UHD Review A Few Words About A few words about...™ - The Man Who Shot Liberty Valance -- in 4k UHD (1 Viewer)

[titch]

I’m in agreement that the especially problematic releases should not go unreported.

But for those, I’d like to see a credit list of everyone who worked on the project and their responsibilities, as well as a concept of precisely who (on the corporate level) is making bone-headed decisions.

As I wrote on another thread, if I can see someone's name, such as David Mackenzie, or a company such as Silver Salt, on project credits, I can be reassured enough by their previous track history, to blind purchase anything with their names on it. Some publishers, such as Second Sight and Arrow Video, I can purchase from automatically, without worrying about the video/audio quality. They always provide comprehensive mastering and authoring credits on their titles.

 

[tenia]

No, it's more important to spotlight the bad releases than praise the good ones, IMO.

People assume 4Ks/BDs will look/sound good. It becomes more crucial to tell them when something goes wrong than to just confirm what they already assumed.

In theory, I agree with you : I prefer to know when things went wrong and know what to avoid, in part because we humans tend to respond more (and more instinctively) to bad stuff rather than good one (bad is bad, good in normal). In practice, and especially with BDs, most people still buying catalogue movies on BD are likely to know quality can vary from the (fortunately) few SD upscales to gorgeous brand new 4K/OCN restorations, with everything in-between from re-using obsolete DVD-era HD masters to quite OK DVD-era HD masters to sadly FUBARed new restorations to OK-ish new restorations. It thus still is useful to offer a confirmation, whichever direction it goes, of what's what. And shameful work definitely need to be shamed anyway.

But in practice, again, there's so much stuff being released, it's pretty much impossible to cover it all, so one has to prioritise anyway at some point, and since this'll turn into a zero-sum game at some point, if I have to choose, I prefer pushing forwards deserving stuff than criticizing sub-par or mediocre releases. Firstly because that prevents me having to deal with people who think I'm being unfair while I'm not, but also because every single sur-par or mediocre releases I go through pains me. It just pains me to see movies not being properly handled, whatever the reasons, whether it's because someone thought a heavily filtered 20yo HD master was enough for a BD or because they still don't know how to properly encode a BD in 2022 and end up outputting an encode so rubbish it's pointless to have a 4K restoration keeping as much high frequencies as it can since it's wiped out by the encode then.

I’m in agreement that the especially problematic releases should not go unreported. But for those, I’d like to see a credit list of everyone who worked on the project and their responsibilities, as well as a concept of precisely who (on the corporate level) is making bone-headed decisions. I’m referring to decisions like removing grain from the Disney animated classics.

Would this also concern whoever is handling the Fox Deluxe realed gradings ?

As I wrote on another thread, if I can see someone's name, such as David Mackenzie, or a company such as Silver Salt, on project credits, I can be reassured enough by their previous track history, to blind purchase anything with their names on it. Some publishers, such as Second Sight and Arrow Video, I can purchase from automatically, without worrying about the video/audio quality. They always provide comprehensive mastering and authoring credits on their titles.

I do like to have these tech details too, not just to reassure me of who worked on this and the project having been on good hands rather than debatable ones, but also it helps understanding who is yielding what kind of results. As written just above, I'd love to know who the Fox Deluxe projects have had in common. I'd also love to know who are outputting the rubbish encodes I talked about above and that plague several BD and UHD releases in France (from Studio Canal for instance).

 

[OliverK]

I would love to have a few specifics for each release, something like this:

scan / telecine and resolution
ip/OCN/fine grain/print
performed at company in location
cleanup / dust busting etc. done with xy software by
color grading by
grading based on IB Tech prints / notes etc.
HDR grade by
compression by
supervised / approved by director / DOP etc.
Dates for when certain steps of the process were performed

That would be fantastic and it would also help to keep expectations in check when for example it is known in advance that somebody used a degrained 3D master as the basis for the T2 UHD release or that the LOTR trilogy UHD release is based on ancient decades old masters.

On the other hand there would be little to no excuse for movies that have been freshly scanned in 4k only to look like To Catch A Thief or Grease.

