THE WIZARD OF OZ to get Ultra Resolution Treatment (1 Viewer)

[Will Krupp]

Wow....I WROTE the first quote!! :b

 

[ScottR]

I have never heard of the tornado being hand tinted to produce a rainbow effect.

 

[Mark Anthony]

In reply to Mr Buklis, if you liked the look and colour of the re-release, then that's exactly how any release prints made off the 4K master will or can look(baring any further colour changes, a la GWTW).

The 4k master is effectively an identical copy of the film negative (or master) in digital form, as every drop of information contained in the 65 year old 3 strip neg's can be scanned in at full resolution, combined and then manipulated to remove dirt, scratches and final colour correction and grading - to make it look colourfull and technicolor.

This pristine picture can then be output to standard 35mm film, so there is no need for the 3 strip master elements to make a print as the colour information that makes it look like a 3 strip technicolor production is already there, I believe - and could be wrong - it just need's processing like a normal print.

This has the added advantage that film, as a medium, is far more stable than digital storage and far more likely to be playable in 150 years time than the digital tapes and hard drive's the 4K master will be sitting on!! Therefore the salvaged and 4k output film negative may be used to create another digital master in 20 years time!

M

 

[Jack Theakston]

Done with Kodak's new VISION stocks, any recent non-IB print of WIZARD OF OZ can (in my opinion) rival its predecessor. Processed correctly, the VISION stocks will beat out IB in color vibrancy any day.


Only the first 13 prints used this effect. None survive, but there was extensive documentation in both MGM records and contemporary reviews that mention this effect. At any rate, I don't believe this warrents Warners to go back and do it, as most of the country didn't see it this way.

What they SHOULD do is reinstate the neccisary tones to films like THE GOOD EARTH (which was entirely sepia toned). Thankfully, they recently added the correct toning to the jungle sequences in THE SEA HAWK (which were green) and to a lesser extent, the restoration some time ago of PORTRAIT OF JENNIE accurately portrayed the tints of the last reel correctly.

 

[MatthewA]

Mark,

A negative of the 4K master would be color negative, thus using dye couplers. The low-fade negatives are not "no-fade." They WILL fade someday.

 

[Mark Anthony]

I'm not saying any film output from the 4k master won't fade, any film will over time, just purely the fact that technology marches on - and as many record labels are finding out, some recording formats are almost impossible to find equipment to play them back on now! Thus a film element is more important for archival purposes, as it is as playable today as it was 100 years ago.

M

 

[Phil Dally]

Does anyone know when this will be out?

 

[Brian Kidd]

I'd still hold on to the current release as I doubt that the supplements will be duplicated in their entirety on the new set. More obscure items like the Chuck Jones animation segments might go by the wayside. Thankfully there has never been a shortage of information about OZ due to its constant popularity. I, for one, would love to have some mention about the Land of Oz theme park that operated in N.C. during the 1970's. It was a little funky, but still fairly cool. I have fond memories of going there on vacation when I was a child.

 

[ScottR]

Jack-
Can you please tell me where you got the information about the hand-colored tornado? You said that there is extensive documentation from MGM. Where did you read this? I think the hand tinting would have destroyed the effect of going from sepia to color. It's not in the script, not in any book published on the film, and according to historians, did not occur. If you have evidence, I would love to see it.

 

[MatthewA]

Of course, you can't even print an Eastmancolor or VISION print directly from a 3-strip negative...you would need to make an IP and then an IN or a digital intermediate, or in dye-transfer, a set of matrices.

Am I correct?

But you should never, ever throw out the originals no matter what.

 

[Jack Theakston]

Scott,

My information was passed onto me by a film historian that works at a major archive. It is not completely unknown to researchers of the film and was even mentioned in several books in the 1960s.

When my email is up and running again, I will gladly forward you my citations that I think you will find most interesting.

 

[Andrew Budgell]

I'd love to read them also, Jack! Maybe you can post them here?

Andy

 

[Mark Anthony]

Of course you should never through out the originals, they should be kept and preserved for posterity. That's the beauty of this process, as it allows them to remain untouched and survive for as long as possible - whilst still allowing everyone to view the film as good as new, as if it had been printed directly off the original materials.

M

 

[Eric Peterson]

I know that the commentary track on the "Ultimate Oz" LD boxset states that a double was used for Judy when entering OZ, and that the double was wearing a sepia-toned dress and the house was painted sepia-tone. It sounded like a perfectly good explanation for the effect to me.

 

[ScottR]

Read The Wizard of Oz The 50th Anniversary Pictorial history for an account of the stencil printing process.

 

[Ken_McAlinden]

Does a 4k output to 35mm film really contain "full resolution"? Has anyone done tests about what a 3rd or fourth generation element from a "4k digital to 35mm" IP looks like compared with a third or fourth generation element from a photochemically created IP? If outputs from 4k to 35mm were really being kept as archival elements, this would seem to be an important concern.

Regards,

 

[Andrew Budgell]

I just asked John Fricke (for those who are not aware of him, he provided the commentary for the Ulitmate Oz, has introduced the latest Judy Warner DVDs, co-written The Wizard of OZ: 50th Anniversary Pictorial History, etc.) about the colouring of the tornado and he said that this is PURE FABRICATION and only "some preliminary script discussion about Dorothy and Toto being "turned into"
color by Glinda -- after their arrival in Munchkinland -- but this was abandoned way before production."

There you have it folks, the worlds foremost OZ and Garland historian has spoken!

Andy

 

[DeeF]

I know that Singin' in the Rain had new negatives and prints made, and this was done at 2K. So, perhaps 4K is enough.

 

[Ken_McAlinden]

The requirements for an acceptable 35mm print versus an archival element would be very different.

Regards,

 

[Jack Theakston]

Sources for the hand coloring of the tornado (from my notes, I don't have the original documents):

- Pressbook c. 1954 (around the time of the re-release in hype of A STAR IS BORN). Ad Pub states that 15 of the prints had a hand color process on the tornado.

- Vault documents stating that a print was in the MGM archive as late as 1956. I am aware of it surprising the heck out of some knowledgeable film people (including Mr. Fricke) who did not have any idea that this had been done. I'm sure that if you sent a letter to the archival department at Turner/Warners or whomever has MGM's logs now, you will be able to resurface these.

- My claim was that Dorothy (in the original script) called for Judy to be rotoscoped and kept in B&W while the background changed to color until she put on the shoes. This was dropped when they received a lab estimate of the costs to do this. This is even written in the first draft. I even made a point to state that it was dropped before film even started rolling.

R1 and R2 were done in MGM's lab in sepia tone. The rest of the feature was done at Technicolor. Sepia toning was dropped after the first run. All reissues until the late 1980s had the opening in B&W. I suspect that replacement prints during the '39/'40 general release were not sepia toned after the first prints wore out for cost factors.