Oklahoma! in Todd-AO?

Discussion in 'DVD Video' started by MrBuddwing@aol.com, Jan 16, 2005.

  1. Guest

    Sorry if this has already been asked and answered, but is there an easy
    way of getting both the Todd-AO and CinemaScope versions of OKLAHOMA!
    on home video? Years ago, I passed up a chance to buy a laserdisc of
    the Todd-AO version and I've been quietly kicking myself ever since.
    (Which version is the latest DVD release?)
     
    , Jan 16, 2005
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. Martin Hart Guest

    In article <>,
    says...
    > Sorry if this has already been asked and answered, but is there an easy
    > way of getting both the Todd-AO and CinemaScope versions of OKLAHOMA!
    > on home video? Years ago, I passed up a chance to buy a laserdisc of
    > the Todd-AO version and I've been quietly kicking myself ever since.
    > (Which version is the latest DVD release?)


    Everything currently available is from the Todd-AO production. The DVD
    is of very mediocre quality, being a single sided disc that is neither
    dual layer nor anamorphic. The first LDs were from the CinemaScope
    version, later followed by the Todd-AO. You might check eBay once or
    twice a week and you may be able to find the old CinemaScope LD sooner
    or later. It may not be the easiest way of getting it, but you get too
    winded.

    Marty
    --
    http://www.widescreenmuseum.com
    The American WideScreen Museum
     
    Martin Hart, Jan 16, 2005
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. Don Carter Guest

    On Sun, 16 Jan 2005 09:29:58 GMT, Martin Hart
    <> wrote:

    >In article <>,
    > says...
    >> Sorry if this has already been asked and answered, but is there an easy
    >> way of getting both the Todd-AO and CinemaScope versions of OKLAHOMA!
    >> on home video? Years ago, I passed up a chance to buy a laserdisc of
    >> the Todd-AO version and I've been quietly kicking myself ever since.
    >> (Which version is the latest DVD release?)

    >
    >Everything currently available is from the Todd-AO production. The DVD
    >is of very mediocre quality, being a single sided disc that is neither
    >dual layer nor anamorphic. The first LDs were from the CinemaScope
    >version, later followed by the Todd-AO. You might check eBay once or
    >twice a week and you may be able to find the old CinemaScope LD sooner
    >or later. It may not be the easiest way of getting it, but you get too
    >winded.
    >
    >Marty


    Actually, if you can get it and play PAL videos, I think the current
    UK widescreen VHS is from the CinemaScope version

    Don
     
    Don Carter, Jan 16, 2005
    #3
  4. ahollis577 Guest

    And there certainly is a difference between the two versions. All you have
    to do is compare the Kansas City number and see that the staging was
    different for each version.



    <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > Sorry if this has already been asked and answered, but is there an easy
    > way of getting both the Todd-AO and CinemaScope versions of OKLAHOMA!
    > on home video? Years ago, I passed up a chance to buy a laserdisc of
    > the Todd-AO version and I've been quietly kicking myself ever since.
    > (Which version is the latest DVD release?)
    >
     
    ahollis577, Jan 16, 2005
    #4
  5. On Sun, 16 Jan 2005 12:10:49 +0000, Don Carter <> wrote:

    >On Sun, 16 Jan 2005 09:29:58 GMT, Martin Hart
    ><> wrote:
    >
    >>In article <>,
    >> says...
    >>> Sorry if this has already been asked and answered, but is there an easy
    >>> way of getting both the Todd-AO and CinemaScope versions of OKLAHOMA!
    >>> on home video? Years ago, I passed up a chance to buy a laserdisc of
    >>> the Todd-AO version and I've been quietly kicking myself ever since.
    >>> (Which version is the latest DVD release?)

    >>
    >>Everything currently available is from the Todd-AO production. The DVD
    >>is of very mediocre quality, being a single sided disc that is neither
    >>dual layer nor anamorphic. The first LDs were from the CinemaScope
    >>version, later followed by the Todd-AO. You might check eBay once or
    >>twice a week and you may be able to find the old CinemaScope LD sooner
    >>or later. It may not be the easiest way of getting it, but you get too
    >>winded.
    >>
    >>Marty

    >
    >Actually, if you can get it and play PAL videos, I think the current
    >UK widescreen VHS is from the CinemaScope version
    >
    >Don


    Of course I could be wrong, but I believe both the Laserdisc and the
    DVD is the 2.20:1 35mm cinemascope version. To the best of my
    knowledge, there has never been a laserdisc or dvd that contained the
    2.55:1 Todd-AO version. Additionally, so far, the only 2.55:1 DVD
    Rogers & Hammerstein musicals are Carousel and The King and I.

