So today I was thinking about film preservation, but more specifically, the process that goes into scanning a movie for home video release (eg, blu ray). I kind of had an “ah ha” moment (that could very well be wrong!).
Now, I know very, very little about this subject, so this may be an ignorant question… but for home video releases, doesn’t it make the most sense to scan a theatrical print of a film, rather than an earlier generation source, such as an interpositive?
I could be totally off-base with this, but my reasoning is: when filmmakers make a movie, don’t they take into consideration the generational losses that occur when going from the original camera negative to the interpositive, from the interpositive to the internegative, and finally from the internegative to the theatrical print? And aren’t those losses part of what makes the movie “the movie”?
That is, I would assume they make filmmaking decisions knowing that grain will increase, and resolution will be lost by the time theatrical prints are made. For example, when doing practical effects, perhaps they realize that the harness cables that yank the stunt man across the room may be clearly visible on early generation prints, but won’t show up on theatrical prints.
So, when a digital master is struck using an earlier generation print, is it possible the audience might see things that the filmmakers did not intend them to see? Other than the filmmakers themselves, does anyone actually ever get to see an interpositive projected? It sounds crazy, but wouldn’t a scan of an interpositive be too good, and not represent what the film was actually supposed to look like?
In other words, isn’t the theatrical print the final product, and is in fact “the movie”? As Star Wars fans who want to see what audiences saw in 1977, shouldn’t we actually want a (preferably pristine) scan of what would’ve been projected in theaters? Wouldn’t a digital scan of an interpositive not represent that?
Of course, I assume there are no “pristine” theatrical prints floating around, and scanning one and cleaning it up takes a tremendous amount of effort (thank you team_negative1!). But couldn’t a studio that’s releasing an old movie clean up the interpositive, print a new internegative from it, and then print a new “theatrical” print from that (all on film), and then scan this new “theatrical” print for the blu ray release? I know this sounds crazy, but wouldn’t the resulting digital master be the closest thing to what was projected in theaters when the film was released?
Does this make sense? I know I have a lot to learn, so please be gentle. 😃