What's new

special effects becoming noticeable (1 Viewer)

rayman1701

Second Unit
Joined
Jul 17, 2008
Messages
284
Location
Outside Chicago
Real Name
Ray Miller
Mark-P said:
Just what is 240 video? Analog video doesn't compute resolution in the same way that digital does. Digital is measured in pixels, like 1080, 720 or 480 and analog is measured in lines and the two don't correlate. I think the 240 you are referring to is the horizontal resolution (lines) of VHS, which is lower than TV broadcast resolution which was about 330 lines. Both had 525 scanning lines.
Thank you, this was confusing the hell out of me too.
 

jimmyjet

Senior HTF Member
Joined
Sep 11, 2009
Messages
3,052
Real Name
jimmy
haineshisway said:
Oh, dear. I got news for you - you could see exactly the same thing that you see on the Blu-ray on the DVD and the VHS and on broadcast TV - there is NO difference - yes the entire image is sharper - a good thing - but the shot or shots you're referencing have always looked that way. And then you admit you haven't even seen the thing since it was broadcast??? How do you even think you remember what you saw forty years ago or more in terms of one shot. Your MEMORY thinks it remembers but you don't really remember at all. And had you even a perfunctory knowledge of this episode or had you seen it in any subsequent years the thousands of times it's been shown, or seen it on VHS or DVD you would have made this same post - it has NOTHING to do with Blu-ray or 1080p. Your posts are beyond baffling, but somehow I just think you know that.

it appears my memory is better than you thought.

here is a link on vudu.

http://www.vudu.com/movies/#!content/261168/The-Twilight-Zone-The-Eye-of-the-Beholder

now look at between 33 seconds and 36 seconds, when the nurse walks in, face to view. at about 36 seconds, she walks behind the screen.

you cant see the face at all. it is almost totally blacked out.

on blu-ray, you can see it sharp and clear, just like any other face. IT IS THAT EVIDENT.

the original viewers weren't that dumb. and neither was rod serling. this is why it came as a big surprise. SERLING DID NOT SHOW THE FACES.

maybe you should actually get the blu-rays for yourself, before you make accusations ?

showing the faces as it is on blu-ray is a big, BIG error.

you have now been placed on my ignore list, as you are always arrogant and obnoxious when you post to me.
 

jimmyjet

Senior HTF Member
Joined
Sep 11, 2009
Messages
3,052
Real Name
jimmy
i watched the vudu several times again. when you see her straight on, the face is almost totally blacked out.

as you see her profile disappear behind the screen, you can spot her face a bit. but that is not noticeable to most viewers who would have simply been watching the show.

the average person would not notice that unless they were keenly looking for it, and had the pause button ready, etc.

but there are about 3 seconds where the shot is straight on at the nurse's face. and on blu-ray it looks clear like any other face.
 

Mark-P

Senior HTF Member
Joined
Sep 26, 2005
Messages
6,487
Location
Camas, WA
Real Name
Mark Probst
jimmyjet said:
hi mark,

yea, i was using 240 as a shortcut for regular tv in the 60s when tz aired. my mistake.

i am understanding you to say that tz had 330 lines, when originally aired ?
330 lines was the broadcast standard since the beginning of TV.
 

jimmyjet

Senior HTF Member
Joined
Sep 11, 2009
Messages
3,052
Real Name
jimmy
hi mark,

i love the great clarity that we get with better resolution. in tz 1080, the stuff is way clearer than i ever saw it over broadcast tv.

some posters seem to get on attack mode when anything about a technology is pointed out.

there is a problem with the blu-ray conversion of this particular episode. i dont see where that statement should get some purists all up in arms.

as i view the vudu though, i dont think it is just resolution ? but i am certainly no expert.

somehow or other, when the blu-ray was created on this episode, the "blackness" was removed.

because quite frankly, it does not seem likely to me, that increasing the resolution alone would take that black picture on vudu, and make it a quite clear picture on the blu-ray ?

the rest of the contrast seems normal enough - just that part of the face that once was blacked out, no longer has the blackness.

i hope image addresses this issue at some point. it is a great episode, and one that i hope first-time viewers get to see, as it was intended.
 