    Charles
    nzvideos.org
     
    Charles Eggen, Jan 16, 2005
    #5
  6. Warchild Guest

    In article <>,
    Charles Eggen <> wrote:

    > On Sun, 16 Jan 2005 12:10:49 +0000, Don Carter <> wrote:
    >
    > >On Sun, 16 Jan 2005 09:29:58 GMT, Martin Hart
    > ><> wrote:
    > >
    > >>In article <>,
    > >> says...
    > >>> Sorry if this has already been asked and answered, but is there an easy
    > >>> way of getting both the Todd-AO and CinemaScope versions of OKLAHOMA!
    > >>> on home video? Years ago, I passed up a chance to buy a laserdisc of
    > >>> the Todd-AO version and I've been quietly kicking myself ever since.
    > >>> (Which version is the latest DVD release?)
    > >>
    > >>Everything currently available is from the Todd-AO production. The DVD
    > >>is of very mediocre quality, being a single sided disc that is neither
    > >>dual layer nor anamorphic. The first LDs were from the CinemaScope
    > >>version, later followed by the Todd-AO. You might check eBay once or
    > >>twice a week and you may be able to find the old CinemaScope LD sooner
    > >>or later. It may not be the easiest way of getting it, but you get too
    > >>winded.
    > >>
    > >>Marty

    > >
    > >Actually, if you can get it and play PAL videos, I think the current
    > >UK widescreen VHS is from the CinemaScope version
    > >
    > >Don

    >
    > Of course I could be wrong, but I believe both the Laserdisc and the
    > DVD is the 2.20:1 35mm cinemascope version. To the best of my
    > knowledge, there has never been a laserdisc or dvd that contained the
    > 2.55:1 Todd-AO version. Additionally, so far, the only 2.55:1 DVD
    > Rogers & Hammerstein musicals are Carousel and The King and I.
    >
    > Charles
    > nzvideos.org


    I believe that the last US laserdisc release, which I own, was the Todd
    AO version. It also included a documentary about the production and
    showed the differences between the two films. I might be wrong though,
    and will have to dig out my laserdisc to confirm.

    I realize that this is wishy-washy, but a big point was made of the
    version of the film at the time the disc was released.
     
    Warchild, Jan 16, 2005
    #6
  7. P Pron Guest

    Warchild wrote:
    > In article <>,
    > Charles Eggen <> wrote:
    >
    >> On Sun, 16 Jan 2005 12:10:49 +0000, Don Carter <>
    >> wrote:
    >>
    >>> On Sun, 16 Jan 2005 09:29:58 GMT, Martin Hart
    >>> <> wrote:
    >>>
    >>>> In article <>,
    >>>> says...
    >>>>> Sorry if this has already been asked and answered, but is there
    >>>>> an easy way of getting both the Todd-AO and CinemaScope versions
    >>>>> of OKLAHOMA! on home video? Years ago, I passed up a chance to
    >>>>> buy a laserdisc of the Todd-AO version and I've been quietly
    >>>>> kicking myself ever since. (Which version is the latest DVD
    >>>>> release?)
    >>>>
    >>>> Everything currently available is from the Todd-AO production. The
    >>>> DVD is of very mediocre quality, being a single sided disc that is
    >>>> neither dual layer nor anamorphic. The first LDs were from the
    >>>> CinemaScope version, later followed by the Todd-AO. You might
    >>>> check eBay once or twice a week and you may be able to find the
    >>>> old CinemaScope LD sooner or later. It may not be the easiest way
    >>>> of getting it, but you get too winded.
    >>>>
    >>>> Marty
    >>>
    >>> Actually, if you can get it and play PAL videos, I think the current
    >>> UK widescreen VHS is from the CinemaScope version
    >>>
    >>> Don

