Indicator’s FOOTSTEPS IN THE FOG (1 Viewer)

[J. Casey]

Does anyone else have this? I’ve been very happy with their releases in general, but this one looks quite off to me. I know they can only use the transfers the licensors provide them with, but this looks little better than the DVD-R Columbia released a few years ago in terms of the color*. Was it filmed to look this way? The supplements are fantastic as usual, though. Overall glad to have it in HD.
*Although it carries the credit line “Color by Technicolor,” I know it wasn’t filmed in the “3-strip” process

Continue reading...

 

[Dick]

I have this. It looks pretty damn nice to my eyes. Ditto THE PUMPKIN EATER, THE BORDER and every film on the two Harryhausen box sets, all of which came in the mail two days ago. I think Indicator has taken the Criterion model and gone even further with it -- the special features are bursting at the seams, and the booklets (between 25-40 pages long) are gorgeous.

 

[J. Casey]

Ok, perhaps this is the film's intended look. I was expecting more vibrant color. Great film, anyway. Thanks for the input!

 

[Douglas R]

I didn’t have a problem with the color but the picture was rather soft at times. Excellent presentation by Indicator as always. Very entertaining film which for some reason seems to have been largely ignored over the years.

 

[Andrew Budgell]

I had no idea this was available. I just placed my order--thanks!

 

[haineshisway]

Ok, perhaps this is the film's intended look. I was expecting more vibrant color. Great film, anyway. Thanks for the input!

You are correct, the others are wrong. Sony has not restored this - it's an old master from a fading internegative. Pretty simple.

 

[J. Casey]

You are correct, the others are wrong. Sony has not restored this - it's an old master from a fading internegative. Pretty simple.

That's what I was afraid of.....skin tones look sick in interiors especially. Thanks for the input.

 

[RMajidi]

You are correct, the others are wrong.

I have this. It looks pretty damn nice to my eyes.

You were wrong, Rick! This does NOT look pretty damn nice to your eyes.

I didn’t have a problem with the color but the picture was rather soft at times.

Ditto you, Douglas: you DID have a problem with the colour, but just didn’t know it.


My copy arrived on Thursday. I’ll be viewing it soon and then checking in with Bruce to see whether I was right or wrong in how my eyes responded to it. (Do you have any idea how much it pained me to force myself to include an emoji for clarity’s sake?)

 

[haineshisway]

With color there is only right or wrong. If people think wrong looks fine, I suppose that's peachy keen. But someone has to point out (and it ain't just me) that the color on this disc is anything but fine or correct. Beyond that I cannot control what people find acceptable or not acceptable. And I don't need an emoji - but here's one anyway, just to keep up with you.

 

[moviefanatic1979]

Could someone, please, post a picture of the right Technicolor color compared to the wrong "Footsteps" color?

 

[haineshisway]

First of all, Technicolor is being misused here as Footsteps was printed by Technicolor not shot IN Technicolor.

 

[david hare]

THis was made several months after the last three strip feature in the UK, The Ladykillers. The new Indicator encode looks like it was was mastered from an Eastman recomb. It's very brown and gray.

 

[haineshisway]

THis was made several months after the last three strip feature in the UK, The Ladykillers. The new Indicator encode looks like it was was mastered from an Eastman recomb. It's very brown and gray.

Exactly. That's three of us.

 

[RMajidi]

That's what I was afraid of.....skin tones look sick in interiors especially. Thanks for the input.

Loved the film.

Agree with Jason that the skin tones in interior shots especially looked ashen (“sick”) ...and fluctuating. Then again, I was looking out for that after having read the comments here before watching.

However, my better half didn’t know about any of this, and she spontaneously asked at one point whether the colours looked “a bit weird”.

Glad to have bought this Blu, and if it gets a better master at some point, shall gladly upgrade, as I greatly enjoyed the movie.

