1041 The Comfort of Strangers

[tenia]

I can't say about the ratio because it might something Schrader originally wanted but couldn't at the time, and is now using the opportunity. Why not.
But those caps, from a texture perspective...
As I regularly remind, it's actually quite possible to relatively accurately guess a restoration workflow (including solely from caps), but if I had to guess on this one, I'd say older HD master, not 4k restoration (even less so from OCN).

[nitin]

It looks somewhat degrained to me but clearly from a new restoration/master? And even moreso in comparison to the BFI which looks like your typical MGM old master.

[tenia]

Yes, the older master the BFI used most likely is sharpened at least, so the comparison intuitively isn't in favor of the new disc, but that's a trick. Which is why I switched to purely looking at Blu-ray.com caps with no other reference.

[cdnchris]

Chris, when you get it, will you be able to state here what the element used for the restoration ? This doesn't look like the usual "artefacts" of using an IP or IN rather than the OCN either.

I haven't looked at the disc at all yet but the notes say the scan comes from the "Super 35 mm original camera negative."

[tenia]

Thanks Chris. That's what I thought it'd turn out to be. Something definitely happened here.

[flyonthewall2983]

So I take it the disc doesn't have any of the issues I mentioned previously

[cdnchris]

So I take it the disc doesn't have any of the issues I mentioned previously

I didn't notice anything you pointed to in that post so I'm guessing not.

Thanks Chris. That's what I thought it'd turn out to be. Something definitely happened here.

So I went through this first time and at first glance I'd say it's fine, and maybe I'm just not seeing what you are. But this is definitely a new scan, not an old master, if that's what your concern was. Colours have been pushed a teal (more evident in exteriors than interiors, though interiors are pretty dark) and the blacks get a bit thick at times, maybe a side-effect of that. The image is not razor-sharp, but it's definitely not fuzzy, and that looks more to be inherent to the photography (I haven't seen this since VHS days so I can't compare to any other release). Grain is there, heavier in places, but there are a few shots that look "dupey" I guess, and then others showed a bit of noise. I'm going to go through it again and I haven't look at grabs (not on Beaver or the other site), but I didn't see anything I'd call super worrying and I definitely wouldn't say it looked like a video presentation.

[tenia]

I don't doubt this is a new restoration, but from what I saw on the caps from Beaver and blu-ray.com, it seems at least at times thick to the point of looking like an older HD master, with some caps looking even worse than this.
Some of Beaver comparisons, like the 1st one (with the subtitles), also seem to make the BFI looks truly having finer details (look at the hair on Everett's fore-arm). It's not just a question of seeming finer because of sharpening, but a truly higher delineation. The third comparison (Mirren alone) also is weird, it's extremely dupey indeed.

I can understand part of it might come from the photo or the elements, but if the BFI indeed really has a better delineation, it can't explain everything since the BFI disc should display the same limitations.

I guess I'll see when I get my hands on the disc.