The Good, the Bad and the Ugly (4k Remastered Blu-ray) Single Available for Preorder (5 Viewers)

[Dr Griffin]

I've noticed something strange on the remastered GBU single disc (USA) BD edition, starting at 2:56:38. Immediately after Tuco says: "..dirty son of a b****!" Most of the ground to the left of "Blondie" appears green, and the ground on his right is more off a light tan. As he continues to ride away to the right, the green color seems to be following behind him, changing the light tan surface to green.


Has anyone else noticed this, and is there an explanation why this happens? Filters perhaps?

I looked at this and it almost looks like a passing cloud effect, with a cloud moving into the sunny area on the right. I'm not saying that is what's going on, but it reminds me of that. It is a wide area of ground, but for whatever reason the left side of the frame is darker than the right. There also looks to be more grassy area on the left moving to more dirt on the right.

Also, The mono tracks on the first Man With No Name Trilogy and the later stand-alone release with the new master sound different, not just from the fact that the Trilogy version is mono 2.0 and the remaster is mono 1.0. There is less bass in the remaster's mono 1.0 track. I don't have the older DVD to compare, but it's interesting that someone has said the newest 1.0 also sounds different from the DVD mono track.

 

[Dale MA]

Also, when I said original mono, I of course forgot about the reinstated scenes which have "reconstructed" audio. So not quite an "original" mono track, but more original than the 5.1 track!

 

[haineshisway]

Everywhere I've looked everyone swears the 1.0 mono is the original and not a mix down of the stereo. They SWEAR it and offer up many examples. If I find this is not the case, well...

 

[OliverK]

Everywhere I've looked everyone swears the 1.0 mono is the original and not a mix down of the stereo. They SWEAR it and offer up many examples. If I find this is not the case, well...

Maybe there were really different production runs of discs with the mono soundtrack? First mixed down mono and later the correct mono? In any case this should be easier but it is hard to trust a studio when they start out with only a 5.1 remix and without the original mono,


It would be so much better if we started out with one sound track on each release that within the technical capabilities of the format replicates the original soundmix.

 

[RickardL]

Everywhere I've looked everyone swears the 1.0 mono is the original and not a mix down of the stereo. They SWEAR it and offer up many examples. If I find this is not the case, well...

Looking at the timeline, the UK single release came about the same time as the UK box and the US box so it makes sense

that they all contain the downmixed 1.0 track whereas the single US release came 4 months later, now with the original 1.0 track.

US Single - Oct 7, 2014
US Box - Jun 03, 2014
UK Box - Jun 02, 2014
UK Single - Jun 02, 2014


The specs from blu-ray.com for the UK and US single are very similar which confused me but they are different...


UK:
Video
Codec: MPEG-4 AVC (23.16 Mbps)
Resolution: 1080p
Aspect ratio: 2.35:1
Original aspect ratio: 2.35:1

Audio
English: DTS-HD Master Audio 5.1 (48kHz, 24-bit)
English: Dolby Digital Mono
Spanish: Dolby Digital 5.1
French: DTS 5.1
German: DTS-HD Master Audio Mono
Portuguese: Dolby Digital 5.1

Subtitles
English SDH, French, Spanish, Portuguese, German, Danish, Dutch, Finnish, Norwegian, Swedish


US:
Video
Codec: MPEG-4 AVC (23.16 Mbps)
Resolution: 1080p
Aspect ratio: 2.35:1
Original aspect ratio: 2.35:1

Audio
English: DTS-HD Master Audio 5.1 (48kHz, 24-bit)
English: Dolby Digital Mono (Original)
Spanish: Dolby Digital 5.1 (448 kbps)
French: DTS 5.1
German: DTS-HD Master Audio Mono
Portuguese: Dolby Digital 5.1

Subtitles
English SDH, French, Spanish, Portuguese, German, Danish, Dutch, Finnish, Norwegian, Swedish

 

[MoroderDejaVu]

The new 4k restored Blu-ray is very close to original IB Technicolor prints.

 

[OliverK]

The new 4k restored Blu-ray is very close to original IB Technicolor prints.

I would like to see a scan of one of the closeups against the previously blue sky that is now a very different color, like this one:
http://caps-a-holic.com/c.php?go=1&a=0&d1=4091&d2=4088&s1=38021&s2=37973&i=14&l=0

 

[haineshisway]

I would like to see a scan of one of the closeups against the previously blue sky that is now a very different color, like this one:
http://caps-a-holic.com/c.php?go=1&a=0&d1=4091&d2=4088&s1=38021&s2=37973&i=14&l=0

A very different color than what? A previous home video release. You have a frame off an IB print and a frame from the new Blu-ray - they're just about identical, which is what I said when this first came out - I looked at my old print and it was pretty close in color timing. But everyone is much more comfy comparing it to previous home video releases. I've also seen side by side comparisons with the Blu-ray and someone who's been working with some 35mm tech prints - very close.

