What's new

OliverK

Senior HTF Member
Joined
Feb 1, 2000
Messages
5,813
We’re on very opposite sides of the coin here as to Paramount, as I see the work coming out of the studio continually gaining in quality, with some superb product.

Two things to keep in mind per studio releases. As I’m certain you understand, there are older masters with baked in problems, and newer image harvests, with all (or most) tools being used properly. In some cases, because of budgetary or other reasons, an older master may be massaged, and that final result after compression, authoring, etc, should not be considered as an indication of either the studio‘s desires or capabilities.

The other problem that can occur, and has affected my team’s work in a few situations, is having more than one voice leading a project. This may have come into play in the instant case — which is not a purely Paramount product.

I have recently been very pleasantly surprised with the second and third Harrison Ford / Jack Ryan movies I watched but this is not really helping me with this one.

So maybe it is just me but a movie that ranks very high on the list of best westerns of all time should imo warrant more scrutiny and even added effort in case previous work was not up to current standards.

In any case it is what it is for now and I will closely check if other rights holders come forward with releases that may or may not turn out to be better.
 

Robert Harris

Archivist
Reviewer
Senior HTF Member
Joined
Feb 8, 1999
Messages
18,710
Real Name
Robert Harris
I have recently been very pleasantly surprised with the second and third Harrison Ford / Jack Ryan movies I watched but this is not really helping me with this one.

So maybe it is just me but a movie that ranks very high on the list of best westerns of all time should imo warrant more scrutiny and even added effort in case previous work was not up to current standards.

In any case it is what it is for now and I will closely check if other rights holders come forward with releases that may or may not turn out to be better.
The door is always open toward perfection, but in this case it may not be possible to make everyone happy.

I fear that even if a perfectly rendered release arrived with virtually all elements intact, there would still be that vocal minority making note of a momentary lapse of a missing wing on a fly alighting on Mr. Strode’s nose that was impressed upon some viewer’s brain in 1969.
 

tenia

Stunt Coordinator
Joined
Oct 24, 2012
Messages
230
Location
France
Real Name
Rémy
I think you're forgetting one important thing. Most people that read and participate on this board are not looking at these home video releases strictly from your technical point of view. It comes down to how these home video releases look on their HT setups. I have zero problem with you discussing technical aspects of home video releases. However, I do take exception to you disregarding our membership's posted thoughts about this release in a condescending manner. You might not find any value to their thoughts, but I value all thoughts expressed on this forum including yours.
I'm sorry it comes out as condescending, which I'm not aiming to, as I also do value people's thought here. I otherwise wouldn't take so much time to try and articulate my point of view.

This being written, I don't it's condescending to point out possible blind spots when one watches a high-end presentation of a catalogue movie and comes back on a tech oriented board to give a feedback about how it looks and sounds. I myself learnt a lot about tech over the past 10-15 years, allowing me to cover some of those blind spots. I'm still learning. It's a learning curve, anyway, and when people told me back then "you missed this", "be careful about that because of how you're looking at it", all it did was pointing me directly towards my improvement opportunities. So when I remark things like these, it's only with such a "continuous improvement" idea in mind.
Let's just say there are issues, some deduct a lot of points for it and some don't.
Absolutely. And I'm perfectly OK with it, as not all people are disturbed by the same kind of limitations.

We’re on very opposite sides of the coin here as to Paramount, as I see the work coming out of the studio continually gaining in quality, with some superb product.
The issue remains, as someone told about earlier in the thread, their inconsistencies. They can give Coming to America, Mission Impossible or Scream perfectly fine UHDs, and then, they're vastly inconstent in their encodes (Deep Impact, 48 Hours, Primal Fear, The Firm, OUATItW) and/or will yield intrusively filtered presentation (To Catch A Thief, OUATItW, Grease, Hustle & Flow, Planes, Trains & Automobiles, Fatal Attraction).
 

