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

[KubrickFan]

Penton, I just found out that The Big C - Season 1 won't have a Blu-ray release. Do you know why that's the case? Wasn't it popular enough? Might one still happen in the future?
If you have such information, and can disclose it, I'd very much like an answer .

[Bobby Henderson]

Originally Posted by sharkshark

But, yeah, new tools are fun, but the look of film has much to do with 24fps, rightly or wrongly. High framerate reproduction, from what I've seen demoed, certainly has a tendency to look like daytime television.

Although 24fps is a factor, what makes up the film look is more complicated. Color gamma and the behaviors of film versus CCD/CMOS imagers in capturing each frame is really the bigger part of the issue.

I can shoot 1080p/24 footage with my Canon EOS 5D Mark II. If I do nothing to alter the native color gamma of the footage and just leave it as is the footage will still look very electronic despite the 24fps frame rate. The same is true for just about any camera capable of shooting 1080p/24. That makes it necessary to do a lot of serious color grading work to the footage. In low light situations it's a bigger challenge to prevent the footage from looking like video. The CMOS imager can work only so fast. You can compensate by cranking up the gain, but that kills detail, color fidelity and brings a lot of electronic noise into the image.

As video cameras move on to faster imagers that perform much better in low light AND capture footage in much greater bit depths they'll have a much better ability at imitating the film look. With more levels of shading from light to dark in each RGB channel the color signal will look more natural.

Likewise, I have seen 70mm 60fps Showscan motion simulator movies that didn't really look like video. Showscan doesn't look like standard 24fps film either. It just looks more "real" as if the movie screen has been turned into a window showing another reality. Both 24fps film and video in any frame rate have artificial qualities to them that separate what we see in real life.

Human eyesight is more dynamic than most film or video cameras. We see roughly 8 stops of dynamic range while the best camera/lens combinations are limited to about 5. This allows us to see shadow or highlight detail cameras would render only as white or black. Most people can perceive frame rate differences (judder, flicker) between 70fps and 100fps. Our eyes also have the ability to actively white balance and do so for multiple light sources, like see color normally in an indoor setting as well as through a window outdoors. White balance a video camera for indoors and get outdoor light coming in you'll have blue video. Human eyesight is quite a miracle of evolution. And we seem more amazed by the vision of bees, eagles or other animals instead of being impressed by what our own eyes can do.

Anyway, I think camera technology has a ways to go to equal what motion picture film cameras can do in certain areas and has a long way to go before it can deliver hyper real looking footage.

[Blu-Ray Watcher]

Penton, Is Julianne Nicholson still in The Amazing Spider-Man? IMDB (a terrible website to trust) says she was replaced by Embeth Davidtz. Is this true or false (probably false).

[sharkshark]

Heh, my throaway comment seems to be generating the most chat...serves me right for being pithy.

Excellent comments - I never got to see a showscan film (well, save for the BACK TO THE FUTURE ride, which I believe Douglas Trumbull and co put together, if memory serves). While being buffeted in a fake Delorian, I can't say I noticed a radical difference between it and superior IMAX presentations.

Again, I'm certainly not against superior framerates (it's what Ebert, for example, was advocating over 3D). It's certainly a more esoteric change (mono to color, stereo to surround, 2D to 3D are big jumps). In fact, this is one of those "small" jumps perceptually, where a "good enough" factor has existed and the increase in quality is for some difficult to perceive.

In otherwords, just like the arguments about how Blu Ray is superior quality to the quality of HD VOD or even normal Broadcast.

I'm pleased with Cameron's investigations, as long as every movie made won't need to look like AVATAR.

Originally Posted by Bobby Henderson

Although 24fps is a factor, what makes up the film look is more complicated. Color gamma and the behaviors of film versus CCD/CMOS imagers in capturing each frame is really the bigger part of the issue.

I can shoot 1080p/24 footage with my Canon EOS 5D Mark II. If I do nothing to alter the native color gamma of the footage and just leave it as is the footage will still look very electronic despite the 24fps frame rate. The same is true for just about any camera capable of shooting 1080p/24. That makes it necessary to do a lot of serious color grading work to the footage. In low light situations it's a bigger challenge to prevent the footage from looking like video. The CMOS imager can work only so fast. You can compensate by cranking up the gain, but that kills detail, color fidelity and brings a lot of electronic noise into the image.

As video cameras move on to faster imagers that perform much better in low light AND capture footage in much greater bit depths they'll have a much better ability at imitating the film look. With more levels of shading from light to dark in each RGB channel the color signal will look more natural.

Likewise, I have seen 70mm 60fps Showscan motion simulator movies that didn't really look like video. Showscan doesn't look like standard 24fps film either. It just looks more "real" as if the movie screen has been turned into a window showing another reality. Both 24fps film and video in any frame rate have artificial qualities to them that separate what we see in real life.

