That's what kills me-I haven't yet been able to devise a capture method that works with my PC. Until I can build an editing machine I figured detailed analysis would be the best I could do. Plus it is striking how different things can look in motion and on a calibrated CRT as opposed to just screenshots.
TMWTGG
LD and SE share the same print. Must have been rerun and cleaned off for the SE transfer. Aspect ratio identical save for that the SE shifts the framing down a little bit. Color is extremely pushed on SE for some reason. The opening white circles become blue and many shots feature pushed color not present on LD or UE. This is one of the very few where they really seemed to have got it right. The UE looks better on my CRT and like a relatively accurate balance between over-saturated SE and slightly contrasty LD.
The BD is just a 1080p bump of the UE. The LD is phenomenal for the format due to coming out in 1993 and a very rare find. You can't really go wrong with any version. The 1.78 cropping here is much more minimal, from the original 1.85.
The mono suffers from being compressed. The 5.1 spread is very artificial, and so the PCM mono is badly needed.
Also, I noticed that some SEs (GF, TB, LALD, FYEO, TLK, GE, TND) list a "Newly struck widescreen master for optimal PQ and SQ". Perhaps these were the THX LDs that were finished? But it doesn't list the credit on MR, and the GE/TND discs were only reissues...who knows.
Lastly, there are audio glitches in LALD on all LDs...these are really weird, they sound like very tiny faint beeps or pulses that start in the Bond-Kananga confrontation underneath the Fillet of Soul and then pop up again in the underground caverns. Weird. Almost like the element was in hospital.
Indeed!
Got mine and spun it up to compare. Colors are much more saturated, and indeed the Criterion is a release print. Much more damage, and damage to the audio but still a high level of hiss like the MGM disc. The Connery collection version has less damage, but is opened up and contrast boosted in addition to the pink leanings of earlier telecine work.
The SE DVD is the opposite, deeper color and all. The Criterion seems to be somewhere in the middle as far as look.
LALD
Recalled LBX LD vs LD LBX reissue vs SE DVD vs UE vs BD:
Same print source used for all old copies. The LDs have a different look and feel, much more contrast but more filmmlike. A Blue and green look is felt in places. The older disc was recalled for audio dropouts and mistakenly placing the isolated M&E track on the digital. In comparison, it is much more smeary looking, faded and washed out. The LD reissue is outstanding, great definition coming from a later issue, better color and to be honest may be the best looking regular Bond title on disc--especially CAV Side 3. This reissue opens up the right side of the frame a bit over the previous issue.
Example: The opening torch flames of the main titles are washed out and almost pinkish on the 1st LD, and a proper red on the reissue.
The SE is closer to 1.78 and adds a great deal on top and left with a slight amount on bottom. Color is much richer and blacks are far deeper as part of whatever process was used in the THX mastering originally done for the abandoned LD SE reissue series.
The UE boosts the contrast to awful levels and attempts to smooth out the colors, resulting in a rather waxy, flat and undefined presentation. The contrast is so bad that the black titles are now infused with bright red. By taking a bit of the top and bottom of the SE, you get the UEs 1.85.
The BD attempts to correct all of this, resulting in far better color and a touch of the same higher level of brightness seen on YOLT-OHMSS-DAF. Part of the first wave, this was one quickly noticed to have been corrected or at least changed from the UE. Again, it seems that Lowry may have only done tinkering in 480p for the DVDs. (Remember the R2 discs came out first and many were even worse, having to be fixed for R1.)
The BD looks like the film should from all I can tell. Though perhaps too much grain was removed and the day for night shots are better but still off. Bond smoking on the glider was printed dark-but here is still bright and lit. The SE and better yet the reissue LD off a fuller representation of a release print, with the latter really nailing it for me. It just has that touch of 1973 that isn't quite there on the BD-much like how the original LP has a warmth and vibrancy mixed out of the 2003 expanded soundtrack CD.
The difference comes from the repressing by Pioneer, who also did the CLV. That exact framing difference shown above with the markers is the difference between 3M and Pioneer CAV sets. The 3M is much noisier, but isn't rotted. (haven't gone through it 100% for sure. Also, the 3M is hinged and the Pioneer regular slip box.)
Checked against the MGM first WS CLV, reputedly the first from 65mm elements. Slightly different color tones, but overall actually similar. The above shot on the MGM has both sides intact. Top and bottom are the same on all three.
Thus The 3M CAV cropped a bit from the right, the Pioneer reissue/CLV shifted the frame to the right, and the MGM CLV has the frame totally intact.
