STeVE's ever-evolving tall tales
Jan 10, 2020 13:40:22 GMT
Post by braindead on Jan 10, 2020 13:40:22 GMT
Re "The Wizard Of Oz":
We have a friend who runs an archive with a mint 35mm British IB Tech print of OZ, printed in 1955. Trust me, nothing comes close to the depth and color of that print...
Steve Hoffman, Jul 27, 2009
A mint original print exists in the archives but they won't use it for any new release (not even as a bonus). Why? God knows..
Steve Hoffman, Jul 28, 2009
Maybe they are trying to raise the 10 million bucks that projectionist in Santa Barbara wants to hand over the Jitter-Bug segment..
Steve Hoffman, Jul 29, 2009
No, no, no, the original "unwedded" nitrate preview print, projected for the original audience which was not reclaimed by the studio and survives (as the tale is told) because the original projectionist kept it, blah, blah. This nitrate print is in pristine shape and unprojected for the most part. It has like 19 extra minutes of footage that they decided to cut after this first preview. You see a few seconds of some of this footage (returning to OZ with the broomstick, etc.) in the original IB Tech trailer...
So the story goes. Guy in SB has it..
Steve Hoffman, Jul 29, 2009
I used to own a British Technicolor print of THE WIZARD OF OZ, struck in 1955. No digital version will do anything for me. Spoiled. Even though I don't have the print anymore, I'm ruined.
Steve Hoffman, Nov 28, 2015
Hard to believe that "Somewhere Over The Rainbow" was nearly dropped from the film!
It actually WAS dropped for a while. You can see on most old prints the exact spot when it was reinserted.
Steve Hoffman, Jul 14, 2008
I consider myself lucky that I got to meet two Munchkins, 10 technicians who worked on the movie, the special effects maven A. Arnold Gillespie and the scarecrow himself Ray Bolger, along with being able to once watch West Coast NBC broadcast of the film from the IB Tech print from inside the Telecine at NBC Color City, Burbank.
The night I met Ray Bolger at the Academy I also met Gene Kelly, Mickey Rooney and Fred Astaire. What a "star spot" night that was..
Steve Hoffman, Jul 15, 2008
We have a friend who runs an archive with a mint 35mm British IB Tech print of OZ, printed in 1955. Trust me, nothing comes close to the depth and color of that print...
Steve Hoffman, Jul 27, 2009
Sad. I have (well, had, sold to MGM) a British IB Tech original print. I know it well. It looked amazing. The new DVD looks nothing like this movie did when it was in theaters in the original release and first re-release. I mean, it looks scrubbed and all but geez, the glow is gone, the LOOK is gone. It's so clinical now. Very solid state. Depressing that no one can actually see this movie the way it was actually projected back in the day...
Don't mind me..
Steve Hoffman, Sep 26, 2011
Oh, well, it's their world now, we have to live in it! Make THE WIZARD OF OZ look like it was lit like THE BRADY BUNCH, people can relate better or something..
Steve Hoffman, Sep 27, 2011
Well, that is where it gets funky. I mean, yes, I agree with you, I don't want to be on the MGM set and see all the painted backdrops (and the characters skipping toward them), etc. but I understand that people want clarity.
That's why the old MONA LISA analogy is so great for me. France loans you the real MONA LISA for a party you are giving. You hang it on your living room wall. How do you light it? Do you light it brightly to see all the hidden detail and hundreds of years of dust, cracks and other imperfections? Or, do you light it carefully, masking some of the damage and detail for an overall more romantic look?
That's what the technicians have to deal with. Most people would side with the current look. Some of us don't want to see the sets and (as you say) want to see OZ. OZ really looks like OZ in that 1948 British Technicolor print I had. I just wish that the new version was not so lit up. Looks like a bad newsroom Hi-Def TV set now... That's not what OZ is... OZ is a dream..
Steve Hoffman, Sep 29, 2011
I got to see my old British nitrate IB Tech print of OZ projected (illegally) a few times at the Academy and here and there at midnight screenings for a few friends. Open mouthed, slack jawed, whatever you want to call it, we were always in awe of this ancient film technology.
