'Raiders of the Lost Ark' - bluray and colour timing changes (Released) — Page 9

msycamore said:

litemakr said:

Based on some googling it sounds like Laser Pacific did a Raiders restoration under Spielberg's supervision, which I assume is the Wowow version. Then Laser Pacific was bought by Technicolor, who then re-colored what I assume is the same scan for the blu ray. That makes sense to me, I don't think the blu is a different scan. And Technicolor is listed on the blu ray. The question is why did they change the color after creating an already excellent restoration? The only thing I can think of is to "modernize" the look to match Crystal Skull and somehow appeal to a modern audience. It must have been done late in the game because the trailer released to promote the blu-ray set has a restoration demo featuring the Laser Pacific color, not what was actually released on blu. 

Check out what I posted earlier in the thread: http://originaltrilogy.com/forum/topic.cfm/Raiders-of-the-lost-ark-bluray-and-colour-timing-changes/post/633298/#TopicPost633298

As the link to the Pan American Clipper - matte shot isn't working any longer, here's a repost; http://caps-a-holic.com/hd_vergleiche/multi_comparison.php?disc1=1520&disc2=1519&cap1=14343&cap2=14327&art=full&image=2&hd_multiID=760&action=1&lossless=#vergleich (see removal of matte lines and tweaked water reflections in the Lowry DVD transfer). The same subtle digital tweaks seen in the 2003 DVD transfer are present in the Laser Pacific (Wowow HDTV-Broadcast) transfer.

Personally I vastly prefer the HDTV-Broadcast as well but there's clearly issues with both of them.

EDIT: Still, I guess a recycling of the same scan is a possibility despite the restored matte shot. Perhaps all the negativity surrounding the butchering of the Star Wars trilogy around the same time called for it. But then again, why restore that matte shot and keep the other tweaks? (A question that remains no matter how you look at it.)

 Interesting shot, the wowow looks like this:

http://screenshotcomparison.com/comparison/103028

hairy_hen said:

Yet again, I must bring up the fact that the low fade 35mm print of Raiders that turned up on eBay a while ago clearly showed a color timing that was very similar to the Bluray.

This film has always been gold-tinted.  Always.  The Bluray transfer is an attempt to recreate the original color timing, though since it was done digitally and not photochemically, it may not have always turned out exactly the same.  But it's in the ballpark, and its intentions were in the right place.

What you see on these other transfers is more akin to what was shot on the negative, before the initial color timing for interpositive would have taken place.  It also does not take into account that projection bulbs from that era were much warmer in tone than they are today.  The wowow transfer may be an accurate representation of what was actually photographed, but it does not represent how the film would have looked in theatres when it first came out.

This whole controversy reminds me of the time before Technicolor print references became available for Star Wars, and we didn't know what that film actually looked like originally.  Everybody thought the grey appearance of the Death Star on earlier home video releases was how it should have been, only to be disproved when it turned out the Death Star was actually quite blue in a lot of shots all along.  If the pictures from the eBay auction were to be posted here, the Bluray's undeniable resemblance to the film print could be seen by everyone.  I really wish now that I had saved them . . .

Sorry, but I strongly disagree.  I have yet to see a single screenshot, still photo or any 8mm, 16mm or 35mm screening I have ever attended which matched the orange/teal haze and messed up gamma on the blu ray. There is a slight red push, maybe a touch of yellow in the projected film, but not orange/teal or gold. I don't think you could actually get the blu ray color photo-chemically on film if you tried. And the orangish haze which permeates the blu ray to the point of actually obscuring detail in places has also never been there. Perhaps they started with an intention, but it was botched.  I agree that it is supposed to be warmer than the DVD, but not orangish warm. To my eyes the wowow, which is quite a bit warmer,  hits it right on.

Every single home video release since the first VHS has been supervised and proclaimed by Spielberg as matching his intentions. Why would it only now be suddenly so different? And people seem to forget that up until recently home video transfers were created from low contrast prints which had the theatrical timing, not from the camera negative. There was only a limited amount of color tweaking that could be done. That's why all of the releases of Raiders are pretty consistent up to the blu. It's only recently that studios have been going to the camera negative (instead of the internegative which has the timing) and digitally color timing from scratch. That pretty much coincides with the glut of revisionist color in the last 5-10 years.

