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

[Robert Harris]

Originally Posted by mark brown
Wasn't 10 Commandments re-released in 1989 in 70mm 2.20:1 - Super VistaVision?

With the best of intentions, but 70mm is misleading.
RAH

 

[Paul Rossen]

Wasn't 10 Commandments re-released in 1989 in 70mm 2.20:1 - Super VistaVision?

It certainly was advertised as Super VistaVision!

 

[Moe Dickstein]

If I read the comment correctly, RAH didn't say it wasn't POSSIBLE, just that it wouldn't be a pleasant experience....

 

[RolandL]

Wasn't 10 Commandments re-released in 1989 in 70mm 2.20:1 - Super VistaVision?

I heard that the 70mm version was blown up from CinemaScope.

 

[OliverK]

I heard that the 70mm version was blown up from CinemaScope.

They had a big readers letter about it in The Perfect Vision and about how moronic that was - I obviously agree if indeed this is what happened.

 

[Jim*Tod]

I did see the 70mm "Super Vistavision" of TEN COMMANDMENTS and left after about 30 minutes as the cropping was pretty awful and the picture quality was sub par. Mr. Harris---- based on your reent comment, TEN COMMANDMENTS never got shown in the horizontal VistaVision projection format? Also... I have read a variety of conflicting reports on the sound format for this film. I know VistaVision generally used Perspecta Sound optical, but I know some VV releases (like HIGH SOCIETY) did have four track mag stereo. Can you tell us what the sound format (s) were used for TC. Thanks.

 

[rsmithjr]

Regarding High Society, I was told by someone at Warners that the MGM sound department had recorded High Society in stereo (being annoyed with VV's sound specs), but that there were no magnetic release prints. Recent video incarnations have been in stereo of course. Do you know for a fact that there were magnetic release prints?

 

[Vertigist]

Mr. Harris, You mention in this thread that a much better presentation of Vertigo, a real "restoration," is possible today, and that the materials which make this possible are not going to get any better as time goes on, but degrade. Two questions: 1. About how much money do you think a proper restoration of Vertigo would cost at this point? 2. Is there any telling how receptive the execs in charge would be of outside financing for such a project?

 

[Jim*Tod]

No... sorry I don't. I just assumed based on the dvd release, that it was in full stereo. My bad. I can confirm that STORY OF A PATRIOT, shot in VistaVision shown using horizontal projection in purpose built theatres in Williamsburg, Va, had six track magnetic sound (billed as Sound by Todd-Ao). Mr Harris recently restored this and they now show it in 70mm. I have a faded-to-pink strip of a horizontal print of the VistaVision version of this film and you can see the magnetic tracks on it. So---- maybe the question may need to be... what, if any, VistaVision films, had true stereophonic magnetic sound as opposed to Perspecta sound? (And maybe this discussion needs to be moved to the VistaVision thread)

 

[RolandL]

I did see the 70mm "Super Vistavision" of TEN COMMANDMENTS and left after about 30 minutes as the cropping was pretty awful and the picture quality was sub par. Mr. Harris---- based on your reent comment, TEN COMMANDMENTS never got shown in the horizontal VistaVision projection format? Also... I have read a variety of conflicting reports on the sound format for this film. I know VistaVision generally used Perspecta Sound optical, but I know some VV releases (like HIGH SOCIETY) did have four track mag stereo. Can you tell us what the sound format (s) were used for TC. Thanks.

I think mono optical.

 

[Keith Cobby]

I am patiently waiting for Vertigo (and Harry) to be split out into individual releases.

 

[AstonMartin007]

Mr. Harris, First let me express my incalculable gratitude towards you and Mr. Katz in rejuvenating this masterpiece. That Vertigo is #1 on the S&S list (and let's not argue semantics, #1 or not it's one of the greatest ever) is no doubt due in part to your tireless efforts to save the film from the ravages of time. And yet, I have to say I'm immensely frustrated regarding the current state of the restoration. That Vertigo has been dangerously deteriorating has been known for decades now, why aren't all the stops being pulled to restore it to its former glory? With all the praise lavished upon it, are funds really an issue? Surely the studio can pull $100K from one of their CGI flicks, or some directors can band together and collect the spare change in their multimillion dollar mansions? Hell, post the project on kickstarter.com $100K is nothing compared to some of the other funds on there. At the risk of echoing Daniel Day-Lewis in 'Lincoln', if Vertigo is to be preserved for future theatrical releases and formats, then the time to act is now, Now, NOW (!) while it's still possible. It is the very height of absurdity that one of Hollywood's most celebrated masterpieces can't be allotted the equivalent of >0.1% of the budget of Fast & Furious 6... On a lighter note, I do have some questions for you. While the Blu-ray might not be optimal, the increased resolution does give us more to nitpick. 1. Vertigo seems grainier than I remember North by Northwest being. It's not to the point of distraction, but I'm wondering whether this was how it was originally or an artifact of the deterioration. I've read that NxNW was scanned in 8K, a privilege presumably not extended to Vertigo, would this impact image quality much? 2. On second viewing, I noticed a constellation of 3 dots on the left side of the frame,

. They show up at 1:43 when Scottie brings Judy back from Ernie's and keep flickering until 1:51 when Scottie's trying to change Judy's hair color. Any idea what this is? 3. This site has a number of critiques regarding the restoration that I wonder if you would respond to, including the loss of fade elements which brings me to my final question, 4. As it stands now, could Vertigo ever be fully restored to its original 1958 state, or will there always be some deviations (such as the fades)? Thanks again for all your work and integrity...the only problem is we need more people like you, and less films like Fast and Furious...

