Press Release Paramount Presents! Press Release: To Catch a Thief (1955) (4k UHD) (1 Viewer)

[Robert Crawford]

Enough with the "tit for tat" exchanges! It's not bringing anything of value to this thread.

What I would like to happen is for those that already have "To Catch a Thief" on 4K digital is to take another look at it and share your thoughts about this new 4K digital.

 

[tenia]

What I would like to happen is for those that already have "To Catch a Thief" on 4K digital is to take another look at it and share your thoughts about this new 4K digital.

Please, yes !

 

[Robert Harris]

A AR can be kept and the framing being very different anyway, and the difference between 1.78 and 1.85 is negligible, so it's indeed, in the end, a very limited issue in practice.

However, hat do you mean by "hardly ever been seen at 1.85" ? That this exact ratio isn't always respected in theaters ?

If that's so, and that is the supposed OAR, not respected it then doesn't mean the the irrespect has to keep on (especially for a 1.78 ratio that is a modern digital thing that bears no relevance for most catalogue movies). If anything, it'd be the opportunity to have it properly shown !

Perhaps I misspoke.

An aspect ratio is always the aspect ratio it appears to be on screen. But two things come into play with VVLA.

1. The format was designed for multiple ratios, although fot TCaT 1.85 is suggested.

2. An aspect ratio is simply a shape, and has absolutely nothing to do with the actual content within that shape.

 

[tenia]

Thanks for the detail with your 1st point, I think that's what I wasn't sure.
We agree on the second one.

 

[Robert Harris]

Thanks for the detail with your 1st point, I think that's what I wasn't sure.
We agree on the second one.

Many viewers don’t understand that actual picture content is more important that retaining a shape that was almost irrelevant to the image.

 

[tenia]

Ideally, I'd suppose both should be retained since geometrically, you either have both right or both wrong. If the AR is the right one but the content isn't, then either the picture can be zoomed in/out or geometrically distorded or not properly centered, or... And if the content is about fine but the AR isn't the right one, then it's probably cropped, or zoomed out, etc etc...

But yes, there is an overaching point about the AR in itself (1.66, 1.75, 1.78, 1.85, etc) while the correct AR can be maintained with a picture content that is absolutely wrong, which I agree is something more people should keep in mind.

 

[Glenn C.]

Enough with the "tit for tat" exchanges! It's not bringing anything of value to this thread.

What I would like to happen is for those that already have "To Catch a Thief" on 4K digital is to take another look at it and share your thoughts about this new 4K digital.

Understood but just to be clear, I wasn't even talking to that person when he quoted my post. Anyway, I'll drop it.

 

[Worth]

...What I would like to happen is for those that already have "To Catch a Thief" on 4K digital is to take another look at it and share your thoughts about this new 4K digital.

I had a closer look at it last night and I agree that it's much improved. The green day-for-night shots still look weird to me, but overall I'd say there's finally a version that's superior to the old blu-ray.

 

[AlexNH]

This disc is now the #1 best seller on amazon.

 

[Robert Crawford]

This disc is now the #1 best seller on amazon.

As I previously stated, if you wait too long, this 4K/UHD release will be difficult to purchase just like "Chinatown" and "Once Upon a Time in the West". Mark my words!

 

[Sultanofcinema]

Instead of s$@^^&*g on the title To Catch A Thief unseen, can we please wait until the actual 4k is in our hands and then comment. Chinatown was magnificent! I am proud to say that I preordered as I did with Once Upon A Time...In The West!

 

[Robert Crawford]

Instead of s$@^^&*g on the title To Catch A Thief unseen, can we please wait until the actual 4k is in our hands and then comment. Chinatown was magnificent! I am proud to say that I preordered as I did with Once Upon A Time...In The West!

People can do as they please, but I'm not waiting.

 

[Konstantinos]

I found some screenshots from the 4k digital file (from 2 years ago). What do you make of them? Do they resemble the latest blu-ray or the earliest?

