8mm Forum: Which studio's Digests were the worst?

This is topic Which studio's Digests were the worst? in forum 8mm Forum at 8mm Forum.

To visit this topic, use this URL:
https://8mmforum.film-tech.com/cgi-bin/ubb/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=1;t=003338

Posted by Osi Osgood (Member # 424) on December 29, 2007, 10:07 AM:

Lets limit this conversation to the big studio's and not the Niles film company for instance ...

I've noticed that some studio's were far better than others. 20'th Century Fox were okay, but I've found the Columbia digests (as a general rule) tended to be poorer quality.

Especially those later day digests. You remember them, they were generic yellow boxes with a little label saying
what the title was. I've found them to have somewhat washed
out color and the color, even on brand new prints, tended to be
rather poor ...

(and lets not even mention that Horrible narraration over the top!)

Posted by Paul Adsett (Member # 25) on December 29, 2007, 12:32 PM:

I find most of the Columbia black and white digests to be of excellent print quality, particularly 'Only Angels have Wings' and 'Requiem for a Heavyweight'. I thought the editing was also good on most of the ones I have seen, but as Osi points out that voice-over narrator was very annoying. One thing to remember is that Columbia were the first big studio on the scene with 400ft digests, and it was their success in that market that spurred Fox, Universal and MGM to follow suite. So Columbia deserve credit for breaking new ground in packaged home movies.

Posted by Osi Osgood (Member # 424) on December 29, 2007, 02:16 PM:

True Paul ...

I had a copy of "The Caine Mutiny" (Humphrey Bogarts last hit, in my opinion) and from the start, the color had a washed out slightly faded look, but that damnedable narraration com-
-pletely destroyed what could have been a good digest, as the editing was pretty good, but the voice-over was intolerable.

Posted by Patrick Walsh (Member # 637) on January 03, 2008, 03:02 AM:

I always like the UNIVERSAL 8 digests of those 70s epics EARTHQUAKE, AIRPORT, AIRPORT 77 etc.
Pat

Posted by David Kilderry (Member # 549) on January 08, 2008, 12:22 AM:

I'd have to give Ken (Fox) the worst digest for The Sound Of Music; great editing, good sound, nice box too BUT, why did they use faded original elements to produce it?

I have NEVER seen a good copy with strong colour of this digest. I have owned several and all looked a washed out brown colour. I even hired a copy that was near new in 1979 and it looked the same.

I don't blame Ken, I blame Fox who could not or would not supply an unfaded original print or neg for the project.

I actually like the Columbia digests despite their tendancy to fade. Remember Ken (Fox) had voice-overs too like The Boston Strangler.

David

Posted by Graham Ritchie (Member # 559) on January 08, 2008, 04:21 AM:

In gereral the studios did produce some good stuff, but in saying that, some awful digests as well, and those new prints were expensive, I guess the thinking in those days was that you were lucky to have a slice of the cake "films that is" than none at all, when you look back the print quality of many of those prints wasen't that great, soft focus etc, with the exception of the "Disney" prints imported from the US which were always very good, sadly many of those are now fading.

Graham.

Posted by John Hourigan (Member # 111) on January 08, 2008, 10:19 PM:

Graham, you are exactly right -- back in those days, the enthusiasm over screening "portions" of a film at home overshadowed things like print quality or quality of editing. The majority of new digests I purchased in the 70s suffered from soft focus and poor sound quality (with the exception of the Disneys). It is even more so apparent when screening these films today.

Posted by Osi Osgood (Member # 424) on January 08, 2008, 10:36 PM:

I sometimes wonder if this was due to time constraints, (level of quality control)?

For instance, I have seen the digest of "Dillinger" (Warren Oates, mid 70's) and the print suffers from the standard somewhat marginal focus and over all color.

The optical sound super 8mm feature, however, is nearly Derann quality pin sharp, with excellent color.

Granted, those who edited the digest probably recieved certain grade material to master with, and then it was duped, (no doubt) once more to the master negative for the digest, from which other main master negatives were made, and then the happy little prints that you and I hold are made from these ...

So it's, what? at least two generations far from the negative that they cut for the digest ...

... and then we don't know the overall quality of the that original print that they cut. If that was sub-standard, then the final outcome would be less than sub standard ...

... which makes the digest versions that Derann produced even more impressive.

