Artificial Eye / Curzon Film World

[pro-bassoonist]

And it is not a "correct" route to go from 50i > 25p > 24p. Assuming that the "master" they used was 1080/50i, which is what you speculate, the correct route would have been to just have a 1080/50i transfer.

If the film was shot on HD at 50i but was theatrically presented on 35mm at 24fps (such as Jia's THE WORLD, which I produced for MoC Blu-ray), then it makes a great deal of sense to go 50i > 25p > 24p (which is what we did).

Quite a number of films have been shot at 50i/25p and theatrically displayed at 24fps. Because the HD master is the source for the Blu-ray, the question is: do you try to mimic the theatrical experience, or do you slightly cripple the Blu-ray by releasing it in 1080i which may cause problems for a fraction of the audience?

Criterion have regularly taken 50i/25p masters (ANTICHRIST, BERLIN ALEXANDERPLATZ) and slowed them to 24p because of 1080i incompatibilities on certain Blu-ray players/displays. Again, ANTICHRIST and BERLIN ALEXANDERPLATZ probably played theatrically at 24fps, so you can't definitively say one way or the other that something is "correct" or not.

For Blu-ray authoring options it seems that ultimately, 24p regularly wins, due to these incompatibilities with 1080i.

The elephant in the room here is that 50i/25p keeps cropping up due to Japanese HD television originating at 50i in the 1990s and the entirety of European television broadcasts still stuck at 50Hz/50i.

Purpee, please understand that there are different issues here.

1. Your 'dilemma' as a producer is whether to present the film as it was natively shot, in the case you note above in 50i, or as presented theatrically. In other words, you could choose to go 50i or 24fps. It is your decision to make.

2. Criterion did not face your dilemma. Because 1080/50i is not standardized in North America. What this means is that 1080/50i compatibility isn't an official tech spec for U.S. players. (In fact, as far as Region-A Blu-ray players are concerned, if I recall correctly only first generation PS3s produced in Hong Kong, which is Region-A territory, had legitimate 1080/50i playback capability, because 1080/50i and PAL were used there to a certain degree).

The fact that you had some manufacturers adding chips that would automatically convert 1080/50i to 1080/60i/1080p on some Blu-ray players sold in the U.S. 3-4 years AFTER the high-definition format was launched does not mean that "certain players" were/are SIMPLY having trouble processing 1080/50i content. In the U.S., 1080/50i is not standardized, which means that it is not used. (We also had various DVD players, such as the popular CyberHome, that would convert PAL to NTSC on the fly, but PAL, as you know, is not utilized in the U.S.).

All of the above immediately dictates that Criterion have to adjust and present content either in 1080/60i (which they have been doing with some releases of silent films) or 1080p.

As far as Faust is concerned, you have a very similar situation. Whether it was shot in 1080/50i or not it does not matter, because ALL UK Blu-ray players and TV sets can handle 1080/50i content. 1080/50i is standardized in your country.

[peerpee]

I do understand what you're saying – I don't think we're in disagreement – and I think you understand what I'm saying, but we're slightly at cross purposes on a number of subtly different but related points.

Let's strip it back to the core.

The Artificial Eye Blu-ray of Sokurov's FAUST is 24p but has embedded interlacing. It's got serious problems.

We don't know how exactly the film was shot, at what framerate, whether 50i, 25p, or 24p.

In my experience, the label/authoring house will request all HD masters to be 1080/24p as a matter of course, for Blu-ray and DCP uses. Sometimes, when a film has been shot at 50i/25p, this causes problems when the licensor's lab supplies the foreign label with a pre-converted dub (50i > 24p), thus embedding the interlacing at source (which appears to be what happened with the recent BFI POTEMKIN Blu-ray problem), *or* a 50i HD master is supplied and then screwed by the label's authoring house when trying to encode the 24p Blu-ray.

In this instance, one of those two reasons must be behind the Artificial Eye Blu-ray problem.

The fact that a 50i FAUST Blu-ray exists in other European countries gives us a good chance to sort this out! If someone could analyse the running time of one of these 50i FAUST Blu-rays, and the PQ with regards to interlacing, then we might have this licked!

[manicsounds]

The Russian BD of Faust:
Runtime is 2:13:39, MPEG2 25fps

The Italian BD of Faust:
Runtime is 2:19:31, MPEG4 AVC 24fps


(And a correction: Japanese HD TV standards were never at 50i, and was in 60i, like America)

[TMDaines]

German and French are same as Russian then, I believe.