The remastered snapper WB DVD from 2001 seems to have the sides somewhere between the Criterions.
I'll give these a spin later and compare audio. Anyone have any suggestions for what scenes would be best, or those with directional dialogue?
DAF
Connery Collection 2 LD and SE DVD same print source. Cleaned up for the DVD, as the black marks on the LD are gone. The DVD is far, far darker and has the full width. The LD is cropped on the sides but has a sliver more headroom. Far, far lighter and with seemingly different colors. Wint & Kidd in the desert is bright and sunny in a dusk sort of way on the LD, whereas on the SE it is dark and black-bluish.
The BD is bright with the contrast and has deep but not very saturated colors. It has appearances of both SE and LD. The UE appears closer to the LD in brightness but is very drab looking.
No idea which looks is correct overall.
Holy moly...35mm IB Tech YOLT! Looks a bit dirty, but could something possibly be done?
If it's not the set calibration, (always calibrate! DVE or use this free set from AVS: http://www.avsforum.com/forum/139-display-calibration/948496-avs-hd-709-blu-ray-mp4-calibration.html) then perhaps it is the player. Check the settings and make sure there is not some option checked that causes unnecessary processing.
My old PS3 always does a great job at upscaling, but I hardly ever use this function as I'm still a CRT nut.
My 1995 Letterboxed VHS is the same as the LD. This tape should be the same as the first uncut UK VHS boxset released in 1996.
With the BD having a much wider available range for information and color, it appears far beyond what older formats were capable of. The LD looks rather flat in comparison, but there may be a few spots of minor color cast differences here and there on the BD. Overall this is far closer than anything I had expected.
So if you want to really enjoy the film stick with either LD, letterbox VHS, or most shocking the BD for the most part.
FF, I wanted to compare it against the MGM and see if the print used was different. I should have mine here soon.
OHMSS
LD and SE seem different.
The cuts in foreign UK and German prints lead me to believe that this was the source of the differently edited stock car race and placement of those lines, the snafu with Campbell climbing, the reason for the errored shot of the cable car, and the reason why "closed shop" line is missing. All of these were either truncated or missing in various prints/video copies issued in both Germany and the UK for decades. In 1994 the UK VHS reinstated most things and appears to come from the 1991 LD master.
So. The print source used for the abandoned THX LD/SE DVD appears to possibly be from the UK, which explains the edits. Comparing to the LD reveals that the SE has far richer colors-almost to the point of boosting. It has different identifying marks than the LD so it's very likely it was another print. The LD is cropped on the sides and top, but has a few lines extra on the bottom. The SE is much less cropped.
The LD overall appears closer to the colder look of the BD. Not kidding.It's going to take a capture and direct, minute comparisons between all three to really nail down a definitive look. The SE print could have been Technicolor, or the LD could have for all we know.
With the newer BDs all have this heavy contrast bright look to them with deep color, again suggests that perhaps they scrapped the Lowry tinkering and just released the source scan as-is. We know for a fact that they rejected the cropped GE master and just used an old one so there is reason to believe that this is the case. Perhaps the extra Lowry tinkering was only done at 480p?
Sound? LD all the way, better levels in everything, but has several loud pops throughout.
YOLT
92 RCE VHS, 95 VHS, 89 WS LD, CC Vol2 93 WS LD, SE DVD, UE DVD, BD
For fun: 1997-era TBS Superstation broadcast
Looking at the above, I think I'm nuts. ;)
The VHS tapes are same master. Both have a 1992 copyright date on startup. This is also the source of the Japanese women being subtitled "He has just walked by." when speaking into their purse microphones. No idea where this came from.
As I said before, the CC2 LD has more reddish skintones and overall is more colorful than the 1989 LD. This is an overall cast and visible only by going directly back and forth.
SE DVD is a new transfer of the same element with deeper coloring than the slightly more dark CC2 LD reissue. Finer detail but with a heavy black cast, much like the Thunderball SE DVD/THX LD boxset versus previous LDs.
Now here's where it gets weird. This is the first time I'm doing direct and detailed comparisons on a calibrated CRT across formats.
For all intents and purposes when calibrated for DVD, the Lowry UE seems to generally match the colder look of the 1989 LD. I have no idea why or how it happened. Some coloring is different due to operators preferences. The BD seems to be far more accurate and has better blacks and color depth. It also seems to fix the UE's error of screwing up the opening sunset fading into the bay from the titles.
Thus, my theory is that the SE DVD was another THX remaster done for LD and ported to DVD. This explains the different look and saturation level, like Thunderball, and why the others are colder.
