The Dark Knight Trilogy - Theatrical Preservation. (* unfinished project *) — Page 3

_,,,^..^,,,_ said:

Good idea to make two versions - more people will be happy!

Indeed, from a work point of view it would make no difference. Just encoding time.

The only problem I can see it my internet bandwidth for delivery, it would be 2x BD-25 with both versions unless I can work out some way of 'branching' with playlists in Encore but that would not be seamless.

It's alot of Data to upload.

Stamper said:

I saw TDK in digital and the print was just magnificent, absolutely astonishing PQ and colors.

The Blu-ray is the worst piece of shit I have ever seen.

 Did it look like my test?

_,,,^..^,,,_ said:

Good idea to make two versions - more people will be happy!

At which point does one stop?  He's already doing a lot of work just doing it for himself to find others are interested and supportive of his work.  Then others come along and want different versions ..... i.e. xVid, superlenticular full-screen, trippy dippy pan & scan, 2:40:1 .... when does it finally become good enough that everyone is happy?

Not arguing or bitching, just trying to understand why his version needs other versions to make him and those interested in his idea happy.

:) 

Well there's  only two versions, 1 aspect ratio and 2 and frankly i like the Imax open matte 2 aspect ratio. I saw it for the first time this way in Imax, a night before it was released for free. It was one hell of a time, everyone one was so into the movie.

Right but it still has more image than the theatrical. All the IMAX 2 aspect ratios are cropped on BD. I realize we won't see a true IMAX picture for sale.

I could see making a double disc set then, 1 for each aspect ratio .... I guess I always wonder why folks not doing the projects ask for what they want instead of being happy with what the person doing the project is putting out.  It's all good.

:) 

I think the reason would be the know how, not everyone can do this stuff and it takes a bit of learning.

I'm good with what ever CSchmidlapp decides to do though. The test video looks good, i never new how different it really was. 

So ive recieved the 'Ultimate' box set and the IMAX sequences on disc 6 are the same colour grading as the blu ray.

On some of the later TV spots for TDK, the colour grading is more in tune with the BLU as well. Maybe besides the other problems with the transfer, the colour grading is infact correct on the BLU? I certainly prefer the advertising materials look, but it might not be the final finished grade approved by Mr Nolan.

From my understanding, promotional material is sent out for use most of the time while the film is still in production. These clips from a Assemble edit will be raw and proberbly have a blanket colour grade or one done by the marketing team.
After picture lock, the final grading will begin. If the deadline is tight, it is common that the film can be completed very close to release. (this was the case with the movie 'The Rock' with theatrical prints still being 'wet' from print when arriving at cinemas).

The 35mm stills in the OP are interesting. Is there a 'bootleg' CAM from back in the day floating around that would have been a capture of a 35mm showing?
I don't condone such things, but outside of a 35mm showing somewhere, it maybe our only way of getting to the bottom of it.

The Tech Museum of Innovation is playing the trilogy in 70mm IMAX - Begins every weekend in February, TDK in March, TDKR in April. But would the color timing on IMAX prints be the same as 35mm?

The 35mm shots of the the regraded version all have a strong green tint.  I must say that I have absolutely no recollection whatsoever of these scenes looking this way in the theatre.

My memory is not authoritative proof, of course, but their complete lack of familiarity is causing me to be somewhat skeptical that this is how they are actually supposed to look.  As indicated above, it is possible that is reflects an earlier, unfinalized version of the color timing.  It is also possible that the 35mm prints had a different timing than the Imax prints, and that both are 'correct' in their own way.

Here is some information im copying over from the avforums thread. There more for my benifit as the thread is quite long and full of de-rails. Some interesting information, its a shame some of the original links to articles are now down.

From the American Cinematographer story (Whole article Here) on TDK:

After shooting was complete, and after the editing process was well under way, DKP 70mm scanned select Imax takes at 8K resolution on a unique Northlight scanner. Then, Pacific Title and other facilities made 2.40:1 extractions from the 1.33:1 Imax negative to conform to the framing and movement decisions made in the Avid by Nolan and editor Lee Smith. That process resulted in a 35mm anamorphic negative, which was combined with effects shots and used to generate 35mm release prints.

To bring scenes shot in 35mm to Imax screens, where images are projected in 1.43:1, DKP 70mm scanned the 35mm interpositive at 4K, and an Imax team in Toronto applied digital DMR (Digital Remastering) processing to degrain and sharpen the images. The process stayed at 4K until the images were filmed out onto 65mm back at Keighley's facility and combined with the Imax material for print. The final Imax print combined the 4K DMR filmout, 5.6K and 8K Imax filmouts, and 18K contact prints from the Imax negative, says Keighley.

