Go Back   Forums @ The Digital Fix > Entertainment Discussion Forums > DVD and Blu-ray Discussion

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 30-08-2006, 08:47   #81
Guest 50820
Dippy & dizzy
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: The West Country
Posts: 2,133
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
I don't mind at all Danny,
and I agree your efforts to correct the snapshot look very good. I'm not sure why movie studios don't bother to correct the flm elements properly, the technology certainly exists, butthey just don't bother. "Digitally Remastered" just seems to be a label they stick on boxes to impress people. So many times they release scrached and marked prints, when it is so easy to correct (they did fix "The Wizard of Oz" but that's about it)

Robert
Feel free to post my image on HTF, I don't have an account there so can't myself ...... (edit) now I have!

Last edited by pjclark1; 30-08-2006 at 11:45.
Guest 50820 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 30-08-2006, 11:21   #82
John Hodson
Out to lunch...
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Bolton, Lancashire
Posts: 12,507
Thanks: 9
Thanked 55 Times in 4 Posts
Perhaps it's time to re-read this article, the second half of a two-parter and more pertinent to this discussion. It's quite an old piece, but makes some valid arguments, perhaps moreso now.

The old DVD; not very good at all. The new DVD; much, much better, but not perfect. Thanks to the efforts of Sarah and Danny, it's evident (though I hesitate to use that word) that there is room for improvement, but then, there always is. And when it's offered up - 65th Anniversary release? - I'll be in the queue.
John Hodson is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 30-08-2006, 11:53   #83
bosque
Trusted User
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 4,623
Thanks: 100
Thanked 25 Times in 24 Posts
Just bought a new desk top PC with Media Centre DVD playback - the PC only cost about £400 and I didn't need a new monitor as it works through my LCD screen - the first DVD I tried on it was the new "Seachers" release: with this film I think we'll always be looking for the holy grail of a DVD transfer but playback via the PC is looking amazingly clear, and the early scene with Scar's attack on the homestead has a weepingly good colour scheme. My standalone DVD player is pretty expensive but I'm sure the Media Centre playback - in some respects - is a big improvement.
bosque is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 30-08-2006, 12:25   #84
Guest 49777
Trusted User
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 54
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
The article referenced by Mr. Hodson makes some good points, but also is inclusive of errors.

The bottom line re: The Searchers seems to be that the colorist used the studio print as gospel. And following an artifact too religiously may not have been the proper road.

RAH
Guest 49777 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 30-08-2006, 12:35   #85
John Hodson
Out to lunch...
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Bolton, Lancashire
Posts: 12,507
Thanks: 9
Thanked 55 Times in 4 Posts
Regardless of the technical aspects - and the author runs www.tle-films.com - one of the lines that rings truest for me from that piece, Robert, is: 'It is a fact that the detailed reconstruction and restoration of damaged frames does cost money; and the policy of issuing DVDs at $10.99 a piece with HD masters and extras included does not help, either.'

What we may have here, in view of what has been occuring recently (and I'm not specifically referring here to The Searchers), is a collision of output and budget. Just a thought.

Last edited by John Hodson; 30-08-2006 at 13:14.
John Hodson is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 30-08-2006, 14:49   #86
Guest 53019
Trusted User
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 1,216
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
I completely agree that sad as it may be, some films don't justify huge expense, especially given what people feel DVDs should cost. The studios have sort of boxed themselves in by pricing lower and lower over the years (well, some studios, anyway), and now consumers expect that and get annoyed with higher-priced DVDs.

The Searchers, of course, would have to be considered a crown jewel of any studio's output, and the expense is certainly justified. And the thing is, they made the expense with The Searchers - clearly. As Mr. Harris, I, and others have said, it simply could have been better, color-wise. We differ slightly in how better, but we all feel it and that Danny Burk experiment is an excellent example of what could have been more pleasing.

