New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Lawrence Of Arabia in HD - Page 3

post #61 of 168
2/21/08 at 4:12pm

Re: Lawrence Of Arabia in HD

Quote:
Originally Posted by Michel_Hafner
Then the softness is in the film elements used.
Not necessarily. Gate weave is also a factor in making a transfer appear "soft". I know this from experience.
Reply
post #62 of 168
2/21/08 at 8:14pm

Re: Lawrence Of Arabia in HD

I'm sure the high compression of the digital cable or satellite source made it worse.

This is one title I can wait for them to do it right, because it deserves nothing less than perfection.
Reply
post #63 of 168
2/21/08 at 11:26pm

Re: Lawrence Of Arabia in HD

Paul, Matthew and Marco,

thanks for pointing me to Auntie Mame - missed that one before and look forward to watching it.

Oliver
Reply
post #64 of 168
2/21/08 at 11:28pm

Re: Lawrence Of Arabia in HD

Quote:
Originally Posted by Paul Hillenbrand
IMHO, it needs to be authored with full 1080P resolution from an 8K digital master!

If they can do an 8k scan from Baraka Lawrence deserves nothing less.
Reply
post #65 of 168
2/22/08 at 8:01am

Re: Lawrence Of Arabia in HD

Quote:
Originally Posted by Stephen_J_H
Not necessarily. Gate weave is also a factor in making a transfer appear "soft". I know this from experience.
4K scans are usually done on a film scanner with pin registration.
Reply
post #66 of 168
2/22/08 at 8:37am

Re: Lawrence Of Arabia in HD

Quote:
Originally Posted by Michel_Hafner
4K scans are usually done on a film scanner with pin registration.

To add to that individual frames are not moving during the high quality scanning processes of today. I also expect this to be the case for 6k and 8k scans, otherwise the higher scanning resolutions would not make any sense.

I did talk to a tech at Fotokem some time ago and he told me that the scanning processes where film is constantly moving were not really giving the best results for HD masters but that studios often ordere them due to budget limitations.
Reply
post #67 of 168
2/23/08 at 10:16pm

Re: Lawrence Of Arabia in HD

Quote:
Originally Posted by Douglas Monce
The 65mm elements of Blade Runner would have been reduction printed to 35mm in 1982 for inclusion in the final inter negative. These reduction elements were probably used for the digital scans on the final cut.

Doug

Sorry to stray off-topic, but you're wrong. It's been noted several times that the effects shots for the "Final Cut" of BLADE RUNNER were scanned at 8k from the original 65mm elements, not the 35mm anamorphic reductions.

Vincent
Reply
post #68 of 168
3/13/08 at 2:08pm
Thread Starter 

Re: Lawrence Of Arabia in HD

This is slightly related as it mentions the director of LOA -David Lean.

"Ten films directed by David Lean during the 1940s and 50s have been faithfully restored by the BFI National Archive, in partnership with Granada International, to coincide with the centenary year of the great British film director. The sparkling new restorations are part of a year-long programme of events, screenings, tributes, book and DVD releases involving different organisations and allowing people across Britain to discover and rediscover Lean’s work."

Throughout the year, brand new 35mm and high definition digital prints of the restored films will be screened up and down the country by Granada International, through its theatrical partners Park Circus and the BFI, and by Canal Plus.

Although this mainly concerns the UK, in the more detailed info from the BFI, it mentions a USA theatrical tour from July to December(BFI/Park Circus)


In relation to my original post regarding LOA HD broadcast and possible Blu-Ray release (which looks like a late 2008/2009 release.) We had an HD screening of the movie 'Zulu' here in the UK. The film was broadcast on Sky HD 1080i with stereo sound. The presentation was superb,very clean print,no grain,and no obvious artifacts and very consistent throughout.The colour's of the red uniforms are amazing. I would say that this print puts LOA to shame some what. Originally shot in Super Technirama 70, the definition really comes through,and night and day difference betwen this and the DVD.
I would compare it to 'Grand Prix' on HD-DVD, if anyone has seen that. What it will look like on it's eventual Blu-Ray release at 1080/24p,should be a joy. Its of interest to know,that this HD remaster was a joint venture between SkyTV and Paramount Pictures. This sunday we have the original 'Italian Job'.
Reply
post #69 of 168
3/18/08 at 2:03pm

Re: Lawrence Of Arabia in HD

Some sad news being reported from Penton-Man the Sony Insider:

Quote:
Originally Posted by Penton-Man
I will tell you that the film will not debut on Blu-ray in 2008.
I doubt that it will even debut in 2009, as Close Encounters of The Third Kind, barely made any money factoring in all the work/expense that was put into it.