 

[Robert Harris]

Another great review. I may buy a copy…

The Man Who Shot Liberty Valance - Paramount Presents (4K UHD Blu-ray Review)

4K Ultra-HD Blu-ray review for The Man Who Shot Liberty Valance - Paramount Presents. Available 5/17/2022.

whysoblu.com

 

[Chewbabka]

Another great review. I may buy a copy…

The Man Who Shot Liberty Valance - Paramount Presents (4K UHD Blu-ray Review)

4K Ultra-HD Blu-ray review for The Man Who Shot Liberty Valance - Paramount Presents. Available 5/17/2022.

whysoblu.com

I’ll take “crisp” and “spacious” over filmic any day!

 

[sbjork]

Another great review. I may buy a copy…

The Man Who Shot Liberty Valance - Paramount Presents (4K UHD Blu-ray Review)

4K Ultra-HD Blu-ray review for The Man Who Shot Liberty Valance - Paramount Presents. Available 5/17/2022.

whysoblu.com

Wait, what? "Gorgeous color saturation"?

Youse gotta be careful when you copy/paste from one of your own older reviews.

 

[AnthonyClarke]

Not only 'gorgeous color separation' but 'Black and white films have faired extremely well' --- fair's fair, but in this case, FARED well....

 

[ManW_TheUncool]

Another great review. I may buy a copy…

The Man Who Shot Liberty Valance - Paramount Presents (4K UHD Blu-ray Review)

4K Ultra-HD Blu-ray review for The Man Who Shot Liberty Valance - Paramount Presents. Available 5/17/2022.

whysoblu.com

I’ll take “crisp” and “spacious” over filmic any day!

Kinda ironic that review actually mentions "film" 24x in total (albeit inclusive of his brief bio) and "movie" just once (not including all the unrelated sidebar and website stuff), including this for conclusion:

"This is a must own for any film fan, I don’t think I need to be shouting out a recommendation for it. If you’re a film buff, you pre-ordered it the moment it went live."

That last bit may well be true for very many... until they realize what's actually being released and reconsider accordingly, if they are indeed film fans...

_Man_

 

[titch]

I would love to have a few specifics for each release, something like this:

scan / telecine and resolution
ip/OCN/fine grain/print
performed at company in location
cleanup / dust busting etc. done with xy software by
color grading by
grading based on IB Tech prints / notes etc.
HDR grade by
compression by
supervised / approved by director / DOP etc.
Dates for when certain steps of the process were performed

That would be fantastic and it would also help to keep expectations in check when for example it is known in advance that somebody used a degrained 3D master as the basis for the T2 UHD release or that the LOTR trilogy UHD release is based on ancient decades old masters.

On the other hand there would be little to no excuse for movies that have been freshly scanned in 4k only to look like To Catch A Thief or Grease.

I think the benchmark so far, is the restoration, scanning and mastering information provided on the Second Sight Dawn Of The Dead limited edition 4K UHD booklet. An example to follow.

 

[Keith Cobby]

I'm not sure a lot of technical information really helps (the less technical among us). I've often read it and then think, ok but why does it look so bad!

 

[OliverK]

I'm not sure a lot of technical information really helps (the less technical among us). I've often read it and then think, ok but why does it look so bad!

Obviously if that infomation would be on all existing discs many would still look bad but with that information we might be able to find out why that is the case and also see some patterns. On the other hand there are very good releases out there where we do not know anything about that release. A good example is King of Kings (1961) from Warner where I was always curious to find out what kind of work was done and which elements were used - it is just strange this was put out with zero fanfare when it was for a long time the second best looking large format release from Warner.

 

[FordPeckinpahLeone]

On another note, I have long wanted Shane in 4K. However, with Paramount’s apparent track record of not respecting film, I shudder. I think Criterion should do Shane, or some outlet that respects film and doesn’t want to make it “digital.”

 

[Colin Jacobson]

Wait, what? "Gorgeous color saturation"?

Youse gotta be careful when you copy/paste from one of your own older reviews.

I know that lesson well - too many times I've copied comments about quality from another of my reviews and forgotten to change the title of the movie mentioned!

I feel like a cheat a little when I do this... but I'm not taking content from another person, and dammit, there are only so many ways to describe picture/sound quality. If certain remarks apply to one movie, might as well reuse them for another!

