›

James Bond on Blu-ray/4K

1…8283858788…108

Comments

  • MakeshiftPythonMakeshiftPython “Baja?!”
    Posts: 8,181
    Before HDTVs, televisions used to have a thing called “overscan” which meant you were not going to get the full image displayed on your set, so you’d essentially lose information on all sides of the screen. It was a very common limitation of CRT TV sets. One of the ways of trying to combat that was to do picture boxing, so that you’d be able to see the full image of the signal. Picture boxing wasn’t very common, but few have done it and for Bond it was a great way of ensuring you’d see the full image of the titles. There used to be cases where certain names would trail off the screen so you’d see Peter Lamont’s name butchered to “Peter Lamo” if his credit was on the far side. Some LaserDiscs did that as well such as GF.

    But ever since the advent of HTDVs displaying the full image on screens, picture boxing is really no longer necessary. You were never meant to see those black borders on the sides of old TVs anyway, but now with HDTVs it’s hard not to see those black borders.
  • TorgeirtrapTorgeirtrap
    Posts: 17,753
    MakeshiftPython wrote: »
    Before HDTVs, televisions used to have a thing called “overscan” which meant you were not going to get the full image displayed on your set, so you’d essentially lose information on all sides of the screen. It was a very common limitation of CRT TV sets. One of the ways of trying to combat that was to do picture boxing, so that you’d be able to see the full image of the signal. Picture boxing wasn’t very common, but few have done it and for Bond it was a great way of ensuring you’d see the full image of the titles. There used to be cases where certain names would trail off the screen so you’d see Peter Lamont’s name butchered to “Peter Lamo” if his credit was on the far side. Some LaserDiscs did that as well such as GF.

    But ever since the advent of HTDVs displaying the full image on screens, picture boxing is really no longer necessary. You were never meant to see those black borders on the sides of old TVs anyway, but now with HDTVs it’s hard not to see those black borders.

    Ah, yes - forgot about the limitation of CRT TV sets. But why does the Blu-ray have it (and the UE DVD for that matter)? Surely the need for picture boxing was gone by the time the Blu-ray collection was released?
  • MakeshiftPythonMakeshiftPython “Baja?!”
    Posts: 8,181
    Some DVDs were doing that at the time because TVs with overscan were still very common. Criterion practiced this on some of their films as late as 2008 before they dropped it due to complaints. http://www.dvdbeaver.com/film/DVDReviews8/thirdman.htm

    As for why it was kept on blu-ray, I dunno. For all the fixes they made that’s just something they glaringly overlooked until 4K.
  • TorgeirtrapTorgeirtrap
    Posts: 17,753
    MakeshiftPython wrote: »
    Some DVDs were doing that at the time because TVs with overscan were still very common. Criterion practiced this on some of their films as late as 2008 before they dropped it due to complaints. http://www.dvdbeaver.com/film/DVDReviews8/thirdman.htm

    As for why it was kept on blu-ray, I dunno. For all the fixes they made that’s just something they glaringly overlooked until 4K.

    Wow, as late as 2008? Would have thought that the various distributers would be quick to drop the picture boxing as soon as the HDTVs became the standard.

    Picture boxing seems like a pretty big thing to overlook for Blu-ray, as it's so noticeable. Did they overlook the picture boxing on any of the other Blu-ray releases as well?
  • MakeshiftPythonMakeshiftPython “Baja?!”
    Posts: 8,181
    The weird thing about Bond was that it was only done for certain films. All the John Glen films were untouched except TLD. The SE TND DVD has it, but the UE DVD/Blu-ray doesn’t.
  • TorgeirtrapTorgeirtrap
    Posts: 17,753
    MakeshiftPython wrote: »
    The weird thing about Bond was that it was only done for certain films. All the John Glen films were untouched except TLD. The SE TND DVD has it, but the UE DVD/Blu-ray doesn’t.

