@Dr.Cooper, will you be using the full aspect ratio/image of the print or will you crop it to a shorter height?
While the 35mm prints of Spider-Man 2 and 3 should have a larger image than the widescreen home video counterparts, they won’t contain the full camera image as Spider-Man 1 does. This is because Spider-Man 1 was a flat print which used the full 4-perf height from the negative, while SM-2 and 3 were printed anamorphic.
While Spider-Man 2 was filmed in Super 35, a lot of the VFX shots were hard-matted to a scope ratio. In the HDTV version, those scenes are pan and scanned to 16:9. Other scenes are open matte though.
It’d be nice to see the film this way.
Why would you use production stills to regrade a film???
In this film’s case I’d see no point. However, with films that either have differing palettes in their various releases, or those that have been modified over the years and with no theatrical source as a reference; production stills can offer some clues as how the image looked in its neutral form.
All of the home video releases of JP 1-3, with the exception of the very first VHS editions, have a wrong colour grading with pink and magenta push drowning out the warm mud-brown and golden timing of the original prints. The laserdisc, DVD, Blu-ray and UHDs also have a very dull contrast, destroying any depth the image had. The 3D version is the closest to the prints and even that went overboard with the orange and the reds. The 35mm scan also doesn’t look as warm (yellow-green) as the prints should. It has a blue cast (much less than the home videos).
Good that you have removed the blue filter, but the colours still feel like someone desaturated the image and then applied a yellow filter on it. A 35mm projected print will be warmer, but also have a great colour separation between the primaries and the various shades. It’s almost impossible to recreate that with the poor quality Blu-rays.
Also, the framing of the image on the Blu-ray is smaller and different than the 35mm version. The dinosaur heads were not cut off the frame in the cinema and the top framing was higher, showing more vertical info. There was less info at the left side and more on the right, compared to the Blu-ray.
You can find videos of a 35mm projected print on Youtube to get an idea. Just search “Jurassic Park 35mm screening.”
Casino Royale is indeed 16:9 open matte on PSP. Someone at FE has ripped the disc before and synced it to the Blu-Ray soundtrack. Sony UMD discs use a proprietary sound codec that won’t work outside of a PSP, but all the movies are merely stereo anyway.
Only the prologue of Casino Royale (2006) is open matte from what I remember, in the PSP UMD video. The rest of the runtime is all pan & scan.
Perhaps the best horror feature ever-made in India. Every aspect of production is top notch, especially, cinematography, music, effects and the performances. Give it a watch. It is about the depths of geed to which men can stoop and the horrors and possibilities of redemption.
I don’t have enough computing power or HDD space at the moment.
Hmm. That’s because the JP source was old film frames, while for Interstellar, the source is the Blu-ray.
Ok. Because this isn’t a preservation or a fan-edit (just pictures) I thought it’d belong to the “Off-topic” section.
This was an experiment meant to give a classic monochrome film look to one of the greatest space epics ever. Software used - VLC, Photoshop. I concentrated on giving this film similar gray shades as seen on black & white film, not just desaturate. Have a look at the images below and share your opinion. : )
More images will be added…
Folks, I manipulated the gamma, contrast and brightness of each frame to my liking. This is not representative of the actual contrast and brightness of the projected 35mm release prints; which would appear much brighter and less contrasty. This black & white rendition was done keeping in mind artistic b&w photos and cinema that I remember from memory.
EDIT: More images added above. Enjoy!
P.S: Here’s my new thread on Interstellar black & white - https://originaltrilogy.com/topic/Interstellar-in-classic-Black-and-White/id/63619#1252843
Bobson Dugnutt said:
Already ahead of you
That’s cool! Though nothing much can be done about the video quality of the scene.
The HBO broadcast was cropped 1.33:1 but properly colour timed, and the footage matched that of the movie proper. However, also limited to VHS resolution.
The deleted scenes on the DVD (the same released worldwide) are 1.85:1 OAR, but in bad shape, with lots of film artefacts.
Unfortunately, I doubt either sources will splice very well to a proper restoration.
