The Official Camera Obscura Thread

[nitin]

Very nice shots, although like Daughters, seems like there is more scanner noise than in past releases.

[sjconstable]

Originally Posted by nitin

Very nice shots, although like Daughters, seems like there is more scanner noise than in past releases.

Ah, thought I was the only one to have noticed that about Daughters, all the reviews and comments I've seen mysteriously ignored it. I'm not liking the Ritrovata-like colours of the Amuck remaster though unfortunately, shame as the quality is a massive improvement over any previous edition.

[nitin]

Originally Posted by sjconstable

Ah, thought I was the only one to have noticed that about Daughters, all the reviews and comments I've seen mysteriously ignored it. I'm not liking the Ritrovata-like colours of the Amuck remaster though unfortunately, shame as the quality is a massive improvement over any previous edition.

I commented on the scanner noise visible in Daughters a few pages back when Mondo Digital put up caps, but the overall PQ still looked quite nice overall. Same with Amuck. But it is weird that recent releases have had more scanner noise than previous ones.

[AlexIlDottore]

Maybe Camera Obscura can let us know?

Also, there are some typos in the English subs for Daughters. It's not a huge deal (It does take me out of the movie for the microsecond when my brain tells me "that ain't right") and when it happens multiple times... when you pay premium, you hope that stuff such as subs would be correct.

[2-perf]

I don't see scanner noise, I see grain. Anyway, is there anyone here that saw moving images of Amuck? At least wait for moving images before saying there's scanner noise. It was scanned at 2K on a Arriscan so there should be no noise.

[Camera Obscura]

Okay, since this is getting out of hand, it seems, here's the low-down:

WHAT HAVE THEY DONE TO YOUR DAUGHTERS?: This one was done at the same lab as MARIALE' and SHORT NIGHT OF GLASS DOLLS with the only difference being that an optical scratch-removal tool was employed during the transfer since the negative was incredibly scratched in most parts. This was done to minimize the digital clean-up afterwards. Downside: Exisiting grain is hightened a little. That in combination with the characteristics of a 2P negative resulted in more grain in some sequences. Can't be helped. If you observe the transfer more colsoely you will see that brighter scenes have less coarse grain that darker ones. What followed was our usual extensive restoration work (dirt removal, remaining scratches, etc.) plus a fine-tuning of the color correction of the pre-grading by the lab.

AMUCK!: Yes, the scan was done at Bologna. We instructed Bologna to send us a sample of a "light" color correction (i.e. neutralization of redish, greenish, yellowish tints) to speed up the process since we were in a hurry to provide the master to our licensor and our sub-licensee 88 Films. The sample looked good, we gave the go-ahead. What we received, though, was their usual teal & orange correction which we didn't want (of course this is the last time we will do the grading NOT in-house -- we learned our lesson). So we re-graded the whole thing in-house and removed the crazy tinting to get the neutral grading there is now (which we will also have to do for our upcoming BLOODSTAINED BUTTERFLY release, and which we have done for basically all our releases so far). The lush, slightly Technicolor-look is correct, though. It looks beautiful now, and we are extremely happy with it.

All in all, what you get on our discs is the maximum there is you can get picture-, audio- and extras-wise at the given time the transfers were struck. We do everything in-house and/or very small cirlce of trusted associates (digital clean-up/picture-restoration) including a second manual dirt-cleanung, additional or complete color correction, subtitles/translations, design, authoring, audio commentaries, sometimes interviews, you name it. We can't do more than that, sorry. Which is also the reason why we have such a small output. We won't release something unless we can say that we gave 110% without much regard for our own health/family time/expenses (as long as their are somewhat justifiable). We're not in it for the profit but the passion.

Can't tell you more than that.

[OgamiittoMcJ]

so you supplied 88 Films with Amuck ?

[nitin]

Thank you for that detailed response. Especially for confirming what many have suspected re Bologna's colour grading.

[Camera Obscura]

Originally Posted by AlexIlDottore

Also, there are some typos in the English subs for Daughters. It's not a huge deal (It does take me out of the movie for the microsecond when my brain tells me "that ain't right") and when it happens multiple times... when you pay premium, you hope that stuff such as subs would be correct.

Sincerely sorry for that! Will pay even more attention to it in the future and check them a third or fourth time.

[Camera Obscura]

Originally Posted by OgamiittoMcJ

so you supplied 88 Films with Amuck ?

Yes.

[AlexIlDottore]

Originally Posted by Camera Obscura

Sincerely sorry for that! Will pay even more attention to it in the future and check them a third or fourth time.

As I said, it's not a big deal. I really appreciate your hard work, but I am happy that you'll be more vigilant in the future.

Again, thank you for giving us the best releases possible

[sjconstable]

Originally Posted by Camera Obscura

AMUCK!: Yes, the scan was done at Bologna. We instructed Bologna to send us a sample of a "light" color correction (i.e. neutralization of redish, greenish, yellowish tints) to speed up the process since we were in a hurry to provide the master to our licensor and our sub-licensee 88 Films. The sample looked good, we gave the go-ahead. What we received, though, was their usual teal & orange correction which we didn't want (of course this is the last time we will do the grading NOT in-house -- we learned our lesson). So we re-graded the whole thing in-house and removed the crazy tinting to get the neutral grading there is now (which we will also have to do for our upcoming BLOODSTAINED BUTTERFLY release, and which we have done for basically all our releases so far). The lush, slightly Technicolor-look is correct, though. It looks beautiful now, and we are extremely happy with it.

