Question Regading Image Entertainment
#1
Senior Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Detroit
Posts: 516
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Question Regading Image Entertainment
I just looked at the Image Press release on the HD-DVD web site and linked over to the Image website. I didnt realize they did Criterion releases. With Image now on board does that mean we could be seeing some Criterion releases on HD-DVD soon? If so that is huge huge news to me. They are by far my favorite DVD company as Ihave over 250 of thier releases. I would absolutly love to update my collection onto HD-DVD. So any idea if they own the rights to these and are planning on releasing any of the titles in the future?
PS...
PS...
#2
Banned by request
I've heard conflicting things about Image's relationship to Criterion. Some people assert they own them outright (which would make Criterion an HD DVD supporter), and some claim that they only handle their distribution. If they handle their distribution, then they can strongly suggest HD DVD, but can't really force them, nor could they say "Release this title now."
#3
Senior Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Detroit
Posts: 516
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Well according to the press release says they have the Exclusive rights to over 3000 DVD Titles and 200 exclusive CD titles in North America.
"About Image Entertainment:
Image Entertainment, Inc. is a leading independent licensee, producer and distributor of home entertainment programming in North America, with over 3,000 exclusive DVD titles and approximately 200 exclusive CD titles in domestic release and approximately 300 programs internationally via
sublicense agreements. For many of its titles, the Company has exclusive audio and broadcast rights and, through its subsidiary Egami Media, Inc., has digital download rights to more than 1,500 video programs
and over 150 audio programs containing more than 2,500 tracks. The Company is headquartered in Chatsworth, California, and has a domestic distribution facility in Las Vegas, Nevada. The Company’s subsidiary Image Entertainment (UK) maintains a content acquisition office in London, England. For more information about Image Entertainment, Inc., please go to www.image-entertainment.com."
3000 Titles is alot of movies. I surly hope that includes the Criterion line. Criterion is 2nd only to me wanting Fox in HD-DVD's camp in my book.
PS...
"About Image Entertainment:
Image Entertainment, Inc. is a leading independent licensee, producer and distributor of home entertainment programming in North America, with over 3,000 exclusive DVD titles and approximately 200 exclusive CD titles in domestic release and approximately 300 programs internationally via
sublicense agreements. For many of its titles, the Company has exclusive audio and broadcast rights and, through its subsidiary Egami Media, Inc., has digital download rights to more than 1,500 video programs
and over 150 audio programs containing more than 2,500 tracks. The Company is headquartered in Chatsworth, California, and has a domestic distribution facility in Las Vegas, Nevada. The Company’s subsidiary Image Entertainment (UK) maintains a content acquisition office in London, England. For more information about Image Entertainment, Inc., please go to www.image-entertainment.com."
3000 Titles is alot of movies. I surly hope that includes the Criterion line. Criterion is 2nd only to me wanting Fox in HD-DVD's camp in my book.
PS...
#5
Senior Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Detroit
Posts: 516
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Does anyone on this site have any connections at Image entertainment that you know of. I am dying to find out if Criterion are planning on releasing anything on the format. The thought of Brazil, Seven Samurai, Jigoku and many others being released on HD-DVD has me salivating. I also just noticed all of the IMAX films on thier site. Criterion and IMAX sounds very nice in HD-DVD
PS...
PS...
Last edited by PornoStar; 09-11-06 at 02:54 AM.
#6
Senior Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Detroit
Posts: 516
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I just sent an email to both the licensing dept and the inquiries dept at Image asking them about their future plans with HD-DVD and if either Criterion or IMAX were apart of them. I will post on here any awnsers i get from them. Lets keep the ol fingers crossed on this one. I would be extremely excited if either or both of them had titles planned for HD-DVD. Imagine IMAX's 70mm neg transfered onto HD. That would definity be something to see.
PS...
PS...
#7
Banned by request
Image has already committed to HD DVD. They've announced the full Twilight Zone TV series, as well as several concerts. So we already know they're committed. I think if you're really interested, send a separate email to Criterion, although I think you're going to get a stock "We're holding off on both formats for now" reply.
#8
Senior Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Detroit
Posts: 516
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Suprmallet
Image has already committed to HD DVD. They've announced the full Twilight Zone TV series, as well as several concerts. So we already know they're committed. I think if you're really interested, send a separate email to Criterion, although I think you're going to get a stock "We're holding off on both formats for now" reply.
Of course they have already commited to HD-DVD, just look at the 2nd post of mine which has the statment from Image stating they have commited. My Inquiry has to do with the brands they represent and wether or not they have any plans on releasing any Criterion or IMAX titles and wether or not they get to decide any of that stuff.
Image is not just a distributor and will likly have alot to say regarding when and if these titles get transfered to HD-DVD or BD.
