A Sneak Peek at The Blue Max (1 Viewer)

[DP 70]

This is a perfect transfer just as I remember it on release thanks TT.

 

[Torsten Kaiser]

Again, I leave you to the faded Eastman internegatives and I and others will enjoy this perfect transfer. I'm curious how "color for a film of that era" gets a "sic" but the question "are you talking about Deluxe labs or Eastman stock from the mid-Sixties" doesn't. Deluxe was a lab, Eastman was a stock - Deluxe processed Eastman stock, just like other labs (not talking about Technicolor, which also processed Eastman stock and printed in dye transfer). Other than that, we can obviously agree to disagree.

Mr Kimmel,

I read your posts over the last weeks with growing concern and uneasiness with regard to your "rock solid" opinions - or rather the interpretation of what photochemical color processes actually mean in terms of how the differ and how they actually register(ed). Your unwavering, absolute position in stating as "perfect" and "spot-on" the color values and their registration of the Blu-ray editions of DESK SET, INN OF THE SIXTH HAPPINESS and THE BLUE MAX - and in particular how this was achieved (or rather the lack of knowledge of) makes an already muddled debate even more problematic. You surely have your "followers" - but that does not mean you are correct - neither are they.

Now, one can like the transfer and its color palette as a personal preference. Knowing for sure whether the master itself IS correctly timed is a completely different thing. I am not posting to tell anyone whether to like the master or not, but to help to understand what is personal preference, how this mastering was actually done (how this color curve that was applied actually originated) and how a correctly represented color palette of the specific color process used actually registers (and yes, there were variations from lab to lab, especially with DeLuxe - even though the Eastman stocks delivered the labs were the same, the ways and means of the photochemical processing sure were not).

You, Mr Kimmel, have written extensively about your opinions re: so-called "teal push". Unfortunately, the many, many words you used do not even remotely address the actual issue(s).

[*]TO BE CLEAR: The masters of the aforementioned films DO NOT represent the actual color palette that was photochemically achieved by DeLuxe at the time. To be exact these are modern interpretations (of color values and emphases) applied by digital means post scan to a classic stock, which has gradually to totally different values - depending how a scene was shot and what color tones are included - inherent in it. In fact, the effect is entirely digital and called a LUT (Look Up Table) in form of a preset integrated in color correction consoles such as DaVinci, Lustre or Filmlight's BaseLight and actually designed for DI grading of (scans of) stocks from Kodak's VISION series that itself was introduced only almost 20 years ago. The actual implementation of these LUTs came much later. These settings are often used in commercials, too. Does this mean that this color could not be found in classic films ? No, not at all. But it was CERTAINLY NOT PRESENT IN SUCH DOMINATING EMPHASIS - AND NOT THE WAY IT WAS ATTRIBUTED in these cases and some others.

What actually happens during this digital process of applying the LUTs is that the color values are digitally literally combined, simplified, twisted and the curve shifted so that the shades in the colors are altered in registration and saturation, along with "adopting" the color values of a completely different tone. That "coating" process mimicks a similar, but far more elaborate and more accurate way used in photochemical processing that as such was available for a long, long time. But, it was used differently; and the color palettes chosen were much different, too. In the digital world there are two ways of this LUT technique (although the first can also be achieved manually). Often times, the LUTs are used or applied globally, affecting all colors and shades. The other approach is to "curve grade" and affect the colors and shades individually. Depending on the CC console and the abilities of the colorist this digital processing can work well or not. Another problem is that the digital process is just as "sticky" as the photochemical one: correcting, for instance, a completed master without the aid of all separate layers (the work file) back to neutral or even original levels if often extremely difficult; if noise reducers were applied, downright impossible.
Remember: it was designed for VISION print stocks and their specific color emphases - not for older ones. And here is where the trouble begins.

