Jump to content



Sign up for a free account to remove the pop-up ads

Signing up for an account is fast and free. As a member you can join in the conversation, enter contests and remove the pop-up ads that guests get. Click here to create your free account.


Photo
- - - - -

ZULU - On Bluray ( UK )


  • You cannot start a new topic
  • Please log in to reply
206 replies to this topic

#41 of 207 OFFLINE   dannyboy104

dannyboy104

    Stunt Coordinator



  • 55 posts
  • Join Date: Oct 08 2006

Posted November 07 2008 - 03:11 PM

I also received Zulu today and can confirm that the main movie is not region coded. It also has the usual Cinemascope aspect ratio of 2.35 to 1 despite having been shot in Super Technirama 70.




further insight taken from Widescreen Museum - The Technirama Wing - Page 3 showing the frame marker



Technirama® vs Super Technirama® 70 Image Sizes





There is often some misunderstanding about how much image is lost in one dimension or other when Technirama negatives make 70mm versus 35mm prints. The 35mm screen ratio was 2.35:1, as per CinemaScope, and the 70mm ratio was 2.21:1, as per Todd-AO. This is not a very great difference. Since the camera negative in the Technirama system created an image with a ratio of 2.25:1, both formats could be extracted with virtually no image loss, as clearly indicated in the sketch above. The extraction areas are so similar that it would not be necessary to use separate camera finder markings in order to protect action within the frame, though the finders actually did have such markings. Please note that the indicated areas are not the exact extraction areas used by Technicolor, they are simply an illustration of how little the difference is between the available extraction areas.

#42 of 207 OFFLINE   MarkRowley

MarkRowley

    Auditioning



  • 10 posts
  • Join Date: Nov 14 2000

Posted November 08 2008 - 12:30 AM

I cannot agree with OliverK IMO the movie looks great. I'm very happy with it and it's certainly an improvement over the SDVD.

#43 of 207 OFFLINE   OliverK

OliverK

    Screenwriter



  • 1,957 posts
  • Join Date: Feb 01 2000

Posted November 08 2008 - 02:09 AM

further insight taken from Widescreen Museum - The Technirama Wing - Page 3 showing the frame marker



Technirama® vs Super Technirama® 70 Image Sizes





There is often some misunderstanding about how much image is lost in one dimension or other when Technirama negatives make 70mm versus 35mm prints. The 35mm screen ratio was 2.35:1, as per CinemaScope, and the 70mm ratio was 2.21:1, as per Todd-AO. This is not a very great difference. Since the camera negative in the Technirama system created an image with a ratio of 2.25:1, both formats could be extracted with virtually no image loss, as clearly indicated in the sketch above. The extraction areas are so similar that it would not be necessary to use separate camera finder markings in order to protect action within the frame, though the finders actually did have such markings. Please note that the indicated areas are not the exact extraction areas used by Technicolor, they are simply an illustration of how little the difference is between the available extraction areas.


I am very aware of the technical aspects of the format, that's why I pointed out that the aspect ratio is 2.35 and not the one that theatrical 70mm prints would have had.



I wonder why this aspect ratio would have been chosen if indeed the master created for this transfer is from the original horizontal elements, but maybe it isn't ?

#44 of 207 OFFLINE   OliverK

OliverK

    Screenwriter



  • 1,957 posts
  • Join Date: Feb 01 2000

Posted November 08 2008 - 02:16 AM

I cannot agree with OliverK IMO the movie looks great. I'm very happy with it and it's certainly an improvement over the SDVD.
An improvement over the DVD is not what my yardstick is, but the best transfers out there in the Blu-Ray format. Compared to them Zulu is a big disappointment for me and it certainly does not look like film anymore. As you can still see this movie is pure eye candy and if a master was properly harvested from the original horizontal elements and put on Blu-Ray with care and with the hands off the DNR and EE buttons on the mastering equipment it could be another reference transfer. This coming from Paramount after the quality transfers of Indy IV, Iron Man and The Godfather collection is a big disappointment for me.

