Standard definition films issued on Blu-ray? (1 Viewer)

[Brent Reid]

All this talk lately of 2K DI films being issued on 4K UHD discs got me to thinking of feature films shot wholly on standard definition video that have been released as the main attraction on Blu-ray discs.

I'm not referring to older SD-shot music concerts recently released on BD, mostly in Germany, with lossless audio. Nor am I referring to the countless films or documentaries that use SD footage. Nor do I mean films shot in a higher definition format, such as 16/35mm or HD video, that have been deliberately degraded in post. I suppose any shot wholly on 8mm could be included though.

Anyhoo, these are what I have so far:

• Necromantik (Jörg Buttgereit, 1987) [1]
  
• Peter Benchley's The Beast (Jeff Bleckner, 1996) [2]
• 28 Days Later... (Danny Boyle, 2002) [3]
• Full Frontal (Steven Soderbergh, 2002)
  
• Open Water (Chris Kentis, 2003)
• Inland Empire (David Lynch, 2006)
  
• The Man from Earth (Richard Schenkman, 2007) [4]
  
• No (Pablo Larraín, 2012)

• Red Dwarf (TV series 1988– ) [5]

Can anyone think of any more? Incidentally, apparently the BFI had plans for a BD of Terence Davies' Of Time and the City (2008) until they found out the film was mastered on SD video.

[1] Shot on 8mm, except for the opening scene on degraded 16mm.
[2] Unconfirmed, but IMDb claims it was shot on 35mm and had a stereo soundtrack. The atrocious BD is 720p, 1.33:1 AR with mono Dolby Digital audio, no extras or subs and looks like a poor quality DVD. It's the worst official BD I've come across and is going for a fortune on Amazon.
[3] Shot fully in SD, but had the original downbeat ending scene replaced with a later, more positive 35mm-shot one when the original did poorly with test audiences.
[4] I have the US DVD and US-only BD; strangely, the latter is a single-layer vanilla disc with lossy 5.1 audio that loses the various DVD editions' additional 2.0 stereo track and plentiful extras. Even when viewed on my 106" screen there's no difference whatsoever in image quality; a completely pointless release. DVDCompare: DVD and BD comparisons.
[5] This unique example is worthy of inclusion. Its early series were shot and edited entirely on SD videotape, but are being reworked and remastered for BD release.

 

[Mark-P]

Hoop Dreams.

 

[Bill Waits]

In Germany, they released the Major League trilogy on Blu Ray.... In SD. They also did the same for Buck Rogers. If my memory serves correct, they put out an entire series of The King of Queens on Blu Ray, but Season 1 was in SD, with the rest in HD.

 

[Will Krupp]

Even when viewed on my 106" screen there's no difference whatsoever in image quality; a completely pointless release.

I believe the only advantage to SD material released on BD would be as a space saver, since much more material (obviously) can be stored on a single disc. This would make sense for older TV or movie series that only exist as SD masters. I can't understand any benefit in releasing a single title that way, however. What a waste of real estate. In addition, as we take into consideration the discussion we've been having on other threads regarding SD material on blu-ray discs necessarily being interlaced, there's every chance the SD blu-ray disc would look less good than the same title released to DVD.

 

[Worth]

The ending of 28 Days Later was shot on 35mm, so the blu-ray isn't 100% limited to SD.

 

[David Weicker]

I believe the only advantage to SD material released on BD would be as a space saver, since much more material (obviously) can be stored on a single disc. This would make sense for older TV or movie series that only exist as SD masters. I can't understand any benefit in releasing a single title that way, however. What a waste of real estate. In addition, as we take into consideration the discussion we've been having on other threads regarding SD material on blu-ray discs necessarily being interlaced, there's every chance the SD blu-ray disc would look less good than the same title released to DVD.

I've asked this before, but don't recall if it was answered.

For SD material on a Blu-Ray, is the Interlaced limitation a technical one? Or is it just because the BR spec says it should be.

If it is technical, does anyone know the science behind it?

If it is just to meet the requirements of the spec, couldn't it just be ignored (or the spec modified)?

