List of 4K film transfers on Blu-ray shot on film (non-digitally shot)

[StingingVelvet]

Originally Posted by Geoff D

That's what I hate about all these modern multi-aspect shows: effective composition is taking a back seat to filling da screen.

Same as it ever was.

[jscoggins]

Originally Posted by Geoff D

I should think the specs are correct, they're using flat format(s) as opposed to anamorphic in order to give the captured image a nice balance between height and width (as Peter said, there's no going back with anamorphic, it's widescreen or bust with that format).

The specs suggest it'll be matted to 2.35 for regular DCPs though, so it'll probably be a typical IMAX joint: looks okay in the action scenes but with too much headroom in the talky bits. That's what I hate about all these modern multi-aspect shows: effective composition is taking a back seat to filling da screen.

I prefer the taller ratios, not just to fill the screen but because I hate the way people compose their movies now. Almost 70% of movies are comprised of shots showing only people's heads and shoulders. Whatever happened to showing people's torsos and legs? Plus, it's such a waste of costume and production design -- all that hard work isn't being shown on the screen.

[Geoff D]

Originally Posted by jscoggins

I prefer the taller ratios, not just to fill the screen but because I hate the way people compose their movies now. Almost 70% of movies are comprised of shots showing only people's heads and shoulders. Whatever happened to showing people's torsos and legs? Plus, it's such a waste of costume and production design -- all that hard work isn't being shown on the screen.

Because you can't read emotion from torsos and legs? Seriously though, it's not wide or tall per se that I have a problem with, it's one being compromised for the other. As Velvet said, perhaps that's always been the case with the flat widescreen formats like Super 35 (the temptation being there to use the taller frame, even only subconsciously, and by definition the spherical lenses will mean that you'll have to shoot and light it differently than with anamorphic glass), but I love that anamorphic has made such a comeback in recent years, not only for that classic elliptical bokeh but because it can't be 'opened up' or otherwise ****ed with just to embiggen the picture. WYSIWYG.

And it's ironic that the big thing for cinema in the middle of the 20th century was the move to widescreen to differentiate it from square TV screens, but now most people have widescreen displays at home and the current big thing (IMAX) is all about going back to a nearly-square image! Such is life, eh?

[jscoggins]

Originally Posted by Geoff D

Because you can't read emotion from torsos and legs?

People could see acting just fine back when the Plain Americain was used for the majority of shots.



Nowadays, that shot would prolly be a close up of Cary Grant's shoulders and face.



I much prefer the taller framing, where I can see more of the sets.

[Geoff D]

Originally Posted by jscoggins

People could see acting just fine back when the Plain Americain was used for the majority of shots.

[Show spoiler]

Nowadays, that shot would prolly be a close up of Cary Grant's shoulders and face.

[Show spoiler]

I much prefer the taller framing, where I can see more of the sets.

There's a reason why plan américain wasn't initially a term of endearment, not to the French anyway. Maybe it's just us crazy Europeans and our liking for the camera to actually do something rather than just have it being a passive bystander, watching from a distance. Thank God Orson Welles came along.

And set designers themselves know exactly what the score is; they know that their untold hours of hard work may only be seen fleetingly on screen - sometimes it's more of an aid to the actors than anything - but they get paid just the same, so I don't feel sorry for them whenever I see something shot in widescreen.

[jscoggins]

Originally Posted by Geoff D

There's a reason why plan américain wasn't initially a term of endearment, not to the French anyway. Maybe it's just us crazy Europeans and our liking for the camera to actually do something rather than just have it being a passive bystander, watching from a distance. Thank God Orson Welles came along.

And set designers themselves know exactly what the score is; they know that their untold hours of hard work may only be seen fleetingly on screen - sometimes it's more of an aid to the actors than anything - but they get paid just the same, so I don't feel sorry for them whenever I see something shot in widescreen.

[Geoff D]

Hey, you like what you like, I like what I like, it'd be boring if we were blowing smoke up each other's asses in perpetuity.