TravisR

Senior HTF Member
Joined
Nov 15, 2004
Messages
42,425
Location
The basement of the FBI building
jimmyjet said:
it appears my memory is better than you thought.

here is a link on vudu.

http://www.vudu.com/movies/#!content/261168/The-Twilight-Zone-The-Eye-of-the-Beholder

now look at between 33 seconds and 36 seconds, when the nurse walks in, face to view. at about 36 seconds, she walks behind the screen.

you cant see the face at all. it is almost totally blacked out.

on blu-ray, you can see it sharp and clear, just like any other face. IT IS THAT EVIDENT.

the original viewers weren't that dumb. and neither was rod serling. this is why it came as a big surprise. SERLING DID NOT SHOW THE FACES.
I could see what your talking about when the show was in syndication and on both of the DVDs (and I'll make a safe guess that you could see it on the VHS and laserdisc too). While I agree that Doug Heyes and George Clemens knew that a 1960 TV broadcast would hide their 'sins' to some degree, this isn't a problem that's new. Plus, I still don't think the gag is revealed to a new viewer because it's so early on in the episode that they don't know that the show is going out of its way to not show people's faces.
 

Jari K

Senior HTF Member
Joined
May 16, 2007
Messages
3,288
If companies/filmmakers want to remove e.g. wires, "bad effects" (what's that anyway?), reflections, mistakes etc, they should do that digitally. And they're doing that every now and then (e.g. no more reflection when Indy meets that cobra etc).If the companies don't want to do that then so be it. Seeing wires is 10 times better than seeing some shots in "lower resolution".If you can't watch older/cheaper stuff, there's always Pacific Rim, Hobbit etc.
 

stevenHa

Second Unit
Joined
Sep 12, 2005
Messages
367
Being a visual fx enthusiast, I'm on the fence with this. If you compare the matte paintings in the blu ray of North by Northwest with the previous dvd edition, there was more detail in the painted areas in the dvd because the images were lighter than they were meant to be ? Since the blu ray is overall darker, that has changed significantly (I'm guessing the director would not want it to be so noticeable to the audience). Overall I still prefer the artistry of the old style fx compared to CGI.
 

jimmyjet

Senior HTF Member
Joined
Sep 11, 2009
Messages
3,052
Real Name
jimmy
TravisR said:
I could see what your talking about when the show was in syndication and on both of the DVDs (and I'll make a safe guess that you could see it on the VHS and laserdisc too). While I agree that Doug Heyes and George Clemens knew that a 1960 TV broadcast would hide their 'sins' to some degree, this isn't a problem that's new. Plus, I still don't think the gag is revealed to a new viewer because it's so early on in the episode that they don't know that the show is going out of its way to not show people's faces.
hi travis,

i wasnt claiming that this was a new problem. i just said that it was the first time that i had actually witnessed a problem with a special effect, in that it changed the original intention of the show.

in this particular instance though, it actually changed the story-line. so in my opinion, it was a more serious breach than simply showing wires, etc.

as far as it being evident in other earlier releases, it is very possible. i have nothing to say about that, cuz i never saw them. as i already stated, i havent seen them since their original airing.

and while it is at least possible that some viewers, including myself, might have forgotten that the faces were revealed, many viewers would have seen it, and the knowledge of that would have gotten out.

gosh, isnt there some sort of technology available today that would be able to put the black back into the small area enough, such that the faces could not be seen ? i would think that would not be a big deal ?

and in doing so, save the original intent of the episode.
 

jimmyjet

Senior HTF Member
Joined
Sep 11, 2009
Messages
3,052
Real Name
jimmy
btw, someone made a comment about the viewers today being wise to tz, and would have known something was up, with the faces not being shown, with at least what i thought was an inference to the original viewers not being so adroit.

