A few words about...™ Bram Stoker's Dracula -- in BD

Re: A few words about...™ Bram Stoker's Dracula -- in BD

With all dew respect to Dave and his screen shots of the film. I will say they are interesting and they can give SOME idea of the different color pallet of the film in the different video versions, however his screen shots of the BD don't look like what I'm seeing on my screen when I watch this movie.

His screen shots do indeed look a bit washed out and desaturated. What I'm seeing doesn't look like that at all. I think Paul Hillenbrand has hit the nail on the head when he talks about filters in the previous versions. The bride scene is a complete wash in the warm fire light. EVERYTHING in the shots is that color in the old version.

In the new version, it's still quite warm from the fire light, its just that now you can also see many other colors that seem to have been on the film all along but apparently weren't visible in the previous versions. All you have to do is look at the faces and you can now see variations in the flesh tones that were before all one shade of yellow. The sheet that they are rolling around on is made of many different colors. You can't see that in the older version.

I just rented this film, but now actually having seen it I'm going to have to go out and buy it. I really think it is quite beautifully done.

Doug

Re: A few words about...™ Bram Stoker's Dracula -- in BD

I will buy it, especially since no one has indicated that my beloved Ms. Bellucci is in any way harmed by the new look of the BD

But I do want to echo thanks to both Dave and RAH. Because without Dave bringing up his observations, this never would have been investigated. This is why I continue to be a member at HTF, because of the insightful membership and the invaluable resource of true industry professionals such as Mr. Harris.

I can now eagerly anticipate the arrival of this disc, knowing that it will look different from previous incarnations, but as they say "knowledge is power" (or is it half the battle?) and at least I will be armed with it when viewing for the first time on BD.

I have a new Sony SXRD set on the way (hopefully in a week or so) and this will make for great initial viewing on it!

Re: A few words about...™ Bram Stoker's Dracula -- in BD

Just wondering...does anyone have the new DVD that was released at the same time as the Blu-Ray?

I would think that if it this was indeed a technology limitation, the new DVD would pretty much look like the old SuperBit version and the Blu-Ray would be decidely different.

Has anyone compared the new DVD and the Blu-Ray?

Re: A few words about...™ Bram Stoker's Dracula -- in BD

Ms. Bellucci has survived fully intact and looking lovely as ever.

Doug

Re: A few words about...™ Bram Stoker's Dracula -- in BD

I just have to say that this is my favorite intentionally funny post in a very long time. Thank you!

M.

Re: A few words about...™ Bram Stoker's Dracula -- in BD

Does anyone have any more screenshots of the Blu-Ray version?

Re: A few words about...™ Bram Stoker's Dracula -- in BD

apparently yes.

Re: A few words about...™ Bram Stoker's Dracula -- in BD

Doug, what display do you have?
I have an Avia tweaked Mits hc3000U PJ which has a very good rep.
I'm sure my screenshots are not exact in regards to perfectly capturing the color and brightness as I'm indeed aiming a digital camera at a projector screen. All I can say is that in the comparison shots, the differences are valid as I'm in full manual mode. Most people seem to think it's good for a rough "idea" of what the differences are. I am far from the only one seeing radical color differences in only select scenes and a much flatter, washed out look on the BD. Now also, many of these were taken on my first night ever even attempting screenshots. By that 3rd night, I feel I had gotten much better, (but that's beside the point)
An analogy, I am mixing my record at the moment. Now I have excellent, PERFECT flat studio monitors, big ones. I also have perfectly flat, studio level headphones. But when I mix, I also listen to the same tracks through good home speakers as well as other peoples (I often make cds and take them to different people's houses. I listen in the car and I even listen on a couple of boomboxes. Most people when they do professional mixdowns do as well. (You will ofteh see a cheap boombox sitting on the mixing desk as well as sometimes a few speakers aside from the monitors)
I do this so I can hear how the same mix will sound on all these different types os speakers.
Often if a mix sounds great on just the monitors, it will sound muddy as hell on other settups.
I would assume a similar thing should happen when a new transfer is made.
If the new transfer comes out so flat and dark that you would need only the best possible display to see even a remotely satisfactory image then that's odd. How many people have a settup like RAH's...? (And believe me, I am jealous!)
One percent? Maybe less?
I have watched dozens of BDs and now some Hddvds, have had HD for 2 and a 1/2 years as well as having an Oppo player, have watched numerous PAL discs upscaled. I have never seen a disc that so radically looks different than what either a previous media version looked like or what my memory (albeit not totally trustworthy) of a film looked like before this.
Now last thought, if all the theatrical prints were off, the official book of the film's photos were off, the previous video versions including an LD set that some paid $100 for was off, (thinking they were getting an accurate representation of the film) what really is the "accurate theatrical presentation" suppossed to be?
If you bought a new version of a beloved old album but the new mix was radically different in many songs, sounded muddier, the instruments were much less clear and now buried and even some were flipped from left to right, (the color on Dracula turning from blue to green is a nice comparison)
and in your opinion the earlier album, even if not in what's considered the hihest fidelity possible, sounded better to you than might you not be a tad disappointed? (Actually it happens all the time with "remastered albums") Especially if basically you were being told something like, "this is the correct way the album SHOULD have sounded. You just can't appreciate it." Or "Your stereo isn't good enough to make this sound great." and "unless you have $5,000 speakers, don't expect to hear everthing in the mix."