The 1989 LD appears to be a straight transfer perhaps with some contrast boosting. The UE was a negative scan, and the BD a better representation of that. If we could find a print reference, perhaps once and for all the actual look could be properly replicated.
Also note: opening gunbarrel and first shot of capsule off center in LDs.
Best scene of comparison: Bond & Ling
Because I'm nuts, I've also been digging out my VHS tapes. For some I still have old 90's era broadcast tapings, but these are otherwise the 1995-2000 era series, plus three 1992 "Remastered Collector's Edition" (DN, YOLT, OP), and two of the rare 1995 letterboxed VHS (TB and OHMSS, the latter was my first letterboxed experience.)
I've won a lot with a CAV Criterion FRWL, so here's hoping that gets here soon!
Also, I stumbled across a listing for a UK Derann Super 8mm print of GF that was super clean and sold some time ago. Here are many screenshots I found and reupped: http://s1292.photobucket.com/user/humphreybogart1941/library/Derann%20Super%208mm%20GF
This reveals again, just how good the film should look and how MGM nailed it in 1995. The Criterion looks nothing like this since the print used was apparently of a previous vintage or they applied much color in post, as with their version of Dr. No being hugely colored over the MGM using the same print.
I too expected a lot worse, but by God that puts the 2003 restored 35mm MGM put out to shame! I can see how some of the caps accentuate the magenta level but in motion it should not be so prevalent.
This more closely resembles a point somewhere between the MGM international we grew up with and the Mondo BD-but with a color depth and level of detail far beyond. I don't think any other release prints would have been this clear either, as most were dupes of dupes finally issued years after the fact. The Italian-sourced editions for all of Leone's films wind up different looking, for this reason alone. It is only when you go back to the source that you can overcome the 60's reprinting issues. MGM scans without working with the film's inherent process or knowledge of the uncut edition-then puts it through a myriad over over-processing and DNR to remove the expanded inherent grain of a Techniscope negative.
I think, were he still with us, that Sergio himself would be touched by the level of care displayed here by a few dedicated fans.
It would also be nice to hear Frayling's opinions on the different cuts, looks and presentations of all five Westerns over the years.
The only other one I can think of not on the list there is Die Another Day. Saw the premiere week in the then-new Carmike flagship theater which I believe was full DTS-ES. There was an extra rear sixth channel but I don't think they were doing the Dolby EX. Anyhow, it sounded stellar and very huge but later seeing it again in standard 35, it didn't have the same hugeness.
The 5.1 was done in MGM's "restoration" and is with the 35mm print that has been shown only a handful of times. Those caps show the detail restored along with a heavier color palette. It looks gorgeous on the big screen and this BD loses some of the greenish cast of the DVD. The Italian BD more closely resembles old release prints and especially the old LDs for the slightly fuzzy look and being rather blown out,
Would the MGM LD be a better base source since in the LD era it was common to simply transfer the master mag track? I'll check mine out and see if it sounds more like optical.
Not a fan of TDK at all, but when the BD came out I was shocked to see how poorly it looked compared to the theatrical. BB had a very dated master done and needs a new transfer as it looks nothing like the 35mm theatrical run, and TDK appears similar, though I only saw the second film as a 2K DCP in scope.
Only saw TDKR once in 15/70.
I'd love to see all three of these films properly presented if only to have a stunning example to show of full film production in the modern age. I thought the design and look of BB was downright gorgeous in places.
From what I've always heard of, the TDK prologue seems to be a scan of the source IMAX in a ratio closer to the native 1.44:1. It should lack any of the post-processing and compression done for the pitiful BD release.
Confirmed 4K DCP premiere in Berlin, for Goldfinger.
https://www.berlinale.de/en/presse/pressemitteilungen/retrospektive/retro-presse-detail_26581.html
Several venues stateside have announced or listed 4K DCPs. Seems that about 5 to 10 are completed.
And who the hell knows what they may have done now?
Lucky you, I've wanted an HTS for some time now...;) These quick shots look fantastic.
Also keep in mind, the WB was from a newly struck print off of the 65mm negative. This being done in the early 2000's means that none of the process would have involved vintage equipment, stock or processes. The Criterion used a 35mm print which will itself look different. (I saw one like this and it remains the best edition yet in my book. Usually you see the 2K WB remaster or a 35mm print made from the "new" WB edition.)
