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

[haineshisway]

Were any of the prints Technicolor dye sublimation prints? If so they wouldn't have faded.

There have never been any IB Technicolor 70mm prints ever. All 70 prints are Eastman stock - Technicolor did not use dye transfer for 70mm.

 

[DP 70]

Yes i have seen a lot of 70mm pink prints

 

[Worth]

I once saw 2001 in 35mm at a rep house and there was no black in the print - space was purple.

 

[PMF]

Yes i have seen a lot of 70mm pink prints

That comes as no surprise to me, because David Niven's portrayal of Sir Charles Litton was the best of the series.

 

[Jean-Pierre Gutzeit]

For comparisons, you may be interested in DVDBeaver's previous 2001 web-page (now overwritten and occupied by the newest 2018 UHD v 2011 region free Blu-ray comparison), saved for posterity by the Internet Archive - Wayback Machine:
https://web.archive.org/web/20100706182436/http://www.dvdbeaver.com:80/film/DVDCompare6/2001.htm

As fate would have it, here are captures of the 2001: A Space Odyssey Criterion Collection laserdisc (transfer by editor Martin Hunter with dailies sent to Kubrick, in England, who faxed back comments, requiring 6 runs with changes before his approval) for the scene of interest:

My "proof-of-concept" normalization of this was a few page back, to the "shock and awe" of all.

(My next post was to back-track UHD of it's reduction in contrast and luminance ... apparently hiding lens fall-off, which was reported to have been reduced/eliminated. But I wanted to this post to precede it. Be sure to see this caps-a-holic web-page for it's UHD - Blu - Blu comparisons.)

Thank you for the effort in compiling the data. I had looked into it more often in the past few years, when it became clear that from a dozen editions you now had to pick out the "most bearable" color timings "by the scenes". Because no one version has a consistent "line" in color timing, while - as Mr. Harris explained - the 70mm premiere prints were flawless, and we agree.
Because this impression most closely approximates the Blu ray of 2007, and this mainly concerns the final sequence of the film (hotel sequence), the current version from 2018 appears in an unfavorable light.

When we screened a faded 70mm print at a festival in May (after I rejected the newest 70mm Dup print from 2018), there was another opportunity to realize that since 1968, as a result of damages to the original negative, several inserts have been added as dup in the current OCN. One recognizes them in the newest Blu ray/UHD version (2018) at the standing Wetgate points, which permit the conclusion on typical optical Intermediates (about over Oxberry printers), if someone is interested.

On the previous page Mr. Harris refers to the black and white color separations, but he did not explain which specific scenes were replaced by MGM or Warner. (For his MY FAIR LADY in the 1994 restoration, the short shot in question is clearly documented.) Is that possible, please? Thank you very much. (The characteristic blue color fringes around image contours in the latest version are traced back to the common intermediate material from the beginning to the mid of the 60s, not to the separations masters)

Unfortunately, it has to be assumed that the "cooperation" between MGM Laboratories and the Technicolor Labs has resulted in subsequent direct prints of the original negative (years later for an Warner Archival Print and Archival print for the American Cinematheque and so on). Already the change of an original negative from one lab to another (like the "passing around a whore", as dan was described in industry jargon) should be avoided. A change to be accepted is then followed by the switch from contact printers at Metrocolor (Bell Howell Model C) to Optical Step-by-Step printers at Technicolor and the subsequent risk for notch / edge notches.

Too bad, that the Interpositiv, which was used for the Blu ray in 2007, has the illumination error on the image sides (greenish), especially since color saturation, contrast and color balance are the most convincing.

 

[Jeff Cooper]

This is starting to remind me of the Brahm Stoker's Dracula remastered blu-ray thread...

 

[Robert Harris]

Thank you for the effort in compiling the data. I had looked into it more often in the past few years, when it became clear that from a dozen editions you now had to pick out the "most bearable" color timings "by the scenes". Because no one version has a consistent "line" in color timing, while - as Mr. Harris explained - the 70mm premiere prints were flawless, and we agree.
Because this impression most closely approximates the Blu ray of 2007, and this mainly concerns the final sequence of the film (hotel sequence), the current version from 2018 appears in an unfavorable light.

When we screened a faded 70mm print at a festival in May (after I rejected the newest 70mm Dup print from 2018), there was another opportunity to realize that since 1968, as a result of damages to the original negative, several inserts have been added as dup in the current OCN. One recognizes them in the newest Blu ray/UHD version (2018) at the standing Wetgate points, which permit the conclusion on typical optical Intermediates (about over Oxberry printers), if someone is interested.

