JURASSIC PARK 35mm 4K scan + 35mm 4k scans of many trailers Mega Project including the rare Spiderman Twin Towers Teaser, Blade Runner, Pretty In Pink and numerous, some rare, others, see post (WIP - 6.5K scans of JP and trailers complete. Scan data now in hand! Funding of the project is a little past half-way now. Contributor only project for feature. I can't publicly distribute it. Small preservation project.) — Page 3

…

MonkeyLizard10 said:

early demo samples from some of the trailers:

I’d love to see the finished Spider-Man trailer. I have an SD version downloaded from way back when it was first put online, but I think that’s the only version I’ve ever seen.

…

current funding: $283/$1245

$308 of $1245

…

The amazing thing is i bet your Bring it On trailer is better than the actual film on blu-ray which is quite lackluster.

Current funding: $328 of $1245

JadedSkywalker said:

The amazing thing is i bet your Bring it On trailer is better than the actual film on blu-ray which is quite lackluster.

Home Video versions will almost always be lackluster for movies shot and colour-timed on film because these companies use the Interpositive (IP) or the negative (O-neg), which have better resolution, but don’t have the grain or richness of photochemical colours that you see on 35mm film prints. O-neg or IPs look much smoother and not as crisper or textured as film prints. This is because prints used to go through a 4-step processing to become cinema release prints. With every step, the processing made the images denser/thicker and grains became more prominent, or so I heard. It is this grain that adds to the textured look of projected prints, which home videos obtained from O-neg or IPs lack.

take a look at the Jurassic Park 35mm scan. Why does it look far more richer than the 4K UHD. This is because the prints are four generations removed from the O-neg, while the UHD is a direct scan of the O-Neg. The result is the print looks crisper and textured while the UHD looks less defined. It doesn’t help that home video companies then apply an additional layer of denoising to water down whatever textures were left; resulting in a mushy, flattened look. Plus, cinema prints have richer and deeper colours because they use actual colour dyes. Digital colour does not look or feel as deep or thick, no matter the processing. Steve Yedlin came close to achieving print-level colours on The last jedi and Knives Out, but the images still looked recognisably digital.

Speaking of digital vs film, one noticeable difference between film prints and Digital Cinema Packages (DCPs) is that 35mm prints have an inherent soft, soothing image, while digital prints look sharp and harsher to the eyes, comparatively. I spoke to a cinema manager and he confirmed my observations.

Papai2013 said:

JadedSkywalker said:

The amazing thing is i bet your Bring it On trailer is better than the actual film on blu-ray which is quite lackluster.

Home Video versions will almost always be lackluster for movies shot and colour-timed on film because these companies use the Interpositive (IP) or the negative (O-neg), which have better resolution, but don’t have the grain or richness of photochemical colours that you see on 35mm film prints. O-neg or IPs look much smoother and not as crisper or textured as film prints. This is because prints used to go through a 4-step processing to become cinema release prints. With every step, the processing made the images denser/thicker and grains became more prominent, or so I heard. It is this grain that adds to the textured look of projected prints, which home videos obtained from O-neg or IPs lack.

take a look at the Jurassic Park 35mm scan. Why does it look far more richer than the 4K UHD. This is because the prints are four generations removed from the O-neg, while the UHD is a direct scan of the O-Neg. The result is the print looks crisper and textured while the UHD looks less defined. It doesn’t help that home video companies then apply an additional layer of denoising to water down whatever textures were left; resulting in a mushy, flattened look. Plus, cinema prints have richer and deeper colours because they use actual colour dyes. Digital colour does not look or feel as deep or thick, no matter the processing. Steve Yedlin came close to achieving print-level colours on The last jedi and Knives Out, but the images still looked recognisably digital.

Speaking of digital vs film, one noticeable difference between film prints and Digital Cinema Packages (DCPs) is that 35mm prints have an inherent soft, soothing image, while digital prints look sharp and harsher to the eyes, comparatively. I spoke to a cinema manager and he confirmed my observations.

Not to mention that 35mm prints have this organic look that makes the movie feel alive.