Re: A few words about...™ Bram Stoker's Dracula -- in BD

Posted as an addendum to the DVD Empire review - this is th ebest explanation I have read in regards to the changes that are present from previous versions:



Editor's Note:
Kim Aubrey, who works for ZAP Zoetrope Aubry Productions LLC and worked on the Blu-ray transfer of this title, took some issues with some of the statements in our Empire Review.

In the interest of "fair play" and making sure our customers had all the facts, we thought it fair to include his comments here:

If the electronic transfer of the film that you are seeing reveals grain structure...that is, if you are SEEING the film grain, then by definition, you are seeing all of the sharpness that was captured by the film camera. We can’t manufacture sharpness or definition in the telecine process. It is true that in the standard definition home video era, it was common to dial in some electronic edge enhancement to overcome the limitations of NTSC Video and television receivers of that era. And it was common in pre HD transfers to “filter out” the grain giving movies more of a “TV look” which was considered desirable at that time. But the “detail enhancement” they used in that era was erzatz definition....fake. An illusion of detail. Again, if you are seeing “tons of grain” then you are seeing a faithful reproduction of the film element.

American Zoetrope, Francis Coppola’s company does not own (and has never owned) the facilities to do feature film telecine mastering...aka the film transfer. The studio that OWNS the title (in this case Columbia-Sony) owns Dracula and they commissioned and paid for the new transfer in 1996 because they believed that the old one was wanting. I agreed with them. I was post production executive on the film in 1991-1992 and I always was horrified at what the home video and TV editions of Dracula looked like because they were so far from what Coppola and Ballhaus had done for the original release prints. So orange-y. So bright. Zoetrope’s role in the new transfer was to make sure that the transfer colorist had access to a pristine original “final answer print” to screen and refer to. A final answer print is a vaulted 35mm film print in Sony’s possession that bears a signature from the original production indicating that the director or director of photography was satisfied with the color timing and that this print was to be the gold standard...the reference for all 35mm release prints to be compared with and accepted/rejected. It was a controversial answer print at the time. It was dark. The soundtrack was considered very avant-garde. Coppola was breaking rules. Some critics appreciated it, others did not.

Re: A few words about...™ Bram Stoker's Dracula -- in BD

Hey All,

Like many others, I want to really thank RAH and Dave Mack for this very insightful and interesting topic. That's why I love HTF as well.

That being said, (and Dave, I'm glad you did bring up your concerns), I have to agree with RAH, at this point, we're beating a dead horse.

* Dave, you clearly don't agree with the BD transfer of this film.
* RAH has confirmed that this is the closest the film has ever gotten to the Answer Print.
* Kim Aubrey from ZAP Zoetrope Aubry Productions LLC and worked on the Blu-ray transfer of this title, has chimed in as well to confirm that this BD version is the most faithful to the Answer Print.

Done.

I understand your frustrations, but what do you want to do at this point?

Start a National Petition to recall Dracula? Demand a new transfer?

Again, I definitely see that the colors are radically different, and this is a very unique case of "something we remembered, and have seen being dramatically changed" (and we're being told, "sorry this is the way it was supposed to be"), and there may be frustrations, but we've gotten the official answers already. Unless you're starting a petition to recall this, this topic has been belabored to death.