Steve Hoffman, Sep 29, 2011
I saw that CBS print projected once. It was amazing. I wanted to lick a few frames (didn't).
My laser disc is pretty right on, color wise..
Steve Hoffman, Oct 6, 2013
Just a quick note, no 1939 nitrate print of OZ survives is complete pristine form. The IB Tech print that MGM struck for CBS Television in 1956 is the print used for all "original" versions. Note that in this 1956 print, Technicolor forgot to sepia tone the opening and closing which is why it is in straight black and white, unlike the original 1939 and 1948 IB Tech release prints. An over-site.
Steve Hoffman, Nov 11, 2005
Everything deteriorates over time. However, as you film collectors will know, nitrate from that era still exists in pristine form. It's just dangerous to project even though the lamps are no longer what they used to be.
When we projected something in nitrate a few years ago we had to have a fireman in the booth just in case..
Also (as collectors know) there ARE pristine nitrate IB Tech prints of OZ, GONE WITH THE WIND, ROBIN HOOD, TRAIL OF THE LONESOME PINE, SNOW WHITE, BAMBI, FRENCHMAN'S CREEK, THE JOLSON STORY, etc. out there but they are in the hands of collectors and therefore essentially "lost" to the GP.
I had the privilege of running the MGM/CBS print of THE WIZARD OF OZ in a huge Hollywood screening room back in the early 1980's. Giant screen, correct lamp brightness, comfy seats; one of the supreme movie experiences of my life..
Steve Hoffman, Nov 12, 2005
I remember going through all the music at Turner Vault back in 1990. What a mess it was, glad it was all saved but geez, mind-boggling puzzle.
Steve Hoffman, May 13, 2015
No stems survive. The nitrate was dumped to 1/4" magnetic tape in the 1960s and then destroyed.
Steve Hoffman, May 14, 2015
That is because the M-G-M Technicolor print that was struck for CBS in 1956 had straight monochrome for the opening and closing, same as the last theatrical release prior to the broadcast. Since this same print was shown for the entire original run, years and years, the opening and closing were never "correct". Didn't bother me except the "reel changeover" shot before the door opens in sepia and doesn't match..
Steve Hoffman, Jan 3, 2013
Painted sepiatone, not monochrome.
Steve Hoffman, Jan 3, 2013
Dan, I used to know but I forgot. A wash, wasn't it? Something in the Tech processing like an old silent film.
I personally like the crisp black & white version myself (but that's what I'm used to since 3 years old). The only problem with the black & white is it doesn't work for the changeover to sepia and then color.
Steve Hoffman, Jan 3, 2013
Sepiatone, like an old tintype from 1890. That is the look they were going for in the opening and closing scenes of the movie.
That printing style for the print was abandonded after the 1948 re-release.
Steve Hoffman, Jan 4, 2013
Didn't you read my earlier posts? It was a chemical wash of some kind.
Steve Hoffman, Jan 4, 2013
The film was issued with Sepia in 1939 and the 1949 reissue. The 1955 reissue did not duplicate the look and had the opening and closing in straight monochrome. CBS' IB Tech broadcast print originated with the 1955 theatrical reissue.
Like any "remix" stuff goes wrong. When the sepia went, the crucial "matching" scene got messed up. When the reel change happens after she lands in OZ the effect is jarring, not natural. Goofs happen when stuff is "redone" all the time...
Steve Hoffman, Jan 20, 2016
You've got the best one, Mikey.
Try watching the movie with only the music & effects channel playing. A new experience!
Steve Hoffman, Dec 1, 2003
Originally posted by cbsolson
Is this the MGM LD with the true Technicolor print? cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=3367032130&category=18852
No, that's the oldest one. I'd avoid it.
Steve Hoffman, Dec 1, 2003
Vidiot said: ↑
I actually prefer for the movie to be in pure B&W and not sepia-tone. I find the sepia a little too distracting. And I also think the digital recreations add too much brown; real sepia is more subtle (to me).
They are supposed to match the sepia to the first shot in reel three but they never do.