People suggested Chris and Wally should have covered themselves by shooting key sequences in both 35mm and Imax, but the 2.40:1 extraction from the Imax frame looks beautiful, he continues. In fact, due to the oversampling, it's probably the best 35mm anamorphic image we've ever seen. If we'd had time to scan the original negative at 6K, we could have produced even higher quality. The information is on the negative 35mm film captures the equivalent of 6K and a color bit depth of 14 bits plus.

As they did with the Imax prints of Batman Begins, Keighley and his team screened each of the 80 Imax prints of Dark Knight in real time to ensure quality. We're a small group of hands-on people who really care about images, he says. We pay attention to all the details all the way to the screen.

http://www.videography.com/articles/article_15888.shtml
"You also have to go in the other direction for the IMAX release. For these, the cut 35mm negative was color-timed at the lab [instead of a DI], producing an interpositive of the 35mm portions of the film. This went to IMAX, who used DMR—an IMAX-proprietary digital process—to 'blow up' the 35mm to the IMAX format. These scenes were then intercut with the IMAX camera negative. So, digital processes were used for the two format conversions, but each set of release prints was created by cutting the negative and timing the shots in a traditional manner."

It seems the concensus up to now is that that they used the IMAX version for the Blu. This version had 35mm blowups proberbly Edge Enhanched and corrected to the IMAX sequences, and then when put to BLU, another layer of EE and DNR was applyed. The EE and DNR are inconsistant through out the transfer.

http://gizmodo.com/5250780/how-regular-movies-become-imax-films

http://www.nxtbook.com/nxtbooks/questex/hom292114QPM/#/10

OK, I saw Begins in IMAX last night. Yes, it's obviously a DMR blowup with degraining and sharpening, but the color still matches up with my memories of seeing it in theaters 10 years ago.

I remembered the film looking brown and gold, but screenshots of the DVD and Blu-ray, while having the brown/gold look, show a more neutral and varied palette. That's not the case with the IMAX print - almost everything is pushed to either brown/gold or teal/cyan, just as I remembered from the original run.

The DVD palette looks closER?, but skin tones on the Blu look too pink. Everyone's skin was quite bronze on the IMAX print. It was also a lot more contrasty than the video transfers, though that is the case with all theatrical prints of anything compared to home media...

My memory of Batman Begins in the theater from 2.5 years ago is that the colors showed very little difference, if any, from the Bluray.  The triple-feature screening at the Cine Capri I attended was of all three films in 2.35:1 ratio throughout.

Given the information and anecdotes in this thread, I'm starting to think that the Imax and 35mm versions may well have had different colors from each other, due to the simple fact of their having been made at different times with different processes and equipment, most of which were analog and therefore not capable of being duplicated exactly with no change every time.

But I remember the 35mm of Begins having the same pushed browns and teals, the Blu-ray has too many/too varying colors. I'm thinking of the scene where Bruce confronts Ducard in Wayne Manor, the DVD/Blu show lower contrast and lots of varying colors, but the IMAX was all pushed gold and brown and high contrast and that's what I remember from 2005. (I actually had not watched the film since the original theatrical run back in '05, so all my color memories were what I still remembered from seeing it in the theater.)

Not trying to say you're wrong, but I just remember a distinct color palette, and the IMAX seemed to match up with my 35mm memories.

I don't buy that the blu-ray of TDK is the intended look at all. If the colour timing and the over-sharpened look were something Nolan approved, then why was the same not applied for the TDKR, and why was the TDKR colour timing closer to the original prologue TDK IMAX sequence included on the BB blu-ray?

Saw TDK at a press screening, and the Blu-ray doesn't match what I saw at all. Period. The parking lot scene (when Batman jumps from above and crushes the car) was absolutely breathtakingly crystal clear and beautiful.

Remember, Nolan tried to match this film look to Michael Mann's HEAT. Does the Blu looks like a Mann's palette? Nope. 

I will get a chance to see an IMAX print of TDK next month. I am not familiar with the Blu-ray colors, I didn't ever watch the Blu-ray, but I will be able to describe what I thought the IMAX looked like, just like I did with Begins.

Perhaps the Blu could be another case of regrading the untimed version almost from scratch to "read" better on the home medium - sort of like how even the original video transfer of The Matrix looks nothing like the theatrical prints. 

It's possible the TDK blu-ray was different because the studio had someone else oversee the transfter to blu-ray. It's possible Nolan's hands were tied in this instance, and went with whatever WB wanted to do with the release. That would be my view on the difference anyway, because none of his other films look that different.

why crop the imax scenes when the movie was in fact shown like this in (imax) cinema?

why crop the imax scenes when the movie was in fact shown like this in (imax) cinema?

Because it wasn't shown like that in non-IMAX cinema, and some people don't like the shifting aspect ratio.

Besides, the BR's aren't technically OAR either, as it crops the IMAX shots to 1.78:1 when they should be 1.44:1.