A Few Words About A few words about...™ Citizen Kane -- in Blu-ray (1 Viewer)

[Robert Harris]

The old Metrocolor Labs was the only one that always timed the color of every shot. Now it seems that, if there's any timing done at all, it's set on autopilot at the beginning of the film or TV show and just allowed to run.
It's a mess.

Why would you presume this? Totally untrue.

RAH

 

[DarthYotsuya]

The cameras used to be almost irrelevant, other than the quality of the movements inside. A film camera is basically just a light tight box. The important items are the lens and the film. A digital camera is a different animal all together, and in that case the camera is enormously important to the quality of the image in total.
HD cameras actually date back to the early 1970s when the Japanese demonstrated a 1125 line system called MUSE.
Doug

While not technically accurate, I think of the lens and filters as part of the camera. My point was that there is a lot that goes into film making to get the image on the film and it is just as important as what you do with the film after it has been exposed. More so in many cases.
One of the fun things about watching deleted scenes and behind the scenes/making of documentaries is seeing what some of the untouched footage looks like. Some shots look radically different, other times, you see that they got the effect they wanted in camera.

 

[Richard--W]

I agree with your frustration over color timing. I'm pretty much tired of that desaturated, filtered or otherwise chemically altered look. It works for some films or scenes (Private Ryan/Gladiator) but, as happens with fads, it's been overdone and wearing a bit thin.

I'm not not talking about desaturation, or trying to emulate old sepia photos (two techniques I thoroughly dislike, but that's a different matter), but merely not bothering or seeming to care that everything in the frame is some shade of green or yellow instead of something resembling a naturalistic range of color.

There is more than chemical desaturation going on in Saving Private Ryan and Gladiator. There is also the dulling and dimming of a digital intermediate. There is extreme digital manipulation of color and gamma. The texture of the source media is so completely altered it no longer resembles the way human beings see -- within the context of the film, or in the audience.
Want to see an example of desaturation that works? works as in telling the story? Study Conrad Hall's photography in The Professionals (1966), Hell In the Pacific (1967), Butch Cassidy and the Sundance Kid (1969), and especially Tell Them Willie Boy Is Here (1969). He shot a lot of early morning light and golden hour light and then manipulated exposure and timing in the lab to bring the rich tones of dye-transfer color down to an earthy pallette that human beings recognize as natural.

The last paragraph in the 'Portraying History' section of the Wiki article describes Spielberg's desire and Kaminski's efforts to replicate the look of color film from cameras of the period. Horror of horrors (like watching a beautilful car being demolished in a movie), they first stripped the camera lenses of their protective coating, then bleach-bypassed the negative to desaturate it even further. It doesn't say it here, but I believe the process used was a variation called ENR (after the initials of the man who 'developed' the system for Vittorio Storaro).

Then anyone who's seen John Ford's "Battle of Midway" or William Wyler's "Memphis Belle" documentaries, or the color footage shot by George Stevens in newly-liberated Europe knows that Spielberg and Kaminski got it 100% wrong as to what footage from that period really looks like, printed from 16mm Kodachrome originals onto Technicolor release prints.

While I don't doubt Spielberg and Kaminski said that, I wonder why they said it. They are brilliant, and they know the approach they took would not lead to such a result. They also know it is not the camera but the raw stock and the lab processes, the lenses and the lighting conditions that produced the color and the newsreel "look." Maybe it was something to say to get the gullible film critics talking nonsense. The joke is on the reporter who reported it. I think Spielberg and Kaminski were after something very different, a kind of hyper-real texture, which they certainly achieved.
Life was in color in 1944. The soldiers saw in color just as they see in color now. But nobody then or now sees the kind desaturated hyper-real texture that Saving Private Ryan displays. That quality is for the benefit of the film's contemporary audience and not a representation of the 1940s.
If Spielberg and Kaminski really wanted to "replicate the look of color film from cameras of the period" they could have tried replicating the materials and conditions under which newsreel photographers shot. Meaning the graininess of 16mm instead of 35mm film. Meaning no artificial light. They would have to shoot Saving Private Ryan in natural available light. Not even a reflector to bounce light into the dark areas of the frame. As it is, there is a lot of artificial light in Saving Private Ryan. They could also take the lens turrett off the old cameras and mount it on their Arriflex or Panaflex or whatever they used. This turrett would have three different fixed focal lengths, a wide, a medium, and a telephoto lens. These lenses were ground and polished rough compared to the fine lenses of today. The photochemistry from the 1940s can not be duplicated today, so the filmmakers are stuck with a current formulation. Regardless of which formulation they load in the camera, they would get an image that resembles this:

Nothing like Saving Private Ryan, is it? The captures are from:

I think your statement is an overly harsh and over simplified view. For one thing, isn't color timing a very film based necessity. I don't believe it has been required in TV for many years. Everything is shot digitally and airs digitally. This really is a conversation to have with the camera makers. What we are seeing is exactly what the camera captured.

Actually, the reverse is true.
Color timing is as vital in digital capture as it is in photochemstry.
But color timing is not the only timing, and not the only thing going on.
It is accomplished by different means in digital capture.
A digital camera is a computer. It has to be programmed. A vast range of tools for image manipulation are built into digital cameras that come into play before, during, and after capture. Every aspect of the captured image can be manipulated ad infinitum. A digital camera plugs into a tall rack of digital support devices, each with a vast array of functions and options. There is no baseline. It never really sees what the human eye sees not even at default settings. You can play with it all week and never reach the end of choices for a seven-seconds shot. A digital camera is like advanced physics. In comparison, photochemistry is basic math. Add, subtract and divide off the top of your head all the way up to 50. Even when making allowances for how different formulations respond to light, a film camera captures what the human eye sees in the viewfinder.
For every complicated digital solution, there is a simple photochemical solution that achieves a better and more natural result.

 

[montrealfilmguy]

Holy Jeepers !
How OLD is Ashley Judd ?????

 

[Garysb]

Anyone know what's different about the BB version?
http://www.bestbuy.com/site/Citizen+Kane%3A+70th+Anniversary+-+Blu-ray+Disc/3158361.p?id=2267726&skuId=3158361&st=Citizen%20Kane%20blu&lp=2&cp=1
Besides it appearing to be in the book format WB does, anyways.

Not exactly a bargain but the Best Buy exclusive digibook has the movie plus the documentary, "The Battle Over Citizen Kane." Comes with 48 pages of Film History, photos and more per the sticker on the cover. It does not have the TV movie , RKO 281 which was in the previous SD release of Citizen Kane and in the Limited set available elsewhere. Priced like a Criterion, list price is $39.99, regular Best Buy price is $34.99 and it is currently on sale for $29.99. Perhaps it will be a Black Friday special. Still cheaper than the limited edition available everywhere else.

 

[DarthYotsuya]

For every complicated digital solution, there is a simple photochemical solution that achieves a better and more natural result.

That is certainly a valid opinion, but not one that I share. I find that digital image manipulation allows many things that a photochemical process could never match. This is a very subjective conversation and no one is right, there are only differing opinions.

 

[Hollowbrook Drive-In]

While not technically accurate, I think of the lens and filters as part of the camera. My point was that there is a lot that goes into film making to get the image on the film and it is just as important as what you do with the film after it has been exposed. More so in many cases.

The camera is not irrelevant. There are many ways that the camera affects what goes onto the film and affects the quality of what comes after. I know of several movies that were filmed with panty-hose over the lens to give it a soft look.

Lenses and filters and pantyhose aren't the camera. As for the last, whether it's gels or Vaseline or the finest Victoria's Secret has to offer, it's its own layer of "creative" tinkering (that really ought to be done in post production. Compromising camera negative with an effect whose charm may wear off between the time the footage was shot and when the negative goes to answer-print is insane. Futz with it all you want in post, but leave the negative pristine). The same goes for filters (anyone who's ever blanched at Joshua Logan's ghastly "creative" misuse of filters on SOUTH PACIFIC knows what I mean). And lenses shouldn't affect color, apart from coatings meant to reduce chromatic aberration.

