Warner Archive Discussion Thread (FEEDBACK) - Page 22

Re: Warner Archive Discussion Thread

I've spot-checked the five Warner Archive titles that I received today, and I am very happy with them! Having said that, I wouldn't recognize Interlacing if it bit me in the ass. I'm not a rube, but I'm not especially sophisticated, either. I am a longtime film collector (16mm, VHS, laserdisc, and standard DVD), so the new Warner policy is great for me. I would certainly encourage the studio to put out the best quality product that they can, but I am very encouraged at this point.

Re: Warner Archive Discussion Thread

LEFT interlaced source, RIGHT deinterlaced version.

Obviously this is a pretty extreme example, but if you can see two different fields, especially when objects move, then the interlaced source isn't being deinterlaced properly during playback.

Examples taken from here

Some DVD players and HD TVs have very good deinterlacing circuits, and thus can convert an interlaced DVD to progressive as it plays. But some chips won't recognise the source as interlaced, and thus won't do deinterlacing properly, or at all.

It is much better if the DVD source itself is deinterlaced before compression so that the DVD will look fine played on any player or display, irrespective of how good it is at deinterlacing. After all, a compressionist will have access to extremely sophisticated hardware and / or software to do the deinterlacing properly.

Re: Warner Archive Discussion Thread

Got my eighteen titles today. First off, thanks Robert for the Warners number, which I've made note of.

I've taken a quick gander at about twelve of the titles and they really run the gamut. The best of them so far is The Money Trap, which looks great in its anamorphic scope transfer. And Wichita looks equally good, which is a real treat. Sweet November looks ugly, smoggy, muddy, with no vibrance to its look at all. George Raft Story looks barely better than VHS. The Crowded Sky, ditto. The D.I. looks okay, as does Made In Paris. I'll report on others as I watch them.

Re: Warner Archive Discussion Thread

Everyone I talk to says they want to get Wichita, I seriously think this is a release that could've made money as a regular DVD.

I'd love to see some screen captures of it if you can make some.

Re: Warner Archive Discussion Thread

I've been sporadically reading this thread, so I have gathered that the transfers of some of these films are not the best that could be done. However, I think things are going a bit too far when Warner is accused of performing the actions of a bootlegger. A good many of these transfers are being reproduced anamorphically. What bootlegger can produce anamorphic transfers by taping off a TV and burning discs? The answer? None.

Secondly, Warner is having these transfers done directly from the masters. Some of the masters, unfortunately, have problems; however, I highly doubt that a film image taped from a TV is going to come even close to the quality of a film transfer taken from even a problematic master.

The prices may be considered too high, considering the discs are burned, but the fact remains that most of the films being released in this program are going to be low volume sellers. The studio doesn't have much choice but to charge a higher price, considering that most of these films will probably sell only a few thousand copies.....if even that. Warner wants to make these films available to film buffs, but they also don't want to go broke doing it. Warner isn't going to be making gobs of money off these releases since most of them are probably going to sell in relatively low volumes.

A person may not like Warner's approach to these films, but it is unreasonable to compare them to bootleggers selling shoddy copies of TV broadcasts. Frankly, I don't think I could blame Warner if they decided to stop participating or interacting with this forum. There are only so many insults people can take before pulling the plug. Comparing the people who work on this program to bootleggers is tantamount to calling them crooks and fraud artists. I'd get pretty damn annoyed reading comments comparing me to a thief if I was an employee working on this program

Re: Warner Archive Discussion Thread

It seems to me that most people are willing to accept lower quality transfers, so long as the DVDs don't have severe compression artifacts. A lot of the criticism is of DVDs that feature compression artifacts, such as visible blocking or pixelation of the image. These are symptoms of bad DVD compression and bad quality control. WHV would never sell a regular pressed DVD that had huge compression errors (I don't simply mean minor errors that are limitations of the DVD format), I don't understand why they are willing to do so for their Warner Archive project. Starting with an old but acceptable video tape of the film is fine if it makes the film available, but degrading the image further due to poor encoding are two different issues; the former is forgivable, the latter isn't.

My second qualm is that Warner should simply list on every page a summary of the film's transfer so that consumers know before hand what to expect when they part with their money.Something like: "This film was transferred from an existing 35mm print to Standard Definition video in 1996. The DVD you will receive was converted from that video transfer."

So the film element used, the year the transfer was made, and the master format (e.g. SD 720 X 480, HD, 2K, 4K etc).

Some people would be so desperate to own a legit copy of particular film that they will be happy spending $20 irrespective of the DVD's source. Whereas other people would prefer to only buy films that were transferred within the DVD era (i.e. after 1997).