    >>
    >> Of course I could be wrong, but I believe both the Laserdisc and the
    >> DVD is the 2.20:1 35mm cinemascope version. To the best of my
    >> knowledge, there has never been a laserdisc or dvd that contained the
    >> 2.55:1 Todd-AO version. Additionally, so far, the only 2.55:1 DVD
    >> Rogers & Hammerstein musicals are Carousel and The King and I.
    >>
    >> Charles
    >> nzvideos.org

    >
    > I believe that the last US laserdisc release, which I own, was the
    > Todd AO version. It also included a documentary about the production
    > and showed the differences between the two films. I might be wrong
    > though, and will have to dig out my laserdisc to confirm.
    >
    > I realize that this is wishy-washy, but a big point was made of the
    > version of the film at the time the disc was released.


    Yes - the original laserdisc issue was produced from the CinemaScope master.
    The final issue was produced from the restored Todd AO version, and was an
    enormous step-up from the previous issue. I've seen a lengthy article
    describing the differences between the two versions, but can't now find a
    link to it.....

    AFAIR, the surviving 'scope elements are too far gone to restore to a decent
    standard.

    paul
     
    P Pron, Jan 16, 2005
    #7
  8. Guest

    P Pron wrote:
    > Warchild wrote:
    > > In article <>,
    > > Charles Eggen <> wrote:
    > >
    > >> On Sun, 16 Jan 2005 12:10:49 +0000, Don Carter <>
    > >> wrote:
    > >>
    > >>> On Sun, 16 Jan 2005 09:29:58 GMT, Martin Hart
    > >>> <> wrote:
    > >>>
    > >>>> In article

    <>,
    > >>>> says...
    > >>>>> Sorry if this has already been asked and answered, but is there
    > >>>>> an easy way of getting both the Todd-AO and CinemaScope

    versions
    > >>>>> of OKLAHOMA! on home video? Years ago, I passed up a chance to
    > >>>>> buy a laserdisc of the Todd-AO version and I've been quietly
    > >>>>> kicking myself ever since. (Which version is the latest DVD
    > >>>>> release?)
    > >>>>
    > >>>> Everything currently available is from the Todd-AO production.

    The
    > >>>> DVD is of very mediocre quality, being a single sided disc that

    is
    > >>>> neither dual layer nor anamorphic. The first LDs were from the
    > >>>> CinemaScope version, later followed by the Todd-AO. You might
    > >>>> check eBay once or twice a week and you may be able to find the
    > >>>> old CinemaScope LD sooner or later. It may not be the easiest

    way
    > >>>> of getting it, but you get too winded.
    > >>>>
    > >>>> Marty
    > >>>
    > >>> Actually, if you can get it and play PAL videos, I think the

    current
    > >>> UK widescreen VHS is from the CinemaScope version
    > >>>
    > >>> Don
    > >>
    > >> Of course I could be wrong, but I believe both the Laserdisc and

    the
    > >> DVD is the 2.20:1 35mm cinemascope version. To the best of my
    > >> knowledge, there has never been a laserdisc or dvd that contained

    the
    > >> 2.55:1 Todd-AO version. Additionally, so far, the only 2.55:1 DVD
    > >> Rogers & Hammerstein musicals are Carousel and The King and I.
    > >>
    > >> Charles
    > >> nzvideos.org

    > >
    > > I believe that the last US laserdisc release, which I own, was the
    > > Todd AO version. It also included a documentary about the

    production
    > > and showed the differences between the two films. I might be

    wrong
    > > though, and will have to dig out my laserdisc to confirm.
    > >
    > > I realize that this is wishy-washy, but a big point was made of the
    > > version of the film at the time the disc was released.

    >
    > Yes - the original laserdisc issue was produced from the CinemaScope

    master.
    > The final issue was produced from the restored Todd AO version, and

    was an
    > enormous step-up from the previous issue. I've seen a lengthy article


    > describing the differences between the two versions, but can't now

    find a
    > link to it.....
    >
    > AFAIR, the surviving 'scope elements are too far gone to restore to a

    decent
    > standard.
    >
    > paul
     
    , Jan 16, 2005
    #8
  9. Guest

    Several years ago American Movie Classics (before they went down the
    tubes and started showing commericals during the feature) presented
    Oklahoma in the Cinemascope and ToddAO versions back to back. I
    recorded both and compared them side by side. There are certainly
    differences. Unfortunately when I moved recently I apparently
    misplaced both copies.
     
