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

[haineshisway]

I guess I should be grateful that I have a "smaller" TV of 55" so for me and many others in the various Funny Face threads, the disc looks really good. Perhaps someday I'll get into this 100" screen stuff with a projector and then, like others, can criticize many releases that otherwise I wouldn't have

Of course, the confusing part of this is that the original Patton looked terrible on my 55" screen. Go know.

 

[Kevin EK]

Just want to back up RAH's words here. We looked at Funny Face on two different systems with Joe Kane, as he noted. Something had clearly gone awry with the look of the movie.

We actually took some time to look at several other titles, including the new Blus of Touch of Evil and Double Indemnity, both of which are excellent. All three of us were in agreement on them.

Oliver, I believe you're correct that Joe has spoken to people at Universal about some titles here and there. He's also applauded several of their releases. And he's been very strict about home theater equipment and presentation. He's not a fan of the TV and the receiver making lots of choices about how to display what's on a disc. On his system, perfectly calibrated between his projector design and his screen, what you see is pretty much exactly what's on the disc.

 

[haineshisway]

Someone invite me to Joe Kane's - I'd love to see a really good Blu-ray projected that big in proper fashion. I'd also like to see Funny Face that big - I'm sure it would be illuminating. But I do want to reiterate that REALLY bad Blu-rays look REALLY bad on my 55" screen - but like Robert said in his original viewing on his smaller screen, this wasn't one of those.

 

[OliverK]

Just want to back up RAH's words here. We looked at Funny Face on two different systems with Joe Kane, as he noted. Something had clearly gone awry with the look of the movie.

We actually took some time to look at several other titles, including the new Blus of Touch of Evil and Double Indemnity, both of which are excellent. All three of us were in agreement on them.

Oliver, I believe you're correct that Joe has spoken to people at Universal about some titles here and there. He's also applauded several of their releases. And he's been very strict about home theater equipment and presentation. He's not a fan of the TV and the receiver making lots of choices about how to display what's on a disc. On his system, perfectly calibrated between his projector design and his screen, what you see is pretty much exactly what's on the disc.

Kevin,

thanks for your impressions, I happen to think that Double Indemnity looks excellent in its latest incarnation which caused me to buy it again as my European release does not quite hold up.

Yes, Joe has applauded some releases from Universal but I am sure it was not Spartacus, Jurassic Park or the first BTTF or to name a newer release Fried Green Tomatoes.

When I met Joe at the IFA he presented his projector for Samsung so I know it pretty well, he did not add any enhancements whatsoever in the presentation. I also have one of his JKP Affinity Screens that you probably watched the movie on, they are excellent.

 

[Kevin EK]

Oliver, I would agree that Joe was not applauding Spartacus. Nobody was. And he wasn't applauding The Sting, which I evaluated on his system and found significant problems thereon.

I'm going to dispute the account of the Jurassic Park and BTTF trilogies on Blu. Some people had issues with those releases, while others did not. And those were absolutely not in the area of the above two titles. I don't know about Fried Green Tomatoes as I did not receive that for review and have not seen it on Blu. (I have the DVD release from over 10 years ago, I believe.)

Joe's screen is a JKP and it's a beauty. He showed us in graphic terms the difference between his custom design and the standard projection screen - his is much smoother and doesn't have all the rough texture that can wind up actually obscuring the picture. His screen presents a uniformity of color and brightness over the surface, so you don't have hot spots in one place or another and you don't get the "dirty screen door" effect with a really knobbly surface. By the way, he also has a custom setting on his projector that is specific to black and white films, which is something along the lines of a "carbon arc mode" - providing a warmer palette for black and white. It's a pleasure and a privilege to be able to see these titles in such a well-designed setup.

 

[OliverK]

Oliver, I would agree that Joe was not applauding Spartacus. Nobody was. And he wasn't applauding The Sting, which I evaluated on his system and found significant problems thereon.

I'm going to dispute the account of the Jurassic Park and BTTF trilogies on Blu. Some people had issues with those releases, while others did not. And those were absolutely not in the area of the above two titles. I don't know about Fried Green Tomatoes as I did not receive that for review and have not seen it on Blu. (I have the DVD release from over 10 years ago, I believe.)

