The Beatles' "Help!" available on blu-ray June 25th! Pre-order page already up at Amazon (1 Viewer)

[Ruz-El]

Wait, I thought based on the Shane threads that aspect ratios no longer matter since every transfer has a bit of difference regardless?

 

[DVDvision]

The video world is always one step shy of the real aspect ratio... 1.37:1 is the new 1.66, 1.66:1 is the new 1.75, 1.77:1 is the new 1.85 etc.

 

[Keith Paynter]

And don't forget:

AHDN_5Bcrop.jpg

"Intermission"
"End of Intermission; Part 6A - Later that evening..."

 

[Brian Husar]

When are the reviewers or RAH going to comment on this release? I have it and I am not liking what I am seeing.

 

[haineshisway]

I have read all the comments on the other, well, let's call them boards. I have read about DNR and NO GRAIN and soft and horrid. So, imagine my surprise when I put in the disc and saw - GRAIN. Some grain heavier than other grain (in the opticals, obviously, of which there are plenty). At no point did I not see grain. I saw opticals that were softer than the rest of the image. I saw a transfer that was not a disaster and that resembled a release print of a movie called Help. Could it be better? Mostly everything can be better. I have no idea about the elements and this transfer apparently came from a 2007 "restoration" of whatever the elements are. I enjoyed the film (but not as much as A Hard Day's Night) and the comments on those other boards were amusing, as always, and 90% of them were made by people who haven't actually watched the disc.

I looked in vain for haloes from sharpening - other than one outdoor shot, which, if I paused and blew up the image there's something there, although I don't think it's what everyone else thinks, that's it - the only time. Backlighting is not haloes. And why would they sharpen one shot out of all the shots so much that it would produce a halo, when the preceding shot and the shot that follows have no problems? That pretty much answers all questions. I'm very surprised that not one person here has written about this transfer.

 

[Walter Kittel]

I've only sampled the new Blu-Ray but with regard to haloes simply check out the Ticket to Ride sequence in the film and you will see ringing around the black costumes of the Beatles against the snow and sky.

I have only viewed that segment and You're Going to Lose that Girl (my two favorite songs from the film) so I haven't formed an overall opinion of the disc. The segments I watched were acceptable and certainly enjoyable to view again. I need to watch the Bd all the way through to get a better feeling of the overall presentation but ringing is definitely present in the sequence I described above.

This was viewed on a 104" screen via Front Projection, BTW.

- Walter.

 

[Peter Apruzzese]

I'm very surprised that not one person here has written about this transfer.

I was waiting to purchase it until I heard from a few viewers whose eyes and sensibilities about films of that era match mine chimed in with positive notices. Thanks for the recommendation!

 

[Sam Favate]

I'm still waiting to get mine! Amazon taking its sweet time!

 

[Walter Kittel]

Since would be purchasers might be basing their decisions upon comments from those who've viewed the disc, I thought I would follow up on my prior post regarding ringing. In the Ticket to Ride segment the haloing is fairly subtle. It doesn't call a lot of attention to itself and is not as pronounced as some of the worst offenders (such as the DVDs of Tombstone and Star Wars: The Phantom Menace). Once again I need to view more of the title but what I saw in Ticket to Ride would not dissuade me from a purchase.

- Walter.

 

[jacksparrow900]

I have read all the comments on the other, well, let's call them boards. I have read about DNR and NO GRAIN and soft and horrid. So, imagine my surprise when I put in the disc and saw - GRAIN. Some grain heavier than other grain (in the opticals, obviously, of which there are plenty). At no point did I not see grain. I saw opticals that were softer than the rest of the image. I saw a transfer that was not a disaster and that resembled a release print of a movie called Help. Could it be better? Mostly everything can be better. I have no idea about the elements and this transfer apparently came from a 2007 "restoration" of whatever the elements are. I enjoyed the film (but not as much as A Hard Day's Night) and the comments on those other boards were amusing, as always, and 90% of them were made by people who haven't actually watched the disc.

I looked in vain for haloes from sharpening - other than one outdoor shot, which, if I paused and blew up the image there's something there, although I don't think it's what everyone else thinks, that's it - the only time. Backlighting is not haloes. And why would they sharpen one shot out of all the shots so much that it would produce a halo, when the preceding shot and the shot that follows have no problems? That pretty much answers all questions. I'm very surprised that not one person here has written about this transfer.

I agree with everything he said I watch the disc and I went back and watch the 2007 dvd and this is definitely an upgrade don't forget about how amazing the sound is especially the beatle songs.

 

[haineshisway]

Since would be purchasers might be basing their decisions upon comments from those who've viewed the disc, I thought I would follow up on my prior post regarding ringing. In the Ticket to Ride segment the haloing is fairly subtle. It doesn't call a lot of attention to itself and is not as pronounced as some of the worst offenders (such as the DVDs of Tombstone and Star Wars: The Phantom Menace). Once again I need to view more of the title but what I saw in Ticket to Ride would not dissuade me from a purchase.

- Walter.

I'm sure that's the sequence I made note of, but I'm not sold on "ringing" or "halo" because it makes no earthly sense to me as the shots surrounding it have none at ALL.

 

[Paul D G]

I'm hardly an expert, but I watched this with my kids the other day. I wasn't looking for ringing, or grain, or anything with a critical eye but nothing jumped out at me to make me think ew, that doesn't look right. In fact I thought it looked fantastic.