Such is the business.
Reply
post #70 of 168
3/18/08 at 3:18pm

Re: Lawrence Of Arabia in HD

They're judging potential sales of this film based on sales of an unrelated film? I know which end of the bull that came out.

Once costs of manufacturing decrease perhaps catalog titles could make money on Blu-Ray.
Reply
post #71 of 168
3/18/08 at 3:47pm

Re: Lawrence Of Arabia in HD

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jeff Adkins
Some sad news being reported from Penton-Man the Sony Insider:

This ain't so bad. Apparently the original plan was to release a Blu-Ray version of the transfer that has been aired on SkyHD in the UK and HDnet.

I will say that most people who post here and want to watch Lawrence in that kind of quality are free to do so NOW on those stations. As for me I am willing to wait until 2010 if necessary for an improved version of Lawrence and in the meantime I plan to catch the occasional 70mm screening of this movie.

Oliver
Reply
post #72 of 168
3/18/08 at 4:25pm

Re: Lawrence Of Arabia in HD

this sounds like a good choice for a limited pressing item.

just print 25,000 and let it sell out.
then later reprint it again if needed.
Reply
post #73 of 168
3/18/08 at 5:00pm

Re: Lawrence Of Arabia in HD

Quote:
Originally Posted by MatthewA
They're judging potential sales of this film based on sales of an unrelated film? I know which end of the bull that came out.
I don't like it but I'm sure you can estimate how well it will sell based on the other's numbers. In other words, if Close Encounters always sold similar numbers compared to Lawrence Of Arabia on VHS, laserdisc and DVD, why would Blu Ray be any different? And when you factor in that Close Encounters barely made any money (in their eyes), it makes business sense.
Reply
post #74 of 168
3/18/08 at 7:02pm

Re: Lawrence Of Arabia in HD

The flip side of this coin (lemonade out of lemons) is that it demonstrates that they do plan to invest some time and money into making the BD of LOA optimized... new film transfer etc. Otherwise, there wouldn't be any overhead costs to really talk about (if the current HD master was used).
Reply
post #75 of 168
3/18/08 at 8:02pm

Re: Lawrence Of Arabia in HD

Quote:
Originally Posted by DaViD Boulet
The flip side of this coin (lemonade out of lemons) is that it demonstrates that they do plan to invest some time and money into making the BD of LOA optimized... new film transfer etc. Otherwise, there wouldn't be any overhead costs to really talk about (if the current HD master was used).
Fingers crossed and hoping your right about a much deserved restoration investment for this gem.

Like Oliver expressed, I am willing to wait for necessary improvements involving time & talent using the latest resources for a restoration of LoA and hoping for a possible 2009 BD release (Penton-Man had a definite NOT for 2008, but only a "doubt" for a debut in 2009).
Guess I could wait impatiently for a 2010 debut.

Paul
Reply
post #76 of 168
3/18/08 at 10:18pm

Re: Lawrence Of Arabia in HD

Quote:
Originally Posted by DaViD Boulet
The flip side of this coin (lemonade out of lemons) is that it demonstrates that they do plan to invest some time and money into making the BD of LOA optimized... new film transfer etc. Otherwise, there wouldn't be any overhead costs to really talk about (if the current HD master was used).
Except that's not the real reason for delaying this release.
Reply
post #77 of 168
3/19/08 at 2:35am

Re: Lawrence Of Arabia in HD

It's not surprising. HD sales are small to begin with , so catalog titles are naturally going to be a small subset of that. CE3K is a big enough catalog title to attract people, and if the sales are low for it - then LOA should be even lower.

This really doesn't bode well for catalog titles in general.
Reply
post #78 of 168
3/19/08 at 4:36am

Re: Lawrence Of Arabia in HD

Of course companies like Sony invest 30 Mio $ for promotion only of a new major film. So if they spent 20 instead and put the 10 into catalog releases they could release a lot of titles and sell little and still make the same kind of money. Unless they tell us 10 Mio more promotion will make Spiderman 4 etc. a bigger success with >= 10 Mio additional profit. But is that so??
Reply
post #79 of 168
3/19/08 at 5:23am

Re: Lawrence Of Arabia in HD

Quote:
Except that's not the real reason for delaying this release.


I said that along with the delay we're also getting a full restoration (which we are)... not that that restoration itself was the reason for the delay (looking at the bright side... ).
Reply
post #80 of 168
3/19/08 at 5:25am

Re: Lawrence Of Arabia in HD

Quote:
Originally Posted by Michel_Hafner
Of course companies like Sony invest 30 Mio $ for promotion only of a new major film. So if they spent 20 instead and put the 10 into catalog releases they could release a lot of titles and sell little and still make the same kind of money. Unless they tell us 10 Mio more promotion will make Spiderman 4 etc. a bigger success with >= 10 Mio additional profit. But is that so??