And leaving color out altogether, the gamma is wrong on the blu. Highlights such as skies, mist, ghosts and fire are blown out to the point of having less detail than the VHS. That is definitely not how it looks when projected on film.

Why does the trailer touting the restoration of Raiders not show the blu ray colors?:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ba2eMxx0oHs

All of the shots from Raiders are not the blu ray colors/gamma. Skies are blue, greens are green and flesh tones are warm and a bit red, but not orange. No haze. Those are the correct colors. The clips from the bonus features DO show the blu ray colors interestingly, because they applied the same filters to the On Set feature. And they look flat in comparison.

I've seen Raiders a LOT on film, in 8,16, 35 and 70mm since 1981. And it never looked radically different (aside from some slight red shift) until I saw the IMAX version. From the opening scene I could tell something was wrong.

I'm not an expert on Star Wars, so can't comment on that. That probably has more to do with it being seen on lower resolution, outdated transfers for years until it we saw it in the ultra cleaned up DVDs and blu rays.

Well, I'm right there with h_h (deja vu with the Indy blu-ray thread). The DVDs and WOWOW transfers are mostly likely what the negative looks like, which admittedly looks great. That doesn't mean that is what a release print looks like. That kind of chemical color timing was popular in the early 80s. A lot of films were push to golden/yellow hues. I have seen plenty of 35mm prints from the 80s that have that look. Frankly, even though the BD transfer doesn't have the detail of the WOWOW, I admire that they went the extra mile to recreate the look of a release print.

People see to be ignoring the conversations that occurred earlier in this thread but here is the 35mm low fade H_H was talking about:

or from a different print:

or from a vintage 16mm print (I have pics from another print I have to find):

Hell, Temple had very similar color timing that was not duplicated in the DVD, HDTV or the BDs. From a 70mm print:

vs the BD:

And a quick and dirty regrade to see what the BD would look like if adjusted to the 70mm:

But I guess this won't be decide till someone gets a Raiders print and scans it. Which is something I would love.

Those 16mm caps are very interesting, thanks for posting. I have been trying to get my hands on a good 16mm copy for years. They still look more like the Wowow to me with fading and a bit of and red shift. How did you capture those? Can you post a couple of caps from the ark opening scene? Particularly one of the ghost shots, close ups of Indy and Marion or the fire sweeping the altar? That sequence looks the worst IMO, mainly because of blown out highlights. We can debate the color all day long and never agree, but blown out areas are definitely not correct, that's a mistake. Interesting that TOD seems to have the opposite problem on BD: red instead of orange. 

When you say the wowow probably is accurate to the negative, what do you mean? Because if it looked like the camera negative the color and brightness would be all over the place. If it looks like the internegative then it would be accurate to a perfect release print because the internegative has all of timing set based on answer prints. So I don't really understand your comment.

I almost bought a 35mm print of Raiders recently but it was too far shifted to red to be useful. I do have a Super 8 condensed version on the way, I am very curious to see how it looks. I saw it on super 8 many years ago but don't recall it looking any different. 

I am far from ignoring what went before, but those 35mm shots always looked a little worse for ware, and you can see even in those that and the trailer posted that the nazi flags are not orange.

So PDB nearly all your shots, bar the Temple ones say the BD is wrong.

The 16mm looks colder just like the wowow so I am not sure what that was aimed at

Maybe in between the two HD versions, but in no way was it ever as bad as the BD shows

35mm (slightly tamed) vs HD

http://screenshotcomparison.com/comparison/103115

I think this thread is one that people will never agree on.

Those 35mm shots don't exactly match either version, but the overall gamma and balance looks more like the wowow to me. Here is an ebay auction for a clip from what appears to be a more balanced print:

http://www.ebay.com/itm/1985-Raiders-of-the-Lost-Ark-35mm-film-strip-very-Rare-rad14-/271694361142?pt=UK_DVD_Film_TV_Film_Memorabilia_LE&hash=item3f423ef236

Definitely a better match for wowow, especially in the lighter areas.

