F13 hits blu-ray - Feb 3, 2009

Discussion in 'High Definition' started by rxfiend, Nov 3, 2008.

  1. Angelman

    Angelman OCD Blu Ray Collector

    Joined:
    Oct 27, 2004
    Messages:
    3,552
    Likes Received:
    1,078
    Trophy Points:
    113
    I think I disagree. We are consumers, they make product. They want to sell us $30 Blu-Rays in a bad economy. I think they can go the extra mile to get it right. If you got a car that had all these malfunctions you would call it a lemon.
     
  2. Kolpitz

    Kolpitz Purely and Simply Evil

    Joined:
    Oct 29, 2004
    Messages:
    1,503
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Boxborough, MA
    Agree or disagree, I just sent them an e-mail anyway. We'll see if I'm proven wrong.
     
  3. rhett

    rhett Administrator

    Joined:
    Jul 30, 2000
    Messages:
    9,395
    Likes Received:
    45
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Canada
    You should know what I'm going to say here, but I'll say it anyway. There's a big difference between a 3.8% discrepancy on the top and bottom of the frame between 1.78 and 1.85 and a 10.6% zoom in on all sides of the frame with conscious choices of new bits of framing and composition. And you're not entirely correct in stating that all 1.78 transfers are crops of 1.85. Prints are most often made in 4-perf, 35mm format with a 1.37:1 aspect ratio of exposed negative. It's the job of the projectionist, or the telecine operator when it comes to video transfer, to place in a plate that mattes off the image to the desired (usually 1.85) ratio. So with the extra negative space on the top and bottom, that 3.8%, more often than not, is actually gained footage that would normally be matted with black bars. Again, with this new FRIDAY THE 13TH transfer, we're losing 10.6%, and someone has clearly made arbitrary changes to the composition.

    Full frame vs. widescreen loss of top and bottom picture is a definite grey area. Look at all the problems with BLACK CHRISTMAS over the years. There is nothing grey about Paramount needlessly cropping this footage and destroying the compositions.


    I've forwarded Paramount this thread along with my review, so either way, please make your opinions known for them to see.
     
  4. Kolpitz

    Kolpitz Purely and Simply Evil

    Joined:
    Oct 29, 2004
    Messages:
    1,503
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Boxborough, MA
    I included a link to your review in my e-mail.
     
  5. Angelman

    Angelman OCD Blu Ray Collector

    Joined:
    Oct 27, 2004
    Messages:
    3,552
    Likes Received:
    1,078
    Trophy Points:
    113
    For the record, your point was not lost on me either. We ARE whiny nerds.
     
  6. gunner

    gunner Cropsy Maniac

    Joined:
    Dec 13, 2000
    Messages:
    911
    Likes Received:
    14
    Trophy Points:
    18
    Location:
    Bar Harbor, Maine
    I agree with both sides. As to why Paramount would zoom in? Who knows! One thing I did notice on Paramount's original dvd release was a very noticeable discoloration across the top edge of the frame. Could it be the elements they used for this latest transfer suffered from this discoloration on multiple edges of the frame? Maybe they had to zoom in? I don't know.
    Despite me defending the new blu-ray transfer (it still kicks ass), I totally see where Rhett coming from on destruction of compositions. Though the grading should be "Incomplete?" not D...D sounds harsh. Like from a mean professor you want to injure.
    Another tidbit about the newly seen details in the film. The exaggerated hand paddling Alice does in the canoe after the battle finale. I had never seen this before. It's eerie!!
     
    Last edited: Feb 4, 2009
  7. Kolpitz

    Kolpitz Purely and Simply Evil

    Joined:
    Oct 29, 2004
    Messages:
    1,503
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Boxborough, MA
    I also sent an e-mail to Bill Hunt over at The Digital Bits. He always seems to be able to get to the bottom of these issues. And, that's the site where I always find out about replacement plans, if Paramount decides to do so.
     
  8. Sam Loomis

    Sam Loomis New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 19, 2000
    Messages:
    25
    Likes Received:
    2
    Trophy Points:
    3
    Location:
    Dartmouth, Nova Scotia
    It's possible that for the 1999 transfer, they used more of the negative than was intended.

    If you look at the caps from the recent transfer, it seems that the shots are more tightly framed with the subjects being more prominent.

    I think the only shot that looks noticably inferior is the shot of Alice in the hospital where you can't see the sherif's hand on her shoulder.
     
  9. gore

    gore Guest

    Heads up!

