criterionforum.org

perkizitore wrote:

captveg wrote:February sees another month with 3 Blu-ray releases. They're certainly coming through on their increased production promises.

Nah, that happened because two of the films are new ones!

What does a film's vintage have to do with production capacity? As Criterion has noted before, making Blu-rays is not just a matter of pushing a button on the Blu-ray machine. I think continually seeing three Blu releases a month is a sign that they've ramped things up.

yeah, I was under the impression that each Blu is basically like working on a different film. So, instead of getting 3 more art house staples this month (or 7 films/DVDs), we are getting three Blu Rays along with four DVDs.

captveg wrote:February sees another month with 3 Blu-ray releases. They're certainly coming through on their increased production promises.

Which is great. If all goes at this pace we will have 36 Criterions on BD in 2010 and the current 2009 list of 25 (give or take I didnt feel like counting again) for a total of 61.

Thats pretty impressive.

erick wrote:

zedz wrote:

Highway 61 wrote:It definitely looks that way, given how the Blus of Contempt and Ran panned out, not to mention non-Criterion BR upgrades like Universal's botched Do the Right Thing.

Now that's something I'd forgotten about - instances (like Do the Right Thing) where a BluRay might be inferior to the existing DVD.

Yep. That Blu-ray will, I predict, become the example of choice whenever arguments about the essential superiority of blu-ray to standard dvd are made. It's why I recently took advantage of the B&N Criterion sale to pick up Do The Right Thing.

It could be THE Example, but so could The French Connection. And then there are myriad other grain-reduced, edge-enhanced BDs that deserve quite a bit of scorn, even if many of them trump their DVD counterparts. Also, I remember a while back people comparing Spartacus unfavorably to the Criterion DVD based solely on the materials used.

aox wrote:yeah, I was under the impression that each Blu is basically like working on a different film. So, instead of getting 3 more art house staples this month (or 7 films/DVDs), we are getting three Blu Rays along with four DVDs.

I might be wrong but I believe the whole thing about it taking as much work to put out a Blu as another new title refers more to Blu upgrades of catalogue titles, where they basically have to start from scratch. With something like Hunger, where I'm sure they knew they would put it out on both formats from the beginning, I would guess there's a lot of crossover in what needs to be done between the two releases. So maybe it's only the work of putting out 1 1/2 titles, or maybe even less than this. Plus, factor in the fact that a newer title like this surely needs much less restoration work, if any. So I doubt we would have seen any more titles this month if there had been less Blu-ray releases. Four mainline plus an Eclipse is already a pretty stacked month.

Yeah. Like I said, I don't know for sure, and I think your reasoning is sound here.

aox wrote:Yeah. Like I said, I don't know for sure, and I think your reasoning is sound here.

From what I can gather even when a new title is released using the same master its still Criterion releasing 2 titles work wise.

Authoring-wise, yes. Total-wise, factoring in time to gather materials/extras/etc., I don't see it. But authoring BD may take longer than DVD, so there's that.

nsps wrote:Authoring-wise, yes. Total-wise, factoring in time to gather materials/extras/etc., I don't see it. But authoring BD may take longer than DVD, so there's that.

Even then its still two different encodes, two different packaging styles, two different barcodes and so on...its certainly easier if the DVD and BD are released at the same time and encoded from the same master but its still releasing two titles.

I'm not arguing the basic premise that it takes a long time to produce these BDs, but there's no denying that If they'd never prepped an HD transfer or gathered any supplements for 8 1/2, it would take even longer.

nsps wrote:I'm not arguing the basic premise that it takes a long time to produce these BDs, but there's no denying that If they'd never prepped an HD transfer or gathered any supplements for 8 1/2, it would take even longer.

I realize this doesn't speak to your greater point, but I don't think the existing 8 1/2 SD is sourced from an HD master.

Blood Pie wrote:

captveg wrote:February sees another month with 3 Blu-ray releases. They're certainly coming through on their increased production promises.

Which is great. If all goes at this pace we will have 36 Criterions on BD in 2010 and the current 2009 list of 25 (give or take I didnt feel like counting again) for a total of 61.

Thats pretty impressive.

And some of those 25 were actually 2008 releases.

The only problem I have with the Blu-ray production from Criterion is that we really won't see a whole lot of catalog titles being re-issued on Blu, unless they squeeze in one or two from the new releases they're not issuing on Blu. I'm not blaming Criterion because they probably can't handle the load, just will be dissapointing.

Brian C wrote:

nsps wrote:I'm not arguing the basic premise that it takes a long time to produce these BDs, but there's no denying that If they'd never prepped an HD transfer or gathered any supplements for 8 1/2, it would take even longer.

I realize this doesn't speak to your greater point, but I don't think the existing 8 1/2 SD is sourced from an HD master.

I don't have the box handy at the moment, but the website says its an HD transfer. It could be wrong, though, so thanks for the correction.