#45 of 207 OFFLINE   willyTass

willyTass

    Second Unit



  • 374 posts
  • Join Date: Sep 09 2005

Posted November 08 2008 - 03:53 AM

but it was shot on plastic , not film Posted Image

#46 of 207 OFFLINE   Danny_N

Danny_N

    Second Unit



  • 253 posts
  • Join Date: Jan 02 2001

Posted November 08 2008 - 05:40 AM

Watched it a few days ago and it looks much better than Patton. There is some DNR but not so much that fine detail is totally gone as is the case with Patton. I could easily spot fine detail in the red tunics and the actor's faces for instance (beware that the make-up is quite heavy on some actor's faces which makes their faces clayish but that's not because of DNR). Although it does look artificial to a degree, I never had the feeling that I was watching a videogame instead of film. I enjoyed the disc despite the flaws.

#47 of 207 OFFLINE   dannyboy104

dannyboy104

    Stunt Coordinator



  • 55 posts
  • Join Date: Oct 08 2006

Posted November 08 2008 - 06:59 AM

I agree with the comment about the make-up with this film.The new Blu-Ray reveals the over use of make-up,which can make the actor's skin tone's look slightly odd.For instance you can now see, really clearly Michael Caine's light blue eye liner! It appears that the leads had more make up applied than the supports who tend to look more natural. Looking towards the opening scenes,featuring Ulla Jacobsson as Margareta Witt,the BCU of the actress shows plenty of detail,making out the powder make-up on her face.(The closer shot was done in the studio and the group shot on location) The other aspect that needs to be mentioned is the lighting,which more often than not,was achieved by three small lamps on the top of the camera,this can bring a slightly harsh and unnatural look on M/S and MCU's. I viewed this on a 106" scope frame,1080/24p and it became clear that careful attention is needed in the colour set up,namely the reds and those tunic's. The scene where Rev Otto Witt (Jack Hawkins) rides away with great speed with his daughter,you can see a stunt man with very large dark side burns standing in for Jack. I couldn't detect any compression issues or EE,and would like to know where this is,to be able to view in real time. Audio wise,there is a nice stereo spread,but this is the weak spot for this release,and could have done with a complete re-working with what remaining elements are left.

#48 of 207 OFFLINE   Jim_K

Jim_K

    Executive Producer



  • 10,090 posts
  • Join Date: Apr 07 2000

Posted November 08 2008 - 07:45 AM

I also received Zulu today and can confirm that the main movie is not region coded. It also has the usual Cinemascope aspect ratio of 2.35 to 1 despite having been shot in Super Technirama 70.

So does it look as good or better than the HD of Grand Prix since you ordered it? Posted Image or did you ignore your own advise? Posted Image

As usual I'm going to have to order this myself since...well...I like to form my own opinions with my own eyes and on my own equipment. I'm crazy like that.

Anyone know if The ITV U.K. blu-ray of The Ipcress File that's getting released next week is region free?http://www.amazon.co.uk/gp/product/images/B001DOM03C/ref=dp_image_0/279-0906577-4318541?ie=UTF8&n=283926&s=dvd
Death before Streaming!


#49 of 207 OFFLINE   OliverK

OliverK

    Screenwriter



  • 1,957 posts
  • Join Date: Feb 01 2000

Posted November 08 2008 - 08:23 AM

As usual I'm going to have to order this myself since...well...I like to form my own opinions with my own eyes and on my own equipment. I'm crazy like that.
Must be expensive some times to be you Posted Image

#50 of 207 OFFLINE   dannyboy104

dannyboy104

    Stunt Coordinator



  • 55 posts
  • Join Date: Oct 08 2006

Posted November 08 2008 - 08:35 AM

I expect The ITV "The Ipcress File" to be region free,as the ITV disc's I own,have been region free so far.

#51 of 207 OFFLINE   OliverK

OliverK

    Screenwriter



  • 1,957 posts
  • Join Date: Feb 01 2000

Posted November 08 2008 - 09:11 AM

I will upload a few caps tonight, here is the first one: http://[URL=http://www.hdimage.org/][IMG]http://static.hometheaterforum.com/imgrepo/9/95/htf_imgcache_36212.png[/IMG][/URL] The guy on the right must even have makeup on his arm and the bandage on him looks kind of pasty, too.

#52 of 207 OFFLINE   Jim_K

Jim_K

    Executive Producer



  • 10,090 posts
  • Join Date: Apr 07 2000

Posted November 08 2008 - 09:58 AM


Must be expensive some times to be you

Not really, no more than anyone else. But collecting movies and home theater has never been cheap. Now if a $20 BD is going to cripple your finances then this isn't the hobby for you. Posted Image Posted Image
Death before Streaming!


