Criterion and UHD

The scuttlebutt on Criterion, Eclipse, and Janus Films. Lists and polls are STRONGLY discouraged.
Post Reply
Message
Author
User avatar
mfunk9786
Under Chris' Protection
Joined: Fri May 16, 2008 4:43 pm
Location: Philadelphia, PA

Re: Criterion and UHD

#126 Post by mfunk9786 » Mon Jul 23, 2018 4:41 pm

tenia wrote:
Mon Jul 23, 2018 4:26 pm
2K DIs aside, the utmost majority of VFXs are generated at 2K anyway so even 4K DIs are partial upscales anyway.
My phrasing was weird - I just meant that if Criterion doesn't have a 4K master, I don't think they'd bother with a UHD disc. Whereas major studios want to put out a UHD disc of any film that they think will sell well regardless of the source needing to be upscaled or not.

User avatar
tenia
Ask Me About My Bassoon
Joined: Wed Apr 29, 2009 11:13 am

Re: Criterion and UHD

#127 Post by tenia » Mon Jul 23, 2018 5:38 pm

I agree with you and understood (I think) your point, but wanted to emphasise that for studio UHD releases, even having a 4K DI doesn't mean it's not upscaled anyway.
However, you're right in the way that this will be more "direct" for catalog movies since these restorations aren't really mixing different rez : either it's scanned and restored at 4K or it's not. The question could arise though for movies scanned at 4K but restored at 2K.

User avatar
solaris72
Joined: Tue Nov 02, 2004 3:03 pm
Location: Baltimore, MD

Re: Criterion and UHD

#128 Post by solaris72 » Wed Jul 25, 2018 12:06 pm

tenia wrote:
Mon Jul 23, 2018 4:26 pm
2K DIs aside, the utmost majority of VFXs are generated at 2K anyway so even 4K DIs are partial upscales anyway.
It's interesting, movies where everything or almost everything is in-camera are the majority of "true 4k" masters now. 70mm films were often the same way, not many attempted to incorporate optical effects as far as I know. But unlike in the days of David Lean, I can't think of any A-budget movies that are entirely/almost entirely in-camera. (These days when a director of a science fiction film talks about going practical and doing as much as possible in-camera, he or she is talking in very relative terms.

User avatar
McCrutchy
Joined: Mon Feb 25, 2008 4:57 am
Location: East Coast, USA

Re: Criterion and UHD

#129 Post by McCrutchy » Wed Jul 25, 2018 5:02 pm

Aren't Nolan's films the definition of this?

User avatar
solaris72
Joined: Tue Nov 02, 2004 3:03 pm
Location: Baltimore, MD

Re: Criterion and UHD

#130 Post by solaris72 » Sat Jul 28, 2018 9:28 am

McCrutchy wrote:
Wed Jul 25, 2018 5:02 pm
Aren't Nolan's films the definition of this?
Nolan's films are photochemically finished, but still use plenty of CGI. Though now that you mention it, Dunkirk may be an exception to this.

User avatar
Roger Ryan
Joined: Wed Apr 28, 2010 12:04 pm
Location: A Midland town spread and darkened into a city

Re: Criterion and UHD

#131 Post by Roger Ryan » Mon Jul 30, 2018 8:16 am

solaris72 wrote:
Sat Jul 28, 2018 9:28 am
McCrutchy wrote:
Wed Jul 25, 2018 5:02 pm
Aren't Nolan's films the definition of this?
Nolan's films are photochemically finished, but still use plenty of CGI. Though now that you mention it, Dunkirk may be an exception to this.
Dunkirk definitely used digital tools to erase wires and to eliminate anachronistic buildings, etc. in wide shots.

moreorless
Joined: Thu Apr 26, 2018 5:34 am

Re: Criterion and UHD

#132 Post by moreorless » Tue Sep 04, 2018 8:28 am

I spose one thing to question is are the kind of people who buy criterions also the kind of people who own very large screens? I'm not sure it holds that the cinephile market is automatically made up of people with massive home cinemas.

In terms of quality its obviously very hard to judge even 35mm only films as a set standard, the film stock, the quality of the lenses and the condition of the print are all going to play a big role. I would say that personally as a photographer who's worked with scanning 35mm film whilst it clearly does have potential resolution well beyond HD you are probably starting to get more into the realm of diminishing returns by 4K, DVD to Blu-ray on the other hand was a shift that was so far within the resolution of the medium that you got almost the full benefit of it provided the scan was good.

