Sign In

Post #1281093

Author
Dek Rollins
Parent topic
Alien 1979 35mm scan opportunity
Link to post in topic
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/1281093/action/topic#1281093
Date created
12-May-2019, 5:41 PM
Last modified
12-May-2019, 5:42 PM
Edited by
Dek Rollins
Reason for edit
None provided

TiddySprinklesPimpBillion said:

Dek Rollins said:

TiddySprinklesPimpBillion said:

RU.08 said:

Well for the theatrical experience anyway. The “detail” in prints is 1-2K not anywhere near 4K (although they have much richer dynamic range than digital) and most prints have little shadow/highlight detail, the exception being dye-transfer prints that retain the same detail level into the shadows/highlights. Blurays and 2K/4K restorations are often sharpened way beyond the sharpness of prints as well. This is not a limitation of prints - films like Alien were shot in anamorphic and transferred using contact-printing so there is little to no loss of sharpness between the negative and the final prints.

So then I should get rid of this since it shouldn’t exist to own? Mastered in 4K and is older than ALIEN. (Warning, shit cover design.)

https://www.blu-ray.com/movies/The-Bridge-on-the-River-Kwai-4K-Blu-ray/183746/

You’re telling me I’d need to watch it properly if the scan were a low resolution of an outdated print? Not the 65mm~70mm print but a 35mm answer print?

Same goes for this too, I bet. ALSO older than ALIEN. https://www.blu-ray.com/movies/2001-A-Space-Odyssey-4K-Blu-ray/224350/

Jonno said:

Indeed. 4K transfers should be technically superior, in terms of detail retention and consistency of performance, every time.

But that’s not what films shot in the 1970s were designed for - even TV and home video would have been a distant afterthought. It was all about rendering the best possible image on those theatrical prints, and all the creative decisions in the filmmaking process had that firmly set as their end goal.

4K (and, to be fair, Blu-ray) are fantastic at wringing visual information out of archival film materials - it’s among their chief selling points - but they’re aimed at achieving a much different purpose than the one those materials were created for. Hence my concern about claims of ‘original intent’, which is always a dicey issue with this technology.

This isn’t some bullshit whingey tripe about some George Lucas revisionism this forum is so bitchy about. Too much complaining about comparing it to an older print on an outdated format such as VHS, Laserdisc, and DVD. Hell, the current Pet Semetary 4K+Blu-ray disc has fucking weird color timing but is revisioned. ALIEN doesn’t regarding the Theatrical Cut. Same goes for BLACK HAWK DOWN. 2K upscales don’t count.

So yes, perhaps this does recreate the theatrical experience of seeing this within the same day or a week of opening in 1979. I’m keeping the official 20th Century FOX 4K UHD release and this fan “restoration” will be a nice bonus disc, not a replacement.

EDIT: By the way, no need to pay attention to me, I’m a fucking dumbass.

Dude, chill out. You came in here to shit on the thread for no reason and it’s clear you don’t understand why people enjoy these preservations. Why should I, someone who doesn’t own any 4K equipment, be forced to accept the new UHD BD of Alien as the absolute for enjoying this picture? How do you know the color timing isn’t different from the theatrical release? Why is it wrong for people like me to see a theatrical preservation as the definitive version of a movie? We aren’t forcing you to watch it in place of your glorious official release. Even good BD releases don’t always preserve the theatrical experience as it was originally intended. And calling yourself a dumbass doesn’t automatically make you not an asshole shitting on a thread for no reason.

It’s a fan preservation, not a definitive or official one, and it won’t replace the 4K UHD.

For me, someone who doesn’t watch 4K discs and doesn’t have the equipment to play them, it will definitely replace the 4K UHD that I can’t watch. “Definitive” is usually a subjective term based on a persons preferences. “Official” is also a meaningless term in this situation, since the “official” versions of many films have incorrect color timing and even George Lucas-esque changes. The print is being scanned for the sake of preserving the theatrical experience, and for the people who prefer watching movies how they originally looked at the cinema. I seriously doubt that the 4K UHD disc looks like the picture did in theaters, and your going to need to show some proof if that’s what you’re saying, since you’re the one making the claim that this project is superfluous.

Case in point, the 4K UHD with the BD included is fucking trash regarding T2. I’d rather see a proper presentation of that compared to the sub-par bullshit of that release, which far more needs it compared to ALIEN.

You don’t think people would jump at the chance to scan a print of T2? Priorities can’t be set on something when the source of the project doesn’t exist yet. If you want a 35mm print of T2 scanned, go find a print and rent it and pay these good folks for the cost of scanning. If you don’t like that someone is scanning Alien, then I’m sorry but you’ll just have to live with it.

EDIT:

JayArgonaut said:

TiddySprinklesPimpBillion said:

But get with the times of home media physical formats.

Troll confirmed. I shall respond no further after this.

Starve Trolls Do Not Feed Them

Lol sorry. 😛