Re: A few words about...™ Bram Stoker's Dracula -- in BD

Of course this is only speculation on my part but from Kim Aubrey's comments it sounds as if the release studio, or at least someone other than Coppola/Zoetrope, played a hand in changing the image to the one we have become familiar with up until this point.

Re: A few words about...™ Bram Stoker's Dracula -- in BD

Dave,

I have a Hitachi P50S601 50" Plasma HDTV.

One thing about the screen shots taken with a digital camera that can be problematic, is the white balance setting. I understand that you have the camera set to full manual mode, but if the white balance setting doesn't exactly match the color temp of the TV or projector, the colors won't be conveyed accurately. The only way to find out the exact color temp being displayed by the TV is to use a Colorimeter to measure it.

Doug

Re: A few words about...™ Bram Stoker's Dracula -- in BD

I checked out the DB version of Bram Stoker's DRACULA last night for a brief bit (I couldn't watch it in its entirety because I had a 9.5 hour drive today... needed sleep.) and my personal opinion is that what I saw of the DB release is a bit of a mixed bag. The opening few minutes ARE dark and murky to the point where I almost... almost turned it off. For the record, I watched the BD on my PS3, with HDMI connection on a 60" Sony LCD that was ISF calibrated by the genius, Eliab, at AVICAL. I think a lot of the dense blacks we are seeing in this transer are worse than normal because many scenes in the movie are edited with optical dissolves. The colors are weird looking to me... they do seem unrealistic and "enhanced"... kind of reminded me of an old B&W photo from the 30s or 40s that had been dye tinted. The flesh tones seemed way off and artificial to me. But maybe that was the original intent.

The film does not look how I remember it and, while this may indeed be the intended approved look, I have to say that, well... I don't like "most" of what I saw of it. But, I didn't make the movie so my opinion really doesn't count on how it looks unless I was hired to supervise. I personally prefer the "look" of original Superbit transfer over the BD release for many scenes. Much of the movie is a little too dark for my taste... the first scene with Renfield (sp?) is so dark and so blue that you can barely even see him (but in the 2nd shot of him, when he moves back down in the cell, the darkness "works" in that it looks like he disappears into the inky blackness). Same for when Keanu gets out of the carriage on the road to the castle (when the hand reaches for his shoulder)... I just had trouble seeing anything.

But all is NOT lost here. As a matter of fact, when Keanu finally gets into Dracula's castle, there are some scenes of amazing quality, color and detail that completely rise above the older versions. One sequence that seemed to almost jump off my screen was right when he first meets Dracula and Oldman is holding that lantern emitting the white light. That sequence was so "right", so haunting and so beautifully done that the shots of him holding the light seemed almost 3D in their quality.

So, for me, just because of my previous experience in watching this film on home video, I'm used to seeing it quite differently. And, I think the deal here is that, usually, when a "new" version of a film comes out on home video, the video "buff" or consumer just assume (hope?) that what you are going to see is "better" than what you have seen before. For many, this may be the ULTIMATE version of the movie, presented in exactly the way it was intended. For me, well, I'm not 100% satisfied with the BD transfer, but I'm certainly entitled to my own opinion (whether in the minority or not). Some things look worse to me and some scenes look better. The scenes that DO look better are AMAZINGLY better, though, so in that respect I urge anyone interested to at least watch it if you can. If you like the film enough to buy it (like me), then please do so. But, if you are concerned about many of the BDs criticisms at least still seek it out via rental before dropping the cash for the purchase. It's a great movie.

Personally, I AM disappointed in it. I'm not upset that I bought it before seeing it, but I won't be throwing it into my player again to show off the BD format to friends, that's for sure.

Re: A few words about...™ Bram Stoker's Dracula -- in BD

No, that wasn't just an overblown analogy for the purposes of discussion in my original post. Because Scott, anticipating outcry over the debut of the intended look of his film on home video, was actually considering a special, double briefcase edition of Bladerunner. The set was to include the existing, fan-popular "urban drab" color timing in one transfer--the "Replicant Chic Edition" and--in that second Limited Edition attache', with an included magenta origami unicorn and spray on, Pris-style eye makeup for your girlfriend--the "Embrace The Pink" cut of the film, the first transfer painstakingly matched to the answer print.