The 1.33:1 version is open matte, not cropped (film was shot in 35mm 4 perf). And the deleted scenes are in (open matte) 1.50:1 (16:10), not 1.85:1. However, the deleted scenes have the original colour timing of the 35mm photochemical prints, since they are direct scans from the film reels.
@Bobson Dugnutt, Sure. Please check and let us know if there are more deleted scenes than those two for The Lost World.
heathen3017 said:…In addition, it is my understanding that there was a UK Double DVD box set of the first two Jurassic Park movies released in 2000 that had even more deleted scenes included…
I don’t think they included more than those two deleted scenes on a DVD edition and then discarded them for others. Unless anyone can confirm that more deleted scenes exist in the UK double disc box set from 2000, we have no way of knowing.
What did strike me was that the first few scenes were really green, yellow and orange. The colours were very deep and rich, the likes of which I don’t recall seeing since the 90’s.
I saw ‘Interstellar’ on 35mm. It was part of the 4th edition of ‘Reframing the Future of Film’ with Tacita Dean and Christopher Nolan, presented by Filmmaker and film preservationist Shivendra Singh Dungarpur.
The screening took place at a beautiful art-deco cinema in Mumbai called Liberty Cinema. The crowd was chanting “Nolan, Nolan” as a chorus. What did strike me was how incredibly humble and contained a person he is. Very reserved, regal and calm.
As for the projection itself, it was a beautiful looking print with gorgeous, richly saturated, warm colours. Textural details were delicious. The difference between the DCP/Blu-ray and the print was that the latter had a soft look, which was very soothing for the eyes. The details never took a hit and I noticed no intrusive black crush. The colours were very much closer to the images of the 70mm film cells that were posted on the first page of this thread.
The colours in the ice-planet scenes were slightly dull for my tastes, lacking in good contrast (the Blu-ray is even worse in these regards). It wasn’t at all grainy, neither did the print distractingly shake. But thankfully, it wasn’t stable as dead, like digital projection. The sound was out of this world powerful and I remembered that the sound during the 90’s 35mm screenings were also this loud and thumping, but never hurt the ears like digital sound does now in multiplexes. There’s a nice echo in analog sound, especially in older single-screen cinema halls, that creates a larger-than-life soundscape.
As for the cropping (and I took careful notice), the sides were quite tight, though never compromising the framing. The home videos are much wider in that regard. But I prefer the framing of the 35mm print as it was tight and focussed on the action without adding too many distracting elements at the edges. The vertical portion of the film frame was not masked however and we could often see the tail end of the previous film frame running through the projector. The cinema did not have projectors since 2014, so they can be forgiven for not getting all the necessary equipment.
But having seen 35mm film projection, I prefer it any day than over-hyped digital projection. Digital is pixelated and hurts my eyes while film soothed them. I never got any eye-fatigue watching this. Actually, I would say the 35mm projected image is close to the quality of the UHD blu-ray in terms of the details and the colour, than the Blu-ray. However, the home videos look a bit sharper but that’s a feature I don’t really need or even want.
Well unfortunately, Nolan can hold up as a prime example that the involvement of a director is no guarantor that a remaster turns out to be better:
With Memento, we yet again had a master with the contrast boosted (which seems to be a spreading decease these days just like the loudness war with audio) and lower resolution black and white scenes.
The 10th Anniversary Edition of ‘Memento’ looks fantastic! About on par with how a 35mm projected print looks like, with boosted contrast (acquired from the stages of printing - ON-IP-IN-Release print) The original Blu-ray looks horribly dull and flat. Movies projected on film do not look so dull and lifeless.
As for the Nolan films on UHD, all the IMAX scenes have been even more cropped than on the BD, on all four sides. Though the colour grading is now closer to the prints, there are many instances where there is too much artificial grain removal resulting in a smearing mess of images. The 2.39:1 framing is also slightly different now. I’d stick to the BDs for the 2.39:1 scenes and just use the UHD as a colour reference.
The IMAX shots of all the Nolan films on UHD have been zoomed-in and cropped out from all four sides.
Interstellar’s new 4K UHD Blu-ray has been zoomed-in and cropped on all four sides; much more than the IMAX shots in the Blu-ray.
Looks good; like 35mm photochemical timing. The colours pop better.
There is no project. The thread was theoretical.