A Few Words About A few words about...™ Garden of Evil -- in Blu-ray (1 Viewer)

[Konstantinos]

I never mentioned what i think is right and what is wrong (for the record I think that the TT might be the most accurate to the original presentation of the film).
I just asked what anyone prefers despite what is original and what is not.

 

[OliverK]

I never mentioned what i think is right and what is wrong (for the record I think that the TT might be the most accurate to the original presentation of the film).
I just asked what anyone prefers despite what is original and what is not.

Oh I did not mean it that way, I just think that many here try to not discuss color and contrast that much anymore especially with certain Fox titles.

Clearly I would prefer the new version but I still think that it looks rather dark and contrasty overall. I would expect this to also be due to a faded negative where only so much information remains above black in darker scenes plus the color balance will be off to some degree due to differential fading. As Fox can only spend so much time and effort on a regular catalog title I am happy with the result given the circumstances.

 

[David_B_K]

This is a brand new restoration, done several years after the DVD.

Thanks, I have just ordered the new Blu-ray.

 

[haineshisway]

So now we know that the negative has faded? And we know this how? My point of view, as most of you can guess, is that this is a great transfer with gorgeous color and the previous transfer on DVD had sucky color. This is what the film looked like - I had a gorgeous IB 16mm print and those blue skies are just what they should be. But the Beaver, as is his waffling wont just had to mention teal, of which there is not a lick in this transfer. I await cries of blue wash, but a simple look at ANY scene in this transfer will tell you how silly that would be. Every color on the walls, the wood furniture, everything, everywhere, looks great and miles better than the DVD. Other than that it makes no sense to comment on it but because it makes no sense yet people still comment I'm commenting even though it makes no sense.

This is a seriously beautiful transfer and my grade, like Mr. Crawford's, is slightly higher than Mr. Harris's just because I'm so grateful to have these films looking incredible. But it must be pointed out that the sound is absolutely astonishing on this.

 

[OliverK]

So now we know that the negative has faded? How we know this how? My point of view, as most of you can guess, is that this is a great transfer with gorgeous color and the previous transfer on DVD had sucky color. This is what the film looked like - I had a gorgeous IB 16mm print and those blue skies are just what they should be. But the Beaver, as is his waffling wont just had to mention teal, of which there is not a lick in this transfer. I await cries of blue wash, but a simple look at ANY scene in this transfer will tell you how silly that would be. Every color on the walls, the wood furniture, everything, everywhere, looks great and miles better than the DVD. Other than that it makes no sense to comment on it but because it makes no sense yet people still comment I'm commenting even though it makes no sense.

This is a seriously beautiful transfer and my grade, like Mr. Crawford's, is slightly higher than Mr. Harris's just because I'm so grateful to have these films looking incredible. But it must be pointed out that the sound is absolutely astonishing on this.

Is there any early Fox scope production shot on Eastman stock with a non-faded negative? Never heard of one so far.
And who is we?

I also looked for somebody mentioning blue wash in this thread and teal but you seem to be the first poster to mention both?

I am looking forward to order this with some kind of sale as the TT titles end up costing a lot with the added shipping costs to Europe and added taxes and import duties. The previous DVD indeed was rather flat and mushy mess and it is best forgotten. For me watching the new TT disc will be like seeing the movie fo the first time.

 

[haineshisway]

When people begin discussing color timing preferences between an older DVD transfer and a new Blu-ray transfer and the title is a Fox title, one doesn't have to mention teal or blue wash because what else would they be talking about. The Beaver says it straight out - teal-leaning, his usual mantra on any Fox transfer. But it isn't "teal-leaning" and the timing on the new transfer is very accurate.

Never heard of one so far? Do you chat with the folks at Fox? I occasionally read here of faded negatives, but it clearly is not an across the board thing - there is fadING and there is fadED and there is stable - I believe the Fox stuff travels all three stops.

 

[OliverK]

When people begin discussing color timing preferences between an older DVD transfer and a new Blu-ray transfer and the title is a Fox title, one doesn't have to mention teal or blue wash because what else would they be talking about. The Beaver says it straight out - teal-leaning, his usual mantra on any Fox transfer. But it isn't "teal-leaning" and the timing on the new transfer is very accurate.

Never heard of one so far? Do you chat with the folks at Fox? I occasionally read here of faded negatives, but it clearly is not an across the board thing - there is fadING and there is fadED and there is stable - I believe the Fox stuff travels all three stops.

Ah, I did not read the Beaver review, they are usually not that astute in noticing even very obvious errors like the DNR in the Sidonis release so I mostly just have a look at their caps until they pop up on other sites.