(and the kids loved it)

 

[Brian Husar]

Maybe I am being too critical of the transfer. Criterion released The Monkees film Head in the box set America Lost And Found The BBS Story and it looked much better. I saw grain in Help but it looked more digital. But maybe like I said I am looking too critical at it. Especially after the masterful release of Yellow Submarine last year.

 

[Alan Tully]

I saw this playing in an HMV shop the other day, & standing close to the screen (which I know is a bit unfair), I thought it looked a bit frizzy & digital (the best way I can think to put it), it didn't look bad from a distance. Is it a new transfer? It's no Yellow Submarine. Not that I'm going to buy it, I thought it was pretty bad when I saw it at the cinema (Odeon, Shepherds Bush, London), I remember my school mate (a huge Beatles fan) wanted to see it twice (continuous programs in those days), but I left.

 

[lukejosephchung]

Keep in mind that this is the same 2k video transfer and 5.1-channel audio mix created for the 2007 DVD release, this time with true 1080p resolution and lossless 24-bit audio in both stereo PCM and DTS-DT-MA...it is what it is...those expecting improvement beyond the upgrade in format are inevitably going to be disappointed...I bought and watched my copy knowing what I was getting and am satisfied with it...your mileage may vary!!!

 

[Walter Kittel]

The more I watch of the title, the less impressed I am with the video transfer. There is ringing throughout the film, not just in the Ticket to Ride chapter. Look at the top of John's shoulders in the Scotland Yard segment, when he is standing on the left side of the screen (to the right of the Inspector). It does vary from shot to shot sometimes within the same scene, with dark objects in sharp focus against light backgrounds being the types of shots where ringing is most noticeable.

Also, there are some pretty soft and indistinct medium range shots here and there in the film. Thankfully they are not that frequent but they really seem softer than the accompanying closeups in the same sequences. Perhaps this reflects the originally filming conditions. (??)

On the other hand, I like the color performance of the Blu-Ray disc and the audio is nicely rendered. All in all, a flawed presentation that has room for improvement and yet it still offers improvement over the previous DVD release. Probably still worth purchasing for fans but don't expect a pristine video experience.

Just my $0.02.

- Walter.

 

[Ruz-El]

I watched this one last night on my modest set up and saw no problems. There is what looks like that natural ringing effect in some of the back lit shots, but nothing looks added or anything. It all looked age appropriate to me.

First time seeing the film too, loved it! Reminded me of the type of things Python would do later. Lennon and Ringo made a hell of a comedy team.

 

[haineshisway]

I watched this one last night on my modest set up and saw no problems. There is what looks like that natural ringing effect in some of the back lit shots, but nothing looks added or anything. It all looked age appropriate to me.

First time seeing the film too, loved it! Reminded me of the type of things Python would do later. Lennon and Ringo made a hell of a comedy team.

This is what no one seems to understand - it happened on the Journey to the Center of the Earth threads, too - backlight produces what some here mistake as "haloes" or "ringing" from edge enhancement. My point is always the same - if you don't see that in EVERY shot in that sequence then it's not what you think it is. They're not going to artificially sharpen occasional shots to the point of causing what people call "haloes" or "ringing" - they're going to apply it to the entire transfer and therefore it would be viewable in every shot. They're not going to sit there and make arbitrary decisions like "Oh, let's sharpen this one shot so much that it causes a halo people will see if they sit one foot from their screen and really look for it." And as I've said many times, having seen just how far you have to push the sharpening to actually produce a halo, I'm thinking that whatever's on Help is a product of the filming.

 

[Keith Paynter]

To be fair, the restoration documentary referenced "how much do we clean up"? Artifacts that reflect the presentation, such as dirt in the footage in the opening title sequence, were considered elements that should have been left alone. It's not about "Han shoots first", it's about removing the trick of the light - the reflective sheet of glass that separates Harrison Ford from the snake in "Raiders".

High resolution home video certainly has made us a bunch of nit picking fanatics when we can dissect something over and over again years after paying a modest sum to see something flash by in an instant magnified on the big screen, and then possibly paying to see it a second or even third time on our own dime.

 

[Douglas R]

Absolutely, 100% spot on! I mean, as ever, open to any other evidence that someone might produce. But unless that's forthcoming, same director, same production company, same studio, and made within a year of each other (more or less), it has to be 1.75:1, doesn't it?The only think...how bothered are we?I mean I know it'll niggle a little, and fair enough.But we're very used to getting 1.85:1 films opened out slightly to 1.78:1, and the jump from 1.75:1 to 1.66:1 is almost identcal. And we're not getting any of the OAR cropped off - it's a less-wide ratio showing just a little more than intended, rather than a little less.If this were an American 1.85:1 film from last year released in 1.78:1 I doubt anyone would even comment, would they? Could be wrong.But yes, to be precise it should be 1.75:1, unless they have a damn good reason otherwise.Steve W

I've been researching Kine Weekly and this is from the December 16, 1965 issue which gives the aspect ratio of HELP as 1.85:1 on 1.65 head room. I assume they mean the picture was composed for screens of any aspect ratio between 1.66:1 to 1.85:1. However, Kine Weekly also shows that in 1965 very few films British were being shot for 1.66. They were either 1.75 or 1.85.