First world complaint, sorry.
Steve Hoffman, Oct 21, 2012
We have a friend who runs an archive with a mint 35mm British IB Tech print of OZ, printed in 1955. Trust me, nothing comes close to the depth and color of that print...
Steve Hoffman, Jul 27, 2009
A mint original print exists in the archives but they won't use it for any new release (not even as a bonus). Why? God knows..
Steve Hoffman, Jul 28, 2009
Maybe they are trying to raise the 10 million bucks that projectionist in Santa Barbara wants to hand over the Jitter-Bug segment..
Steve Hoffman, Jul 29, 2009
No, no, no, the original "unwedded" nitrate preview print, projected for the original audience which was not reclaimed by the studio and survives (as the tale is told) because the original projectionist kept it, blah, blah. This nitrate print is in pristine shape and unprojected for the most part. It has like 19 extra minutes of footage that they decided to cut after this first preview. You see a few seconds of some of this footage (returning to OZ with the broomstick, etc.) in the original IB Tech trailer...
So the story goes. Guy in SB has it..
Steve Hoffman, Jul 29, 2009
I used to own a British Technicolor print of THE WIZARD OF OZ, struck in 1955. No digital version will do anything for me. Spoiled. Even though I don't have the print anymore, I'm ruined.
Steve Hoffman, Nov 28, 2015
Hard to believe that "Somewhere Over The Rainbow" was nearly dropped from the film!
It actually WAS dropped for a while. You can see on most old prints the exact spot when it was reinserted.
Steve Hoffman, Jul 14, 2008
I consider myself lucky that I got to meet two Munchkins, 10 technicians who worked on the movie, the special effects maven A. Arnold Gillespie and the scarecrow himself Ray Bolger, along with being able to once watch West Coast NBC broadcast of the film from the IB Tech print from inside the Telecine at NBC Color City, Burbank.
The night I met Ray Bolger at the Academy I also met Gene Kelly, Mickey Rooney and Fred Astaire. What a "star spot" night that was..
Steve Hoffman, Jul 15, 2008
We have a friend who runs an archive with a mint 35mm British IB Tech print of OZ, printed in 1955. Trust me, nothing comes close to the depth and color of that print...
Steve Hoffman, Jul 27, 2009
Sad. I have (well, had, sold to MGM) a British IB Tech original print. I know it well. It looked amazing. The new DVD looks nothing like this movie did when it was in theaters in the original release and first re-release. I mean, it looks scrubbed and all but geez, the glow is gone, the LOOK is gone. It's so clinical now. Very solid state. Depressing that no one can actually see this movie the way it was actually projected back in the day...
Don't mind me..
Steve Hoffman, Sep 26, 2011
Oh, well, it's their world now, we have to live in it! Make THE WIZARD OF OZ look like it was lit like THE BRADY BUNCH, people can relate better or something..
Steve Hoffman, Sep 27, 2011
Well, that is where it gets funky. I mean, yes, I agree with you, I don't want to be on the MGM set and see all the painted backdrops (and the characters skipping toward them), etc. but I understand that people want clarity.
That's why the old MONA LISA analogy is so great for me. France loans you the real MONA LISA for a party you are giving. You hang it on your living room wall. How do you light it? Do you light it brightly to see all the hidden detail and hundreds of years of dust, cracks and other imperfections? Or, do you light it carefully, masking some of the damage and detail for an overall more romantic look?
That's what the technicians have to deal with. Most people would side with the current look. Some of us don't want to see the sets and (as you say) want to see OZ. OZ really looks like OZ in that 1948 British Technicolor print I had. I just wish that the new version was not so lit up. Looks like a bad newsroom Hi-Def TV set now... That's not what OZ is... OZ is a dream..
Steve Hoffman, Sep 29, 2011
I got to see my old British nitrate IB Tech print of OZ projected (illegally) a few times at the Academy and here and there at midnight screenings for a few friends. Open mouthed, slack jawed, whatever you want to call it, we were always in awe of this ancient film technology.