Human eyesight is more dynamic than most film or video cameras. We see roughly 8 stops of dynamic range while the best camera/lens combinations are limited to about 5. This allows us to see shadow or highlight detail cameras would render only as white or black. Most people can perceive frame rate differences (judder, flicker) between 70fps and 100fps. Our eyes also have the ability to actively white balance and do so for multiple light sources, like see color normally in an indoor setting as well as through a window outdoors. White balance a video camera for indoors and get outdoor light coming in you'll have blue video. Human eyesight is quite a miracle of evolution. And we seem more amazed by the vision of bees, eagles or other animals instead of being impressed by what our own eyes can do.

Anyway, I think camera technology has a ways to go to equal what motion picture film cameras can do in certain areas and has a long way to go before it can deliver hyper real looking footage.

[Penton-Man]

Originally Posted by Doctorossi

Yes, so far, it has.

Before the advent of color, the look of film had "much to do with" monochrome.

Aesthetics aside, both frame rates have different obstacles and ‘issues’ which it seems weren’t explained in this article PM’ed me by a theater owner…
http://marketsaw.blogspot.com/2011/0...ectacular.html

who, lol, asked me to clarify what is “only slight software modifications" as reported in the last paragraph of that piece. Well, for 60 fps, even if one had a “generation 2 digital projector”, one would still need two servers running in sync to do 60 fps/per eye as a 60 fps/eye stereo Digital Cinema Package hasn’t been standardized. So, individual theater owners can define for themselves how “minor” the cost of adding and installing another server would be to make it all work. And even if, 60fps per eye stereo were to be standardized, at the current time, no one server is capable of doing 120 fps, so theater owners would still have to purchase another server and synch them in the install.

As far as the implementation of 48 fps/eye for stereo, that really wouldn’t be much of a hassle at all for theater owners because as I explained on the other thread here, the DCP has supported (and actually for that matter, distributed) 48fps already. The *fly in the ointment* for that particular frame rate (whether it be for 3D or 2D), for all Blu-ray enthusiasts out there reading is that 48 fps results in noticeable artifacts when transferred from the mastering suite to Blu-ray. Jim may not be aware of this or may not care. I don’t know but, if AVATAR 2 is shot at 48fps I would recommend for optimal viewing to skip the eventual Blu-ray (in whatever dimension is to your liking) and just go see it in 2D or 3D at your local Cinema house because the Blu-ray version will be a definite downgrade in terms of PQ.

P.S.
And by local Cinema house ^, I mean Digital theater, because if your local cinema still runs a film projector, you’ll be pretty much out of luck for ever seeing Avatar 2 in 48 fps at those type of venues since motion pictures captured at 48 fps won’t transfer well to film for analog projection at 24 fps.

And don’t reveal anything to me about the Arsenal match as I haven’t watched it yet and if we can’t beat a team struggling at the bottom of the table, the situation is hopeless to ever catch ManU.

[Penton-Man]

Originally Posted by Oliver K

Say Penton, now that Blu-Ray won the format war I would like to replace my blue cases with black ones like in the first pic of this thread:

https://forum.blu-ray.com/blu-ray-te...ray-cases.html

To my astonishment I could not find these anywhere - is it not possible to get a license to manufacture these?
Sorry if this is not right up your alley, maybe you would know where to turn to regarding this?

And yes I know you are not really interested in packaging but you should appreciate that there are people that care - these are also the guys who still buy prepackaged media

I am sensitive to other peoples’ sincere interests, but packaging and cover art, etc. are far removed from my domain and honestly, of very little personal or professional interest, the later being other colleagues’ responsibility.

Sorry Oliver but, my contribution(s) in regards to that sort of stuff ended with my facilitation of low-tack stickers, see –
https://forum.blu-ray.com/insider-di...ml#post1550041

and, with all due respect, I plan to keep it that way.

Let me give you an idea of what my Blu-ray ‘collection’ looks like at home.... a bunch of discs, some in their proper cases, some not, scattered amongst HDCAM-SR tapes and SR memory cards in a few A/V pull-out drawers. Come to think of it, maybe I should put my blank SR tapes up for sale on e-bay given the situation following the earthquake.

[4K2K]

Originally Posted by Penton-Man

who, lol, asked me to clarify what is “only slight software modifications" as reported in the last paragraph of that piece. Well, for 60 fps, even if one had a “generation 2 digital projector”, one would still need two servers running in sync to do 60 fps/per eye as a 60 fps/eye stereo Digital Cinema Package hasn’t been standardized. So, individual theater owners can define for themselves how “minor” the cost of adding and installing another server would be to make it all work. And even if, 60fps per eye stereo were to be standardized, at the current time, no one server is capable of doing 120 fps, so theater owners would still have to purchase another server and synch them in the install.

