4K restoration process?

[ZoetMB]

Originally Posted by danoeltico

My thoughts exactly

Baraka they talk a little bit about how they did the restoration. Probably one of the prettiest pictures I've seen yet.

Well..you can't compare Baraka and Cinema Paradiso. Baraka was shot in 65mm and wasn't popular enough to have ruined the negative. Cinema Paradiso was shot 35mm 1.66, although IMDB doesn't list the specific Kodak film stock.

[FrameFecker]

Originally Posted by Donat96

Basically, the higher resolution the scan, the more detail and less grain shows up in the image. However, 35mm film doesn't benefit much with anything over 4K. 6K and 8K are more noticeable when used on VistaVision and 70mm productions such as Ben-Hur and The Ten Commandments.

So I kinda figured I had reached the end of the Internet tonight, another wild and crazy Saturday!
Then I stumbled across this. An interesting read. I enjoyed the video very much too. However, I quoted that bloke up there (yeah it was 2 years ago or something), but the higher the res of the scan means less grain?.... In that case, you're scanning it wrong. You get one shot to scan a classic. Pin registered. None of this tension based shit. Yeah it's cheaper and faster, but it ain't right.
These classic films are already decades old! Don't rush the scan! That's all anyone will get to play with.

[retablo]

Originally Posted by Donat96

Basically, the higher resolution the scan, the more detail and less grain shows up in the image. However, 35mm film doesn't benefit much with anything over 4K. 6K and 8K are more noticeable when used on VistaVision and 70mm productions such as Ben-Hur and The Ten Commandments.

According to Arri, the ceiling for 35mm is 6K, not 4K (but to be fair, it's somewhere around 5K or a bit more). So there can be benefit from a 6K scan of 35mm, but how much of a benefit is questionable, depending on film stocks used, etc.

[Penton-Man]

Originally Posted by FrameFecker

...but the higher the res of the scan means less grain?....

No.
The grain will be better defined rather than looking fuzzy or smeary, if you will. Not to mention the fact that the operator can get more precise DNR effect when using a 4K rather than a 2K scan…if one feels the need to use that image processing feature in the first place.

[FrameFecker]

Originally Posted by Penton-Man

No.
The grain will be better defined rather than looking fuzzy or smeary, if you will. Not to mention the fact that the operator can get more precise DNR effect when using a 4K rather than a 2K scan…if one feels the need to use that image processing feature in the first place.

Oh I know, believe me. I was merely being a tad facetious. And I completely agree with you.

[scaramunga]

Great discussion. I find it puzzling that some of the James Bond films were scanned at 4K and others were done at 2K.

I think all should be done at 4K.

Anyway with UHD on the way I'm sure they will be scanned again. The current scans of the DVD's and blu rays were done in 2005 and 2006 I believe.

Goldeneye on blu ray appears to have a new non Lowry HD scan however.

[Spicoli]

Originally Posted by Blue_Baron

Check out these on YouTube:

http://www.youtube.com/results?searc...storation&aq=f

This one in particular: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yksfQDHC5QY

Great video everyone must see!

[RocShemp]

Originally Posted by scaramunga

Great discussion. I find it puzzling that some of the James Bond films were scanned at 4K and others were done at 2K.

I think all should be done at 4K.

Time and money. Time and money. That's all that matter when deciding between 4K and 2K. Even if we'd like to believe that quality should be the only consideration.

[blonde_devil]

very true. a few more dollars and a few more weeks would make a huge difference in most cases. but it isn't as simple as just scanning at a higher resolution. especially with older movies, you need to go in and clean up things too as the source may not be the best and there may be problems that are a part of the film too(think Metropolis). this adds on to it and I think that is why lots of studios will then only do a 2K release - the spend the money elsewhere. but even with that, it still comes back to time and money because when all is said and done, you can still do all the same things in a 4k restoration you can do in a 2k - it just takes a little longer and costs a little more. but if they did that, then they wouldn't be able to market the wonderful new 4K transfers they are doing.

[singhcr]

Originally Posted by scaramunga

Just curious in why some films are done at 2K, 4K and 6K. Why is there a difference in terms why one method is used over another?

Does the age of the film make a difference?

I'm sure there is a cost difference as well.

I'm curious to know why though. I do know that for the James Bond films Dr. No - Live and Let Die and Moonraker were scanned at 4K. All of the other Bond films were scanned at 2K.

Again, just curious as to why not scan them all at 4K and the differences that it makes to the films at 4K vs 2K.

Thanks!!

I'm guessing the later films had more recent scans that were 2k so they used them to save money. I know many of the older Bond movies had their negatives in poor shape so the 4k scan is part of the restoration/archival process so that's most likely why they have 4k scans.

[John-kimball44]

Hello friends new to this forum, wanted any information
About the audio on the godfather 35mm film masters they had.

Generally for old movies like godfather etc is the audio track on
the 35mm film or is this separate? What did they store the audio
on back in the day? As the method was to transfer 35mm film to 4k HD
what method did they use for the audio process of the films?

Thx

[Tekka]

Originally Posted by John-kimball44

Hello friends new to this forum, wanted any information
About the audio on the godfather 35mm film masters they had.

Generally for old movies like godfather etc is the audio track on
the 35mm film or is this separate? What did they store the audio
on back in the day? As the method was to transfer 35mm film to 4k HD
what method did they use for the audio process of the films?

Thx

During filming, the audio was recorded on audio tape that was separate from the 35mm film. The lengthy production process culminated in them fitting audio tracks onto finished rolls of 35mm film.

Here is what the audio tracks looked like on more recent 35mm film strips. They had several different audio formats each located on different parts of the film edge.

The audio for the more recent releases were just high def audio mixes they produced from the original master tapes. All they really needed to do was scan the audio tapes in HD and mix and master with software and hardware like protools.