Images

Discuss DVDs and Blu-rays released from Arrow and the films on them.

Moderator: MichaelB

Message
Author
User avatar
rapta
Joined: Sun Jun 29, 2014 5:04 pm
Location: Hants, UK

Re: Images

#26 Post by rapta » Thu Mar 01, 2018 8:52 pm

Looking pretty solid to me: http://www.dvdbeaver.com/film3/dvd_revi ... lu-ray.htm" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

User avatar
mfunk9786
Under Chris' Protection
Joined: Fri May 16, 2008 4:43 pm
Location: Philadelphia, PA

Re: Images

#27 Post by mfunk9786 » Thu Mar 01, 2018 9:10 pm

Looks great! Can't wait to have my pre-order cancelled

User avatar
domino harvey
Dot Com Dom
Joined: Wed Jan 11, 2006 2:42 pm

Re: Images

#28 Post by domino harvey » Thu Mar 01, 2018 9:36 pm

Don't worry, you can just pick up any of the countless other films that play the same notes of "It was all a dream/hallucination... or was it?!"

Costa
Joined: Fri Sep 03, 2010 5:10 pm

Re: Images

#29 Post by Costa » Fri Mar 02, 2018 12:18 am

Those screenshots sold me! Looks excellent!
(though I imagine many complaints about that heavy grain in some shots.. hehe)

User avatar
swo17
Joined: Tue Apr 15, 2008 10:25 am
Location: SLC, UT

Re: Images

#30 Post by swo17 » Fri Mar 02, 2018 1:16 am

mfunk9786 wrote:Looks great! Can't wait to have my pre-order cancelled
Be fair, this isn't a limited edition. The joke should be about the replacement discs never being distributed.

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

Re: Images

#31 Post by tenia » Fri Mar 02, 2018 2:54 am

gap wrote:Tenia, where do you post your reviews?
French website http://www.retro-hd.com" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;.
Though it has been 2 rather slow months lately for me, for various personal reasons.
swo17 wrote:
mfunk9786 wrote:Looks great! Can't wait to have my pre-order cancelled
Be fair, this isn't a limited edition. The joke should be about the replacement discs never being distributed.
Pretty much. Though obviously, I suppose LEs can also get replacement discs never being distributed. \:D/

User avatar
Shrew
The Untamed One
Joined: Tue Feb 27, 2007 2:22 am

Re: Images

#32 Post by Shrew » Fri Mar 02, 2018 7:41 pm

domino harvey wrote:Don't worry, you can just pick up any of the countless other films that play the same notes of "It was all a dream/hallucination... or was it?!"
But how many of those films contain snippets of their lead actresses's unpublished story about unicorns?

User avatar
domino harvey
Dot Com Dom
Joined: Wed Jan 11, 2006 2:42 pm

Re: Images

#33 Post by domino harvey » Fri Mar 02, 2018 7:43 pm

As Waylon Smithers once said, even one is too many

User avatar
Colpeper
Joined: Thu Nov 04, 2004 8:52 pm
Location: Buckinghamshire, United Kingdom

Re: Images

#34 Post by Colpeper » Sat Mar 03, 2018 12:52 am

Shrew wrote:But how many of those films contain snippets of their lead actresses's unpublished story about unicorns?
You probably know this, but just for the record, Hodder & Stoughton eventually published Susannah York's In Search of Unicorns, a few months after the film's release. Oddly enough, one of my earliest memories is my sister reading a borrowed copy to me not long thereafter, so it must have made some impression.

User avatar
MichaelB
Joined: Fri Aug 11, 2006 6:20 pm
Location: Worthing
Contact:

Re: Images

#35 Post by MichaelB » Sat Mar 03, 2018 6:03 am

I remember that too - and I’d have been just the right age (five or six, with younger siblings). In fact, I knew Susannah York as a writer long before I ever realised she had a more famous parallel career.

User avatar
bearcuborg
Joined: Fri Sep 14, 2007 2:30 am
Location: Philadelphia via Chicago

Re: Images

#36 Post by bearcuborg » Sat Mar 03, 2018 8:48 am

At five you were long aware of the author of a couple minor kids books?

User avatar
MichaelB
Joined: Fri Aug 11, 2006 6:20 pm
Location: Worthing
Contact:

Re: Images

#37 Post by MichaelB » Sat Mar 03, 2018 9:24 am

bearcuborg wrote:At five you were long aware of the author of a couple minor kids books?
I'm genuinely startled that you interpreted my post like that, as I thought I was being perfectly clear - but in case anyone else is confused, I was saying that I only found out that she was an actress many, many years (as in teens minimum) after I became aware that she was an author.

