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

[Penton-Man]

Originally Posted by Bobby Henderson

Low light problems with film and video are bad, but aren't quite the same in nature.

You're probably familiar with true analog video cameras based on tube technology rather than CCDs. Anyone who has worked with those kinds of cameras knows all about "tube burn" that occurs when the camera operator allows studio lights to creep into the frame. You get those trailing streaks off of bright light sources as the camera pans across them. That's kind of an extreme example, but the lag from CCD and CMOS chips feels a little similar. It's just that CCDs and CMOS chips tend to choke on dark material instead. The chips are basically stuck wanting to finish recording one frame while the camera is piling up many others to record behind it -shutter speed be damned. That smearing and ghosting muddy stuff is the end result.

Film doesn't have that issue since every frame of film is defined physically and separately on the film strip and mechnanically by the motor in the camera. You won't have a ghost of one frame laying itself on the next frame.............

No, you won’t but, you will have smearing, if the colorist is forced to do what I described above (dnr), which is what I meant by “artifacts” in my prior post.
I really think you’re parsing my words now.

[Penton-Man]

Originally Posted by Bobby Henderson

When producing movies at night outdoors, every major production should budget having a Musco truck or two nearby..................

I’m not talking exclusively about planned shooting at night, if you read my prior post carefully I said “especially for late evening or night scene”.

A scenario would be a planned daytime shoot which for some reason (unexpected delays) extends past when the sun has set and the production tries to *get the shot* in that 'day' because they have full control of the location whereas perhaps the following 'day' they don’t.

[Bobby Henderson]

The Musco truck thing was kind of a joke. I'm sorry I didn't read your earlier post more clearly. Yes, I agree, in the post production state if someone has to digitally process a badly photographed sequence of film across numerous frames at once there is a strong risk of smearing and Lord only knows what else. Photoshop-style tools are only going to bail a shot out only so far. OTOH, the look of the artifacts I saw in Get Smart are camera-based, not something I've seen from something shot on film and over-corrected in the posting stage.

On the bright side, I think it's amazing that certain video sourced movies can pull off the "film look" as good as they do. Obviously some are better than others. I thought Sin City looked really good and didn't look like video at all -but then that's a very visually stylized movie. Wanted also didn't look like video either -wasn't that shot with the Red One camera system?

[Penton-Man]

Originally Posted by Bobby Henderson

OTOH, the look of the artifacts I saw in Get Smart are camera-based, not something I've seen from something shot on film and over-corrected in the posting stage.

I feel like there is just no logical progression to this discussion with your above statement after what you posted on the last page namely “The Genesis system does a decent job as long as the shooting is done in well lighted situations. The camera struggles in lower light situations and is much more prone to exhibiting a video-ish look in those situations.”

So now you’re saying that the Genesis caused camera-based artifacts with Get Smart capture even when it was not pushed to its limits, i.e. “well lighted conditions”?
Let’s just stop this discussion now, because you’re giving me a headache.

P.S.
I’ll concede that the major advantage of 35mm negative over any digital camera is its broader latitude which comes in handy during some conditions and that given the inherent resolution of the Genesis, the wide shots may appear a tad soft during commercial exhibition at your local Cineplex with 2k digital projectors but, I have no idea what camera-based artifacts you’re now talking about (other than if a DP pushes the limits of the Genesis and essentially produces what is the film equivalent of a thin negative which causes nightmares in post when trying to add in vfx)………and I don’t want to know.

When you total up all the plus and minuses of everything, it’s my opinion that the *best* way to shoot a *typical* feature film would be Super35 followed by a 4k DI.

[Penton-Man]

Originally Posted by GabrielB

BTW what do you think of the Lowry James Bond releases? Don't you think there ought to be a little more grain for films that age?

That’s the ass-backwards way to look at it, a pitfall which many people fall into.

It depends upon what source/elements and the condition of the source that was given to Lowry Digital (or anyone else for that matter) to work on, to begin with. A knowledge of that is necessary to realistically and fairly determine how well the end product (Blu-ray movie) came out.

I haven’t seen any of the old James Bond movies on Blu-ray.
I waiting for something like a period of time when I’m laid up after some major surgery and confined to the house for a couple weeks, and then I’ll have myself a Bond Bash so I don’t go bonkers.

