your post was exactly what I wanted to read...it informed us tremendously about the nature of the film elements and the process of film-tape transfering.
One comment you made leaves me quite concerned:
I knew this was the case some time ago (I believe is paritally why the Vertigo transfer wasn't 16x9) but I had hoped someone had developed equipment to solve the problem.
My concern is that if the problem of image softness and loss of resolution (among a few other problems) with large-format film elements is inerehent in the process of film-tape transfering given current technology limitiations (that are not as problematic with transfering from 35mm), then that's quite alarming!
It means that even an 1920 x 1080 uncompressed HD transfer would be subject to the same compromises.
I'm well aware that digital media, even at the 1920 x 1080 level, cannot capture all the visual information and color purity of the native 65mm print. But to be further compromised by excessive softening and obscuring of fine detail isn't acceptable in the long run. Is anyone doing work to develop equipment so that large-format film media can be transfered to digital with a minimum of loss???
It seems a sad irony that a 1920 x 1080 transfer from a 70mm source would look inferior to the same transfer made from a 35mm print of the same film!
p.s. is this also the reason that the Hello Dolly DVD looks slighty softened to my eyes? (was it a large-format transfer as well?)
Mr. Harris's comments also raise questions with me concerning the new HD formats of the near future.
Will the inherent quality issues of video transfers be exasperated with 1080p (with larger screens, different display sources, etc) or will they be somewhat overcome?
Any hi-definition display media is going to show the good with the bad as far as source material goes, as if it's on there you'll see it, resulting in greater potential for nit-picking as well as the overall wow factor..
..fortunately studio's have been preparing for HD for some time and have been making HD transfer's from film for over a decade, with the result that film to tape transfer machines, digital clean up and other methods to digitally improve picture quality have advanced dramatically since then - compare Lowry Digital's work over the past few year's for an example of this compared to it's first releaes.
These technologies will continue to improve as years go by and costs come down, so even on a HD disc there will be scope for improvement and no doubt a few years after whichever format is succesfull, if any, the titles first released on the format may well be re-authored, re-transferred or re-mastered for superior, superior HD quality!
But the prospect of seeing some of the current reference quality dvd's master's transferred in 1080p and uncompressed surround sound, in the home, is mind-blowing.
Regarding this Northlight link in TedD's post #39 above:
When you browse using the side bar, the area list that reads: "More than 35 Northlight scanners are in use by leading facilities around the globe, including: DKP IMAX 65mm Los Angeles
Having no technical background in this area, I'm asking: Couldn't the same scanner used for Imax quality film digitizing be used for a sharper 65mm transfer of Ben Hur?
I've been wanting to see the silent version ever since they teased us with it in the documentary of the last release which I one. I am curious if anyone would buy it again for the silent version alone? Since most of the talk has been about the latter release; what's the word on the old one? Thanks Grant
The 1925 version looks fantastic on my 35" direct view monitor. The restoration, done a few years ago and released on laserdisc, looks stunning on this new DVD. (I remember years ago seeing prints looking so bad that, as one friend said, you couldn't tell which one was Ramon Novarro and which one was the horse!)
As far as the film itself goes, it's a fascinating companion piece to the 1959 remake, offering the various sub-plots that the remake dropped for time (particularly character of the temptress, Iras, mentioned on the commentary track of the 1959 version). In fact, at 145 minutes, it's surprising how the film seems to cover more story in much less time.
Of course, it's cornier and more stereotypical in its character development than the remake but a strong asset in its favor is the thrilling chariot race which, to me, equals one in the remake and more especially, the sea battle, which was filmed full-scale at enormous expense without the use of miniatures and mattes. The 1925 sea battle sequence is hands-down the superior one.
Thank you Mr. Harris. No one can dispute the claim that this is the finest "home" video presentation of BH yet. My concern is that HD will not be a perfert fit into the "bucket" as well. Or, that mastering equipment is not up to the task, as well. Will a movie shot in digital, fit into the home HD "bucket"? Will current mastering equipment handle 1080p digital 'film' (tape) transfer to 1920 x 1080 HD? Thanks to any that can fill me in on our future home theater experience.
To my untrained eye, The new BH looks red (or brown) to the older transfer on The Beaver. The whites and the skin tones especially. Anyone?
I knew I was looking at a transfer nearing perfection when Judah, on his attempted escape from the prison, completely disappeared into a shadow. . .that's the way I remembered that scene on the big screen, and lo, and behold, that's the way I saw it last night!
Here's to hoping that when we get our chance to triple-dip this on HD-DVD for it's 50th anniversary, Warner uses their "Ultra-Resolution" process, even if just from an HDTV resolution master.
Either one scans a large format element on what is essentially a dinosaur of a machine, or one creates a reduction element for scanning on one of the latest generation set up for standard 35mm. --------------------------------------------------------
Are you saying Imagica or Northlight scanners are dinosaurs or not up to the job?
#Frankly, I wish I was back in Tunbridge Wells.
A man who tells lies, like me, merely hides the truth. But a man who tells half-lies has forgotten where he put it.