Joe's screen is a JKP and it's a beauty. He showed us in graphic terms the difference between his custom design and the standard projection screen - his is much smoother and doesn't have all the rough texture that can wind up actually obscuring the picture. His screen presents a uniformity of color and brightness over the surface, so you don't have hot spots in one place or another and you don't get the "dirty screen door" effect with a really knobbly surface. By the way, he also has a custom setting on his projector that is specific to black and white films, which is something along the lines of a "carbon arc mode" - providing a warmer palette for black and white. It's a pleasure and a privilege to be able to see these titles in such a well-designed setup.

Thank you Kevin,

I like the JKP screen for the very reason that it offers a perfectly smooth surface, very important with higher resolution pictures and especially when the screen is not that big.

And as a disclaimer the titles I mentioned were pure conjecture as I happen to find them problematic but to a different degree and I think he would agree. I mentioned Jurassic Park and BTTF because in my opinion they are poster childs for transfers that still get a pass but at the same time they do not really work that well when projected on a big screen. Imo they tell us something about a studio that does not exactly pull out all the stops for its biggest franchises but is happy with hauling in all the profits without actually doing much for that.

Funny you should mention the I believe D5400 setting as he also mentioned it at the IFA - I have a setting like that on my projector, too and sometimes use it to watch a black and white movie - really cool or I should rather say hot!

 

[Kevin EK]

Oliver, I'm pretty sure that's the projector but I'll check my notes.I think we can agree that all the studios have taken steps at one time or another with their releases that fans did not appreciate. Universal is sadly not alone in that area. Funny Face is an unfortunately fresh example of the issue, showing that either Paramount or Warner Bros had a transfer made that will not please anyone with a larger screen. I personally wish that none of the studios did this.

 

[FoxyMulder]

Oliver, I'm pretty sure that's the projector but I'll check my notes.I think we can agree that all the studios have taken steps at one time or another with their releases that fans did not appreciate. Universal is sadly not alone in that area. Funny Face is an unfortunately fresh example of the issue, showing that either Paramount or Warner Bros had a transfer made that will not please anyone with a larger screen. I personally wish that none of the studios did this.

If i was a betting man i'd say Paramount are the problem here, i would also add that some studio's are worse than others for poor catalog releases, i think Paramount and especially Universal fall into the category of believing DNR and edge enhancement are acceptable additions to 1080p content, they are not acceptable to anyone who uses a projection system.

 

[haineshisway]

I wonder if it's simply a case of some of these titles being mastered and viewed on smaller screens and never being checked on big screens via projection? And again, maybe all the criticisms of a lot of things come from those with the big screens and projectors and the ones giving the passes to things are the ones who view on the smaller screens, not that in my wildest imaginings I would ever call a 55" screen small, but compared to this other stuff, I guess these days it is. I guess unless it's extreme, like Spartacus or the initial Patton, we just don't see what you guys see. Whether that's a bad or good thing is another story for another day.

 

[Robert Crawford]

I wonder if it's simply a case of some of these titles being mastered and viewed on smaller screens and never being checked on big screens via projection? And again, maybe all the criticisms of a lot of things come from those with the big screens and projectors and the ones giving the passes to things are the ones who view on the smaller screens, not that in my wildest imaginings I would ever call a 55" screen small, but compared to this other stuff, I guess these days it is. I guess unless it's extreme, like Spartacus or the initial Patton, we just don't see what you guys see. Whether that's a bad or good thing is another story for another day.

I've been saying that for years, after each HTF Meet when we come back from visiting the studios or companies being utilized to prepare titles for video releases.

 

[Robert Harris]

Someone invite me to Joe Kane's - I'd love to see a really good Blu-ray projected that big in proper fashion. I'd also like to see Funny Face that big - I'm sure it would be illuminating. But I do want to reiterate that REALLY bad Blu-rays look REALLY bad on my 55" screen - but like Robert said in his original viewing on his smaller screen, this wasn't one of those.

Not certain at what size Funny Face falls apart. Looked quite good, with a question or three on a plasma 42. No doubt it will hold up at 55, as you know what you're seeing.I'd bet that at 65 it shows its transfer heritage. At 85, it's gone, which means that for projection it's a non-starter.Check your mail for an invite.RAH

 

[rsmithjr]

I wonder if it's simply a case of some of these titles being mastered and viewed on smaller screens and never being checked on big screens via projection?

Good point!

There is a fair amount of use of Blu-ray in commercial theaters. For example, the Seattle Cinerama house has a sci-fi festival coming up. Some titles in 70mm, some in DCP, and a few in Blu-ray.

