Sign In

Raiders of the Lost Ark 35mm LPP Theatrical Experience - v1.0 (Released) — Page 10

Author
Time

tomi said:

gracie1979 said:

Can anyone help me in the right direction to see this please? I’ve had no luck with it on Usenet and don’t have spleen.

i’ll send you a pm

i know this is old but raiders is easily one of my favorite movies, can i have a pm please?

Author
Time

I would also love a link if possible. I just found out about all this stuff recently.

Author
Time

Schilkeman said:

I would also love a link if possible. I just found out about all this stuff recently.

Hi
can anyone help out on this one?
Been after for a while and struggling

thanks
CC

Author
Time

PM me with a download link, if completed!. This is a must have.

Author
Time
 (Edited)

RobotB9 said:

I’ve seen this discussion (yellow/gold tint on Raiders blu ray) on various sites, and I don’t want to get into a big discussion or step on any toes, but I’d like to relate my experiences with this movie as I was 18 and saw it when it first came out, and people who saw it in theaters should relate their experience for how it looked originally. If no one wants to hear another raiders color experience, by all means, ignore me.

When I first saw the movie, the one thing that stood out immediately was a very warm tint, and I may have remarked to my date (now my wife) how warm the movie was. Now mind you, I wasn’t into video or audio hobbies or equipment at this point in my life, but the warmth was immediately apparent to me. It looked like most outdoor scenes were shot in morning or evening light, but bright as normal daylight. The Nepal bar scenes were definitely warm looking (yellow/red tints). I saw the movie a couple of times in big theaters and it was always the same. When it first aired on television, I thought how it already looked old and faded and cold (no warm tint). Every release I’ve seen since then (only vhs and dvd) looked as if it was taken from an old faded videotape of the movie. It never looked right (or like I first saw it in theaters). It always seemed cold and somehow faded, and looked like a 50’s or 60’s faded movie.

When I first saw the 2012 Blu ray, I thought to myself, “Finally, this movie looks like I remember!” It’s warm and friendly looking again. Just my 2 cents, but the (2012) blu ray version looks closest to what I remember seeing in theaters. Now I’ll grant you, the cave shots may be a bit brighter, and some scenes look blurry (the spiders on their backs), so maybe not perfect, but good.

I’m not going to argue if someone wants the yellows toned down a bit, or darkens the movie a tad, or even if they want to perfectly correct the colors, but the blu ray is essentially the experience I had in theaters if you want the original theater look. With all the home releases viewed over the years, even people who saw it in theaters may have skewed memories of how warm this movie was, but my memory of how warm the movie was has actually stuck with me all these years, even before there was a yellow tint/no tint debate. Again, just my $.02.

Leo

With all due respect, your recollections are wrong. While some original prints may have looked warmer than others (Fuji prints in particular) absolutely none of them looked like the blu-ray because it was digitally color graded from scratch using a scan of the original negative. What many people don’t understand is that the negative DOES NOT have the theatrical color timing. It is low contrast and designed to be printed to interpositive film that will then show the correct contrast and that is where the color timing happens. Each shot is carefully color timed and balanced to have the correct exposure and color so scenes shot on different film stocks and cameras match. The interpositive has the correct look, not the negative. Prints are made based on the interpositive. So scanning a negative requires digitally recreating (or reimagining) the original look. In the case of Raiders, they took creative license and applied an orange/teal color scheme that would have been literally impossible to create with old photochemical color timing. So you definitely never saw that in original prints. A bit warmer, maybe, but not like the blu-ray.

All video releases up to the blu-ray were created from an interpolative, so they reflect the original timing to varying degrees. The faded look you mention would be more related to standard definition not having the best color reproduction and older scanning technology. The 4K release is based on the same negative scan used for the blu-ray, but they went back and removed the worst (but not all) of the revisionist color. They also did a lot more digital fixes and tweaks including one glaring error. But nothing approaching the changes in Star Wars.

The print this 35mm restoration is based on is an original Kodak print and reflects what most people would have seen back in 1981. Depending on the temperature of the projector light, the warmth could have varied, but would never have resulted in anything like the orange/teal look. I have also seen scans of 2 original Fuji prints, which are warmer, but look nothing like the blu-ray. There is some evidence that the color timing was tweaked in the 1983 re-release resulting in the bar scenes being warmer, so if you saw a release later than 1983 that could have been the case. But again, just warmer, not the blu-ray color grading.

Author
Time

I would very much like a PM as well if anyone can help me find this. One of my favorite movies. Thanks and glad to have found others who appreciate this!

Author
Time

Hello from the East!

I have been looking for this for a week, everything is private or not accepting invites! Cannot locate a usenet or began to sign up if I don’t have a source. Can anyone point me in the right direction?
Much appreciated. Thanks!

Author
Time

litemakr said:

RobotB9 said:

I’ve seen this discussion (yellow/gold tint on Raiders blu ray) on various sites, and I don’t want to get into a big discussion or step on any toes, but I’d like to relate my experiences with this movie as I was 18 and saw it when it first came out, and people who saw it in theaters should relate their experience for how it looked originally. If no one wants to hear another raiders color experience, by all means, ignore me.