The really baffling thing is why Fox would spend the reported figure of two million bucks to restore a film like The Black Swan. It's a nice little movie, but it's hardly a crown jewel. They couldn't possibly ever hope to see any kind of return on that money. I'm beginning to wonder if that price tag has been mis-reported because it really doesn't make sense. Then again, I'm really glad to have the DVD.

Those are my two centimes.
Guest 53019 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 30-08-2006, 21:43   #87
Guest 53019
Trusted User
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 1,216
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
From Mr. Hodson: "And the question still hangs heavy; what did Mr Ford want?"

Since Mr. Price has acknowledged that the skies in his IB Tech studio print are, in fact, in his words, "Technicolor blue" or however he put it (was it "brilliant blue skies), then I think we know the answer to that question, as the studio print would have been approved by both Mr. Ford and Mr. Hoch (and every IB print I've owned or seen has resembled Mr. Burk's handywork). But, those screen grabs by Danny tell the whole story. So, again, a big thanks from me to Mr. Burk.

Last edited by haineshisway; 30-08-2006 at 21:47.
Guest 53019 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 30-08-2006, 21:47   #88
John Hodson
Out to lunch...
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Bolton, Lancashire
Posts: 12,507
Thanks: 9
Thanked 55 Times in 4 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by haineshisway
From Mr. Hodson: "And the question still hangs heavy; what did Mr Ford want?"
Serious question, seriously asked at the HTF, so:

Quote:
Originally Posted by John Hodson
One of the great central pillars, many moons ago, in declaring oneself a 'hi-fi enthusiast' was refusing to (a) twiddle with the tone control knobs from their declared neutral position, then (b) actually buying an amp that simply didn't have tone controls. It meant you were a true Hi-Fi Buff. Tone controls - pshaw!

Since entering the field of Home Cinema, it's been one of my great sources of dismay that I've had to mess around with my display's colo(u)r, brightness and contrast controls in order to achieve a pleasing picture - I mean where are the one size fits all neutral positions. At least the makers of my chosen DVD also include said controls but, quite rightly, recommend they stay in the default position. So, some semblance of satisfaction there.

However, my display does also include a button that will also change the colour tones from neutral, to 'warm' and 'cool' - I watched the scene in the grab on the previous page with the setting on 'cool' tonight and can report a much bluer sky, and much less evidence of yellow with an overall picture that looked alot like 'normal' Technicolor. However, somehow, messing with buttons, it didn't seem right.

And the question still hangs heavy; what did Mr Ford want?
I am also a member if the DVD Talk forum, Roobarbs Forum and I also dip into the Criterion Forum. Tomorrow, I'll probably pop into the office for a couple of hours, then I'll be off to 'The Dog and Duck' for a swift half and a pickled egg. The rest of my movements are a mystery as yet, due to my burgeoning social calendar, but email me and I'll fill you in.

Last edited by John Hodson; 30-08-2006 at 21:49.
John Hodson is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 30-08-2006, 21:50   #89
Guest 53019
Trusted User
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 1,216
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by John Hodson
Serious question, seriously asked at the HTF. I am also a member if the DVD Talk forum, Roobarbs Forum and I also dip into the Criterion Forum. Tomorrow, I'll probably pop into the office for a couple of hours, then I'll be off to 'The Dog and Duck' for a swift half and a pickled egg. The rest of my movements are a mystery as yet, due to my burgeoning social calendar, but email me and I'll fill you in.
I understand it was a serious question, John, which is why I quoted it for this thread and why I responded. I don't really care where else you post or what you post about, but if something is posted that's relevant, whether by you or anyone else, then I think it's fair game to respond. After all, you bring over quoted posts from there and elsewhere, there are lots of links to lots of "reviews" all over the web, and then comments are made. It's sort of what boards are all about. Again, you are acting like I somehow am doing something disrespectful when all I'm doing is posting on topic in a thread having to do with The Searchers. I've quoted other people's posts from over there, as have others here.