    That's very strange! Wonder why they weren't consistent with it.
  • MakeshiftPythonMakeshiftPython “Baja?!”
    edited November 2019 Posts: 8,181
    I’ll have to check, but I’m sure at the very end of the Lowry remasters after the end credits there are different people credited for each film. So those that remastered FYEO mightn’t be the same folks that did OHMSS.
  • TorgeirtrapTorgeirtrap
    Posts: 17,753
    MakeshiftPython wrote: »
    I’ll have to check, but I’m sure at the very end of the Lowry remasters after the end credits there are different people credited for each film. So those that remastered FYEO mightn’t be the same folks that did OHMSS.

    I see, that might explain it. Anyway, it's nice to see that for OHMSS at least, the 4K release sorted out the picture boxing!
  • MakeshiftPythonMakeshiftPython “Baja?!”
    edited November 2019 Posts: 8,181
    Here we go with TWINE. Like TND the improvements seem to be incremental, aside from the Lowry remaster boxing the title sequence. One image that concerned me was the color banding in the Turkish background behind Bond and Christmas. I dunno if this is just a persistent video error or a flaw inherent in the digital compositing of the film's production. It only looks worse on the blu-ray.




    2000 MGM Special Edition DVD
    TSTWINE2.png



    2009 Fox Blu-ray
    TSTWINE4.jpg



    2017 iTunes 4K
    TSTWINE4K.png





    2000 MGM Special Edition DVD
    01TWINE2.png



    2009 Fox Blu-ray
    01TWINE4.jpg



    2017 iTunes 4K
    01TWINE4K.png






    2000 MGM Special Edition DVD
    02TWINE.png



    2009 Fox Blu-ray
    02TWINE4.jpg



    2017 iTunes 4K
    02TWINE4K.png





    2000 MGM Special Edition DVD
    03TWINE2.png



    2009 Fox Blu-ray
    03TWINE4.jpg



    2017 iTunes 4K
    03TWINE4K.png





    2000 MGM Special Edition DVD
    04TWINE2.png



    2009 Fox Blu-ray
    04TWINE4.jpg



    2017 iTunes 4K
    04TWINE4K.png





    2000 MGM Special Edition DVD
    05TWINE2.png



    2009 Fox Blu-ray
    05TWINE4.jpg



    2017 iTunes 4K
    05TWINE4K.png





    2000 MGM Special Edition DVD
    06TWINE2.png



    2009 Fox Blu-ray
    06TWINE4.jpg



    2017 iTunes 4K
    06TWINE4K.png





    2000 MGM Special Edition DVD
    07TWINE2.png



    2009 Fox Blu-ray
    07TWINE4.jpg



    2017 iTunes 4K
    07TWINE4K.png





    2000 MGM Special Edition DVD
    08TWINE2.png



    2009 Fox Blu-ray
    08TWINE4.jpg



    2017 iTunes 4K
    08TWINE4K.png





    2000 MGM Special Edition DVD
    09TWINE2.png



    2009 Fox Blu-ray
    09TWINE4.jpg



    2017 iTunes 4K
    09TWINE4K.png





    2000 MGM Special Edition DVD
    10TWINE2.png



    2009 Fox Blu-ray
    10TWINE4.jpg



    2017 iTunes 4K
    10TWINE4K.png
  • Creasy47Creasy47 In Cuba with Natalya.Moderator
    Posts: 40,963
    Damn, I love the coloring in the 4K screenshots, everything seems to really pop and sparkle and the overall image is so much brighter.
  • ToTheRightToTheRight
    edited November 2019 Posts: 16,153

    The differences are fairly subtle to me. In fact, I'd go with any of these versions and be satisfied. I think the tint on the Blu-ray, especially in that shot of M probably looks the closest to the theatrical version.

    I remember the film looking slightly greenish in the cinema, especially during the Istanbul sequences and in the banker office. Also, the contrast on this film wasn't very deep compared to other Bonds.

    The cinematography wasn't particularly striking and the colors didn't pop. Not exactly washed out, but certainly not vivid like the Connery films.
  • MakeshiftPythonMakeshiftPython “Baja?!”
    Posts: 8,181
    Photography-wise, TND and TWINE are probably my least favorites of the Bond series. One trend I didn't like from the 80s and 90s was adding smoke onto the sets, which was used a lot in TND and in some scenes in TWINE. I guess DPs did this because they felt it gave the scenes atmosphere.
  • ToTheRightToTheRight
    Posts: 16,153
    MakeshiftPython wrote: »
    Photography-wise, TND and TWINE are probably my least favorites of the Bond series. One trend I didn't like from the 80s and 90s was adding smoke onto the sets, which was used a lot in TND and in some scenes in TWINE. I guess DPs did this because they felt it gave the scenes atmosphere.

