Midnight Cowboy (1969)

[CarlosMeat]

Originally Posted by Fat Phil

People talk about the teal of the Criterion, but I don't know how anyone can stomach that oppressive DVD era magenta push of the MGM. Fookin' unbearable

MGM


Criterion

I don't have the MGM version but I agree.

[RCRochester]

Originally Posted by CarlosMeat

So you are just using that style today then.

Not today, just in certain posts like in my responses to you.

Originally Posted by CarlosMeat

It does look like crap since I want to fit in.

That makes no sense whatsoever.

Originally Posted by CarlosMeat

It looks like an attempt to make it look like the grading in blade Runner 2049 for example where outside has a cyan push.

http://caps-a-holic.com/c.php?d1=119...78&i=4&l=0&a=1

This looks nothing like films of the era but instead those of today.

I understand that the decisions are those who did the work but I'm not blind use a high quality 4K projector color calibrated so it's impossible to not see this.

There's no "cyan push" at all and it looks absolutely nothing like Blade Runner 2049.

[CarlosMeat]

Originally Posted by RCRochester

Not today, just in certain posts like in my responses to you.



That makes no sense whatsoever.



There's no "cyan push" at all and it looks absolutely nothing like Blade Runner 2049.

Horse ****. Cyan irises, cyan sclera, cyan concrete not just in artificial light My posts make sense and are of course my opinion as there having been no manipulation is yours.

The powers that be checking off makes it their artistic choice just as Blade Runner Final cut compared to all the other versions. It was their choice to manipulate it.

To say it looks great or awesome doesn't change what's there.

I've looked at film and hundreds of films on media from that era and they didn't grade them that way.

I never said it looks like 2049 but instead that it has been manipulated in the same way.

If you like the teal look that is so prevalent today that is your bias mine is for films of that era to look like films of that era in color grading.

Look at Lawrence in UHD , Hard Times,The French Connection to name a few.

[Dailyan]

Originally Posted by CarlosMeat

Horse ****. Cyan irises, cyan sclera, cyan concrete not just in artificial light My posts make sense and are of course my opinion as there having been no manipulation is yours.

The powers that be checking off makes it their artistic choice just as Blade Runner Final cut compared to all the other versions. It was their choice to manipulate it.

To say it looks great or awesome doesn't change what's there.

I've looked at film and hundreds of films on media from that era and they didn't grade them that way.

I never said it looks like 2049 but instead that it has been manipulated in the same way.

If you like the teal look that is so prevalent today that is your bias mine is for films of that era to look like films of that era in color grading.

Look at Lawrence in UHD , Hard Times,The French Connection to name a few.

"Lawrence of Arabia" was shot in 65mm comparing that to "Midnight Cowboy" is absurd. Every film is graded differently; If John Schlesinger, Jerome Hellman, and Adam Holender wanted a cold push then let them have a cold push.

[RCRochester]

Originally Posted by CarlosMeat

Horse ****. Cyan irises, cyan sclera, cyan concrete not just in artificial light My posts make sense and are of course my opinion as there having been no manipulation is yours.

The powers that be checking off makes it their artistic choice just as Blade Runner Final cut compared to all the other versions. It was their choice to manipulate it.

To say it looks great or awesome doesn't change what's there.

I've looked at film and hundreds of films on media from that era and they didn't grade them that way.

I never said it looks like 2049 but instead that it has been manipulated in the same way.

How so?

Originally Posted by CarlosMeat

If you like the teal look that is so prevalent today that is your bias mine is for films of that era to look like films of that era in color grading.

Where in any of my previous posts, or in fact in any post I've ever made on this or any other forum, did I say I liked the "teal look that is so prevalent today"?

Originally Posted by CarlosMeat

Look at Lawrence in UHD , Hard Times,The French Connection to name a few.

Three random films, some shot on different film stocks by different DPs, hoping to achieve certain looks. That proves nothing. Throwing Lawrence of Arabia in there is particularly laughable.

I trust that Adam Holender and prior to his passing John Schlesinger knew how this film was supposed to look and if they say this is how this film is supposed to look, that trumps your complaining no matter how hard you try to contradict them.

[I KEEL YOU]

Originally Posted by Fat Phil

People talk about the teal of the Criterion, but I don't know how anyone can stomach that oppressive DVD era magenta push of the MGM. Fookin' unbearable

[B

[Show spoiler]]MGM[/B]


Criterion

One was a 2011 release sourced from a master that is probably much older than that. The other one is 2018 release sourced from a 2018 master, or a 2017 master perhaps? Maybe that's why people focus more on the Criterion and are frustrated with the way it looks. Not to mention the Criterion is way more expensive as well.

[billydillydilly]

Forget this dork with the Nicolas Cage avatar. He doesn't know anything.