Maybe Puck was also talking about you?

Re: A few words about...™ Bram Stoker's Dracula -- in BD

To Mr. Johnson...

I believe you may be misinterpreting my comments.

As an Eastman Color SP print, which most likely would have been the emulsion for the Bladerunner OAP, the print in question should now be quite warm and magenta.

My comment, which may be a bit obtuse, was in relation to believing or disbelieving what one sees on an OAP.

And yes, Puck is an old friend, who knows me quite well.

RAH

Re: A few words about...™ Bram Stoker's Dracula -- in BD

Jack Johnson: Not to go off-topic here, but just to be clear on this. Are you saying that Ridley considered using this odd looking "pinkish" color timing in one of the DVD sets soon to be released with the newly restored/remastered Blade Runner cuts, but his better judgment decided against the idea, and thus all the cuts being released in December on DVD will look more or less as Blade Runner has always looked to us with the normal non-pink colors?

This is a very interesting discussion, and while there are times when a certain stylized look can work well in a film (look at Sleepy Hollow), I'm sitting here trying to imagine what Blade Runner would look like with a ultra warm pink coloring throughout the movie. And I just can't understand why on Earth Ridley could possibly want the movie to have a bizarre super unnatural unrealistic fake look to everything. I mean, if you're trying to create a believable deep sci-fi movie like Blade Runner, why make the whole movie look artificial? That wouldn't exactly lend credibility to the world of Blade Runner, which is important if you're going to have suspension of disbelief while watching it.

It seems in these new Dracula DVD sets that the director made some odd choices originally for the coloring on some scenes. The one with the female vampire goes from her looking like a vampire with believable colors to some sort of weird burnt orange-ish color in the new version, like someone took pulverized pumpkin pie covered her face, skin and everything else in it. Very strange looking, and quite unappealing. Oh well, we still have the regular Dracula DVD's to watch for the many that I suspect won't like these colors.

P.S. Note related to above post by Robert Harris that I just read. It seems Mr. Harris may have been joking about the condition of the original print in question, rather than being serious. Of course, Jack Johnson still said what he said about Ridley's thinking on this subject and my post was based on Jack's comments.

Re: A few words about...™ Bram Stoker's Dracula -- in BD

This is indeed a fun, great and educational discussion and I'm glad it's staying that way.

Re: A few words about...™ Bram Stoker's Dracula -- in BD

Robert:


At this point, I may not be sure what either one of us was getting at. But for clarification, I guess I thought you'd made a dig at my intendedly outlandish example of how we'd all react to a hypothetical "accurate" transfer of Bladerunner that rendered it a garish pink a few posts back...as part of a running discussion about a sense of surprise and dismay some seemed to have in learning that, for the first time, Dracula conformed to specifications when it didn't look at all as they remembered. In short: would we accept it?

But I guess you're now suggesting an answer print matched transfer of Bladerunner might actually skew toward the reddish? Perhaps that's why we're confused, as I thought I was concocting a pretty far fetched scenario.

At any rate, I'm clearer on things now...and yes, I grossly misinterpreted your comments. My bad, and apologies.

Incidentally, have you ever been in a position where you found you preferred an inaccurate transfer to a correct one? Not to the extent where you'd consider it official and representative of intent and the answer print, but one you nevertheless found pleasing enough to hang onto and give a spin in your player once in a while?


--Jack

Re: A few words about...™ Bram Stoker's Dracula -- in BD

Lee, see my above reply to Robert Harris; this all got head-spinningly confusing. But we might have it sorted out (I think).



--Jack

Re: A few words about...™ Bram Stoker's Dracula -- in BD

Off topic, but this reminds me of when the remastered Lawrence of Arabia DVD came out and everyone was praising it for it's incredible picture quality, and it turned out that it wasn't supposed to look that way.

The film as intended was supposed to look dirty. This was about the time I first started to know who Robert Harris was, as he was the lone person who was dismayed at the new transfer of LoA.

Re: A few words about...™ Bram Stoker's Dracula -- in BD

Re: Mr. Johnson's comment on Bladerunner, I was suggesting that an OAP of same may be quite off color by this time, and not representative. I have no direct information regarding said print. We didn't have decently fade resistant release stock until mid-1982. It depends which stock was used for final printing, as the earlier stock (SP) was still in production into 1983.