I don't know if a 35mm press slide is relevant, but this matches wowow color exactly:

http://www.ebay.com/itm/Raiders-of-the-Lost-Ark-Harrison-Ford-Press-Color-Slide-Photo-35mm-/251744719056?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&hash=item3a9d2790d0

The 2 versions aren't really that different in color in daytime scenes (unlike the DVD). The blu-ray has an added brown/orange haze that affects lighter areas, dulling whites and reducing contrast. Saturation is a bit too high.  Add to that blown out skies and other bright areas and you get an unpleasant image in many places. Darker scenes look worse, flesh tones are much more orange. Indy and Marion look like oompa loompas in the scene on the boat and during the ark opening. Reducing saturation and adjusting brightness and contrast makes the blu ray look better, but you can't fix shots which are blown out because the detail is just gone.

In the screenshot of Indy with the shovel you can see a slight blue tint to the sky on that lightens as you go left (it's backwards). The blu ray is all white, the wowow has subtle the blu transition.

I wish there were some caps to compare the ark opening sequence, that looks the worst on the blu. 

We need to keep on the lookout for low-fade prints of Raiders. 35mm, 16mm, 8mm, whatever.

I'd like to note that some of the star wars scans I've seen also seem to have very "oompa loompa orange" skintones.

Also keep in mind that a print photographed like that wont tell you everything, you need to keep the light source of the time (very warm) in mind.

Well, now I get to have fun making picture comparisons. But I'm getting ahead of myself I guess. I should talk about taking pictures of a 16mm (16) or 35mm (35) being projected might not represent it properly, that camera white balance, exposure can play a factor, blah blah, we are adults we all know this but we need reference points so lets push on.

I should say to litemakr those are the only shots I have of that 16mm print. I have pics from another 16mm print but I have to find those. And thanks to Harmy for the 35mm pics (I had them store on a HDD somewhere that I can't find at the moment, Also has my laserdisc captures).

I guess I should reiterate what my position is in this matter before I really get into it. I believe that Raiders' theatrical prints had a yellow/golden tint added to them. Something that was common at the time and something that hasn't been seen before in any home video master. I also believe that the BD was an honest attempt to recreate that look. It is not revisionistic, it is restorative.

Moving on lets look at the 16mm shots I posted. Post here say they look more like the WOWOW then the BD. But let me play devil's advocate against myself first. Let's see if I can see the other perspective.

16mm/35mm (not same frame obviously)/BD/WOWOW (Wow)

Indy's jacket is dark in the 16 and the WOWOW (also in 35mm) but is brown in the BD. That's a point for the WOWOW. The idol has green highlights in the 16 and WOWOW (and also the 35mm). The BD is more prue gold. So that another point for the WOWOW. There is one small point for the BD in that Indy's face is more orange in the 16, 35 and BD whereas in the WOWOW, its tend more red but its a minor difference.The bottom is I do agree that the 16 does match the WOWOW in some cases.

You'll notice the 35mm has a yellow "haze" like the demo dvdmike posted. Well that's how chemical timing was done. Universally, over the whole print.Nowadays with computers you can target parts of the frame/screen instead of the whole

But lets look at the other side. One of the common complaints about the BD was that grass was not green in the beginning chase, that it is yellow

16mm/BD/WOWOW

The 16 is is very yellow. It closest match is the BD which also has "yellowed" grass. Opposed to that the WOWOW's grass is brilliant green. 

Taking a pause right at the moment I can hear people saying that's not right. Grass is green and in the BD its not green. That misses a bit of the point. Movies are not reality and they are not truth. They are beautiful lies told to us but great artists. They can have grass as green or yellow or brown or whatever. Maybe the director and cinematographer wanted the grass to be green, maybe they made sure the grass was ultra green so when they applied a yellow tint, the grass wouldn't totally turn yellow. Hell my yard looks like the BD in the dead of summer.

It remains me of an intresting fact I found out in like when researching what Aliens is suppose to look like in theaters. The Pulse Rifles props used in the film were brown. When under lights, the guns looked more green. Not once in every video release I have seen do those guns look like there true brown. Owners of the original props painted them green to match how they look in the film. So how something looks in really life doesn't mean it will look that way on screen. But I digress, just making a point.

Moving on lets look at the fight at the airplane with Jock:

16mm/BD/WOWOW

Jock's skin tone looks different in each but look at the sky, yellow in the 16mm and BD but normal blue in the WOWOW. Again 16 is the closest to the BD.

