ATTN: JMS - widescreen source material
Joseph DeMartino
the following: "They stuck the regular prints rather than the lbx copies
*that
exist already*." (Referring to which set of prints they stuck into the
telecine transfer machine, presumably.) You also made a reference to the
original materials being kept in cold storage and needing time to thaw out
before they could be worked with.
All of this sounds like the LBX version exists *on film*, which is something
I don't think I've seen before on the 'net. All previous discussions
revolved around PAL or Hi-Def video masters and the need to transfer them to
NTSC for broadcast or DVD use. It may sound like a small point but if the
correct 1.77:1 versions were printed on film it removes a lot of the
headaches from getting WB to eventually do the DVDs in enhanced widescreen.
Now that Warner Bros. has "semi-officially" announced that the DVDs are in
the works a few of us are ramping up a letter-writing campaign urging them
to do it right.
(I realize that Warner Home Video has waffled on this before, and that no
formal public announcement has been made. But two different Warner Reps
confirmed that the series is in the works for 2001 at "Studio Day" at Dave's
Laser back on the 10th of this month. Their comments were on-the-record and
given to editors from two prominent DVD internet sites. One of them
repeated the information to me personally. They've never gone that far at
as public and well-covered event as Studio Day before, indeed they went out
of their way to avoid the question at the mini-Studio Day Dave held in March
of this year. So I'm taking their latest comments a little more seriously.)
The first thing we're asking for in the letter campaign is that you oversee
the project from the content side (episode order, extras, and - if we're
incredibly lucky - a commentary track or two.) At the very minimum we'd
like to make sure that you're consulted on what they're up to. A big part
of the success of "The X-Files" boxed sets is attributable, in my opinion,
to Chris Carter's involvement in the project. (The rest is due to Peter
Staddon's commitment to the DVD format and the high standard he sets for Fox
Home Entertainment. Wish we could clone him and have him run Warner Home
Video, too.)
The next thing we want is enhanced widescreen. But it is important that we
have our technical facts straight when we get into this with the studio.
Any light you can shed on this will help.
Thanks,
Joe
Jms at B5
>I don't think I've seen before on the 'net. All previous discussions
>revolved around PAL or Hi-Def video masters and the need to transfer them to
>NTSC for broadcast or DVD use. It may sound like a small point but if the
>correct 1.77:1 versions were printed on film it removes a lot of the
>headaches from getting WB to eventually do the DVDs in enhanced widescreen.
Of course they exist on film. The only way they can exist in ANY other video
format -- PAL, NTSC, Digibeta or anything else -- is if they first exist on
*film* which is transferred to video. WB went back and re-telecine'd the
negatives to produce two versions of the show during the period in which B5 was
in production, and after we wrapped.
jms
(jms...@aol.com)
(all message content (c) 2000 by
synthetic worlds, ltd., permission
to reprint specifically denied to
SFX Magazine)
Joseph DeMartino
video
format -- PAL, NTSC, Digibeta or anything else -- is if they first exist on
*film* which is transferred to video."
Obviously the episodes themselves were shot on film. My impression was that
the 1.77:1 letterboxed version could have been extracted from the full
Super35 frame *during or after the telecine process* - in which case it
would not be necessary to print the widescreen version to film. Everything
from that point on could have been done on video. Thanks for clearing this
up.
Regards,
Joe