[peerpee]

The Russian BD of Faust:
Runtime is 2:13:39, MPEG2 25fps

The Italian BD of Faust:
Runtime is 2:19:31, MPEG4 AVC 24fps

Ace. Do we have a lockdown on the length of the AE Blu? I sold my copy. I presume it's 2:19:31 like the 24p Italian Blu?

Does the Italian Blu exhibit the same embedded interlacing as the AE Blu?

(And a correction: Japanese HD TV standards were never at 50i, and was in 60i, like America)

Thanks! Yes, I meant to emphasise the "i" of Japanese HD TV standards, and how difficult (and ultimately silly) it was to get those early 60i masters into 24p (MoC VENGEANCE IS MINE!).

[manicsounds]

DVDBeaver says the AE "Faust" runtime is 2:19:17, so it is the 24fps speed. Further adds to the mystery.

[RossyG]

My brain hurts reading threads like this. Why can't technical stuff just be simple?

[manicsounds]

DVDBeaver on the Claire Denis collection

The 3 old DVDs are repackaged, and "Nenette et Boni" looks meh. I was hoping for something better looking and with extras.

[peerpee]

DVDBeaver says the AE "Faust" runtime is 2:19:17, so it is the 24fps speed. Further adds to the mystery.

That all makes sense. I had the AE Blu of FAUST and knew it was 24fps, but didn't make a note of the running time.

The 24fps Italian Blu could have gone 50i > 25p > 24p and not have visible, embedded interlacing like the AE, but we don't know for sure.

Sounds like the Russian BD would be an interesting one for a close PQ examination!

[Rupert Pupkin]

back about the blu-ray subtitles on A.E "Holy Motors", it seems that something is changing with Artificial Eye Blu-Ray and subtitles....
can someone who would have bought some more new titles can confirm this tendancy ?

recently I bought A.E's "Holy Motors" and audio track is in French, thus English subtitled are now forced. Which is now a premiere in A.E world.

one month ago I bought Berberian Sound Studio (awesome movie) and was annoyed by the fact that only English were available. It was partial English subtitles only for the parts were people were talking in Italian... But most of the movie has English dialogues which are a bit difficult to understand sometime when there's a strong italian accent behind it. But it was not that a big deal with this movie.

then I bought the new A.E - "Ginger & Rosa" (Sally Potter). No subtitles at all.
So far, all A.E that I have bought have English SDH subtitles or English subtitles for non-english audio track (such as "Lourdes" - French dialogues)

scenario was a bit weak (to say the least), but Robbie Ryan photography is magnificient (Andrea Arnold's Fish Tank, the recently superb and sadly underrated Wuthering Heights) worth the price alone of this blu-ray. It's a constant poem dedicated to Elle Fanning...

well, 3 new Artificial Eye titles, and it seems that they are "locking" their content no.
In France, many blu-ray editors have forced subtitles (TF1, etc...) - really I'm sorry for this country- I'm French.
perhaps for (c) contract clauses, the region B locking is not enough and A.E will go now to no subtitles at all for all English audio (not a problem for me) and I'm afraid about A.E turning into forced subtitles (THAT's- I hate it....!)

Mind you, Au Hazard Balthazard, and Mouchette are coming in blu-ray soon via Artificial Eye, so imagine if they had forced subtitles like Holy Motors !? ](*,) I'm sure that English or American people, would like to have to possibility/option to remove the subtitles when watching a movie. Perhaps they will watch it one time with subtitles, and try next without subtitles.
so, until now.... I'm [-o< [-o<
I don't want to use VLC and other ripping desperate technique to play a blu-ray

at least if this is the case the Hal Hartley movies won't have subtitles, but that was already the case with Olive Blu-Ray (that's always the case with Olive).

[tenia]

To add to this, The Deep Blue Sea AE BD has no subs at all, but Andrea Arnold's Wuthering Heights has optional removable full English subs.