 

[haineshisway]

So as it turns out, you agree with not only Jason but with the guy you castigated for telling you the color was not correct. That's so lovely of you. Oh, and

 

[RMajidi]

Actually, I was tickled that you would tell folk that they were “wrong” in expressing their purely subjective opinion. They hadn’t said “the colour is...” but rather “to my eyes” and ...”I didn’t have a problem”.

I also expressed my subjective opinion of the film after watching it, which as it happens agrees that the colour was lacking. Not saying I’m objectively right - simply that that’s how I saw it.

Have you seen this Blu by the way? You didn’t say so, but I’m presuming that you must have done.

 

[Dick]

Wow, there's an awful lot of sarcasm going on in this thread. This shouldn't be an us-versus-them discussion like our politics have become. In my post above I said it looked "pretty damned nice to my eyes," and it does. Not perfect, no. But opinions are personal and often even unique, and our eyes do not necessarily see the way those of others do for any number of reasons. I don't see any cause for people to be establishing a Hatfield v. McCoys-type of atmosphere in this or any other thread where so-and-so has this many proponents and the "others" have that many. I acknowledge without argument that there are more knowledgeable participants in this discussion than I when it comes to color stocks and prints and whatnot. I can only go by what I see myself, and what I perceive to be normal or natural to me. This also goes for the long-running teal vs. not teal disagreements in this forum. Frankly, I think there is no right or wrong here. I might be just slightly colorblind for one or more hues and don't even know it. Maybe we all are to varying degrees!

FOOTSTEPS IN THE DARK looks decent to me, and that is all that is important to me.

Oh...

 

[haineshisway]

Actually, I was tickled that you would tell folk that they were “wrong” in expressing their purely subjective opinion. They hadn’t said “the colour is...” but rather “to my eyes” and ...”I didn’t have a problem”.

I also expressed my subjective opinion of the film after watching it, which as it happens agrees that the colour was lacking. Not saying I’m objectively right - simply that that’s how I saw it.

Have you seen this Blu by the way? You didn’t say so, but I’m presuming that you must have done.

Gee, I don't know, what do you think? Think I'd be commenting based on - what exactly? Screen caps? As you know, I don't comment on screen caps.

 

[haineshisway]

Wow, there's an awful lot of sarcasm going on in this thread. This shouldn't be an us-versus-them discussion like our politics have become. In my post above I said it looked "pretty damned nice to my eyes," and it does. Not perfect, no. But opinions are personal and often even unique, and our eyes do not necessarily see the way those of others do for any number of reasons. I don't see any cause for people to be establishing a Hatfield v. McCoys-type of atmosphere in this or any other thread where so-and-so has this many proponents and the "others" have that many. I acknowledge without argument that there are more knowledgeable participants in this discussion than I when it comes to color stocks and prints and whatnot. I can only go by what I see myself, and what I perceive to be normal or natural to me. This also goes for the long-running teal vs. not teal disagreements in this forum. Frankly, I think there is no right or wrong here. I might be just slightly colorblind for one or more hues and don't even know it. Maybe we all are to varying degrees!

FOOTSTEPS IN THE DARK looks decent to me, and that is all that is important to me.

Oh...

But here was my simple point, as posted above: But someone has to point out (and it ain't just me) that the color on this disc is anything but fine or correct. Beyond that I cannot control what people find acceptable or not acceptable.

 

[RMajidi]

Gee, I don't know, what do you think? Think I'd be commenting based on - what exactly? Screen caps? As you know, I don't comment on screen caps.

What do I think?

Well, since you ask, I thought it might have been another case of you warning members away from a competitor’s master because Twilight Time might have rejected it. But if you say you’ve actually seen it with your own eyes (and your statement above sarcastically implies this, although doesn’t categorically state it), then that’s fine.

I value other folks’ opinions as well as yours on HTF, and would not wish for self-censorship to creep into the mix, with members holding back from expressing their subjective take lest their views be publicly slammed by haughty, self-appointed judgments such as ‘you’re right...they’re wrong...pretty simple’.