8mm Forum: rooster cogburn

This is topic rooster cogburn 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=007096

Posted by Luis Caramelo (Member # 2430) on May 12, 2012, 03:12 PM:

hi! fellas if there,s any one who has this digest from universal in 400ft can tell how is the edit
-rosster cogburn with john wayne 1975

many thanks:

luis caramelo

Posted by frank arnstein (Member # 330) on May 12, 2012, 09:56 PM:

I have a copy of this 400' digest Luis.
what do you need to know?
I will watch it again to check it out.

dogtor [Confused]

P.S. Where is Funchal?

[ May 13, 2012, 04:45 AM: Message edited by: frank arnstein ]

Posted by Luis Caramelo (Member # 2430) on May 13, 2012, 06:13 AM:

hi! frank ,nice to meet you,well in first place i would like to know if the cut-down of this digest it,s nice to watch and if the editof the chosen scenes are good...
about your question where,s "funchal" it,s in MADEIRA ISLAND,i hope you will come to visit it some day

regards:
luis caramelo

Posted by Hugh Thompson Scott (Member # 2922) on May 13, 2012, 06:59 AM:

Hello Luis,if you are thinking of purchasing a print,have no fears.
The version I have is the more common version available and not
the Cineavision print.The film is printed full frame and has the
familiar "pinky" Universal bias but is still okay,it has all the key
scenes and is very well edited,excellent in fact,as it still manages
to capture some of the interplay between two screen greats John
Wayne and Katherine Hepburn.Very highly recommended and a
great 17 minutes.The sound is top notch.

Posted by Douglas Meltzer (Member # 28) on May 13, 2012, 09:54 AM:

Luis,

I agree with Hugh. I have the Cineavision print and this is a very entertaining digest.

Doug

Posted by Jonathan Trevithick (Member # 3066) on May 14, 2012, 02:17 AM:

I have it too. I've never seen the full feature and this digest tells its own story quite well. It's a shame mine is fading.

Posted by Luis Caramelo (Member # 2430) on May 14, 2012, 04:03 AM:

thanks,friends for those informations,it helps a lot,thanks to douglas for the picture of the box art work,maybe i get lucky to get a scope version of this digest...
super 8 it,s a wonderfull world

regards:~
luis caramelo

Posted by Osi Osgood (Member # 424) on May 14, 2012, 01:15 PM:

I agree as well. I have the CIneavision version of this digest and the colors are still spot on! No fade whatsoever. At least with this print, I have heard that the Cineavision version has held up better (color wise) than the flat version, which has tended to be faded ...

... and it is a very good edit indeed. It well encapsulates the story line ...

... and lastly, they included the short scene with Strother Martin's character, and I always loved that character actor!

Posted by Pasquale DAlessio (Member # 2052) on May 14, 2012, 01:28 PM:

Strother Martin "Now what we have here is a failure to communicate".

Where's that line from Osi?

Posted by Hugh Thompson Scott (Member # 2922) on May 14, 2012, 02:07 PM:

Ya gotta hand it to Luke,he's so cool.

Posted by Hugh Thompson Scott (Member # 2922) on May 14, 2012, 05:41 PM:

Well Doug and Osi,you've got a great film in Cineavision.The
scenery in John Wayne's later films I always thought were worth the price of admission alone.It's just a shame that this film wasn't given the 2x400' treatment,as there was some great dialogue.
Still at least we still have "True Grit",which I don't think needed
remade,how can anyone hope to eclipse Wayne in his greatest
role.No doubt the decision makers in Hollywood are the thirty somethings who couldn't find their arse in the dark with both hands.

Posted by Brad Kimball (Member # 5) on May 14, 2012, 06:29 PM:

They did remake "True Grit" with Matt Damon and Jeff Bridges playing John Wayne's role. It didn't measure up at all for me probably because I'm so accustomed to the original.

Posted by Pasquale DAlessio (Member # 2052) on May 14, 2012, 06:37 PM:

The original was much better. Even though Glen Campbell sucked as an actor. Kim Darby was awesome. I have both 400' digests of Grit and Rooster and they are both great.

Posted by Brad Kimball (Member # 5) on May 14, 2012, 10:36 PM:

Wouldn't one need a regular anamorphic lens? I thought "proportianally reduced scope" meant it's full aspect ratio, but in a smaller gauge. I don't think I understand what a Cineavision print really is. I thought a squeeze lens is used to pan-and-scan a scope movie.

Posted by Osi Osgood (Member # 424) on May 15, 2012, 01:19 PM:

Brad ...

"Cineavision" was just the name used to distinguish this from scope. However, Cineavision is actaul anamorphic scope in truth.

What was done with Cineavision prints, (for instance, my "Empire" print, nice plug, eh?! [Smile]

) is that they, instead of just printing the scope image so that it completely filled the super 8 frame, they brought the original scope image "back" a little, placing black bars on the left and right hand side, so that the actual printed image on the super 8 frame, that you see with the naked eye (unsqueezed), is a perfect, or near perfect box, as the original 35MM frame shows.

