criterionforum.org

davidhare wrote:Has anyone seen the "true" 1080 monitors? I frankly prefer 720p as a resolution on practically everything, PAL or NTSC, or even 1080 broadcasts. Maybe because the monitors have to downconvert to match the 768 vertical rez?

I just bought a Sony Bravia XBR 40". It's like nothing I've ever seen. Sold my 42" Panasonic Plasma to the neighbor.

I'm resucitating this ancient thread to ask a question I'm pretty sure I've asked elsewhere, and it's not exactly related to HD vs SD: when did Criterion start doing progressive transfers?

Rushmore, released Jan. 2000, seems to be progressive, but Cleo from 5 to 7 and Le Million, released May of 2000, are not.

Looking at the release schedule it seems that by June, 2001 they were producing only progressively transferred discs, but then there's the exception (Withnail and I [released July '01]). Also, some relatively early releases (besides Rushmore there's Grand Illusion [released Sept. 1999]) seem also to be progressive. (Or am I wrong about Grand Illusion? It's been a while since I've watched it.)

Were they just experimenting with different digital methods of transferring these films? Why the discrepancy?

denti alligator wrote:I'm resucitating this ancient thread to ask a question I'm pretty sure I've asked elsewhere, and it's not exactly related to HD vs SD: when did Criterion start doing progressive transfers?

Rushmore, released Jan. 2000, seems to be progressive, but Cleo from 5 to 7 and Le Million, released May of 2000, are not.

Looking at the release schedule it seems that by June, 2001 they were producing only progressively transferred discs, but then there's the exception (Withnail and I [released July '01]). Also, some relatively early releases (besides Rushmore there's Grand Illusion [released Sept. 1999]) seem also to be progressive. (Or am I wrong about Grand Illusion? It's been a while since I've watched it.)

Were they just experimenting with different digital methods of transferring these films? Why the discrepancy?

It has to do (I Imagine) with many things, but mostly budget.
The budget for the Rushmore disc was much larger because there would be more return on the finished product... therefore they could afford to transfer the film at a different facility (they probably got their own Spirit Datacine in 2001, as to why they were all progressive HD transfers since then)
as for Grand Illusion... they had been working on that disc for years, and probably gave it a larger budget as it was a labor of love (and a fantastic film)

It's hard to believe that conjecture, because it means that they knew of better technology and decided not to use it on several dozen releases over a period of almost two years. I can't imagine them saying, "well, these would look better if we did them progressively, but let's save some money and put out an inferior product."

It actually has to do with when a film was transferred and encoded, which is not always consistent with when it is released. A good analogy is the current trend of pictureboxing films in a 1.33 ratio. Kind Hearts and Coronets was the first 1.33 film released that was pictureboxed, but if you'll notice, a number of 1.33 that have been released since then have not had the same black border. These transfers were done prior to the changeover. Similarly, I would say that the high-profile nature of Rushmore didn't get it a better transfer, but it may have allowed it to be fastracked to release after the changeover, while other non-progressive discs from before were also being put out. Le Million and Cleo weren't given worse treatment, I'd imagine they just had their releases delayed after the transfer and encode were completed. This isn't at all an uncommon occurence in DVD Production; my former company sat on a couple of movies for a few years before they could financially justify releasing them.

arsonfilms wrote:Kind Hearts and Coronets was the first 1.33 film released that was pictureboxed, but if you'll notice, a number of 1.33 that have been released since then have not had the same black border.

Not true. It was Forbidden Games (and if we're going to be really picky, Nanook of the North, The Most Dangerous Game and the M reissue were also windowboxed).

Narshty wrote:Not true. It was Forbidden Games (and if we're going to be really picky, Nanook of the North, The Most Dangerous Game and the M reissue were also windowboxed).

M was not picture-boxed... it was pillar-boxed, which is an entirely different matter (it has to do with the original aspect ratio being narrower than 1.33:1 because of the UFA film stock with the sound strip taking up more room, therefore impacting the framing)

I've been amassing HD DVD releases for some months now and have just begun importing from Europe (love the fact that there is no region coding for the format).

davidhare wrote: At one point (only a couple of years ago) Lowy was using 4k ONLY for the "very special" projects like Kane and North BY NW. But the recent Warner delay of already excellent HD masters of North by Northwest, Maltese Falcon and a few other things raises the question again.

Have you read somewhere that they've been delayed due to problems or could it just be that they are waiting for the "right" time (to make the most money, I presume).

davidhare wrote: My biggest question mark surrounds fucking Studio Canal and their endless PALpitchglitch syndrome, as well as the flaws that show up in some (eg Mulholland Dive) transfers when ouput at 1080i. (They disappear at 720p - can someone tell me why? Same goes for some Paramount HD DVD titles.)

I have been worried about the pitch problem, but I've only ordered those releases that I've read reviews where the pitch problem was specifically mentioned to not have occurred.

Have you experienced it yourself? I've read that many folks don't seem to notice it at all and others (with perfect pitch, I guess) go nuts over it.

I haven't read about the 1080i vs 720p difference. I do 1080p from disc to display - would I hear the problem in this case?

What Paramount HD DVD titles have the issue?

davidhare wrote: the flaws that show up in some (eg Mulholland Dive) transfers when ouput at 1080i. (They disappear at 720p - can someone tell me why? Same goes for some Paramount HD DVD titles.)

David, if I remember right, you have digital upconverting capability on your DVD player. I do also. On occasion I have a similar problem with certain DVDs...some, particularly older Kinos, are only viewable at 480...others don't show anything at 720 or 1080. I've never detected (or paid any particular attention) any pattern to it.

Tribe

miless wrote:

Narshty wrote:Not true. It was Forbidden Games (and if we're going to be really picky, Nanook of the North, The Most Dangerous Game and the M reissue were also windowboxed).

M was not picture-boxed... it was pillar-boxed

No, it has black bars on the top and bottom as well. Watch it again.

Narshty wrote:

miless wrote:M was not picture-boxed... it was pillar-boxed

No, it has black bars on the top and bottom as well. Watch it again.

from Criterion's "About The Transfer"

M is presented in its original aspect ratio of 1.19:1, a European process that is much narrower than the 4:3 monitor. The black bars along the side of the screen, called "pillarboxing," are normal for this format, and will be even more pronounced on widescreen televisions. The narrowness of this format is due to the variable density soundtrack, which was positioned to the left of the picture area.