List of DVDs restored by Lowry Digital Images

Discussion in 'DVD Video' started by Chuck Kahn, Feb 15, 2004.

  1. Chuck Kahn

    Chuck Kahn Guest

    "We've done 60 films in the last three years," says John Lowry.

    Searching the web, I've managed to identify DVD releases of 25 of
    them. What else is there?

    1. Brief Encounter - Criterion Collection
    2. Casablanca (Two-Disc Special Edition)
    3. Citizen Kane (Two-Disc Special Edition)
    4. Doctor Zhivago (Two-Disc Special Edition)
    5. Giant (Two-Disc Special Edition)
    6. Little Women
    7. Mary Poppins
    8. Mildred Pierce
    9. Moby Dick
    10. North by Northwest
    11. Now, Voyager
    12. Once Upon a Time in the West
    13. Peter Pan (Special Edition)
    14. Pinocchio
    15. Pocahontas (Disney)
    16. Roman Holiday (Special Collector's Edition)
    17. Singin' in the Rain (Two-Disc Special Edition)
    18. Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs (Disney Platinum Edition)
    19. Sunset Boulevard (Special Collector's Edition)
    20. The Adventures of Indiana Jones (Raiders of the Lost Ark/The
    Temple of Doom/The Last Crusade) - Widescreen
    21. The Ghoul
    22. The Godfather DVD Collection
    23. The Importance of Being Earnest - Criterion Collection
    24. Them!
    25. THX 1138 (Upcoming)

    I've put these into an Amazon Listmania! list at:

    http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/r...path=tg/listmania/list-browse/-/1X2DZ42QS8OVB
     
    Chuck Kahn, Feb 15, 2004
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. Chuck Kahn

    anon Guest

    Lowry is also well underway in restoring the new SE of the Star Wars
    Trilogy....

    "Chuck Kahn" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > "We've done 60 films in the last three years," says John Lowry.
    >
    > Searching the web, I've managed to identify DVD releases of 25 of
    > them. What else is there?
    >
    > 1. Brief Encounter - Criterion Collection
    > 2. Casablanca (Two-Disc Special Edition)
    > 3. Citizen Kane (Two-Disc Special Edition)
    > 4. Doctor Zhivago (Two-Disc Special Edition)
    > 5. Giant (Two-Disc Special Edition)
    > 6. Little Women
    > 7. Mary Poppins
    > 8. Mildred Pierce
    > 9. Moby Dick
    > 10. North by Northwest
    > 11. Now, Voyager
    > 12. Once Upon a Time in the West
    > 13. Peter Pan (Special Edition)
    > 14. Pinocchio
    > 15. Pocahontas (Disney)
    > 16. Roman Holiday (Special Collector's Edition)
    > 17. Singin' in the Rain (Two-Disc Special Edition)
    > 18. Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs (Disney Platinum Edition)
    > 19. Sunset Boulevard (Special Collector's Edition)
    > 20. The Adventures of Indiana Jones (Raiders of the Lost Ark/The
    > Temple of Doom/The Last Crusade) - Widescreen
    > 21. The Ghoul
    > 22. The Godfather DVD Collection
    > 23. The Importance of Being Earnest - Criterion Collection
    > 24. Them!
    > 25. THX 1138 (Upcoming)
    >
    > I've put these into an Amazon Listmania! list at:
    >
    >

    http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/r...path=tg/listmania/list-browse/-/1X2DZ42QS8OVB
     
    anon, Feb 16, 2004
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. Chuck Kahn wrote:
    > "We've done 60 films in the last three years," says John Lowry.
    >
    > Searching the web, I've managed to identify DVD releases of 25 of
    > them. What else is there?
    > 9. Moby Dick


    The John Huston version? Gosh, you wouldn't know to look at it.