The old Metrocolor Labs was the only one that always timed the color of every shot. Now it seems that, if there's any timing done at all, it's set on autopilot at the beginning of the film or TV show and just allowed to run.
It's a mess.
Why would you presume this? Totally untrue.
RAH

Because someone I know who worked at Metrocolor told me so.

 

[Robert Harris]

Because someone I know who worked at Metrocolor told me so.

Metro was a superb lab, and I had great experiences with them. But color timing, whether at MGM, deluxe or Technicolor is shot by shot. There are certain presumptions made regarding a cut negative, such as cut-backs. If nothing is changing on your neg, and you're merely going back and forth from one shot to another A-B-A-B-A-B-C-A-B-A-D-B-A-C, for example, one might correctly presume that the lites for each of those shots would continue from cut to cut. One test print, and you know.

Alternatively, if one is working from daily lites, which even MGM could not keep standardized, they will keep you in the ballpark. Other than that, grading is grading, and while you can not time every shot, you're then going to go through a whole lot of test prints.

RAH

 

[Vincent_P]

There is more than chemical desaturation going on in Saving Private Ryan and Gladiator. There is also the dulling and dimming of a digital intermediate. There is extreme digital manipulation of color and gamma. The texture of the source media is so completely altered it no longer resembles the way human beings see -- within the context of the film, or in the audience...

Neither of those films underwent a Digital Intermediate.
Vincent

 

[PatrickDA]

Getting back to "Citizen Kane," I thought the transfer was fantastic. It had the perfect amount of film grain. I only wish I could see it on a really large screen, but my 22" and 36" HDTV's will have to due for now. Excellent job by Warner Bros. Home Video. I think it's worth picking up the Best Buy and Amazon sets. Of course, I got the Amazon set when it was only $39.99 with "Abersons" included.
"Citizen Kane" IS the best film ever made. THE END!

 

[Moe Dickstein]

Just got this and watching it - is it just me or is there something odd happening at 1:29:20? It seemed like the shot of the bulb at the opera (the second time we see the opening night, from Susan's POV) is frozen for several frames. It looked like some sort of digital glitch.
I rewound it several times to be sure it wasnt just a one off glitch, and it repeated. Is this organic to the film or is it an issue with the disc, or just with my disc...

 

[Douglas Monce]

There is more than chemical desaturation going on in Saving Private Ryan and Gladiator. There is also the dulling and dimming of a digital intermediate. There is extreme digital manipulation of color and gamma. The texture of the source media is so completely altered it no longer resembles the way human beings see -- within the context of the film, or in the audience.

Saving Private Ryan did not use a digital intermediary. Color timing was done completely as a photo chemical process.
Doug

 

[Douglas Monce]

While not technically accurate, I think of the lens and filters as part of the camera. My point was that there is a lot that goes into film making to get the image on the film and it is just as important as what you do with the film after it has been exposed. More so in many cases.
One of the fun things about watching deleted scenes and behind the scenes/making of documentaries is seeing what some of the untouched footage looks like. Some shots look radically different, other times, you see that they got the effect they wanted in camera.

The camera is the box, the lens is the lens. Together they are a system. Of course the lens choices and film stock are critical to the way the film looks, but the box is the box. This is why Mitchell cameras that were built in the 30s were still being used as late as the 80s, but they weren't still using the lenses made in the 30s.
Doug

 

[Douglas Monce]

While not technically accurate, I think of the lens and filters as part of the camera. My point was that there is a lot that goes into film making to get the image on the film and it is just as important as what you do with the film after it has been exposed. More so in many cases.

The camera is not irrelevant. There are many ways that the camera affects what goes onto the film and affects the quality of what comes after. I know of several movies that were filmed with panty-hose over the lens to give it a soft look.

