A Few Words About A few words about...™ 2001: a space odyssey -- in 4k UHD Blu-ray (1 Viewer)

[Jeff Brooks]

Warner informed me the survey may not be available until the new release date of the 20th.

 

[Peter Neski]

They did a softcover reprint that includes all of the text and pictures from the main book that’s significantly cheaper:

https://www.amazon.com/Making-Stanl...preST=_SX218_BO1,204,203,200_QL40_&dpSrc=srch

It’s missing the book of frame enlargements from the film, and the script outline and script notes mini books, but has everything from the main book.

"why do you say soft cover "?

 

[Britton]

Warner informed me the survey may not be available until the new release date of the 20th.

Ah, that makes sense. Thanks! I have my fingers crossed that they'll address my favorite subject (fade vs. cut) once the official date hits.

The new blu-ray looks fantastic, so all in all, this release has been a huge net gain. I never realized how lacking the 2007 release was.

 

[WillG]

I did, in 1978. Peyote actually.

How was it?

 

[STAN aso]

... welcome to HTF, STAN.

Thanks! Looks like a fun place already.

Also, I'm glad, with a mere mention, to encourage others towards Taschen's The Making Of Stanley Kubrick's 2001: A Space Odyssey. Author Piers Bizony had full access to the documents of the Kubrick estate. With the Paris design agency M/M professionally preparing all inclusives for this quality publication, it is an excellent go-to reference -- no matter the compact edition's special fold-outs and cross-paging.

But back to my not getting the blind spot to the obvious weaknesses of this issue of 2001 (with acknowledgement of it's strengths having been addressed earlier in the thread). This next major problem is one I've noticed across many releases -- vignetting, the fall-off of illumination towards the edges.

My original thinking was that particular lens aberration, from the on-set cameras to the extremely wide film formats, was the cause. However, the recent, Christopher Nolan helmed, "unrestored 2001" was noted to have eliminated most or all of this by going farther back to the original negative. (Yes, I have read the bickering over film generations.)

In any case, here is my test to demonstrate the effect and it's normalization:

This proof-of-concept was applied to luminance as a whole. Better, the normalization would be applied differently to individual R-G-B layers, as progressively darker areas show progressively stronger blue (this tinting is much less in the red and the green). Again, I would ask your "2 cents" about this, but I think more value is needed this time -- feel free to throw pocketfuls of coin.

 

[PMF]

Thanks! Looks like a fun place already.

Also, I'm glad, with a mere mention, to encourage others towards Taschen's The Making Of Stanley Kubrick's 2001: A Space Odyssey. Author Piers Bizony had full access to the documents of the Kubrick estate. With the Paris design agency M/M professionally preparing all inclusives for this quality publication, it is an excellent go-to reference -- no matter the compact edition's special fold-outs and cross-paging.

But back to my not getting the blind spot to the obvious weaknesses of this issue of 2001 (with acknowledgement of it's strengths having been addressed earlier in the thread). This next major problem is one I've noticed across many releases -- vignetting, the fall-off of illumination towards the edges.

My original thinking was that particular lens aberration, from the on-set cameras to the extremely wide film formats, was the cause. However, the recent, Christopher Nolan helmed, "unrestored 2001" was noted to have eliminated most or all of this by going farther back to the original negative. (Yes, I have read the bickering over film generations.)

In any case, here is my test to demonstrate the effect and it's normalization:

This proof-of-concept was applied to luminance as a whole. Better, the normalization would be applied differently to individual R-G-B layers, as progressively darker areas show progressively stronger blue (this tinting is much less in the red and the green). Again, I would ask your "2 cents" about this, but I think more value is needed this time -- feel free to throw pocketfuls of coin.

I, for one, am a novice on all things technical. I see it. I hear it. But for the life of me, have no diagnostic to offer. Always learning more at HTF from the others upon this thread; adding expansions to my film library and a supreme joy to all my home viewings of that which is either digitally re-mastered or; in its truest definition; a restoration. Therefore, I am not able to add my 2 cents worth, but am endlessly thrilled with the ongoing advancements of these past few years that have now led up to this moment of the 4K/UHD release of "2001".

