-

Jump to content



Photo
- - - - -

A few words about...™ Funny Face -- in Blu-ray

Blu-ray Paramount Warner A Few Words About

  • Please log in to reply
83 replies to this topic

#41 of 84 OFFLINE   rsmithjr

rsmithjr

    Supporting Actor

  • 830 posts
  • Join Date: Oct 22 2011
  • Real Name:Robert Smith
  • LocationPalo Alto, CA

Posted April 16 2014 - 12:21 PM

The circuit I run uses Blu-ray for classics and kid shows if a DCP is not available. It does look quite good on a 25' and above screen. The only problem I have is to make the managers start the Blu and pause at the start of the presentation in order to not to start at the menu. That would cause a poor presentation.

Great story!  I know that many indie houses are using Blu-ray for some titles, even new ones.  Can you tell us about the circuit?

 

On the opposite side, I see a lot of classics at the Stanford Theater in Palo Alto run by David Packard.  They only use 35mm projection with carbon arcs and changeovers, very old school.  They also have access to places like the UCLA Archive for prints and gets some amazing things. 

 

Sadly, i often think that the Blu-ray of a given title would look better than the print they are able to find, and certainly sound better.  I just saw Double Indemnity a few weeks ago there (during a Barbara Stanwick festival) and am looking forward to comparing it to the new Blu-ray (in my mind) a few weeks hence. 

 

I suggested to David that DCP's and Blu-rays might have their place in his theatre, expecting a rejection of the idea.  Somewhat surprisingly, he said he was thinking about it. 

 

I really see DCP and Blu-ray as furthering the cause of classic and indie theaters by increasing availability and quality. 


  • ahollis and JoHud like this

#42 of 84 OFFLINE   davidmatychuk

davidmatychuk

    Second Unit

  • 431 posts
  • Join Date: Mar 10 2012
  • Real Name:David Matychuk
  • LocationVancouver, B.C.

Posted April 16 2014 - 05:46 PM

*
POPULAR

David Matychuk, 58". I think I'll preface any future posts in this forum this way, so that when I post my delight about the "Funny Face" Blu-Ray everyone else can just smile and shake their heads sadly. Should I be glad that I'll never be able to afford Mr. Kane's dream set-up?


  • Will Krupp, David Weicker, FoxyMulder and 1 other like this

#43 of 84 OFFLINE   Kevin EK

Kevin EK

    Screenwriter

  • 2,781 posts
  • Join Date: May 09 2003

Posted April 16 2014 - 08:35 PM

RAH makes a critical point. Studios will spend some money on some catalogue titles but not on all of them. Some titles, like Wizard of Oz, Goldfinger, Casablanca, will see release after release and new transfer after new transfer. Other movies get an HD transfer that doesn't indicate much time was spent on it. And other movies are either left in the vaults or only available via MOD. It's the same with classic tv. A series like Twilight Zone or Star Trek is sure to get a new transfer for blu-ray and a lot of tlc. A series like Hill Street Blues or Homicide is unlikely to get such treatment. It's a shame, but it's hard to argue with the financial numbers.



#44 of 84 OFFLINE   Robin9

Robin9

    Screenwriter

  • 1,842 posts
  • Join Date: Dec 13 2006

Posted April 16 2014 - 09:30 PM

David Matychuk, 58". I think I'll preface any future posts in this forum this way, so that when I post my delight about the "Funny Face" Blu-Ray everyone else can just smile and shake their heads sadly. Should I be glad that I'll never be able to afford Mr. Kane's dream set-up?

 

A good question. I have the U.K. BRD and it looks good when projected onto my 10' wide screen.

 

If Mr. Kane's set-up, using a smaller screen, makes the disc look intolerably bad, then the question becomes: what's the point? What's the point of creating a special projector, buying a special screen, calibrating everything to an infinite degree, if the result is that normal discs look bad?

 

I'll have another look at Funny Face over Easter to see if it's as bad as RAH suggests or as good as I remember.



#45 of 84 OFFLINE   OliverK

OliverK

    Screenwriter

  • 1,635 posts
  • Join Date: Feb 01 2000

Posted April 16 2014 - 09:37 PM

Entirely plausible that Funny Face goes back a few years. To look at it from the studio perspective, it's another bothersome old film on old elements, with zero popularity, actors many Walmart shoppers cannot identify and therefore not worth any heavy lifting.

In no way an income maker.

RAH


That is probably the sad reality. A musical with Fred Astaire and Audrey Hepburn - Audrey who? And they are all dead, already!

Still additonal expenses for grain reduction and/or sharpening are absolutely unnecessary in such a scenario and only make matters worse. If only studios understood this I could live with a release of an old master but the addiotional tinkering to make these Blu-rays (in the mind of some people at the studio? I can only guess) fresh and new is insulting and not helpful at all, fortunately Gunfight at the O.K. Corral got away!

