Sign In

Papai2013

User Group
Members
Join date
27-Apr-2013
Last activity
24-Jun-2022
Posts
398

Post History

Post
#1490078
Topic
Original Jurassic Park Trilogy 35mm Preservation Project
Time

Firecracker00 said:

Thanks for that, I heard something similar to what you said there on a youtube video about the open matte version. But why does the bluray version I have show a small amount to the left side but the open matte version is cropped, only slightly but noticeable?. Do you know where the open matte version of JP came from and how they got hold of them?. Also, I noticed there was a 16:9 aspect during a non effects shot where the camera moves into Grant’s face as he is looking towards the herd of Brachiosaurs moving across the lake below, but the other non effects shots go back to the open matte look.

I don’t know why that close-up shot (and another one where he says “they move in herds”) was matted. Such shots probably had green screen. We know that they couldn’t film inside the ranch where the lake is. The wide shot of the Brachios wading on the lake is a still photo frame that was animated during post-production. the actors were shot with a green screen in the foreground and later composited in the photo, edited to look like a motion picture image; with heatwaves, reflections on the water surface and camera shakes, etc.

Post
#1489825
Topic
Original Jurassic Park Trilogy 35mm Preservation Project
Time

Firecracker00 said:

I came across an open matte copy of Jurassic Park… During shots of the CGI effects the image is shown in a wide format and I’ve heard this was the way the effects shots were filmed, but I did notice that the left hand side of the frame during those CGI shots that it’s cropped slightly but the right side shows more than the DVD and bluray version but the bluray and DVD versions show more than the open matte version. Does anyone know why the left side is cropped, shouldn’t it show the full image?.

The very left side of the frame gets printed over by the sound strip that is placed at the left side of the print. The right side has nothing obscuring the edges, hence you see more picture. The effects shots were filmed on VistaVision cameras that have a tall 1.47:1 aspect ratio. They were then cropped to a 16:9 type of shape, for ease of rendering (less amount of effects rendered is less cost in post-production and more time saved). The film gate through which the entire print passes, not only hides the sprocket holes and splices, but also obscures more image at the edges for stabilisation purposes. The DVD, Blu-ray don’t show much more image than the theatre, but the Laserdisc and THX Widescreen VHS did. They showed the full width of the negative. The DVD and Blu-ray actually show less image and a slightly different framing than the projected theatrical prints. They cut off more headroom than the projected image did.

Post
#1489791
Topic
Original Jurassic Park Trilogy 35mm Preservation Project
Time

SpacemanDoug said:

I wouldn’t say the 4K is 100% like the old blu-ray, because at least on the 4K the annoying green tinge is gone, but in other aspects it could be a lot better

It’s almost the same. There are some very subtle improvements, sure, owing to the 4K scan, but they are negligible. The colour grading is the biggest offender for me. It’s just cold and pale compared to the warmer and richer hues of the original photochemical timing. Also, the 4K is more cropped than the 35mm projection. In the projected print, you see more of the top and the right and slightly less of the left side and the bottom. The top and right portion in the of the frame is more cropped in the BD/4K which compromises the composition. The dinosaur snouts/heads get cropped out of frame in the home videos when they bellow/roar at the skies. In the 35mm projections, the heads can be clearly seen inside the frame. The BD/4K also adds extra image at the left, which affects the composition negatively in certain wide shots where the right side was needed more.

Post
#1489672
Topic
Original Jurassic Park Trilogy 35mm Preservation Project
Time

Every single home video version, except the 1994 VHS, has the wrong colour grading. The colours were pushed towards blue and pink, plus desaturated. The greens and yellows, reds were too pale. The original photochemical timing had warm hues - the skin of the actors looked sun-tanned.

When you look at the 1997 VHS, Laserdisc, DVD, BD, 4K, the skin looks pale and pinkish. The yellow-brown-red tone of the film prints is completely gone in the home video versions. The 3D tried to recreate this effect in the Rec 709 colour space, but they went overboard with the reds and oranges, resulting in reddish skies. But, out of all the higher definition versions, my favourite is the 3D, though it’s not accurate.

The 4K looks no different than the pale and dull-looking Blu-ray. It’s like they scanned the negative/interpositive but decided not to work on the colour correction. The greens of the Ford Explorers should be deep green, not light green. The yellows should be stronger to act as a contrast, but it isn’t the case with the 4K. This is why many 4K buyers/reviewers wonder if they just upscaled the 2011 Blu-ray master.

Post
#1488218
Topic
Original Jurassic Park Trilogy 35mm Preservation Project
Time

RU.08 said:

SpookyDollhouse said:

Higher color gamut alone would benefit it and HDR would be icing on the cake.

Film doesn’t have a “colour gamut”, it’s basically got intensity of reds, greens, and blues which is represented by each corresponding resistive dye layer (magenta blocks green etc). Film has a bit_ more in the reds and oranges and a little bit more in cyan blue and yellow compared with Rec709, but that’s it:

Thanks for the above explanation, RU.08. I feel that photochemical colour timing is an organic process that has physical limitations based on the dyes and the chemical reactions that take place. With digital, you could do a lot more; which doesn’t make HDR or Dolby Vision better by default. It’s just a different look. If the final product looks good in the rec 709 or at most Rec 2020 SDR colour space and matches with the look of projected film, then it’s job done I think. I don’t consider HDR or Dolby Vision to be an absolute necessity when preserving 35mm film. But who knows, I may be wrong.

Post
#1487900
Topic
Original Jurassic Park Trilogy 35mm Preservation Project
Time

SpookyDollhouse said:

Papai2013 said:

Not 2 start a quarrel but I don’t think you know how HDR works. Film (negatives and prints alike) has higher dynamic range than SDR. Higher color gamut alone would benefit it and HDR would be icing on the cake. It’s only revisionist if you make it so.