I have thought myself when I sampled the Spartacus HD-DVD that Universal should have taken a buck or two from the 200+ million dollar budget of King Kong and put it into a proper Spartacus restoration from the OCN

But it seems that most of the time a movie has to stand on its own. It does not matter how much money or prestige it meant for the studio in its intitial release but mainly what return of investment is to be expected by restoring and releasing it in the present.

Oliver
Reply
post #81 of 168
3/19/08 at 5:48am

Re: Lawrence Of Arabia in HD

"from the OCN"


ocn?
Reply
post #82 of 168
3/19/08 at 7:05am

Re: Lawrence Of Arabia in HD

original camera negative
Reply
post #83 of 168
3/19/08 at 7:33am

Re: Lawrence Of Arabia in HD

thanks.
Reply
post #84 of 168
3/19/08 at 1:55pm

Re: Lawrence Of Arabia in HD

If CE3K's sales were not enough for Sony, perhaps they should think about reducing the price to a more realistic level. I stayed away for that reason.
Reply
post #85 of 168
3/19/08 at 3:53pm

Re: Lawrence Of Arabia in HD

Quote:
Originally Posted by OliverK
I have thought myself when I sampled the Spartacus HD-DVD that Universal should have taken a buck or two from the 200+ million dollar budget of King Kong and put it into a proper Spartacus restoration from the OCN

But it seems that most of the time a movie has to stand on its own. It does not matter how much money or prestige it meant for the studio in its intitial release but mainly what return of investment is to be expected by restoring and releasing it in the present.

Oliver


Spartacus was restored from the OCN in 1991. I think rather what it needs is a proper HD transfer. Because of Mr. Harris' efforts, the restored elements are probably in pretty good shape.

Doug
Reply
post #86 of 168
3/19/08 at 4:18pm

Re: Lawrence Of Arabia in HD

Quote:
Originally Posted by Douglas Monce
Spartacus was restored from the OCN in 1991. I think rather what it needs is a proper HD transfer. Because of Mr. Harris' efforts, the restored elements are probably in pretty good shape.

Doug

Ups, I should have written HD transfer from the restored elements, dunno how that slipped through. Of course the restoration has already been made but the technology available to do a proper HD transfer from existing elements has certainly improved by leaps and bounds.

Oliver
Reply
post #87 of 168
3/19/08 at 5:28pm

Re: Lawrence Of Arabia in HD

Quote:
Originally Posted by OliverK
Ups, I should have written HD transfer from the restored elements, dunno how that slipped through. Of course the restoration has already been made but the technology available to do a proper HD transfer from existing elements has certainly improved by leaps and bounds.

Oliver

Yes it has but I'm not sure that even at this time that it isn't prohibitively expensive to transfer an entire film from the 65mm elements on state of the art equipment. Universal's best bet maybe to go the route that Warner takes with its 65mm films and transfer them from a 35mm reduction element.

Doug
Reply
post #88 of 168
3/19/08 at 7:15pm

Re: Lawrence Of Arabia in HD

A couple of points.

The OCN of Spartacus was suffering yellow layer failure well over two decades ago.

Could we create a better element today?

Yes.

Would a transfer to HD from the 65mm preservation neg provide a superior starting point for a proper BD release?

Absolutely!

RAH
Reply
post #89 of 168
3/19/08 at 8:33pm

Re: Lawrence Of Arabia in HD

Quote:
Originally Posted by Robert Harris

Would a transfer to HD from the 65mm preservation neg provide a superior starting point for a proper BD release?

Absolutely!

RAH

This is assuming that a modern/high quality 65mm telecine machine is used, yes? I'm also assuming that the equipment used for the current HD DVD was an older machine that was something less than state of the art?

Doug
Reply
post #90 of 168
3/19/08 at 11:50pm

Re: Lawrence Of Arabia in HD

Quote:
Originally Posted by john a hunter
If CE3K's sales were not enough for Sony, perhaps they should think about reducing the price to a more realistic level. I stayed away for that reason.

GOOD GRIEF!!

Sony's BD presentation of CE3K was certainly worth its $50 MSRP, if not a whole lot more. How soon we forget the days of Laserdisc where a similar set would have run into many hundreds of today's dollars. And both the PQ and AQ are beyond comparison to either LD or even SD. This definitive release on BD of a seminal Spielberg film for $30 or so discounted (and I've seen it even as low as the mid-$20's) is nothing less than a major steal. Sony should be applauded for its release, and anyone who doesn't already own this disc should run, not walk, to their local retailer to pick up a copy.
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Blu-ray