    , Jan 16, 2005
    #9

  10. >
    > Of course I could be wrong, but I believe both the Laserdisc and the
    > DVD is the 2.20:1 35mm cinemascope version. To the best of my
    > knowledge, there has never been a laserdisc or dvd that contained the
    > 2.55:1 Todd-AO version. Additionally, so far, the only 2.55:1 DVD
    > Rogers & Hammerstein musicals are Carousel and The King and I.
    >

    Yes, you're wrong. The last LD and only DVD is the 2.2:1 70mm Todd-AO
    version. The first (or second to last) LD was from the 35mm Cinemascope
    2.55 version (or was it a mag-optic 2.35 release?) Anyway, Todd-AO was
    never 2.55.
     
    Paul Linfesty, Jan 16, 2005
    #10
  11. Guest

    Of course the thing that really moved me with Todd-AO was how bright it was,
    and how little flicker there was. Those aren't variables that get
    translated to disk.
     
    , Jan 17, 2005
    #11
  12. jayembee Guest

    Charles Eggen <> wrote:

    > Of course I could be wrong, but I believe both the Laserdisc and the
    > DVD is the 2.20:1 35mm cinemascope version. To the best of my
    > knowledge, there has never been a laserdisc or dvd that contained the
    > 2.55:1 Todd-AO version.


    Yes, you are wrong.

    2.20:1 is Todd-AO (or any 70mm gauge process).

    2.55:1 is CinemaScope with mag (rather than optical) tracks.

    -- jayembee
     
    jayembee, Jan 17, 2005
    #12
  13. Martin Hart Guest

    In article <>,
    says...

    >
    > Of course I could be wrong, but I believe both the Laserdisc and the
    > DVD is the 2.20:1 35mm cinemascope version. To the best of my
    > knowledge, there has never been a laserdisc or dvd that contained the
    > 2.55:1 Todd-AO version. Additionally, so far, the only 2.55:1 DVD
    > Rogers & Hammerstein musicals are Carousel and The King and I.
    >
    > Charles
    > nzvideos.org


    From a composition standpoint, both the CinemaScope and the Todd-AO
    laser disc versions are quite acceptable, with the CinemaScope being
    approximately 2.55:1 and the Todd-AO being 2.2:1.

    Todd-AO is a 65mm format with a screen ratio of 2.2:1, and was used in
    the roadshow version of "Oklahoma!". The general release version of the
    film was made in CinemaScope, a 35mm anamorphic system. Both "Carousel"
    and "The King and I" were filmed in CinemaScope 55, which used a
    negative width of 55.625mm. CinemaScope 55, like the original magnetic
    sound version of 35mm CinemaScope, had a screen ratio of 2.55:1.

    Information on CinemaScope may be found at:
    http://www.widescreenmuseum.com/widescreen/wingcs1.htm

    Information on Todd-AO may be found at:
    http://www.widescreenmuseum.com/widescreen/wingto1.htm

    Actual film frames from both the CinemaScope and Todd-AO versions are
    shown on the web site.

    You can see surviving frames of specially rectified Todd-AO prints made
    for deeply curved screens with a high projector angle at:
    http://www.widescreenmuseum.com/widescreen/wingto5.htm

    A frame from a CinemaScope 55 test film can be seen at:
    http://www.widescreenmuseum.com/special/cs55.htm

    A standard 65mm frame Todd-AO frame from "Oklahoma!" and a beautiful
    Technicolor four-track magnetic CinemaScope frame can be see at:
    http://www.widescreenmuseum.com/widescreen/wingto6.htm

    A comparison chart of all the major wide screen systems can be seen at:
    http://www.widescreenmuseum.com/widescreen/aspectratio.htm

    In my opinion, the two different versions of "Oklahoma!" are much more
    alike than some people seem feel. There are points in the film, such as
    the main title, where the two films are dramatically different, but the
    two versions were shot with lenses that had approximately the same
    horizontal angular coverage, with the Todd-AO taking in a bit more in
    the vertical dimension. The video transfer of the CinemaScope version
    isn't as brilliant as the Todd-AO version but it's up to the standards
    that were common at the time it was made. A new transfer, using today's
    best systems, should be made. Todd-AO looks a whole lot better than the
    current DVD would lead you to believe. An example of how good it could
    look can be seen in Warner Home Video's DVD of "Around The World In 80
    Days." "Oklahoma!" deserves better treatment.