    --
    "Get rid of the Range Rover. You are not responsible for patrolling
    Australia's Dingo Barrier Fence, nor do you work the Savannah, capturing
    and tagging wildebeests."
    --Michael J. Nelson

    Grand Inquisitor
    http://www.dvdprofiler.com/mycollection.asp?alias=Oost
     
    Grand Inquisitor, Feb 16, 2004
    #3
  4. Chuck Kahn

    Chuck Kahn Guest

    Grand Inquisitor <> wrote in message news:<biYXb.10581$>...
    > Chuck Kahn wrote:
    > > "We've done 60 films in the last three years," says John Lowry.
    > >
    > > Searching the web, I've managed to identify DVD releases of 25 of
    > > them. What else is there?
    > > 9. Moby Dick

    >
    > The John Huston version? Gosh, you wouldn't know to look at it.


    Patrick L. Almanza lists it on his resume at:

    http://www.geocities.com/futekgods/html/GRAPHICS_RESUME.html

    5/02 - present Lowry Digital Images Burbank, CA
    Special Restoration Expert
    Digital restoration and training Artists for special fixes including
    removing scratches, dust, splice fixes, title repairs and wire
    removal. Created manuals and other administrative documents for QC
    Department. Titles I repaired for either back to film, HD or NTSC
    output include: "Sunset Boulevard", "Casablanca", "The West Wing",
    "Raiders of The Lost Ark" series, "The Godfather" I and II,
    "Pinocchio", "Moby Dick", "Mildred Pierce", and "Giant".

    Not sure if he means the John Huston version or not...
     
    Chuck Kahn, Feb 16, 2004
    #4
  5. Chuck Kahn

    Chuck Kahn Guest

    wrote in message news:<>...
    > Ned <Ned > wrote:
    >
    > >>11. Now, Voyager

    > >
    > >Thanks for the list. I watched North By Northwest to inaugurate my new home
    > >theater setup with prog-scan DVD and a 55" HDTV and I was blown away by the
    > >quality of the restoration. Simply stunning. I look forward to seeing more of
    > >their work.

    >
    > "Now, Voyager" isn't terribly impressive. It appears to mimic the
    > periodic flaws on the VHS release.


    Maybe LDI's "Now, Voyager" work is only available in certain Regions
    -- can anyone confirm this DVD?
     
    Chuck Kahn, Feb 17, 2004
    #5
  6. Re: North by Northwest

    Sounds like you know something about post-production lab work. So what could
    be wrong with the matched camera negative? By 1959 weren't they using the
    camera neg only for internegatives (or more correctly, for making
    interpositives from which they made the internegatives) from which they did
    the release printing? It seems it wouldn't suffer much wear. Nitrate-based
    film stocks were no longer used. And acetate is much more stable.
    Technicolor is one of the most stable color processes from that era. Please
    note, I'm just posing as a devil's advocate. I believe you, but I don't
    understand what could have happened to the film elements of so relatively
    recent a film.
    Also, why hasn't Turner - or whoever the current copyright holder is - taken
    steps to preserve such a moneymaker?
    "Lincoln Spector" <> wrote in message
    news:wlaYb.24542$...

    > North by Northwest is truly a great-looking DVD, but be careful how you

    use
    > the word "restoration." The original film elements of NbNw are reportedly

    in
    > wretched condition, and there's no way to create a decent-looking print.
    >
    > A great-looking DVD transfer costs much less than a real restoration,

    which
    > should result in a new internegative and great-looking 35mm prints. That
    > still needs to be done on NbNw.
    >
    > Lincoln
    >
    >
     
    Randall Coleman, Feb 17, 2004
    #6
  7. In article <>, Ned <Ned> wrote:
    >
    >Thanks for the list. I watched North By Northwest to inaugurate my new home
    >theater setup with prog-scan DVD and a 55" HDTV and I was blown away by the
    >quality of the restoration. Simply stunning. I look forward to seeing more of
    >their work.


    So when are we going to see a good 35mm print of NxNW? It seems that there's
    always a "new 35mm print" of this in circulation on the rep house circuit, and
    it seems that this "new 35mm print" always looks crappy.

    --
    Scott Norwood: ,
    Cool Home Page: http://www.redballoon.net/
    Lame Quote: Penguins? In Snack Canyon?
     
