New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

A few words about...™ Patton -- in Blu-Ray - Page 12

post #331 of 495
7/3/08 at 7:43pm

Re: A few words about...™ Patton -- in Blu-Ray

Quote:
Originally Posted by DavidJ
Interesting. Panasonic seemed to be a commonality, but I was not ready to place the blame on them.

Yeah, I definitely don't think Panasonic is the culprit as I finished watching Batman: The Movie last night with my son, I noticed that it was handled by Panasonic also, and to quote one of the many the funny labels in the Batcave the 'Super Fine Batgrain' was as well preserved.
Reply

Gear mentioned in this thread:

Patton [Blu-ray]
$13.79 at
See it »
post #332 of 495
7/4/08 at 2:14am

Re: A few words about...™ Patton -- in Blu-Ray

Quote:
Gorgeous? Maybe gorgeous for an animated feature.

Please don't misunderstand.

The transfer is something for the eye to behold. Never seen
anything from that era look as perfect as it does here. It doesn't
mean I approve of what was done and I hope I clearly expressed
that in my statements above.
Reply
post #333 of 495
7/4/08 at 6:46am

Re: A few words about...™ Patton -- in Blu-Ray

you were clear enough, vern just partially quoted you, i think vern may have been commenting more on the disc then your statement, but that wasnt very clear.
Reply
post #334 of 495
7/11/08 at 12:16am

Re: A few words about...™ Patton -- in Blu-Ray

I got a question...

No Fox logo on this one?

It starts with the Coppolla intro and then goes right into the
film with no Fox fanfare logo.
Reply
post #335 of 495
7/11/08 at 6:02am

Re: A few words about...™ Patton -- in Blu-Ray

Ron, it was there but it was DNR'd.
Reply
post #336 of 495
7/11/08 at 7:51am

Re: A few words about...™ Patton -- in Blu-Ray

I am positive that when I saw this film during it's original general release that the Fox opening logo was not there. I thought it strange when the curtains opened up to the huge American Flag and Patton marched up and began his speech. (Curtains, what a unique way to start a movie.)
Reply
post #337 of 495
7/11/08 at 9:34am

Re: A few words about...™ Patton -- in Blu-Ray

Any waxy buildup on them there curtains?




Sorry; couldn't resist.
Reply
post #338 of 495
7/11/08 at 9:59am

Re: A few words about...™ Patton -- in Blu-Ray

I just called my husband and he said there was no opening FOX logo in the art house theater showing he has attended, if his memory is correct.
Reply
post #339 of 495
7/11/08 at 10:09am

Re: A few words about...™ Patton -- in Blu-Ray

From the always-questionable imdb.com:

Quote:
The movie begins without showing the 20th Century Fox logo, or any other indication that the film is starting. At military bases across the U.S., theater owners reported that soldiers in the audience would often stand up and snap to attention when they heard the movie's opening line ("Ten-hut!"), assuming it to be a real call to attention.

But that info certainly seems to provide a clear answer to Ron's question.
Reply
post #340 of 495
7/11/08 at 10:09am

Re: A few words about...™ Patton -- in Blu-Ray

From the trivia page at imdb.com:
The movie begins without showing the 20th Century Fox logo, or any other indication that the film is starting. At military bases across the U.S., theater owners reported that soldiers in the audience would often stand up and snap to attention when they heard the movie's opening line ("Ten-hut!"), assuming it to be a real call to attention.

Link to trivia page: Patton (1970) - Trivia
Reply
post #341 of 495
7/11/08 at 10:19am

Re: A few words about...™ Patton -- in Blu-Ray

Welcome to ReelThoughts!

Another positive take on Patton's transfer by critic James Berardinelli. He dismisses Robert's take, but admits it's only because of his own eyes.

"I know this film very well and I was not offended by what I saw. Is this the best I have ever seen Patton look? Without question, but I have never seen a pristine print projected in its full Dimension 150 glory."

What I ask from DVDs and Blu-Ray discs is not a replication of the theatrical experience but a facsimile.


I have read and considered Mr. Harris' concerns but, insofar as this movie is concerned, I reject them on the basis of the evidence of my eyes. Patton in Blu-Ray is still Patton, not some plastic clone.
Reply
post #342 of 495
7/11/08 at 2:38pm

Re: A few words about...™ Patton -- in Blu-Ray

I like Berardinelli as a reviewer quite a bit, but I'm very disappointed to see him express sentiments like this
Quote:
What I ask from DVDs and Blu-Ray discs is not a replication of the theatrical experience but a facsimile. I want to be able to enjoy the sweep and passion of a movie in the privacy of my home. Maybe this version of Patton looks substandard on a 100" screen, but that's not how I'm watching it.
This is the typical "It looks great on what I have at the moment so don't buy into all the hyperbole"
I've been seeing comments like that from way back in the day, when only a vocal minority would get apoleptic over a looked forward to release showing up in 4:3 letterbox.
The fact is, the technology exists and is quite affordable today to replicate the cinema experience and even better it in almost all respects at home.
He's way off base and sadly representitive of the majority mindset we need to overcome before we even get to the real battlefield.
Reply
post #343 of 495
7/11/08 at 8:39pm

Re: A few words about...™ Patton -- in Blu-Ray

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jrf2
Welcome to ReelThoughts!