To my credit, though, I don't believe I've ever referred to color quality for a black and white movie!

 

[Colin Jacobson]

But in practice, again, there's so much stuff being released, it's pretty much impossible to cover it all, so one has to prioritise anyway at some point

I just watch what I wanna watch. I sometimes review movies I don't especially desire to view because of their status, but usually I just choose what I write about based on what I feel like watching!

 

[sbjork]

I know that lesson well - too many times I've copied comments about quality from another of my reviews and forgotten to change the title of the movie mentioned!

I feel like a cheat a little when I do this... but I'm not taking content from another person, and dammit, there are only so many ways to describe picture/sound quality. If certain remarks apply to one movie, might as well reuse them for another!

To my credit, though, I don't believe I've ever referred to color quality for a black and white movie!

I usually don't copy audio/video comments, but I'm more than guilty of repeating some of my stock phrases anyway!

On the other hand, I do copy disc descriptions when they're similar, and from the same manufacturer. For instance, I'm working on an Umbrella "Sunburnt Screens" title right now, so I can copy the description from a previous "Sunburnt Screens" review that I did, and just change the movie title, number, rating classificaiton, and a few other specific details. There's no reason to try to build a new wheel there. But ye gods, am I ever paranoid that I'm going to slip up and forget to change something. Haven't done it yet, knock wood, but it's only a matter of time.

 

[Robert Harris]

On another note, I have long wanted Shane in 4K. However, with Paramount’s apparent track record of not respecting film, I shudder. I think Criterion should do Shane, or some outlet that respects film and doesn’t want to make it “digital.”

Paramount already has a quality master on Shane.

The problem with 3-strip is that re-combining the three b/w records at 4k reproduces three grain fields, which may need to slightly grain reduced (or softened) to properly reproduce a comfortable viewing experience.

Dye transfer prints were inherently soft, which is why the process worked, and also why the grain structures had an overall velvety appearance.

WB affects their grain, and it works fine in 4k.

It all comes down to how things are handled.

 

[Colin Jacobson]

I usually don't copy audio/video comments, but I'm more than guilty of repeating some of my stock phrases anyway!

Which is why I just cut/paste when I feel it makes sense.

I've written more than 9000 reviews since 1999. Maybe someone else could come up with 9000+ different ways to describe picture/sound quality, but I can't.

And if I'm just gonna use the same terms anyway, why not just copy prior comments from another review?

I don't cut/paste movie comments from one review to another - not unless it's literally the same movie, of course - so my remarks for each film are "original", though my own stock phrases infiltrate those as well.

But reusing PQ and SQ comments from old reviews makes like a little easier - as long as I remember to change the titles of the movies involved!

 

[ManW_TheUncool]

I know that lesson well - too many times I've copied comments about quality from another of my reviews and forgotten to change the title of the movie mentioned!

I feel like a cheat a little when I do this... but I'm not taking content from another person, and dammit, there are only so many ways to describe picture/sound quality. If certain remarks apply to one movie, might as well reuse them for another!

To my credit, though, I don't believe I've ever referred to color quality for a black and white movie!

Work smarter, not harder..., but sometimes, we work a little too smarter...

_Man_

 

[FordPeckinpahLeone]

Paramount already has a quality master on Shane.

The problem with 3-strip is that re-combining the three b/w records at 4k reproduces three grain fields, which may need to slightly grain reduced (or softened) to properly reproduce a comfortable viewing experience.

Dye transfer prints were inherently soft, which is why the process worked, and also why the grain structures had an overall velvety appearance.

WB affects their grain, and it works fine in 4k.

It all comes down to how things are handled.

Thanks Robert for the response. I do love the Shane Blu-ray and think Paramount/Warner Bros. did a good job with that transfer. I would like a 4K with that master, if they choose to put it out, appropriately formatted for 4K UHD of course. The cinematography by Loyal Griggs on that is some of the finest. And it seems Paramount has put quality stuff out, with the remastered Gladiator, and the Ten Commandments, that don't seem to go away from grain.

 

[Colin Jacobson]

Watched the uber-grainy "Beverly Hills Cop II" 4K and spent the whole time wondering if it came with real grain or fake grain!