It's also good you got the CLV version because according to an old post of Disclord's I found, the CAV is misframed badly...at least on the rotted 3M first issue. I never realized that my second copy is a 3M, which is rotted, but my usual one that doesn't really have any is the Pioneer reissue. I'll have to check the framings since Pioneer made both CAV and CLV in 1990.
Also here, disclord discussed the audio used and how the six-track element transferred had some distortion and a lack in bass compared to the later discrete transfers. On my system some distortion is inherent and if properly decoded through say a Shure HTS processor into proper 4 channel DS we might be able to better present this alongside the 5.1 discrete from MGM which still has the original mix.
I'll have to also check the PCM on my MGM CLV and see if it runs better.
Thanks very much. I was beginning to wonder if I was just babbling on a bit too much. ;) I've only noticed the lines in Thunderball on LD due to my new DVD recorder and by minute comparisons. I'll check through YOLT.
To be honest, I'm thinking that because nine films were held up for so long, and most of them were ones with transfers that caused the most concern (Goldeneye) or were merely DVD-era redos (TSWLM for example) that perhaps somebody at MGM/Fox did some extra work before releasing to Blu-ray.
Goldeneye seems to use the old 1995-era master on BD.
I'm convinced that some are not even the UEs. Thunderball looks nothing like the Lowry UE. YOLT, OHMSS and DAF are restored to pre-UE DVD tinkering like LALD was in terms of color and contrast. That said, those three have overblown contrast levels which to me indicate that they may have just been released as-is. TSWLM of course got a brand new transfer, done in-house at MGM/Fox, which has deep color like the above mentioned three and the same enhanced high contrast level which again leads me to believe that Spy's BD is in fact a straight as-is transfer.
My hypothesis: The better presentation, color level and detail in the newer discs/transfers in addition to differences from the Lowry UE DVDs indicate that perhaps these newer transfers may have been sourced from some of the negative scans but were handled by someone at Fox, since these seem more like some of their recent catalog classic reissues on BD.
And keep in mind all, it appears the SEs were new transfers of the same elements done for the scrapped THX LD reissue series. All those I've looked at so far seem to vary from their older LD counterparts in terms of color and contrast.
What does become quickly apparent is just how long MGM re-used the same elements and even the same transfer of the same element over and over again. So far the other big surprises were the opened up 1.55:1 framings and the fact that the MGM and Criterion Dr. No are the same.
If anyone has the Criterion CAV FRWL, let me know.
I never received any response from Criterion. I've also written to the former head of MGM's video department, so we will see what comes about.
YOLT has the same thing going on: CC Vol. 2 is color boosted in skin tones and backgrounds over the 1989 release. SE DVD goes even further.
The colder and brighter 1989 disc better matches the IB Tech trailer.
Thunderball
Same print element used for 1989 LD, 1993 Connery Collection II, THX CAV LD, and SE DVD.
1. 1989 disc has slightly elevated contrast, and overall different color tone. Some pale-ish skin tones. Mono with variations.
2. 1993 CC reissue is same master, but colors were boosted and contrast dialed down a touch. Skin tones that were pale-ish are now red-orange-ish. Walls and stationary objects more vibrant. Mono with variations.
3. 1995 THX CAV LD utilizes same source print, but seems to be a new transfer of the print. Detail jumps ahead in leaps and bounds, but has EE. New color timing is more like the 1989 subdued rich color look, but there are many shots where you see a level of black more like a 35mm print of the era. Most notable is in the hotel room with Derval and Fiona in bed. Remixes stereo surround with alternate track. Opening gunbarrel has dropout in matrixed right rear, fixed for 1998 reissue and DVD.
4. SE DVD increases detail over CAV set, but same transfer and master. Identical, but the matrixed track is in DD 5.1 discrete @ 448 kbp/s.
Before I go further, is it just me or does the Lowry DVD and BD seem to be different? The BD has this strange purplish cast all over which I don't recall being on anything else.
-The Lowry UE sucks out all the color of any of the previous editions. Any semblance of Technicolor is gone, along with all grain. 5.1 mixes seem to be new and not the 1995 stereo remix.
-BD appears different, some of the old color has come back in, grain and vertical lines reappear. The vertical lines are visible on all the LDs with comb filter, and the SE DVD. The 5.1 DTS-HDMA seems to be the 1995 stereo remix.
Take a look at the shot of Bond donning the helmet for the Bell rocket belt. The 1989, CC, Lowry have the background plate of the chateau normally colored. But on the CAV, SE and Blu-ray this has gone purplish. There are a few other things that seem to suggest that perhaps this one for some reason was further tinkered with by MGM/Fox for the Blu-ray release.