Steve Hoffman, Sep 29, 2011
I saw that CBS print projected once. It was amazing. I wanted to lick a few frames (didn't).
My laser disc is pretty right on, color wise..
Steve Hoffman, Oct 6, 2013
Just a quick note, no 1939 nitrate print of OZ survives is complete pristine form. The IB Tech print that MGM struck for CBS Television in 1956 is the print used for all "original" versions. Note that in this 1956 print, Technicolor forgot to sepia tone the opening and closing which is why it is in straight black and white, unlike the original 1939 and 1948 IB Tech release prints. An over-site.
Steve Hoffman, Nov 11, 2005
Everything deteriorates over time. However, as you film collectors will know, nitrate from that era still exists in pristine form. It's just dangerous to project even though the lamps are no longer what they used to be.
When we projected something in nitrate a few years ago we had to have a fireman in the booth just in case..
Also (as collectors know) there ARE pristine nitrate IB Tech prints of OZ, GONE WITH THE WIND, ROBIN HOOD, TRAIL OF THE LONESOME PINE, SNOW WHITE, BAMBI, FRENCHMAN'S CREEK, THE JOLSON STORY, etc. out there but they are in the hands of collectors and therefore essentially "lost" to the GP.
I had the privilege of running the MGM/CBS print of THE WIZARD OF OZ in a huge Hollywood screening room back in the early 1980's. Giant screen, correct lamp brightness, comfy seats; one of the supreme movie experiences of my life..
Steve Hoffman, Nov 12, 2005
I remember going through all the music at Turner Vault back in 1990. What a mess it was, glad it was all saved but geez, mind-boggling puzzle.
Steve Hoffman, May 13, 2015
No stems survive. The nitrate was dumped to 1/4" magnetic tape in the 1960s and then destroyed.
Steve Hoffman, May 14, 2015
That is because the M-G-M Technicolor print that was struck for CBS in 1956 had straight monochrome for the opening and closing, same as the last theatrical release prior to the broadcast. Since this same print was shown for the entire original run, years and years, the opening and closing were never "correct". Didn't bother me except the "reel changeover" shot before the door opens in sepia and doesn't match..
Steve Hoffman, Jan 3, 2013
Painted sepiatone, not monochrome.
Steve Hoffman, Jan 3, 2013
Dan, I used to know but I forgot. A wash, wasn't it? Something in the Tech processing like an old silent film.
I personally like the crisp black & white version myself (but that's what I'm used to since 3 years old). The only problem with the black & white is it doesn't work for the changeover to sepia and then color.
Steve Hoffman, Jan 3, 2013
Sepiatone, like an old tintype from 1890. That is the look they were going for in the opening and closing scenes of the movie.
That printing style for the print was abandonded after the 1948 re-release.
Steve Hoffman, Jan 4, 2013
Didn't you read my earlier posts? It was a chemical wash of some kind.
Steve Hoffman, Jan 4, 2013
The film was issued with Sepia in 1939 and the 1949 reissue. The 1955 reissue did not duplicate the look and had the opening and closing in straight monochrome. CBS' IB Tech broadcast print originated with the 1955 theatrical reissue.
Like any "remix" stuff goes wrong. When the sepia went, the crucial "matching" scene got messed up. When the reel change happens after she lands in OZ the effect is jarring, not natural. Goofs happen when stuff is "redone" all the time...
Steve Hoffman, Jan 20, 2016
You've got the best one, Mikey.
Try watching the movie with only the music & effects channel playing. A new experience!
Steve Hoffman, Dec 1, 2003
Originally posted by cbsolson
Is this the MGM LD with the true Technicolor print? cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=3367032130&category=18852
No, that's the oldest one. I'd avoid it.
Steve Hoffman, Dec 1, 2003
Vidiot said: ↑
I actually prefer for the movie to be in pure B&W and not sepia-tone. I find the sepia a little too distracting. And I also think the digital recreations add too much brown; real sepia is more subtle (to me).
They are supposed to match the sepia to the first shot in reel three but they never do.
First world complaint, sorry.
Steve Hoffman, Oct 21, 2012