The point that I was attempting to make was that even an OAP must be vetted to confirm that it has not changed over the years. In the case of Dracula, this would not have been a problem.

To Mr. Cooper...

LoA was not supposed to look "dirty." Colors were supposed to be correct. Very simple.

This was finally tended to in the SuperBit edition. All other editions have inaccuate color.

RAH

Re: A few words about...™ Bram Stoker's Dracula -- in BD

DVD is usually component too with no composite signal artifacts. Same as HD.

Re: A few words about...™ Bram Stoker's Dracula -- in BD

For now certainly not. Never say never, though. And 4K is somewhat overkill anyway for viewing purposes at home. Give me today's 2K DI data visually losslessly compressed (not far out of reach with BR bit rates and optimised AVC or VC1 encodes) and with cinema color primaries and we are pretty much there for 35mm material.

Re: A few words about...™ Bram Stoker's Dracula -- in BD

That surely is not 1996, is it?? 2006 perhaps? A HD transfer from 1996 is completely outdated by today's standards.

Re: A few words about...™ Bram Stoker's Dracula -- in BD

It looked great here. I still wonder if the issues being reported are because of the technology being used to view them(LCD). I'm pretty sure Dave's PJ is LCD.

I know on my Plasma, it looks fantastic. I wouldn't call it perfection but I'm thoroughly pleased with what I saw.

Re: A few words about...™ Bram Stoker's Dracula -- in BD

Nope. I've said before that my PJ is a Mits hc3000u DLP which is considered to have pretty good blacks. I'm also using a grey screen which makes the blacks better.

http://www.projectorreviews.com/mits...agequality.php

"Ok, to summarize, with a basic calibration, the Mitsubishi produces extremely good flesh tones, dynamic looking images (if a little less saturated than the HD72, although Brilliant Color adjustments do affect that. Black levels and shadow details are exceptional for a projector in it's price, with only the slightly more expensive HD7100 doing a bit better..."

Bottom line: Mitsubishi's HC3000 offers the best picture quality we have seen of the many DLP projectors (using the Darkchip2 processor), as well as home theater LCD projectors, that we have reviewed..."


Now I do plan on getting the Optoma hd80 soon.

Re: A few words about...™ Bram Stoker's Dracula -- in BD

You see, thats the whole argument in a nutshell. Film, it seems is a very tricky medium. You can watch it in a theater, but it's a sham. You can admire the picture and color tone, but don't get comfortable, because it just isn't correct, and will be fixed at a later date. It just seems so....weird. It's like living in the Bizarro world.

Joking aside, Robert Harris has been very informative on the whole process of film, and I have learned quite a bit from him, and this thread.

Re: A few words about...™ Bram Stoker's Dracula -- in BD

And when people see an incorrect version in a theater or on video and find they do appreciate an aspect of the presentation only to discover that particular aspect is first on the list to correct when someone finally gets around to supervising a proper transfer...it makes one hesitate to praise or embrace the look of film in any incarnation, period.

Frustrating, because if filmmakers can rarely communicate "intent" to the audience, the audience feels like shrugging... You know, is this the one you want us to see? Or should we wait for that corrected transfer on HD? Looks best on plasma? How 'bout liquid crystal? It goes on and on.

In the end, you either let yourself appreciate the film you experience, incorrect or not...because otherwise you'd never see any version of it, anywhere.

The only way I'll believe there's any integrity to this transfer process now is if Dracula gets "locked off" and is never touched again for HD. If this is a correct transfer, there's no reason to go back to it until the next leap in technology. Otherwise, they would seem to be tweaking a bad transfer. I would not be surprised if that's exactly what happens in another five years.



--Jack

Re: A few words about...™ Bram Stoker's Dracula -- in BD

I really have no opinion on this one way or the other (though this is a very interesting discussion), and will probably not be getting any HD player for the foreseeable future.

That having been said (and in my completely subjective opinion), it's hard to believe in the oft-posted above scenes that the BD version is the correct one, color-wise. The BD shot looks like an actress in gaudy makeup. The SD shot looks like a scene from a film.

I'm just sayin'...

My thanks to all involved for a fascinating (and civil...!) discussion, though!

Re: A few words about...™ Bram Stoker's Dracula -- in BD

Yet, the above image is exactly what I expect a vampire to look like complexion-wise.