.

And the technology is even better now. But me, I prefer a film untouched. No unncecessary digital alteration. Just a nice transfer. Worst case scenario, I don't even care if the print looks dirty. I would sooner go a for quality looking dirty film print than a super clean altered look print.

I am so used to dirty prints because in the UK we would see film at the cinema where they were sent to our smaller theatres after there USA box office run. This was in the 70's and 80's.

On subject, but slight change to the above context :


Whoever has this Blu Ray and thinks it is not digitally altered, then please go to the scene at time stamp 126:46 on the player. Press pause and look.

It is the crypt scene and part of Lucy's husband has his moustache, left eye and hair badly digitally altered. It looks unbelievably bad. It makes no sense that these artifacts could be elements on the original film. That's the worst example in that scene and I am shaking my head even all these years later! How the.... did they not realise something is badly wrong.

Also the scene where the younger looking Drac meets Mina on the streets of London. Please take a look at the shots where you see the back of his hair.

All I can say, is that how the hell was this approved? It looks odd and so out of place. What were they trying to achieve. If they wanted to darken the film then fine but this?

I heard the argument the crypt scene looks better now, but the digital noise kills it for me.

I do admit some scenes do look good comparatively but others ruin the experience. Once noticed the flaws are impossible to ignore.

Why oh why did they do this? Nothing needed to be fixed. And why the strong defense of some in the business that this is the best it has looked? It has nothing to do with offence or disrespect to Sony/Zoetrope but the reality of the issue. I always thought honesty was a virtue not a crime.

These alterations were never part of the original film period and should not be there. And a new transfer is badly needed. The parties involved can keep their heads in the sand and ignore us, but the problem won't go away.
post #725 of 763
Quote:
Originally Posted by WarrenD View Post

The "No Fools" part refers to the fact that on the whole, Sony have a good reputation when it comes to transfers and that they have excellent knowledge and facilities. When they did the original 1997 DVD and then 2001 Superbit, they owned this film and knew what they were doing and no doubt knew how it originally looked.

My point was also referring to the criticism by Zoetrope that the earlier Sony transfers were inaccurate and not sanctioned/approved.

Dracula 1992 is owned by Sony hence they would have a vested interest at the time to be faithful to the work and those earlier transfers at the time were handled to the highest standard possible. They were praised unanimously for their effort.

I wonder how would have this film looked on Blu Ray if Sony had worked on this new transfer exclusively without Zoetrope's involvement as well as suggestions?


Whoa! I know Sony are losing money now, but years back, the motion picture arm of the company was profitable and cash rich. They overall reported losses of $6.4 billion the other week.

"I wonder how would have this film looked on Blu Ray if Sony had worked on this new transfer exclusively without Zoetrope's involvement as well as suggestions?"
Much closer too the theatrical presentation (ala the Superbit).

Yeah, dropping $6,400,000,000.00US is... "foolish"!!!
post #726 of 763
Quote:
Originally Posted by BIG ED View Post

"I wonder how would have this film looked on Blu Ray if Sony had worked on this new transfer exclusively without Zoetrope's involvement as well as suggestions?"
Much closer too the theatrical presentation (ala the Superbit).

Yeah, dropping $6,400,000,000.00US is... "foolish"!!!

That's what I think too. And the fact that as far as I am aware, Francis Ford Coppola had no direct involvement in the new transfer of BSD. Now, Apocalypse Now got a way better transfer which he oversaw personally. And we got two versions of the film. The original 2:35 aspect and the redux.

Makes me think.
post #727 of 763
I'm too young to have seen this in the cinema, but I did see it many times on VHS and OTA in the UK, as well as on regular DVD in more recent years. The colouring always struck me as something that gave the film an almost stage theatrical look. I mean that in a very positive way; the whole film had a unique feel of quality and maturity to it.

In a way it's nice to see people lamenting the poor treatment and loss of colour in the blu-ray release, as it makes me think my feelings on the colour were correct despite being fairly new to the whole PQ enthusiast scene myself.

Does anyone know if there's been an HDTV broadcast of Dracula where the source was something other than the blu-ray? I'm hoping somewhere an HD version exists with colour that's remotely faithful to the theatrical release.

Oh and thank you to everyone who's mentioned the superbit in this thread, I've just ordered myself a copy as I wasn't aware this existed until reading about it here.
post #728 of 763
Quote:
Originally Posted by z0mb View Post

I'm too young to have seen this in the cinema, but I did see it many times on VHS and OTA in the UK, as well as on regular DVD in more recent years. The colouring always struck me as something that gave the film an almost stage theatrical look. I mean that in a very positive way; the whole film had a unique feel of quality and maturity to it.
In a way it's nice to see people lamenting the poor treatment and loss of colour in the blu-ray release, as it makes me think my feelings on the colour were correct despite being fairly new to the whole PQ enthusiast scene myself.
Does anyone know if there's been an HDTV broadcast of Dracula where the source was something other than the blu-ray? I'm hoping somewhere an HD version exists with colour that's remotely faithful to the theatrical release.
Oh and thank you to everyone who's mentioned the superbit in this thread, I've just ordered myself a copy as I wasn't aware this existed until reading about it here.