    When I picked up the f13 documentary and was looking at the blueray of part1 I noticed two of the three copies had really blurry cover art on the back. Holding it next to the good copy it was very noticable. Same thing at best buy (they didnt have the doc.) . So if you are buying this in the store ( i didnt) and this sort of thing would bug you ( it would me ), keep an eye out ;)
     
  10. rhett

    rhett Administrator

    Joined:
    Jul 30, 2000
    Messages:
    9,395
    Likes Received:
    45
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Canada
    There are plenty more examples throughout the film of how the zooming cuts out important information. It's clear, by the way that the zooming moves from shot to shot (it cuts off more of the top in the Annie/Lakeside shots, yet cuts out more of the bottom on the Steve Christie/Bed shots). Even if more of the usable print was shown on the 1999 DVD, there is no way it would be consciously cropped like that for exhibition. A 1.85 matte would be thrown on, and that's how it would be.
     
  11. Matt89

    Matt89 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 13, 2004
    Messages:
    5,639
    Likes Received:
    914
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Location:
    Toronto
    No, actually, movies don't get CROPPED from 1.85:1 to 1.78:1, they're more OPENED UP. That was just a rare case with My Bloody Valentine. The last time I saw a blu-ray with actual 1.85:1? Pineapple Express, Burn After Reading, Carrie...

    And Friday the 13th, Part 2 proves that studios are OPENING up films from 1.85:1 to 1.78:1. The new disc is 1.78 and still has more image. I kindof like it, it fits the screen better. I dunno, aspect ratios are so fiddly. 1.78:1 is so close to 1.85:1 that you hardly notice the difference. Either you get tiny thin black lines on your TV or you get the movie opened up a bit and it completely fills the 16x9 frame. They're opened up, not zoomed.

    ~Matt
     
  12. Matt89

    Matt89 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 13, 2004
    Messages:
    5,639
    Likes Received:
    914
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Location:
    Toronto
    Yeah it's true, someone definitely fucked it up then. Matting the movie just removes picture information from the top and bottom of the frame ONLY, stuff you were never meant to see anyway, not picture info from the sides. The transfer was definitely botched. I'll check my blu-ray and see how pleased I am with it. I'll probably end up keeping it, because if Paramount does a recall, chances are I'll get a free replacement disc.

    ~Matt
     
  13. Kolpitz

    Kolpitz Purely and Simply Evil

    Joined:
    Oct 29, 2004
    Messages:
    1,503
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Boxborough, MA
    I've clearly been put in my place, from a technical standpoint. However, I still stick by my feelings about this one not being the huge deal that some are making it out to be. I just watched both Pineapple Express and Burn After Reading within the last week and I don't recall seeing even a smidgen of a black bar at the top and bottom. I'll have to go back and check.
     
  14. Matt89

    Matt89 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 13, 2004
    Messages:
    5,639
    Likes Received:
    914
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Location:
    Toronto
    Well you better go check it again, because Pineapple Express and Burn After Reading are in TRUE 1.85:1. :)

    ~Matt
     
  15. Katatonia

    Katatonia Hellbound Heart

    Joined:
    Jun 12, 2003
    Messages:
    20,534
    Likes Received:
    1,290
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Location:
    Missouri
    Well, I pre-ordered the Blu-ray last week and it arrived in the mail earlier today. I doubt I'll even bother returning it now, as it's just more hassle.

    Hopefully there'll be an official recall and disc replacement program. Then again, this is Paramount we're talking about here. :eek2:
     
  16. Matt89

    Matt89 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 13, 2004
    Messages:
    5,639
    Likes Received:
    914
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Location:
    Toronto
    Yeah I can't be bothered to return it either.

    That's what I'm hoping for. *fingers crossed*

    ~Matt
     
  17. grodd

    grodd New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 12, 2007
    Messages:
    62
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
  18. evileye

    evileye Member

    Joined:
    Dec 4, 1999
    Messages:
    406
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    16
    Location:
    Detroit, MI
    Recall? Paramount? You gotta be kidding!
    The title will sell well (especially the DVD since it's cheap) and the average consumer will not notice the cropping. While I'm dissappointed that there was not more care in the transfer, the clarity overall compensates until the eventual 40th anniversary edition.

    Now... let get moving on the rest of these films! If Part 2's DVD transfer is any indication, the BLURAY will look great.
     
  19. KillerCannabis

    KillerCannabis Slow, Deep & Hard

    Joined:
    Oct 12, 2000
    Messages:
    5,609
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    38
    Location:
    So Cal
    Huh? Pineapple Express is a 2.40:1 film. How are you watching it 1.85:1?
     
  20. Matt89

    Matt89 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 13, 2004
    Messages:
    5,639
    Likes Received:
    914
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Location:
    Toronto
    My bad. :D It was another Judd Apatow comedy, I meant The 40 Year-Old Virgin. (Watched them both last week, got confused as to which one was 1.85.)

    ~Matt
     

Share This Page