    Scott Norwood, Feb 17, 2004
    #7
  8. In article <>,
    <> wrote:
    >Ned <Ned > wrote:
    >
    >>>11. Now, Voyager

    >>
    >>Thanks for the list. I watched North By Northwest to inaugurate my new home
    >>theater setup with prog-scan DVD and a 55" HDTV and I was blown away by the
    >>quality of the restoration. Simply stunning. I look forward to seeing more of
    >>their work.

    >
    >"Now, Voyager" isn't terribly impressive. It appears to mimic the
    >periodic flaws on the VHS release.


    What is it about this film that needs restoration? There was a pretty good
    35mm print made in 1998 (?) for the WB 75th festival.

    --
    Scott Norwood: ,
    Cool Home Page: http://www.redballoon.net/
    Lame Quote: Penguins? In Snack Canyon?
     
    Scott Norwood, Feb 17, 2004
    #8
  9. Re: North by Northwest

    "Randall Coleman" <> wrote in message
    news:eek:8gYb.13097$...
    > Sounds like you know something about post-production lab work.

    Just what I read.

    > So what could
    > be wrong with the matched camera negative? By 1959 weren't they using the
    > camera neg only for internegatives (or more correctly, for making
    > interpositives from which they made the internegatives) from which they

    did
    > the release printing?
    > It seems it wouldn't suffer much wear.

    Most films in '59 were printed directly from the ON. But North by Northwest
    was an exception, since it was a VistaVision title. With VistaVision, most
    prints were Technicolor IB prints made from matrices. The ON was used only
    to make the matrices (and perhaps a handfull of 8-perf prints for theaters
    that directly supported VistaVision).

    > Nitrate-based
    > film stocks were no longer used. And acetate is much more stable.

    In the long run, acetate hasn't proved much more stable than nitrate. True,
    it doesn't tend to burst into flames, but it still shrinks and suffers from
    vinegar syndrome.

    > Technicolor is one of the most stable color processes from that era.

    Technicolor IB dye transfer prints are indeed, extremely stable. They are
    not, however, good sources for restoration because of their high contrast.
    And the ON, of course, was not an IB print, but Eastmancolor camera
    stock--which was extremely unstable then. I don't believe that an
    Eastmancolor negative, developed by Technicolor, is all that more stable
    than an Eastmancolor negative developed by someone else.

    > Please
    > note, I'm just posing as a devil's advocate.

    No need to apologize. You're asking good questions.

    > I believe you, but I don't
    > understand what could have happened to the film elements of so relatively
    > recent a film.

    Recent? It's 45 years old. North by Northwest is older now than Birth of a
    Nation was when North by Northwest came out. Lawrence of Arabia was less
    than 30 years old when Robert Harris undertook a massive restoration of that
    masterpiece.

    Keep in mind that Harris also had to do a major restoration on Vertigo, also
    shot in VistaVision and Technicolor (Eastmancolor with IB release prints)
    just a year before NbNw.

    > Also, why hasn't Turner - or whoever the current copyright holder is -

    taken
    > steps to preserve such a moneymaker?

    Ah, the eternal question. Time and money are always limited resources, of
    course, and Warners has a huge library to take care of (they own more
    American movies than any other company). Properly restoring a film costs a
    lot more than mastering a great-looking DVD, and probably doesn't bring in
    more money in the short term.

    Hopefully they'll get to it before it's too late.

    Lincoln
     
    Lincoln Spector, Feb 17, 2004
    #9
  10. Chuck Kahn

    Chuck Kahn Guest

    "Lincoln Spector" <> wrote in message news:<wlaYb.24542$>...
    > > Thanks for the list. I watched North By Northwest to inaugurate my new

    > home
    > > theater setup with prog-scan DVD and a 55" HDTV and I was blown away by

    > the
    > > quality of the restoration. Simply stunning. I look forward to seeing more

    > of
    > > their work.

    > North by Northwest is truly a great-looking DVD, but be careful how you use
    > the word "restoration." The original film elements of NbNw are reportedly in
    > wretched condition, and there's no way to create a decent-looking print.
    >
    > A great-looking DVD transfer costs much less than a real restoration, which
    > should result in a new internegative and great-looking 35mm prints. That
    > still needs to be done on NbNw.