Sky show the correct version, so have ITV
post #729 of 763
Bram Stoker's Dracula is being re-released in the UK on Blu Ray on October 1st 2012. http://www.amazon.co.uk/Bram-Stokers-Dracula-Blu-ray-Region/dp/B008H120DY

I am wondering if they will reinstate the non-redux version like Sky Movies HD has???????????? There is little information available as to what we are getting. I mean, what is the point of buying this if it is the same as the 2007 version?
post #730 of 763
Quote:
Originally Posted by WarrenD View Post

Bram Stoker's Dracula is being re-released in the UK on Blu Ray on October 1st 2012. http://www.amazon.co.uk/Bram-Stokers-Dracula-Blu-ray-Region/dp/B008H120DY
I am wondering if they will reinstate the non-redux version like Sky Movies HD has???????????? There is little information available as to what we are getting. I mean, what is the point of buying this if it is the same as the 2007 version?

Since that release is still coming from Sony, it's undoubtedly just a repackaging of the existing disc. It's not being advertised as a "Special Edition," "Collector's Edition," etc.
post #731 of 763
Quote:
Originally Posted by Josh Z View Post

Since that release is still coming from Sony, it's undoubtedly just a repackaging of the existing disc. It's not being advertised as a "Special Edition," "Collector's Edition," etc.

Thanks for the information! A shame and wasted opportunity for fans of the theatrical version.
post #732 of 763
Quote:
Originally Posted by WarrenD View Post

Thanks for the information! A shame and wasted opportunity for fans of the theatrical version.

I would wait and see, but I think it will be the same disc
post #733 of 763
Where is the original Dracula ? I thought we were supposed to have it by now.

Art
post #734 of 763
Quote:
Originally Posted by Art Sonneborn View Post

Where is the original Dracula ? I thought we were supposed to have it by now.
Art

October 2nd - at least in the US
post #735 of 763
Quote:
Originally Posted by dvdmike007 View Post

I would wait and see, but I think it will be the same disc

Thanks DVDMike007!
post #736 of 763
Will this be the same old DARK=CULA disc?frown.gif
post #737 of 763
Quote:
Originally Posted by Art Sonneborn View Post

Where is the original Dracula ? I thought we were supposed to have it by now.
Art
http://bluray.highdefdigest.com/7298/classic_monsters_essential.html
post #738 of 763

"Listen to them, children of the night ,what music they make".cool.gif

Thanks !

Art
post #739 of 763
Quote:
Originally Posted by Art Sonneborn View Post

"Listen to them, children of the night ,what music they make".cool.gif
Thanks !
Art
No problem smile.gif

Here's a little 2 and a half minute video of some of the restoration. Looks like they did a great job. I'd love to get the set, just wish it wasn't so expensive.
post #740 of 763
Has anyone heard what this Dracula October 2012 new release is like?. I cannot find anything on the net. If it is the same as the 2007 version then I would rather burn my money than buy that!smile.gif
post #741 of 763
Saw it in hmv today, but there is no way I am going first
post #742 of 763
Quote:
Originally Posted by dvdmike007 View Post

Saw it in hmv today, but there is no way I am going first

I will probably take the plunge in the next week and then let you all know the score.

I just don't want to reward Sony for an abysmal transfer. I admit how naive I was when I defended this a long time ago. But I was so new to HD that it took little to impress me. I conned myself into thinking if it is Blu Ray then it has to be amazing. Little did I know that the grass is not always greener when it comes to jumping from DVD to Blu Ray.

In fact during the week I will contact Sony to make a complaint about the abysmal quality in some parts of the film. They could have remedied the situation for the 20th anniversary and really done something for the fans. This was a big film and they missed a perfect milestone in the definitive edition.

My friend has Sky HD now so he will record it for me. And I have the new Sony BDP S790 which really upscales DVD brilliantly.

And I will send it back if this edition is identical in look to 2007. Money is too tight these days to squander on sub-par products. Sleepy Hollow compared to Dracula is the greatest transfer ever!
post #743 of 763
Dracula looks very good. I was impressed how the scene in the opera house they managed shadow detail. In the DVD there was black and white and that's it.

Art
post #744 of 763
Which scene?
post #745 of 763
I would love to see the Spanish language version receive the same treatment. Other than the lead, it's a far better film.
post #746 of 763
Quote:
Originally Posted by Matt_Stevens View Post

I would love to see the Spanish language version receive the same treatment. Other than the lead, it's a far better film.
I think the Spanish version looks amazing in the new set, except for reel 3 which had to be taken from a far inferior print. Otherwise I think it's the best looking title in the set.
post #747 of 763
Lots of confusion here, this thread is not for Dracula but for Bram Stoker's Dracula
post #748 of 763
Of course, it would help if the thread was titled appropriately.
post #749 of 763
To be fair the thread was made years before the universal disc existed
post #750 of 763
Quote:
Originally Posted by dvdmike007 View Post

To be fair the thread was made years before the universal disc existed

I know, but it's still not the correct film title. wink.gif Can't a mod re-name it?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Blu-ray Software
AVS › AVS Forum › Blu-ray & HD DVD › Blu-ray Software › Bram Stoker's Dracula comparison *PIX*