 

[OliverK]

A very different color than what? A previous home video release. You have a frame off an IB print and a frame from the new Blu-ray - they're just about identical, which is what I said when this first came out - I looked at my old print and it was pretty close in color timing. But everyone is much more comfy comparing it to previous home video releases. I've also seen side by side comparisons with the Blu-ray and someone who's been working with some 35mm tech prints - very close.

Of course a previous home video release - this is precisely stated on the site that I linked to, very few of us have prints at our disposal.

The most glaring difference to me was the sky that was more or less blue on previous editions and it is turquoise now so I would like to see how the print compares.

 

[haineshisway]

I've told you - it's basically the same color and it ain't turquoise - it's just not quite the same blue of the home video releases, but it's absolutely blue, and if it's not blue how you're viewing it, then you should adjust your color settings because it's blue, not turquoise, on my screen and matches fairly accurately what's on the tech prints.

 

[OliverK]

I've told you - it's basically the same color and it ain't turquoise - it's just not quite the same blue of the home video releases, but it's absolutely blue, and if it's not blue how you're viewing it, then you should adjust your color settings because it's blue, not turquoise, on my screen and matches fairly accurately what's on the tech prints.

My setup has been rather extensively calibrated so I would prefer not to adjust any colors on it.

You must have a very special calibration if it makes the sky in this scene:
http://caps-a-holic.com/c.php?go=1&a=0&d1=4091&d2=4088&s1=38009&s2=37961&i=2&l=0

look like the sky here which is one of the scenes where the sky looks especially weird:
http://caps-a-holic.com/c.php?go=1&a=0&d1=4091&d2=4088&s1=38012&s2=37964&i=5&l=0

To be clear I am talking about the remastered version from the UK, unfortunately I could not find proper standalone caps.

In any case, the scene with Blondie and the gun to his head should be easy to find. I would very much like to see a scan of the print for one of those frames.

 

[haineshisway]

I can't keep beating around the bush, sorry. You've seen a frame of a tech print right here and the same frame from the Blu-ray. Now you want some other scene. Then you'll want some other scene. I've seen an IB print (I had the person I sold it to run it for me) right after the Blu-ray came out and I gave my impressions then, which I know you read. Now others have come in with more evidence which supports what I said. And I've told you I've recently seen side-by-side clips from a tech print and the Blu-ray and they are extremely close in color. You are simply taking the position that because a previous home video release had different color that that color must be correct. It wasn't then and it isn't now. However, we're all free to believe whatever we want

And I understand what those caps look like - and that's the comparison danger - your eye plays tricks - on the screen when watching the actual transfer, there is NOTHING turquoise about it and numerous people have said the same thing. I will not play the caps game because you cannot win.

 

[OliverK]

I can't keep beating around the bush, sorry. You've seen a frame of a tech print right here and the same frame from the Blu-ray. Now you want some other scene. Then you'll want some other scene. I've seen an IB print (I had the person I sold it to run it for me) right after the Blu-ray came out and I gave my impressions then, which I know you read. Now others have come in with more evidence which supports what I said. And I've told you I've recently seen side-by-side clips from a tech print and the Blu-ray and they are extremely close in color. You are simply taking the position that because a previous home video release had different color that that color must be correct. It wasn't then and it isn't now. However, we're all free to believe whatever we want

And I understand what those caps look like - and that's the comparison danger - your eye plays tricks - on the screen when watching the actual transfer, there is NOTHING turquoise about it and numerous people have said the same thing. I will not play the caps game because you cannot win.

It is really funny that a cap of a Blu-ray is considered kind of "inadmissable" by you and a scan of an IBtech print, which is much harder to do correctly, next to a cutout of a screencap is evidence

In any case I asked for one other frame of the print and not for an extended discussion so I will just wait now and see if MoroderDejaVu will have that specific frame or not, I am not even sure he has access to the print.

 

[Dave H]

So, what's the real story on the color timing of this remastered version? To me, it looked outstanding projected and the yellow doesn't look anywhere near as bad as I see in screenshots, but my JVC projector is also pro calibrated. However, I've seen some screencaps of original prints which seem to show a different color. Thoughts?

 

[Dr Griffin]

So, what's the real story on the color timing of this remastered version? To me, it looked outstanding projected and the yellow doesn't look anywhere near as bad as I see in screenshots, but my JVC projector is also pro calibrated. However, I've seen some screencaps of original prints which seem to show a different color. Thoughts?