[Rupert Pupkin]

To add to this, The Deep Blue Sea AE BD has no subs at all, but Andrea Arnold's Wuthering Heights has optional removable full English subs.

thanks. I'm talking about the latest Artificial Eye releases in order to see if things have started to change with A.E and subtitles (= no subtitles at all / or forced subtitles). Wuthering Heights has been released by A.E 1 year ago.... (and yes it has English sub (SDH) optional)

but, thanks for this example, because in the end it seems that English SDH and Artificial Eye has never been a 100% "rule" : for instance, Andrea Arnold's previous movie "Fish Tank" - released on blu-ray by Artificial Eye too did not have subtitles. I remember some English buyers complaing on amazon.co.uk about the fact that some of the dialogues were sometimes hard to understand because of the accent and all the slangs (Mia's little sister wins the battle ) I bought this Blu-Ray before the Criterion came out (then I sold the A.E later)...

Sometimes I tend to forgot this but we must keep in mind that English SDH are - as SDH stands for - hearing-impaired person. French people like you and me like the presence of English SDH because it helps.
But if for some (c) or contract clause reason A.E do not put debelirately English SDH on a movie, the first people who will be affected by this decision are people who suffer from hearing loss. Determine why a particular film can be seen rather than another is quite discriminatory. (it also goes for some Criterion titles like Yi Yi / Merry XMas Mr Lawrence, etc...)

Let's hope that they won't go into forced subtitles for the no-English audio tracks. So far, as far as I can tell, "Holy Motors" is a a premiere.

[peerpee]

If the two Bresson Blu-rays don't have removable subtitles, they're going back for a full refund, in anticipation of Criterion Blu-rays.

[GaryC]

The AE Blu-ray and DVD of Babette's Feast, released today, have optional English subs.

[manicsounds]

"Amour" Blu-ray.com review, another imposed English subs BD title

[The Fanciful Norwegian]

Well, Holy Motors and Amour have the same French distributor (Les Films du Losange), so perhaps they're obliging AE to impose subtitles as a move against parallel imports? Of course they've released titles from them before with optional subs (Michael and Goodbye First Love being two recent examples), but it could be a new policy. Just a stab in the dark.

[TMDaines]

Looks like I'll be importing from abroad. It was good to know you, AE.

[triodelover]

Beaver on Amour. Gary says there are two subtitle options, English SDH and English and both are removable.

[GaryC]

The DVD-only release of Nénette et Boni, released both singly and as part of a four-disc Claire Denis Collection box, has optional English subtitles.

[Kauno]

The new release of Kurosawa's Dersu Uzala isn't a simple re-package and comes with an improved presentation: DVD Outsider.

I've only seen Dersu Uzala of their latest Russian batch - and it's a definite improvement on the earlier one (although still far from perfect: it badly needs a proper photochemical restoration).

It should be mentioned that Kino have announced plans for a Blu of Come and See.

And Dersu Uzala for 2012.

Both Dersu Uzala and Come and See are quite cheap at Amazon right now (£7.50 & £6.75). Any news on the Kino's Blu-Ray releases?

[MichaelB]

Beaver on Amour. Gary says there are two subtitle options, English SDH and English and both are removable.

The question is: did Gary and Svet review the same disc, and was it a final production copy or a checkdisc? And, if the latter, were there any changes made afterwards?

Some distributors conscientiously flag up whether check discs reflect what's going to be in shops - for instance, I'm just about to watch a DVD-R of MoC's The Murderer Lives at No.21, which comes with the following warning:

Please note: This disc is in the final stages of proofing. Any video, audio or subtitle issues will be remedied before release.

Apologies for sending you a non-finalised disc but we are conscious of your deadline.

...but in my experience that's surprisingly rare.

[Calvin]

On June 24th, Artificial Eye are releasing Satyajit Ray's Charulata and Atom Egoyan's Family Viewing on Blu-Ray.

[Drucker]

That could bode well for a Criterion of Charulata as they mentioned they might release more Ray before the Apu Trilogy

[Adam X]

On June 24th, Artificial Eye are releasing ... Atom Egoyan's Family Viewing on Blu-Ray.

That's some good news. Going to be interesting to see how this compares to the seemingly tape-based R1 DVD, AV-wise. Though I imagine it'll be pointless hoping for AE to port across all of that releases' extras, unless they're all owned by EgoFilmArts.
Either way, this is very unexpected. First Hal Hartley, now this!

[zedz]

That could bode well for a Criterion of Charulata as they mentioned they might release more Ray before the Apu Trilogy

It's probably just a standalone release of exactly the same transfer they released years back in the box set, which as it stands is probably too rough a source for Criterion. But I agree that this is a front-runner for the eventual follow-up to The Music Room.