#53 of 207 OFFLINE   Ed St. Clair

Ed St. Clair

    Producer



  • 3,320 posts
  • Join Date: May 07 2001

Posted November 08 2008 - 10:36 AM

I will do a comparison to the DVD later and I assume that the Blu-Ray will be the preferred version despite its weaknesses, but still I would not advice to buy it due to its shortcomings.
Looking forward too that! Thanks, again.
Movies are: "The Greatest Artform".
HD should be for EVERYONE!

#54 of 207 OFFLINE   OliverK

OliverK

    Screenwriter



  • 1,957 posts
  • Join Date: Feb 01 2000

Posted November 08 2008 - 02:28 PM

Now if a $20 BD is going to cripple your finances then this isn't the hobby for you. Posted Image Posted Image


Well in my case after that 14 ft screen, the 1080p projector and the 7.2 speaker system there is simply not enough money left for any movies Posted Image

#55 of 207 OFFLINE   OliverK

OliverK

    Screenwriter



  • 1,957 posts
  • Join Date: Feb 01 2000

Posted November 08 2008 - 03:29 PM

more: http://[URL=http://www.hdimage.org/][IMG]http://static.hometheaterforum.com/imgrepo/4/4f/htf_imgcache_36223.png[/IMG][/URL] http://[URL=http://www.hdimage.org/][IMG]http://static.hometheaterforum.com/imgrepo/2/2e/htf_imgcache_36224.png[/IMG][/URL] http://[URL=http://www.hdimage.org/][IMG]http://static.hometheaterforum.com/imgrepo/7/78/htf_imgcache_36225.png[/IMG][/URL] http://[URL=http://www.hdimage.org/][IMG]http://static.hometheaterforum.com/imgrepo/7/70/htf_imgcache_36226.png[/IMG][/URL]

#56 of 207 OFFLINE   Danny_N

Danny_N

    Second Unit



  • 253 posts
  • Join Date: Jan 02 2001

Posted November 08 2008 - 03:47 PM

I will upload a few caps tonight, here is the first one: The guy on the right must even have makeup on his arm and the bandage on him looks kind of pasty, too.
Is this going to be the AVS kind of staring-at-caps-pseudo-science? Caps only give an indication and it is very easy to pass judgement based on a few screencaps, I find myself falling in that trap sometimes but films should be watched in motion. Yes there is some DNR and it is heavier in some scenes than in others but as a whole and in motion, Zulu looks much better than Patton. I enjoyed it fwiw.

#57 of 207 OFFLINE   CraigF

CraigF

    Screenwriter



  • 2,425 posts
  • Join Date: Nov 20 2002
  • Real Name:Craig
  • LocationToronto area, Canada

Posted November 08 2008 - 04:03 PM

Ummm...what faults am I supposed to be looking for in those caps? They look pretty good to me...

#58 of 207 OFFLINE   OliverK

OliverK

    Screenwriter



  • 1,957 posts
  • Join Date: Feb 01 2000

Posted November 08 2008 - 04:14 PM

in motion, Zulu looks much better than Patton. I enjoyed it fwiw.
Patton is more even and has less EE. It might be DNR'd and degrained a little more, but the jumps in quality on Zulu make up for that in my subjective assessment. Why you think that Zulu is much better than Patton is honestly beyond me, but hey it is your opinion that counts for you.

#59 of 207 OFFLINE   OliverK

OliverK

    Screenwriter



  • 1,957 posts
  • Join Date: Feb 01 2000

Posted November 08 2008 - 04:20 PM

Thanks. Looking forward too that! Thanks, again.
Ed, I just peeked into the DVD of Zulu that I last watched some 4 years ago and there is no comparison - the Blu-Ray is much better. The fault of the Zulu Blu-Ray IMO lies in the fact that is falls short of what it could have been. It is still the version to get if you want to watch/own a digital copy of the movie.

#60 of 207 OFFLINE   OliverK

OliverK

    Screenwriter



  • 1,957 posts
  • Join Date: Feb 01 2000

Posted November 08 2008 - 04:25 PM

Ummm...what faults am I supposed to be looking for in those caps? They look pretty good to me...
You are not supposed to look for faults - if you are fine with what you see go ahead and get the Blu-Ray. If you were sensitive to it you could see that DNR has rendered most faces in those caps rather plasticised - fine detail in faces is obscured or missing and the same goes for surfaces made of wood or stone.




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users