Author
|
Topic: Dracula, Hammer 1958 Blu Ray £8.99 delivered !!!
|
|
|
|
|
Rob Young.
Phenomenal Film Handler
Posts: 1633
From: Cheshire, U.K.
Registered: Dec 2003
|
posted January 06, 2015 11:23 AM
Mark, it is a massive improvement compared to previous DVD releases.
Many forums were up and arms at the time of release about the colour not being true to the original; the truth is most that criticised it were jumping on the bandwagon of rumour-ville and hadn't actually seen it.
Personally, I have absolutely no issues with the colour balance at all.
The Reptile is especially stunning, with huge amounts of detail, and the colour balance looks very like the Derann feature release, which was in itself very good and taken from quality Rank negatives.
Twins of Evil hasn't had quite the same level of care and the master material certainly isn't as good as Dracula, Reptile, or "Plague of Zombies", which is also superb. That said, again it is a huge improvement over previous DVD versions.
Quatermass and the Pit is also stunning quality; just flawless.
Hammer went through selected titles to give them an HD make-over and whilst it hasn't always been plain sailing (they released "Dracula Prince of Darkness" with out of sync sound!) they have endeavoured to correct errors and give these films the highest quality release possible, as they all deserve.
Have a look at Hammer's web site for blogs over the last few years regarding these releases.
http://www.hammerfilms.com/
Considering the work involved and the quality of the releases, these prices are an absolute bargain and I wouldn't even think twice about replacing a DVD copy with these Blu-ray versions.
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rob Young.
Phenomenal Film Handler
Posts: 1633
From: Cheshire, U.K.
Registered: Dec 2003
|
posted January 13, 2015 11:03 AM
"Why do they mess with films? Just do the best transfer possible, and leave the rest alone?"
Well, because it just isn't that simple.
It's like saying, "why not just make the best film print possible?"
In the past, with VHS and even DVD, no one ever really commented upon "colour balance".
I personally think that's because we were all more concerned with whether or not a fairly decent image had made it to the format.
Even in commercial cinema, 35mm, there would be changes in colour balance between reels. Sloppy by the labs, but true. When watching blockbuster movies in the 80's and 90's, you would frequently see a colour shift as each reel changed.
But you quickly became used to the "new" colour balance.
When making a new transfer for HD release, even from an interpositive, a choice has to be made in mastering to provide a uniform colour balance for the final result.
Of course labs used to do this to provide prints and frequently they would introduce variations (they shouldn't have, of course, but no one is perfect!), yet we all seemed happy about it so long as it was sharp and didn't have too much negative dust, bounce or weave.
Now take "Dracula"; the best master material has been used for scanning and the results cleaned up as best as possible given the budget.
Someone has to make a decision upon colour timing. It's just part of the process, not interfering, and is based upon direction from, hopefully, the DP, or failing that, any relevant reference or direction from production.
On one of the "Dracula" documentaries, a poor chap sits there and explains his choice of colour balance for the final Blu-ray release...you just have to feel for this poor bloke, given the onslaught of criticism that would follow the discs release.
Now, as I have said, personally I have no problem with the colour balance. If I were to compare it with other format releases, it may be that I would prefer one to the other.
But then, I have Derann Disney releases on super 8 that vary in colour from one reel to the other.
I'm tempted to say that we, as film collectors have become "spoilt" with the quality that new HD transfers have to offer; would we ever have critiqued "colour balance" on super 8 releases so heavily? I know some later releases were blue, but they were just plain wrong.
Point is; this is not "interfering"; this is making new technical judgements for "new" releases (the type labs and video transfer folk used to make without criticism).
Sometimes. I think, we are too eager to jump upon the bandwagon of criticism, rather than appreciate the virtues and hard work that goes into such new release.
I think the people involved really tried their best to get this release right. Whether or not we the viewers agree or not with the result is a different matter, but I never recall this much discussion over colour timing back in the day of super 8; we were more concerned about how well we could see and hear it!
I could go further with colour temperature references on displays (modern TV screens, projectors), as opposed to lamp temperatures on film projectors, but I'll leave it for now!
Just my opinion.
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
Rob Young.
Phenomenal Film Handler
Posts: 1633
From: Cheshire, U.K.
Registered: Dec 2003
|
posted January 15, 2015 03:04 AM
True, Mark, they don't always get it right, especially earlier Blu-ray releases which were rushed to cash-in.
A friend of mine brought around "Escape From New York" last week, and on my 6ft wide screen it looked little better than DVD, with lack of resolution and lots of edge enhancement; clearly not from a proper HD master, but from all the Blu-rays I've seen it was rather the exception.
Regarding "The Mummy's Shroud", "The Reptile", "Plague of Zombies" & "Quatermass and the Pit", I think you'll be delighted with the quality...all taken from really good master material and with spot-on colour.
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|