    This is true for NbNw, which was done when they were only doing NTSC
    and PAL resolutions, but since then, they have offered 4k
    restorations:

    "Lowry Digital Images CEO John Lowry says his company performed
    end-to-end digital restorations last year for theatrical rereleases of
    1950's "Sunset Boulevard" and 1953's "Roman Holiday." His facility
    offers 4K scanning, which reassures some preservationists that detail
    can be maintained through the digital process."

    from http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/thr/film/feature_display.jsp?vnu_content_id=2053173
     
    Chuck Kahn, Feb 18, 2004
    #10
  11. Chuck Kahn

    Martin Hart Guest

    Re: North by Northwest

    In article <ZktYb.24949$>,
    says...

    <SNIP>

    > Technicolor is one of the most stable color processes from that era.
    > Technicolor IB dye transfer prints are indeed, extremely stable. They are
    > not, however, good sources for restoration because of their high contrast.
    > And the ON, of course, was not an IB print, but Eastmancolor camera
    > stock--which was extremely unstable then. I don't believe that an
    > Eastmancolor negative, developed by Technicolor, is all that more stable
    > than an Eastmancolor negative developed by someone else.


    I have no proof, if such a thing is even possible, but I am of the
    opinion that Eastmancolor negative AND Eastmancolor prints made by
    Technicolor tend to be more stable than those done by other labs. The
    trick is in taking great pains with the processing of the film. In my
    collection of 70mm snippets, I find that 1960s 70mm from DeLuxe are
    almost faded to transparency, Metrocolor's are faded pink, and
    Technicolor's are more a ruby red, generally indicating that there are
    more traces of color left in them than the others. This is a pretty
    consistent characteristic. When I scan the film and try to play with the
    color layers to see if it's possible to bring back some of the original
    look, the Technicolor prints yield better results than Metrocolor or
    DeLuxe. Those prints made on the newer stocks, by whatever labs, are
    pretty good for color stability, but by no means perfect. I think that
    there was an ethic at Technicolor that went beyond merely doing the job.
    And since they were in competition with in-house labs it certainly
    behooved them to treat the film, negative or positive, as carefully as
    possible in all aspects of its handling.

    > > Please
    > > note, I'm just posing as a devil's advocate.

    > No need to apologize. You're asking good questions.
    >
    > > I believe you, but I don't
    > > understand what could have happened to the film elements of so relatively
    > > recent a film.

    > Recent? It's 45 years old. North by Northwest is older now than Birth of a
    > Nation was when North by Northwest came out. Lawrence of Arabia was less
    > than 30 years old when Robert Harris undertook a massive restoration of that
    > masterpiece.
    >
    > Keep in mind that Harris also had to do a major restoration on Vertigo, also
    > shot in VistaVision and Technicolor (Eastmancolor with IB release prints)
    > just a year before NbNw.
    >
    > > Also, why hasn't Turner - or whoever the current copyright holder is -

    > taken
    > > steps to preserve such a moneymaker?

    > Ah, the eternal question. Time and money are always limited resources, of
    > course, and Warners has a huge library to take care of (they own more
    > American movies than any other company). Properly restoring a film costs a
    > lot more than mastering a great-looking DVD, and probably doesn't bring in
    > more money in the short term.
    >
    > Hopefully they'll get to it before it's too late.
    >
    > Lincoln


    The same question applies to "Ben-Hur" which has earned many times its
    original cost of production and has always been a cash cow when things
    were tough. It needs to be treated with a great deal more respect than
    seems to be the case. Yes, I like this film and I hate to see people
    subjected to less than what I saw when I was a kid.

    Marty

    --
    http://www.widescreenmuseum.com
    The American WideScreen Museum
     
    Martin Hart, Feb 19, 2004
    #11
  12. Chuck Kahn

    Guest

    Re: North by Northwest

    On 17-Feb-2004, "Lincoln Spector" <> wrote:

    > Technicolor IB dye transfer prints are indeed, extremely stable. They are
    > not, however, good sources for restoration because of their high contrast.
    > And the ON, of course, was not an IB print, but Eastmancolor camera
    > stock--which was extremely unstable then. I don't believe that an
    > Eastmancolor negative, developed by Technicolor, is all that more stable
    > than an Eastmancolor negative developed by someone else.


