- Joined
- Feb 8, 1999
- Messages
- 18,409
- Real Name
- Robert Harris
Warner's new Blu-ray of the great George Stevens' Shane is a perfect example of what occurs when a three-strip Technicolor production is brought to Blu-ray with consummate intelligence, extremely high-end technical precision, and an overall desire by those involved for absolute perfection.That said, I must invoke the theory as espoused by David Lean, that any true restoration must have some tiny artifact to enable people to believe that it actually is a restoration. Much like a hand-woven Native American blanket, there must be some tiny thing to hold it back from absolute technical perfection.For those interested in the more technical attributes of reviewing or commenting upon Blu-rays, and especially those in the rarified air of three-strip Technicolor -- and with comments regarding The Quiet Man over at that thread -- this discussion may be instructive.I've compared three Blu-rays based upon three-strip productions. The Quiet Man, Niagara (which will be dealt with in a bit more detail when I have a moment, and Shane.All began as black & white negatives, which went through Technicolor's matrix and dye transfer printing system. There is little different about them technically.My feelings about The Quiet Man are no secret. I'm unimpressed with Olive's work on this project. And the other two films in this discussion make the perfect point of why it's as poor as it is.Three-strip negatives, if printed directly to a positive will generally yield an image far grainier and more highly resolved than was ever seen on original dye transfer prints. Those original prints were far softer, and less highly resolved, than the casual viewer might recognize. Their "sharpness," for lack of a better word, was more imagined that real. It was based upon the contrast of those prints.In reproducing a three-strip production for Blu-ray, one must recognize what those original prints looked like, and how very different a modern 4k scan of the three records is from what was intended. The same thing could be said of scanning original Eastman negatives in 4k toward the creation of a DCP or Blu-ray, but to a far lessor extent. Working with modern stocks, do you reproduce what's on the original negative, or the slightly more velvety image of a dupe? That answer is in the eye of the beholder. The situation with three-strip, being far more drastic, is not.The original negatives for Shane were scanned beautifully. The resultant processed image has superbly perfect registration (even in dupes), color, black levels, shadow detail and highlights. The image is just soft enough to give it that authentic dye transfer look -- almost akin to watching moving velvet on the screen. Grain looks authentic for a dye transfer print, and moves naturally.Compare Shane, back to back, with Niagara, and you'll find a slightly different beast. Color on Niagara is gorgeous, as it should be with anything three-strip, as nothing is lost to time or fading. Registration is equally nice, as are black levels and all other attributes. And while the visible grain structure allows for an extremely pleasing overall look, there are portions of the frame, where certain elements freeze in place, with hardly any moving grain. Just an anomaly. Sit back at a normal viewing distance, and nothing is obvious. The final product is beautiful.Compare either of these Blu-rays to The Quiet Man, and what you'll find is an extremely competent original scan and basic compositing and color. The comparison ends there. Final registration and grain are handled poorly.The original stereo tracks for Shane are long gone. The Blu-ray is presented in DTS-HD MA 2S, to give it a bit of presence. Aspect ratio, which has been discussed elsewhere, is the proper 1.37:1. The film was released theatrically in a placebo-like wide-screen, which would not have made its way to Blu-ray. A 1.66 with very thoughtful vertical tracking was prepared, but the final decision for release is perfect at 1.37.Back to that blanket. What's wrong with WB's presentation of Shane?What my eyes are seeing, is something tiny, and which may have existed on the original elements. In one of the final shots, with Alan Ladd riding away from the camera toward the mountains in the far background, there are small areas of snow in the peaks. Whether that snow was problematic within the exposures of the original negatives, or just some anomaly in the processing or compression of the final image is unknown to me. It simply looks a bit odd. And for those who care, that is what's potentially wrong with Shane. It may have always been that way.But it matters naught.This Blu-ray will hold up against huge projection with perfection. With all of the pre-planning, technical proficiency and finishing work for this Blu-ray, it's a "perfect storm." But in a very good way.Shane is a meticulously produced Blu-ray which shows ultimate love, care and dedication toward properly reproducing (and saving for future generations via asset protection) one of the finest films ever made.Image - 5Audio - 4.5Very Highly Recommended.RAH