 

[Brian L]

I just saw a Tweet from Edgar Wright saying that Douglas Rain, the voice of HAL has passed.

https://www.cbc.ca/news/entertainment/douglas-rain-stratford-dead-1.4901400

 

[Mark-P]

Someone is going to have to start a list of large format titles as they make their way to 4K on home video. This is where 4K really shines. It can be inclusive of 70MM, Technirama, and VistaVision. Right now it’s a super short list. Just 2001 and Lawrence of Arabia.

 

[Charles Smith]

It’s a bit more of a shock than it might have been, hearing about Douglas Rain just at this time.

Talk about one for whom immortality seems particularly assured...

And he just happened to hit an oddly appropriate number (90)...

RIP

 

[OliverK]

Someone is going to have to start a list of large format titles as they make their way to 4K on home video. This is where 4K really shines. It can be inclusive of 70MM, Technirama, and VistaVision. Right now it’s a super short list. Just 2001 and Lawrence of Arabia.

There, you just did it - almost.

You can add 4 more movies that to my knowledge have been exclusively shot in large format:

Dunkirk (65 mm IMAX and 5 perf)
Savage Pampas (65 mm) German release only, better to buy the normal BD
Flying Clipper (65 mm) German release only, issues with black levels and contrast
Samsara (65 mm) so far streaming only as far as I know, have not checked Kaleidascape

Unfortunately I cannot recommend number two and three on this short list as the are really not up to the standard that we should come to expect and I would suggest to wait for number four to be released on UHD disc.

There are a few more Nolan movies and movies from other directors that have large format bits and pieces that make up less than half of the movie iirc, that list would be bigger but honestly to me they do not look like large format movies so I do not want to list them.

 

[CarlosMeat]

If I'm wrong isn't Bridge large format ?

 

[Jimbo64]

If I'm wrong isn't Bridge large format ?

35 mm CinemaScope

 

[Worth]

If I'm wrong isn't Bridge large format ?

Nope. 35mm anamorphic.

 

[CarlosMeat]

Thanks !

 

[B-ROLL]

Deleted by Bryan

 

[Worth]

The discussion wasn't about what was shot in large format, but about what's currently available in 4K that was originally shot in large format.

 

[DP 70]

Murder on the Orient Express (2017) was shot on 65mm is available on 4KUHD.
Although the 70mm prints, BD ,4KUHD the ratio is 2.39.

 

[OliverK]

Murder on the Orient Express (2017) was shot on 65mm is available on 4KUHD.
Although the 70mm prints, BD ,4KUHD the ratio is 2.39.

Yup, that was a big omission, I even watched it in 70mm but sadly found it to be rather forgettable as you can see

 

[dpippel]

Yes, the formatting of the book is odd - they were determined to keep a monolith shape even though it makes for awkward reading. But that’s true of the $600 and $1200 editions as well.

Frankly, I haven’t spent as much time with the book as I thought I would because the formatting makes it uncomfortable to read, and the text is a bit on the dry side. I’m glad I have it - but it’s not very practical.

I've spent some time with my copy, and while ALL of the complaints directed against it are valid IMO, it's still a stunning piece of work. The photos and info are such a joy for me to experience, as I'm a huge fan of the film, which I consider to be Kubrick's crowning achievement and definitely in my Top 10 of all time. I do wish that cooler heads had prevailed when designing this thing, but I'm very glad to have it all the same.

 

[Josh Steinberg]

That’s ultimately my takeaway as well. I had the first edition with all the extra books and I just finished the one labeled “script” only to discover that it wasn’t the draft of the script I’ve seen circulating for years. It was actually the story/novel first draft that Kubrick and Clarke wrote together to pitch the film, since they felt a conventional screenplay wouldn’t be the best selling tool for getting executives to approve it.

That was pretty amazing to read.