#46 of 84 OFFLINE   haineshisway

haineshisway

    Screenwriter

  • 2,274 posts
  • Join Date: Oct 26 2011
  • Real Name:Bruce
  • LocationLos Angeles

Posted April 16 2014 - 09:40 PM

Not certain at what size Funny Face falls apart. Looked quite good, with a question or three on a plasma 42. No doubt it will hold up at 55, as you know what you're seeing.

I'd bet that at 65 it shows its transfer heritage. At 85, it's gone, which means that for projection it's a non-starter.

Check your mail for an invite.

RAH

I shall wait for the invite and take advantage of it.



#47 of 84 OFFLINE   OliverK

OliverK

    Screenwriter

  • 1,635 posts
  • Join Date: Feb 01 2000

Posted April 16 2014 - 09:45 PM

A good question. I have the U.K. BRD and it looks good when projected onto my 10' wide screen.
 
If Mr. Kane's set-up, using a smaller screen, makes the disc look intolerably bad, then the question becomes: what's the point? What's the point of creating a special projector, buying a special screen, calibrating everything to an infinite degree, if the result is that normal discs look bad?
 
I'll have another look at Funny Face over Easter to see if it's as bad as RAH suggests or as good as I remember.


I suggest that it looks as described as I know that version and believe it to be identical to the US transfer.

It will also depend on your sensitivity to certain things and interest in film and how things usually look that are shot on film and in certain processes. I am not sure that I would suggest for you to get more knowledgable about this as you will probably enjoy a lot of classic movies less than before. In summary it depends on your approach to this hobby of ours.

I have to do with people looking at bigger projected pictures to some degree and the level of sharpening and noise reduction that some apply to pictures and that they are clearly happy with is astonishing so I can assure you that not everybody will see the same thing, not even in the same room and on the same screen.

#48 of 84 OFFLINE   JoHud

JoHud

    Screenwriter

  • 2,660 posts
  • Join Date: Sep 11 2007
  • Real Name:Joe Hudak

Posted April 16 2014 - 10:04 PM

So how does this look compared to the recent blu-ray of In The Heat of the Night?  Currently that is my low bar this year for sub-par blu-ray transfers of a AAA film.  Not terrible but thoroughly lackluster.  I just have a 50" but it was easy to see how weak the transfer was.

 

I'll still buy it since it seems to be an "acceptable" blu-ray for TV viewing.  Definitely sounds like Paramount just used the same HD source used in the Centennial DVD some years back.  Not a deal-breaker, but not exactly something I'll be rushing out to buy right away.



#49 of 84 OFFLINE   Robert Harris

Robert Harris

    Archivist

  • 7,493 posts
  • Join Date: Feb 08 1999
  • Real Name:Robert Harris

Posted April 16 2014 - 10:21 PM

Funny Face looks like affected video. Nothing like film. And certainly nothing like Vista.

The less one is aware of the true capabilities of film, and the less one is exposed to true cinema, the better these hybrid beasts will look.

My battle, since day one, has been to achieve a level of performance via the ability of the Blu-ray format to reproduce the look of film.

Nothing more.

Nothing less.

By those standards, Funny Face is a failure, as it beautifully reproduces the look of low to medium quality video.

RAH
  • JoHud and FoxyMulder like this

"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


#50 of 84 OFFLINE   Will Krupp

Will Krupp

    Screenwriter

  • 1,046 posts
  • Join Date: Oct 02 2003

Posted April 17 2014 - 05:36 AM

*
POPULAR

Should I be glad that I'll never be able to afford Mr. Kane's dream set-up?

 

Quite frankly, the thought of spending all that money so that half of my blu-ray collection and ALL of my DVD's can look like shit doesn't sound like much of a dream to me.


  • MatthewA, David Weicker, Robin9 and 1 other like this

#51 of 84 OFFLINE   JoshZ

JoshZ

    Second Unit

  • 419 posts
  • Join Date: May 26 2012
  • LocationBoston

Posted April 17 2014 - 07:16 AM

That is probably the sad reality. A musical with Fred Astaire and Audrey Hepburn - Audrey who? And they are all dead, already!

 

What are you talking about? I just saw her in a Dove chocolate commercial!

 

:)


  • MatthewA and ahollis like this

Writer / Blogmaster

High-Def Digest


#52 of 84 OFFLINE   OliverK

OliverK

    Screenwriter

  • 1,635 posts
  • Join Date: Feb 01 2000

Posted April 17 2014 - 10:46 PM

What are you talking about? I just saw her in a Dove chocolate commercial!
 