    If they have the separate negatives, it it can be restored much better than
    combined color negatives.
     
    , Feb 19, 2004
    #12
  13. Chuck Kahn wrote:
    >
    > "Lincoln Spector" <> wrote in message news:<wlaYb.24542$>...
    > > > Thanks for the list. I watched North By Northwest to inaugurate my new

    > > home
    > > > theater setup with prog-scan DVD and a 55" HDTV and I was blown away by

    > > the
    > > > quality of the restoration. Simply stunning. I look forward to seeing more

    > > of
    > > > their work.

    > > North by Northwest is truly a great-looking DVD, but be careful how you use
    > > the word "restoration." The original film elements of NbNw are reportedly in
    > > wretched condition, and there's no way to create a decent-looking print.
    > >
    > > A great-looking DVD transfer costs much less than a real restoration, which
    > > should result in a new internegative and great-looking 35mm prints. That
    > > still needs to be done on NbNw.

    >
    > This is true for NbNw, which was done when they were only doing NTSC
    > and PAL resolutions, but since then, they have offered 4k
    > restorations:
    >
    > "Lowry Digital Images CEO John Lowry says his company performed
    > end-to-end digital restorations last year for theatrical rereleases of
    > 1950's "Sunset Boulevard" and 1953's "Roman Holiday." His facility
    > offers 4K scanning, which reassures some preservationists that detail
    > can be maintained through the digital process."


    But they have not done a film in 4K yet, 'only' 2K, as far as I know.
     
    Michel Hafner, Feb 19, 2004
    #13
  14. Re: North by Northwest

    "Lincoln Spector" <> wrote in message
    news:ZktYb.24949$...
    >

    Thanks for a great explanation. But, I would like to ask for clarafication
    of a couple terms and concepts.

    > Most films in '59 were printed directly from the ON. But North by

    Northwest
    > was an exception, since it was a VistaVision title. With VistaVision, most
    > prints were Technicolor IB prints made from matrices. The ON was used only
    > to make the matrices (and perhaps a handfull of 8-perf prints for theaters
    > that directly supported VistaVision).


    I know IP and IN, but what is IB? Also, when you talk about matrices, is
    that the three color separations? Are matrices different from a simple set
    of color separations?

    > Technicolor is one of the most stable color processes from that era.


    Are dye transfer prints ones made from a set of matrices? I know that with
    early 3-strip Technicolor, three negatives were exposed in the camera, and
    through the use of filters there was a b&w negative record for magenta,
    cyan, and green. I've heard that this process is what gave us those electric
    colors to the 20th Century Fox musicals of the 40s. Was Technicolor creating
    such matrices even after the advent of single strip negative film?

    > Technicolor IB dye transfer prints are indeed, extremely stable. They are
    > not, however, good sources for restoration because of their high contrast.


    Are IPs and INs, or just IPs done in low contrast and on fine grain stock.
    Isn't the reason for low contrast that the image naturally gets more
    contrasty with each generation?

    > Recent? It's 45 years old. North by Northwest is older now than Birth of a
    > Nation was when North by Northwest came out. Lawrence of Arabia was less
    > than 30 years old when Robert Harris undertook a massive restoration of

    that
    > masterpiece.


    An editor friend of mine said that studios now do color separations for the
    purpose of preservation. Do you think this is true? It seems to me that the
    studios see revenues down the road coming from home video and would be more
    interested in a digital master. There doesn't seem to be much use for prints
    after a film's initial run. Home video has put all the revival houses out of
    business.
    >


    > Ah, the eternal question. Time and money are always limited resources, of
    > course, and Warners has a huge library to take care of (they own more
    > American movies than any other company).


    I know that Ted Turner acquired the libraries of MGM, WB, a chunk of RKO,
    and I believe Monogram is in there somewhere. I see videos released as
    MGM/UA, Warner Studios, and Turner Home Entertainment. Are these separate
    entities?

    >Properly restoring a film costs a
    > lot more than mastering a great-looking DVD, and probably doesn't bring in
    > more money in the short term.


    Do you think Turner is ignoring entirely the work of creating a viable film
    master for their titles?