When I first saw the movie, the one thing that stood out immediately was a very warm tint, and I may have remarked to my date (now my wife) how warm the movie was. Now mind you, I wasn’t into video or audio hobbies or equipment at this point in my life, but the warmth was immediately apparent to me. It looked like most outdoor scenes were shot in morning or evening light, but bright as normal daylight. The Nepal bar scenes were definitely warm looking (yellow/red tints). I saw the movie a couple of times in big theaters and it was always the same. When it first aired on television, I thought how it already looked old and faded and cold (no warm tint). Every release I’ve seen since then (only vhs and dvd) looked as if it was taken from an old faded videotape of the movie. It never looked right (or like I first saw it in theaters). It always seemed cold and somehow faded, and looked like a 50’s or 60’s faded movie.

When I first saw the 2012 Blu ray, I thought to myself, “Finally, this movie looks like I remember!” It’s warm and friendly looking again. Just my 2 cents, but the (2012) blu ray version looks closest to what I remember seeing in theaters. Now I’ll grant you, the cave shots may be a bit brighter, and some scenes look blurry (the spiders on their backs), so maybe not perfect, but good.

I’m not going to argue if someone wants the yellows toned down a bit, or darkens the movie a tad, or even if they want to perfectly correct the colors, but the blu ray is essentially the experience I had in theaters if you want the original theater look. With all the home releases viewed over the years, even people who saw it in theaters may have skewed memories of how warm this movie was, but my memory of how warm the movie was has actually stuck with me all these years, even before there was a yellow tint/no tint debate. Again, just my $.02.

Leo

With all due respect, your recollections are wrong. While some original prints may have looked warmer than others (Fuji prints in particular) absolutely none of them looked like the blu-ray because it was digitally color graded from scratch using a scan of the original negative. What many people don’t understand is that the negative DOES NOT have the theatrical color timing. It is low contrast and designed to be printed to interpositive film that will then show the correct contrast and that is where the color timing happens. Each shot is carefully color timed and balanced to have the correct exposure and color so scenes shot on different film stocks and cameras match. The interpositive has the correct look, not the negative. Prints are made based on the interpositive. So scanning a negative requires digitally recreating (or reimagining) the original look. In the case of Raiders, they took creative license and applied an orange/teal color scheme that would have been literally impossible to create with old photochemical color timing. So you definitely never saw that in original prints. A bit warmer, maybe, but not like the blu-ray.

All video releases up to the blu-ray were created from an interpolative, so they reflect the original timing to varying degrees. The faded look you mention would be more related to standard definition not having the best color reproduction and older scanning technology. The 4K release is based on the same negative scan used for the blu-ray, but they went back and removed the worst (but not all) of the revisionist color. They also did a lot more digital fixes and tweaks including one glaring error. But nothing approaching the changes in Star Wars.

The print this 35mm restoration is based on is an original Kodak print and reflects what most people would have seen back in 1981. Depending on the temperature of the projector light, the warmth could have varied, but would never have resulted in anything like the orange/teal look. I have also seen scans of 2 original Fuji prints, which are warmer, but look nothing like the blu-ray. There is some evidence that the color timing was tweaked in the 1983 re-release resulting in the bar scenes being warmer, so if you saw a release later than 1983 that could have been the case. But again, just warmer, not the blu-ray color grading.

Your general idea is correct, but at the very technical level, the original negative is the un-colorcorrected original. The color timing is done from the negative. They use it to make presentation prints (taken directly from the negative so a higher quality with less grain) and interpositives. The color timing is baked into the interpositive which then creates the internegatives (this is usually where subtitles are added, which is why the Star Wars GOUT is subtitle free because it was taken from a newer interpositive). The internegatives strike all the prints. so on a popular movie like Star Wars, the negative gets some heavy use as they have to make more interpositives.

35mm print preservation archives what the prints originally looked like. So viewing them is as close to going to the theater to see the original again as you can get. There is some interpretation, but in general they are very well done.

Author
Time

yotsuya said:
The color timing is baked into the interpositive which then creates the internegatives (this is usually where subtitles are added, which is why the Star Wars GOUT is subtitle free because it was taken from a newer interpositive). The internegatives strike all the prints. so on a popular movie like Star Wars, the negative gets some heavy use as they have to make more interpositives.

If I’m understanding this correctly then it explains why C4 (UK) usually provide their own custom subtitles to their telecasted films instead of the theatrical subtitles, because they’ve received a copy of the interpositive and not the internegative?

“Logic is the battlefield of adulthood.”

  • Howard Berk
Author
Time

How odd that it should end this way for us after so many stimulating encounters. I almost regret it.

Where shall I find a link to this 35mm restoration that is so close to my own needs?

Author
Time

I did happen to discover a download for the scan, although it may have been an earlier version not too sure. The one I have has a ton of imperfections, and certainly no substitute for the blu-ray. Perhaps it’s not supposed to be.

Author
Time

I found a version on myspleen but this is not the one listed here i think 😦

Author
Time

Hello I would very much like a link to this film or a copy of it. Thank you!

Author
Time

I would love a link to this if it’s still available.
Many thanks