View Single Post
Old 12-02-2016, 07:48 PM   #417
2-perf 2-perf is offline
Senior Member
 
2-perf's Avatar
 
Feb 2016
Montreal
215
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Camera Obscura View Post
The transfer is done. We already supplied 88 and the deal was we will release identical masters and we stand by that. Apart from that, and as I said, I'm very happy with the result and the film looks gorgeous the way it is now.
As for DEEP RED, I have no idea what was delivered to Arrow, they might have even done the grading at a different lab than Bologna. Was it even scanned at Bologna? No idea. Fact is, so far Arrow seems to have been content with Bologna's work as many of their latest Italian releases, including BLOODSTAINED BUTTERFLY, wear the Bologna stamp.
Anyway, I have a huge problem with revisionist grading as done by Bologna and Eclair, and will not allow it for future transfer work anymore. It's tougher to get rid of the tinting than doing the work from scratch, so...
To me it looks like they're adding a Print Film Emulation LUT so the end result looks like a projection of the film at the theater back in 1972. I guess the Camera Obscura folks already know that but let me explain it for the people who might not know about it.

I'm assuming everyone here is familiar with the following Kodak Optical Workflow chart.


Basically,

1 - Cut Negative (Edit of the movie using the OCN (Original Camera Negative))
2a - Answer Print (A Positive copy of the Cut Negative to watch the movie in the positive world to see how it looks and see what needs to be fixed. This is at this stage that the Color Timing is done in the optical world.)
2b - Interpositive (The FINAL Positive copy of the Cut Negative.)
3 - Internegative (A Negative copy of the Interpositive used to duplicate the Release Print since you can't go Positive to Positive)
4 - Release Print (Positive copy)

Back in 1972, when you went to the theater to watch a movie, they would project a Release Print of the film, not the OCN, right?

The thing is, a Release Print film stock has characteristics that modifies the colors and contrast of the OCN so even though you color correct the OCN properly, it will never look like when it was projected at the theater back in 1972.

It looks like their philosophy regarding their restoration is aimed at rendering the movie as it looked projected in a theater.

So, I think they're adding those "Release Print" characteristics to their restoration and this is probably done by using some Print Film Emulation LUTs (Look up tables).

Personally, I sort of like it as I when watch a movie restored / color corrected from the OCN, without "Release Print" characteristics I always feel it's missing something but sometimes, it just feel they went too far, especially with The Good, the Bad and the Ugly.


For me, The Bloodstained Butterfly is just a tad over top, it almost looks good. The court sequence is the worst.


In conclusion, should a restoration of a movie look like the projection of a pristine Release Print or it should look like color corrected Original Camera Negative?

Last edited by 2-perf; 12-06-2016 at 12:28 AM. Reason: typos
  Reply With Quote
Thanks given by:
AlexIlDottore (12-02-2016), cakefactory (12-02-2016), djvaso (12-03-2016), Mahadeva (12-03-2016), nitin (12-03-2016)