Sure thing. I'm sure a print will show up for sale online eventually and an ultimate fan restoration can then be made. I will be seeing 2001 again on June 30 in theater but I don't think it will be a film print rather the bluray projected on a big screen but I will inquire and find out.
FYI, I'll be seeing Back to the Future 1 in original 35mm on July 5. Don't mean to derail the thread but wanted to get some exposure out there in case anyone wants me to take note of anything.
kaosjm said:
FYI, I'll be seeing Back to the Future 1 in original 35mm on July 5. Don't mean to derail the thread but wanted to get some exposure out there in case anyone wants me to take note of anything.
Hop over to the BttF thread if you haven't already.
A picture is worth a thousand words. Post 102 is worth more.
I’m late to the party, but I think this is the best song. Enjoy!
—Teams Jetrell Fo 1, Jetrell Fo 2, and Jetrell Fo 3
I had no idea this existed...
I presume it was tied into the release of 2010 that year. Would be interesting to see how they adapted it. I wonder if Stanley signed off on it?
Where were you in '77?
Very cool!
That reminds me, I created digital versions of the Star Wars talking book series for a member here, who disappeared. I probably should upload them somewhere seeing that he seems to have gone.
Donations welcome: paypal.me/poit
bitcoin:13QDjXjt7w7BFiQc4Q7wpRGPtYKYchnm8x
Help get The Original Trilogy preserved!
The storybook records you mean? Puggo is looking for a extra feature for his Jedi 16mm project.
Where were you in '77?
Cool, I will check if I have the Jedi one, I did a couple, Droid World and I think the storybooks.
Donations welcome: paypal.me/poit
bitcoin:13QDjXjt7w7BFiQc4Q7wpRGPtYKYchnm8x
Help get The Original Trilogy preserved!
I'm watching the bluray of 2001 at the moment and wanted to add that the scene where Dave and his colleague go to replace the "alpha echo 35 unit" that HAL states is failing Dave is walking through a tunnel very briefly. This happens around 1:12:15 in to the movie and the whites were obviously yellow in the film print whereas in the bluray they are more of a white and grey tone.
I am noticing very many color timing deficiencies between the film and bluray where the film is much darker, more yellow, and the bluray is much more neutral and dull.
The scene where Dr. Floyd is flying towards the base on the moon... the rocks were definitely more brown but the tone was so dark on the rocks that you could barely make it out. I may be new to this game but film definitely seems to be much darker in general and the colors are more saturated and maybe a bit too much at times.
kaosjm said:
I'm watching the bluray of 2001 at the moment and wanted to add that the scene where Dave and his colleague go to replace the "alpha echo 35 unit" that HAL states is failing Dave is walking through a tunnel very briefly. This happens around 1:12:15 in to the movie and the whites were obviously yellow in the film print whereas in the bluray they are more of a white and grey tone.
I am noticing very many color timing deficiencies between the film and bluray where the film is much darker, more yellow, and the bluray is much more neutral and dull.
The scene where Dr. Floyd is flying towards the base on the moon... the rocks were definitely more brown but the tone was so dark on the rocks that you could barely make it out. I may be new to this game but film definitely seems to be much darker in general and the colors are more saturated and maybe a bit too much at times.
I read an article a while back, right after George Lucas had paid for or help pay for the refurbishment of the Rafael Theater in Marin. The article was about the new state of the art projection and the quality of the lenses.
They were showing a revival of Lawrence Of Arabia, the David Lean Classic. The article stated that although the Camera,Film and Lenses ( Super Panavision 70) that were used to film the movie were of the highest quality, the Lenses that the were available for the projection at the time of the first run of the move could not faithfully reproduce what was actually captured on the film. When they showed the film right after the completion of the restoration of the theater, with the newest and highest quality projection lens (THX certified?) they were astonished to be able to see the individual grains of sand in the hair of Peter O'Toole in one of his close up desert scenes. My point is this. What one sees and remembers when viewing a movie at a theater may not be exactly what is actually supposed to be seen. The theater's equipment may be out of calibration, the light source may not be of the right specification may be at the end of its useful life and was supposed to be replaced but the projectionist was lazy or the owner wanted one more use out of it to save some money, or the film may have been faded after many showings.Or as in Lawrence of Arabia, the technology at the time was not up to the task.
So all of the work in our preservation efforts here is still highly subjective. To further clarify my point. Would one complain that in viewing the grains of sand in O'Toole's hair, that it is not the way it was shown back in the theater in its original run?
Not that I don't appreciate all the work that is done here. I love the fact that hear the original soundtracks and see the original edits. But to a point, I saw 2001 at a Cinerama theater the first week it was out during it's original run. What I saw then and what I may see now other than any re-editing and remastering of the soundtrack. May be what was there to be seen but could not due to the limits of the technology at the time.
^ Very insightful. Thank you!
suntech said:
May be what was there to be seen but could not due to the limits of the technology at the time.