[StingingVelvet]

Here in the US we know the UK isn't really Europe, Geoff. Don't try pretending you're down with those damn Frenchies!!!

P.S. Most directors today have no idea how to use scope and I wonder why they bother.

[Geoff D]

Originally Posted by StingingVelvet

Here in the US we know the UK isn't really Europe, Geoff. Don't try pretending you're down with those damn Frenchies!!!

P.S. Most directors today have no idea how to use scope and I wonder why they bother.

It's the other side of the water, that's all that matters to you Yanks.

As for the directors thing, it's another reason why I love anamorphic rather than matted 2.35 widescreen because even in this day and age it still forces the filmmakers to realise that that is their frame. There's no opening it up for IMAX or for TV, no safety net of leaving a fair bit of room because you know you can just reframe it later, it's the ultimate test of any DP. Just because it's anamorphic doesn't mean every movie will look like Chinatown (incidentally, John Alonzo adored anamorphic), granted, but it's an unforgiving format (look at the focus issues in Interstellar) that when is done right is like nothing else in the world.

[jscoggins]

Originally Posted by StingingVelvet

P.S. Most directors today have no idea how to use scope and I wonder why they bother.

This. So many of today's movies just have one person in the frame at a time. No one bothers rehearsing and blocking anymore. What a total waste of the rectangular frame.

[PeterTHX]

Originally Posted by Geoff D

Storaro's probably dancing a jig right about now. Don't get me wrongo, I don't mind 2:1 if it's composed for that (as Trevorrow said, it's damned close to the 1.90 IMAX digital ratio) but cropping 2.35 movies to get there is NOT cool, Vittorio. Not cool.

His revisionist cropping of Apocalypse Now and The Last Emperor really grates, at least for Blu-ray they were finally able to "fix" AN, but still can't find a watchable (read: with English subtitles) 2.35 version of TLE.

[Geoff D]

I still can't believe how much better AN looked in 2.35 than 2:1, the composition was ruined by the crop. It was like watching a different film for me.

[PeterTHX]

Originally Posted by jscoggins

People could see acting just fine back when the Plain Americain was used for the majority of shots.

And you can see acting just fine in 'Scope.

Nowadays, that shot would prolly be a close up of Cary Grant's shoulders and face.

Not necessarily. It would be framed very differently.

I much prefer the taller framing, where I can see more of the sets.

And I can see more the sets just fine in 'Scope, especially since a majority of sets don't even have a ceiling so you see more of the sides. Most of the time in flat 1.33/1.85 photography the actors fill the frame so you can't see anything else anyway.


Humans SEE wider than tall.

[gkolb]

Hi OP. Looks like Ken Burns' The Civil War Blu-ray will be a 4k remaster. Not due out til this fall. Are you including TV or documentaries in this thread? A copy of the press release is here https://www.blu-ray.com/news/?id=16524.

I kept wanting to buy the dvd set at Costco this spring, so glad I held off. Sounds like the bd should be awesome!

[L'armée des ombres]

Originally Posted by gkolb

Hi OP. Looks like Ken Burns' The Civil War Blu-ray will be a 4k remaster. Not due out til this fall. Are you including TV or documentaries in this thread? A copy of the press release is here https://www.blu-ray.com/news/?id=16524.

I kept wanting to buy the dvd set at Costco this spring, so glad I held off. Sounds like the bd should be awesome!

If it's shot on film it belongs here
Added thanx gkolb

[dvdmike]

Was the new Thelma and Louise disc only 2k? It looks more like 4k but is not on the list

[tama]

Originally Posted by dvdmike

Was the new Thelma and Louise disc only 2k? It looks more like 4k but is not on the list

For an MGM disc it looks really good.

[dvdmike]

Originally Posted by tama

For an MGM disc it looks really good.

It's a very modern master also

[HeavyHitter]

Any screencaps of it?

[dvdmike]

Originally Posted by HeavyHitter

Any screencaps of it?

http://caps-a-holic.com/hd_vergleich...D=1929#auswahl