[Fat Phil]

Originally Posted by I KEEL YOU

One was a 2011 release sourced from a master that is probably much older than that. The other one is 2018 release sourced from a 2018 master, or a 2017 master perhaps? Maybe that's why people focus more on the Criterion and are frustrated with the way it looks. Not to mention the Criterion is way more expensive as well.

Well, obviously that's why people are focusing on the Criterion . That wasn't my really my point. I'd read a few, "I'm sticking with the MGM" comments. Despite how anyone may feel about the colour of the Criterion (I happen to like it) it's worth pointing out in the course of this discussion, that the MGM looks like s***.

[I KEEL YOU]

Originally Posted by Fat Phil

Well, obviously that's why people are focusing on the Criterion . That wasn't my really my point. I'd read a few, "I'm sticking with the MGM" comments. Despite how anyone may feel about the colour of the Criterion (I happen to like it) it's worth pointing out in the course of this discussion, that the MGM looks like s***.

And despite how you may feel about the MGM looking like s*** (I happen to think it looks acceptable, not great, but acceptable), the MGM has a pretty good excuse for looking like s*** - it's a 2011 release sourced from an ancient master.

And I don't really have anything against you preferring the color of the Criterion, as long as you don't deny that the Criterion has been tealed. If you like revisionist teal, then cool. As long as you don't try to use crap excuses like "fluorescent lighting" to justify the insane amount of tealness in screencap 7, when in fact there is a clear evidence of tealing on screencap 1 that is an exterior shot on a sunny day:

http://caps-a-holic.com/c.php?a=1&x=...9&l=1&i=0&go=1

Those must have been some powerful fluorescent lights they used if they were capable of overpowering the sun itself.

[Fat Phil]

Just a shot in the dark here - but judging from your posts, i'm guessing you don't own the Criterion and as such haven't seen it in motion on a calibrated display? That's fine, but you can't hope to properly evaluate the release by viewing twenty/thirty frames from a two hour movie on a computer monitor. Having A/B'd the two discs, I can confidently say that the Criterion s**ts on the MGM from a great height - as well it should.

I absolutely don't deny that teal is occasionally prevalent, but a 35mm print supervised by the director, producer and DP was used for colour correction. You are 'internet forum guy' - and that's not an insult, I too am 'internet forum guy' . This simply boils down to preference. You hate what you see. Your mind isn't going to be changed.

[I KEEL YOU]

Just because I am using lossless .png screencaps while viewing them on several screens both at home and work to form an opinion, it doesn't mean that they are misleading. I know that because I've witnessed it on other releases.

I don't own the Criterion release of Sex, Lies and Videotape (yet), but I have seen the screenshots and I can already tell that it looks amazing and doesn't have a teal push.

[Fat Phil]

Originally Posted by I KEEL YOU

Just because I am using lossless .png screencaps while viewing them on several screens both at home and work to form an opinion, it doesn't mean that they are misleading. I know that because I've witnessed it on other releases.

I don't own the Criterion release of Sex, Lies and Videotape (yet), but I have seen the screenshots and I can already tell that it looks amazing and doesn't have a teal push.

Sure, you can form an opinion. Just not a completely informed one.

[I KEEL YOU]

Originally Posted by Fat Phil

Sure, you can form an opinion. Just not a completely informed one.

Yeah, that's what they were telling me about several other releases that I ended up buying in order to see them in motion, and then saw that the screencaps turned out to be pretty accurate after all.

[Dailyan]

Originally Posted by I KEEL YOU

Screencap 7 on caps-a-holic just might be the tealest thing I've seen in my life. And this is coming from someone who regularly watches Charlotte Hornets home games...

Originally Posted by I KEEL YOU

One was a 2011 release sourced from a master that is probably much older than that. The other one is 2018 release sourced from a 2018 master, or a 2017 master perhaps? Maybe that's why people focus more on the Criterion and are frustrated with the way it looks. Not to mention the Criterion is way more expensive as well.

Originally Posted by I KEEL YOU

And despite how you may feel about the MGM looking like s*** (I happen to think it looks acceptable, not great, but acceptable), the MGM has a pretty good excuse for looking like s*** - it's a 2011 release sourced from an ancient master.

And I don't really have anything against you preferring the color of the Criterion, as long as you don't deny that the Criterion has been tealed. If you like revisionist teal, then cool. As long as you don't try to use crap excuses like "fluorescent lighting" to justify the insane amount of tealness in screencap 7, when in fact there is a clear evidence of tealing on screencap 1 that is an exterior shot on a sunny day:

http://caps-a-holic.com/c.php?a=1&x=...9&l=1&i=0&go=1

Those must have been some powerful fluorescent lights they used if they were capable of overpowering the sun itself.

