-

Jump to content



Sign up for a free account!

Signing up for an account is fast and free. As a member you can join in the conversation, enter contests and you won't get the popup ads that guests get. Click here to create your free account.

Photo
- - - - -

A few words about...™ Patton (take two) -- in Blu-Ray

A Few Words About

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

#1 of 49 Robert Harris

Robert Harris

    Archivist

  • 7,402 posts
  • Join Date: Feb 08 1999
  • Real Name:Robert Harris

Posted November 11 2012 - 02:38 AM

Those of you who read my words, will recognize that I'm not a fan of the original Blu-ray release (2008) of Patton.  We'll leave that one alone.


Re-visiting Patton on the new Blu-ray is a very different experience.


The extra image manipulation, which removed all high frequency information from the older release is no longer a problem, and the image is now projector friendly.  There also has been additional clean-up performed to the image, removing both minus and plus density bits and pieces that adorned the earlier transfer.


Here's where it gets interesting.  The trailer attached to the new disc is the same as the original.  I don't get that one, but I presume there's a rationale.  The constant horizontal ticking in the earlier transfer is still in place, and I've not seen this movement on other 65mm origination productions.  I'm presuming that it comes from the scanner.


The earlier release was based upon a 65mm IP, and this still appears to be the case.


The final result is quite beautiful.


Grain levels are low, which might be accounted for by either the use of an IP, or alternatively the lower rez 65mm scan.


Color, density, shadow detail, as was the case with the original Blu-ray, are exemplary.


For those who may have not yet had the pleasure of seeing Patton, know that it's brilliant film-making.  Beginning with a superbly crafted screenplay, unbeatable acting, direction, cinematography...


Buy this one, and rejoice that they got it right.


Image - 4.25


Audio - 5


Highly Recommended.


RAH


"All men dream: but not equally. Those who dream by night in the dusty recesses of their minds wake in the day to find that it was vanity: but the dreamers of the day are dangerous men, for they may act their dreams with open eyes, to make it possible. This I did." T.E. Lawrence


#2 of 49 lukejosephchung

lukejosephchung

    Screenwriter

  • 1,140 posts
  • Join Date: Aug 31 2007
  • Real Name:Luke J. Chung
  • LocationSan Francisco, CA., USA

Posted November 11 2012 - 02:49 PM

Thank you for your highly favorable and reassuring review of this newly-minted presentation. Shawn Belston and Company appear to have finally rectified a colossal blunder of the first order by properly presenting this classic drama/war epic with the love and care it deserves.Posted Image



#3 of 49 Robert Harris

Robert Harris

    Archivist

  • 7,402 posts
  • Join Date: Feb 08 1999
  • Real Name:Robert Harris

Posted November 11 2012 - 04:37 PM

Thank you for your highly favorable and reassuring review of this newly-minted presentation. Shawn Belston and Company appear to have finally rectified a colossal blunder of the first order by properly presenting this classic drama/war epic with the love and care it deserves.:tu:

Whenever Schawn Belston has free rein on a project, it will be superb. RAH

"All men dream: but not equally. Those who dream by night in the dusty recesses of their minds wake in the day to find that it was vanity: but the dreamers of the day are dangerous men, for they may act their dreams with open eyes, to make it possible. This I did." T.E. Lawrence


#4 of 49 Robert Crawford

Robert Crawford

    Moderator

  • 24,388 posts
  • Join Date: Dec 09 1998
  • Real Name:Robert
  • LocationMichigan

Posted November 11 2012 - 07:04 PM

Originally Posted by Robert Harris 


Whenever Schawn Belston has free rein on a project, it will be superb.
RAH

A very cool guy too.






Crawdaddy


Crawdaddy

 

Blu-ray Preorder Schedule

 


#5 of 49 EnricoE

EnricoE

    Supporting Actor

  • 516 posts
  • Join Date: Oct 13 2003

Posted November 11 2012 - 11:18 PM

Here's where it gets interesting.  The trailer attached to the new disc is the same as the original.  I don't get that one, but I presume there's a rationale.  The constant horizontal ticking in the earlier transfer is still in place, and I've not seen this movement on other 65mm origination productions.  I'm presuming that it comes from the scanner.

was you hoping for a hd version of the trailer or what did you wanted to say about by mentioning specifically the trailer?