Another positive take on Patton's transfer by critic James Berardinelli. He dismisses Robert's take, but admits it's only because of his own eyes.

"I know this film very well and I was not offended by what I saw. Is this the best I have ever seen Patton look? Without question, but I have never seen a pristine print projected in its full Dimension 150 glory."

What I ask from DVDs and Blu-Ray discs is not a replication of the theatrical experience but a facsimile.


I have read and considered Mr. Harris' concerns but, insofar as this movie is concerned, I reject them on the basis of the evidence of my eyes. Patton in Blu-Ray is still Patton, not some plastic clone.

I think he is beong shortsighted with comments like these. I read his entire article. He writes that he has no problem with the transfer, because he is watching on a 52" screen and figures that it looks good at that size. However, a home theater is not static. At some point he might make changes to his viewing environment. Maybe he will, at some point in the future, decide to upgrade to a 100" screen.

Is he going to be happy with the transfer quality of PATTON then? All of of sudden he may be singing a different tune and be demanding that PATTON be redone properly. What I cannot figure out is why these studios cannot do the job right the first time and ensure that the picture quality matches the original look of the film, regardless of projected size.

Blu-ray is capable of producing more than a "facsimile" of the theatrical experience. Within it's technical limits, BD can now closely replicate the look of film. So, why not take advantage of that ability and produce quality transfers that recreate the intent of the filmmaker right from the start, rather than always having to go back and do the job again when people start complaining.
Reply
post #344 of 495
7/12/08 at 12:40am

Re: A few words about...™ Patton -- in Blu-Ray

Quote:
I think he is beong shortsighted with comments like these. I read his entire article. He writes that he has no problem with the transfer, because he is watching on a 52" screen and figures that it looks good at that size. However, a home theater is not static. At some point he might make changes to his viewing environment. Maybe he will, at some point in the future, decide to upgrade to a 100" screen.

I completely agree. Right now my display is a 1080p 42" plasma and I'm sure Patton would impress me, but I hope to get a front projector and screen when I finally settle down in a few years. I refuse to give the studios money for a BD in which they had the perfect opportunity to make a faithful, definitive home video transfer and blew it, despite the fact it would make good demo material on my display. I care more about the film than just how it looks on my TV!
Reply
post #345 of 495
7/12/08 at 8:48am

Re: A few words about...™ Patton -- in Blu-Ray

I'm very disappointed in James Berardinelli. Saying it's a "facsimile" is NO EXCUSE for not striving for technical excellence. Fox could have done better and should have done better. PERIOD.
Reply
post #346 of 495
7/12/08 at 9:46am

Re: A few words about...™ Patton -- in Blu-Ray

Of course, when anyone says "facsimile" I immediately think of fax machines and the wondrous depth and quality in what they output.

[sarcasm]THAT is exactly what I'm looking for in an HD presentation.[/sarcasm]
Reply
post #347 of 495
7/12/08 at 12:42pm

Re: A few words about...™ Patton -- in Blu-Ray

Quote:
Originally Posted by RobertR
I'm very disappointed in James Berardinelli. Saying it's a "facsimile" .....


Me too and I've never read a review by him, yet, if ever? How much worse language could ya pick than that 'F' word! ....amongst some other dreaful language choices. His tone is awful in this piece.

Mr. Harris has such a history of blessing films in his series of threads here. I wasn't quite sure how to take him on Patton.....'an I was trying to sort out what was different 'bout "high frequency detail compared to garden-variety, reg-lar detail. Despite anything Mr. Harris said in advance, ...he bloody prepared me and I stille was shocked by the disc! I was dumbfounded by the Mr. Clean sheen and blank faces 'an stuff.

Mr. Berardinelli may have some game as far as judging films but as he admits he hasn't seen the real deal. Advantage, match, match point, Mr. Harris!
Reply
post #348 of 495
7/12/08 at 1:57pm

Re: A few words about...™ Patton -- in Blu-Ray

Quote:
Originally Posted by Edwin-S
I think he is beong shortsighted with comments like these. I read his entire article. He writes that he has no problem with the transfer, because he is watching on a 52" screen and figures that it looks good at that size. However, a home theater is not static. At some point he might make changes to his viewing environment. Maybe he will, at some point in the future, decide to upgrade to a 100" screen.