    That reminds me of a comment Robert Mitchum made when discussing his film noir era at RKO: "The big studios had all the lights. We lit ours with cigarettes."

    The cinematography in both TND and TWINE lacked punch as Carver might say.
  • boldfingerboldfinger
    edited November 2019 Posts: 5,767
    @ToTheRight, could you please not quote all the screenshots? It doesn´t have any benefit in this thread, and what´s really annoying is that if too many fotos are on one page, the page takes ages to load, at least on my computer. I very much appreciate your consideration :-).

    I pretty much share your opinion that I would not be bothered with any of the three versions. The SE looks quite dark here in comparison, but I own the SE and always thoroughly enjoyed the colours and brightness. I wouldn´t throw the 4K version out of the window, but I´m also not in awe, to me it looks a tiny bit artificial in comparison with the other two, like it did already in some instances before.
  • ToTheRightToTheRight
    edited November 2019 Posts: 16,153
    boldfinger wrote: »
    @ToTheRight, could you please not quote all the screenshots? It doesn´t have any benefit in this thread, and what´s really annoying is that if too many fotos are on one page, the page takes ages to load, at least on my computer. I very much appreciate your consideration :-).

    I pretty much share your opinion that I would be bothered with any of the three versions. The SE looks quite dark here in comparison, but I own the SE and always thoroughly enjoyed the colours and brightness. I wouldn´t throw the 4K version out of the window, but I´m also not in awe, to me it looks a tiny bit artificial in comparison with the other two, like it did already in some instances before.

    No problem. I went back and trimmed some of those quotes out. Save some space. My apologies for the inconvenience.
  • JET007JET007
    Posts: 632
    Has anyone else noticed that the Bond movies in iTunes are in 4k...EXCEPT the Craig ones since the release of the box set? Those are only showing up in HD for me now.
  • MakeshiftPythonMakeshiftPython “Baja?!”
    Posts: 8,181
    I just looked at mine. It’s HD instead of 4K. What the hell???
  • boldfingerboldfinger
    Posts: 5,767
    ToTheRight wrote: »
    boldfinger wrote: »
    @ToTheRight, could you please not quote all the screenshots? It doesn´t have any benefit in this thread, and what´s really annoying is that if too many fotos are on one page, the page takes ages to load, at least on my computer. I very much appreciate your consideration :-).

    I pretty much share your opinion that I would be bothered with any of the three versions. The SE looks quite dark here in comparison, but I own the SE and always thoroughly enjoyed the colours and brightness. I wouldn´t throw the 4K version out of the window, but I´m also not in awe, to me it looks a tiny bit artificial in comparison with the other two, like it did already in some instances before.

    No problem. I went back and trimmed some of those quotes out. Save some space. My apologies for the inconvenience.
    Thanks bro :-)!

    I had a typo in my post, I meant I´m not bothered by any of the three versions. Forgot the "not" ;-).

  • ToTheRightToTheRight
    Posts: 16,153
    boldfinger wrote: »
    ToTheRight wrote: »
    boldfinger wrote: »
    @ToTheRight, could you please not quote all the screenshots? It doesn´t have any benefit in this thread, and what´s really annoying is that if too many fotos are on one page, the page takes ages to load, at least on my computer. I very much appreciate your consideration :-).

    I pretty much share your opinion that I would be bothered with any of the three versions. The SE looks quite dark here in comparison, but I own the SE and always thoroughly enjoyed the colours and brightness. I wouldn´t throw the 4K version out of the window, but I´m also not in awe, to me it looks a tiny bit artificial in comparison with the other two, like it did already in some instances before.

    No problem. I went back and trimmed some of those quotes out. Save some space. My apologies for the inconvenience.
    Thanks bro :-)!

    I had a typo in my post, I meant I´m not bothered by any of the three versions. Forgot the "not" ;-).

