The Civil War: A Film By Ken Burns (Blu-ray) Available for Preorder (1 Viewer)

[Rodney]

In just a few day's we will all find out if they have kept the original aspect ratio of 1.33:1 or cropped it for this new 25th anniversary release.

I am optimistic that it is going to be the original ratio, though that may be more wishful thinking than anything else.

 

[Adam Lenhardt]

In just a few day's we will all find out if they have kept the original aspect ratio of 1.33:1 or cropped it for this new 25th anniversary release.

I am optimistic that it is going to be the original ratio, though that may be more wishful thinking than anything else.

Based on the article RAH linked to in the Washington Post and some of the other coverage out there, it sounds like the situation is a lot more complicated than just OAR or cropped.


The logical choice for a Blu-Ray release would have been to scan the original 16mm final production and release it pillar boxed in the original 1.33:1 ratio. But instead, Ken Burns and his team went back to the original source material they used to make the film the first time and have basically reconstructed the documentary from those original elements. Presumably they're recomposing all of the shots for 1.77:1 during this process, but some footage is likely to be cropped while some photographs and the like are likely to be opened up so we see more.


The purist in me is still uneasy about this. But it's not a situation like HBO's The Wire, where the creative folks were trying to make the least compromised 16x9 version of a show where the shows were specifically composed for 4x3. With this, Burns is essentially making those original composition decisions all over again. The new version will be a different product than the original, but I'm not sure I'd call it compromised, either.


I look forward to next week's broadcasts to judge for myself.

 

[Adam Lenhardt]

I was very happy to be proven wrong about that, with the 1.43:1 ratio being much closer to the 1.33:1 original. Presumably they just opened the frame up slightly on the sides.

 

[Hollywoodaholic]

Has anyone heard of any plans to correct this release? I'm reading horrible reviews of the brightness levels and picture on Amazon and other sources. I was all set to pick up at Costco for $65, but I won't do that until I know more about any plans to fix the video image. Now I'm regretting trading my DVD version in anticipation of this BD release.

 

[Hollywoodaholic]

Again, can anyone comment about the picture quality on the new Blu-ray release of this. I'm reading bad comments about the brightness and contrast.

 

[Robert Crawford]

Again, can anyone comment about the picture quality on the new Blu-ray release of this. I'm reading bad comments about the brightness and contrast.

I haven't experience those issues with my BD set. Are there specific scenes/discs they're referring to?

 

[Mike Frezon]

I haven't experience those issues with my BD set. Are there specific scenes/discs they're referring to?

I considered pulling the trigger at the $69.99 price...but after reading the reviews on Amazon, I thought twice, too.


I usually don't put much stock in Amazon reviews, but these were all so similar and forceful that I decided to wait to hear from others around here. This is not a "gotta have" purchase for me. Burns' "Baseball" would be a different story, on the other hand.


Another common thread with the Amazon reviews is that they are not very specific (although one mentions the problem was evident for him in the first ten minutes. And another says it was evident during the first two discs). Here is a sampling:

Like other reviewers, I have found a major problem with the black levels on this release.

**Warning** Do not buy this set unless it is corrected!

Picture is as bright as the Sun, and at least for me and my family almost impossible to watch. I watched on my very "high end" blu-ray transport and the video on the documentary itself is horrible.

This is a major disgrace. PBS and Burns should be alerted to this disaster. I couldn't sit through more than 10 minutes and had to give up. I checked the 2nd disc and found the same problem.

I have the previous DVD release and can easily see the black levels are fine here.

I just finished watching the first two discs of The Civil War and I feel compelled to pen my amateur opinion. While I do not have the best hardware, nor any longer the sharpest eye, and my technical expertise is more a personal fantasy than an established fact, I have to say that I am sorely disappointed with what I saw.

Watching these first two discs was as if someone had turned the brightness on my television to its maximum. There were no blacks to be seen, not even in the vertical bars aside the viewing area. When the credits were rolling, it was hard to see where the image ended and the black bars began. Dark greys were the closest thing to black to be found.

The whites were so bright as to obscure fine detail. It made me want to squint my eyes.

The colors seemed bleached like laundry left to dry several times too often under a desert sun. I thought I was looking at a faded Polaroid print. It is an overexposed slide show that made me wish I could apply Adobe photoshop to it. At times the grain is so thick during the color scenery segments that you would think it was filmed in the middle of a swarm of gnats.

These discs should be recalled, incinerated, and replaced. I would really rather watch my dvd edition than this unnatural abomination. I have no idea how the blu-ray.com reviewer gave the video a 4 out of 5. I do not know what Ken Burns saw, if or when he approved of this travesty, but it could not have been what I just sat through.

Frustrating Blu-ray quality. The black levels on the episodes are gray and washes out the picture. On the extras, you can see how it is suppose to look with the correct black levels. However, on the episodes themselves, it is gray in color, and it makes the picture whiter than it is suppose to be, affecting the video.

I have compared to my DVD set from years ago and this Blu-ray is better. The sound is good, the picture has more information, and is a more clear picture. When I compare the snippets of the show in the extras, to what the episodes look like, you can clearly see something bad happened in the episodes with the black levels.