#6 of 49 Matt Hough

Matt Hough

    Executive Producer

  • 10,895 posts
  • Join Date: Apr 24 2006
  • LocationCharlotte, NC

Posted November 12 2012 - 12:27 AM

Originally Posted by EnricoE 


was you hoping for a hd version of the trailer or what did you wanted to say about by mentioning specifically the trailer?


It's simply very odd for a trailer advertising a 2008 film to be attached to a Blu-ray issued in 2012. Seeing that trailer come up before the main feature gives a viewer pause thinking that maybe the disc he's watching is not going to be the new remaster of Patton but rather the old one mistakenly inserted into a new Blu-ray case.



#7 of 49 Doctorossi

Doctorossi

    Supporting Actor

  • 833 posts
  • Join Date: May 23 2012

Posted November 12 2012 - 02:44 AM

constant horizontal ticking

:confused:

#8 of 49 Robert Harris

Robert Harris

    Archivist

  • 7,402 posts
  • Join Date: Feb 08 1999
  • Real Name:Robert Harris

Posted November 12 2012 - 04:01 AM

Originally Posted by Doctorossi 


Posted Image

A problem (a horizontal tick, or pulling movement) either in the execution of the IP, or in scanning.  I doubt it to be camera related.  The Todd-AO cameras were extremely steady.  Almost appears to be an 8 perf look, with problematic perfs or shrunken stock.


Just very odd.  Same situation with both older and newer Blu-rays.


RAH


"All men dream: but not equally. Those who dream by night in the dusty recesses of their minds wake in the day to find that it was vanity: but the dreamers of the day are dangerous men, for they may act their dreams with open eyes, to make it possible. This I did." T.E. Lawrence


#9 of 49 Doctorossi

Doctorossi

    Supporting Actor

  • 833 posts
  • Join Date: May 23 2012

Posted November 12 2012 - 04:29 AM

A problem (a horizontal tick, or pulling movement) either in the execution of the IP, or in scanning.  I doubt it to be camera related.  The Todd-AO cameras were extremely steady.  Almost appears to be an 8 perf look, with problematic perfs or shrunken stock. Just very odd.  Same situation with both older and newer Blu-rays. RAH

Thanks, Robert. So this manifests itself in the transfer, with the appearance of gate-weave?

#10 of 49 Robert Harris

Robert Harris

    Archivist

  • 7,402 posts
  • Join Date: Feb 08 1999
  • Real Name:Robert Harris

Posted November 12 2012 - 05:16 AM

Originally Posted by Doctorossi 


Thanks, Robert.
So this manifests itself in the transfer, with the appearance of gate-weave?


It appears different than gate-weave, which well...


weaves, as in around.


This has a defined tick to the right.


RAH


"All men dream: but not equally. Those who dream by night in the dusty recesses of their minds wake in the day to find that it was vanity: but the dreamers of the day are dangerous men, for they may act their dreams with open eyes, to make it possible. This I did." T.E. Lawrence


#11 of 49 Doctorossi

Doctorossi

    Supporting Actor

  • 833 posts
  • Join Date: May 23 2012

Posted November 12 2012 - 07:12 AM

This has a defined tick to the right.

So, the image "bounces" to the right, periodically?

#12 of 49 Robert Harris

Robert Harris

    Archivist

  • 7,402 posts
  • Join Date: Feb 08 1999
  • Real Name:Robert Harris

Posted November 12 2012 - 07:21 AM

Originally Posted by Doctorossi 


So, the image "bounces" to the right, periodically?

No.  Just a slight, possibly non-rhythmic tick.  Definitely noticeable, if one is looking for it.


But not a problem for 99% of viewers.  As this is the web, I'm certain someone will ask why I

didn't make note of it.


I have.


RAH


"All men dream: but not equally. Those who dream by night in the dusty recesses of their minds wake in the day to find that it was vanity: but the dreamers of the day are dangerous men, for they may act their dreams with open eyes, to make it possible. This I did." T.E. Lawrence


#13 of 49 Robert Harris

Robert Harris

    Archivist

  • 7,402 posts
  • Join Date: Feb 08 1999
  • Real Name:Robert Harris

Posted November 18 2012 - 11:00 PM

It has been confirmed that this is a new transfer. RAH

"All men dream: but not equally. Those who dream by night in the dusty recesses of their minds wake in the day to find that it was vanity: but the dreamers of the day are dangerous men, for they may act their dreams with open eyes, to make it possible. This I did." T.E. Lawrence