Also, reports have been filtering in that versions are on Netflix without the squeezed titles. They may or may not be from the 4K DCPs which have been being quietly released in art houses and repertory.
Guys, if and when we do Thunderball, I'm thinking maybe a new hybrid mono mix with the stereo variations?
Goldfinger continued:
The CAV THX and SE DVD are the same source. The DVD has greater reproduction of the color and detail but the LD is no slouch. It may actually be a touch more natural looking. Both have the edge enhancement slathered all over. The DVD may have gotten a fresh run through of the print source as it has some extra bits of dirt not on the THX laser but otherwise it is the same. The DVD crops mostly in the top of the frame with maybe a line or two from the bottom. none of the crop really wrecks composition but it does make the headroom a bit cramped.Also of note, all these MGMs seem to open the frame to something closer to a 1.55:1 ratio. The THX Goldfinger is a bit less than this but it doesn't seem to be 1.66:1 either.
The Criterion is supposedly 1.75 and has a few extra lines on the left edge and significantly more in the bottom when compared to the SE.
The UE has the most picture area, but loses all color and depth compared to any other transfer.
Final verdict: MGM CAV/SE DVD for color re-timing to better match the negative. Has the delicate golden hues associated with this film. (most notable in the golf scenes-look for the grass) The Criterion may be a bit too boosted in the reds and blues, but does have a more vintage look to it. The Connery Collection was too bright and too brown. Thus the MGM strikes the best balance between the two.
The UE pays no regard to anything.
Best scenes for comparison: Teaser opening, Bond catching the card cheat, Discovery of Jill, Golf scenes. The scenes in the hotel room show the most fluctuation in color.
Godawful. There seem to be a great number of film prints that have been hacked up on ebay.co.uk simply for this purpose including many Bond films. That shot with the blue saber in training is very striking.
Don't worry, this has become the sort of Bond repository.
I'd love some of those trailers if I had either the spare cash or means to properly store and project them! I truly appreciate you and your team's work on these, they are a treasure.
More of captainsolo's truly obsessed ramblings on 007 Lasers:
Goldfinger
...
We know how 2001 is Kubrick's approved transfer on the early Criterion which has different color than the MGM, but had to be sourced from 35mm and is slightly hazy in comparison to the later MGM CLV disc which was able to use the 70mm print to source a new transfer. The MGM had completely inaccurate color and had to be redone for the later CAV 25th anniversary boxset reissue. The same transfer was used but this time in full CAV and with redone color to better match the Criterion and SK's approval.
Goldfinger follows the EXACT same pattern. Comparing the Criterion CAV, Connery Collection CLV from MGM and the full CAV anniversary boxset from MGM reveals that:
1. The Criterion is print sourced of some type: with dropouts in the audio, some crackle and pops, some distortion. But there are no visible reel change markers which could indicate a non-release print.
2. The Criterion has vastly deep color that is VERY VERY saturated like their Dr. No.
3. The MGM CC CLV disc has none of this color, appears much brighter as if contrast was boosted, yet has much better detail as if from a higher generation element. This is even visible on CLV compared to the Criterion CAV, just like the visual superiority on the equivalent discs of 2001.
4. The CAV boxset has even more detail and redone color. It was supposedly form a new print struck off the negative. However close comparison reveals many of the same marks and defects in the CLV disc's transfer. It appears as if this was yet again another recoloring and reissue on CAV of an earlier brightened disc.
5. The color of the CAV is closer to the Criterion but much more normalized. if watching the CLV if one deepened the color, turned down the contrast and brightness levels, the image would begin to look like the new look of the CAV set.
6. The CAV set has edge enhancement though that seems to not be present on the CLV disc. It was also reframed slightly, losing some headroom and gaining a few lines on the right side of the frame.
7. Both PCM mono tracks on the MGM's are clean and appear virtually the same. The CAV may have been cleaned up a bit more.
8. The Criterion correctly has the titles in mono, both MGM's replace it with the more common stereo version due to revisionism. They also did this on their North by Northwest disc.
9. The Criterion is the ONLY release to ever feature the missing frames from Oddjob driving Mr. Solo.
So there you have it. Since there was such a discrepancy between the Criterion and MGM Dr. No discs, which use the same print, i cannot exactly tell which color is always accurate. Terrence Young signed off on the Criterion discs for DN and FRWL, but the recolored MGM CAV Goldfinger is probably more accurate to the negative source.
Thus, it seems if you want the most vintage experience possible, try Criterion for something more akin too early 60's printing. The MGM's offer better detail but not necessarily as striking color.