|
|
 
|
|
Author
|
Topic: Film to Video... New method!
|
|
|
Dave Williams
Wet nipple scene
Posts: 1836
From: Salt Lake City, UT, USA
Registered: Jan 2000
|
posted 02-05-2000 07:08 PM
AAAAAUGH. I went to thier website and was APPAULED at the fact that they think that they can IMPROVE what they call directorial mistakes. They totally trashed cinemascope and 70mm, and insinuated that everything should be in IMAX format because most tv's are in the same 4:3 format. 4:3 will eventually go by the wayside. Why would we want to convert our old classics into digital recomps just so we can show em in an overly done IMAX house or keep our old antequated tv's? And besides, A BUGS LIVE dvd and video recomps that kept all the elements from the widescreen into the 4:3 version was easy as all the elements were digital in the firstplace, all you had to do was reprogram the placement of everything and WALAH! With movies shot in 70mm, it will look just like that bud light commercial with john wayne facing off against a drill seargent looking for his beer and pretzels. It was sacrilidge to do it and it would be a shame to alter forever the amazing films that this company is doing, Lawrence of arabia and Ben Hur. LEAVE EM ALONE!!! Hey, I know, why don't we recomp old classics done in 4:3 into cinemascope? We can cut out James Stewart then do a closeup shot of the background of Bedford Falls then shrink him a bit then put him back in and then... well it would look like complete and total crap, because it is and doing any digital recompositioning to these classic films to placate the 4:3 crowd or IMAX is sacrilidge. Cinemascope, widescreen, 70mm, panavision, whatever you want to call it, was the best invention in film history and should NEVER NEVER NEVER be tampered with. Maybe I'm wrong. ------------------
"If it's not worth doing, I have allready been there and done it"
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
Dave Williams
Wet nipple scene
Posts: 1836
From: Salt Lake City, UT, USA
Registered: Jan 2000
|
posted 02-05-2000 11:25 PM
OH THANK GOD!!!!I thought i was going to have to play joan of arc and lead a revolution. I had enough of ted turner colorizing things and damn I just freaked!!! YOU GOT ME MAN!!! Admitted shmuck at your service. Well at least you know where I stand right? ------------------
"If it's not worth doing, I have allready been there and done it"
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
Bruce McGee
Phenomenal Film Handler
Posts: 1776
From: Asheville, NC USA... Nowhere in Particular.
Registered: Aug 1999
|
posted 02-06-2000 09:38 AM
As for Ted Turner, I dont think he is colorizing anymore, thank God. You have to admit, though, Turner has saved the Pre-'48 Warner films, all the MGM titles, and many RKO features since he got them. Remember how nasty prints of KING KONG and 42ND STREET used to be? I, too, hate colorization, but the idiot kids now cant stand B/W movies! Believe me when I say that I try to convert the colorized kids. I have a colorized "Dark Victory" (1939) that looks awful. If I turn down the color, it still looks washed out. My old 16 print looks vastly better, and it was a rental!
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
All times are Central (GMT -6:00)
|
|
Powered by Infopop Corporation
UBB.classicTM
6.3.1.2
The Film-Tech Forums are designed for various members related to the cinema industry to express their opinions, viewpoints and testimonials on various products, services and events based upon speculation, personal knowledge and factual information through use, therefore all views represented here allow no liability upon the publishers of this web site and the owners of said views assume no liability for any ill will resulting from these postings. The posts made here are for educational as well as entertainment purposes and as such anyone viewing this portion of the website must accept these views as statements of the author of that opinion
and agrees to release the authors from any and all liability.
|
Home
Printer-friendly view of this topic