    Yes. Unlike some of the Connery/Moore films, the TWINE differences in transfers are subtle. I imagine DAD to be more or less the same.
  • MakeshiftPythonMakeshiftPython “Baja?!”
    Posts: 8,181
    Couldn't be more right... @ToTheRight Though unlike the more muted tones of TND/TWINE, DAD at least looks more colorful. Not too surprising, as the photographer was David Tattersall, coming right off of the Star Wars prequels which were known to be highly saturated. Thankfully this was shot on film rather than the digital cameras that George Lucas used. DAD would have looked even more plastic than it actually does now.

    As odd as it seems, Lowry "remastered" the film for the Ultimate Edition DVD and Blu-ray sets even though the first DVD was only 3 year old at the time and is arguably one of the best DVDs as far as picture quality goes for that format. The only difference I can notice in the blu-ray is that there was a tiny bit more information on the top and bottom but it's extremely minuscule. And I guess it wouldn't be blu-ray without having the skin tones appear with a magenta push. Also Lowry restored the original burned in subtitles for establishing shot and foreign dialogue. As for the 4K, there's a more noticeable difference in that the images appear to be brighter and there's extra information on the bottom and right sides, and the skin tones look much more natural.

    This was the last Bond film to be mastered on film rather than digital like future Bonds. My understanding is that certain scenes such as those set in North Korea were digitally graded, but that's about it.


    Anyway, here's DAD.