The format is that good. And in the future, we will probably see more Blu-ray theatricals simply because that is what is available. My belief is that many Blu-ray disks are better than any extant print of the film in question.

Studios need to treat Blu-ray releases like the archival format that it is.

 

[Robert Harris]

I wonder if it's simply a case of some of these titles being mastered and viewed on smaller screens and never being checked on big screens via projection? And again, maybe all the criticisms of a lot of things come from those with the big screens and projectors and the ones giving the passes to things are the ones who view on the smaller screens, not that in my wildest imaginings I would ever call a 55" screen small, but compared to this other stuff, I guess these days it is. I guess unless it's extreme, like Spartacus or the initial Patton, we just don't see what you guys see. Whether that's a bad or good thing is another story for another day.

Entirely plausible that Funny Face goes back a few years. To look at it from the studio perspective, it's another bothersome old film on old elements, with zero popularity, actors many Walmart shoppers cannot identify and therefore not worth any heavy lifting.In no way an income maker.RAH

 

[Robert Harris]

Good point! There is a fair amount of use of Blu-ray in commercial theaters. For example, the Seattle Cinerama house has a sci-fi festival coming up. Some titles in 70mm, some in DCP, and a few in Blu-ray. The format is that good. And in the future, we will probably see more Blu-ray theatricals simply because that is what is available. My belief is that many Blu-ray disks are better than any extant print of the film in question. Studios need to treat Blu-ray releases like the archival format that it is.

A quality HD signal, with proper illumination, can hold up very nicely on a 25' wide screen.RAH

 

[Rob_Ray]

Entirely plausible that Funny Face goes back a few years. To look at it from the studio perspective, it's another bothersome old film on old elements, with zero popularity, actors many Walmart shoppers cannot identify and therefore not worth any heavy lifting.In no way an income maker.RAH

Many WalMart shoppers can't identify Fred Astaire and Audrey Hepburn? Oh, the world I belong to is truly gone!

I noticed that the titles on this and Sabrina are both window-boxed. Does this indicate a transfer probably done a few years ago?

 

[Tama]

Not certain at what size Funny Face falls apart. Looked quite good, with a question or three on a plasma 42. No doubt it will hold up at 55, as you know what you're seeing.I'd bet that at 65 it shows its transfer heritage. At 85, it's gone, which means that for projection it's a non-starter.Check your mail for an invite.RAH

It showed its transfer heritage on my 60" Samsung. It was about a 50/50 with half the shots looking decent and pleasurable while the other half clearly showed its scrubbing ans somewhat flatness.

 

[OliverK]

I wonder if it's simply a case of some of these titles being mastered and viewed on smaller screens and never being checked on big screens via projection? And again, maybe all the criticisms of a lot of things come from those with the big screens and projectors and the ones giving the passes to things are the ones who view on the smaller screens, not that in my wildest imaginings I would ever call a 55" screen small, but compared to this other stuff, I guess these days it is. I guess unless it's extreme, like Spartacus or the initial Patton, we just don't see what you guys see. Whether that's a bad or good thing is another story for another day.

I have been saying this for a long time - bigger screens and close viewing distances are essential in mastering.

Something that still looks good 10 ft away from a 10 ft screen will be even better on smaller screens and with bigger relative viewing distances so for practical purposes in mastering there is no such thing as too big as long as the image is of the proper quality needed.

Sometimes I would prefer to be more happy with the less than stellar stuff but then with discs that are done right it is just so satisfying to have a really big picture that I would rather like to continue to ask for more quality instead of more quantity in Blu-ray releases.

 

[Joel Arndt]

Many WalMart shoppers can't identify Fred Astaire and Audrey Hepburn? Oh, the world I belong to is truly gone!

I noticed that the titles on this and Sabrina are both window-boxed. Does this indicate a transfer probably done a few years ago?

But I'm sure the average Walmart shopper would know Kay Thompson.

 

[Rob_Ray]

But I'm sure the average Walmart shopper would know Kay Thompson.

I guess the average WalMart shopper has pizzazz!

 

[ahollis]

A quality HD signal, with proper illumination, can hold up very nicely on a 25' wide screen.RAH

The circuit I run uses Blu-ray for classics and kid shows if a DCP is not available. It does look quite good on a 25' and above screen. The only problem I have is to make the managers start the Blu and pause at the start of the presentation in order to not to start at the menu. That would cause a poor presentation.