 

[Robert Harris]

Originally Posted by AstonMartin007
Mr. Harris,
First let me express my incalculable gratitude towards you and Mr. Katz in rejuvenating this masterpiece. That Vertigo is #1 on the S&S list (and let's not argue semantics, #1 or not it's one of the greatest ever) is no doubt due in part to your tireless efforts to save the film from the ravages of time.
And yet, I have to say I'm immensely frustrated regarding the current state of the restoration. That Vertigo has been dangerously deteriorating has been known for decades now, why aren't all the stops being pulled to restore it to its former glory? With all the praise lavished upon it, are funds really an issue? Surely the studio can pull $100K from one of their CGI flicks, or some directors can band together and collect the spare change in their multimillion dollar mansions? Hell, post the project on kickstarter.com $100K is nothing compared to some of the other funds on there. At the risk of echoing Daniel Day-Lewis in 'Lincoln', if Vertigo is to be preserved for future theatrical releases and formats, then the time to act is now, Now, NOW (!) while it's still possible. It is the very height of absurdity that one of Hollywood's most celebrated masterpieces can't be allotted the equivalent of >0.1% of the budget of Fast & Furious 6...
On a lighter note, I do have some questions for you. While the Blu-ray might not be optimal, the increased resolution does give us more to nitpick.
1. Vertigo seems grainier than I remember North by Northwest being. It's not to the point of distraction, but I'm wondering whether this was how it was originally or an artifact of the deterioration. I've read that NxNW was scanned in 8K, a privilege presumably not extended to Vertigo, would this impact image quality much?

The grain structure is a result of the way the image was handled digitally, and has nothing to do with scanning resolution. NxNW would have been scanned at 4k. No reason to go higher.

2. On second viewing, I noticed a constellation of 3 dots on the left side of the frame, .
They show up at 1:43 when Scottie brings Judy back from Ernie's and keep flickering until 1:51 when Scottie's trying to change Judy's hair color. Any idea what this is?

Possibly bullet holes left by some earlier production. If not, probably ladybugs in mating season.

3. This site has a number of critiques regarding the restoration that I wonder if you would respond to, including the loss of fade elements which brings me to my final question,
4. As it stands now, could Vertigo ever be fully restored to its original 1958 state, or will there always be some deviations (such as the fades)?

With the proper care, and not a great deal more as was spent on the latest incarnation, and possibly less, it can be perfect.

Thanks again for all your work and integrity...the only problem is we need more people like you, and less films like Fast and Furious...

Nothing wrong with Fast and Furious.

RAH

 

[JoeDoakes]

I am patiently waiting for Vertigo (and Harry) to be split out into individual releases.

My guess is that Vertigo and Rear Window will be revisited. The trouble with the Trouble with Harry is that your wait may be very long.

 

[Keith Cobby]

I assume each film is on a separate disc so it should just be a simple repackaging job to retail them individually.

 

[John Weller]

Given the box set seems to be 50 % good transfers and 50 % lousy transfers, I'm hoping they get re-released on their own. The UK set is a lot cheaper but Vertigo doesn't have the mono track grrr!

 

[Vertigo in SF]

Hello all, I'm a new member here. As you nay be able to tell by my username, I'm relatively fond of this film. First of all, I'd like to thank Mr. Harris and Mr. Katz for making the 1996 restoration of Vertigo. I've seen the restoration screened on film and it looks stunning. Seeing it in the Castro in 70mm has to be one of my favorite cinematic experiences. That being said I also thank Mr. Harris for his review of this disc. Might I ask though... I noticed the color timing of this new disc is rather different than that of the 1996 restoration: which is more fateful to the original Technicolor dye prints?

 

[Robert Harris]

Originally Posted by Vertigo in SF
Hello all, I'm a new member here. As you nay be able to tell by my username, I'm relatively fond of this film.
First of all, I'd like to thank Mr. Harris and Mr. Katz for making the 1996 restoration of Vertigo. I've seen the restoration screened on film and it looks stunning. Seeing it in the Castro in 70mm has to be one of my favorite cinematic experiences. That being said I also thank Mr. Harris for his review of this disc.
Might I ask though... I noticed the color timing of this new disc is rather different than that of the 1996 restoration: which is more fateful to the original Technicolor dye prints?

Neither, although the 1996 is closer in many sequences.
The film requires a modern digital restoration.
RAH

 

[John Gilmore]

Another question for Mr. Harris: The Pacific Film Archive in Berkeley, CA. is having a Hitchcock festival and will be screening "Vertigo" in what they bill as an "IB Tech Print....courtesy of the Academy Film Archive and Lowell Peterson." Can I presume that the colors on this print will be accurate?

 

[haineshisway]

I can answer a bit: I know Lowell very well - in fact, he may have ended up with my print (it was with someone else but Lowell may have ended up with it - unknown for sure - Lowell, or Nick as we used to call him, worked on my film The First Nudie Musical). The colors will absolutely be correct. Whether they "look" correct is another issue and it's a tricky one. It's not enough that it's an IB print - these prints were timed for projecting with a carbon arc lamp house. If they're projected with a Xenon bulb, which is what today's film projectors use, it will not look the same as a carbon arc.