- Joined
- Jun 10, 2003
- Messages
- 26,382
- Real Name
- Josh Steinberg
I want to ask again a question from earlier.
I read an interview with Landis where he praised the previous Blu-ray release, and said that he almost didn't like how clear the new restoration looked - here's the relevant quote (added emphasis mine):
"I think the Blu-Ray of Werewolf looks very good, I was happy with it and I supervised that. But now they did a 6K scan of the original negative and it was a remarkable thing, it was so weird because it was not like looking at a movie, it was like looking through a window. I didn’t like it actually because the clarity and depth of field is such that you can count the blades of grass. It’s unbelievably crisp and what the most remarkable thing is that black is black. On film black is never black. Here, black is black and that is cool, and it was so clear it was weird."
Is there a chance that whatever is going on with the disc is not an accident, but was an intentional decision made by Landis so that the disc wasn't as clear as the scan of the OCN may have been?
I read an interview with Landis where he praised the previous Blu-ray release, and said that he almost didn't like how clear the new restoration looked - here's the relevant quote (added emphasis mine):
"I think the Blu-Ray of Werewolf looks very good, I was happy with it and I supervised that. But now they did a 6K scan of the original negative and it was a remarkable thing, it was so weird because it was not like looking at a movie, it was like looking through a window. I didn’t like it actually because the clarity and depth of field is such that you can count the blades of grass. It’s unbelievably crisp and what the most remarkable thing is that black is black. On film black is never black. Here, black is black and that is cool, and it was so clear it was weird."
Is there a chance that whatever is going on with the disc is not an accident, but was an intentional decision made by Landis so that the disc wasn't as clear as the scan of the OCN may have been?