[Jeff Kleist]

When you total up all the plus and minuses of everything, it’s my opinion that the *best* way to shoot a *typical* feature film would be Super35 followed by a 4k DI.

|Breaking my heart Penton Super35 bleh. Give me negative or give me death! :P

[Penton-Man]

Originally Posted by Jeff Kleist

|Breaking my heart Penton Super35 bleh. Give me negative or give me death! :P

Anamorphic plus 4k DI is just too damn expensive.
Many people won’t green light it.

Plus, scope is a pain in the ass to work with anyway.

[JimSD]

Originally Posted by Penton-Man

I haven’t seen any of the old James Bond movies on Blu-ray.
I waiting for something like a period of time when I’m laid up after some major surgery and confined to the house for a couple weeks, and then I’ll have myself a Bond Bash so I don’t go bonkers.

You'll be in for a treat. Dr. No and From Russia With Love look especially good, at least from my average Joe perspective.

[Penton-Man]

Originally Posted by JimSD

You'll be in for a treat. Dr. No and From Russia With Love look especially good, at least from my average Joe perspective.

Average Joe's are good folks.
Notice all the attention they're getting with expensive primetime Blu-ray commercials these days.

I would like to watch the James Bond stuff in the sequence that they were presented theatrically.
So, please when someone gets the time, compile the historical timing list…..maybe by then (some indeterminate future surgery) all of the twenty or so Bonds will be eventually out on Blu-ray.

[phansson]

This is the official release order.


Dr. No (1962)
From Russia With Love (1963)
Goldfinger (1964)
Thunderball (1965)
You Only Live Twice (1967)
On Her Majesty's Secret Service (1969)
Diamonds Are Forever (1971)
Live and Let Die (1973)
The Man with the Golden Gun (1974)
The Spy Who Loved Me (1977)
Moonraker (1979)
For Your Eyes Only (1981)
Octopu$$y(1983)
A View to a Kill (1985)
The Living Daylights (1987)
Licence to Kill (1989)
GoldenEye (1995)
Tomorrow Never Dies (1997)
The World is Not Enough (1999)
Die Another Day (2002)
Casino Royale (2006)
Quantum of Solace (2008)


Never Say Never (1983) Debatable whether or not this is a "real" bond film.

[GabrielB]

Originally Posted by Penton-Man

That’s the ass-backwards way to look at it, a pitfall which many people fall into.

Well yeah, maybe... You know, I don't have some general preconceived idea about releases and I'm not looking for problems. I might just be not enough educated. For instance the Bond film I saw, I found the picture seemed processed or had a slight digital texture to it. But that's my opinion and that's why I asked the question. (I was also interested to know more about Lowry "remove bad grain, leave good grain" thing.)

I just love film and the way it looks and moves on the screen. So you know I'm just hoping for film-like experiences. Sometimes I just want to understand and that's all. Like I'd like to understand why some studios DNR or have DNRed their titles if it's not - as you explained in thebits thread - because of the suits wanting to please everyone. (I know sometimes it's to blend different film stock to reach that uniformity. And also bad habits have been talked about)

But I also understand DNR issues (or low bitrate encodes for that matter) and posts have been beaten to death so I'm not asking you to talk about it if you're tired of it and feel others are too.

I also understand there's a lot of people saying shit everywhere and talking through their hats so you might have developed a carefulness around posts of people you don't know or who seem to show too much interest in issues such as DNR, EE, low bitrates encodes, films released on BD-25, etc.

I haven’t seen any of the old James Bond movies on Blu-ray.
I waiting for something like a period of time when I’m laid up after some major surgery and confined to the house for a couple weeks, and then I’ll have myself a Bond Bash so I don’t go bonkers.

Well I sure hope you're not planning on having surgery to get the chance to do that... You could take a day during your Christmas holidays to enjoy 3 or 4 Bond films, couldn't you?...

Cheers and thanks for your time here
Gabe

[Penton-Man]

Originally Posted by GabrielB

Well I sure hope you're not planning on having surgery to get the chance to do that... You could take a day during your Christmas holidays to enjoy 3 or 4 Bond films, couldn't you?...

Cheers and thanks for your time here
Gabe

Nope, not planning it but, with riding mountain bikes, I generally run about 3 -5 years between pushing the envelope - which results in some major orthopedic surgery (by major, I mean long rehab).

P.S.
Christmas Holidays for us this year are going to be even crazier than ever so I don’t think I’ll be doing much home theater movie watching.....devoting my time to family and friends and such.

[horseflesh]

Originally Posted by Penton-Man

Nope, not planning it but, with riding mountain bikes, I generally run about 3 -5 years between pushing the envelope - which results in some major orthopedic surgery (by major, I mean long rehab).

