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

[Jack Torrance]

Originally Posted by mhafner

Firstly the people who have to put the new restoration together. Their goal is to have a seamless as possible version of the whole film. When you have to integrate footage of very varying quality you have big technical problems making it look consistent.
Of course it's great that footage was found at all. And it must be used even if it were VHS quality. But unless we know for sure the 35mm print was destroyed people should keep looking for that one as well.

Well, an original 35mm print of this version would of course be preferable, but let's be honest... the chances of finding that, considering the history of this film and that it has long be sought after (by general film buffs/historians and more than a couple of restorations), are incredibly slim to none. Fritz Lang himself said that a complete version didn't exist anymore. I really think that this is a situation where beggars can't be choosers. It's a miracle it exists at all and I think we'll all be happy just to see it, even if the quality is inconsistent.

That was what I was getting at, which wasn't meant to besmirch your original point at all

[mhafner]

Originally Posted by Penton-Man

You’ll ultimately figure it out eventually on your own.
Actions speak louder than words.

You can purchase my 'action' in 2009.

[mikey p]

Originally Posted by mhafner

You can purchase my 'action' in 2009.

On reflection, forget it.......

[scraptor]

This is Penton's thread, why harangue him to death. If you feel so strongly about DNR there are other avenues of expressing your concerns.

Penton-man, thank you once again for all the tidbits. Hope you had a great holiday! BTW, I saw The Fall announced as coming to Blu--did anyone see this movie? Is it actually any good (ie. more than just visual flair)? The Cell (same director) was visually stunning but IMO not a very good movie.

[Blu Titan]

Originally Posted by mhafner

You can purchase my 'action' in 2009.

You are probably the second coming of Steven Spielberg, looking foward to it.

[Spankey]

A similar situation occured back in the early days of dvd when Bill Hunt amongst others fought for anamorphic widescreen on all releases, again at the time it was thought to be a non-issue, then everyone got widescreen tv's....similarly edge-enhancement was a non-issue, until tv's got bigger, transfers got better and star wars I came out!

That issue was frowned upon by the same narrow minded "Forum" that is touting SUC now. We were supposed to be "thankful" that we had movies on DVD in the first place and those that complained to the studios were "vultures". Unfortunately, an agenda is present and some have been made privy to it. Leave it at that.

[Blu Titan]

Well nice little "bit" on the Patton Blu-ray debate. I really enjoyed this part:

Glenn Erickson, writing for film.com, points out that the Patton Blu-ray DVD was "enhanced to minimize the natural grain," but that in that case, the altering makes it look more like the theatrical 70mm presentation, so he doesn't take issue with that one. Funny how somebody on this forum appears to have better information than everybody else.

http://www.cinematical.com/2008/07/0...ms-on-blu-ray/

[JimSD]

Originally Posted by Blu Titan

Well nice little "bit" on the Patton Blu-ray debate. I really enjoyed this part:

Glenn Erickson, writing for film.com, points out that the Patton Blu-ray DVD was "enhanced to minimize the natural grain," but that in that case, the altering makes it look more like the theatrical 70mm presentation, so he doesn't take issue with that one. Funny how somebody on this forum appears to have better information than everybody else.

http://www.cinematical.com/2008/07/0...ms-on-blu-ray/

Just as interesting in the article you linked to are his comments about the Dirty Harry Blu-ray. Basically he thinks Dirty Harry has had too much processing (first review I've read that says that), yet doesn't have a problem with Patton.

[Paul H]

Originally Posted by Blu Titan

Well nice little "bit" on the Patton Blu-ray debate. I really enjoyed this part:

Glenn Erickson, writing for film.com, points out that the Patton Blu-ray DVD was "enhanced to minimize the natural grain," but that in that case, the altering makes it look more like the theatrical 70mm presentation, so he doesn't take issue with that one. Funny how somebody on this forum appears to have better information than everybody else.

http://www.cinematical.com/2008/07/0...ms-on-blu-ray/

I think everybody agrees that Patton looks like the theatrical 70mm presentation on a 30" to possibly 40" monitor.

It's bigger screens that start to show problems.

https://forum.blu-ray.com/showpost.p...rris Post #241

Originally Posted by Robert Harris

To Paul H...

I generally do serious screening of video on a screen of approximately 100".

At 30" Patton looks magnificent.

