A Few Words About A few words about...™ Bram Stoker's Dracula -- in BD (1 Viewer)

[Michel_Hafner]

No. Without access to the IP I can't say how close the BD is to the IP.

 

[Gabe D]

For me, the question is: Do we really know that the BD looks like the answer print? Or do we just know that some Sony or Zoetrope employees say that the BD looks like the answer print? If Mr. Harris or anyone else here can tell me that they have confirmed with their own eyes that the BD matches the answer print, then I will rest easy. Until then, though, I have trouble believing it, only because it's hard to believe that this is how this movie is supposed to look. It's easier for me to believe that some employees of Sony or Zoetrope might be mistaken.

 

[RobertR]

This seems to be the heart of the matter. There are some things one knows to be true simply by being told so (for example, a sportscaster telling you the score of the Super Bowl). With other things, however, personal knowledge of something and/or independent verification from other sources is needed. Some of us are thinking this may be a case of the latter situation.

 

[Jeff Cooper]

Can we rest easy now?

 

[Gabe D]

We can, but ONLY IF Mr. Harris is saying that based on his own observations, and not just on reassuring words from those involved with the production of this disc.

 

[RobertR]

Exactly.

 

[Douglas Monce]

Why would someone who has seen the answer print, and supervised the new version, lie about it?

Doug

 

[Stephen_J_H]

RAH is not a Sony shill, which is more than can be said for some others posting opinions on the Web. He's a true independent and calls 'em as he sees 'em. Not everyone agrees with him, but he has a greater knowledge of film and its characteristics than just about anyone on this forum. If he says it matches the answer print, I'm inclined to take his comments @ face value.

BTW, Dave, I take issue with Xylon's screencaps in terms of accuracy, particularly since they are wildly inconsistent. First, he's posting downsampled upconversions and BD caps, then he's posting full resolution BD and upconverted SD. Who's to say his caps are accurate, other than a subjective "yeah, that looks about right" ?

 

[RobertR]

I don't think anyone disagrees with you, provided we know that Mr. Harris has seen the answer print (ie has independent knowledge of it), and doesn't have to rely on what he's been told.

 

[Lee Scoggins]

I saw this on sale at Fry's for $9.99 tonight.

 

[Robert Harris]

First, and most important, I have no relationship to the Dracula transfer.

It was not my project. It did not need restoration.

There would have been no reason for me to screen the AP.

Further, even if my opinion was requested, it would have been a waste of effort when people that I personally trust implicitly, namely Mr. Crisp and Mr. Aubry are aware of the film and it's problems shot by shot -- and I am not.

These gentlemen do not lie.

Mr. Aubry reports to Mr. Coppola.

Mr. Crisp finds it important enough to bring in original cinematographers for his transfers to make them correct.

The work done by Mr. Aubry and Mr. Crisp is continuously superlative, meticulous and professional.

Their only desire is to make FFC's Dracula available to the public as it is meant to look -- in this case a video match as close as the limitations of the electronic form will permit, to the original.

I'm beginning to think that some people have way too much free time on their hands.

RAH

 

[Stephen_J_H]

I'm beginning to think you're right. Thanks, RAH.

 

[Brandon Conway]

Maybe we can finally put this issue to rest. Thank you Mr. Harris.

 

[Dave Mack]

Xylon's captures seem pretty consistant to everyone at AVS. Stephen, All his captures are the large ones, 1920X1080, the smaller ones posted were made smaller by me to make it easier to see the color differences.
You can see all the large ones here.

Another AVS poster confirms his caps here...

AVS Forum - View Single Post - Dracula comparison PIX

and ok, if this finally looks like the answer print, then the superimposed words were never meant to be seen? I (and dozens of others fans of this film) find that very hard to believe. And if it wasn't meant to be seen and crushing it into blackness is accurate, then, it looked better and was MUCH more effective in the incorrect VHS, (both FS and then WS copies) that I bought. On the 2 DVDs, on the Coppola approved LD... If ALL that time, EVERY version released was THAT wrong, shoot we should ask for a refund for all those defective versions!

And to anyone saying, "the words are clearly visible on MY BD" Fine, take a screencap. I have yet to see one confirming this.

 

[Cees Alons]

Dave,

Several people, who have their monitors/projectors calibrated slightly differently, state very clearly and recently (in this same thread) that they DO see the writing. Some recent posters question the quality (and consistency) of those screencaps on another forum.

Now simply put like this: if some people *do* see 'em, they're there, despite anyone else *not* seeing them.

New screencaps won't help very much, because they can be questioned as well, PC-monitors can be wrong, etc.
But the writing is (faintly) visible to some. So to answer your question: yes, it's meant to be seen, one would say.


Cees

 

[Dave Mack]

Hiya Cees! Happy Holidays!

There ARE ways to capture an image DIRECTLY off the BD so we see exactly what's on the disc. Dozens of people have stated they don't see the writing at all now. I think 2 or 3 claim they still can. I'd just like to see one direct RAW grab showing what I and dozens of others can no longer see even if we crank the brightness on our displays to Max (which we shouldn't HAVE to do...)
And that's aside from Dracula now bathed in GREEN moonlight, (which has no logical explanation, just seems like a revisionist change)

 

[Cees Alons]

Dave,

But then they have to be displayed on PC-monitors, etc.

Dave, we actually know the writing is on the BD, because some people see it.

Now, it's quite possible that they have their TVs all calibrated the wrong way, etc., or perhaps exactly right, but at least we know that it's there to be seen (under certain circumstances).
So it cannot be totally burried in black mud on the BD itself. That much we know for certain.

And Happy Holidays to you too!


Cees

 

[Dave Mack]

Hi Cees,

With all due respect, I will take my own opinion with my disc and equipment qnd the word of dozens of people and direct screengrab evidence over the 2 or 3 who "say" they see them anyday at least until someone provides visual evidence to the contrary. Interesting they the 2 or so people who swear they can see them can't provide evidence, can't even simply take a digital picture of their display like I did to back up their opinion. The burden in on them in this instance. I and others have stated our case lucidly and politely and have offered visual examples. Some of us have actually worked in the field and are not simply some ignorant, knowledgeless newb.

 

[Robert Harris]

deleted

 

[Douglas Monce]

Just because he is taking a direct screen capture from the BD doesn't mean that software is set up to accurately represent what is on that disc.

Also screen captures in any form are by definition inaccurate because they aren't moving. As I said the writing is very faint, and if it were just a still it may very well blind into the background. but its not a still its a moving image, and the writing is clearly there.

Doug