WHV should simply be willing to inform the consumer so they can make an informed decision. A benefit of doing so could be that Warner Archive would receive fewer complaints, because customers would know what to expect of the quality before choosing to order a particular item.

They could also add an extra star vote on each page so people can vote on the QUALITY of the DVDs, not simply the quality of the film. They say they stand behind the quality of these DVDs, so they should have no problems letting customers leave feedback about the quality of each disc on their webpage so other customers can make informed choices.
Digital TV is broadcast in 16:9 anamorphic format, so it is very easy to make anamorphic encoded DVDs at home now from digital TV recordings.

A 4:3 letterboxed transfer can be converted to an anamorphic DVD by cropping off the letterboxing, resizing the image, then telling the encoder to encode as anamorphic. I am not saying this is what bootleggers do, and doing it would likely degrade the image, but I simply point out that it is possible to do with a bit of video manipulation know how.
I simply want WHV to use their own staff, working with their own equipment, and to their own high standards to convert these video masters to DVD. Then they can send the DVD images (ISO files most likely) to Allied Vaughn who do the rest of the work (burning and posting of the discs).

I just can't understand why these DVDs shouldn't be encoded to the same high standards as regular WHV DVDs. I can't see WHV sending off an HD master of How the West Was Won to be encoded by Allied Vaughn, I don't think these DVDs should be different. In fact, the flaws in the older transfers such as dirt, noise, and the problem of interlacing means that more rather than less time must be spent carefully converting the transfers to DVD.

So I think WHV should do the following:

1) Transfer all the video masters to DVD in-house, including deinterlacing if necessary.
2) Describe on each film's page the source used to make the DVD, including the film element used (e.g. new or old, print or inter-positive), the year the transfer was made, and the resolution of the video master format HD or SD, 2K, 4K etc.
3) Enable customers to leave feedback on the quality of the DVD (not just whether they liked the film) on each film's page.
4) Use dual layer DVDs for all films over 110 minutes long, so that the average bitrate for all the DVDs is around 6 Mbps (like their regular pressed DVDs). Bumping up the bitrate is the easiest way to avoid compression artifacts.

Re: Warner Archive Discussion Thread

Warner Archives is a great idea. It just needs tweaking. Hopefully, Warners will take things to heart and either improve their product, bringing it up to industry standards, or reduce the price to better reflect the kind of product they are selling. Doing so will prove without a shadow of a doubt that they are better than those bootleggers, in that they actually care about their customers and want to give them the best product possible at the best price.

No one can argue that their product is like the bootleggers'; of course it's a thousand times better, and moreover it's legal. It just seems that at this point, Warners' philosophy behind their product bears a striking similiarity to the philosophy behind those bootleggers. Warners said they were developing this project for three years. I'd be shocked if they didn't track the activities of those on ebay, seeing how they did it. Hopefully, Warners won't merely copy their practices, but show they actually care about things other than the bottom line.

Re: Warner Archive Discussion Thread

This is woefully off topic and I apologise in advance, but the above has been rattling around in my head since Charles posted it. Charles (or indeed anyone), could you expand on that a little further? What falling axe? And was it directly associated with failed sales of classics on DVD?

EDIT; I'm au fait now; many thanks!

Re: Warner Archive Discussion Thread

The word that's getting back to me is that the "tweaking" is already occurring. Studio execs have been reading this thread and taking appropriate and well conceived posts seriously. I believe we'll be seeing changes very quickly in all areas. The fact that these discs are burned allows them to turn on a dime and react.

I'm certain that everyone that has supported the program will be pleased.

Re: Warner Archive Discussion Thread

There are certain posts from a select few that's not even worth commenting on, thus, Warner is better off thinking along the lines of "consider the source" type of attitude when it comes to those posts and that they don't reflect the general thoughts of the majority of HTF members.







Crawdaddy

Re: Warner Archive Discussion Thread

Right, there are some very legitimate comments, concerns and suggestions being made by many members here and those are the people Warner needs to address regarding their stated concerns.