[*]The LUTs applied to the aforementioned films (and many others - HOW TO MARRY A MILLIONAIRE being another) attribute a totally different color curve of color shades than the original elements (and processes by way of photochemically emphasising specific tonal values inherent in the stock used at the time, which are totally different compared to modern ones) called for. That brings me to another issue: the generalization of labs. Yes, identical stock would be shipped by Eastman to them. But it is not true, that all would deliver the same outcome, quite different. DeLuxe (mostly Fox for a number of years) and MetroColor (mostly MGM at the beginning) did do a lot of tweaking re: controlling - or rather twisting - the color values by specifically targeting the specific color shades emphasised and inherent in the stock itself, including the IP stocks, by the way. That change affected the palette accordingly. The color shades chosen to be highlighted in the stocks would change over the years, sometimes gradually, sometimes drastically. In addition, some filmmakers chose to twist the color curve photochemically even further, but that is another issue and another debate.

So, how does DESK SET or any other mentioned films actually look like ? This brings me to my next point, where I have to say to you, Mr Kimmel, that you offer a lot of opinions but contribute little to the issue, which is, especially for the reader who does not know much about these things, unfortunate. These people trust your judgment. I am sure you are an eager collector of things. But, the mind can play tricks on you, especially when you do not know, what the reference is.
You referred here earlier to once owning a TECHNICOLOR print of DESK SET, claiming it had exactly the same color structure as the new U.S. Blu-ray. In your recent blog you admitted, the print was merely 16mm, thus a reduction copy.
There are several things wrong with this picture:
a) DESK SET (as the others mentioned) was filmed on Eastman stock and copied with DeLuxe processing as priority, not Technicolor. Technicolor registers very distinctly with excellent color separation and the emphasis was with dyetransfer always on saturation of primaries, not shades. The philosophy behind the DeLuxe print making based on the photochemically very specifically handled Eastman stocks was totally different: the emphasis was much more on shades and primaries were mostly muted except for very specific colors, such as lush reds. A darker shade, the emphasis would not apply. This made the appearance of the colors in DeLuxe prints very pastel-like in presence, and color separation was much more muted compared to the properties of IB Tech.
b) judging from a commercial print is already problematic, from one you no longer seem to have means to rely on (often failing) memory alone - doing so from a 16mm reduction copy that was made with a completely different color process than the intended one (also by means of physical and photochemical means and stocks (emulsion!!)) that the intended one is negligent. It is like equalling CineColor and Eastman. No dice.
c) and, no, IB Tech certainly never exhibited these color emphasis to bluish tones either - much less (globally applied) in all shades.

[*]So what does this mean for the Blu-ray discs (for instance: DESK SET BD Germany vs FOX U.S.) ??
The U.S. BD does have a vastly better scan. I wish the color values were the original ones ... The German BD, using an older master, is also not accurate - the transfer has some coring (sharpening) and telecine artefacts, it is oversaturated, and leaning too much to green tonalities (and not, as was claimed brownish ones at all) but it is actually more balanced and closer to the original color palette. The metal framing of the typewriter is actually a give-away: Both, Technicolor as well as DeLuxe would, if done properly have registered that metal as grey/aluminum/chrome - as it quite does on the master used for the German Blu-ray - and not bluish/cyan/cobalt as is evident on the U.S. Blu-ray Disc. Again, this is a modern, digital interpretation - a redux work. But certainly no accurate representation of the original, let alone a "restoration".
[/list]

 

[Robert Crawford]

An informative post. Thank you for making it as I'm sure it will generate some responses and lead to a constructive debate here.

 

[haineshisway]

Rather than quote that long post, I'll just say that we can agree to disagree, as so often happens on these boards. I appreciate the post and your thoughts, and I know you have a lot of knowledge - I also know I have some knowledge of my own and I have to believe that we both believe what we believe, but in the end, you think what you think, and I think what I think. I am a fanatic about color reproduction, and to me (and now many others) The Blue Max finally looks correct. Fox obviously had the original timing notes for the film - I don't think they just walked into a room and said, "Oh, let's assign this color to this scene, and this color to this scene." And then you go on to emphatically state that The Blue Max did not have this color scheme - or at least that's the way I'm reading it. And you know this how? You see, it works both ways.

