david hare wrote:
They've managed to "refine" the grain which is way too coarse on the UK disc (and Oz disc.) One of the reasons for coarse grain is because the 2.00 mask requires they blow up the open matte optical 1.37 image and then crop, resulting in much higher grain than, say, an anamorphic print. As far as color goes all the source prints seem to be Eastman - you can tell by the popping on opticals and the blueish tinge - this extends to the Carlotta. It would seem there's no IB answer print.
I have nothing else to say on this movie or this title or this edition.
The grain would be mostly the same between the two if they were to use the same source. So, an open matte transfer would sort of appear slightly less grainy, but only because it's being shrunk down more. Most of the time for matted widescreen films with dual formats available (like, let's say, The Producers '68), you can see very little difference. Usually the differences in grain structure have more to do with the quality of the transfers or sources.
Technicolor prints are suitable for 35mm projection only and usually for color reference. Generally dye-transfer is unsuitable for digital transfers, which is why 99% of the time studios either use new internegatives/interpositives or scan the color records separately.
I realize this is a generally accepted truism among tehnical people but there are - very few - direct transfers to telecine from IB prints. The Lang Indian duo on Fantoma for one, and odds and ends like the "Mr Monotony" outtakes on the Easter Parade Extras.
Deleted scenes would obviously be more likely to survive only as prints, but I really don't think "Indian Epic" was sourced from dye-transfer. Is that what the restoration notes say or just from observation? It looks like they transfered the negative or a new interpositive from looking at the contrast values and sharpness.