Is he going to be happy with the transfer quality of PATTON then? All of of sudden he may be singing a different tune and be demanding that PATTON be redone properly. What I cannot figure out is why these studios cannot do the job right the first time and ensure that the picture quality matches the original look of the film, regardless of projected size.

Blu-ray is capable of producing more than a "facsimile" of the theatrical experience. Within it's technical limits, BD can now closely replicate the look of film. So, why not take advantage of that ability and produce quality transfers that recreate the intent of the filmmaker right from the start, rather than always having to go back and do the job again when people start complaining.


I first looked at Patton on a 42 inch screen and I noticed problems with it right away.

Doug
Reply
post #349 of 495
7/13/08 at 2:21am

Re: A few words about...™ Patton -- in Blu-Ray

The grain rapers speak up: Patton on BD. How is it? - High Def Forum - Your High Definition Community & High Definition Resource
Reply
post #350 of 495
7/13/08 at 3:47am

Re: A few words about...™ Patton -- in Blu-Ray

Quote:
Originally Posted by Michel_Hafner
Yeah, I have to wonder if he'll reply to your rather rude comments because I know I wouldn't do so. At least, if this person is for real, he knows there are problems with those releases, I just hope he doesn't ignore the issues brought before him because of the method used to express those issues.





Crawdaddy
Reply
post #351 of 495
7/13/08 at 5:14am

Re: A few words about...™ Patton -- in Blu-Ray

Quote:
Originally Posted by Robert Crawford
Yeah, I have to wonder if he'll reply to your rather rude comments because I know I wouldn't do so. At least, if this person is for real, he knows there are problems with those releases, I just hope he doesn't ignore the issues brought before him because of the method used to express those issues.





Crawdaddy

I asked a few questions about the whole process starting from the film elements.
Maybe they still have the raw data of the scan around IF indeed the scan did capture the elements properly. In that case a new transfer would at least not necessitate the added expense of another scan.
Reply
post #352 of 495
7/13/08 at 6:16am
Thread Starter 

Re: A few words about...™ Patton -- in Blu-Ray

Posts 349 -351 are most interesting, and I thank you for them.

I checked out the noted thread (at a site of which I'd be unaware) and found yet another dangerous concept...

someone rating audio on a 38 year old film on a point system comparing it to today's latest and greatest as opposed to the actual reproduction quality of the original tracks, which on the Patton release is superb.

They like the image as "great PQ" but shun the audio.
Reply
post #353 of 495
7/13/08 at 6:25am

Re: A few words about...™ Patton -- in Blu-Ray

Quote:
Originally Posted by OliverK
I asked a few questions about the whole process starting from the film elements.
Unfortunately your polite and reasonable questions will probably get overlooked, because the hectoring accusations by one "hapfl" will have poisoned the exchange. Why do some "enthusiasts" think this is a productive way to approach people who work in the industry?

Quote:
Originally Posted by hapfl
Are you people at this facility the least bit interested how film looks? What textures it has? How one film is different from another? If there is fine detail or not? Do you think of film as something that needs to be homogenized into a standard look with some specific qualities such as:
- grain and noisefree
- no fine detail
- some sharpening
- cartoon like appearance
- compression friendly
- looking best in 480p
??
What on earth are you trying to achieve when applying such processing to old classic films? Pretend they were shot on digital cameras in 720p resolution? Make the transfer look good on small displays with sharpness and brightness set way too high? What??
There's always a lot to learn from RAH, but one thing in particular I wish people would take note of is how careful he is to acknowledge the hard work and good intentions from everyone who works on these releases. How else can you expect to start a productive dialogue?

M.
Reply
post #354 of 495
7/13/08 at 6:54am
Thread Starter 

Re: A few words about...™ Patton -- in Blu-Ray

From the same site. A response re: Patton's "creation." Why am I thinking of elsa Lanchester?

***************

Quote:
Originally Posted by Nikopol
Since you were working hands-on on that release, would you like to add a few comments about the DNR discussion surrounding Patton? (If you are aware of the discussion.)



I don't have the BD yet, so i can't comment from personal experience.
Our DI department did the noise reduction part of it. I dealt with a bunch of problems with the HDCAM SR’s right before we sent it out to make the BD’s. I found a problem with the master and I was talking to my boss about it and he asked “how long have you been here today?” My answer was “24 hours” and he said “short day, how about taking care of it?” So 15 hours later I got to go home. I never did get to watch the entire movie.

