Blu-ray elite line (1 Viewer)

[GMpasqua]

After reading the Digital Bits column the other day on why favorite titles are not available due to cosnumer compliants regarding quality. It got me thinking:

Maybe the studios should develop an Elite brand line of Blu-Rays - the top quailty of the blu-ray based on the 70MM films. Paramount has the Sapphire series - but that is more based on the quality of the title, than the film stock.

70MM films will look great on Blu-ray - the ones released already do. At least the consumer will know they are getting demonstration quality picture.

Other good films with low grad film stock/grain would not be included (Dog Day Afternoon, MASH, The Godfther, Caddyshack - all great films but they leave something to be desired when screened on a big screen - these films weren't meant to look like "Cleopatra" or "Lawrence of Arabia")

Maybe all the studios can aggree on one banner and all use it. If Blu-ray is an elite market, then certain films should be the elite of the format


Just because a film is on blu-ray doesn't mean it looks good

 

[Clinton McClure]

Or better yet, the studios can do their job right and give us a quality transfer the first time.

 

[Edwin-S]

Originally Posted by GMpasqua


Other good films with low grad film stock/grain would not be included (Dog Day Afternoon, MASH, The Godfther, Caddyshack - all great films but they leave something to be desired when screened on a big screen - these films weren't meant to look like "Cleopatra" or "Lawrence of Arabia")

I think your argument for an "elite" line of blu-rays is fundamentally flawed considering that these films were originally projected on screens bigger than anything in the home and looked perfectly okay. If the blu-ray is produced from a properly prepared master then all of these films should look good on a home screen, even without an "elite" label.

 

[Joseph Bolus]

Originally Posted by Edwin-S

I think your argument for an "elite" line of blu-rays is fundamentally flawed considering that these films were originally projected on screens bigger than anything in the home and looked perfectly okay. If the blu-ray is produced from a properly prepared master then all of these films should look good on a home screen, even without an "elite" label.

I agree with Edwin. Besides "Blu-ray" is already considered to be an elite DVD by the average consumer. This would just foster additional confusion.

The studios should just concentrate on providing artifact-free 1080p transfers with lossless audio from the best available source (or a digitally remastered source if needed). And, just for the record, a 35mm source provides much more available resolution than 1080p. (Most of today's digital theaters are projecting 4K digital representations of 35mm prints.) If the studio is not prepared to do that with a particular catalog title, then that title doesn't need to be issued to Blu-ray. The already extant DVD will suffice.

Blu-ray already is an elite DVD format.

 

[Robin9]

Originally Posted by GMpasqua

70MM films will look great on Blu-ray - the ones released already do. At least the consumer will know they are getting demonstration quality picture.

Although I agree with the other contributors that the main issue is for Blu-ray producers to do the job properly and to get it right first time, I think you're correct that 70mm films have the best chance of looking good in high definition. Not only 70mm movies, but also movies shot in Vista Vision or Technirama.
The underlying problem here is the general downturn in the market for home cinema material which makes it unlikely that many old movies will sell well on Blu-ray. For example, in the 1950s Universal released a fairly modest Western called Night Passage which does not have a good reputation although I love it. Night Passage was photographed in Technirama by William Daniels, one of the all-time great cinematographers. Night Passage looks fantastic and there is a pretty good DVD. It would look far better on Blu-ray but who would buy it? I would within five seconds of hearing about it, but who else would?

As, apparently, even the James Bond movies are not selling in large quantities on Blu-ray, it seems improbable there will be a sudden surge in large-scale movies coming out in high definition. I'm just delighted we got Dr. Zhivago so early.

 

[Chad R]

With all due respect to Bill at the Digital Bits, I'm sure the real reason there's few catalog releases on Blu is not consumer complaints on quality, but rather low sales. This is a money driven business, if it sells they'll release it. If it doesn't, they'll hold on to it until they can. It's that simple.

I'm sure the studio people did tell him about their anger towards nitpicky consumers, but that was just a seized opportunity to vent a little. After all, their work is being disparaged and it's upsetting to them. So they took a moment to let people know that.

 

[Robert Crawford]

I have to agree with Chad about sold units and profitability being the motivating factor over any expressed quality complaints from some consumers.




Crawdaddy

 

[Joseph Bolus]

I'm one of the consumers who has not purchased any James Bond titles on Blu-ray yet in spite of the fantastic sale prices that we've seen the last month or so.

The reason is simple: I purchased the four DVD "James Bond Ultimate Box" sets with the Lowry Digital remasters just two years ago. And for some of those titles, like "Goldfinger" and "Thunderball", that was already my fourth time to purchase these flicks on the DVD format.. The DVDs in that box set still look and sound "pretty good" upscaled to my 720p Optoma projector. So I just don't see the need to purchase the Bonds over again on BD at this time; *especially* when all the titles are not available. I really think that MGM should have released the DVD "Ultimate Sets" to Region 1 in Fall 2005 -- which I believe is when the rest of the world got them. That would have placed more distance between that release and the BDs.

In any event, I'll probably be ready to purchase the Bonds again when the inevitable BD box set for all the extant movies is released by whatever studio ends up owning the rights.

 

[Worth]

Originally Posted by Joseph Bolus

The studios should just concentrate on providing artifact-free 1080p transfers with lossless audio from the best available source (or a digitally remastered source if needed)...If the studio is not prepared to do that with a particular catalog title, then that title doesn't need to be issued to Blu-ray. The already extant DVD will suffice.

I strongly disagree with you on this. I'd rather have a wide variety of catalogue titles on blu - even if they aren't sourced from the negative and don't take full advantage of the format's potential - than wait for years for something that may never come.

Even mediocre looking blu-rays like Ran look far more like 35mm prints than their DVD counterparts.