    > Lincoln


    Let me thank you now if you decide to tackle this new set of questions. I am
    intensly interested in all the steps in getting from camera negative to
    release print and all of the elements produced. I guess it comes from seeing
    old films in different venues and becoming sensitive to the quality and
    state of the image.

    I should know all this stuff because I was an assistant film archivist while
    in college and a sound editor all my working career. But, alas my jobs never
    put me in direct contact with the labs, so my knowledge is spotty.

    Since there seem to be people in this newsgroup with a solid background like
    yourself, I'm going to post some questions about this whole process as it is
    done today. If there is enough response, I'll post about different eras. For
    instance, the status of things in the late 50s as you described them is very
    interesting. Please take a look at the post.

    Again, thanks so much for your response.

    Randall
    >
    >
     
    Randall Coleman, Feb 19, 2004
    #14
  15. Re: North by Northwest

    <> wrote in message
    news:0WVYb.9612$...
    >
    > On 17-Feb-2004, "Lincoln Spector" <> wrote:
    >
    > > Technicolor IB dye transfer prints are indeed, extremely stable. They

    are
    > > not, however, good sources for restoration because of their high

    contrast.
    > > And the ON, of course, was not an IB print, but Eastmancolor camera
    > > stock--which was extremely unstable then. I don't believe that an
    > > Eastmancolor negative, developed by Technicolor, is all that more stable
    > > than an Eastmancolor negative developed by someone else.

    >
    > If they have the separate negatives, it it can be restored much better

    than
    > combined color negatives.

    The "separate negatives?" I think you may be under the impression that NbNw
    was shot in three-strip Technicolor, which did indeed result in three b&w
    negatives. Three-strip Technicolor was phased out in 1953-55. NbNw was shot
    on Eastmancolor negative--one negative holding the color record through
    three layers of dyes, basically the same technology as today's color films.
    It was a Technicolor film only in that Technicolor did the lab work, and the
    original release prints were Technicolor IB dye transfer prints.

    There probably were color separation masters made off of the negative (a
    common practice for big budget movies back then). But these have their own
    problems. They may have been badly made (surprisingly common). They can have
    shrinkage problems. Some image quality is lost through them.

    If they exist, seps are one more tool that can be used for creating a good
    restoration. But they're just one possible source.

    Lincoln
     
    Lincoln Spector, Feb 19, 2004
    #15
  16. Re: North by Northwest

    > I know IP and IN, but what is IB?
    IB is Technicolor's acronym for dye transfer. Yeah, I know, confusing. I
    don't remember off-hand what it stands for (or more precisely, I can't spell
    it without looking it up).

    > Also, when you talk about matrices, is
    > that the three color separations? Are matrices different from a simple set
    > of color separations?

    Matrices are like 3D contour maps of the image. Normal b&w film emulsion
    darkens where it's struck by light. Matrix film had a thick, soft emulsion
    that hardened when struck by light. After exposure, the soft parts were
    washed out, and you had a strip of film with little hills and valleys.
    Technicolor would run these through the appropriate dyes and print from
    these matrices onto the print film.

    Basically, a photo-engraving process, similar to the way color photos are
    printed in magazines.

    >
    > > Technicolor is one of the most stable color processes from that era.

    >
    > Are dye transfer prints ones made from a set of matrices?

    Yes.

    > I know that with
    > early 3-strip Technicolor, three negatives were exposed in the camera, and
    > through the use of filters there was a b&w negative record for magenta,
    > cyan, and green.

    Actually, the negative record was of red, green, and blue. The dyes used to
    reproduce those colors were cyan, magenta, and yellow. For a full
    explanation, see
    http://www.widescreenmuseum.com/oldcolor/additive-subtractive.htm (hey,
    Marty, do I get a kickback for recommending your site?).

    > I've heard that this process is what gave us those electric
    > colors to the 20th Century Fox musicals of the 40s.

    A number of factors caused that particular look, including 3-strip, dye
    transfer (IB) printing, and a conscious decision on the part of Technicolor
    and the filmmakers to go for that look.

    > Was Technicolor creating
    > such matrices even after the advent of single strip negative film?