I'm not seeing the difference, of course, between my rock solid opinions (emphasis on "opinions") and your rock solid opinions (emphasis on "opinions") - in the end I'm presenting mine and you're presenting yours - people can make up their own minds. The difference between us is that I don't read your posts with a growing sense of unease. I read them, I understand them, sometimes I agree and sometimes I don't, as in the case with some of the above. Like me, you use many words to make your point but in the end your point, like mine, is your point. You say I have my followers. I don't know what that means, really, but, yes, there are some folks who trust my judgment in these matters because when they view a transfer I've talked about they tend to agree with my assessment, just as I'm sure there will be some who agree with yours - thus, horse racing.

I actually have continued access to many of my former 16mm and 35mm dye transfer prints. And I'm sorry, but dye transfer prints projected with carbon arc light had blue and plenty of it. My memory isn't playing tricks on me - I have seen hundreds of these prints projected properly. If they were projected with Xenon, the blue becomes a very different story, which is why I hate seeing IB prints projected that way.

 

[Eastmancolor]

Bruce, just to be clear regarding carbon arc projection, carbon arcs provide a color temperature of around 5400k, whereas Xenon is around 6000k, so carbon arc will provide an image with a bit more yellow in it. Xenon is a slightly "cooler" light and actually makes blue more pronounced. So IB prints shown with carbon arcs are going to lean towards the Earth tones. On Xenon projectors IB prints look cooler, or more blue-ish.

Our mutual friend with the screening room in Burbank uses Tungsten bulbs, which have a much lower color temperature than carbon arc. Sometimes when he runs IB prints, everyone onscreen looks like they have jaundice.

Lastly, the original color timing notes of an Eastman color negative, even if available would have to be adjusted due to fade over time. The original timing lites definitely are useful, though it's difficult to make a uniform adjustment as negatives will often fade unevenly, sometimes within the frame. So if you have the original settings and then compensate for the fade, some shots or sequences, particularly where dupes are cut in during optical sequences, are all over the map color-wise. Because of this there is a degree of guessing of how the color should look when a colorist is making a new scan of a classic film at a post house.

Having said that, I still think the new Blu-ray of THE BLUE MAX is a great disc. Don't cringe, but I do think there are some shots here and there that are a bit too blue/green (stone walls, skies and hair color leaning in this direction a handful of times) but overall the bulk of the film looks great, the detail is astounding and it's certainly the best I've ever seen it look.

 

[haineshisway]

Bruce, just to be clear regarding carbon arc projection, carbon arcs provide a color temperature of around 5400k, whereas Xenon is around 6000k, so carbon arc will provide an image with a bit more yellow in it. Xenon is a slightly "cooler" light and actually makes blue more pronounced. So IB prints shown with carbon arcs are going to lean towards the Earth tones. On Xenon projectors IB prints look cooler, or more blue-ish.

Our mutual friend with the screening room in Burbank uses Tungsten bulbs, which have a much lower color temperature than carbon arc. Sometimes when he runs IB prints, everyone onscreen looks like they have jaundice.

Lastly, the original color timing notes of an Eastman color negative, even if available would have to be adjusted due to fade over time. The original timing lites definitely are useful, though it's difficult to make a uniform adjustment as negatives will often fade unevenly, sometimes within the frame. So if you have the original settings and then compensate for the fade, some shots or sequences, particularly where dupes are cut in during optical sequences, are all over the map color-wise. Because of this there is a degree of guessing of how the color should look when a colorist is making a new scan of a classic film at a post house.

Having said that, I still think the new Blu-ray of THE BLUE MAX is a great disc. Don't cringe, but I do think there are some shots here and there that are a bit too blue/green (stone walls, skies and hair color leaning in this direction a handful of times) but overall the bulk of the film looks great, the detail is astounding and it's certainly the best I've ever seen it look.

