"Club Penton" - Ask questions to Hollywood insider "Penton-Man"

[Rob Tomlin]

..

[CAB]

Originally Posted by Penton-Man

From a screening at the Academy last year………………
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0PRGCi3ayRk

( ^ read the “more info” section on the right side of the page)

They've play that one too but it was clearly not rough enough for their own making. I never knew the source and I appreciate it more now that I do.

I'm still amazed they got the former Texas Governor, the now late Ann Richards to do that spot.

[Penton-Man]

Originally Posted by Deciazulado

Vibrations of a 35mm professional motion picture camera and objects in motion can of course lower resolution due to motion blur. Negative film generally tends to have higher resolution/MTF than transparency film.
The ITU tests mentioned here show MTF curves of a regular movie shooting with a general purpose film negative and camera combination. Those numbers suggest that a system of at least 6K would be needed to preserve what's visible on a OCN, before any digital enhancement of the MTF curve. When archiving film to digital for generations to come the ultimate goal should be to use a system that preserves the highest attanaible quality. I agree though that for film watching, an optimized system of about 2000pixels per picture height would look excellent for most purposes.

Deci,
Schawn Belston is planning on attending The Reel Thing 20.
I suggest you ask him for his thoughts on the restoration of Patton and the upcoming Blu-ray edition due to street in a few days.

His comments should prove insightful and authoritative to readers here, as you will be getting the info directly from the horse’s mouth so to speak.

[Penton-Man]

^
Hey,
I’d like to see my pic of Maya posted in all its glory for members as well as non-members!
Not some *you have to click on thing*.

Rob’s car is getting too much face time, not to mention the fact that there is no greenery where he lives anyway (think desert) so, for all I know he parked the damn car down the street from me and then snapped that photo.

[JasonR]

[Penton-Man]

^
Thank you.
I was about ready to call Mike D. in Texas for cripes sakes !

P.S.
That vague dark area just over the superior aspect of her left eye is a small scar……..the result of an old past altercation with a cougar.

[Rob Tomlin]

..

[Penton-Man]

Originally Posted by Rob Tomlin

Hey Penton, do you think you are going to make it to the showing on 6-20?

I’ll be at Cine Gear
(http://www.cinegearexpo.com/seminars2.html)

most of the day (and the following) but, I may be able to swing on over there before 7:30 P.M.
At this point, I’m just not certain for sure.

[mhafner]

Originally Posted by Deciazulado

Vibrations of a 35mm professional motion picture camera and objects in motion can of course lower resolution due to motion blur. Negative film generally tends to have higher resolution/MTF than transparency film.
The ITU tests mentioned here show MTF curves of a regular movie shooting with a general purpose film negative and camera combination. Those numbers suggest that a system of at least 6K would be needed to preserve what's visible on a OCN, before any digital enhancement of the MTF curve. When archiving film to digital for generations to come the ultimate goal should be to use a system that preserves the highest attanaible quality. I agree though that for film watching, an optimized system of about 2000 pixels per picture height would look excellent for most purposes.

Interesting reading. But where does that 6K figure come from? Negative was not going beyond 2400 L/PH on the charts. That's roughly 3.5 K of resolution. About the same as the 4K Red camera. Everything else had steep drops from there. Especially shocking how one copy stage to the IP loses so much. There is no substitute for scanning the original negative, folks, if you want the most detail. Forget the IP and all INs.
(And that test was ideal insofar as a perfectly focused stationary object was shot. Not typical for motion picture photography.)

[Penton-Man]

Originally Posted by Rob Tomlin

We have a winnah!

And speaking of “winnahs”,
To the “winnah” of the Winn contest that we had on this forum (I forgot your online *handle* but I jotted down your address before I deleted your PM ) –

My humble contribution to the pot for the contest winner is now in the mail to you.
Keep an eye out for it.
Please make no assumptions regarding the listed return address as I was just using the studio’s in house administrative services (free postage) while on site.

[Penton-Man]

Received a PM regarding the tech specs of 2001: A Space Odyssey in contrast to Patton relating to any possible differences in theatrical presentation imagery.

As I said (about a week and a half ago), Patton was shot on Kodak 5254 (100ASA).
On the other hand, 2001: A Space Odyssey……………………
http://www.oscars.org/events/past/20...ey/index2.html

used an entirely different stock (Kodak 5251, 50 ASA stock) under entirely different lighting conditions.

P.S.
My inbox is now clean as a whistle ……….so it’s time for me to get to work.

[Penton-Man]

Originally Posted by mhafner

There is no substitute for scanning the original negative, folks,........

And pin registered scanners for their handling is often recommended.

[mhafner]

Patton BD does not look like film as well. Scrubbed clean. DNR clean.
Says Robert Harris. I have no reason to doubt him. Sad.

[ThatArtGuy]

Any ideas, thoughts, guffaws on these two stories, Penton?

1TB Blu-Ray Compatible Optical Disc Announced
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2008/05...optical_drive/

And

New DVD Hi-def Player Within '08 by Toshiba
http://tinyurl.com/3wxjom

[Penton-Man]

Originally Posted by mhafner

Patton BD does not look like film as well. Scrubbed clean. DNR clean.
Says Robert Harris. I have no reason to doubt him. Sad.

Why, have you seen it?
Give me a link to what he says.

[Dogdvr]

Here ya go
http://www.hometheaterforum.com/htf/...n-blu-ray.html

[Penton-Man]

Originally Posted by ThatArtGuy

Any ideas, thoughts, guffaws on these two stories, Penton?

1TB Blu-Ray Compatible Optical Disc Announced
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2008/05...optical_drive/

Good for them.
Long live packaged media!

I said months ago that I felt yet another generation of optical media drive was possible before HD “digital downloads” gained any traction. But the current optical media of choice (Blu-ray) probably has a good 8-10 year run in her from a consumer standpoint.

Follow these people for the latest basic science ideas…………………
http://spie.org/optical-data-storage.xml

[WickyWoo]

Well, there is without a doubt confirmation of DNR

It's a sad sad day, especially with such an amazing film

[savage1984]

Wow. RAH really has a way with words. It's too bad that for reasons unknown to me, they chose to DNR this film.

[Penton-Man]

Originally Posted by mhafner

Patton BD does not look like film as well. Scrubbed clean. DNR clean.
Says Robert Harris. I have no reason to doubt him. Sad.

That’s not good to hear but, I wish he would refrain from making comments about digital cameras which should be taken with a large boulder of salt when viewing the OP prior to editing and then post editing, as it is evident that current high resolution digital cinematography is not his forte.

I don’t want to get into the middle of *situation* between the Academy Film Archive and Fox, or even Fox’s film preservation division and their home media division so, I think it best for me to defer any *picture quality* comments on this title to these two fellows if they can indeed get together next Friday-Saturday…………………..
https://forum.blu-ray.com/showpost.p...postcount=3448

In the meantime, might I suggest that the Blu-ray version should be a substantial improvement over the DVD version (which as we have seen with other titles, is not always the case), so I wouldn’t let any perceived picture inadequacies by some, defer you from renting or buying the disc if you are a fan of this title.