PS..
Last edited by PornoStar; 09-11-06 at 10:15 AM.
#10
Moderator
Originally Posted by PornoStar
Imagine IMAX's 70mm neg transfered onto HD. That would definity be something to see.
PS...
PS...
Chronos IMAX (HD-DVD and BluRay)
Everest (Buena Vista) IMAX (BluRay)
Grand Prix (Warner-HD-DVD) 65mm non-IMAX
Criterion's release of Tati's Playtime (65mm) would also look great in HiDef!
If and when Fox starts to release on BluRay - Sound of Music, Oklahoma! (TODD-AO) version Hello, Dolly! will also look great, if correctly transferred.
Warner Bros.' HiDef transfer of 2001 from a 65mm source print as seen on HDNet is breathtaking.
Last edited by Giles; 09-11-06 at 02:49 PM.
#13
DVD Talk Legend
Originally Posted by PornoStar
Of course they have already commited to HD-DVD, just look at the 2nd post of mine which has the statment from Image stating they have commited. My Inquiry has to do with the brands they represent and wether or not they have any plans on releasing any Criterion or IMAX titles and wether or not they get to decide any of that stuff.
Image is not just a distributor and will likly have alot to say regarding when and if these titles get transfered to HD-DVD or BD.
Image is not just a distributor and will likly have alot to say regarding when and if these titles get transfered to HD-DVD or BD.
#14
Banned
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Blu-Ray: We Don't Need No Stinkin' Petition
Posts: 6,677
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Criterion has enough of a niche in the market to do whatever they want, and that unfortunately will be to wait a few years before releasing any HD discs.
#15
Senior Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Detroit
Posts: 516
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Well I just found out that Image has an exclusive distribution agreement with Criterion and that is as far as thier relationship goes, as far as IMAX i havent been able to find out what thier relationship entitles. Also when I was refering to IMAX films I was really refering to the films created by Macgillivray Freeman as those are the films that are really worth owning. There are quite a few IMAX labled films that an IMAX Camera was used to make the film but was produced by other companies. While those would still be nice to get on HD-DVD they simply do not hold up to the quality of the Macgillivray Freeman films.
The films I would like Macgillivray Freeman IMAX to release would be Dolphins, Everest, Stormchasers, The Magic of Flight, Coral Reef Adventure, Top Speed, The Living Sea, To Fly and To The Limit. I have the Windows HD version for most of these and they are absolutly stunning. I would upgrade to HD-DVD for this without even thinking about it. Until you see IMAX films in HD you really havent seen just how beautiful HD can look.
PS...
The films I would like Macgillivray Freeman IMAX to release would be Dolphins, Everest, Stormchasers, The Magic of Flight, Coral Reef Adventure, Top Speed, The Living Sea, To Fly and To The Limit. I have the Windows HD version for most of these and they are absolutly stunning. I would upgrade to HD-DVD for this without even thinking about it. Until you see IMAX films in HD you really havent seen just how beautiful HD can look.
PS...
#17
Senior Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Detroit
Posts: 516
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Suprmallet
IMAX is just 70mm run horizontally, so any 70mm film should look comparable.
In terms of other films that have been shot on 70mm which did not use an IMAX camera the image quality will not equal that of the IMAX cameras using the same film. IMAX cameras have many patented techinques which improve drastically the image quality of the film being shot such as the film transport. Also IMAXuse a special film stock made by Kodak which is a much more precise film base than standard stocks.
Of course I am not refering to major potion pictures that go throught the IMAX DRM process eiither which coverts convention fillsm to IMAX format. Iam referring to IMAX films shot on IMAX Cameras. Bottom line is these are without a doubt some of the highest quality films ever shot and thier release onto HD is unsurpassed in quality.
#18
Banned by request
I don't see why the percentage of films shot on 70mm should matter, because what percentage of all films are shot on IMAX?
I looked up IMAX on Wikipedia and you are indeed correct that it uses three times the film and uses a different film stock than a normal 70mm film. However, I would suspect that the limitations of HD would make such differences negligible. If you took, for example, one of the remastered 70mm prints of 2001 and put it up against an IMAX film, both on HD DVD, I think you'd be hard pressed to say that one looks significantly better than the other.
Heck, even if you projected the two you might still be hard pressed to see a significant increase in resolution.
Note: I'm not trying to rag on IMAX, it's a great system and a wonderful successor to the roadshows of the 50's-70's. Also, I just noticed that a Rolling Stones concert was filmed with IMAX cameras. I'd love to see that in an IMAX theater.