As far as the implementation of 48 fps/eye for stereo, that really wouldn’t be much of a hassle at all for theater owners because as I explained on the other thread here, the DCP has supported (and actually for that matter, distributed) 48fps already.

Since the current standard for 48 fps in digital cinema is for 2D not 3D, do you mean that there are servers that could be upgraded through software only to do 48 fps x2 for 96 fps, but above that, eg. for 60 fps x2=120 fps, they couldn't and you'd need two projectors & servers?

I thought a lot of them now support the other 2D standards (eg. I read that over 80% of digital cinemas are now estimated to support the 25 fps standard - is that about right? - and is it about the same for the other newer rates (eg. 30, 50 & 60 fps)?).

edit - It looks like the Hobbit is going to be the first 48 fps (47.96) 3D film a couple of years before the first Avatar sequel

[Oliver K]

Originally Posted by Penton-Man

I am sensitive to other peoples’ sincere interests, but packaging and cover art, etc. are far removed from my domain and honestly, of very little personal or professional interest, the later being other colleagues’ responsibility.

Sorry Oliver but, my contribution(s) in regards to that sort of stuff ended with my facilitation of low-tack stickers, see –
https://forum.blu-ray.com/insider-di...ml#post1550041

and, with all due respect, I plan to keep it that way.

Let me give you an idea of what my Blu-ray ‘collection’ looks like at home.... a bunch of discs, some in their proper cases, some not, scattered amongst HDCAM-SR tapes and SR memory cards in a few A/V pull-out drawers. Come to think of it, maybe I should put my blank SR tapes up for sale on e-bay given the situation following the earthquake.

Clearly HDCAM-SR tapes are not the kind of software you will find with the typical customer that the BDA is targeting

So point taken about the matter of packaging and realistically with the content being right and reasonably faithful to the source I would buy Blu-Rays even if they were all in pink polka-dotted cardboard cases, although I am glad I don't have to

[johndoyle123]

mr penton

quick question

does sony uk/usa still have guns of navarone and caine mutiny on track for release on blu-ray this year ?

and another quick question in regards to :

-from here to eternity
-on the waterfront
-anatomy of a murder

i believe they have all been scheduled for release atleast once , any chance of seeing them spring up any time soon , would be a shame to waste such restorations

[Penton-Man]

Originally Posted by 4K2K

Since the current standard for 48 fps in digital cinema is for 2D not 3D, do you mean that there are servers that could be upgraded through software only to do 48 fps x2 for 96 fps, but above that, eg. for 60 fps x2=120 fps, they couldn't and you'd need two projectors & servers?

I haven’t kept up with what any server companies may have announced last week at CinemaCon but barring any new announcements I’m certain that no one server exists today which is capable of doing 120fps…..so for 60fps per eye, yes, you still need two servers and high performance Digital Cinema servers aint cheap.

In order to be fully DCI ‘compliant’ for a long time all servers have needed to be capable of accepting a 48fps Digital Cinema Package to use to show 3D movies. In other words, output 24 fps/eye. I *think* it’s possible that with a ‘minor’ upgrade, some *could* be capable of doing 48fps/eye and that may be what Jim C. is reportedly referring to as “a minor software upgrade”.

But still something which should be of overriding concern to Blu-ray enthusiasts is that as I said before, 48fps doesn’t transfer well (Picture Quality) to Blu-ray, which actually is why the Society of Motion Picture and Television Engineers never adopted 48fps stereo as a standard back in ’09. The best thing for the interests of Blu-ray-ians would be for Jim to shoot at 60 fps and then at least you could get a 3D Blu-ray of Avatar 2 authored in 720p/60 to show the motion picture at the correct speed at home and be artifact free.

Originally Posted by 4K2K

I thought a lot of them now support the other 2D standards (eg. I read that over 80% of digital cinemas are now estimated to support the 25 fps standard - is that about right? - and is it about the same for the other newer rates (eg. 30, 50 & 60 fps)?).

Yes, 80% sounds about right for offering everything up to and including 60fps for 2D…or at least I’m sure that figure is correct for 60 fps (which Jim C. is interested in) because the software upgrade for 60 fps is already available to theater owners at no cost.

[Penton-Man]

Originally Posted by johndoyle123

mr penton
quick question

does sony uk/usa still have guns of navarone and caine mutiny on track for release on blu-ray this year ?
and another quick question in regards to :

-from here to eternity
-on the waterfront
-anatomy of a murder
i believe they have all been scheduled for release atleast once , any chance of seeing them spring up any time soon , would be a shame to waste such restorations

No plans so far for those titles for the U.S., except for Guns which should be forthcoming later in '11, if things stay on schedule.

[Penton-Man]

All the other above intervening questions I’ve read but, either I don’t know, or am not comfortable in saying anything about.