 

[Brent Reid]

Thanks for the replies, guys.

Mark: Hoop Dreams isn't a feature film. True, though it began as a short, was ultimately expanded in length and attained theatrical release, it's still every inch a documentary.

Bill: Without checking, I assume that none of those titles was actually shot in SD, regardless of the state of their eventual transfers to BD?

Will: I agree on both counts; in actual fact I bought the BD before learning it was a dud and have since sold it. It's unique in my collection for being the only film where I've favoured the DVD over the same studio's uncut BD equivalent!

Worth: Good point. However, as the film was released originally shot and finished fully in SD, with the later 35mm-shot ending added after initial screenings, I felt it worthy of inclusion. I've edited my OP to clarify that.

 

[Lord Dalek]

The Blair Witch Project

 

[Mark-P]

Thanks for the replies, guys.
Mark: Hoop Dreams isn't a feature film. True, though it began as a short, was ultimately expanded in length and attained theatrical release, it's still every inch a documentary.

Sorry. I though when you said "Nor am I referring to the countless films or documentaries that use SD footage." you meant documentaries that were shot on film but included SD footage within them, rather than documentaries that were completely shot in SD like Hoop Dreams.

 

[Brent Reid]

Lord Dalek: The Blair Witch Project was naturally the very first film I thought of, but I'm under the impression it was shot on a combination of SDV and 16mm. If anyone can say definitively either way I'd be grateful.

Mark: I appreciated your suggestion, it's just that I was looking specifically for (scripted and acted) feature films, not documentaries at all. I imagine there must be loads of the latter and I was trying to be as unequivocal as possible... I obviously wasn't though and must try harder!

 

[Lord Dalek]

The black and white stuff is definitely 16mm however it appears the final edit was done entirely on sd tape before transfering to 35mm (Blair Witch was going to be a movie for cable TV so film wasn't a concern, especially when 70% of it is on hi-8).

 

[Brent Reid]

Which puts it firmly in the camp of having higher definition material "deliberately degraded in post". It certainly deserves an honourable mention though. So that leaves only three 'pure' SD-shot films on BD, although 28 Days' original SD ending is included in its BD/DVD extras.

 

[OliverK]

Inland Empire (2006) comes to mind, shot on 480i digital video camera I think. I refuse to watch low quality video if I don't have to and I think that David Lynch has totally lost it producing a movie like that so I cannot comment on how bad it looks except that screencaps seem to range from looking very bad to horrible:

http://www.blu-ray.com/movies/screenshot.php?movieid=10205&position=11
http://www.blu-ray.com/movies/screenshot.php?movieid=10205&position=15

These caps may only be 720p for non-members but I think it is easy to see that in this case it doesn't make much of a difference...

 

[Worth]

There's also Open Water, which was entirely shot on SD video.

 

[Lord Dalek]

Probably Timecode whenever that shows up on Blu-ray. And then of course there are the Dogme films like Festen and Idioterne.

 

[Brent Reid]

Inland Empire: check.
Open Water: Duh – I have it on the US twofer BD, alongside the sequel!
Both added.

There must be thousands of SD or 8mm-shot films in existence; I'm only asking about ones transferred to BD.

 

[Lord Dalek]

Well then how about Dancer in the Dark? That's on blu-ray in Germany and Japan.

 

[Brent Reid]

DitD is a definite possibly, though my eyes have just started to swim from looking at loads of manuals and tech specs for the cameras that were used, according to IMDb. I didn't reach any definite conclusion. In addition it seems that anamorphic lenses were used on said cameras for some scenes, though I'm unsure what percentage they make up of the total runtime. If anyone can weigh in with any knowledgeable insights it'd be helpful.

 

[Jesse Skeen]

I projected "Hoop Dreams" on 35mm when it was out- GOD did that look AWFUL! It would've been more practical to just set up a video projection system for that, rather than transferring it to 35mm- all 3 hours of it!

 

[Lord Dalek]

AFAIK von Trier hasn't shot a movie on film since Breaking the Waves.