    IB printing both predated and survived 3-strip. It was first introduced in
    1928 as a more practical way to print their two-color system. Technicolor
    continued to make IB prints off of color negatives until the mid-70's.

    >
    > > Technicolor IB dye transfer prints are indeed, extremely stable. They

    are
    > > not, however, good sources for restoration because of their high

    contrast.
    >
    > Are IPs and INs, or just IPs done in low contrast and on fine grain stock.
    > Isn't the reason for low contrast that the image naturally gets more
    > contrasty with each generation?

    Release prints tend to have high contrast because that makes for better
    projection. Negatives and intermediates tend to be low contrast that makes
    for better copying.

    >
    > > Recent? It's 45 years old. North by Northwest is older now than Birth of

    a
    > > Nation was when North by Northwest came out. Lawrence of Arabia was less
    > > than 30 years old when Robert Harris undertook a massive restoration of

    > that
    > > masterpiece.

    >
    > An editor friend of mine said that studios now do color separations for

    the
    > purpose of preservation. Do you think this is true? It seems to me that

    the
    > studios see revenues down the road coming from home video and would be

    more
    > interested in a digital master. There doesn't seem to be much use for

    prints
    > after a film's initial run. Home video has put all the revival houses out

    of
    > business.

    If they're smart, they still preserve the movies on film. Two problems with
    preserving a film only in the digital realm:

    1) It's extremely expensive to scan a film at a high enough resolution to
    preserve the image properly. Preserving only a, say, DVD-quality image isn't
    wise, because home video technology will improve.

    2) Digital has yet to prove itself as a long-time archival medium.

    Personally, I think a movie that already exists in a hi-def digital version
    (and that's common, these days) should be digitally preserved IN ADDITION to
    film preservation. But it's too risky to depend entirely on digital.

    > >

    >
    > > Ah, the eternal question. Time and money are always limited resources,

    of
    > > course, and Warners has a huge library to take care of (they own more
    > > American movies than any other company).

    >
    > I know that Ted Turner acquired the libraries of MGM, WB, a chunk of RKO,
    > and I believe Monogram is in there somewhere. I see videos released as
    > MGM/UA, Warner Studios, and Turner Home Entertainment. Are these separate
    > entities?

    A lot of history there. Pre-1950 Warner Brothers movies, for instance, have
    changed ownership seven times that I know of.

    Briefly, when MGM bought UA in the early 80's, they acquired the pre-1950
    Warners library, the entire (or almost entire--there are always exceptions)
    RKO library, and the post-1952 UA library (before that, UA mostly
    distributed independent films made by producers who retained their own
    copyrights). In the late 80's, MGM/UA sold the Warner, RKO, and MGM
    libraries to Turner, while keeping the UA films.

    For about 10 years, MGM handled home video distribution for the Turner
    library, which is why videos from most of the 90s carry both MGM and Turner
    logos. Then Turner sold his entire business to Time Warner, and the films
    became part of the Warner Brothers library.

    >
    > >Properly restoring a film costs a
    > > lot more than mastering a great-looking DVD, and probably doesn't bring

    in
    > > more money in the short term.

    >
    > Do you think Turner is ignoring entirely the work of creating a viable

    film
    > master for their titles?

    No. I think they're trying to do what's right, but they've got budgets like
    everyone else. Look at the wonderful 3-strip restorations they did recently
    (Singin' in the Rain, Adventures of Robin Hood). These were digital, but
    done at a high-enough resolution (2k) to output to 35mm.

    Lincoln
     
    Lincoln Spector, Feb 19, 2004
    #16
  17. Chuck Kahn

    Guest

    Re: North by Northwest

    On 19-Feb-2004, "Lincoln Spector" <> wrote:

    > > If they have the separate negatives, it it can be restored much better

    > than
    > > combined color negatives.

    > The "separate negatives?" I think you may be under the impression that
    > NbNw
    > was shot in three-strip Technicolor, which did indeed result in three b&w
    > negatives.


    I guess we need to mention which Technicolor in these discussions.

    Fortunately, color isn't an important part of _North By NorthWest_.