Two stars because of this glaring mistake, NOT the show itself. Why couldn't they get the black levels right, like they did on the extras and the short commercials.

I eagerly ordered the bluray restored edition, expecting crisp photos and beautiful graphics. What I received is a terrible disappointment, ugly and unwatchable. The images are too bright, the screen is washed out, the image does not fill the screen but has ugly gray sidebars left and right, the black levels and contrasts and color saturations are amateurish, the videos such as of Shelby Foote are grainy and annoying, and even the soundtrack seems weak and pale compared to the wonderful sound of the DVD set I bought a few years ago--even though it seems to be the same recording. I assumed that I got a defective set, so I looked here at the Amazon customer reviews and discovered that many other buyers are having the same disappointing experience. I can see that some of the photos seem to be more detailed, but it does not compensate for the unpleasant appearance of the screen. Don't buy it. Find the previous DVD set. I am sending mine back, something I almost never do.

There is a major problem with the new blu-ray set released today - 10/13/2015. All of the bonus features, the PBS logos and the sponsor videos look great, but the black level of all of the actual episodes is set to light gray.

See what I mean? They are oddly consistent in their tone...but not specific at all in saying where they see particular problems.

 

[Robert Crawford]

Mike,


I don't know, I watched the series when it rebroadcast in HD several weeks ago and the Blu-ray doesn't look any differently to me now. It looks great to me.

 

[Mike Frezon]

Huh.


I've still got the PBS Broadcast on my DVR. I'm halfway through episode 2 (taking my time, obviously!) and it looks okay to me.


It's odd that all these amazon reviews are saying the same thing.


Bad batch? That's doubtful. It's hard to figure.


But I trust your opinion more than any of those folks!

 

[Josh Steinberg]

I've still got it on my DVR and I'm at about the same place as Mike as well. The reviews cited above are surprising - but if the disc looks the same as the broadcast (and Robert is certainly high on the list of opinions I trust) then I don't see what the problem would be. What I've seen of the broadcast looked pretty great to me.

 

[Charles Smith]

I haven't yet watched my DVR'd episodes, and have no idea if I'll be compelled to buy it, so I have no horse in this race.


I do think, from glancing over the Amazon "reviews" that Mike posted, and from his summarizing them as being all so similar in complaint while also similar in being vague, that they might reflect more on that batch of "reviewers" than on the release. Just a feeling.

 

[Mike Frezon]

Like they were all at the same party and all drank from the same punch bowl laced with "lemming juice?"

 

[TravisR]

I have not seen the discs so I could be 100% wrong but I think it's possible that people are noticing what must be a marked difference between the DVD and the Blu-ray. The DVD has SD video that was edited on tape 25 years ago and the Blu-ray has gone back to the negative so there is going to be a significant difference. Since it's what they're used to, people are just assuming that the DVD is correct which makes the Blu-ray wrong.

 

[Charles Smith]

Could be that, too. We know all too well, right here, how easy it is to base one's impression on what one is already used to, right or wrong.

 

[Mike Frezon]

Plausible.

 

[Robert Crawford]

Okay, I just spent the last two hours sampling this BD set on two different displays and did so watching excerpts from the

six different discs. Both displays are plasmas with one being a Panasonic VT model and the other Samsung 8500 model. This series was never going to look pretty, even in 1080p, not with 150 year old photos and the interviews shot on 16mm several years ago. IMO, what I viewed again today isn't really different than what I observed back in September during its rebroadcast on PBS in 1080p. Sure, the black levels aren't what you normally get from a recently made film. However, do any of us have that expectation knowing the specifics of this filmed documentary? Hell, even the interviews shot on 16mm were conducted like 25 years ago.


Has there been any reviews from any review site yet?

 

[Mike Frezon]

Has there been any reviews from any review site yet?

The review at b-r.com doesn't note any anomalies. This sparse review at homeandmediamagazine.com also has no problems with the video quality.


But the all-important Crawdaddy review is what is going to make the difference for me...

 

[Hollywoodaholic]

That you all for the scrutiny and reports. This is a must-own for me having been a Maryland-born Civil War geek growing up, visiting the battlefields, and taking my son to Gettysburg. Mike has reprinted the Amazon reviews that gave me pause here, but the BD has to be the same PQ as was recently broadcast on PBS, and since no one is screaming about that, I will pick this up at Costco. Thanks again!

 

[smithbrad]

I made references to some of these reviews in another thread two weeks or so ago. From what i recall some were comparing it to the PBS broadcast and saw differences. There is a review on one site that gives it a favorable video rating based on keeping expectations realistic based on the source. The only note was "though some boosting of brightness is present". I remember also seeing some negative user discussion on the same site back then (blu-ray). All the talk reminded me of the Them! release. Now that others here have seen it with no issue, it is quite possible there maybe a slight brightness boost is on the blu-rays that is just being magnified by the calibration/settings (or lack there of) of some viewers TV set.

 

[Mike Frezon]

Also plausible, Brad.