At 42 it begins to show problems.

At 50 it becomes obvious, and at 100 it looks totally un-filmlike.

RAH

[Blu Titan]

Originally Posted by Paul H

I think everybody agrees that Patton looks like the theatrical 70mm presentation on a 30" to possibly 40" monitor.

It's bigger screens that start to show problems.

https://forum.blu-ray.com/showpost.p...rris Post #241

I am sure that if viewed in a 200 ft screen it will show more "problems".

[Paul H]

Originally Posted by Blu Titan

I am sure that is viewed in a 200 ft screen it will show more "problems".

I only have a 110" screen.

[Blu Titan]

Originally Posted by Paul H

I only have a 110" screen.

That helps, and so does having a photographic memory. It is amazing how many people remember with the greatest of detail the original theatrical presentation from 1970. I was not even born yet, so obviously I am disqualified. In addition, I played video games growing up <<<another strike against me.

[rlsmith]

Originally Posted by Blu Titan

That helps, and so does having a photographic memory. It is amazing how many people remember with the greatest of detail the original theatrical presentation from 1970. I was not even born yet, so obviously I am disqualified. In addition, I played video games growing up <<<another strike against me.

I somewhat agree with you, it is hard to remember.

However, I worked my way through college as a union projectionist and became very accustomed to forming judgments and memories about how films looked and sounded. I took special attention to the 70mm processes.

I only saw Patton once in 60mm at the Century 21 in San Jose (which was built to the D150 specifications). I paid very close attention.

My comments about Patton have been prefaced by the remark that I need to see the film again (Fox has a new 70mm print) before saying too much about the Blu-ray. Since I saw The Longest Day in an archive 35mm print just 3 years ago, I feel a bit more confident of that.

BTW I have not been overly critical of these titles on Blu-ray in my notes so far.

Your birthdate and game expertise hardly count against you. I am sure that your hearing and vision are better than mine by this point.

[mhafner]

Originally Posted by Blu Titan

I am sure that if viewed in a 200 ft screen it will show more "problems".

Relative viewing distance and the ability to resolve 1080p detail is the relevant point. Bigger screens just help seeing 1080p detail given people's sitting habits in front of their displays/screens. Why do you feel a need to ridicule the topic?

[mhafner]

Originally Posted by Blu Titan

That helps, and so does having a photographic memory. It is amazing how many people remember with the greatest of detail the original theatrical presentation from 1970.

Beating that strawman is getting very old, indeed. It requires no photographic memory to see that Patton BD does not look like 70mm film. It requires some familiarity with the look of 70mm film by watching 70mm prints from the era. That's all.

[AaronSCH]

Sometime after beating the horse he cut to the chase.

[Robert Harris]

In a general sense, one does not need to remember with specificity what certain films looked like 30 years ago to make a determination of their processing to Blu-ray.

Patton would have been printed on Eastman 5385, which would have made original prints look slightly more velvety than a newly struck print.

Assuming that the transfer element was a new 65mm IP, one can also know what that element will look like, and what level of detail and resolution it can provide.

Also, one can make a generalization that a film shot on 5254, normally exposed and unaffected during processing would have a certain look, that can be replicated per the same shooting techniques and optics from film to film.

[BluDomain]

Is anyone going to be at the Herb Allen confab that starts
tomorrow? If you don't know what it is, you haven't been
invited. I think I have arranged an informal meeting
with certain individuals to discuss the importance of
bringing digital video of catalog titles into the modern
age. My understanding is that sales of "Patton" so far
have exceeded expectations, so it should be friendly
and receptive.

Email me privately if interested. I've guests arriving
this afternoon, so I'll check back later. I'm thinking Thursday
around cocktail time.

[MerrickG]

Penton/Wicky,

Can we expect some surprises in regards to bluray at Comic-Con?

I keep hoping to see an announcement for something that is going to blow me away and sadly it never happened at the EMA.

Feel FREE to give a hint

[WickyWoo]

Maybe, things are still fluid. There's a SAG strike pending. While I don't think it will happen, if it were it's possible that SDCC would be boycotted, in which case the big splash stuff would likely be canned and no one wants to schedule specific panels until that's settled. From what I hear there's a lot of blocks labeled "reserved for WB/Paramount/Fox/whoever"

Mostly I expect to see a lot of dates nailed down and features talked about