B.t.w. doctorossi, it is indeed hopeless but I saved myself the pain of a slow death this time by fast forwarding (x5) thru the whole match and just looked at the score board at the top of the picture.

[Penton-Man]

Originally Posted by Penton-Man

...But still something which should be of overriding concern to Blu-ray enthusiasts is that as I said before, 48fps doesn’t transfer well (Picture Quality) to Blu-ray, which actually is why the Society of Motion Picture and Television Engineers never adopted 48fps stereo as a standard back in ’09...

And for that matter, for the same reason, the 48fps frame rate probably never would have even been adopted in 2D in the original DCI specifications but, those were hashed out and published in ’05 whereas I recall the basic Blu-ray video specifications were locked around 2006.

[Penton-Man]

A True teaser outline –http://pro.sony.com/bbsccms/ext/ebla...a_0311_1b.html

[Mr. Cinema]

You've probably been receiving alot of these messages, but I wanted to tell you to pass along thanks to those at Sony who were responsible for Taxi Driver. A great film with a great presentation and package. The 12.99 price was icing on the cake. This is how I want my classics treated and Sony did an amazing job. I expect nothing short of perfection from that 1962 feature film that's been mentioned a couple of times in this forum.

[Penton-Man]

Originally Posted by Mr. Cinema

You've probably been receiving alot of these messages, but I wanted to tell you to pass along thanks to those at Sony who were responsible for Taxi Driver. A great film with a great presentation and package. The 12.99 price was icing on the cake. This is how I want my classics treated and Sony did an amazing job. I expect nothing short of perfection from that 1962 feature film that's been mentioned a couple of times in this forum.

Not really what I would call “a lot’ but I do notice by scanning the titles and stats to the right in the Blu-ray Movies - North America, that Taxi Driver seems to be of some interest with close to 50,000 views which I assume is related to people expressing satisfaction there for what they perceive as a truly premium Blu-ray product…at least, I hope that’s what they’re doing.

I don’t get out much (on the internet forum front) these days so I’m wondering if there is comparative interest in this title on the other outside Blu-ray software forums or, are folks there more interested in discussing other topics/movies than Marty’s taxi driver movie? Some…many? of you guys still be co-inhabitants of other forums, no? I would think Taxi Driver be of some cinematic importance, no matter where be the enthusiast venue.

Anyway, in terms of that other ‘1962 feature film that's been mentioned a couple of times in this forum’, yes, you are correct as I think it first came to the *quest for perfection* forefront a couple years back when I mentioned that initially high resolution test scans of the best available film element were being performed at a local facility in Santa Monica known also for dealing with really large format films…namely, IMAX films. Anyway, LoA will be given the restoration and mastering justice it deserves as the last thing I desire is to see a scowl on the little fella’s face as I walk by in the morning (especially since he holds a crusader's sword
)…
https://forum.blu-ray.com/insider-di...ml#post4132465

^ Which reminds me, I would like to publically thank Deciazulado for yet again taking the time to make that pic in the above linked post viewable only to Blu-ray.com forum members, as my posting time is limited in that regard and I would also like to give him a special shout-out for being a true hero of this forum as one of the guys behind the scenes who, repeated, has made everything on this site work…and work well, during his watch.

[Mr. Cinema]

The excitement over Taxi Driver seems to be going over well on many forums. Not only due to the presentation itself, but the fact that such a classic is being offered on release week for only $12.99 at multiple retail locations (Best Buy, Walmart, Amazon). It sits #10 on Amazon's current BD seller list. I think and hope that aggressive pricing will make for solid first-week sales.

I think more importantly though is Taxi Driver will be used as a benchmark for how a classic catalog should be treated. Obviously due to $$$, not every single classic will get a full blown 4k (or more) restoration, but A-list titles like this one should. For B-level catalogs, I fully expect a few corners to be cut from all the studios. I mean, it is large investments to make on these restorations. But I hope the crown jewels, from everyone, will continue to get the A+ treatment. That's why many of us got into HD in the first place. We want to see our favorites in the best possible quality.

[Dennis M]

Originally Posted by Penton-Man

Not really what I would call “a lot"

Add myself, and I'm sure Shark as well, to the Thank-you list. It's a beautiful Disc with great packaging and extras. A professional undertaking through and through. But honestly not really a surprise coming from the Sony Camp.

Also, thanks again to Sony for the 4K screenings they made available. It's my hope that we'll see more catalog presented this way.

Job well done!!!

[Doctorossi]

I'm sure you'll have my thanks, too, P-Man... if Amazon ever gets around to shipping my copy. *GRUMBLE GRUMBLE*

[SquidPuppet]

Originally Posted by Doctorossi

I'm sure you'll have my thanks, too, P-Man... if Amazon ever gets around to shipping my copy. *GRUMBLE GRUMBLE*

Check your PMs.