Posted by Brad Kimball (Member # 5) on November 03, 2008, 09:05 AM:

I wonder if we're looking at a "Planned Obsolecence" initiative here? Think about it....Studios are reticent about releasing full length versions and settle for excerpts, instead. Obviously so they aren't sued by tv stations for restricting their potential to earn sponsor-purchased air time during a movie's broadcast. Maybe the studios planned the fade and overall degredation of these prints all along so they could rest easy that bootleggers would have, if any, limited use of the prints.

Posted by David Michael Leugers (Member # 166) on November 05, 2008, 06:59 PM:

The black and white Columbia digests are top notch. Every one I have has excellent image density and sharpness. I don't mind the narration, it kinda makes sense out of the story line such as it is and it is used very sparingly. Color is a crap shoot and with the fading of print stock, today almost be assured your color digest will be severely faded or even red.

Posted by James N. Savage 3 (Member # 83) on November 05, 2008, 09:08 PM:

The major U.S. companies-

As far as editing and presentation goes (not image/sound quality), I would have to say Marketing Films digests are my least favorite. Don't get me wrong, I appreciate the releases that Marketing put out, but -

1. Marketing almost always used very plain, generic title cards, instead of using original credits.

2. The editing usually didn't flow that well. Clumsy edits, especially during music, were too noticable.

3. The endings of the digests were usually too abrupt, which made the whole digest seem less enjoyable.

Although other companies sometimes made similar mistakes with editing, it seemed more consistant with Marketing.

James.

Posted by Osi Osgood (Member # 424) on November 05, 2008, 10:11 PM:

I found the same problem with some of the Universal 8 cinevision prints, one in particular.

Force 10 from Navarone digest had a terrible ending to it.

That, and a terrible sense of what to include and what not to include. They spent a good 8 or 9 minutes of the digest on the loading of the train car with explosives and the capture and execution of the traitor, (Franco Nero). This digest could have been SOO much better.

Posted by John W. Black (Member # 1082) on November 05, 2008, 11:48 PM:

Worst lab work (usa) Columbia
Worst Packaging (usa) Marketing (always fell apart
Worst editing (usa) Marketing
Worst sound(usa) Thunderbird
Worst everything! The winner is;Walton

Posted by Osi Osgood (Member # 424) on November 06, 2008, 09:38 AM:

Wow, John!

You could do an awards show for Super 8!

(For best or worse!) [Razz]

Posted by Jim Schrader (Member # 9) on November 07, 2008, 04:23 PM:

Marketing seems to be the only one where the colors are still vibrant after years whereas the others have faded [Frown]

Posted by James N. Savage 3 (Member # 83) on November 07, 2008, 05:54 PM:

Not really.

I have some Ken & Columbia with good colors still. Also, some of my U-8 digests are still decent. Overall, my U-8's that have faded, are the reddest prints.

James.

Posted by Osi Osgood (Member # 424) on November 08, 2008, 09:49 AM:

It is somewhat hard to find some of the Universal 8 digests with good color. I have "1941" and this seller is very reputable and he kept his films is good cool storage, and it still has the slightest "Eastman" fade.

Some of the digests, such as "Battlestar Galactica" were on KODAK SP and so this one has held up much better. Not faded at all. I've heard that "The Blue's Brothers" was prominently printed on Eastman and it's a hard title to find unfaded. Same with "High Plains Drifter".

Unfaded preprint material may be a big problem as well. I have run into situations where the leader will be completely unfaded, but once the actual film starts, the image is suddenly faded.

On one print that I have the leader is a perfect jet black, and even has a color chart with the full perfect color spectrum, (even perfect oranges and turqoise), but once the film starts, the image is faded!

Posted by Bill Brandenstein (Member # 892) on November 08, 2008, 12:49 PM:

Seems to me the most incoherent digest I've seen is the 400' version of the 1951 musical Show Boat. Sure, "Old Man River" is in, but if you didn't know the plot, you'd have little idea of what the story line was about. Unlike a dance-filled great like "Singin' in the Rain," the musical numbers don't "stand alone" quite as well. Add to this fair-quality MGM printing and fading color, and it leaves something to be desired.

Posted by Jean-Christophe Deblock (Member # 792) on November 11, 2008, 10:30 AM:

Hi,

For all columbia (and Elvis super 8 digest), I re-record the sound in frensh ( because my native langage is frensh!!!). So, I don't hear the narrative voice anymore. And in fact, the film pass very well without this voice. Like any other condensed version.
Regards,
JC.

UBB.classic^TM 6.3.1.2