DepeX wrote:
I think someone uploaded the entire doc on YouTube with subtitles
rhapsody8 meant floating subtitles, not hardcore
rhapsody8 meant floating subtitles, not hardcore
Thread
Posts in chronological order
rhapsody8 meant floating subtitles, not hardcore
pittrek wrote:
Yes, that's what I kept saying since the last year's Rainbow release - the BBC have a great looking copy (we have seen it in various documentaries over the years) but for some reason Queen released a red faded transfer. Or at least I hope it was faded, and that it wasn't a result of a deliberate "color correction".
I'm with you on this one Pittrek. If someone actually colour graded it to look like what you see on the left; then that person needs to be shot.
<iframe width="853" height="480" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/Sgtq8sPS5OY" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>
I'm going to get shit for this, but I kinda like the red faded look. :)
Interesting comparison. It's definitely a completely different source, the damage (scratches) are on different places, the cropping is different, of course the colours are different... Really interesting.
Oscar J wrote:
I'm going to get shit for this, but I kinda like the red faded look. :)
For fuck's sake, why?
Thanks
Oh, thanks Nitro! That`s what i said!
I hadn`t the time to doing myself so it´s nice to watch it.
And as Pittrek says it`s likely another source. Maybe (just speculations) in the bbc archives there´s more from that gig, perhaps that "lost" copy of 38 minutes.
I hadn`t the time to doing myself so it´s nice to watch it.
And as Pittrek says it`s likely another source. Maybe (just speculations) in the bbc archives there´s more from that gig, perhaps that "lost" copy of 38 minutes.
MERQRY wrote:
Oh, thanks Nitro! That`s what i said!
I hadn`t the time to doing myself so it´s nice to watch it.
And as Pittrek says it`s likely another source. Maybe (just speculations) in the bbc archives there´s more from that gig, perhaps that "lost" copy of 38 minutes.
Indeed - it's a different source (or at least, transfer) anyway.
But something tells me only these two songs exist. This documentary would've been an excellent chance to show something new if it did exist.
It looks to me as if the BBC source is not a new transfer from film, but rather an old videotape copy of the film. It doesn't have any of the fine grain detail you might expect to see, and has some weird interlacing issues (if you pause the YouTube video, you will see a sort of blurring effect due to consecutive frames overlapping). If they can track down the film print from which the transfer was taken, they could get it to look even better. My hunch is that the BBC charge too much for use of their material, so QPL decided to use an inferior copy for the Blu Ray.
Also interesting to note, there is a nasty jump cut just before the final shot from behind Roger in Son And Daughter, where the footage switches to the same source as the Blu Ray release. It's odd that this was necessary, as I'm sure I've seen this shot in the few bits of footage previously shown by the BBC.
Also interesting to note, there is a nasty jump cut just before the final shot from behind Roger in Son And Daughter, where the footage switches to the same source as the Blu Ray release. It's odd that this was necessary, as I'm sure I've seen this shot in the few bits of footage previously shown by the BBC.
Ale Solan wrote:
Oscar J wrote:
I'm going to get shit for this, but I kinda like the red faded look. :)
For fuck's sake, why?
Because it looks cool. :)
GinjaNinja wrote: It looks to me as if the BBC source is not a new transfer from film, but rather an old videotape copy of the film. It doesn't have any of the fine grain detail you might expect to see, and has some weird interlacing issues (if you pause the YouTube video, you will see a sort of blurring effect due to consecutive frames overlapping).
Those artifacts are only present on the Son and Daughter clip. Strangely enough.
You also have to keep in mind that these clips are from the 720p Webrip. So compression may have eliminated the grain completely.
So this can mean that BBC gets another copy of the FULL march concert in video??
The Real Wizard wrote:
MERQRY wrote:
Oh, thanks Nitro! That`s what i said!
I hadn`t the time to doing myself so it´s nice to watch it.
And as Pittrek says it`s likely another source. Maybe (just speculations) in the bbc archives there´s more from that gig, perhaps that "lost" copy of 38 minutes.
Indeed - it's a different source (or at least, transfer) anyway.
But something tells me only these two songs exist. This documentary would've been an excellent chance to show something new if it did exist.
New source ? Not nesceceirly.
What happenend at least we know Queen handed out 16 mm film reels with these 2 tracks for promotion , these were given to the BBC , scandinavia , Italy, US , Japan and perhaps some more countries.
Celluloid films reacts with the elements , this is a natural process no matter how filmscells are stored detorition proces will starts rigt after the development. Depending on how you store the films this proces can be slowed down. E.g. Storing the actual film cells with their seperate audio cordbands isn't eise they give a chemical reaction. And will speed up the detoriation of the film big time.
This proces draws out the actual colours of the film but not the "red" colour. Right before the film content cannot be viewed anymore , it will show a red film.
You can see this also on some 8mm recordings not being kept well gives a red image quality like on the Berlin 79 and some others as well. Same for my films of Sweet Lady from the 16mm reel.
So I am quite sure these could be different transfers from different 16mm reels.
the BBC doesn't have anymore except these 2 tracks.
Queen: From Rags to Rhapsody HDTV 1080i http://www.queenzone.com/forums/1445951/queen-from-rags-to-rhapsody-hdtv-1080i.aspx?anchor=1445951