P.S.
Christmas Holidays for us this year are going to be even crazier than ever so I don’t think I’ll be doing much home theater movie watching.....devoting my time to family and friends and such.

I start my Christmas holidays next Friday, the 19th!!
And not back in work until January 2nd which is a Friday so I may take that day off too. That would give me 2 weeks off work

[Esox50]

Originally Posted by Penton-Man

...devoting my time to family and friends and such.

Wait a minute? You have friends?

Happy Holidays!

-Esox

[Penton-Man]

Originally Posted by Esox50

Wait a minute? You have friends? .....

Yup, I even pick-up for them in my spare time………………..
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iK523yMFFw8

Hello moto.

[saprano]

Originally Posted by Penton-Man

Your answer is why I’m not a movie reviewer and don’t plan ever to be one, i.e different strokes for different folks.

Just a word of advice though…………….I wouldn’t advertise the above fact to your drinkin buddies.

Oh no i made sure im the only one who knows this

Wouldn't want to get thrown out of the group.

[Penton-Man]

After reading Bill Hunt’s edited Rumor Mill today, I see our friend Digital Bits Bill , has cleaned out the wax from his ears, i.e. South Pacific vs. Sound of Music.

Regarding that, I saw a digital presentation of the restored South Pacific back in Jan.? 2006 at the Digital Cinema Lab(ETC/USC), the exhibited source being a D5 tape projected via a Christie 2k DLP projector and it looked good, from what I can remember.

My question would be to “ender21” (who reads this forum/thread ) or anyone else from Fotokem or Fox.........

Question - Is that same D5 tape being used as the source for the eventual Blu-ray edition of South Pacific or has Fotokem made a new HD master in the interim since ’05? – feel free to PM me if you can find out.

Anyway, during the following Q&A, according to the spokesperson from Fotokem, they did a photo-chemical (pun) preservation and then a digital restoration of the film. One of the most interesting things discussed during the Q&A was that since all the reference prints had faded over time, they got the company that made the actual camera filters used during the original production, to make new ones from the original data which ultimately proved extremely helpful for the colorist during the restoration……..given the faded prints.

The colored imagery of this film is quite unique due the filters that the cinematographer used, I’d say almost funky, if you’ve been to the Garden Isle of Hawaii before.

[phansson]

Hey Penton,

With the upturn of Blu Ray sales, are any of the studios considering releasing Blu Ray on an earlier schedule than SD DVD? Maybe giving Blu Ray a two week window before the release of the DVD would give it another boost.

Just wondering if that has been considered.

[horseflesh]

Originally Posted by saprano

Oh no i made sure im the only one who knows this

Wouldn't want to get thrown out of the group.

Looks like I'll have to go see this next weekend.
My wife just read the first book, and it is her birthday on Friday.....

(it doesn't open here till next Friday)

[Alan Gordon]

Originally Posted by phansson

Hey Penton,

With the upturn of Blu Ray sales, are any of the studios considering releasing Blu Ray on an earlier schedule than SD DVD? Maybe giving Blu Ray a two week window before the release of the DVD would give it another boost.

Just wondering if that has been considered.

Personally, I'm hoping the "upturn" in Blu-ray sales causes a decrease in MSRPs and further discounting by retailers.

A while back, a Fox (I believe it was Fox) executive said that prices on software would/should be going down around the time that Blu-ray reaches a 25% (I think it was 25%) ratio with DVD.

Sure, Fox has reduced the prices on their catalog titles already, but I'd really like to see them reduce it down to other studios' catalog prices, and reduce their (as well as Paramount, Sony, and Universal) D&D releases down to at least WB's and Disney's $34.95 MSRPs, and let the retailers discount them the rest of the way. I felt really good about pre-ordering my just shipped copy of "The Mummy: Tomb Of The Dragon Emperor" for $16.95 from J&R, and while I'm not saying that new releases should be that low, I'd love to see them hit lower than what can be found during the first week of release the majority of the time.

I can't speak for everybody, but I TRY to budget my movie spending, and while that budget has been thrown out the door the last couple of months, I'm going to have to reinstate it this month. The cheaper the movie prices, the more movies I'm willing to buy, meaning more of my money is spread among the studios.

While I'm not against the idea of a Blu-ray release earlier than the DVD release, I personally think that lower prices will help adoption more than the attention an early release will get.

~Alan