 

[Robert Harris]

I found some screenshots from the 4k digital file (from 2 years ago). What do you make of them? Do they resemble the latest blu-ray or the earliest?

View attachment 227484

View attachment 227485

View attachment 227486

View attachment 227487

View attachment 227488View attachment 227489

Why would it matter?

 

[Konstantinos]

Why would it matter?

If they resemble the earlier blu-ray, we would have hope for the upcoming UHD of course.

 

[jayembee]

Have you ever seen a movie in 1.85? Depends on how the cameraman framed - but as always, someone has cherry picked a frame in a panning shot. In the end, who cares. If you've never seen the top of a head cropped at the top of a frame, then you've never seen a movie because it happens in scope, it happens in 1.85, 1.78, and Academy. What's next? The rule of feet? (For those who remember THAT bit of business)

Back in the day of Usenet newsgroups, during the endless arguments about letterboxing vs. "full screen", one person went on about how he preferred a "full screen" version of Blade Runner, describing a shot of Deckard flying about the city, and top of the letterboxed image on Criterion's LD cropped off the top of his head. I told him that if he watched the "full screen" Embassy release, he'd see that Deckard's head is still cropped off. It's just that one doesn't notice that when it's the top of the TV screen doing the cropping off.

 

[Robert Harris]

If they resemble the earlier blu-ray, we would have hope for the upcoming UHD of course.

It should resemble anything. Best to replicate a 35mm dye transfer reference print.

 

[Worth]

I found some screenshots from the 4k digital file (from 2 years ago). What do you make of them? Do they resemble the latest blu-ray or the earliest?

Looks like the most recent blu-ray to me.

 

[ManW_TheUncool]

I found some screenshots from the 4k digital file (from 2 years ago). What do you make of them? Do they resemble the latest blu-ray or the earliest?

View attachment 227484

View attachment 227485

View attachment 227486

View attachment 227487

View attachment 227488View attachment 227489

If they resemble the earlier blu-ray, we would have hope for the upcoming UHD of course.

Since you probably don't do digitals, especially for this case, you might've missed what others already said (and concluded), but that comparison really doesn't matter (anymore) because the current, updated 4K digital (at least on Apple/iTunes) is what matters (for any comparisons of this sort) going forward. Your screencaps are essentially outdated and irrelevant now -- and that's certainly one benefit of digital anyway (though that same quality of changeability could certainly be a double-edged sword of course... even specifically for this case for a while before).

_Man_

 

[gk7193]

I have the 2012 Blu-Ray (the first version of this film I ever saw), the 2020 Blu-Ray, and the post-2020 initial 4K digital release. I also just rented the newest version on iTunes yesterday to see how I thought it compared to those prior versions.

Even if it is historically inaccurate, I personally preferred the 2012 release's 1.78:1 framing for several little details that were included in frame and which appeared intentional (e.g., the very top of the Eiffel in the Travel Service window during opening credits, the flag atop the tower in far left background during the coin toss, the full stationery letterhead on Hughson's jewelry list, etc.) When I watch these scenes in the revised aspect ratio, the framing of these shots make them appear, in my opinion, somewhat less thoughtfully composed since they appear partially cut off. That said, however, if I had never seen the 2012 release, I probably wouldn't have given any of these a second thought. So maybe this is much ado about nothing?

The other thing is that the problematic colors of several closeups in the Sunbeam Alpine convertible appear, I would say, somewhat less than perfectly corrected color-wise compared to other scenes. The car color in the troublesome closeups still looks to me to be more of a grayish-blue and does not match the bright metallic blue body color that is present in most other shots of the car. I am guessing this might have something to do with the source materials for those scenes.

Overall this version of the movie appears to me to be much more vibrant and lively and sports a warmer overall palette than either the 2012 release (which I think pushed a bit green across the board) or the 2020 release ('nuff said) and the level of detail here looked pleasing. The only things to me making this version less than perfect were the framing/composition compared to the 2012 Blu-Ray and those convertible closeups. If you are untroubled by these, you will find this to be the best looking version of this film released to date.