I looked up IMAX on Wikipedia and you are indeed correct that it uses three times the film and uses a different film stock than a normal 70mm film. However, I would suspect that the limitations of HD would make such differences negligible. If you took, for example, one of the remastered 70mm prints of 2001 and put it up against an IMAX film, both on HD DVD, I think you'd be hard pressed to say that one looks significantly better than the other.
Heck, even if you projected the two you might still be hard pressed to see a significant increase in resolution.
Note: I'm not trying to rag on IMAX, it's a great system and a wonderful successor to the roadshows of the 50's-70's. Also, I just noticed that a Rolling Stones concert was filmed with IMAX cameras. I'd love to see that in an IMAX theater.
Last edited by Supermallet; 09-12-06 at 12:37 AM.
#19
Senior Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Detroit
Posts: 516
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Suprmallet
I don't see why the percentage of films shot on 70mm should matter, because what percentage of all films are shot on IMAX?
I looked up IMAX on Wikipedia and you are indeed correct that it uses three times the film and uses a different film stock than a normal 70mm film. However, I would suspect that the limitations of HD would make such differences negligible. If you took, for example, one of the remastered 70mm prints of 2001 and put it up against an IMAX film, both on HD DVD, I think you'd be hard pressed to say that one looks significantly better than the other.
Heck, even if you projected the two you might still be hard pressed to see a significant increase in resolution.
Note: I'm not trying to rag on IMAX, it's a great system and a wonderful successor to the roadshows of the 50's-70's. Also, I just noticed that a Rolling Stones concert was filmed with IMAX cameras. I'd love to see that in an IMAX theater.
I looked up IMAX on Wikipedia and you are indeed correct that it uses three times the film and uses a different film stock than a normal 70mm film. However, I would suspect that the limitations of HD would make such differences negligible. If you took, for example, one of the remastered 70mm prints of 2001 and put it up against an IMAX film, both on HD DVD, I think you'd be hard pressed to say that one looks significantly better than the other.
Heck, even if you projected the two you might still be hard pressed to see a significant increase in resolution.
Note: I'm not trying to rag on IMAX, it's a great system and a wonderful successor to the roadshows of the 50's-70's. Also, I just noticed that a Rolling Stones concert was filmed with IMAX cameras. I'd love to see that in an IMAX theater.
What I mean by stock of film being used is quite simply IMAX chooses the clearest stock of all film made today, nothing in the hollywood market can compare and when you put nature scenes shot by IMAX next to nature scenes shot by Hollywood they blow them out of the water, the difference is not small. If you think it is I suggest you purchase one of IMAX's recent titles that have the Windows HD version on the disc. They are simply the best HD transfers I have seen to date in terms of image quality.
Quite simply taking a 70mm film and tranfering it to HD will absolutly provide a noticably better transfer than talking a 35mm print and doing the same. If not then the person doing the transfer should quit his job. Do you have any idea how much more information is available on a large format negative as compared to a standard 35mm? Its astounding. I am a professional photographer and I shoot about 75% with 4x5 inch film, like 10% with 8x10 inch film and the rest 6x7 medium format. I know first hand the quality differences that these negatives can give you not even taking the film stock into account.
Again I have seen these HD transfers with my own 2 eyes and I have yet to see anything on HD-DVD that matches it. The detail is unmatched as it should be with a 70mm film transfer. Your argument just doesnt hold water. Its not like were to the point with Televisions that the human eye can no longer tell improvements. HD-DVD will be replaced some day with what should be the final upgrade to this format as it will then be reaching that point where our eyes can no longer tell the difference in improvments. We however are not yet there.
By the way the reason I asked what percentage of films you think were shot on 70mm is quite simply because you stated "IMAX is just 70mm run horizontally, so any 70mm film should look comparable." As if to say there is a bunch of 70mm to compare it too whihc there isnt. I can name only like 3 pictures that I know of not made with IMAX cameras that are 70mm.
PS...
Last edited by PornoStar; 09-12-06 at 03:00 AM.
#20
Senior Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Detroit
Posts: 516
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Giles
so far, the only two (or if you want to be technical) three 65mm films that have been announced for BluRay/HD are
Chronos IMAX (HD-DVD and BluRay)
Everest (Buena Vista) IMAX (BluRay)
Grand Prix (Warner-HD-DVD) 65mm non-IMAX
Criterion's release of Tati's Playtime (65mm) would also look great in HiDef!
If and when Fox starts to release on BluRay - Sound of Music, Oklahoma! (TODD-AO) version Hello, Dolly! will also look great, if correctly transferred.
Warner Bros.' HiDef transfer of 2001 from a 65mm source print as seen on HDNet is breathtaking.
