Scanners (1981)

[batman144144]

Originally Posted by tele1962

I think it suits the film much better...

If that's the look you like best, that's fine. In fact, that's my point. The look that I prefer doesn't coincide with the director's, and I'm perfectly fine with that. It's okay to disagree with the director. I can do that. It's one of my superpowers.

[Mr Kite]

Originally Posted by batman144144

If that's the look you like best, that's fine. In fact, that's my point. The look that I prefer doesn't coincide with the director's, and I'm perfectly fine with that. It's okay to disagree with the director. I can do that. It's one of my superpowers.

It sure is, we all have preferences I just go with the most accurate.

[I KEEL YOU]

For me, the cap that shows the most that Subkultur is the winner is this one, where one appears to be a dull cloudy day and the other appears to be a sunny day:

http://www.caps-a-holic.com/hd_vergl...ss=1#vergleich

And whether it's cloudy or sunny we have the answer in the lower left part of the frame:

http://www.caps-a-holic.com/hd_vergl...ss=1#vergleich

And speaking of the sun in that frame, notice how it's outline is sharper on the Criterion than the Subkultur, which is always, ALWAYS a feature of the poorer/more molested transfers when it comes to sharp light sources. Examples:

http://www.caps-a-holic.com/hd_vergl...ess=#vergleich

http://www.caps-a-holic.com/hd_vergl...ss=1#vergleich

http://www.caps-a-holic.com/hd_vergl...ess=#vergleich

http://www.caps-a-holic.com/hd_vergl...ess=#vergleich

http://www.caps-a-holic.com/hd_vergl...ss=1#vergleich

http://www.caps-a-holic.com/hd_vergl...ss=0#vergleich

http://www.caps-a-holic.com/hd_vergl...ess=#vergleich

[Mr Kite]

Originally Posted by I KEEL YOU

For me, the cap that shows the most that Subkultur is the winner is this one, where one appears to be a dull cloudy day and the other appears to be a sunny day:

http://www.caps-a-holic.com/hd_vergl...ss=1#vergleich

And whether it's cloudy or sunny we have the answer in the lower left part of the frame:

http://www.caps-a-holic.com/hd_vergl...ss=1#vergleich

And speaking of the sun in that frame, notice how it's outline is sharper on the Criterion than the Subkultur, which is always, ALWAYS a feature of the poorer/more molested transfers when it comes to sharp light sources. Examples:

http://www.caps-a-holic.com/hd_vergl...ess=#vergleich

http://www.caps-a-holic.com/hd_vergl...ss=1#vergleich

http://www.caps-a-holic.com/hd_vergl...ess=#vergleich

http://www.caps-a-holic.com/hd_vergl...ess=#vergleich

http://www.caps-a-holic.com/hd_vergl...ss=1#vergleich

http://www.caps-a-holic.com/hd_vergl...ss=0#vergleich

http://www.caps-a-holic.com/hd_vergl...ess=#vergleich

I'm not seeing what your getting at to be honest. Are you saying you prefer the brighter one over the directors cut?

[Goremeister100]

Originally Posted by StingingVelvet

I hope you're not talking about 30 years ago, because remembering a little thing like seat colors from then would be prodigy level memory and I'd have to call your bluff there.

In any event, this is gonna be like Thief, everyone is gonna have a different opinion on what is most loyal. Criterion defaults to the director or cinematographer opinion, and that's good enough for me really.

I have a photographic memory and saw it about 10 times when it was first released. I live in Montreal and I used to go through 2001 University where they shot the chase scene at the beginning that also has red as the main color. Trust me, that's the correct red.

[format916]

didnt think this was too special. great score though. outside of the opening scene didnt really care for this. reminded me of a more boring halloween 3.

[StingingVelvet]

Originally Posted by Goremeister100

I have a photographic memory and saw it about 10 times when it was first released. I live in Montreal and I used to go through 2001 University where they shot the chase scene at the beginning that also has red as the main color. Trust me, that's the correct red.

I'm not gonna debate your 14 year old memories. I do think the Criterion is likely altered though, so we don't really disagree. I am just saying when there's a question I think siding with the director is a logical choice, and stops me from stressing over it.

I do think a lot of directors had an intent that was hard to reach with photo-chemical processes and they "make this up" now with digital techniques. So even if Scanners is now a more dull green than it was this could just be matching what he always wanted and couldn't do. Who knows.

[HD Goofnut]

Originally Posted by StingingVelvet

I'm not gonna debate your 14 year old memories. I do think the Criterion is likely altered though, so we don't really disagree. I am just saying when there's a question I think siding with the director is a logical choice, and stops me from stressing over it.

I do think a lot of directors had an intent that was hard to reach with photo-chemical processes and they "make this up" now with digital techniques. So even if Scanners is now a more dull green than it was this could just be matching what he always wanted and couldn't do. Who knows.

Thankfully, we have two choices.

[JMDiaz718]

Originally Posted by format916

didnt think this was too special. great score though. outside of the opening scene didnt really care for this. reminded me of a more boring halloween 3.