Yes, I can't watch Tech prints at his house - just horrid.

 

[ahollis]

What a great Blu-ray and what an excellent movie. Thanks Twilight Time.

 

[Paul Rossen]

Yes, this is the best THE BLUE MAX has ever looked since it's original Roadshow runs. That said I'm a bit confused as to whether or not TBM had Exit Music. The Intrada cd disc clearly states EXIT music after the end titles. The TT Blu- ray does not have it. The new LLL cd release does not have it. I don't remember from its roadshow run in NYC if it had one.

Does anyone know if Intrada Records made the mistake or perhaps the Fox TT Blu-ray?

 

[davidHartzog]

TT has a pretty track record. Just ordered Peckinpah flick.

 

[Neil S. Bulk]

Yes, this is the best THE BLUE MAX has ever looked since it's original Roadshow runs. That said I'm a bit confused as to whether or not TBM had Exit Music. The Intrada cd disc clearly states EXIT music after the end titles. The TT Blu- ray does not have it. The new LLL cd release does not have it. I don't remember from its roadshow run in NYC if it had one.

Does anyone know if Intrada Records made the mistake or perhaps the Fox TT Blu-ray?

While preparing the isolated score and the new La-La Land CD, it was discovered that the cue that was previously thought to be exit music was instead a pick-up take for the end titles. So don't worry, that music is on the LLL release (and the TT disc).

 

[ROclockCK]

Whatever your hand in this project Neil (co-producer?), you guys did one helluva fine job with the score here...

I just love this Blu-ray, especially isolated.

 

[Will Krupp]

a) DESK SET (as the others mentioned) was filmed on Eastman stock and copied with DeLuxe processing as priority, not Technicolor.

Wonderfully written and detailed post Mr Kaiser, and thank you. One MINOR point of reference though, in regards to dye transfer prints. Simply because DeLuxe color was the primary "process" (if you will) does not rule out the possible existence of Technicolor dye transfer prints.

DeLuxe had no European lab so mostly all of the high profile Fox releases would have been printed for European release by Technicolor London. While this doesn't mean they would have necessarily been dye-transfer prints, some definitely were. A British dye-transfer print of GIGI (domestically printed by Metrocolor) was screened about ten years ago at the Egyptian Technicolor festival and there are known dye transfer prints of THE SOUND OF MUSIC (domestically printed by DeLuxe) in existence as well (to name just two)

 

[ROclockCK]

Having said that, I still think the new Blu-ray of THE BLUE MAX is a great disc. Don't cringe, but I do think there are some shots here and there that are a bit too blue/green (stone walls, skies and hair color leaning in this direction a handful of times) but overall the bulk of the film looks great, the detail is astounding and it's certainly the best I've ever seen it look.

This most closely sums up my own reaction to Fox/TT's Blue Max Blu-ray Jim. Like you, I also noticed some minor colour palette trade-offs along the way. But geeeze Louise...in a world of seemingly unbounded woe...at the tail end of the photo-chemical era with our narrowing opportunities for useful recovery...who, realistically, could be so churlish as to fixate on some of the practical choices Schawn Belston and his Fox team made while trying to breathe new life into this still exciting, but unquestionably niche-interest 50 year old picture?

For anyone still stewing over real or imagined colour 'pushes' here, I'd like to direct them to the Trailer on this disc, because that rather gnarly artefact pretty much nails the palette I recall from my first encounter with this movie at a drive-in during the summer of '66, followed by a second viewing in a theatre that fall. After those viewings, nada, until years later on TV and VHS, but Guillermin's wide compositions and Slocombe's wider than usual choice of lenses made those panned and scanned presentations almost unwatchable (so I mostly didn't). On Laserdisc it fared considerably better, although more so because of that format's sonic assist. I never even saw this movie on DVD because by that late date, I was waiting for Fox to once and for all go back to the source and remaster it.