Crawdaddy

Re: Warner Archive Discussion Thread

Thanks Robert, this is good to hear...if they can make the DVDs progressive and maybe offer some discounts on pricing I will be one of their BEST customers. Even if they don't make these changes, I will at least be a customer

Re: Warner Archive Discussion Thread

Well, I'm not all that pleased. First off they had the title "Bright Leaf" posted last Monday to order. When it got to shipping, I got a call and they stated it could not be shipped because of contractual problems with no more details offered to me. I mean I heard that there might be contract related problems with people living overseas but I live in Pittsburgh, PA. This movie has not been shown on TV or anywhere for about 59 years and I would think that 90 percent of the people have never seen it that post here except for some short clips on the Bright Leaves documentary. I personally have had it as number 2 on my most wanted list for the last 3 years with the Hanging Tree at number 1. I believe it was the number one or number two selection in a Gary Cooper Vol 2 box set that was canned last year before it could get released. It is most likely in fully restored status and all they can tell me is that it has contractual problems even though they posted it for release with the other 154 movies. If any execs are reading this thread, what kind of contractual problems are we talking about here. I know of no history of legal problems with this film. Please state what the contract problems might be, as I do not accept that kind of answer without further details of which the customer support will not give me. I would have accepted an answer that it won't be released for a few more months, but contract problems is something that may prevent it from ever getting released, and I would like to know what those problems are or if the customer support people might just be giving me some sort of standard auto reply for when any movie can not be shipped. I mean how serious are these contract problems with this movie if in fact there are problems with it?

Re: Warner Archive Discussion Thread

Sometimes, I just have to rub my forehead and wonder out loud.






Crawdaddy

Re: Warner Archive Discussion Thread

I think Dan just answered my question from post #510.

Re: Warner Archive Discussion Thread

Actually, I can record anamorphically from TCM, and do frequently. I have a receiver that can crop off the black bars at the top and bottom and squeeze the image. The result is better than if I recorded it in 4x3 widescreen, but still not up to the quality of an official release. But anyway.... :-)

Bootlegged discs are invariably interlaced with fair to poor compression. The Warner Archive discs are interlaced with... Well, you get the comparison there, right?

Re: Warner Archive Discussion Thread

I just checked by tracking number, I will have my first order of discs this afternoon so now I can judge them for myself on my own HT setup.






Crawdaddy

Re: Warner Archive Discussion Thread

Article about the Warner Archive

WARNER OPENS FILM VAULT - New York Post

Re: Warner Archive Discussion Thread

If people didn't voice their opinions and concerns about quality, we would still be getting either fullframe-only releases or non anamorphic widescreen discs recycled from aged Laserdisc masters. Does anyone remember when that was a very real issue with discs released by Fox and Disney from 1997-2001 (and even thereafter with Touchstone, Miramax and Hollywood Pictures releases from Disney)? Quite a few of those titles (at least the ones from Fox) were later reissued and in anamorphic transfers.

Some people don't have HDTV displays, and may be using the old composite or S-Video connections to view their titles (God forbid using an RF modulator and a coaxial cable...). Those people aren't likely to see the deficiencies of these new releases as clearly as those with HDTV displays using progressive scan (or HDMI upscaled) DVD player outputs. But still - a certain standard should be adhered to, especially when it was promised. This insistence on quality helps everyone - those with advanced displays that reveal all of the shortcomings of SD-DVD and those without, who will eventually have better displays and would probably like software that looks decent on them.

Re: Warner Archive Discussion Thread

What titles did you get?

Re: Warner Archive Discussion Thread

What does your comments have to do with Edwin's complaints about the bootlegger comparisons to Warner?

Those of us that fought the war for anamorphic transfers don't have a problem with PQ issues regarding Warner Archive being brought to the forefront here. We all want the best looking and listening discs possible for our hard-earned money. However, there have been few "left field" comments that does little to further our cause for better PQ and affordable pricing.




Crawdaddy

Re: Warner Archive Discussion Thread

The first disc I'll watch in ite entirety will be Convicts Four, a title I have waited many years to see again. The next title will probably be "Purple Hearts". I will also view "Mr. Lucky" this week.





Crawdaddy

Re: Warner Archive Discussion Thread

Posted by Edwin-S:
I think it will be apparent to Warner that the more inflammatory comments on the thread are not representative of the forum as a whole, particularly when you consider that 10 or so of the pages of this thread are posts by the same handful of people basically repeating their comments from earlier pages. RAH's comments lead me to believe that the problems some have with the product are likely due to some mistakes or miscommunications which will probably be rectified (or at least improved upon) in the future. Some people are hotheads-the type of people who probably experience a lot of road rage, or refer to a salesclerk as a thief if they make a mistake counting back their change.

If someone at WB is reading this thread, there is a point in which they will start tuning out some posts when the see the name and say to themselves "Oh God, not that guy again..."

Re: Warner Archive Discussion Thread

Or it's gotten to the point where they call over other people in the office to laugh at some of the posts.

Re: Warner Archive Discussion Thread

While I have issues with the WarnerArchives website, I will say the customer service person I spoke with at the above number was really friendly and helpful this morning.

And believe me, I work in Sales for a software solutions company and I will tell you "off the record" that our own customer service people are no where near as friendly.