On the previous page Mr. Harris refers to the black and white color separations, but he did not explain which specific scenes were replaced by MGM or Warner. (For his MY FAIR LADY in the 1994 restoration, the short shot in question is clearly documented.) Is that possible, please? Thank you very much. (The characteristic blue color fringes around image contours in the latest version are traced back to the common intermediate material from the beginning to the mid of the 60s, not to the separations masters)

Unfortunately, it has to be assumed that the "cooperation" between MGM Laboratories and the Technicolor Labs has resulted in subsequent direct prints of the original negative (years later for an Warner Archival Print and Archival print for the American Cinematheque and so on). Already the change of an original negative from one lab to another (like the "passing around a whore", as dan was described in industry jargon) should be avoided. A change to be accepted is then followed by the switch from contact printers at Metrocolor (Bell Howell Model C) to Optical Step-by-Step printers at Technicolor and the subsequent risk for notch / edge notches.

Too bad, that the Interpositiv, which was used for the Blu ray in 2007, has the illumination error on the image sides (greenish), especially since color saturation, contrast and color balance are the most convincing.

There are dupes throughout the 2001 neg, the earliest dating to the initial release in 1968. There are also, two, and possibly three sets of masters, the earliest produced in the UK, and specifically processed to achieve black skies, which caused shrinkage.

All in all, with all of the various personalities and politics involved, I believe the final result looks quite good.

Could it be better?

Absolutely.

But not to any major degree that might be recognized by a general audience.

As to MFL, over 21 minutes came from b/w.

 

[CarlosMeat]

Robert , can you be so kind as to give us the places in 2001 where dups have been used ? The scene where the leopard attacks the ape-man is one I'm guessing.

 

[Robert Harris]

Robert , can you be so kind as to give us the places in 2001 where dups have been used ? The scene where the leopard attacks the ape-man is one I'm guessing.

I don't recall offhand, as they are interspersed throughout the film. The first to go back to masters during the earliest printing, was the shot of Mr. Lockwood jogging around the circumference of the craft, as the camera tracked back in front of him. It appears in the 4k to have slight halos, but not bad.

March 26, 1968

3, 5 and 6 shots later, there was replacement in January of 1981.

These four shots are all in reel 5A.

 

[alpy]

I really enjoyed this transfer, but I would have a question for Mr. Harris. Is it possible to determine if these types of halos are due to electronic interventions (edge enhancement) or are there other aberrations on the film's print? Fortunately, the problem is not present throughout the film.

Example https://caps-a-holic.com/c.php?a=2&x=718&y=272&d1=12517&d2=12509&s1=124359&s2=124251&l=0&i=4&go=1

 

[PMF]

Doesn't anyone just watch movies any more

I most definitely do.
Unfortunately, though, I can only watch the ones that actually materialize.

 

[Patrick McCart]

Finally picked up a UHD player today and immediately checked out 2001 again. I wasn't expecting as much of an improvement in detail and quality, but wow!

The biggest difference I notice is how razor sharp the stars appear to be.

 

[lark144]

Finally picked up a UHD player today and immediately checked out 2001 again. I wasn't expecting as much of an improvement in detail and quality, but wow!

The biggest difference I notice is how razor sharp the stars appear to be.

Do you have a UHD/4k screen?

 

[Patrick McCart]

Do you have a UHD/4k screen?

I've actually had a 4K display (60" Samsung LED) since 2016, but haven't been in a rush to get a new player between not enough titles I want. The majority of physical releases have been films I'm simply not interested in owning.

 

[lark144]

I've actually had a 4K display (60" Samsung LED) since 2016, but haven't been in a rush to get a new player between not enough titles I want. The majority of physical releases have been films I'm simply not interested in owning.

Thanks for the quick reply!

 

[Jean-Pierre Gutzeit]

Robert , can you be so kind as to give us the places in 2001 where dups have been used ? The scene where the leopard attacks the ape-man is one I'm guessing.

The originally planned dupes as inserts in the original negative are very numerous in "2001", perhaps about half of the movie? The reason for this is the combination of separately recorded shots through the use of so-called "masks" (such as used for the windows of the cockpits), to insert the background scene in the optical department of the laboratories. This is only possible about the production of other intermediates and the use of "intermediate materials". A final composited image is supposed to be "negative" and becomes a special part of the original camera negative (a so-called Dup insert in our language). A slight increase in grain and image turbulence is unavoidable, as evident in all STAR WARS productions (no 65mm, bur VistaVision composites and Backgrounds).
If these VIsual effects/dup inserts are re-printed once more für the last "massive" 35mm and 70mm serial prints of "2001" via intermediate materials, the loss is particularly strong. This also had to be bought in the 70mm-reissues since 2001 and now since 2018.
Other scenes existed as an original negative, such as the "hamster" spit of Frank Poole orbiting in the centrifuge, or the scene in which a circa 50-years old David Bowman with a space helmet looks through the door and from behind his alter ego of about 80 Years (with am original blue coat) has dinner at the table. Both scenes have been damaged quite early in the original negative (fortunately, Mr. Harris had an exact date ready) and some already exist in the 70mm premiere prints. In many of the very first prints (which sometimes made it to other countries) both scenes are still intact. The broken takes could have been wonderfully scanned today, even Warner would have taken this trouble. Since that did not happen, the original negative is lost at this point, one might believe. It is questionable whether it is worthwhile to scan both scenes from old faded 70mm prints and restore them in color (David Strohmeier has ambitiously attempted this with some Cinerama productions of which no negative was ever found).
Nevertheless, I am surprised why the director did not let the scene shot again or insert from his surplus takes. For the 70mm-Todd-AO-effect one expects films "as fromout one piece" (MY FAIR LADY, AROUND THE WORLD, FALL OF THE ROMAN EMPIRE for example).
In his 1968 interview, Mr Kubrick commented on the creation of the visual effects, he wanted to avoid traveling mattes and work almost exclusively without loss through separations. The film, however, sees the opposite. The visual work on separations would have led to serious image disturbances and divorced.