OliverK

Senior HTF Member
Joined
Feb 1, 2000
Messages
5,813
Come on now! The technical stuff is constantly being discussed in this thread. Everyone has been able to discuss their thoughts and have done so on a number of occasions.

I just read about the fly on Mr. Strode's nose and had a very good laugh so I will be brief and hopefully positive here:

There was not supposed to be any implication that we / I cannot discuss technical stuff. You and the others are doing a great job here as moderators and I have never felt like technical stuff was not allowed or restricted nor was it supposed to be implied that I did.
 
Last edited:

Johannes S

Grip
Joined
May 13, 2021
Messages
15
Location
Germany
Real Name
Johannes
We’re on very opposite sides of the coin here as to Paramount, as I see the work coming out of the studio continually gaining in quality, with some superb product.

"The Tin Star" master which has been provided from Paramount to Arrow, e.g.

Absolutely superb!


As I’m certain you understand, there are older masters with baked in problems, and newer image harvests, with all (or most) tools being used properly. In some cases, because of budgetary or other reasons, an older master may be massaged, and that final result after compression, authoring, etc, should not be considered as an indication of either the studio‘s desires or capabilities.

Personally I rather enjoy an older master with a bit of dirt, mold, scratches and whatsoever, if not distracting too much, than a digitally butchered and grainless new 4k scan. But, as always in life, to each their own. ;-)
 

Robert Harris

Archivist
Reviewer
Senior HTF Member
Joined
Feb 8, 1999
Messages
18,710
Real Name
Robert Harris
"The Tin Star" master which has been provided from Paramount to Arrow, e.g.

Absolutely superb!




Personally I rather enjoy an older master with a bit of dirt, mold, scratches and whatsoever, if not distracting too much, than a digitally butchered and grainless new 4k scan. But, as always in life, to each their own. ;-)
My preference, when permitted, is to replicate the appearance of a properly projected 35mm print.

Before damage.
 
Last edited:

Alan Tully

Senior HTF Member
Joined
Feb 19, 2008
Messages
4,697
Location
London
Real Name
Alan
Personally I rather enjoy an older master with a bit of dirt, mold, scratches and whatsoever, if not distracting too much, than a digitally butchered and grainless new 4k scan. But, as always in life, to each their own. ;-)
Ha, not me! I spent a working life in a film lab & as a telecine colourist, & the enemy was marks & scratches & dirt on the negative (sparkle, as we called it), so now I'm cursed with a laser vision when it comes to all that, I can't help but notice it all. They can get rid of all of it without touching the film grain or making the picture look over processed, WAC do it (& Paramount's Paint Your Wagon looked pristine without any sign of picture dodginess).
 
Last edited:

Into The Archives

Stunt Coordinator
Joined
Sep 16, 2017
Messages
79
Real Name
Jayson
My preference, when permitted, is to replicate the appearance of a properly projected 35mm print.

Before damage.
So, NOT a banged-up 35mm IB print, with each section printed points off from the other, with scratches, splices, and motorboating in every other reel, because that’s how it originally looked to someone sitting in their parents’ 1966 Galaxie Country Squire at the Skyline Drive-in back in 1969. :P
 

Robert Harris

Archivist
Reviewer
Senior HTF Member
Joined
Feb 8, 1999
Messages
18,710
Real Name
Robert Harris
So, NOT a banged-up 35mm IB print, with each section printed points off from the other, with scratches, splices, and motorboating in every other reel, because that’s how it originally looked to someone sitting in their parents’ 1966 Galaxie Country Squire at the Skyline Drive-in back in 1969. :P
I’ve actually never experienced a drive-in. Apparently, I missed a great deal.
 

Johannes S

Grip
Joined
May 13, 2021
Messages
15
Location
Germany
Real Name
Johannes
My preference, when permitted, is to replicate the appearance of a properly projected 35mm print.

Before damage.

There is no question that this would be the optimum. ;-)

But, as you often point it out, sometimes it is just cost-prohibitive to restore every title to absolute perfection. Especially when there is no market potential to justify the effort.