Originally Posted by I KEEL YOU

Just because I am using lossless .png screencaps while viewing them on several screens both at home and work to form an opinion, it doesn't mean that they are misleading. I know that because I've witnessed it on other releases.

I don't own the Criterion release of Sex, Lies and Videotape (yet), but I have seen the screenshots and I can already tell that it looks amazing and doesn't have a teal push.

Originally Posted by I KEEL YOU

Yeah, that's what they were telling me about several other releases that I ended up buying in order to see them in motion, and then saw that the screencaps turned out to be pretty accurate after all.

The Criterion release looks fine and is miles better than MGM's older ancient master. This master used a 2004 print that was supervised by John Schlesinger, Jerome Hellman, and Adam Holender as a reference for coloring; MGM's master had no involvement with anybody associated with the film. To call it (Criterion) "revisionism" is complete nonsense. You can compare screenshots on a 100 monitors for all care but in the end it's an awful way to form an opinion on how a disc looks. That "tealed" sign looks a lot more natural than MGM's magenta push.

If you don't like it than fine, but don't claim "revisionism" just because you looked at some still images.

[RCRochester]

Originally Posted by Fat Phil

Just a shot in the dark here - but judging from your posts, i'm guessing you don't own the Criterion and as such haven't seen it in motion on a calibrated display? That's fine, but you can't hope to properly evaluate the release by viewing twenty/thirty frames from a two hour movie on a computer monitor. Having A/B'd the two discs, I can confidently say that the Criterion s**ts on the MGM from a great height - as well it should.

I absolutely don't deny that teal is occasionally prevalent, but a 35mm print supervised by the director, producer and DP was used for colour correction. You are 'internet forum guy' - and that's not an insult, I too am 'internet forum guy' . This simply boils down to preference. You hate what you see. Your mind isn't going to be changed.

Funny how it's always the guys who haven't actually seen the disc who argue so vehemently against it.

[Dailyan]

Originally Posted by RCRochester

Funny how it's always the guys who haven't actually seen the disc who argue so vehemently against it.

Not to mention how despite the fact that the director, cinematographer, and producer were all involved with preserving the look of the film...it's still shouted at as revisionism. I guess MGM/Criterion should of consulted the first assistant cameraman.

[RCRochester]

Originally Posted by Dailyan

Not to mention how despite the fact that the director, cinematographer, and producer were all involved with preserving the look of the film...it's still shouted at as revisionism. I guess MGM/Criterion should of consulted the first assistant cameraman.

Gosh no. Still too closely involved with the film's production and, thus, prone to revisionism.

No, I've always found that the most reliable sources of accurate information on how a film should truly look is a guy who worked as a part time projectionist and screened this film three times a day back during it's re-release in 1971.

[Fat Phil]

Originally Posted by RCRochester

Gosh no. Still too closely involved with the film's production and, thus, prone to revisionism.

No, I've always found that the most reliable sources of accurate information on how a film should truly look is a guy who worked as a part time projectionist and screened this film three times a day back during it's re-release in 1971.

Are you insane man! Anyone with any prior relationship to or experience of the movie is tainted and should be automatically disqualified. We need fresh eyes! Only those who've never seen the movie can provide a truly unbiased colour grade.

[I KEEL YOU]

People have always used and will forever continue to use the "approved" label when it fits their agenda. There are several examples that show the "approved" labeling is worthless. You have a Shout Factory and Arrow's releases of The Thing that were somehow both approved by the cinematographer yet look completely different.

Would you be willing to make "this guy thinks he knows more than the director" jokes if I said that the second release of The French Connection beats the first one?

I know teal when I see it. I only wish that Arrow got this 4K master and colorized it themselves like they did with their release of The Tree of Wooden Clogs, which they refused to release the tealed-up version of that Criterion released:

http://www.dvdbeaver.com/film6/blu-r...gs_blu-ray.htm

[RCRochester]

Originally Posted by I KEEL YOU

People have always used and will forever continue to use the "approved" label when it fits their agenda. There are several examples that show the "approved" labeling is worthless. You have a Shout Factory and Arrow's releases of The Thing that were somehow both approved by the cinematographer yet look completely different.

I'm not talking about "approved", I'm talking about "supervised". There's a difference. Both the restored print AND the blu-ray transfer of Midnight Cowboy were supervised by its cinematographer.

Originally Posted by I KEEL YOU

Would you be willing to make "this guy thinks he knows more than the director" jokes if I said that the second release of The French Connection beats the first one?

No, I wouldn't. Because William Friedkin outright admitted that he deliberately altered the look of The French Connection for its first blu-ray release. The second release came about because its DP, Owen Roizman, spoke about against what Friedkin did and became involved to ensure that the new release looked correct.