The booklet states that the 8 1/2 was transferred on a HD telecine. At the same time, that was in 2001, and as Criterion and others are finding out, many older HD transfers are not quite up to the capabilities of Blu-ray. That may not be the case with this particular transfer, but it doesn't preclude Criterion having re-done it for the Blu-ray release.

Blood Pie wrote:two different barcodes

I bet that adds at least a month of additional work

For what it's worth, to those disappointed that there were no Blu upgrades of catalogue titles this month, Criterion said via Facebook that there would be "a steady stream of Blu-rays [of catalogue titles] in months to come."

Matt wrote:The booklet states that the 8 1/2 was transferred on a HD telecine. At the same time, that was in 2001, and as Criterion and others are finding out, many older HD transfers are not quite up to the capabilities of Blu-ray. That may not be the case with this particular transfer, but it doesn't preclude Criterion having re-done it for the Blu-ray release.

I stand corrected then, should have looked it up myself.

Wow, though, it must have been one of Criterion's very first HD transfers. It doesn't quite make me nervous about the release - their track record thus far is excellent - but I think I'll ask on the Facebook page if this is a new transfer. Probably won't get an answer, but worth a shot.

solved

Yeah, I wouldn't be surprised if it were a new transfer, but I also wouldn't be surprised if it were too cost-prohibitive. You'd think they'd want to do an all-new DVD release as well if they were going to invest in a new transfer. I guess we'll have to wait and see how the quality turns out.

Blood Pie wrote:Two different packaging styles.

A quick note on this: Again, it's something that takes more time, for sure, but they don't have to repeat the whole process of deciding on the look and style, selecting fonts and artwork, writing copy, etc.

As I stated, I'm not trying to undermine the great deal of work it takes to put out BDs of this quality. As someone who's worked in design, I know it takes a lot of work to conform an existing design to a new set of specs. But it's not as long or as hard as starting from scratch.

nsps wrote:Yeah, I wouldn't be surprised if it were a new transfer, but I also wouldn't be surprised if it were too cost-prohibitive. You'd think they'd want to do an all-new DVD release as well if they were going to invest in a new transfer. I guess we'll have to wait and see how the quality turns out.

Blood Pie wrote:Two different packaging styles.

A quick note on this: Again, it's something that takes more time, for sure, but they don't have to repeat the whole process of deciding on the look and style, selecting fonts and artwork, writing copy, etc.

As I stated, I'm not trying to undermine the great deal of work it takes to put out BDs of this quality. As someone who's worked in design, I know it takes a lot of work to conform an existing design to a new set of specs. But it's not as long or as hard as starting from scratch.

Of course. I don't think were arguing. I understand and agree with you. But even with the master and artwork taken care of they still have to encode and produce something different than the DVD even if the material is the same.

Also, hasn't Criterion stated that they have to license both the DVD and BD?. That adds another element to the topic concerning added workload if its true. And based on some of the licensing stories I have read it can sometimes be the biggest headache in releasing (and sometimes failing after years of attempts) a film for home consumption.

Also, as Matt pointed out, the extra time to decide on the barcode number sequence easily takes at least a few weeks to settle on.

Brian C wrote:

Matt wrote:The booklet states that the 8 1/2 was transferred on a HD telecine. At the same time, that was in 2001, and as Criterion and others are finding out, many older HD transfers are not quite up to the capabilities of Blu-ray. That may not be the case with this particular transfer, but it doesn't preclude Criterion having re-done it for the Blu-ray release.

I stand corrected then, should have looked it up myself.

Wow, though, it must have been one of Criterion's very first HD transfers. It doesn't quite make me nervous about the release - their track record thus far is excellent - but I think I'll ask on the Facebook page if this is a new transfer. Probably won't get an answer, but worth a shot.

in that case it's likely a 1080i transfer/telecine.

Blood Pie wrote: Also, as Matt pointed out, the extra time to decide on the barcode number sequence easily takes at least a few weeks to settle on.

At least making a decision on the spine number only has to be done once.

swo17 wrote:For what it's worth, to those disappointed that there were no Blu upgrades of catalogue titles this month, Criterion said via Facebook that there would be "a steady stream of Blu-rays [of catalogue titles] in months to come."

Totally with you on this. This ITV or whatever deal is really watering down my intravenous supply of vintage films on Criterion blu rays. I'm really looking forward to Lola Montes in high def (!) but def wish it was three classic blus and not one in Feb.

This was the reply on the Facebook page to Brian's question:

The Criterion Collection We are evaluating each master on a case by case basis. In most cases our Blu-ray masters have been based on the HD transfers we have done for DVD, but all have required additional restoration. In the case of 8 1/2, however, this is a new scan from the original materials.

yup, the unrestored HD master was probably on regular HDCAM stock in 1080i 59.94 The new scan is likely at 1080p 24 on HDCAMSR