To illustrate further, take a piece of 35MM film, say, from a scope movie trailer, hold that up to the light, now, place next to it a Cineavision print on super 8, and a regular scope print on super 8.

You will find that the Cineavision print directly cooresponds with the "square" image on the 35MM. However, the regular super 8 scope image is more rectangular and more likened to your old fashioned traditional TV "aspect ratio", which is not a perfect square.

Therefore, when you watch a Cineavision print on super 8, you are not losing any of the original image information when projecting while your standard super 8 scope print will cut off image information from both the top and bottom of the frame.

further "therefore" ... you truly are not being shown an anamorphic scope image, (besides the fact that you are squeezing it down anamorphically). You are seeing an image that has information missing from the top and bottom.

... and, depending on how much the film labs moved in on the original scope image, you may be missing a lot more image info than you can imagine.

I once compared the "Cineavision" BEN HUR 400ft digest with the scope feature that I have, shot for shot and I was quite struck how much the Derann (or Kempski?) printing came in on the image.

Some shots that were originally "Medium full shots", were now literally close-ups, which does detract from the overall impact that the film-maker intended.

OK, now, I'm sure that many, (Including myself), are going to cry over spilt milk over the fact that our precious scope features are not quite the original aspect ratio.

However, If I had the preference, being a lover of film and the widescreen presentation especially, I would much more prefer the Cineavision presentation of a super 8 print, over the average scope super 8, given the choice. The CIneavision image was certainly the "Cadillac" of the scope super 8's, while the standard scope super 8 is passable, but not accurate to the original image intentions.

I hope that explains it Brad. There is certainly a difference.

Posted by Mal Brake (Member # 14) on May 15, 2012, 05:42 PM:

Cineavision gives an aspect ratio of 2.35:1 while full frame super8 gives a scope ratio of 2.66:1

[ May 16, 2012, 12:52 PM: Message edited by: Mal Brake ]

Posted by Brad Kimball (Member # 5) on May 15, 2012, 10:13 PM:

Gee Whiz, Osi! WOW! What a great explanation! Thank you ever so much! So , Cineavision is much like what Widescreen VHS/DVD look like hence the black bars at the top and bottom. Isn't that what adaped scope is? So what does a squeeze lens do? I have one scope print and I do not have an anamorphic lens so, without the lens, everything is squeezed so the image looks like you're viewing it through a slit in a popsicle (lolly) stick. My print of the '79 "Dracula" is in adapted scope where the image is presented in its true aspect ratio with black bars on the top and bottom and you don't need a special lens to view it. What would help would be a screen cap of "Cogburn" compared to a cap from a true scope print that requires a scope lens.

Posted by Mal Brake (Member # 14) on May 16, 2012, 12:58 PM:

Brad,
Cineavision prints do not have black bars at the top and bottom of the frame.They are on the left and right sides of the 8mm frame to give the correct aspect ratio without losing picture information from the top and bottom of the frame. (cropping).
Without a scope lens the image will appear squeezed the same as the ordinary 8mm scope but with those side bars visible too.

Posted by Osi Osgood (Member # 424) on May 16, 2012, 01:05 PM:

No, Cineavision are not letterboxed prints, (with Black bars at the top and bottom) ... they have black bard on the left and right hand sides of the frame to maintain that perfect, original scope image. However, you do need an anamorphic scope lense, (Kowa, ect.) in order to view them, just like you would need a scope lense to watch any other scope print on super 8/16Mm ect.

Another nice faotr to the Cineavision prints is that I have never, to this day, ever seen a hard to focus Cineavision print. Actually that is not too hard to believe though as, since these went through a deliberate process to maintain that original scope image, (black bars on the left and right) they probably used either 35MM master material or an excellent 16MM negative from a 35MM print. All of these are pin sharp!

The only drawback to these Cineavision prints is that, except in a rare few occasions, they were printed before the era of LPP, and so, while they did use some very good eastman (as all my cineavision prints are spot on in color), they will eventually fade if not stored properly.

That print of Empire I have, (another sneaky ad! HAH!) is a Kodak SP print, and while the color is gorgoeus, if not stored properly, it will fade in years to come. I keep it refridgerated, but even with doing that, sometime in the distant future, it will fade.

Another neat thing with the Cineavision films, is that many titles, especially cartoons, are only found in thier original format with Cineavision. While the Tom and Jerry scope cartoons have been released these days on DVD, (fianlly, and earlier on laserdisc), they were first available on super 8 many years beforehand,a nd some, such as the CIneavision print of "One Droopy Knight" is only available in it's original aspect ratio of scope, as a Cineavision title! I only recieved that one a short while back after a many year search!

I LUV this subject!

UBB.classic^TM 6.3.1.2