Yeah, I agree. I like the first 30 minutes or so. Once it becomes a chase movie, it really loses steam. I do love the creepy heartbeat sound effect, you hear every time, a scanner does their thing.

[StingingVelvet]

You're diagnosing him with a visual impairment based on a BD release? Wow.

All his movies are pretty dark looking, that's his style. Wouldn't surprise me for a minute if Scanners used to be too bright on home media compared to how he wanted it. In the caps the UK edition looks contrast boosted in a lot of places, so who knows. Judging by the Arrow Shivers issue these "Cronenberg approved transfers" actually get barely any input from him at all, and I doubt Criterion made it darker for shits and giggles.

[MifuneFan]

It'll be interesting to see what The Brood looks like. I swear the little freak kids better not be green .

[Mr Kite]

Originally Posted by miribeau

How people feel about this is entirely subjective, as we all know. However, in finally catching the Criterion at a friend's house (I have the German), I was pretty shocked at how accurate the "watching through sunglasses" description is. We played with the contrast and color as much as we could and it was washed out from start to finish, most surprisingly when fire was shown, something I'm so accustomed to seeing on screen in brilliant, vibrant color from decades before scanners, back to the first technicolor images. Also, by removing grain, they removed fine detail in nearly every scene, on direct comparison. Does it matter? Not really. We love what we love and if you prefer Criterion, that's fine with me. But, if the Criterion transfer is really what Cronenberg sees as the pinnacle of what this film can be, visually, I wonder if he may be suffering from the kind of degeneration my father is suffering. He sees bright colors as unnatural and a grey shift as normal at this point, due to progressive glaucoma and retinal issues and, if that is the case, then one of the greatest living directors is losing part of the apparatus that makes him so special, his eyesight. That is a tragedy and, so, of all things, watching this film on Criterion's blu-ray made me terribly sad for him and for all of us who love his work. I hope this isn't representative of a dulling of vision that would affect his future efforts or, worse, his enjoyment of the world as he views it everyday. I live in fear of seeing the world darken this way.

Removing grain, where..............?

[MifuneFan]

^lol

[miribeau]

Originally Posted by MifuneFan

It'll be interesting to see what The Brood looks like. I swear the little freak kids better not be green .

It's weird to read that having watched yet another odd looking digital transfer of The Brood just last month where they did look kind of greenish in a few shots, and sort of overly yellow/jaundice in others, almost as though they'd dialed down the red too much. Of course, so did the male and female leads. But this has nothing to do with the blu-ray. I'm hoping they'll take the time to clean up the final scenes (where there are some blurry artifacts on digital which we all know didn't come from the celluloid original). I wish they'd take three months to make it perfect but who would pay for that.

[miribeau]

Originally Posted by tele1962

Removing grain, where..............?

Well, it wasn't DNR like on Compulsion where you get pretty whole scale loss of grain and fine detail (and don't get me wrong, I love the French blu-ray as compared to my old dvds) but a good comparison would probably be, if you look at an older film, like Harvey with James Stewart, where there is a rather profound level of grain and additional specks from age of the celluloid, and they had the choice to apply filters to a higher level but decided to remove the worst of it and preserve as much of the detail as possible. On Scanners (Germany) if you study the image, it isn't exactly as grainy as the original celluloid presentation and some of the glitches that appeared to be native to the film have been lessened as well but the fine detail, readable signs, wrinkles, grout between tiles, brick and mortar, pavement detail, are still there to be appreciated. In the Criterion edition, I couldn't make out many of those details that I've become accustomed to in repeat viewings of the film on the German release and there was less visible grain than on the German release. That having been said, I'm not opposed to use of DNR given how grainy the film was when I first saw a print but I do prefer more grain if that means more detail. Of course, that is only a preference and, like everything, highly subjective and personal. I don't have pictures from back in the day of the celluloid (and I only saw a few prints so I can't guarantee the original/vault print had the same level of grain) but caps-a-holic has a nice photo comparison of our Criterion to the German blu-ray.

To put it more plainly, in answer to your question, grain from pretty much the whole film. I hope that answers it.

[miribeau]

Originally Posted by Goremeister100

That's how I remember the red being when it played theatrically. Very vivid to go along with the head explosion. The Second Sight and Criterion didn't get the color right.

It is difficult when you've seen the original film because so many of the people here are going off of DVD and television viewings so they just don't know how washed out the Criterion edition is and there is no way to show them because none of us carried around cameras and took pictures during movies back then. But, just so you know, I remember it that way too. You're not alone.

[Mr Kite]

In answer to your post on the directors vision, I would have put it more simply..........he decided this was this was the original intended look.

On your post regarding grain, I think you are confusing grain with digital noise and or sharpening of the picture, as is prevalent in the German release.

..........and lastly, I can't remember a shade of colour from a film from last week never mind how a film looked some decades ago. No one can.