at least with me and my dad, nothing could be further from the truth. we watched the show every week, and had contests with each other in who could guess what the twist was gonna be.

some times we would get it. but it very often would have us changing our minds, or thinking the other person was right, and then thinking that we were right, etc.

in other words, serling was good at disguising his shows - a sign of a good writer.

so of course we all knew something was up when we did not see the faces. but it was a huge surprise for everyone that i knew when they did show the faces !!

in fact, the shows i recall the most are the ones that not only had good meanings, but really came in as a surprise. to serve man and the one about agnes moorehead and the spaceship - no one that i knew guessed what was happening on either of those shows.
 

smithbrad

Senior HTF Member
Joined
Aug 12, 2013
Messages
2,052
Real Name
Brad
jimmyjet said:
gosh, isnt there some sort of technology available today that would be able to put the black back into the small area enough, such that the faces could not be seen ? i would think that would not be a big deal ?

and in doing so, save the original intent of the episode.
Yes, the technology is obviously there to do it without a problem. The issue is identifying all such potential issues. In the case of maybe Star Trek where they have gone back to the original source and done time consuming remastering of print damage and special effects (sometimes frame by frame I believe) it might be easier to adjust for such things since they are already expending the time and energy to clean up everything else.

But for a smaller company like Image maybe not so much. It is definitely one of, if not, their top title. First would come identifying all the changes, then the decision on how to correct, and the process of making the change. This is not an inexpensive task to undertake and it comes down to making up the expense in sales.

Then you also open the door for other criticism on what was decided to change and how it was chosen to be done. Your point in all this is definitely valid, I just don't see it getting done in this case.
 

Douglas Monce

Senior HTF Member
Joined
Nov 16, 2006
Messages
5,511
Real Name
Douglas Monce
Radioman970 said:
There are several episodes of Lost in Space (even those crappy DVDs) where you can see the background propped up at an angle. Another good one, Gilligan's Island w/ backgrounds and lagoon that is (i believe) in a parking lot. lol All of this adds more charm to the show in my adulthood. As a young and stupid kid, I was fooled.
The lagoon in Gilligan's island is actually the same lagoon that was in MANY Republic Serials of the 30's and 40's. Giligan's Island filmed on the old Republic lot, and made extensive use of the "jungle" "lagoon" and "Cave" sets.

Doug
 

Douglas Monce

Senior HTF Member
Joined
Nov 16, 2006
Messages
5,511
Real Name
Douglas Monce
jimmyjet said:
hi mark,

yea, i was using 240 as a shortcut for regular tv in the 60s when tz aired. my mistake.

i am understanding you to say that tz had 330 lines, when originally aired ?
Analog TV, at least the NTSC variety, had a resolution of 640 X 480. That is 480 scan lines high, by 640 individual RGB phosphors wide. At least thats the way the tubes were built. Most TVs overscanned making the effective resolution somewhat less.

I think the 240 you are referring to was the resolution of VHS video tape which was about half the resolution of broadcast TV.

Doug
 

jimmyjet

Senior HTF Member
Joined
Sep 11, 2009
Messages
3,052
Real Name
jimmy
thanks brad,

well i wanted to send something to image, so that at least i know that they are aware.

i guess i am a bit of an optimist here - in that i think they will fix it.

i am still on season 2 - havent noticed anything else.

i dont complain about small stuff.

i guess some of you guys have never seen the original blacked out presentation, if all the media releases have shown the faces ?

that is a shame.

if in the slight chance that i get a reply from image, i will let you guys know.
 

Mark-P

Senior HTF Member
Joined
Sep 26, 2005
Messages
6,487
Location
Camas, WA
Real Name
Mark Probst
Douglas Monce said:
Analog TV, at least the NTSC variety, had a resolution of 640 X 480. That is 480 scan lines high, by 640 individual RGB phosphors wide. At least thats the way the tubes were built. Most TVs overscanned making the effective resolution somewhat less.

