Page 1 of 1

Blu-Ray.com interviews Kino DVD producer Bret Wood

Posted: Sun Dec 20, 2009 6:13 pm
by silentfilm
http://www.blu-ray.com/news/?id=3938

Kino Producer Discusses The General and Silents on Blu-ray

Posted December 20, 2009 06:02 AM by Juan Calonge


Blu-ray review site Doblu has interviewed DVD and Blu-ray producer Bret Wood on the preparation of Buster Keaton's 'The General' for its Blu-ray edition, which was released November 10. In the interview, Wood discusses in depth the specific challenges transferring this movie and other classic films, as well as the digital tools used to that end.


Silent and older films for Blu-ray

Wood said this endeavor is proving to be “a daunting challenge,” because even the best surviving film elements “have considerably more grain and printed-in wear than one finds in a studio-preserved negative that is, say, twenty years old.”

Wood's aim when restoring a film is “to bring the film to a pleasurable viewing experience in which the film element's natural signs of age are not a distraction from the story. That is the fine line I try to tread.”

Kino's new policy is that films “should be released on Blu-ray without digital noise reduction, so that what the viewer gets is an accurate representation of what the 35mm film looks like, grain and all.” Wood hopes that a system will be developed that clarifies the image without reducing the sharpness or creating visual artifacts, “but so far we haven't seen it.”

In Wood's opinion, “the DVNR technology of the DVD era is not subtle enough for the 1080 requirements of the Blu-ray age. In fact, when I look back at some silent films that were released on DVD, heavily treated with digital noise reduction, I cringe. I now recognize the degree to which the film's natural grain and sharpness have been glossed over for the sake of a smooth image.” Wood is concerned that this might have spoiled the consumer, and that he or she will now will now expect every film to look this way “when the actual film never looked that way to begin with!”

Wood asks the question “whether or not Blu-ray users will be satisfied with an HD copy of a film that is not pristine, but looks like an 80-year-old film actually looks.” In his opinion, that question “is still to be answered.”

If a film is retouched frame-by-frame, it won't suffer from the same kind of motion artifacts that come from applying a filtering device. Wood informs that his method was used for the “elaborate restorations” of 'Battleship Potemkin' and 'Metropolis', both of which will be released on Blu-ray by Kino Lorber in 2010.

Wood states that, apart from age deterioration and film grain, the biggest issue with older films is “the scarcity of film elements to work from.” There were a lot of films that existed in fair condition but looked fine on DVD, but do not fare so well in HD. As a result, the pool from which to draw releases is much more shallow. “Kino only wants to release a film on Blu-ray if we are convinced that we have the best existing film element,” said Kino's curator.


The General

'The General' was remastered specifically for the Blu-ray release. Initially, Kino was going to reuse the transfer used for the DVD release but decided against hat because “a minimal aumont” of grain reduction had been applied to that transfer. “Upon close inspection of the Blu-ray test discs, we found that even that small amount of digital noise reduction had created visual artifacting, a slight blurring and ghosting of the image. We brought the film element back to the lab [Crawford Communications] and re-transferred it specifically for Blu-ray, without DRS or any artificial grain reduction.”

Wood clarifies that the element of 'The General' used from the transfer was actually not the highly fragile and flammable nitrate camera negative, but rather a 35mm fine grain master (FGM) that was struck from the original camera negative. “That this is the closest that a person could get to working from the camera neg,” said Wood.

Although the FGM was in excellent condition, it wasn't flawless. The most significant work done was “the digital removal of a lot of nitrate damage to the edges of the frame” (in the scene in which Johnny goes to Annabelle's house to woo her).

Tints were applied digitally since the camera neg (and the FGM derived from the camera neg) were monochrome. The question of tinting is something Kino “continually wrestles with.”

Regarding the choice of Carl Davis's score as the one that got an uncompressd audio track, Wood replied that Davis “is held in higher regard than any other composer for silent film.” And that his score for The General had never been released on DVD, “so when we prepared the DVD/Blu-ray releases of the film, we wanted to give it special attention.”

When told that there is some form of haloing or edge enhancement at work in 'The General', Wood candidly replies: “You nailed it. That's the problem with digital finishing. No matter how well you do it, it isn't going to be perfect. Whether a film is 'cleaned' by digital noise reduction or frame-by-frame retouching, it is slightly deviating from the actual content of the existing film. It's difficult to know how much is too much.”