:)


Interesting - over here in Europe she is still pretty much unknown but in the US Paramount and Warner should bring out more movies and advertise them as "starring the girl from the Dove chocolate commercial" - I am sure that sales to the unwashed masses will explode  :D



#53 of 84 OFFLINE   Torsten Kaiser

Torsten Kaiser

    Film Restoration & Preservation

  • 95 posts
  • Join Date: Nov 30 2002

Posted April 18 2014 - 05:21 AM

Interesting - over here in Europe she is still pretty much unknown but in the US Paramount and Warner should bring out more movies and advertise them as "starring the girl from the Dove chocolate commercial" - I am sure that sales to the unwashed masses will explode  :D

Audrey Hepburn ?  Pretty (yes) much unknown (Hello ?) in Europe ?  What have you been smokin' ? :huh:


Torsten Kaiser
-----------------------
TLEFilms Film Restoration & Preservation Services
www.TLEFilms.com

#54 of 84 OFFLINE   OliverK

OliverK

    Screenwriter

  • 1,635 posts
  • Join Date: Feb 01 2000

Posted April 18 2014 - 07:37 AM

Audrey Hepburn ?  Pretty (yes) much unknown (Hello ?) in Europe ?  What have you been smokin' ? :huh:

She is pretty much unknown in Europe because she wasn't in a Dove chocolate commercial like in the US :) This is not really meant to be taken seriously although it is probably not too far from the truth for a large segment of the younger population...

#55 of 84 OFFLINE   schan1269

schan1269

    HTF Expert

  • 13,881 posts
  • Join Date: Jul 04 2012
  • Real Name:Sam
  • LocationChicago-ish/NW Indiana

Posted April 18 2014 - 08:43 AM

You are right. Nobody watches Amazing Race either...

And everybody was like...

"Why are those people Sitting on a scooter?"
  • jseabough likes this

#56 of 84 OFFLINE   lark144

lark144

    Stunt Coordinator

  • 119 posts
  • Join Date: Feb 22 2012

Posted April 18 2014 - 09:34 AM

I don't know anything about the interests of young people from Europe, but I work in a major cultural institution in NYC, and I see scores of young women from Europe wearing tee-shirts emblazoned with Audrey Hepburn's image every day, so there must be some awareness of who she is, even if they just like the clothes she wears, as FUNNY FACE is certainly a perfect illustration of her collaboration with Hubert de Givenchy. 



#57 of 84 OFFLINE   bigshot

bigshot

    Screenwriter

  • 1,160 posts
  • Join Date: Jan 30 2008

Posted April 18 2014 - 09:38 AM

Funny Face looks like affected video. Nothing like film. And certainly nothing like Vista.
The less one is aware of the true capabilities of film, and the less one is exposed to true cinema, the better these hybrid beasts will look.
My battle, since day one, has been to achieve a level of performance via the ability of the Blu-ray format to reproduce the look of film.


That's what I've been saying about the Disney animated features (lone voice in the wilderness)
  • MatthewA likes this

#58 of 84 OFFLINE   FoxyMulder

FoxyMulder

    映画ファン

  • 5,027 posts
  • Join Date: Sep 14 2009
  • Real Name:Malcolm
  • LocationScotland

Posted April 18 2014 - 09:55 AM

That's what I've been saying about the Disney animated features (lone voice in the wilderness)

 

Not a lone voice, many people have been complaining about the Disney animated releases, i have been complaining for years.

 

I would add that on page 1 you say you projected Funny Face on a ten foot screen and couldn't see the grain reduction and edge enhancement, i saw it immediately on viewing the screencaps with a laptop screen size of just 17 inches........just saying and, to me this is the problem, some people are just not seeing the issues regardless of the screen size, be happy about that, i can't be happy.


  • Mark B likes this

     :Fun Movie Quotes:

"A good body with a dull brain is as cheap as life itself"   

"Maybe it's a sheep dog... let's keep going" 

"Please doctor, I've got to ask this. It sounds like, well, just as though you're describing some form of super carrot"

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 


#59 of 84 OFFLINE   bigshot

bigshot

    Screenwriter

  • 1,160 posts
  • Join Date: Jan 30 2008

Posted April 18 2014 - 10:18 AM

I was looking at the European release. It may be different.

#60 of 84 OFFLINE   bigshot

bigshot

    Screenwriter

  • 1,160 posts
  • Join Date: Jan 30 2008

Posted April 18 2014 - 10:28 AM

I watched it about six months ago, I guess. I remember being struck by the incredibly beautiful color and perfect contrast levels. I wasn't looking for sharpening/grain smoothing, so I might have just overlooked it because of the incredible color. My personal tastes put priority on overall balances over fine details. It's actually easier to find sharp, clear blu-rays than ones with really good contrast/color.

Also, I think my projection system might be doing some sort of cleaning up of sharpening artifacts. I stared at the UK Zulu over and over trying to figure out what people were complaining about, and I couldn't see it at all. Netflix HD streaming looks fantastic projected.

The only films I can think of (besides the obvious Disney ones) that bother me when it comes to grain smoothing are Evil Dead II and Texas Chainsaw Massacre.





Also tagged with one or more of these keywords: Blu-ray, Paramount, Warner, A Few Words About

0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users