    The movie whose fading saddens me the most is not Technicolor. I want to
    see the lush green countryside in _Tom Jones_ again!
     
    , Feb 23, 2004
    #17
  18. Re: North by Northwest

    wrote:

    > On 19-Feb-2004, "Lincoln Spector" <> wrote:
    >
    >
    >>>If they have the separate negatives, it it can be restored much better

    >>
    >>than
    >>
    >>>combined color negatives.

    >>
    >>The "separate negatives?" I think you may be under the impression that
    >>NbNw
    >>was shot in three-strip Technicolor, which did indeed result in three b&w
    >>negatives.

    >
    >
    > I guess we need to mention which Technicolor in these discussions.
    >
    > Fortunately, color isn't an important part of _North By NorthWest_.
    >
    > The movie whose fading saddens me the most is not Technicolor. I want to
    > see the lush green countryside in _Tom Jones_ again!


    I understand what you're saying, but I think you may have forgotten what
    Tom Jones looked like in the theater on its original release. Didn't it
    seem faded and washed-out and under-exposed to you even then? I really
    think some scenes (I'm particularly thinking of a fox-hunting(?) scene
    at dusk) were pushed in the film development process so much that they
    seemed grainy. It was the first film I'd ever seen in which I thought
    the film processing could have been better. Was Tony Richardson going
    for an intentional effect, or was the cinematography diminished by
    limited funds? I dunno.

    By the way, the countryside in my DVD of Tom Jones looks pretty good --
    better than I recall from the theatrical release.

    --
    Bill Anderson

    I am the Mighty Favog
     
    Bill Anderson, Feb 23, 2004
    #18
  19. Chuck Kahn

    Guest

    Re: North by Northwest

    On 22-Feb-2004, Bill Anderson <> wrote:

    > I understand what you're saying, but I think you may have forgotten what
    > Tom Jones looked like in the theater on its original release. Didn't it
    > seem faded and washed-out and under-exposed to you even then? I really
    > think some scenes (I'm particularly thinking of a fox-hunting(?) scene
    > at dusk) were pushed in the film development process so much that they
    > seemed grainy. It was the first film I'd ever seen in which I thought
    > the film processing could have been better. Was Tony Richardson going
    > for an intentional effect, or was the cinematography diminished by
    > limited funds? I dunno.


    Hard to say. I was pretty young, but remembered it being green and was
    surprised in a theatrical re-release on how dull it seemed.

    > By the way, the countryside in my DVD of Tom Jones looks pretty good --
    > better than I recall from the theatrical release.
     
    , Feb 23, 2004
    #19
  20. Chuck Kahn

    David Mullen Guest

    Re: North by Northwest

    What I remember reading about "Tom Jones" was that they decided to shoot as
    much as possible in overcast weather rather than wait for sunny weather,
    which was a reverse of the popular approach of the day. Also, I believe
    that was the start of Walter Lassalley shooting everything through a fine
    net.

    I wouldn't be surprised to hear that some of the footage was push-processed.

    David Mullen
     
    David Mullen, Feb 23, 2004
    #20
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. =?Utf-8?B?cmp3?=

    Network connections not automatically restored at startup

    =?Utf-8?B?cmp3?=, Jul 31, 2004, in forum: Wireless Networking
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    2,104
    =?Utf-8?B?cmp3?=
    Jul 31, 2004
  2. steve

    RAID 1 array restored!

    steve, Jun 30, 2004, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    3
    Views:
    3,803
    Jonathan Wilson
    Jul 1, 2004
  3. *Vanguard*

    How to decrypt EFS-protected restored files?

    *Vanguard*, May 8, 2004, in forum: Computer Security
    Replies:
    5
    Views:
    21,099
    neelakantanr
    Dec 22, 2007
  4. =?Utf-8?B?ZWlk?=

    Mistakenly Overwrite Word File - Can the original file be restored

    =?Utf-8?B?ZWlk?=, Aug 30, 2006, in forum: Microsoft Certification
    Replies:
    4
    Views:
    5,294
    The Rev [MCT]
    Aug 30, 2006
  5. Replies:
    0
    Views:
    387
Loading...

Share This Page