Chronos IMAX (HD-DVD and BluRay)
Everest (Buena Vista) IMAX (BluRay)
Grand Prix (Warner-HD-DVD) 65mm non-IMAX
Criterion's release of Tati's Playtime (65mm) would also look great in HiDef!
If and when Fox starts to release on BluRay - Sound of Music, Oklahoma! (TODD-AO) version Hello, Dolly! will also look great, if correctly transferred.
Warner Bros.' HiDef transfer of 2001 from a 65mm source print as seen on HDNet is breathtaking.
PS.
#21
DVD Talk Legend
Originally Posted by PornoStar
Quite simply taking a 70mm film and tranfering it to HD will absolutly provide a noticably better transfer than talking a 35mm print and doing the same. If not then the person doing the transfer should quit his job. Do you have any idea how much more information is available on a large format negative as compared to a standard 35mm?
In fact, IMAX films converted to HD are at a significant disadvantage due to their 4:3 aspect ratio. If transferred at the proper OAR, the IMAX movie image will only use 1440x1080 of those available pixels, with the rest taken up by pillarbox bars. The only alternative to this is to crop the picture to 16:9, which will give you the full HD resolution but obviously loses active picture content.
This isn't to say that IMAX films in HD don't look good, even great, but there are technical limitations in the video transfer process that you're overlooking.
#22
Moderator
Originally Posted by PornoStar
Quite simply taking a 70mm film and tranfering it to HD will absolutly provide a noticably better transfer than talking a 35mm print and doing the same. If not then the person doing the transfer should quit his job.
#23
Senior Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Detroit
Posts: 516
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Josh Z
Both 35mm and 70mm film have significantly more resolution than HD video. Both have to be downconverted to the same 1920x1080 resolution for video. The end result, regardless of source, is always going to be 1920x1080 pixles.
In fact, IMAX films converted to HD are at a significant disadvantage due to their 4:3 aspect ratio. If transferred at the proper OAR, the IMAX movie image will only use 1440x1080 of those available pixels, with the rest taken up by pillarbox bars. The only alternative to this is to crop the picture to 16:9, which will give you the full HD resolution but obviously loses active picture content.
This isn't to say that IMAX films in HD don't look good, even great, but there are technical limitations in the video transfer process that you're overlooking.
In fact, IMAX films converted to HD are at a significant disadvantage due to their 4:3 aspect ratio. If transferred at the proper OAR, the IMAX movie image will only use 1440x1080 of those available pixels, with the rest taken up by pillarbox bars. The only alternative to this is to crop the picture to 16:9, which will give you the full HD resolution but obviously loses active picture content.
This isn't to say that IMAX films in HD don't look good, even great, but there are technical limitations in the video transfer process that you're overlooking.
I am fully aware of the downconversion that you must do in order to get it on a SD or HD trasnfer. There is so much information in a 6x7 negative or 70mm that it would be ample for any generation of video that is ever made for TV's. You will run into the barrier where your eyes can no longer tell the difference in quality long before you had to move to a bigger nagative in film size. However the end result of that downsampling will be very different from a 35mm source and a 70mm source. The 70mm source simply will look richer and higher in quality due to its increased amount of detail in the beginning phases. 70mm just has much more information in the distant areas that will simply be missing in the 35 mm and you dont lose that difference in a high quality high definition transfer
As for the disadvantage due to the 4:3 ratio, that isnt a disadvantage, its just a different format size and like you said it just isnt a true widscreen format. That wont effect the image quality of the picture inside that 4:3 area. Is it a disadvantage to film in 2.35:1 thus having black bars on the top and bottom? Most IMAX directors actually film a little wider than they want to so they have the option of zooming into the negative and playing around with it. You could literally zoom into a 70mm and get any size transfer you wanted and still have a much higher quality transfer as the resulting zoom into the neg would still be much bigger than standard 35mm.
PS..
Last edited by PornoStar; 09-12-06 at 11:15 AM.
#24
Senior Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Detroit
Posts: 516
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Giles
under that theory the person who did the transfer of the TODD-AO version of 'Oklahoma!' should have his hands cut off. On a side note, the 65mm short film on the supplement disc of 'Oklahoma!': "The March of Todd-AO" is a stunning transfer and demonstrates what the best 65mm transfer can look like on standard DVD, talk about eye-popping. Razor sharp and featuring deep solid colours, notably red, who ever did that transfer should take the cake.
PS...
Last edited by PornoStar; 09-12-06 at 11:14 AM.
#25
Moderator
Interestingly, the broadcast of the IMAX feature of 'The Search for the Great Sharks' on HDNet (a stations that strives to showcase the best in HiDef and feature films in their OAR), presented this in 1.78:1
IMDB denotes the IMAX OAR as 1.44:1
IMDB denotes the IMAX OAR as 1.44:1