Last edited by haineshisway; 30-08-2006 at 21:52.
Guest 53019 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 30-08-2006, 22:14   #90
Guest 54016
Trusted User
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 40
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by haineshisway
But, those screen grabs by Danny tell the whole story. So, again, a big thanks from me to Mr. Burk.
Thanks for the good words; glad I could help.

Earlier today, I sent RAH a copy of the modified Photoshop file with all layers and masks intact. I'll be interested in his thoughts, and whether he is of the opinion that similar modifications are possible to carry over to motion picture color timing software.
Guest 54016 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 30-08-2006, 22:16   #91
John Hodson
Out to lunch...
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Bolton, Lancashire
Posts: 12,507
Thanks: 9
Thanked 55 Times in 4 Posts
I must remember to steer clear of humour...

BTW, for anyone else that's still interested, I did link earlier to the thread at the HTF from which that quote was taken, so I might as well quote this...
Quote:
Originally Posted by John Hodson
I offer this because it may have some bearing on what we're discussing, and here I'm referring to Ford and Hoch's intentions...then again it may not. From Peter Cowie's book John Ford and the American West:

"Ford, however looked to Remington for inspiration primarily where color was concerned...Remington's Among the Led Horses...

http://www.hometheaterforum.com/htf/...e/756.imgcache

...fused two of his favorite hues: a pale blue, mottled with harmless clouds, and an amiable saffron yellow in which the animals revel. Cinematographer Winton C. Hoch, who won an Academy Award for She Wore a Yellow Ribbon, recalled that Ford gave him the laconic brief prior to shooting: 'I want Remington color.'"


It's also worth recalling that the continuity problems Hoch and Ford suffered with regard to an ever changing sky in The Searchers are also more than evident in SWAYR.
...(sadly sans picture until you click on it) which put my comment in context. There might be something in it, there probably isn't, but I'd like to see sight of those mentioned production notes.

Last edited by John Hodson; 30-08-2006 at 22:18.
John Hodson is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 30-08-2006, 23:05   #92
anephric
Kidney Thief
 
anephric's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Derby, UK
Posts: 22,698
Thanks: 33
Thanked 120 Times in 76 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by Danny Burk

I'll be interested in his thoughts, and whether he is of the opinion that similar modifications are possible to carry over to motion picture color timing software.
Just from what little I know of digital grading and colour correction (with something like a Da Vinci Colour Corrector), such things are quite "easy" (if one has an eye, perhaps even two) if you're already professionally proficient in photographic modification in Photoshop (although cinematographs are obviously a different discipline) and are familiar with colour theory. The only way you could go that out of "accepted" gamut in something like the transfer in question is if you purposely wanted to or the rods and cones in your eyes are ker-knackered, not through limitations in the mastering software/hardware system.
__________________
www.khaaan.com
anephric is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 31-08-2006, 00:29   #93
Guest 49777
Trusted User
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 54
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
One of the problems in color (colour) correction is that each individual's eyes are slightly different.

RAH
Guest 49777 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 31-08-2006, 00:40   #94
Guest 53019
Trusted User
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 1,216
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by Robert Harris
One of the problems in color (colour) correction is that each individual's eyes are slightly different.

RAH
I hate when that happens. Why can't we have everyone's eyes the same? I'm tired of everyone's eyes being different. Conformity, that's what I say, eyes-wise. After all, the eyes have it. I shall now sing Old Man River in the key of F.