User avatar
tenia
Ask Me About My Bassoon
Joined: Wed Apr 29, 2009 11:13 am

Re: Criterion and UHD

#133 Post by tenia » Tue Sep 04, 2018 8:44 am

moreorless wrote:
Tue Sep 04, 2018 8:28 am
the film stock, the quality of the lenses and the condition of the print are all going to play a big role.
Diminishing returns discussions aside for UHD, my experience as a BD user buying mostly catalog movies is that these actually don't impact so much the result. Mostly no matter the film stock, the lenses, the DoP, recent (competently done) 4K restorations made from OCN all have the same kind of typical texture, while 4K restorations made for later gen elements all have the same different kind of textures, etc, to the point an experienced eye can guess what it's looking at without taking into account these variables.

But you're probably right in wondering if there is a more pronounced attraction to very high end formats within Criterion's baseline or if it's actually as low as for the market as a whole.

User avatar
movielocke
Joined: Fri Jan 18, 2008 12:44 am

Re: Criterion and UHD

#134 Post by movielocke » Tue Sep 04, 2018 11:45 am

tenia wrote:
moreorless wrote:
Tue Sep 04, 2018 8:28 am
the film stock, the quality of the lenses and the condition of the print are all going to play a big role.
Diminishing returns discussions aside for UHD, my experience as a BD user buying mostly catalog movies is that these actually don't impact so much the result. Mostly no matter the film stock, the lenses, the DoP, recent (competently done) 4K restorations made from OCN all have the same kind of typical texture, while 4K restorations made for later gen elements all have the same different kind of textures, etc, to the point an experienced eye can guess what it's looking at without taking into account these variables.

But you're probably right in wondering if there is a more pronounced attraction to very high end formats within Criterion's baseline or if it's actually as low as for the market as a whole.
That’s actually the issue, a 35mm film negative has a native resolution of about 5500 lines slightly more than 4K. But each generation loses resolution. Release prints are about 2k. An interpositive could be about 4K.

There’s an argument to be made that scanning from a negative doesn’t represent the grain and look of release prints well—that they’re too good.

As for stocks, that’s impossible to replicate that experience with today’s available film stocks, we get merely a simulacrum not a replica. As John Bailey points out on the women in love extras at that point they were using 50 or “fast” 100 (ASA) stock, but today’s stocks are ASA 500. And of course as anyone who has seen nitrate projected, the perfectly clearance transparent nitrate release prints are significantly superior to the translucent acetate. (Nitrate is one of the three most amazing things I’ve seen projected, up there with dye imibition prints and a brand new o neg contact print of Manhattan).

In terms of projection the biggest difference is projection bulb technology. Huge color timing difference between carbon arc projection and contemporary xenon projection. It would have canceled out back in the day, but in today’s environment we get a natural mismatch that has to be accounted for.


Did foreign countries import projection bulbs or did they have a domestic supply chain with their own unique color characteristics. Was there a mismatch back in the day between countries color timing projection color temperature standards and no one really cared? Do we correct that mismatch today to try to replicate the non mismatch look of the country’s native domestic projection? or do we honor the “other” foreignness quality of the mismatch look that non domestic audiences of these films have internalized as the correct look? (Because preserving a look that is “other”/non domestic is more important to these audiences than achieving a correct representation of the original look).

And since nothing is in a vacuum, how did the commercialized / fetishized otherness affect filmmaker decisions over the years selling their product to best exploit the market for those fetishes? So in other words how narrow is the mismatch window before filmmakers started making films that looked “x country” because only that look would sell the film internationally?

But there’s also nicotine to consider. If smoking was prevalent in theatres the screens were yellow, modern screens in non smoking theatres stay white for their lifetime. On the other hand if smoking was allowed in color timing (which it was) their screens were also yellow, so it ultimately canceled out back in the day. It’s only today that we get the nicotine Mismatch.

In terms of dye imibition, just how does the grain structure translate to the gelatin intermediate for each of the three colors, how much of that grain then transfers to a composited nitrate release print. How does that compare to latter era photographic release prints that definitely composited 3x grain from the three colors plus generation loss grain. What’s the best way to handle it digitally

User avatar
Luke M
Joined: Thu Jul 12, 2007 9:21 pm

Re: Criterion and UHD

#135 Post by Luke M » Fri Sep 07, 2018 1:10 pm

I have nothing to add except that’s a fantastic post and a super fascinating thought project.

User avatar
tenia
Ask Me About My Bassoon
Joined: Wed Apr 29, 2009 11:13 am

Re: Criterion and UHD

#136 Post by tenia » Fri Sep 07, 2018 2:25 pm

It is indeed ! I know I sound like a broken record about some restoration works, but a a whole, I believe that sharing these thoughts and discussing these experience and viewers feedbacks like here with movielocke can also be fascinating, way outside any raging discussions about how this or that is not correct color-wise (for instance).

But we're now at a stage where hundreds of competent restorations are available and we can now look at that in hindsight and start questioning what we were told and what is the actual reality of things. I always think it's a wonderful reflection to do.

Post Reply