I think is was summed up nicely in the last few posts by Bruce.

 

[OliverK]

So, what's the real story on the color timing of this remastered version? To me, it looked outstanding projected and the yellow doesn't look anywhere near as bad as I see in screenshots, but my JVC projector is also pro calibrated. However, I've seen some screencaps of original prints which seem to show a different color. Thoughts?

I agree that when you are in the movie the more extreme shots do not stick out that much but if you revisit them after you watched the movie you will notice that indeed they have that tint you see on the caps - provided you see the caps on a calibrated monitor or better even on the display that you use to watch your movies.

To borrow a phrase from haineshisway your mind is playing tricks on you.

Can you elaborate on the prints that look different? If somebody compared them recently they must have been newer Eastman prints or IBTech prints.

For some reason I never watched this one theatrically but only the first Dollar movie and Once Upon a Time in the West and both looked to have a fairly normal timing, and did not look like the Blu of TGTBATU, They were probably most similar in look to the Italian Blu-ray of TGTBATU.

 

[Stephen_J_H]

Slightly OT, but why would anyone do an Eastman print of a Techniscope title? The grain would be awful. Part of the reason for printing Techniscope in IB was to manage grain with that "velvety" look that IB prints have.

 

[Danny_N]

I agree that when you are in the movie the more extreme shots do not stick out that much but if you revisit them after you watched the movie you will notice that indeed they have that tint you see on the caps - provided you see the caps on a calibrated monitor or better even on the display that you use to watch your movies.

To borrow a phrase from haineshisway your mind is playing tricks on you.

Can you elaborate on the prints that look different? If somebody compared them recently they must have been newer Eastman prints or IBTech prints.

For some reason I never watched this one theatrically but only the first Dollar movie and Once Upon a Time in the West and both looked to have a fairly normal timing, and did not look like the Blu of TGTBATU, They were probably most similar in look to the Italian Blu-ray of TGTBATU.

Your mind could be playing tricks on you as well Oliver. You can't compare screen caps from BD's or DVD's to memories from a print you saw some time in a theatre. And even if you would put a Rec709 calibrated monitor next to a projection screen in a cinema I think you would be surprised at the differences in colour (eg white point of Rec709 is D65, of projected film it is D55 which looks greenish in comparison and there are of course many more factors affecting colour differences between theatrical projection and BD's/DVD's).
Robert Harris made an enlightening post some time ago about the myth of dye transfer printing which also deals with the fallacy of using memories of seeing prints in a theatre as your reference: http://www.hometheaterforum.com/com...t-™-the-myth-of-dye-transfer-printing.336967/

 

[OliverK]

Your mind could be playing tricks on you as well Oliver. You can't compare screen caps from BD's or DVD's to memories from a print you saw some time in a theatre. And even if you would put a Rec709 calibrated monitor next to a projection screen in a cinema I think you would be surprised at the differences in colour (eg white point of Rec709 is D65, of projected film it is D55 which looks greenish in comparison and there are of course many more factors affecting colour differences between theatrical projection and BD's/DVD's).
Robert Harris made an enlightening post some time ago about the myth of dye transfer printing which also deals with the fallacy of using memories of seeing prints in a theatre as your reference: http://www.hometheaterforum.com/com...t-™-the-myth-of-dye-transfer-printing.336967/

I am not quite sure what you are getting at as I did not see TGTBATU theatrically so I have no frame of reference for this one. Speaking in general the idea is that within the limits of the format a DVD or a Blu-ray SHOULD emulate the look of a DOP / director approved projected film print and also its color temperature. Very early on I found out that this often wasn't the case with all kinds of tints affecting both film prints and home video versions and even when asked for clarification studios are very tightlipped about the question of what is the correct and intended look of a film.

Regarding the lamps used in film projection that is another big issue as in cinemas both D55 and D65 light sources are used so this can also account for a projection looking a certain unexpected way, same with a screen that has a bluish or yellowish tint that would affect all movies shown on it.

 

[Danny_N]

I am not quite sure what you are getting at as I did not see TGTBATU theatrically so I have no frame of reference for this one.

Maybe I misread your post but it seemed to me you were implying that the Italian BD of TGTBATU looks more correct because it looks like the theatrical prints you saw of Fistful Of Dollars and Once Upon In The West. Doesn't matter anyway. Even if you had seen TGTBATU theatrically I would still maintain that you can't use your memory as reference.

Some fans of the movie are so dissatisfied by the MGM BD that they have started their own project: http://originaltrilogy.com/topic/Th...gly-35MM-IB-Tech-Preservation/id/17006/page/2
I guess they never read Robert Harris' post about the myth of dye transfer printing either.