[Mr Kite]

Originally Posted by miribeau

Film grain is more of a texture. It lacks the uniformity of digital noise. Sometimes it is fine and you have to look closely to see the lack of uniformity but often there is enough variety in the size of the tiny little specks that you can easily tell the difference. Also, the characteristic lightening of spots and darkening of other spots gives it away every time. If you compare the two, you should be able to see the grain on the German release and the lack of it on the Criterion but if you don't, more power to you. I wish it didn't bother me as much when I feel too much has been removed. In the original film grain was evident, but, you are right that he may not have wanted it there. That having been said, they did attempt to sharpen the picture in the German release though not always uniformly so in some sections you do have that horrid over-sharp look but not enough to bother me and I'm pretty picky so it couldn't be that bad.

I think 40 decades was a typo and I do that all the time so I don't blame you, but I get it. Some of us remember and some of us don't. No harm in falling into either group. It was released in 1981, I think. I saw it in theater and later in revival and later in private showing. That having been said, some of us are so obsessive that we do remember these moments in film that had impact on us. For me, the fire in the film was a strong visual memory and I think that, above all else, in the Criterion edition was the most disappointing element. If it is only been bright and lifelike, I might have forgiven the green tint and dialed down contrast.

Again your confusing contrast boosting and over sharpening of the picture, which has the effect of making grain more visible to the eye, although never intended.
I would love for someone to have photographic memory regarding colour.....but have never heard of anyone yet.

[StingingVelvet]

Wow.

Anyway...

[miribeau]

Originally Posted by tele1962

Again your confusing contrast boosting and over sharpening of the picture, which has the effect of making grain more visible to the eye, although never intended.
I would love for someone to have photographic memory regarding colour.....but have never heard of anyone yet.

I may not be understanding you. Photographic memory involves all aspects of processing. The color, visual texture, substance, composition of image, even words on a page including typographical errors. There are many people who have this and, if you are interested, there are some fascinating articles on the subject, though most people are capable of forming perfect visual records of events that influence them profoundly. For me, it has always happened with film but I am not unique in this. I've met a lot of people like me.

As to the film alterations, I also think I may not be understanding you. Are you just saying you don't see both a dialing up of contrast (in addition to color alterations) and examples of oversharpening (though the bulk of the film is not oversharpened) on the German release? Because they did dial up contrast for brightening but they also played with color, dialing up reds and dialing down blue tones at many points in the film and they sharpened the image, a little too much at times but not uniformly through the entire film as great care was taken to get this release looking better than the terrible releases that predated it. But beyond that, they applied some digital noise reduction which had the effect of removing some of the grain but not nearly as much as was removed on the Criterion release. Of course, the DNR removed digital noise as intended but the successful removal of digital noise is not the complaint most people have with over-application of DNR, it is the side effect of stripping grain and fine detail from the image.

I'm not sure what you mean when you say these ideas are being confused. I mean, its not possible to confuse two things that occur simultaneously when saying both are occurring, unless you mean, for example, using a first term to mean a second process and a second term to mean a first process, which I'm not doing.

When I say DNR I mean digital noise reduction which, unfortunately, cannot be applied without removing some grain.

When I say grain, I mean the grain on the film that appears almost as sand only the sand in non-uniform in size and ranges from lighter to darker than the image it overlays.

When I say contrast, I mean the darkening of darks and lightening of lights.

When I say sharpening the picture, I mean running it through algorithm for the purpose of adding artificial definition (such as in the example of a hazy picture of a door, sharpening the image would add and artificially crisp door frame and result in an almost pixelated look where the original picture may be slightly hazy but look more natural).

This is often confused with upscaling which is actually achieved via a different type of algorithm specifically designed to split the data in pixels and often results in a softening rather than the oddly pixelated appearance of oversharpened or artificially defined images. When upscaling is done well, it has less softening and appears more uniform because the data in the pixels has been split uniformly and evenly (as in one pixel cut in fourths to become four pixels looking more even than one pixel cut into three parts vertically to become three side by side pixels looking fuzzy and altering scale). When upscaling is done poorly because the data is unevenly split, the image softens considerably and you get a poor upscaled image like on the German blu-ray of The Killing Floor or even the Austrian Return of the Living Dead Part III (which I still love, in spite of that flaw in image quality).

I hope that clears it up a bit with the multiple issues involved. Again, even though the German release is guilty of making some mistakes in these arenas, it is still far and away the most lifelike of the releases, with the best color and the best contrast and the least removal of grain and fine detail when they applied their DNR. I am unsure as to how many sweeps they did but in the Criterion review (here on blu-ray.com) they did confirm that multiple layers of cleaning were used, first manual removal of dirt, specs, etc., but then DNR for the purpose of reducing noise and grain. I tend to think grain should never be intentionally removed but only removed as a side effect of necessary noise reduction but we all have different opinions on that front and, as it is subjective, no one can ever be right or wrong on that front. On the Criterion edition, some of the color alterations are detailed in the review as well but I got my information from a friend who was ticked off enough to contact them about the blu-ray to complain. Their explanation was that they used the best source material possible, in this original print, and they did not offer any explanation of the failure to reproduce the reds and oranges in the film to what they were originally, citing only the age of the original print.

Also, sorry I'm so wordy. Academia and writing books has left me a wordy old freak, hasn't it.