Lenses and filters and pantyhose aren't the camera. As for the last, whether it's gels or Vaseline or the finest Victoria's Secret has to offer, it's its own layer of "creative" tinkering (that really ought to be done in post production. Compromising camera negative with an effect whose charm may wear off between the time the footage was shot and when the negative goes to answer-print is insane. Futz with it all you want in post, but leave the negative pristine). The same goes for filters (anyone who's ever blanched at Joshua Logan's ghastly "creative" misuse of filters on SOUTH PACIFIC knows what I mean). And lenses shouldn't affect color, apart from coatings meant to reduce chromatic aberration.

The old Metrocolor Labs was the only one that always timed the color of every shot. Now it seems that, if there's any timing done at all, it's set on autopilot at the beginning of the film or TV show and just allowed to run.
It's a mess.
Why would you presume this? Totally untrue.
RAH

Because someone I know who worked at Metrocolor told me so.

You'd be surprised how many of your favorite films used filters of one type or another on the camera for at least part of the shooting.
Doug

 

[Richard--W]

There is more than chemical desaturation going on in Saving Private Ryan and Gladiator. There is also the dulling and dimming of a digital intermediate. There is extreme digital manipulation of color and gamma. The texture of the source media is so completely altered it no longer resembles the way human beings see -- within the context of the film, or in the audience.

Saving Private Ryan did not use a digital intermediary. Color timing was done completely as a photo chemical process.
Doug

Neither of those films underwent a Digital Intermediate.
Vincent

Then the dull. dim and desaturated image I describe above was arrived at photochemically, and the dimming and dulling of a digital intermediate still holds true for those films that go through one. Revenge of the Sith, Iron Man and Iron Man 2, Avatar, and the remake of True Grit, for starters. I haven't watched Saving Private Ryan in a few years, but I recall thinking some of the weather was digitally composed and digitally layered in. In Gladiator, we are treated to digitally composed mud, blood and dirt being kicked up during the combat scenes that doesn't quite match the texture of the film.
I see none of the above in Citizen Kane, which I've just now started watching on the Bravia. This is what cinema is all about.

 

[Patrick Mason]

While having Citizen Kane on Blu-ray is an undeniable pleasure, I can't help feeling it is overshadowed by the long overdue release of Ambersons on DVD. I respectfully disagree with Mr. Harris that this disc should be avoided. This surely is a transfer that could be improved, but it is a revalation for me compared to the dismal presentations that preceded it. I truly feel like I have seen this film for the first time.
That said, I completely agree that an unremarkable DVD-only retailer exclusive "bonus" disc is inappropriate treatment for such a landmark American film.
Ah, well. There is at long last a satisfying way to experience Orson Welles' film, which is more than can be said for too much of his filmography.

 

[Steven_M Grimes]

I think that while the presentation is far from definitive, this is probably the best that AMBERSON's has looked on home video. It is certainly much better than the Criterion laserdisc and is definitely very watchable.
I will gladly buy AMBERSON's again when it is released on Blu-Ray.

 

[BIANCO2NERO]

Hello there,
Just to clarify (probably way after anyone cares to know the answer), the BBC owns outright the TV rights to the RKO library in the UK (like Italian state broadcaster RAI co-owns the rights in Italy). These were sold off separately and are not under a licence with Warner or anyone else. This is significant because it means that Warners cannot distribute their home video versions to us in Europe. Time Warner has US rights and some other territories but they are not global (Universal has UK home video rights to the library for instance). As for the BBC's marvellous documentaries, they are not available commercially though chunks are easy to obtain illegally on YouTube and the like.

 

[Jonathan Perregaux]

I just got my Blu-Ray and the packaging comes mighty close to giving away the ending of the picture.
If you've never seen this film before, try not to look too hard at the outside of the brown booklet containing the lobby pictures because BLAMMO!

 

[David Weicker]

I just got my Blu-Ray and the packaging comes mighty close to giving away the ending of the picture.
If you've never seen this film before, try not to look too hard at the outside of the brown booklet containing the lobby pictures because BLAMMO!

It can't be worse than the original Planet Of The Apes dvd. Both the cover and the disc menus contained the iconic final image. That was probably the worst example of showing what shouldn't be shown. (until they release the Bruce Willis Toe-Tag edition of another famous film)
David