    Marty
    --
    http://www.widescreenmuseum.com
    The American WideScreen Museum
     
    Martin Hart, Jan 17, 2005
    #13
  14. Martin Hart Guest

    In article <>,
    says...

    <SNIP>

    > Yes - the original laserdisc issue was produced from the CinemaScope master.
    > The final issue was produced from the restored Todd AO version, and was an
    > enormous step-up from the previous issue. I've seen a lengthy article
    > describing the differences between the two versions, but can't now find a
    > link to it.....


    The Todd-AO version has not been "restored". The negative was sent
    through the film scanner and whatever color correction that was required
    to fix the faded negative was done in NTSC video. A real restoration
    would result in the production of a state of the art duplicate negative
    from which intermediate materials may be struck for future demands.
    Scanning a film into low rez video should never be confused with
    restoration.

    > AFAIR, the surviving 'scope elements are too far gone to restore to a decent
    > standard.


    The CinemaScope negative should be in far better condition than the
    Todd-AO negative. This is because the CinemaScope prints were made in
    dye transfer Technicolor, a process that requires handling of the
    negative a minimal number of times and all prints are struck from three
    matrix films created from the negative.

    The Todd-AO negative, on the other hand, had to be run through the
    optical or contact printer, depending on whether or not rectification
    was required, for each and every print shipped to a theatre.

    If 200 Technicolor prints were required then the negative went through
    Technicolor's optical printer THREE times, to capture the red, green,
    and blue elements in the image. If 200 Todd-AO prints were required then
    the negative ran through the printer TWO HUNDRED times. Technicolor
    could produce tens of thousands of the CinemaScope prints with less wear
    and tear on the negative than a few hundred Todd-AO prints.

    Marty
    --
    http://www.widescreenmuseum.com
    The American WideScreen Museum
     
    Martin Hart, Jan 17, 2005
    #14
  15. Martin Hart Guest

    In article <1TCGd.53626$>,
    says...
    >
    > >
    > > Of course I could be wrong, but I believe both the Laserdisc and the
    > > DVD is the 2.20:1 35mm cinemascope version. To the best of my
    > > knowledge, there has never been a laserdisc or dvd that contained the
    > > 2.55:1 Todd-AO version. Additionally, so far, the only 2.55:1 DVD
    > > Rogers & Hammerstein musicals are Carousel and The King and I.
    > >

    > Yes, you're wrong. The last LD and only DVD is the 2.2:1 70mm Todd-AO
    > version. The first (or second to last) LD was from the 35mm Cinemascope
    > 2.55 version (or was it a mag-optic 2.35 release?) Anyway, Todd-AO was
    > never 2.55.


    You are correct, Paul. The CinemaScope transfer uses the full 2.55:1
    frame.

    Marty
    --
    http://www.widescreenmuseum.com
    The American WideScreen Museum
     
    Martin Hart, Jan 17, 2005
    #15
  16. Martin Hart Guest

    In article <>,
    says...
    > Charles Eggen <> wrote:
    >
    > > Of course I could be wrong, but I believe both the Laserdisc and the
    > > DVD is the 2.20:1 35mm cinemascope version. To the best of my
    > > knowledge, there has never been a laserdisc or dvd that contained the
    > > 2.55:1 Todd-AO version.

    >
    > Yes, you are wrong.
    >
    > 2.20:1 is Todd-AO (or any 70mm gauge process).


    You forget that Ultra Panavision 70 had a total aspect ratio of 2.76:1.
    (2.21 X 1.25x squeeze ratio). Additionally, dozens of 70mm prints have
    been made by blowing up 35mm negatives that have an aspect ratio of less
    than 2.21:1.