#14 of 49 EnricoE

EnricoE

    Supporting Actor

  • 516 posts
  • Join Date: Oct 13 2003

Posted November 19 2012 - 01:08 AM

It's simply very odd for a trailer advertising a 2008 film to be attached to a Blu-ray issued in 2012. Seeing that trailer come up before the main feature gives a viewer pause thinking that maybe the disc he's watching is not going to be the new remaster of Patton but rather the old one mistakenly inserted into a new Blu-ray case.

so mr. harris was referring to a preview trailer and not the trailer for patton itself. this is indeed odd. personally i would've liked to see fox adding the trailer for patton in hd. reviews confirmed it to be sd only :(

#15 of 49 Josh Steinberg

Josh Steinberg

    Screenwriter

  • 2,415 posts
  • Join Date: Jun 10 2003
  • Real Name:Josh Steinberg

Posted November 19 2012 - 12:00 PM

I picked this up the other night and enjoyed the hell out of it -- was one of those purchases where I said to myself, "It's a little late to watch something tonight, I'm just going to sample the image quality and watch it another night" and then of course put it on and watched straight through. I haven't seen this movie since I was a kid, and couldn't believe how much I had forgotten about it. Absolutely fantastic and incredibly powerful all these years later, and I'm so happy to have a good quality copy on my shelf.

#16 of 49 haineshisway

haineshisway

    Screenwriter

  • 2,112 posts
  • Join Date: Oct 26 2011
  • Real Name:Bruce
  • LocationLos Angeles

Posted November 19 2012 - 12:23 PM

This transfer is stunning in its clarity.

#17 of 49 Guest__*

Guest__*
  • Join Date: --

Posted November 19 2012 - 04:20 PM

I was going to watch about 15 mins. tonight just to sample....I ended up watching an hour and could've finished it if I wasn't so tired today! This is definitely the most I have ever enjoyed the film. It looks great!



#18 of 49 owen35

owen35

    Stunt Coordinator

  • 136 posts
  • Join Date: Oct 13 2008

Posted November 19 2012 - 05:25 PM

I must plead my ignorance on the original release. I heard all the hullabaloo and didn't understand it--it looked great to me, but, oh well. Then I saw this release. Wow! What a difference. I cannot even believe that I thought the 2008 was an acceptable release. This is a much more satisfying release and does give Patton the justice it deserved. though I agree--what is up with the very old trailer at the beginning? For a moment I thought that I had bought the old disc.
=============
Visit My Site: DavidLean.com
Read My Book: David Lean: Interviews

#19 of 49 Dick

Dick

    Producer

  • 4,065 posts
  • Join Date: May 22 1999
  • Real Name:Rick

Posted November 20 2012 - 09:15 AM

Well, okay. The "new" transfer I bought, featuring an American flag behind Patton on the cover art, still seems to be nearly grainless (I noted Mr. Harris' "low grain" description). It doesn't seem smeary or especially video-like, but nor does it appear to be entirely film-like. I realize this was a 70mm presentation, so natural grain would be minimal. And I have only a 46" monitor on which to watch it at this point. Do I have to wait to buy a 60" monitor before I can ascertain whether or not the copy I bought is the definitive remastered edition, or is there some other way of verifying? Thanks.

#20 of 49 Robert Harris

Robert Harris

    Archivist

  • 7,402 posts
  • Join Date: Feb 08 1999
  • Real Name:Robert Harris

Posted November 20 2012 - 09:22 AM

Originally Posted by Dick 

Well, okay. The "new" transfer I bought, featuring an American flag behind Patton on the cover art, still seems to be nearly grainless (I noted Mr. Harris' "low grain" description). It doesn't seem smeary or especially video-like, but nor does it appear to be entirely film-like. I realize this was a 70mm presentation, so natural grain would be minimal. And I have only a 46" monitor on which to watch it at this point.
Do I have to wait to buy a 60" monitor before I can ascertain whether or not the copy I bought is the definitive remastered edition, or is there some other way of verifying?
Thanks.

The new version is nearly grainless.  It appears to be derived from a 65mm IP, which would reduce the grain.  Might it have been reduced a bit further?


Possibly, but if it was, it appears to have done no damage.


A very nice presentation from the folks at Fox.


RAH


"All men dream: but not equally. Those who dream by night in the dusty recesses of their minds wake in the day to find that it was vanity: but the dreamers of the day are dangerous men, for they may act their dreams with open eyes, to make it possible. This I did." T.E. Lawrence






Also tagged with one or more of these keywords: A Few Words About

0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users