Thanks for the response and we all totally understand, and highly appreciate the work you do. With regards to Amuck's colours, unfortunately it definitely still has that Ritrovata look even after the additional work you've done to it, which is proven by the fact I identified it as soon as I saw the screencaps. I urge you to consider doing further colour correction on it, as Arrow managed to make their Ritrovata remaster of Deep Red look right. It would also make your edition more desirable to more people than the cheaper 88 Films edition.

[Camera Obscura]

The transfer is done. We already supplied 88 and the deal was we will release identical masters and we stand by that. Apart from that, and as I said, I'm very happy with the result and the film looks gorgeous the way it is now.
As for DEEP RED, I have no idea what was delivered to Arrow, they might have even done the grading at a different lab than Bologna. Was it even scanned at Bologna? No idea. Fact is, so far Arrow seems to have been content with Bologna's work as many of their latest Italian releases, including BLOODSTAINED BUTTERFLY, wear the Bologna stamp.
Anyway, I have a huge problem with revisionist grading as done by Bologna and Eclair, and will not allow it for future transfer work anymore. It's tougher to get rid of the tinting than doing the work from scratch, so...

[sjconstable]

Originally Posted by Camera Obscura

Was it even scanned at Bologna? No idea. Fact is, so far Arrow seems to have been content with Bologna's work as many of their latest Italian releases, including BLOODSTAINED BUTTERFLY, wear the Bologna stamp.

Yes, it was, and they decided to give it extensive colour correction because they knew people wouldn't accept a film like Deep Red having the bizarre Ritrovata colour timing. And yeah I've criticised Arrow numerous times for putting out Ritrovata remasters with no correction, they look terrible, which is why I asked you a while ago if you'd be correcting The Bloodstained Butterfly. I'm very disappointed that you're releasing Amuck looking like that, but fair enough, at least you're going to avoid revisionist grading from places like Ritrovata and Eclair in the future.

[2-perf]

Originally Posted by Camera Obscura

The transfer is done. We already supplied 88 and the deal was we will release identical masters and we stand by that. Apart from that, and as I said, I'm very happy with the result and the film looks gorgeous the way it is now.
As for DEEP RED, I have no idea what was delivered to Arrow, they might have even done the grading at a different lab than Bologna. Was it even scanned at Bologna? No idea. Fact is, so far Arrow seems to have been content with Bologna's work as many of their latest Italian releases, including BLOODSTAINED BUTTERFLY, wear the Bologna stamp.
Anyway, I have a huge problem with revisionist grading as done by Bologna and Eclair, and will not allow it for future transfer work anymore. It's tougher to get rid of the tinting than doing the work from scratch, so...

To me it looks like they're adding a Print Film Emulation LUT so the end result looks like a projection of the film at the theater back in 1972. I guess the Camera Obscura folks already know that but let me explain it for the people who might not know about it.

I'm assuming everyone here is familiar with the following Kodak Optical Workflow chart.


Basically,

1 - Cut Negative (Edit of the movie using the OCN (Original Camera Negative))
2a - Answer Print (A Positive copy of the Cut Negative to watch the movie in the positive world to see how it looks and see what needs to be fixed. This is at this stage that the Color Timing is done in the optical world.)
2b - Interpositive (The FINAL Positive copy of the Cut Negative.)
3 - Internegative (A Negative copy of the Interpositive used to duplicate the Release Print since you can't go Positive to Positive)
4 - Release Print (Positive copy)

Back in 1972, when you went to the theater to watch a movie, they would project a Release Print of the film, not the OCN, right?

The thing is, a Release Print film stock has characteristics that modifies the colors and contrast of the OCN so even though you color correct the OCN properly, it will never look like when it was projected at the theater back in 1972.

It looks like their philosophy regarding their restoration is aimed at rendering the movie as it looked projected in a theater.

So, I think they're adding those "Release Print" characteristics to their restoration and this is probably done by using some Print Film Emulation LUTs (Look up tables).

Personally, I sort of like it as I when watch a movie restored / color corrected from the OCN, without "Release Print" characteristics I always feel it's missing something but sometimes, it just feel they went too far, especially with The Good, the Bad and the Ugly.


For me, The Bloodstained Butterfly is just a tad over top, it almost looks good. The court sequence is the worst.


In conclusion, should a restoration of a movie look like the projection of a pristine Release Print or it should look like color corrected Original Camera Negative?

[2-perf]

Oh and I forgot to mention, these "Release Print" characteristics are not really removable, you can color correct it but undoing the contrast brought by the characteristics is pure madness. This is probably why sjconstable still feel the Ritrovata "stamp".

[babybreese]

The color work CO has done looks very nice to me.

Can't wait to see full specs and extras ( hope there's more than 88 has ).

[AlexIlDottore]

CO will definitely have a quality English subbed commentary.

[whysleep]

Quick question, I just received The Killer Reserved Nine Seats, Spirits of Death and What Have They Done to Your Daughters? blu rays, all new. However, while Spirits of Death and HWTDTYD? were sealed with y-folded cellophane and a tear strip, like most blu rays, The Killer Reserved Nine Seats was sealed like early BU or Synapse titles (I don't know how that seal it called, it looks like this: http://www.ebay.com/itm/Demons-1-and...wAAOSw5cNYE6ej).
Both The Killer Reserved Nine Seats and Spirits of Death were released the same year, although as far as I know The Killer Reserved Nine Seats was their first release. I'm not very familiar with CO's releases, could this be a reseal? Thanks in advance!

[Torrente]

That's funny, I thought I was the only one who cares about this sort of things

To answer you, I can only say that mine is exactly the same, and you're right, it's the only release I can remember of that came with such shrinkwrap
I'm almost sure it's not refurbished. Their factory probably ran out of the "regular" shrinkwrap they usually use during the making of this release.