criterionforum.org

That Chicago cover is too good, though. You'd see it on the shelf and catch yourself smiling at how perfect it is. The other "newspaper" covers are just going for the EFFECT. Nice of them, but...

Alphonse Doinel wrote:As for the HD stills debate, digital resolution is roughly 1/4 the size of print resolution so 4K equates to about 1.5 X 3.5 inches. A little larger than a 35mm neg. So yeah, there should be no issues with resolution at a dvd size.

I'm not sure I understand what you just said there, but they're not always using the full frame grab, they're usually enlarging just a portion of it. That further reduces the resolution of the image.

I took another look at the Leopard, and you're right, the resolution seems fine, much better than the others, it's something to do with the colors not being properly suited to print, or at least it feels that way to me.

Matt wrote:

Alphonse Doinel wrote:As for the HD stills debate, digital resolution is roughly 1/4 the size of print resolution so 4K equates to about 1.5 X 3.5 inches. A little larger than a 35mm neg. So yeah, there should be no issues with resolution at a dvd size.

I'm not sure I understand what you just said there, but they're not always using the full frame grab, they're usually enlarging just a portion of it. That further reduces the resolution of the image.

Basically I was saying 4K at the standard print resolution is roughly equal to 35mm.

You're right though, you can only do so much enlarging before the image goes to shit. Motion picture frame grabs are probably far less sharp than still photography at the same resolution too.

RE: Bad Cover Art

Maybe CC should do what Arrow Films are doing with some of their recent releases (Check out "Dawn Of The Dead" on Amazon.co.uk). Give us an option of a few different covers. Something like to covers; one on each side of the page.

But maybe not. :-k

MoC occasionally do reversible cover art (mostly for double film packages). I seem to remember...one instance where Criterion did that? I'm probably making that up.

Schizopolis and Zissou.

Is Schizopolis reversible? Zissou isn't, but it does have, like Tenenbaums, a studio-enforced slipcase.

The Killers is reversible.

Schizopolis isn't exactly a reversible cover, but if you take the cover out and read what's printed on the opposite side, you will either love or hate your DVD even more than you already do. It's a great easter egg very much in the spirit of the film, and it looks like it took a lot of effort (on whose part, I have no idea).

I received the The Only son/There was a father package today and I gotta say that the cover of the box as well as those of the individual cases look better in person than they did on the Criterion site.
Quite classy.

Kirkinson wrote:Schizopolis isn't exactly a reversible cover, but if you take the cover out and read what's printed on the opposite side, you will either love or hate your DVD even more than you already do. It's a great easter egg very much in the spirit of the film, and it looks like it took a lot of effort (on whose part, I have no idea).

And you can see it here.

Murdoch wrote:The Killers is reversible.

Nope. Just 2-for-the-price-of-1 covers!

Svevan wrote:Is Schizopolis reversible? Zissou isn't, but it does have, like Tenenbaums, a studio-enforced slipcase.

That's for the two-disc edition. The one-disc edition does have a reversible cover.

Svevan wrote:Is Schizopolis reversible? Zissou isn't, but it does have, like Tenenbaums, a studio-enforced slipcase.

What's a studio-enforced slipcase?

Many stars contracts require their names on the cover, studios want their art represented, but Criterion also wants to do a "Criterion cover," so they split the difference

Finally I received my copy of the The Red Shoes blu-ray. And indeed, that cover looks really unclear and blurry...
Really wondering what`s the cause of that. None of the other Criterion BD`s I got (this is my 15th) has that. Hope that this isn`t gonna be a common thing in the future...

[img]http://criterion_production.s3.amazonaws.com/release_images/3031/540_box_348x490.jpg[/img]

I love it, it's delightful and totally unexpected.

I think I could like it, but it's sort of overwhelmingly bright on a computer screen- it looks like something that will visually make more sense in person.

Well done.

Looks like an extremely easy 'Where's Wally?' (Or Waldo as I believe it is in the US)

Here's the final cover for Darjeeling Limited Criterion. I'm not loving it, too busy



I prefer, by far, the "test design"...

The entire first half of the film is busy in this fashion, the characters are confined to the train and the camera finds interesting ways to bob and weave around and include as much of the variety of the location as possible. The cover art represents this perfectly.

Yeah, I prefer the older one, wherever that came from. The new one makes me cringe. I'd complain if it was even the booklet cover.