Sign In

Papai2013

User Group
Trusted Members
Join date
27-Apr-2013
Last activity
9-Dec-2018
Posts
872

Post History

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

Post
#1233193
Topic
REQ: Jurassic Park: The Lost World Extended Cut 1080p
Time

BenjaminG said:

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.

Post
#1231808
Topic
REQ: Jurassic Park: The Lost World Extended Cut 1080p
Time

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.

Post
#1191620
Topic
Interstellar - ColorMatching BluRay to 70mm
Time

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.

Post
#1182033
Topic
The Dark Knight - EE Reduction and Original Color Timing
Time

little-endian said:

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:

http://caps-a-holic.com/c.php?go=1&a=0&d1=3933&d2=3932&s1=36530&s2=36520&i=2&l=0

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.

Post
#1110724
Topic
TITANIC 35mm Preservation!
Time

I’d also request for the colours to be left on this just as the projected print shows. 35mm prints were more yellow and green than red. We saw this on the 35mm and 8mm examples of Terminator 2, as well as Jurassic Park.

Digital grading cannot successfully emulate the look of photochemical timing, which is why neither Jurassic Park 3D or Terminator 2 3D (I saw it twice theatrically) could emulate the photochemical colour dynamism. There was very little colour separation in both JP3D and T23D because of the limitation of digital colour space.

Because there is already so much good colour information and colour separation on this Titanic 35mm, it’s best to match it to projected colours (you’ll need to use the very same bulbs they used in the cinemas back then) and leave it at that. If there’s no way to accurately find out 1997 projection bulb colour temperature, then it’s best to leave the colours on the print alone. This is my suggestion anyway.

Also, @RU.08, I sent you a PM. Please check and let me know. Thanks.

Post
#1105952
Topic
Alien: Covenant - IMAX edition [spoRv]
Time

^…^ said:

To whom it may concern: the new version is out - Alien: Covenant IMAX [Fundamental Collection] - now all the IMAX/open matte shots are perfect, no more subtitles and/or logo remains, and eventual top/bottom “slices” differences in brightness and/or color, due to the use of two sources, are completely gone.

Solid effort! Now, I needs me buy myself a new HDD.

Post
#1104740
Topic
Harry Potter saga - open matte
Time

My reply was to Andrea, not anybody else. I made the mistake of not referring to him by name. But I didn’t deserve to be insulted by “Density.”

Density said:

Is there any particular reason you’re being such an asshole? Or do you just not realize that some people have to work for a living? … My mistake, won’t make it again.

As for calling me an “A-hole,” please do not unnecessarily create conflict. Without seeking any clarification, you naturally assumed I was being sarcastic to you. Also, don’t drag my personal life, job, etc into this. Do you know whether I earn a living or not? Then why did you say “some people have to work for a living”?
Whatever your issues are, don’t bring them here. Here we don’t ask people about their professions or insult them without knowing anything. This is a place for sharing our love of cinema.
Please don’t make personal attacks against members!