There was no way to see anything close to theatrical quality in the home back when these films came out. Now we have a tool that brings us closer to that experience; to call that tool “revisionist” is, well, a misnomer.

I never called the HDR grading tool “revisionist” in my post, did I? I said I feel SDR colouring (especially using 10 bit Rec 709/Rec 2020 gamut) would be enough. Also, I have no way of seeing HDR anyway. My monitor is a 10 bit one that does not support HDR. When I see 4K films, I watch the SDR 10 bit versions only and they feel adequate to me. Sorry if you found my post to be quarrelsome or otherwise. I may be wrong, but I feel most people don’t have HDR displays across the world. There are many Asian countries where people still have SD TVs or 720p/1080p TVs, like in India. HDR TVs and good ones at that, are quite expensive. The cheap ones don’t last long and don’t do HDR justice anyway. Most cable broadcasts are in SD and HD still. You only get 4K in streaming and that still is not something that is the popular option worldwide. 4K HDR is costlier than SDR to purchase online.

Just compare Jurassic Park on 3D and on UHD disc. The former, despite being in SDR HD, is closer to the original warm colour timing and maintains the proper shades of the primary colours even if it pushes towards a bit too orange. The UHD with HDR looks as bland and cold as the DVDs and the Blu-rays with improper tone mapping and incorrect shades of colours.

HDR is a tool, just like SDR. It is not better or worse. Christopher Nolan does not use Dolby Vision on the UHD discs and yet his films look brilliantly shot, timed and composed. So, personally, I don’t think Dolby Vision/HDR is a necessity. And again, there’s no way for me to see it that way either.

Having said that, if you folks can edit it that way, that’s fine as well. I am not opposed to the idea and certainly won’t stop anyone from doing it. I personally feel that HDR/Dolby Vision are not absolutely necessary tools for preserving the 35mm colour tones and shades. Please don’t feel offended.

: )

Post
#1487850
Topic
Original Jurassic Park Trilogy 35mm Preservation Project
Time

Fullmetaled said:

@RU.08 are you going to give both Jurassic park and Jurassic park 3 a hdr/Dolby vision grade so the awful uhd blu ray can be retired to the dust bin of garbage video transfers?

I don’t think there is any need for a Dolby Vision or HDR grade to create colour that closely matches the prints. There was no Dolby Vision or HDR in 2001 or a decade from then. While JP3 is colour timed photochemically, many films post 2001 were graded digitally and they looked fine. SDR colour with proper white balance is enough. 4K scan will ensure almost all details have been preserved. But removal of print damage is needed as the print has scratches at various sections. This will take time.

Post
#1456607
Topic
The Shining - 35mm print opportunity (a WIP)
Time

SilverWook said:

I’m seeing a lot better these days, but I have other issues with the right eye that distorts my vision and makes reading text on the screen difficult at times. It may be a long while before that’s resolved.

If you haven’t heard, WB sent a C&D to a fan editor whose Hobbit edit may have been a little too high profile, so I’m trying to figure out how to proceed with extreme caution. Someone on facebook found screenshots from earlier in the thread a couple years back and posted them there, so my paranoia is a bit justified.

Hope you recover your sight soon. Yes, your paranoia is justified. If studios start to send notices for fan edits then everyone has to proceed with caution. The problem is, once a content is released, the editor can no longer control how it gets shared, among whom and where it ends up. On the other hand, if the editor cannot share it, or share it only with a tiny number of people, then it’s probably not worth the time to undertake such projects anyway. So, it’s a tricky situation. Creative drive vs corporate batons.
It’s genuinely scary how undemocratic the world is becoming day by day. Even something as non-profit and reverential as a fan edit is being targeted by mega corporations who make a tremendous amount of money anyway. Everyone it seems, want exclusivity nowadays and are aggressively enforcing it. Do correct me if I am wrong.

Post
#1445246
Topic
Info: Jurassic Park - Bootleg / Workprint / Extended Cut on video
Time

ZombiEsushi said:

I wasn’t aware that Spielberg doesn’t like to release extended footage for his movies given that he has released extended cuts (or at least included deleted scenes on the dvds) for ET, Close Encounters and the Lost World. I wonder if it is just this movie he has an issue with…

Maybe. Jurassic Park is one of the few Spielberg films that has consistently gotten incorrect home video versions released with framing and colour timing different from the original 35mm projection. The colour issue is the most obvious. Even Lost World looks much better comparatively. so, who knows why JP does not get the royal treatment it deserves, seeing that it has become a beloved modern classic.

Post
#1389703
Topic
Info: Jurassic Park - Bootleg / Workprint / Extended Cut on video
Time

ReleaseTheImaxCut said:

In regards to your earlier comment I really wish Spielberg would release deleted scenes of his movies. I know he doesn’t like to do so for some reason but I always wondered why The Lost World was an exception? They even show an extended version on the SyFy channel which I wonder if anyone has made that. Even then not all of the deleted scenes are available. Saving Private Ryan is another one I’d love to see. For Jurassic Park there doesn’t seem to be as much filmed but whatever we can get would be great!

True.

Post
#1295493
Topic
Jurassic Park - Theatrical '93 Regrade (Released)
Time

IsanRido said:

Reese said:

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).

Post
#1295368
Topic
Jurassic Park - Theatrical '93 Regrade (Released)
Time

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.”

Post
#1274968
Topic
Info: 007 - Open Matte Bond Movies...
Time

SilverWook said:

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.

Post
#1252843
Topic
Interstellar in classic Black & White
Time

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…

Post
#1252841
Topic
Jurassic Park in Black & White Film
Time

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