Now we have this sumptuous 4k rescan from the original negative, with state-of-the-art workflow, and impeccable presentation of Goldsmith's classic score in all of its variations. Frankly, I don't care whether this is a pixel perfect representation of every last nuance of the original Eastman/Deluxe colour curves...it's just a spectacularly effective presentation which brings this picture more alive for the movie fan in me than it ever did in any previous incarnation, including the original film projection.

So if this is to become the epitaph for The Blue Max on disc, then it's a damn fine one.

 

[Neil S. Bulk]

Whatever your hand in this project Neil (co-producer?), you guys did one helluva fine job with the score here...

I just love this Blu-ray, especially isolated.

Thanks for the kind words. I co-produced the La-La Land album with Nick Redman and the research I did for that album led to the alternate music cues appearing on the commentary track on the Twilight Time disc.

 

[Paul Rossen]

While preparing the isolated score and the new La-La Land CD, it was discovered that the cue that was previously thought to be exit music was instead a pick-up take for the end titles. So don't worry, that music is on the LLL release (and the TT disc).

Neil...thanks for the explanation and the great job done all around with THE BLUE MAX.

 

[Brent Avery]

Yes, and after watching the German blu ray at 128" ( 2:35 ) I was thoroughly enjoying the TT version - such a joy to see in comparison,not to mention the nicely rendered 5.1 audio versus 2.0. The earliest indication of just how much better looking this transfer is was when the movie showed Peppard riding in the truck passing the troops on the way to the airfield through the bombed out town - it was much sharper looking with better saturation ( and color of course ). Just glad 20th Century Fox took the time to give us such a good looking transfer.

 

[mike--]

Went to casually view this last night, after it arrived yesterday in the mail, and there is no Surround whatsoever-it exists for the isolated score, but not for the film itself-everything comes out of the front. Anyone else notice this?

 

[Torsten Kaiser]

Wonderfully written and detailed post Mr Kaiser, and thank you. One MINOR point of reference though, in regards to dye transfer prints. Simply because DeLuxe color was the primary "process" (if you will) does not rule out the possible existence of Technicolor dye transfer prints.

DeLuxe had no European lab so mostly all of the high profile Fox releases would have been printed for European release by Technicolor London. While this doesn't mean they would have necessarily been dye-transfer prints, some definitely were. A British dye-transfer print of GIGI (domestically printed by Metrocolor) was screened about ten years ago at the Egyptian Technicolor festival and there are known dye transfer prints of THE SOUND OF MUSIC (domestically printed by DeLuxe) in existence as well (to name just two)

Correct all the way (although DeLuxe later would have, of course, their own lab in London- they did great work over there). But to (perhaps, if at all necessary) clarify I never said that no TC prints off DESK SET or other films (originally prioritized/slated for DeLuxe Prints distribution) were made or ever existed, because they, of course, in many cases did. What I said (and meant) was that these films were originally planned, filmed and made/copied for DeLuxe (palette) presentations, with creation of prints for later screenings, creation of reduction materials or even because of things like capacity problems at the time sometimes TC (or even Eastmancolor) used as "alternative". The intended color palette, however, was that of DeLuxe. Therefore, the TC or EC values of a given print would give little to no insight at all as to the original palette of the film, of course, much less if it were a reduction material.

 

[DP 70]

Went to casually view this last night, after it arrived yesterday in the mail, and there is no Surround whatsoever-it exists for the isolated score, but not for the film itself-everything comes out of the front. Anyone else notice this?

In the UK on release we only had 35mm 3-Track Magnetic prints, the USA had 70mm prints but were they 5 or 6 Track ?

 

[EddieLarkin]

The sound track on the disc is 5.1, so there obviously is surround activity. The isolated score is 2.0; if you're getting surround from that it's because you're using Pro-Logic, and so most stereo effects are being duplicated in your surrounds. The 5.1 track will probably only have surround activity for a few effects here and there; the music will stay up front, as it was on theatrical release.