    2003 MGM Special Edition DVD
    TSDAD2.png


    2008 Fox Blu-ray
    TSDAD4.jpg


    2017 iTunes 4K
    TSDAD4K.png





    2003 MGM Special Edition DVD
    01DAD2.png


    2008 Fox Blu-ray
    01DAD4.jpg


    2017 iTunes 4K
    01DAD4K.png





    2003 MGM Special Edition DVD
    02DAD2.png


    2008 Fox Blu-ray
    02DAD4.jpg


    2017 iTunes 4K
    02DAD4K.png





    2003 MGM Special Edition DVD
    03DAD2.png


    2008 Fox Blu-ray
    03DAD4.jpg


    2017 iTunes 4K
    03DAD4K.png





    2003 MGM Special Edition DVD
    04DAD2.png


    2008 Fox Blu-ray
    04DAD4.jpg


    2017 iTunes 4K
    04DAD4K.png





    2003 MGM Special Edition DVD
    05DAD2.png


    2008 Fox Blu-ray
    05DAD4.jpg


    2017 iTunes 4K
    05DAD4K.png





    2003 MGM Special Edition DVD
    06DAD2.png


    2008 Fox Blu-ray
    06DAD4.jpg


    2017 iTunes 4K
    06DAD4K.png





    2003 MGM Special Edition DVD
    07DAD2.png


    2008 Fox Blu-ray
    07DAD4.jpg


    2017 iTunes 4K
    07DAD4K.png





    2003 MGM Special Edition DVD
    08DAD2.png


    2008 Fox Blu-ray
    08DAD4.jpg


    2017 iTunes 4K
    08DAD4K.png





    2003 MGM Special Edition DVD
    09DAD2.png


    2008 Fox Blu-ray
    09DAD4.jpg


    2017 iTunes 4K
    09DAD4K.png





    2003 MGM Special Edition DVD
    10DAD2.png


    2008 Fox Blu-ray
    10DAD4.jpg


    2017 iTunes 4K
    10DAD4K.png





    So that's that. I tried screencap samples of CR last month. The DVD and blu-ray were from the same exact transfer, so the only difference is inherent to the formats so it's not even worth comparing. I even looked between blu-ray and iTunes 4K and from what I could tell it's exactly the same, if maybe a tad brighter and that's not even in HDR. So because of that, I'm not going to be doing anymore comparisons. I don't even have the equipment to do screencaps of the actual 4K/HDR discs anyway, and we've pretty much reached an era in digital filmmaking where what you got in theaters will more likely look like what you get on home video. I shouldn't expect future Bond films to look dramatically different on home video in the same way that the Connery and Moore films did. The Brosnan era wasn't all that dramatic from format to format, so it should be even less so for Craig's run.
  • ToTheRightToTheRight
    Posts: 16,153
    Wonderful work, @MakeshiftPython.
    Your efforts on this thread are very much appreciated.
    Oddly I don't expect any of the Craig films to be worth an upgrade when they're not exactly old.
    I find the '62-'89 the most fascinating in terms of comparing the different transfers.
    A topic I've been interested in ever since the films were re-issued for VHS in '88.
  • JET007JET007
    Posts: 632
    On iTunes I’ve found some of the Craigs in HD AND 4K now. My QoS went to 4K, but Spectre is HD. @-)
  • MakeshiftPythonMakeshiftPython “Baja?!”
    Posts: 8,181
    Someone brought up on the blu-ray forum that the reason they likely reverted to HD for a short time was because they would be upgraded with Dolby Vision, and so far the first three Craig films have been. That means SPECTRE is next to get the upgrade.
  • JET007JET007
    edited November 2019 Posts: 632
    MakeshiftPython wrote: »
    Someone brought up on the blu-ray forum that the reason they likely reverted to HD for a short time was because they would be upgraded with Dolby Vision, and so far the first three Craig films have been. That means SPECTRE is next to get the upgrade.

    Awesome! Thanks! Just checked and whilst Spectre is still HD, CR and QoS are showing to be 4K with HDR! :D
  • Benjamin_Weekly69Benjamin_Weekly69 London
    edited December 2019 Posts: 727
    So I just watched Spectre on 4K, and wow, the HDR does so much service to the colour palette. The overwhelming piss filter that everyone hates is much muted. It's still there obviously, but it's much more.....mature. There are greater gradients of colour within the yellow palette which makes it more pleasing to the eye compared to the SDR image. Plus the other colours that make up the image simply pop more compared to the non-HDR image. Counterbalancing the filter. It looks closer to what I remember seeing in the theatre.

    It's the HDR conversion rather than the uptick in resolution that makes Spectre look so good.
  • MakeshiftPythonMakeshiftPython “Baja?!”
    Posts: 8,181
    Did people refer to The Godfather’s color palette as “piss yellow” back in the day?
  • MakeshiftPythonMakeshiftPython “Baja?!”
    Posts: 8,181
    Birdleson wrote: »
    MakeshiftPython wrote: »
    Did people refer to The Godfather’s color palette as “piss yellow” back in the day?


    No, but there was some grumbling that Willis went too far with the darks and shadows in the sequel. But I think most realized that all of it fit Coppola's tone and vision.

    That’s because they’re laaaaaaame.
  • ShardlakeShardlake Leeds, West Yorkshire, England
    Posts: 4,043
    MakeshiftPython wrote: »
    Birdleson wrote: »
    MakeshiftPython wrote: »
    Did people refer to The Godfather’s color palette as “piss yellow” back in the day?


    No, but there was some grumbling that Willis went too far with the darks and shadows in the sequel. But I think most realized that all of it fit Coppola's tone and vision.

    That’s because they’re laaaaaaame.

    I remember a lot of the bitching about the GF Blu ray restorations being idiots that were disappointed that it didn't look like it was made that year.

    I was under the impression with Blu ray and 4K (although not always achieved) is to return the film to as close to the original cinema presentation as possible.

    The brief but informative doc Emulsional Rescue goes into this.

    A good number of reactions to the magnificent restorations of GF 1 & 2 were people who were clearly not understanding what the purpose of the process was trying to achieve.

    The best catalogue 4K releases are doing this even more so or should be.

    I will be interested to see how much different the 4K Godfather versions differ to the excellent Blu ray versions.
  • MakeshiftPythonMakeshiftPython “Baja?!”
    Posts: 8,181
    I would be surprised if the blu-ray was not already based off a 4K transfer.

    Can't believe it's been over a decade now since that blu-ray was released. Still looks great.
  • ShardlakeShardlake Leeds, West Yorkshire, England
    Posts: 4,043
    MakeshiftPython wrote: »
    I would be surprised if the blu-ray was not already based off a 4K transfer.

    Can't believe it's been over a decade now since that blu-ray was released. Still looks great.

    I think it is if I remember rightly.
Sign In or Register to comment.