I think the 240 you are referring to was the resolution of VHS video tape which was about half the resolution of broadcast TV.

Doug
Doug your numbers don't compute. You are treating lines of resolution as if they were pixels. While it's true that NTSC's 525 scan lines only had approximately 480 which were visible, horizontal resolution was nowhere near 640 lines. It was about 330 lines for broadcast, ~ 240 for VHS and 425 for Laserdisc.
 

Radioman970

Senior HTF Member
Joined
Jul 22, 2006
Messages
8,364
Location
Could be anywhere
Real Name
James Perry
Douglas Monce said:
The lagoon in Gilligan's island is actually the same lagoon that was in MANY Republic Serials of the 30's and 40's. Giligan's Island filmed on the old Republic lot, and made extensive use of the "jungle" "lagoon" and "Cave" sets.

Doug
i wish they'd made more gilligans. Anyway, I had no idea they borrowed those sets. In B&W they still look great. Color, the lagoon actually does still look good.
 

jimmyjet

Senior HTF Member
Joined
Sep 11, 2009
Messages
3,052
Real Name
jimmy
in listening to some of the commentary from the extras on various tv shows - i am finding that there was a lot of "borrowing" going on.

i guess the studios made as much use out of things as they could !!
 

FoxyMulder

映画ファン
Senior HTF Member
Joined
Sep 14, 2009
Messages
5,385
Location
Scotland
Real Name
Malcolm
schan1269 said:
Oh yeah, if you are going to complain about noticeable special effects because of 1080P...

Don't bother watching the original King Kong.
There are effects which could not be seen in standard definition that need to be seen, for example you can now see clearly that Kong is holding a flower he has picked up, this is in the cave just before the fight scene with the snake creature, scratch removal meant it was not visible on the DVD edition, even if it was visible the resolution would have prevented you making it out very well, now you see it in all it's glory.

I don't get this argument, i think many things people complain about seeing were visible, perhaps to a lesser degree but still visible on the original cinematic showing, all depends if you were seeing a first rate print or watching a worn muddied one with out of focus projector but they were there.

Kong shot shown here, note the missing teeth that scratch removal took out on the DVD as well as the flower.

http://www.darkrealmfox.com/dvd_bluray_comparisons/king_kong/dvd-bluray%20comparison%20-%20King%20Kong%20-%2024.html
 

Radioman970

Senior HTF Member
Joined
Jul 22, 2006
Messages
8,364
Location
Could be anywhere
Real Name
James Perry
jimmyjet said:
in listening to some of the commentary from the extras on various tv shows - i am finding that there was a lot of "borrowing" going on.

i guess the studios made as much use out of things as they could !!
You know, I remember one that is a favorite that I actually knew of.

This is the movie BUG from the 70s. See if you can recognize the TV show kitchen... hee hee (it has been painted)

Bug-Hair3.jpg
 

FoxyMulder

映画ファン
Senior HTF Member
Joined
Sep 14, 2009
Messages
5,385
Location
Scotland
Real Name
Malcolm
Radioman970 said:
You know, I remember one that is a favorite that I actually knew of.

This is the movie BUG from the 70s. See if you can recognize the TV show kitchen... hee hee (it has been painted)

Bug-Hair3.jpg
The Brady Bunch, talking about Bug, i am wondering if they ever did a sequel to it as i recall seeing a film from the seventies showing bugs and a town catching fire, i just can't remember the film's name, maybe it wasn't a sequel but it always felt like one, maybe my memory is playing tricks on me.

I have always wondered how they did the cat scene in the film, it bothers me not knowing.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Latest Articles

Forum statistics

Threads
356,810
Messages
5,123,543
Members
144,184
Latest member
H-508
Recent bookmarks
0
Top