Re: Warner Archive Discussion Thread

Edwin was stating that people are complaining too much about the releases and that we should be happy with whatever we get. That's pretty much what his post states. My reply was an answer for why it's important to voice an opinion on the quality of the discs so that perhaps there issues can be dealt with on future releases. My posts are meant as constructive criticism, and I do not feel that I have been mean or underhanded at all. Aside from the atrocious quality of DREAM LOVER, I recommended the titles I purchased from the Warner Archive.

And now for what my comments had to do with what Edwin posted: This reminded me of when some studios were recycling old Laserdisc masters onto DVD with non anamorphic widescreen transfers. People concerned about the quality spoke out about this, even when other people were just grateful to have a certain film available on DVD to begin with (this was when the selection of titles was quite low, with only the bigger studio titles appearing on the format). Many of these titles were later reissued in anamorphic widescreen looking far better than they did before. In the end, these anamorphic reissues gave better picture quality for people with advanced displays and ensured those that didn't would have a piece of software that would look better when they had the means of displaying it that way.

I don't know what - if any - impact the outcry over using the recycled transfers had on the studios' decision to reissue titles in anamorphic widescreen, but the fact that it was done shows that at some point the studio realized they could be putting out a better product than what was out previously. The same holds true with the Warner Archive releases. Perhaps the people in charge didn't know about the substandard quality of the compression and encoding on these releases. Isn't that something this forum should cover? Or should we just be happy to get whatever it is that's put out. If that were the case, perhaps we'd all still have just old, recycled masters pressed to DVD with little regard, as we did with many titles at the launch of the format.

My explanation for why constructive criticism, and having a forum for it, is important is so not only those people with advanced displays can get the most out of their SD-DVD discs, but also so those without such displays and equipment will have software that will be better on such equipment when they do have it. In the end, this helps everybody.

I apologize if I didn't explain my thought process clearly enough.

Re: Warner Archive Discussion Thread

I would like to complain about these discs as well ( ) but they are still available only for US destinations. Nevertheless, the moment international buyers can get these disc, I'll pick up "Beast of the City" and "I Was a Communist for the FBI".

Re: Warner Archive Discussion Thread

Excuse my lack of verbiage, but I don't think anybody has problems with constructive criticism stated in a respectful manner and seeing the best product possible from Warner.







Crawdaddy

Re: Warner Archive Discussion Thread

As someone who works in customer service, we often don't have access to this kind of information. I don't think the withdrawal of this film from the Warner Archive is any kind of concerted effort to trick or mislead people. These things happen, and I don't know if it's entirely reasonable to expect a complete, thorough explanation for every decision regarding a film's release onto DVD - the ins and outs are surely proprietary information. If contract negotiations are on going, releasing such information and details can do more harm than good.

I can understand your frustration, especially when appearing to come so close to getting a release you have waited for, but I think the anger would be better directed at the situation rather than at Warner. Would it have been better not to have listed the title at all and not get your hopes up? Sure, but doesn't the fact that it was listed briefly point to it being on the way to some sort of release?

I'm reminded of how Anchor Bay's release of THE WATCHER IN THE WOODS was delayed for years until Disney finally relented to include some of the features that ended up on the disc. AB wasn't allowed to include an alternate edit like they wanted, or include the deleted alternate opening sequence, but that didn't keep us fans from squirming, wondering, "When the hell is this thing ever going to come out?!?!" It might have been better had it not been announced at all rather than know it was coming but not knowing when.

Re: Warner Archive Discussion Thread

Posting the information on the website tells customers what to expect, so they can't complain later because they know what they're buying. By all means post it on the website, but people don't have their computers in hand when looking over DVDs and deciding which to watch, so put the short version on the back of the box and the long version on the menu where viewers can reference it when curiosity is piqued. DVD collectors will appreciate having this information where they can glance at it quickly.

Encouraging news. Glad I'm waiting a month or so for the authoring and encoding issues to be tweaked.

This is the perfect venue to suggest to Warner Archives that they issue their classic 3-D catalog in field-sequential format, beginning with Dial M For Murder and House of Wax, followed by Arena, The Charge at Feather River, I the Jury, and Phantom of the Rue Morgue, among others. All it takes is one more step at the lab. A field-sequential DVD looks interlaced until the polarized glasses are put on. There are many 3-D fans and collectors here who are fully equipped to watch field-sequential DVD's. A great many more 3-D buffs would equip themselves lighting-quick if Warners issued some of the classic 3-D films they've been hungry for. Rest assured Warners will sell more field-sequential 3-D titles through burn-on-demand than some of the other obsure films being offered. I think Warners will be astonished at just how popular field-sequential 3-D DVD's are. Would anyone in the stereoscopic community care to lend support to this suggestion?