I for one don’t mind the generational loss that results from creating a film print, because another bonus is that visual effects, whether traditional optical effects or CGI, blend a lot better with the live action elements of the image as a result.

fmalover said:

Not to mention that 35mm prints have this organic look that makes the movie feel alive.

I for one don’t mind the generational loss that results from creating a film print, because another bonus is that visual effects, whether traditional optical effects or CGI, blend a lot better with the live action elements of the image as a result.

You are right. Generational loss GIVES film it’s aesthetic beauty, including the heightened grain and higher contrast, richer colours. We are not supposed to see the negative or the interpositive. Grain and the inherent photochemical softness hides the imperfections of CGI and blends the image better with the rest of the live action footage. In digitally shot movies, there’s no grain and the image is too sharp. It fails to hide the fakery of the CG.

…

Audio in this project will be both theatrical optical audio and Cinema DTS (for most to all stuff more recent than 1992).

MonkeyLizard10 said:

A few updates, the calibration is getting to be very close to finished (the second copy of the first image is posted in ProPhotoRGB wide gamut since for that one regular sRGB gamut clipped the colors, needs to be viewed in a color-managed browser to be seen normally and, of course, on a wide gamut set monitor set to wide gamut mode to see the extended colors):

Pics look great!

…

Quick Q if I may? Will you be offering a 1:85.1 masked version of JP in the correct theatrical framing? Thanks

ben_uk said:

Quick Q if I may? Will you be offering a 1:85.1 masked version of JP in the correct theatrical framing? Thanks

Yes, both open matte and theatrical 1.85:1.

Hi @MonkeyLizard10,

I hope you are well. I wanted to say thank you for starting this project, Jurassic Park is my favourite film of all time and I’ve been seeking a better version of the film closer to the theatrical release, that does it the justice it deserves for a while. Your work so far looks great.

How do I donate? Is there a minimum donation amount? What will happen to the project and release of the film to donors if you do not meet your target funding?

Hi @Papai2013,

I hope you are well. It has been educational reading your posts regarding film prints and the filmic process, thank you.

Kind regards,

fallinlight

fallinlight said:

Hi @Papai2013,

I hope you are well. It has been educational reading your posts regarding film prints and the filmic process, thank you.

Kind regards,

fallinlight

Thank you for the kind words. Hope you and your loved ones are well.

fallinlight said:

Hi @MonkeyLizard10,

I hope you are well. I wanted to say thank you for starting this project, Jurassic Park is my favourite film of all time and I’ve been seeking a better version of the film closer to the theatrical release, that does it the justice it deserves for a while. Your work so far looks great.

How do I donate? Is there a minimum donation amount? What will happen to the project and release of the film to donors if you do not meet your target funding?

Hi @Papai2013,

I hope you are well. It has been educational reading your posts regarding film prints and the filmic process, thank you.

Kind regards,

fallinlight

Hi,
thanks!

sent you a PM

@MonkeyLizard10 I’m interested, too. Thanks!

Hi there,
I was pointed in this direction by ‘Starwarsbabirusa55’ I am a HUGE HUGE JP fan - owning the Original Kenner toys, command compound, deluxe red box dvd + cd, Blurays, 4k’s You Name it! It would be a dream come true to see a fully scanned in film reel done Properley, with respect to film grain and original colours. I cannot express how much I wish to see and support the making of this version.
I’d love to donate, and would adore to see progess so far, and indeed the finished 6.5K / 4K scanned Movies - open matte / matted (whichever!) Please consider allowing me to contribute. Cannot wait to see this version!
can someone send me a link to the project page / how to donate / discord server. Not sure how to proceed.
kind regards,
T.

If you will, send me a PM on how to donate and I am in. Thank you!

Hello,

I would love to donate and help too. I have been terribly disappointed by the blu-ray and the UHD versions and it’s one of my favourite films.

I have seen the 1080p open-matte scan floating around and of course it’s not great and lacking (plus I don’t really want the immersion breaking open matte haha) but at the same time it gave me a good idea of how pleasant the film could and should look.