Let take a grand tour for the next one. Luckily the scene of Indy teaching lines up between the 16 and 35. I can't find my laserdisc (widescreen and P&S) captures at this time but here is everything else:

16mm/35mm/BD/WOWOW/"European" H.264 Master/DVD

Again the 16mm mostly matches with the BD. The light from the windows is yellow and the chalkboard is slightly green.  All other transfers pretty much line up.

Ok, so maybe now someone is thinking that 16mm is too extreme. Too yellow. Too over exposed. A bad source to look at. So lets look at the 35mm.

35mm/BD/WOWOW

35mm is very yellow, BD is the best match since it is slightly yellower then the WOWOW but its very close.

35mm/BD/WOWOW

35mm is very yellow, BD is the best match since the desert is more yellow then the red in the WOWOW.

35mm is very yellow, BD is the best match since the plane is more yellow then red in the WOWOW.

35mm is very yellow, BD is the best match since the plane is more yellow then red in the WOWOW. I'd like to point out I keep posting this horrible symbol because like the flags in the BD its orange.

The one interesting pic is this:

Where the 35mm is half way between the BD and WOWOW. The BD is all orange, the WOWOW is mostly red with a little orange in the middle and the 35mm is mostly orange with the edges being red.

All of this picture evidence points to one fact, that Raiders had a yellow/gold tint on release. In fact if we take the pics of the 16mm and 35mm at face value (and we don't given the opening disclaimer) the BD did not go far enough in the yellow tint. Imagine the fit people would of thrown if the did the yellow to that extreme.

And getting back to Kingdom Of The Crystal Skull. In many interviews (like American Cinematographer) with DP Janusz Kaminski, he said he went to great lengths to study Douglas Slocombe's (the dp of the original 3) style and look. He looked at many prints of Raiders and went to great lengths to match Raiders in style, details and color. Its a testament to his work that KOTCS look nothing like his normal style. No massive grain, no breaking the frame, its a very classic style with bright colors and high contrast. Janusz's cinematography is the best part of KOTCS. My point is he looked at Raiders many time and duplicated its coloring. KOTCS is colored to look like Raiders not the other way around. 

One could argue that the yellow tinting on the BD was done poorly. That it was done is such a way that it punched the reds too orange. After all red and yellow equal orange. We have seen that kind of bad color timing recently on The Good, The Bad and the Ugly 4K BD. Were the excessive levels of yellow created a green tint on everything. That color timing was proven false when the IB tech print was seen. The yellow was right but the green was wrong. The debate on how much orange is one worth having but its worth noting that the 35mm does have an orange tint in a lot of places.

And speaking of TGTBATU, I know were this mistrust comes from as we have seen many, many screw ups before. And many people around here have fixed those mistakes. As h_h pointed out Star Wars, scanned from the negative, doesn't look like a release print. Road Warrior/Mad Max 2 scanned from the negative, doesn't look like a release print. Conan The Barbarian scanned from the negative, doesn't look like a release print. The Matrix is an entire entry on its own. But why redo Raiders and not the others? Why spend the time on Raiders at all? Why do it in a specific way that tends towards the pics of the 16 and 35 and the style at the time? Is that coincidence?

At the end of the day I love the WOWOW. I have a copy of it myself and I have watched many times. As a scan its superior to the BD in detail. As for the color I think it most likely looks like the Neg or an IP just like the LD, DVD and European master. I think the BD was an honest attempt to recreate the look of a release print, faults and all. The only way this will be decided is with scanned a 35mm print. I have been searching awhile and never found a good one or one at a reasonable price. If someone here can get a print, get it scanned and give me a copy that proves what I just said was wrong. I will happily thank that person for proving me wrong. Gladly. Until then I believe that Raiders is suppose to have more yellow then the WOWOW based on the evidence at hand.

Thanks for posting all of those screenshots PDB. The thing I love about this forum is everyone is truly passionate about film. I agree with you that Raiders should be a bit more yellow and that the jungle scenes were a bit less green. I think they went overboard with orange on the blu-ray to the point that I don't enjoy watching it. It's over saturated and too much teal.  And I don't like the washed out appearance of some of it.

I received my Super 8 version of Raiders today. It's about 15 minutes long and does a pretty decent job of condensing the movie and featuring some of the big moments. It slighly faded but color is pretty good overall. Some daylight scenes are a bit overexposed.