Posted: Tue Dec 22, 2009 2:45 pm
by Scoundrel
" Tints were applied digitally since the camera neg (and the FGM derived from the camera neg) were monochrome. "

Thank You.!!!

The tints on THE GENERAL always bothered me as the original
Image LD was a beautiful B/W print.

" The question of tinting is something Kino “continually wrestles with.” "

FWIW in this instance,..if it ain't broke,..why tint it...?

At least we finally got the Carl Davis score.

Posted: Tue Dec 22, 2009 4:02 pm
by silentfilm
But all silents originally filmed in black and white would not have any tints on the negative for FGM. Only the release prints got tinted. Specific scenes would be printed, tinted the correct color, and then spliced into the release print.

Posted: Wed Dec 23, 2009 4:36 pm
by moglia
Kino's new policy is that films “should be released on Blu-ray without digital noise reduction

Huge Cheers to Kino for this. DNR is a cheap-jack amateur hack that even when used "correctly" yields the crappiest of results.

As for the frame by frame retouching; greatly preferred over Edge Enhancment which is yet another crap hack for the moronic. However was the retouching really, really needed?? In any case Cheers for no EE

Lastly the tinting, while I'd rather of had B/W or both on the Blu-Ray, I will give them a pass on it but don't want to see it become a trend.

Note to Kino, just keep doing what you have and as long as you keep accurate to correct theatrical running speeds (and not the slow crap that started in Europe which has sadly caught some acceptance in the US) and you'll have me a Blu-Ray customer!

DM

P.S.
“whether or not Blu-ray users will be satisfied with an HD copy of a film that is not pristine, but looks like an 80-year-old film actually looks.” In his opinion, that question “is still to be answered.”

Anyone who thinks that a vintage silent should look like a 2009 filmed movie is moron of the highest order. However, I'd bet the farm that people who are buying silents on DVD or Blue-Ray have no such expectations as those who do are outside the customer base for these films. Bottom line no one ages 15-29 is buying silents to begin with, and if they are then they most likely fully know the difference.

Posted: Wed Dec 23, 2009 7:06 pm
by milefilms
moglia wrote:Kino's new policy is that films “should be released on Blu-ray without digital noise reduction

Huge Cheers to Kino for this. DNR is a check-jack amateur hack that even when used "correctly" yields the crappiest of results.
Well like any of the trades in classic filmmaking (cinematography, lighting, editing, composing, etc.) anything that takes you out of the story and back into your seat in the theater ("hey, why is that microphone hanging over the set"), DVNR should only be used to enhance. When a big, huge scratch goes across five seconds of a film, then if it can be fixed, then all the better. When the whole scene or film has been made soft by computerized DVNR, then it's real bad. There is such a range of equipment and software that some of it looks like crap and some of it is pretty astonishing.

So the best DVNR is when you don't know that it's been done. That's on just about every Criterion and studio film in the last ten years. We've only done it on Killer of Sheep, Araya and The Exiles and only on the crud that accumulated since the original film was released. With Killer of Sheep, we actually kept all of the original dust and scratches on it to preserve the look of the film. If anyone can see where we did it, you're a better archivist than I.

More importantly, the reality is that a lot of audience doesn't really care how any film looks as long as it's cheap, which is far worse than expecting it to look perfect. The critics, however, will lambast a DVD for imperfections even if it's the greatest film ever made. That really kills sales.

Posted: Thu Dec 24, 2009 9:54 pm
by moglia
milefilms wrote: More importantly, the reality is that a lot of audience doesn't really care how any film looks as long as it's cheap, which is far worse than expecting it to look perfect. The critics, however, will lambast a DVD for imperfections even if it's the greatest film ever made. That really kills sales.
Much harder to see the damaging effects on DVD due to it lower resolution. On Blu-Ray DNR robs great films of grain and detail in favor of an artificial and or blurry digital look. It is a cheap hack designed for amateurs, that said of course there can be an exception or 2 on DVD's, but Blu-Ray is simply not as forgiving. As for the critics I don't trust a single one of them for Audio or Video media. Buyers of silent's on DVD /Blu-Ray for the most part are more sophisticated in knowing what and what not to expect from 75+ year old films in these mediums. They are the target audience not the common herd who are picking up High School Musical 1/2/3 or Twilight.