Just like all of the CGI in Star Wars; it was always there, you just couldn't see it :)
This signature uses Markdown syntax, which makes it easy to add formatting like italics, bold, and lists:
2001: A Space Odyssey 70mm print screening open-air in Bologna, Italy, July 4th.
"Print coming from the BFI. Colour grading done in 1990 on a new print with Kubrick's approval."
http://festival.ilcinemaritrovato.it/film/2001-a-space-odyssey/
This is a job for, who else? ... FANBOYS !! (... just don't tell us the odds ...)
STEP 1: Learn Italian, very quickly! Jawohl?
STEP 2: Steal the print for our 2001 friends (hey, what are friends for?)!
STEP 3: Cut film into individual scene strips, so we can hide every single one of them (Dr. Smith gets credit for that idea)!
Remember ... for Linus ... :,\ ... and Allofus! ;D
.
* * * *
NOTICE:
The above is a dramatization of the evil Spaced Ranger, from episode 35, The Enemy Within. It in no way condones illegal or immoral conduct. So ... Be Kind, Rewind.
* * * *
"Colour grading done in 1990 on a new print with Kubrick's approval."
Hmm..perhaps this had something to do with the CC transfer. I didn't know of anything SK approved after this which he supervised during FMJ's post-production. Of course it's more likely that he oversaw a new print to make the rounds as the older ones would have been deteriorating.
VADER!? WHERE THE HELL IS MY MOCHA LATTE? -Palpy on a very bad day.
“George didn’t think there was any future in dead Han toys.”-Harrison Ford
YT channel:
https://www.youtube.com/c/DamnFoolIdealisticCrusader
I didn't go to the screening, but I have some interesting information.
As we already knew the 70mm print came from the BFI. Cinema Ritrovato stated that it was a 1990 print with Kubrick-approved color grading. I speaked with the projectionist and he told me that it was in a Dolby Baby Boom format (tracks 2 & 4 for subwoofers). He said that the sound was "Dolby SR 42 format", as this picture confirms:
https://www.facebook.com/CinetecaBologna/photos/ms.c.eJxlzMENACAIQ9GNDKWAsP9ixoMH4frSfgicYeWUUIK68EQrJT~_heHUB2IWjY~_M1hNk7tvvG4soBlWcjzg~-~-.bps./10153649529808132/?type=1&theater
However, according to this site, the 42 format is A-type, while the 45 is SR:
http://www.in70mm.com/newsletter/2000/62/dolby/
So probably there was an error on the label: it is either format 42 (hence A-type, not SR), or SR (hence format 45, not 42).
The BFI archive entry for 2001 doesn't say much about the soundtrack:
http://collections-search.bfi.org.uk/web/Details/ChoiceFilmItems/153451583
Anyway I was surprised that a Kubrick-approved print exists with a Baby Boom format, which didn't exist in 1968. So the question is: were the original left-center and right-center channels just a duplicate of the left and right channels?
According to this article, when the film was restored in 2001 they decided to use Dolby SR but to stay faithful to the original 6-track format. No mention is made to a Baby Boom version.
http://www.arcadiacinema.com/melzo/rassegnastampa/200109_cinematechnology.pdf
What do you think? I'll try and ask information to the BFI, they were very kind to me in the past.
P.S.: here are some other pictures of the screening:
https://www.facebook.com/media/set/?set=a.10153653575613132.1073742255.355192863131&type=3
Whoa! Thanks for the great pix & the intriguing info. "... still a total mystery." :)
Hope you can get more from those nicely cooperative people ...
Sorry to necro post, but if anyone is in the Boston area, there's a 70mm screening of 2001 this Saturday and Sunday. It's at the Somerville Theater. I wish I could go, but this weekend is unfortunately not good for me. :(
Anyway, for those who may be interested: http://feitheatres.com/somerville-theatre/2001-a-space-odyssey-in-70mm-this-sat-sun-only/
What can you get a Wookiee for (Life Day) Christmas when he already owns a comb?
Thanks for the heads-up! I looked up when & where 2001:ASO might also be showing in 70mm and all I get is confusing search results from websites that just want hits and more click-thru's:
"I'm sorry, Spaced. I can't do that ... but from here, click to go there."
So is the blu missing the audio that some of the DVDs are
I think what we’re seeing is the difference between 35, SK attempting to time on the equipment of the day, MGMs 65 scan and eventual attempt to match SK’s timing and then WBs now outdated higher res scan of the 65mm elements. This is why it lacks all the coloring of the others and is limited to 2k.
Like many other WB transfers, the color is missing due to using higher negative elements and at times it appears some non-original tints have leaked in. They should redo it at some point isn’t he near future as other Kubrick titles have been hinted at or done such as ACO in 4K. Many of the others are equally if not more problematic and all based on old work.
