Info: Films re-color timed on video releases

Of course there’s the '04 master we all know and despise complete with it’s famed lobster men.

Then most everyone here knows my absolute hatred of the Lowry led transfers of the Bond canon. 😉

Now they’ve gone and done it to one of the most famously colorful of 50’s Technicolor films, Horror of Dracula. The BFI restoration used an answer print, and their new timing was tweaked by the post house for the new Hammer/Lionsgate BD release.  And it’s all dark and blue. WHY???

http://caps-a-holic.com/hd_vergleiche/comparison.php?cID=1596#auswahl

AHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH!

Does anyone even check what print sources look like? Or think to possibly do some research as to how the look was intended to be???
 

Discuss.

And yes, I still think Raiders looks off somehow. But that may be just me. 😉

Does anyone even check what print sources look like? Or think to possibly do some research as to how the look was intended to be???

Some post-houses do. I know we do around here. :-)

The worst case of revisionist colortiming I've ever seen was the Night of the Living Dead (1990) Blu-ray release. Thankfully, I didn't buy it. I'll stick with my DVD copy until DJ/You_Too's project is released.

Should we mention minor cases of "teal & orange shift" in this thread?

I saw HoD not that long ago at a charity screening. The colour was actually closer to the Bluray than to the DVD version. The DVD is artificially warm, and very red, even in those comparison shots the whites are all pinky.

It did look less subdued at the screening though. I think part of the problem is the colour temp of carbon-arc light vs scanner light sources.

Films used to be timed for Carbon Arc projection, and will look much bluer if projected with modern Xenon or similar equipment. This could lead to colorists believing the print when viewed using the incorrect light source is the way the print was intended to be. I'm guessing but I reckon this is why so many BDs are coming out leaning towards Blue/Green, they are viewing the old master prints with the wrong colour temp light source and matching to that.

I think a majority of these re-coloured transfers are done with a "so it looks good on HDTV" type of subjective

no regard for the original prints at all. unless the original DoP or Director came on board and said they were involved

William Friedkin need not apply

The early Japanese laserdisc of The Evil Dead is a bit of a mystery. Why is it so dark and blue? I doubt the original prints were like this.

Although, some people prefer this look to the warmer look of the DVDs and BD. http://www.bookofthedead.ws/forums/viewtopic.php?f=3&t=17

Non-Japanese releases of Pokémon movie 5 ("Pokémon Heroes" internationally) look drowned, they're so bluecast.

The restoration had to make some different color moves because the layers were either gone or quickly going. They had to spend enormous amounts of time to color grade and match period decor to boot.

The new BD uses the old 2005 struck master with some tweaking.

I'm still thinking HOD isn't right on either Warner DVD or the Hammer BD. The DVD was boosted and lacked color depth (one of those films I always tweaked in VLC) and the new version is too cold, especially in comparison with the other Fisher/Asher made Hammer classics of the period. It should honestly be a bit between the two I think.

djchaseb said:

Speaking about the Raiders Blu Ray color timing, I don't mind it. I think it looks quite nice, having no clue about what the original looked like. I read the whole teal / orange push. I will say the 2004 Star Wars colors are very bothersome. So grateful for fan edits

I think it would be really interesting to see a side-by-side comparison.  It's been a while since I put the RAIDERS blu in, but I don't remember it being as heavily skewed as the new TERMINATOR blu looks.

I think Wrath of Khan looks pretty close to the theatrical color timing i can only find on the first issue laserdisc before the BD.

But since they were working from the OCN which was badly faded or damaged its not perfect.

The DNR of Lowry though is intolerable but not as bad as say star trek III or IV.

I and VI were older transfers with the dnr already applied sadly.

Star Trek I and VI i feel are in need of a restoration.

Not that star trek I is particularly bad on blu ray the transfer was phenomenal but i feel it could have been better with the newest HD scanning tech.

Was not the Terminator before the new BD ever recolor timed?  I mean to match the second film.  Seems to be something they do these days as they did it with the Matrix and Lord of the Rings.

skyjedi2005 said:

Was not the Terminator before the new BD ever recolor timed?  I mean to match the second film.  Seems to be something they do these days as they did it with the Matrix and Lord of the Rings.

It certainly wasn't in every LD and DVD release (I own 'em all).

Also, FWIW, the first LD release was struck right off a theatrical print; cue marks and all.

I just find it weird they do it at all.  It would be like if Disney decided to put  star wars from 1977 on blu ray but then color timed it to match the original theatrical colors of empire strikes back.