A Few Words About A few words about...™ CE3K -- in Blu-ray (1 Viewer)

[Robert Harris]

Bringing CE3K to high definition (Blu-Ray) disc would not be a feat for the faint of heart if only releasing a single version.

To bring all three versions to BD disc at the same time, and on the same disc is begging asking for trouble.

But, with what must have been an enormous amount of technical planning, this release has come together without a hitch.

The film itself has not had an unproblematic history. Beyond it's overall scope and the sheer number of optical (pre-digital) effects shots the film stock chosen for those shots -- Kodak's CRI -- was stock known for it's quick fading characteristics. This is something that needed to be dealt with.

With the exception of a handful of shots which exhibit small technical problems which apparently could not be solved digitally, and an occasional blue sky which seems to have a bit of odd shading, this huge release has arrived in absolutely glorious form. Let me be clear, whatever problems there are miniscule and as far as I can tell, unavoidable.

CE3K is a most own disc -- a huge production, brought to high definition with the highest of quality, inclusive of the interweaving of all three different versions. On the audio front, be forewarned that sonically, this is a disc that will clean the lint out of one's speakers.

CE3K from Sony / Columbia Pictures comes Extremely Highly Recommended as one of the top high definition releases of 2007.

RAH

 

[RickyB]

WTF is CE3K???

 

[BrettB]

What the heck is "WTF"?

Close Encounters of the Third Kind

 

[Michel_Hafner]

Watched it some days ago. I think it looks like the film. In this case the original photography is such that maybe a third of all shots have blurry tops and bottoms from the anamorphic Panavision lenses. Only the middle part is in focus. I found it irritating. But that's how it was shot.

 

[Robert Harris]

Anamorphic Panavision lenses are not blurry from top to bottom.

 

[ToEhrIsHuman]

Thank you very much, Mr. Harris.

I agree wholeheartedly, and I was particularly amazed this title looks as good as it does in HD. I know time has not been kind to the particular stocks of that era, unfortunately (especially considering the exceptional quality of much of the content.) And if anything, I was even more impressed with the audio...kudos to Sony for not one, but two lossless audio presentations.

Watching the disc a couple months ago when it was released had a special resonance for me, having just returned from a marathon trip around the West which just happened to include a stop in Northeastern Wyoming at a particular monolith of note (not to be confused with a certain other monolith from a certain other sci-fi film of note.)

 

[Felix Martinez]

I think this is an absolutely beautiful set. The image quality on this HD release is magnificent - one can now see Zsigmond's use of (what appears to be) a vignette filter in certain scenes.

 

[Douglas Monce]

Robert Harris is right Anamorphic Panavision doesn't have blurry tops and bottoms. They do tend to have a fairly shallow depth of field when compared to spherical lenses.
But the plain of focus is sharp across the whole frame unless a split diopter is used.

Doug

 

[Felix Martinez]

While there is split diopter use, the "blurry tops and bottoms" is - what I think is - the use of a vignette filter.

 

[Peter Overduin]

Thank you! Maybe...FINALLY I can get my wife to STOP using the damn vaccum cleaner on my Paradigm Monitor 11s! Argghhhh!

 

[AlexCosmo]

I have a dumb question. I love this disc, I love how it looks, in terms of retaining that "film" texture, how do they do that? Do they not use a Lowry type process, or do they just do it more carefully, or what? I'm just curious what the pipeline is, in general terms, from a 30 year old faded, problematic film stock to the final result.

 

[Kevin Grey]

Watched this just this past weekend and I was blown away by the picture (more impressed even than Blade Runner). I couldn't stop thinking "man, it looked like it was filmed yesterday. In fact, it looks even better than that!"

 

[Michel_Hafner]

Of course not. But that's not what I said, was it. I said blurry top and bottom. And it's easy to see. Just watch the film and focus not on the middle but the top and bottom. Many shots are simply blurry on top and bottom. That is a fact. And the rest are not.

 

[Michel_Hafner]

Watch the HD. Many shots have a blurry top and bottom and are sharp in the middle. Others are sharp from top to bottom.
More here:
Cinematography.com - A Community of Film and Video Production Professionals

 

[Douglas Monce]

Well there are filters that will create a vignette effect. I don't remember seeing anything like that in Close Encounters. Where exactly are you seeing this in the film?

It could be that the matte box chosen for for a particular lens was just ever so slightly too small and was cutting into the edge of the picture. It could also be a side effect of all of the special effects shots being used in the film.

Also I really don't remember a split diopter being used much in the film either, except for maybe the scene in the trailer where they are interviewing Richard Dreyfuss.

Doug

 

[Douglas Monce]

Thats part of your answer again right there. The matte box maybe too tight. when the lens is wide open the edges of the matte box maybe creeping into the frame.

Also a lens that appears to be very sharp all the way across the focus plain at f5.6, may appear to be slightly blurry at the edges at f2.0. And of course with the Anamorphic lenses anything that is not right on the focus plain becomes distorted because of the squeeze factor. This is why out of focus lights in the background appear to be oval in a film photographed with anamorphic lenses. Also lens flairs go oval too.

Doug

 

[Felix Martinez]

I believe the Neary "mashed potatoes" dinner sequence also makes use of the split diopter.

And forgive me, as I do not know what filters Zsigmond used on CE3K, but there are quite a few shots were there is an oval-shaped area in the center of the frame which is sharp as a tack, while the periphery is blurry - like a vignette blur.

 

[Shane Martin]

I think the sound is more impressive to me than the killer video quality.

I also got a free motion picture soundtrack with purchase as a bonus.

This is stellar must own package especially for the $34 I paid for it.

 

[Michel_Hafner]

Many times. If you have it watch and you will see. If you have and can't see I'll go back and get some time codes.

 

[Douglas Monce]

I'm not doubting that you see it. I just haven't noticed it myself. I'll have to go back and take a look at it.

Doug