Last edited by haineshisway; 31-08-2006 at 00:42.
Guest 53019 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 31-08-2006, 00:57   #95
Guest 54016
Trusted User
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 40
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Another problem, as to judging color from screen caps, is that most people aren't using a calibrated monitor. This is absolutely essential for professional-level color correction work, because one uncalibrated monitor will display a given shade of red differently than another uncalibrated monitor will do, and so on down the line. This is a basic principle of printmaking: it's impractical to do if one's monitor is uncalibrated, because colors tweaked to perfection onscreen are unlikely to match one's prints. Attempts to alter the printer's output rather than calibrate the monitor invariably lead to frustration and lots of wasted paper and ink.
Guest 54016 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-09-2006, 10:43   #96
Guest 15513
Trusted User
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Falkirk
Posts: 2,234
Thanks: 0
Thanked 1 Time in 1 Post
I've found this thread fascinating and quite re-assuring. I thought I was an obsessive - I've got nothing on some of you! How did we cope in the 70s and 80s with TV broadcasts of movies many of which were terribly damaged/faded? I suppose our tolerance threshold must have been so much lower.

The bottom line is we only get so worked up about such things beacuse we care about cinema and classic movies and would like to see them afforded the same respect as other artistic/creative media.

One thing that particularly interests me is the comment made earlier by the chap who worked at the BEEB. He suggested the colour experts on broadcasts there would not have made such a colour error as that of the new disc.

This makes me wonder - how often could hd tv broadcasts be the best available version of a movie? Perhaps the first broadcast of The Searchers on hd (I don't know if there has been one) could correct the colour problem but retain all the detail.

This could be a comeback for broadcast tv, especially if the studios regularly repeat what seems to have happened on this release.

Guest 15513 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-09-2006, 18:54   #97
Guest 2969
Gold Trader
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: London W9
Posts: 521
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by John Hodson
Henry; you say you're getting the HD version. I'd be tremendously interested in your comments once you've seen the new transfer.
I received The Searchers HD-DVD today. It's amazing! The sharpness of the image has to be seen to be believed, but it's only an improvement over the SD version if you have a large and/or high-def display. On my 6.5ft screen the image projected from my CRT projector is jaw droppingly gorgeous and very 3D. Now that I know what I'm looking for I've to say the colours of the HD version are definitely the same as what I saw at the NFT. I've to withdraw my previous comment about that NFT 'print' having similar colours to the old DVD, I was wrong about that.
Guest 2969 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-05-2007, 21:47   #98
Guest 1472
Trusted User
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Posts: 407
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
I recently bought a Blu-Ray player and the first disc I ordered was The Searchers (of course). I got it yesterday and have now watched it twice. All I can say is WOW. I did not think that the difference between SD and HD would be this big. The standard SE is an excellent transfer with regard to sharpness and detail but even upscaled to 720p it looks like VHS compared to the HD. The colour looked slightly better as well. At least in my perception, although I must admit that I was too overwhelmed to pay much attention to it. Simply amazing.
Guest 1472 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-07-2009, 17:31   #99
Guest 10192
Trusted User
 
Guest 10192's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Sometimes here, sometimes there
Posts: 698
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Watched this in HD and although the pic quality was amazing, I didn't think much of the film at all.

Pretty lame movie.
Guest 10192 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-07-2009, 17:58   #100
Livius
Is it far?
 
Livius's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Somewhere in the Med
Posts: 1,587
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by zenza View Post
Watched this in HD and although the pic quality was amazing, I didn't think much of the film at all.

Pretty lame movie.

Wow, thanks for sharing that blindingly incisive piece of critical analysis with us.
__________________
Riding the High Country

Last edited by Livius; 06-07-2009 at 18:00.
Livius is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Tags
Antonio Moreno, Beulah Archuletta, C.V. Whitney, classic, Dorothy Jordan, Hank Worden, Harry Carey, Henry Brandon, Jeffrey Hunter, John Ford, John Qualen, John Wayne, Jr., Ken Curtis, Natalie Wood, Olive Carey, Patrick Wayne, The Searchers, Vera Miles, Walter Coy, Ward Bond

Thread Tools
Display Modes

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 On

Forum Jump

All times are GMT. The time now is 16:27.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.9
Copyright ©2000 - 2021, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.qq
Copyright ©2000 - 2021 Network N Ltd.