Nevertheless, even a raw scan can be beautiful. Just look at the bonus feature of Criterion's Warner-licensed "High Sierra", the second (1949) adaptation of the novel by Raoul Walsh with Joel McCrea, "Colorado Territory". An unaltered raw scan of the OCN provided by the LoC.

With dirt, a couple of jump-cuts and other damage. But incredibly film-like. Still a beauty! ;-) Wouldn't want to know how the scan would have looked after running through a cascade of digital cleanup and de-graining tools, à la OUaTitW.

Admitted that some of the criticism here is complaining at high level.

But just to make it clear -in this wonderful forum- members hopefully will understand that disclosing deficiencies -even if they are based on personal subjective views- are not meant as provocation, but as an honest appreciation of the art of film by looking for technical excellence.

Without the over-use of digital tools, I am sure OUaTitW could have been a real 10/10...
 

Robert Harris

Archivist
Reviewer
Senior HTF Member
Joined
Feb 8, 1999
Messages
18,710
Real Name
Robert Harris
There is no question that this would be the optimum. ;-)

But, as you often point it out, sometimes it is just cost-prohibitive to restore every title to absolute perfection. Especially when there is no market potential to justify the effort.

Nevertheless, even a raw scan can be beautiful. Just look at the bonus feature of Criterion's Warner-licensed "High Sierra", the second (1949) adaptation of the novel by Raoul Walsh with Joel McCrea, "Colorado Territory". An unaltered raw scan of the OCN provided by the LoC.

With dirt, a couple of jump-cuts and other damage. But incredibly film-like. Still a beauty! ;-) Wouldn't want to know how the scan would have looked after running through a cascade of digital cleanup and de-graining tools, à la OUaTitW.

Admitted that some of the criticism here is complaining at high level.

But just to make it clear -in this wonderful forum- members hopefully will understand that disclosing deficiencies -even if they are based on personal subjective views- are not meant as provocation, but as an honest appreciation of the art of film by looking for technical excellence.

Without the over-use of digital tools, I am sure OUaTitW could have been a real 10/10...
Premiering today, only on HTF, is a dual rating for image. Hopefully, this will be helpful.
 

Kumbbl

Auditioning
Joined
Apr 29, 2020
Messages
4
Real Name
Klaus
Premiering today, only on HTF, is a dual rating for image. Hopefully, this will be helpful.
A very appreciated and true USP - especially the NSD mode - among all the myriads of imagery evaluators in Sherlock Homes magnifier-glasses mode ;-)
 

Robert Harris

Archivist
Reviewer
Senior HTF Member
Joined
Feb 8, 1999
Messages
18,710
Real Name
Robert Harris
Folks , do you know what I miss on Once Upon A Time...In The West and every film transferred to bluray/4k? Cue Marks.
I was thinking that yesterday, whilst viewing Furiosa. Cue marks were always my means of keeping track of time. It worked for all films except roadshow / mag productions.
 

Robert Crawford

Crawdaddy
Moderator
Patron
Senior HTF Member
Joined
Dec 9, 1998
Messages
68,475
Location
Michigan
Real Name
Robert
This morning, I watched my 4K/UHD again while spending a great deal of my viewing time concentrating on the audio and video presentations. On a scale of 1-5 with 5 being the best score, I would give the video presentation a 4.5 with great color and good detail. The 5.1 audio presentation was even more impressive for me with a grade of 5.
 

Robert Harris

Archivist
Reviewer
Senior HTF Member
Joined
Feb 8, 1999
Messages
18,710
Real Name
Robert Harris
How many times are licensees going to go back to the OCN well? If I owned the IP, I’d not permit another rescan w/o a great reason.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Sign up for our newsletter

and receive essential news, curated deals, and much more







You will only receive emails from us. We will never sell or distribute your email address to third party companies at any time.

Latest Articles

Forum statistics

Threads
357,603
Messages
5,141,659
Members
144,422
Latest member
williams456
Recent bookmarks
0
Top