No I do not chat with the folks at Fox it is not like there is a way to get through them just like that, I guess one would have to be a bit closer to them to get a chance to do that. I once asked about why the Blu-ray, the DVD and the 70mm print that I saw of Cleopatra looked so different from each other which was especially surprsing as both the print and the 4k master should have come from Fotokem. I never got an answer to this and I asked some other questions, too but no answers.

To be honest I never heard of the distinction between faded and fading, seems to be that by that definition a negative is never really faded but always continuing to fade to some degree until only blank film is left and I guess we can discard stable as in little fading for basically all of the productions shot on Eastman stock up until the introduction of LPP stock in the 80ies.

Let's say that we are talking about fading to a substantial degree that been mentioned for several of the early scope titles from that era while I never read anywhere about one of these titles not having any problems - did you hear from Fox about titles having that problem in such a small amount that it would not be considered an issue?

 

[Konstantinos]

When people begin discussing color timing preferences between an older DVD transfer and a new Blu-ray transfer

For the record, I mentioned the difference between older Bluray and newer Bluray.
Not DVD.

 

[Race Bannon]

To the naked eye this transfer looks beautiful in terms of color, and the soundtrack is presented wonderfully.

 

[haineshisway]

For the record, I mentioned the difference between older Bluray and newer Bluray.
Not DVD.

The older Blu Ray uses the DVD transfer, no?

 

[Robert Harris]

Ah, I did not read the Beaver review, they are usually not that astute in noticing even very obvious errors like the DNR in the Sidonis release so I mostly just have a look at their caps until they pop up on other sites.

No I do not chat with the folks at Fox it is not like there is a way to get through them just like that, I guess one would have to be a bit closer to them to get a chance to do that. I once asked about why the Blu-ray, the DVD and the 70mm print that I saw of Cleopatra looked so different from each other which was especially surprsing as both the print and the 4k master should have come from Fotokem. I never got an answer to this and I asked some other questions, too but no answers.

To be honest I never heard of the distinction between faded and fading, seems to be that by that definition a negative is never really faded but always continuing to fade to some degree until only blank film is left and I guess we can discard stable as in little fading for basically all of the productions shot on Eastman stock up until the introduction of LPP stock in the 80ies.

Let's say that we are talking about fading to a substantial degree that been mentioned for several of the early scope titles from that era while I never read anywhere about one of these titles not having any problems - did you hear from Fox about titles having that problem in such a small amount that it would not be considered an issue?

In many cases, using digital tools, a "fading" negative can be affected to answer reasonably, and from which quality data files can be completed.

A "faded" negative generally cannot be brought back without extreme, and expensive measures.

There are also types of fade, as well as chenical damage, from differential fade across or at one side of an image, fade due to oxidation at splices, and then our favorite, fade combined with chemical damage.

RAH

 

[OliverK]

In many cases, using digital tools, a "fading" negative can be affected to answer reasonably, and from which quality data files can be completed.

A "faded" negative generally cannot be brought back without extreme, and expensive measures.

There are also types of fade, as well as chenical damage, from differential fade across or at one side of an image, fade due to oxidation at splices, and then our favorite, fade combined with chemical damage.

RAH

Thanks, makes sense to have some kind of common sense terminology for this.

From what I read differential fade is a big issue for Can-Can so I wonder how that one will look when it comes to Blu-ray.

I again came near a few 50ies and 60ies 70mm prints lately and the vinegar smell coming from some of the rolls was depressing - they will probably be completely gone in 10 more years.

 

[Robert Harris]

Thanks, makes sense to have some kind of common sense terminology for this.

From what I read differential fade is a big issue for Can-Can so I wonder how that one will look when it comes to Blu-ray.

I again came near a few 50ies and 60ies 70mm prints lately and the vinegar smell coming from some of the rolls was depressing - they will probably be completely gone in 10 more years.

Can Can has some of the same problems as The Alamo.

MFL has lateral fade, fade at heads and tails of some shots, as well as mold on the masters.

The trick is to know how to deal with the different problems, as well as those that are multiples.

Some problems remain problems.

 

[OliverK]

Can Can has some of the same problems as The Alamo.

MFL has lateral fade, fade at heads and tails of some shots, as well as mold on the masters.

The trick is to know how to deal with the different problems, as well as those that are multiples.

Some problems remain problems.

I read about Can-Can having issues so I was surprised when some time ago Can-Can was in a Fox poll where users could vote for their favorites to be released. Obviously Can-Can is no John Wayne movie and did not make the cut but apparently Fox was prepared to release it.

I am very happy about the work from you and the people at CBS with My Fair Lady as from spot checking it this is now a very even and balanced experience with excellent colors, contrast and shadow detail.