It seems to match up to the wowow in places and blu-ray in others. I never quite see the orange haze but there is more yellow. One thing that struck me is how much darker the ark opening scene is. The ghosts are bright and look more glowing while the background is much darker.  I will work on getting some screenshots posted. 

litemakr said:

Thanks for posting all of those screenshots PDB. The thing I love about this forum is everyone is truly passionate about film. I agree with you that Raiders should be a bit more yellow and that the jungle scenes were a bit less green. I just think they went overboard on the blu-ray.  And I don't like the washed out appearance of some of it.

I received my Super 8 version of Raiders today. It's about 15 minutes long and does a pretty decent job of condensing the movie and featuring some of the big moments. It slighly faded but color is pretty good overall. Some daylight scenes are a bit overexposed.

It seems to match up to the wowow in places and blu-ray in others. I never quite see the orange haze but there is more yellow. One thing that struck me is how much darker the ark opening scene is. The ghosts are bright and look more glowing while the background is much darker.  I will work on getting some screenshots posted. 

Maybe in the end like your Super 8, the truth lies somewhere in between, lightmakr. Maybe a little WOWOW and maybe a little BD, like that pic of the sunset. It often happens that way in life. My point of advocacy is the added yellow to the picture. 

Hopefully, no one takes this too seriously. We are talking movies here. I am passionate about this but also having fun arguing my points. I do agree the BD is not a very good transfer when compared to the WOWOW. The WOWOW's detail and sharpness are simply better. I just think people are judging this as revisionist and I don't think it is. I think the intention was pure. We just don't know if it was a crappy job or a good job till a good 35mm can be scanned. Out of curiosity do you have the ability to scan and post pics of the Super 8? I'd love to see some pics after your description.

ScruffyNerfHerder said:

@PDB Thank you! You stated perfectly what I felt, but lacked the evidence to say. Great use of examples, very well reasoned and explained. Everyone is of course welcome to their own opinion, but I believe the Blu-ray is a very good recreation of Raiders as seen in theaters. 

Thanks ScruffyNerfHerder. I think everyone here in this thread loves this movie and I think we are all just looking for the best presentation of it.

PDB said:

 Out of curiosity do you have the ability to scan and post pics of the Super 8? I'd love to see some pics after your description.

 I don't have a way of scanning it, but I shot some video with a high end camera and I will post some of that.

Very interesting stuff. There are other Blu-ray transfers out there that similarly seem to be bad attempts to recreate the original theatrical timing, laced with characteristics of modern grading and thus coming off to many as being purely revisionist.

For example, the maligned U.S. Blu-ray transfer of The Neverending Story with its gold tint and teal/orange tendencies is not without precedent. There used to be a camera recording of part of a Derann digest print online, and the excerpted scenes had similar timing to the BD (though with a better color spectrum, and much better contrast than the darkened blowout/crush mess of the U.S BD). I think they may have tried to match a print, but failed miserably/let their modern digital grading tendencies get the better of them.

But back to Raiders, I can't wait to see your pics, litemakr. The more film evidence, the better...

I saw it projected in 96 and it was far from gold, I think that bulb temp is a factor there also 

dvdmike said:

I saw it projected in 96 and it was far from gold, I think that bulb temp is a factor there also 

Last time I saw 35mm projected was maybe 2008 or 9. It was not gold or orange. Definitely more red and perhaps yellow, but not hazy like parts of the blu ray. It looked warmer than the DVD but had very similar contrast/gamma, something that is not well done on the blu ray. 

I wish I had known about this thread sooner. I saw a 35mm showing back in July. All I can say is that what Harmy posted looks a little fuzzier and maybe a little warmer. From what I could tell the print was in great shape.

Most likely you saw a print of the blu ray restoration, not one with the original timing. I actually toured Paramount studios earlier this year and they showed us the film cans for the new prints they had made for Raiders. I have a picture of it somewhere...

At the Paramount archive. Oh how I wanted to grab this and run ;-)

That picture makes me sad in a weird way 

Here are some sample clips from the 15 minute Super 8mm version. No sound on these clips. When I have more time I will record the entire 15 mins with sound and post. It uses the alternate soundtrack discussed previously in this thread. 

https://vimeo.com/113868838

Password is: raiders

What are people's thoughts about the super 8? It doesn't match wowow or blu-ray really, but it is closer to wowow. It has more red and brown than wowow (some due to slight red shift), but not the orange/gold haze of the blu.