Which has tangentially reminded me of that wonderful Geoff Brown article 'Preston Sturges: Inventor' that I reproduced in Arrow's Sullivan's Travels booklet, the angle being that it was a biography of Sturges as though he was an inventor first and foremost who just happened to briefly dabble in film in the 1940s. Similarly, there are scientists for whom Alexander Borodin is much more famous as a great nineteenth-century analytical chemist - the music stuff was merely a hobby.

User avatar
david hare
Joined: Tue Nov 02, 2004 8:01 pm
Location: WellyYeller

Re: Images

#38 Post by david hare » Mon Mar 26, 2018 11:08 pm

I have just viewed this through twice very careully, initially wiht a 4k uprez and then straight Rec.709 color spacing and absolutely no digital tweaks. I find it extremely hard to believe the encode or 4K was sourced from an O-Neg. The grain is almost totally unmanagable and that's even in highly lit studio material like the opening and closing white apartmrnt sequences which are clearly studio sets. There is a detectable - no a massive increase in grain management, clarity and resolution/sharpness in the last reel/ten minutes. Which makes the preceding 90 minutes seem all the more puzzling. quality wise.

This is to say nothing negative about Arrow's technical handling of the material. But I simply cannot believe how variable this is. And I'm fully aware Zgismond shot with a range of Panavision primes in multiple light and speed conditions. I have seen it theatrically literally forty plus years ago but memory is hopelessly unreliable for that, although I remember not liking the film then and thinking it looked "dark". I love the film now with one small reservation about a love scene at the one hour mark which is overtly expository and against the rest of the picture's ambivalent realities. Anyway a friend was going to ask Grover Crisp about the source.

Needless to say kudos to Arrow for getting it out, it's been virtually mising in action since '72, and I consider it a major Altman.

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

Re: Images

#39 Post by tenia » Tue Mar 27, 2018 1:41 am

The booklet states : "there are a couple of instances in which next gen dupe materials were inserted into the cut negative. At these points the quality of the image is reduced and the film grain is elevated to a noticeable level,, but we have attempted to make these shots fit in with the surrounding footage as closely as possible."

User avatar
david hare
Joined: Tue Nov 02, 2004 8:01 pm
Location: WellyYeller

Re: Images

#40 Post by david hare » Tue Mar 27, 2018 5:18 am

I am seeing many, many more than a couple of shots with this issue.

M Sanderson
Joined: Sat Oct 22, 2016 3:43 am

Re: Images

#41 Post by M Sanderson » Sat Apr 07, 2018 4:14 am

Overall very, very good transfer of a great film. Better than good transfers 3 Women (Arrow and Criterion), That Cold Day in the Park (Eureka); as good as Long Goodbye (Arrow); not quite up there with Short Cuts, The Player, McCabe & Nashville - releases that surely had a way bigger Blu ray production budget.

Maybe there is some variation if they had to use different elements but is it as distracting as having ten minutes of what appears SD, or at the very least an old film print, in the middle of “5 star” restorations like Anatomy of a Murder (Criterion) and Women in Love (BFI and presumably Criterion) (Two restos I mostly greatly admire, to be clear.)

User avatar
david hare
Joined: Tue Nov 02, 2004 8:01 pm
Location: WellyYeller

Re: Images

#42 Post by david hare » Sat Apr 07, 2018 4:20 pm

THe movie was originally distributed by Columbia/now Sony who had no production interest in it so they have never been responsible for "conservation". It presumably drifted into and out of various studio vaults via MGM ending up as a UA property for most of its life. What is odd here is the condition of the negative compared to McCabe and Mrs Miller. Back when that was first released it often projected to look like murky shit. The new 4K of McCabe is the best I have ever seen it and a good home projection system will play it back with premium quality. Things was here Altman and DP Zsigmond were at their stoned peak "let's fool around with the negative" period, and a lot fo the footgae was flashed before exposure, then a lot of the film was shot with minimal light, like candles etc. Images looks similarly shot with low light natural light source but the outcomes are different, the daytime wides (telephotos) are some of the worst images in it for blown out grain, and the dark low light sequences some of the best. It's simply the elements Arrow had to use. Arrow has given it a very high bitrate and maintained total consistency in both grain, rez and color timing. THeir own work can't be faulted.

And I go to pains to insist it's aboslutely worth buying. It's basically been unseen since the early seventies and contrary to some opinions here I consider it a major Altman.

Robin Davies
Joined: Sat Sep 22, 2007 2:00 am

Re: Images

#43 Post by Robin Davies » Sun Apr 08, 2018 8:10 am

david hare wrote:And I go to pains to insist it's aboslutely worth buying. It's basically been unseen since the early seventies and contrary to some opinions here I consider it a major Altman.
I agree with the last comment. To my taste it's easily Altman's masterpiece. I don't know why you say it's been unseen since the early seventies though. It's been available on DVD for years.

Post Reply