Because of the blue halos, a forent on another platform may be on the trail of the phenomenon, assuming, as I do, a peculiarity of the material. He refers it to developed negatives from the photographic technology. With regard to "2001" I can not attribute these impairments to the original negative material, but to early intermediate materials between 1960 us find 1965. Also, older materials in copying works even years later (in this case the spring of 1968) application. The Kodak materials of this early period were reluctantly produced for a full feature film to make serial prints, but only for faders or title backgrounds because of these blue fringes/halos. By the late 1960s, Kodak had corrected this fault. The same can be seen in the Dup transfer, which is based on the Blu ray by GIANTS, because the original negative is considered damaged (and George Stevens preferred exclusively original prints).

Although many scenes from the latest "2001" version are worth looking at, the overall impression remains inconclusive, rather than waste. Regardless of material problems regarding their state of preservation, the color timing is additionally confused. Cold-blue the scene, when "12 months later" the Discovery draws through the picture, again after the pause of the film. The original color of the Discovery was silvery! It also seems to me that drawings have been lost in the radar bowl, for example, which were still recognizable in the first run copies. Bad deep blue the moon bus, which glides along the craters: he was always gray-white and the crater landscape gray! Far too bright the scene in which the astronauts enter the crater Tycho. too bright and colorless also the "Dawn of the Man" sequence, in which the blue sky was massively filtered out? Also this scene never looked like this. The summit then the hotel scene at the end, dark "thunderstorm", with black instead of blue coat of Bowmann with 80 and with fluctuating color timing and in the end the brownish star child.

It's bad enough because Warner does not care about documentation and bonus materials. Regarding the documentation of their Digital Restorations the Universal is exemplary, exemplary on their modified Oxberry scanner.

At Warner (and closely related to the high-quality film lab in Burbank for years), does there seem to be family and friendly "relationships" between all known parties that led to this inefficient restoration? All well-known individuals, however, had already performed brilliantly in earlier restorations. Name the Blu-ray titles HOW THE WEST WAS WON, BARRY LYNDON, SHINING, DOCTOR ZHIVAGO (with slight halos again, but wonderful color timing). Astonished...

2001: A SPACE ODYSSEY should have been better entrusted to the other restorers (-> Blu ray editions) of THE TEN COMMANMENTS, MY FAIR LADY, SPARTACUS, VERTIGO, THE NIGHT OF THE GENERALS, THE BRIDGE ON THE RIVER KWAI, BRAM STOKERS DRACULA or JAWS.


Warner: restore it again!

 

[CarlosMeat]

I don't recall offhand, as they are interspersed throughout the film. The first to go back to masters during the earliest printing, was the shot of Mr. Lockwood jogging around the circumference of the craft, as the camera tracked back in front of him. It appears in the 4k to have slight halos, but not bad.

March 26, 1968

3, 5 and 6 shots later, there was replacement in January of 1981.

These four shots are all in reel 5A.

Thanks ! I was hoping, since I personally can't recognize what is and isn't a dupe but instead only infer from the appearance, that it would be very educational for me too look at those that are and get an idea of what that means to the overall image quality.

 

[haineshisway]

Since I have not quite committed to 4K I'd ordered just the Blu-ray of this - I know the date keeps moving and all, but I just got mine.

 

[Josh Steinberg]

I suspect you'll be very happy with it, Bruce. I'm not set up for 4K yet, so I've only been able to watch the Blu-ray version, but it's a huge improvement over the old disc.

 

[CarlosMeat]

I've now watched it through three times since getting it on 10/26. It is a big deal seeing things they have cleaned up including the reflective tape used in the sky during the Dawn of Man is not visible and the threads lifting Dr Floyd's meal tray are now clearly visible. The 21/2 second added at the fade point where Dr. Smyslov has been chatting with Dr. Floyd I think looks good although on the Blu ray forum people are saying it warrants a replacement disc.