The 1990 print being in Dolby 4-2 is correct as then no one would have been able to mix in the old Todd-AO system of five-one. Plus I think it might suit the film a tad better by isolating the low bass-not that I like losing the LC and RC channels.
Until they do new work we are stuck with these. Utilizing the Bluray and adjusting the color timing whilst adding the MGM PCM (less damage than CC) and 5.1 ac3 for theatrical approximation is about the best we can do. Once this is done perhaps we can then try to tackle a mathematically correct smilebox version.
VADER!? WHERE THE HELL IS MY MOCHA LATTE? -Palpy on a very bad day.
“George didn’t think there was any future in dead Han toys.”-Harrison Ford
YT channel:
https://www.youtube.com/c/DamnFoolIdealisticCrusader
Is there somebody that knows the differences between the uncut criterion cav LD and the blu-ray? I’m currently trying to sync the LD to the blu-ray but when I get to the point where floyd is sleeping on the shuttle with the pen floating by his hand the 2 no longer sync. The pen is maybe a different composite and the scene is cut differently. The LD contains several extra seconds of footage around here too. I think I can re-arrange the scenes and attain sync without losing too much. I’ll give it a further try tomorrow when I’m not so tired.
EDIT: Wow! The criterion LD contains so much extra footage/different cuts it’s going to be nearly impossible to sync them with the same exact footage. The blu-ray for example, has sections where they have doubled the speed by dropping every other frame whereas the criterion LD has the normal speed with all of the frames. I haven’t even gotten haywood to the orbiting space station yet either. Should I perservere and sync up everything that is possible, or just ivtc the criterion laserdisc as it is and put it on the spleen?
I’m thinking I will start by ivtc’ing and putting it on the spleen and then make another attempt at syncing it later.
EDIT2: I’m pretty pissed off about the blu-ray now actually lol. I used to hold it in high regard as one of the better looking titles on the format but what could the excuse be for dropping frames for entire sequences like that? That couldn’t possibly have been part of any print release. It seems like that would have been done post-telecine for whatever reason. Why did they need to speed up those portions?
Luke threw twice…maybe.
“Wow!” is right! I’m stunned that anyone would dare alter Stanley Kubrick's work like that!
You betta not, or da Stan-man gonna get-ya! O-o-oh mercy!
Are you sure this wasn’t the result of a capture/rip or system-overload anomaly?
Is there one particularly obvious shot where they both start in-sync and are guaranteed to go out of sync by the shot’s end? Would it be possible to put up a link to that shot (from the 2 sources) for inspection (by those of us who don’t have access just now)?
Thanks for the rundown althor1138. I would never in a million years think the Ld would have more frames then the BD, that’s bizarre
Links are good for 7 days.
The audio is from the laserdisc and the ld video is on the left with bd on the right.
Can anybody make heads or tails of what’s happened here? The opening credits also don’t match up very well although they are very close. The criterion ld also has cue marks here and there btw.
EDIT: I can’t tell for sure yet but I popped in the blu-ray and it isn’t sped up so it seems dgavcindex did some funky stuff while parsing? I believe I had honor pulldown flags checked. Maybe I should just use force film or something?
EDIT2: Well, it’s got to be directshowsource or dgavcindex messing it up or something. I can get it to slow down to the right speed but the frames are duplicates instead of progressive like on the LD. I guess the BD is maybe encoded with vfr for some scenes. In any case those frames should be progressive and not duplicates so I still haven’t quite figured out what I’m doing wrong. Or there is still a chance that the BD is messed up and missing those frames. Is there a bulletproof way to take the vc-1 file from the bd and import it into avisynth with the correct frame structure? Right now I ripped the BD with makemkv then converted the vc-1 to huffyuv/avi with avidemux and then load it with avisource in avisynth. I first tried directshowsource with convertfps=true but this was the method used in the video posted up above. I’m tired of messing with it today so I’ll do some googling and try it again tomorrow perhaps.
EDIT 3: Bam! I think I solved my problem. Sorry for all of the updates. I don’t often rip BD’s and this is the first vfr/vc-1 disc I’ve had to deal with. The problem is that you have to tell directshowsource how many fps and to convertfps so the line to load the file would be like this:
DirectShowSource(“X:\Movies\2001 ASO-BD\2001-ASO-BD.mkv”,fps=23.976,audio=false,convertfps=true)
Everything seems to be progressive now although the criterion LD does still have a few extra frames here and there. It should be a bit easier to sync things up now. I’ll post the sync’ed LD to the spleen when I’m finished.
Luke threw twice…maybe.
The wrath of Kubrick has been averted, then?
I was just going to suggest using VLC, with the VLC Blu-ray plug-in, to “record” the HD:
http://www.videohelp.com/software/VLC-media-player
If the sources still do not align, it still might be worth trying VLC's capture.
Glad you figured it out althor1138. Another reason to hate VC-1. Whenever I’ve worked with it in the past it has created nothing but problems. I’m glad it is mostly gone now.