    > 2.55:1 is CinemaScope with mag (rather than optical) tracks.
    >
    > -- jayembee
    >


    Marty
    --
    http://www.widescreenmuseum.com
    The American WideScreen Museum
     
    Martin Hart, Jan 17, 2005
    #16
  17. Martin Hart Guest

    In article <DqDGd.9480$>,
    says...
    > Of course the thing that really moved me with Todd-AO was how bright it was,
    > and how little flicker there was. Those aren't variables that get
    > translated to disk.
    >


    Depending on just how sensitive to video frame rates, there could very
    well be noticeably less flicker in the Todd-AO video. The first two
    Todd-AO films were made at 30 frames per second, the same rate as NTSC
    television. There was no need to do the normal 3:2 pulldown trick to get
    a smooth image. Personally, I don't see much of the normal NTSC
    artifacts but I've got a couple of friends that are exceptionally
    sensitive to it, so the 30 fps speed of the Todd-AO version is much
    better for them.

    Marty
    --
    http://www.widescreenmuseum.com
    The American WideScreen Museum
     
    Martin Hart, Jan 17, 2005
    #17
  18. <> wrote in message
    news:DqDGd.9480$...
    > Of course the thing that really moved me with Todd-AO was how bright it
    > was,
    > and how little flicker there was. Those aren't variables that get
    > translated to disk.


    TODD AO was shot at 30 FPS, which results in a significant improvement in
    flicker and strobing due to the 25%
    increase in temporal resolution. This is why I shoot my own movies at 30p
    instead of 24p because they WANT to
    get that "film look." 30 frames per second retains the "dreamy" quality of
    film, because the arrival rate of new information
    is still slower than the image processing rate of the brain which is about
    44, but gives a smoother motion.

    A properly done Film to digital transfer from a TODD-AO original would be at
    30 (actually 29.95) frames, 1080 lines
    resolution. This will playback... once the equipment is available... at
    1080i. Even a DVD downconverted from such
    1080 line masters will exhibit the superior temporal properties.

    zeke... artist and teacher
     
    ZEKE, the NERDS, Jan 17, 2005
    #18
  19. Guest

    ZEKE, the NERDS wrote:
    > TODD AO was shot at 30 FPS, which results in a significant

    improvement in
    > flicker and strobing due to the 25%
    > increase in temporal resolution. This is why I shoot my own movies at

    30p
    > instead of 24p because they WANT to
    > get that "film look." 30 frames per second retains the "dreamy"

    quality of
    > film



    Isn't this an argument for shooting filmed TV shows at 30 fps instead
    of 24? (I can picture producers saying, "Oh, of COURSE we want to spend
    25% more on film stock ...")

    I wouldn't propose this for theatrical features - I'm thinking it's too
    much of a 24 fps world out there. But for films made strictly for TV,
    it could be especially welcome with the advent of HDTV. And wouldn't it
    be easier to convert 30 fps films to 25 fps PAL?
     
    , Jan 17, 2005
    #19
  20. jayembee Guest

    Martin Hart <> wrote:

    > The CinemaScope negative should be in far better condition than the
    > Todd-AO negative. This is because the CinemaScope prints were made in
    > dye transfer Technicolor, a process that requires handling of the
    > negative a minimal number of times and all prints are struck from three
    > matrix films created from the negative.
    >
    > The Todd-AO negative, on the other hand, had to be run through the
    > optical or contact printer, depending on whether or not rectification
    > was required, for each and every print shipped to a theatre.


    Prints are rarely made from the original negative. They are generally
    made from an internegative, precisely so that the original negative
    needs only be handled once.

    -- jayembee
     
    jayembee, Jan 17, 2005
    #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. NHLi.com
    Replies:
    1
    Views:
    529
    Rowdy Yates
    Aug 10, 2004
  2. Lasher

    Lowdes spotted in Oklahoma!

    Lasher, Jan 7, 2006, in forum: MCSE
    Replies:
    13
    Views:
    814
  3. NHLi.com
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    420
    NHLi.com
    Aug 10, 2004
  4. DVD Verdict
    Replies:
    3
    Views:
    606
    Scot Gardner
    Oct 26, 2003
  5. One-Shot Scot

    Oklahoma!: Aspect Ratio Question.

    One-Shot Scot, Nov 18, 2005, in forum: DVD Video
    Replies:
    5
    Views:
    743
    One-Shot Scot
    Nov 19, 2005
Loading...

Share This Page