So about the noise reduction we have been using some type of digital noise reduction for about 20 years whenever we do any type of film transfer so I don’t see why it has become a big deal now. We can control it better now then we ever have.
Reply
post #355 of 495
7/13/08 at 9:07am

Re: A few words about...™ Patton -- in Blu-Ray

Quote:
Originally Posted by Michael Reuben
Unfortunately your polite and reasonable questions will probably get overlooked, because the hectoring accusations by one "hapfl" will have poisoned the exchange. Why do some "enthusiasts" think this is a productive way to approach people who work in the industry?


There's always a lot to learn from RAH, but one thing in particular I wish people would take note of is how careful he is to acknowledge the hard work and good intentions from everyone who works on these releases. How else can you expect to start a productive dialogue?

M.

Come on now, we have to acknowledge the hard work and good intentions of well paid professionals even if their end product is crap? Such a mentality ensures mediocrity.
I see nothing wrong with Michel Hafner's comments, in fact I thought he was too kind.
Reply
post #356 of 495
7/13/08 at 9:19am

Re: A few words about...™ Patton -- in Blu-Ray

Quote:
Originally Posted by Danny_N
Come on now, we have to acknowledge the hard work and good intentions of well paid professionals even if their end product is crap? Such a mentality ensures mediocrity.
I see nothing wrong with Michel Hafner's comments, in fact I thought he was too kind.
No it doesn't and rudeness is just that, rudeness.





Crawdaddy
Reply
post #357 of 495
7/13/08 at 9:24am

Re: A few words about...™ Patton -- in Blu-Ray

i didnt see the problem with what michael said either.
he was just saying everything that has een said here but he said it directly to someone who may have worked on the project.

it didnt seem rude to me just seemed to be said with passion.

doesnt one have to earn respect, what respect has the people who worked on patton and TLD earned?
from the response over there it doesnt even look like they are knowledgeable
on the whole film grain thing.
Reply
post #358 of 495
7/13/08 at 9:29am

Re: A few words about...™ Patton -- in Blu-Ray

Quote:
Originally Posted by TonyD
i didnt see the problem with what michael said either.
he was just saying everything that has een said here but he said it directly to someone who may have worked on the project.

it didnt seem rude to me just seemed to be said with passion.

doesnt one have to earn respect, what respect has the people who worked on patton and TLD earned?
from the response over there it doesnt even look like they are knowledgeable
on the whole film grain thing.
Being passionate is not a good excuse for being condescending and nasty. If you can't see how his words are rude than I don't know what to tell you because it came across to me and I don't even know this person. I hope it doesn't derail that person if he's actually a person who worked on these releases from looking further into these issues.
Reply
post #359 of 495
7/13/08 at 12:04pm

Re: A few words about...™ Patton -- in Blu-Ray

Quote:
Originally Posted by Danny_N
Come on now, we have to acknowledge the hard work and good intentions of well paid professionals even if their end product is crap?
You do if you want to get listened to. If all you want to do is impress others with how loud you can be, then feel free.

BTW, how do you know that the poster known as "1080PsF" is "well paid"? How do you have any idea what he earns? How do you even know what he does or whether he has any responsibility for the specific processes that resulted in grain reduction?

You don't. You don't know much of anything about the guy, and neither did Mr. Hafner (if that's who "hapfl" is). And you're not likely to find out with that manner of approach.

Quote:
Originally Posted by TonyD
doesnt one have to earn respect
One shouldn't have to earn common courtesy, and that's one of the biggest areas of damage wrought by the faceless society of the internet. Would you walk up to a stranger, tap him on the shoulder and start ranting at him in language like that used by Mr. Hafner? If you did, and he gave you a well-deserved punch in the mouth, would you look surprised and say, "Hey, man, you haven't earned my respect yet!" or "I was just being passionate"?

I think not. But on the internet, that kind of unconstructive crap passes as legitimate discourse. And then everyone wonders why industry people don't participate more.

M.
Reply
post #360 of 495
7/13/08 at 12:07pm

Re: A few words about...™ Patton -- in Blu-Ray

well we disagree.

also i didnt just say one has to earn respect i said the guy over the other board who may or may not be who he says he is posted a response that was
odd for someone who should know what he is talking about.

so why should i respect what he says and take what HE says seriously.

also, there was an ongoing discussion, michael didnt just walk up to that guy and say "hey you"

michael was responding to what that guy already posted.

what language did michael use?
did her curse, call the guy names?

other then a few extra question marks what did he do really.

i see micahel calling the guy out on the mistake that is Patton blu-ray.
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home

Gear mentioned in this thread:

Patton [Blu-ray]
$13.79 at
See it »