Remastering process of the movie 'The Wizard of Oz'
Вставка
- Опубліковано 28 вер 2024
- Documentary about the restoration of the film "The Wizard of Oz". The original Technicolor negatives were scanned at about the double HDTV-resoloution to record all the details that can be seen at full-HD resoloution (Nyquist-Shannon theorem).
The great thing about Technicolor is that each elementary color has it's own negative. Ordinary color film (negative or direct positive) has three layers. One for each elementary color. The three negative sources allow to reconstruct damaged frames from the other intact frames. This way the original negatives only needed to be scanned rather than cleaned. Every single frame of the movie was inspected by a skilled operator and retouched if necessary.
How refreshing to hear restoration technicians admitting to getting things wrong, learning from those mistakes, and explaining how they fixed those issues, as well say admitting that automated processes are not always the way forward. Clearly a lot of time went into this process, and I applaud everyone involved.
THANK GOODNESS they scanned it in 4K at 16bit. I'm so happy that they made the right decision and didn't hold back. Hopefully we'll get to see this in 4K soon on UHD Bluray. I'd pay full price for it. I think EVERY movie in the AFI Top 200 list should be restored immediately.
Moses King Totally agree with you.
Moses King It'll be worthy of a double dip for me simply to see the film in 4K resolution
(I read the 3D remaster from a few years ago was transferred in 8K resolution)
Every film with surviving IB Technicolor negatives and/or prints should take those, clean them, scan them, and digitize them, or at least use them as reference for future restorations.
amen!
It’s happening now! A 4K UHD was announced today!
Ironic that this video is not available in HD...
Yeah, IIRC the special features were on a DVD, so 480p it is.
Ironic how oldschool this video appears while they talking about 4K and an old film.
@@MrGTAmodsgerman it was remastered in 2005, that was 16 years ago. Cameras were hella different. No duh
@@Jenaye12345 I know. Me and my brother bought a digital cam in 2005. 480p quality was the shit. But professionals always had the newer stuff way earlier. Like there was 4K cameras in the early 90s. Expensive as hell.
@@MrGTAmodsgerman they are decades ahead of us in everything. Including technology.
As a 55 year old with 35 years, working in film, I still feel that this film is the greatest fantasy film ever created. Generations will continue to enjoy this classic.
My childhood wouldn't have been the same without this amazing masterpiece.
This is the first movie I remember watching. It was my grandmother's 1996 VHS, and I would watch it whenever I went over there. (Then the THX logo sent me running and screaming.) Easily one of my favorite movies ever made.
You mean without.
@@MaskedMan66 Thank you! I feel like I did OZ a disservice with my bad grammar, but I was on some good mushrooms that night, so there's that.
My childhood was made even better once I saw it in grade 1 on VHS in 2006
Years later, I still love rewatching this little mini-documentary on the restoration of the film. The Wizard of Oz is the perfect film to restore since the original camera negatives are in such good shape and the separate audio elements were preserved. I believe there’s been a further digital restoration done since this one; I saw a 3-D showing of the film after the most recent restoration, where they created a subtle 3-D version of the film by digitally separating the background, mid-ground, and foreground elements. It was remarkable to watch! There was unbelievable clarity to the picture there. I had never seen Dorothy’s freckles until I saw that version on a big screen. The sound mix was even more impressive, too, as they had digitally lifted each sound effect out of the mono dialogue & effects track and placed the sound effects into the surround matrix in ways that sounded very natural. I’d watch a whole two-hour documentary on that restoration!
I can only imagine how much money it cost to digitally restore and remaster this film, one of the most beloved movies in the history of motion pictures. MGM's original cast and crew would be proud of the work done on this by the restoration experts.
I think the original cast and crew would just be thrilled with the results and love it even more today, if they could view it - who knows maybe they are........
@@kfl611 maybe they are up on the sky maybe..
4k before 4k
these people are my heroes... congrats for their hard work
That's a lot of storage...
They are getting better at this. Wonderful. Our older films can now be re-scanned and enjoyed all over again. I love that they are doing it with quality in mind.
If they slow the scanning down (slower means lower iso speeds may be used too) can they not use automatic digital ICE for removing dirt & scratches too?
The Blue Ray 3D is a knockout on my 8ft movie screen with video projection.
my favorite childhood movie I could not wait for the networks to play this on cbs
AMAZING
1. Did they ever have a processional through the Emerald City with "Ding Dong The Witch Is Dead!" playing at the end of the movie? 2. When did they star broadcasting in color. 3. Were you in Chicago when this aired in 1977? Thanks!
They did have a procession yes but the footage is lost. A tiny bit appears in one of the trailers.
Also - three-strip Technicolor ("system 3", which used 3 strips of film to properly reproduce full color) was fairly new at the time Wizard of Oz was made (it was developed in 1932 and used in cartoons and only about 20 or so major features). Two-color Technicolor (aka "system 1" and "system 2", one red strip & one green or blue strip, which reproduced a limited palette) had been around since 1917.
If you dig up original promo material from 1939, they say "IN TECHNICOLOR". No colorization.
amazing. i'm studying conservation of materials and digitisation and audiovisual conservation is an area which has a lot of controversy and many issues involved. to see that these people were so amazingly passionate about maintaining the original film makes me very happy.
thank you. thank you so much
Genius they don't take anything away from the movie just make you appreciate it more lot of work shows you how much they love the movie as much as the me and millions of others
I've seen the restored version on SKY TV and its amazing - it could have been made now. I wish they'd restore some other classics too. 'When World's Collide' needs their dedication.
i wonder when films will be transfered to 2160p ooo...now were in for trouble!
i worked on the colorization for this film back in 1991 or 1992 in a company called AFT in California process took place in Tijuana Mexico by Mexican coloring artists it took us about 8 months preproduction and rendering included...such good time in my life...also worked on other American and European classics like stagecoach.
What did you colorize in this film?
Colorization? What are you smoking? 80% of the movie was made in color! The only time it was made completely in black-and-white was for the TV print back in 1956. When color TV became the norm, the Oz scenes were converted back to color, but Kansas remained in black-and-white until 1989, when MGM/UA Home Video, acting under the authority of MGM, restored the movie so that Kansas had its original sepia tone and Oz utilized four Technicolor reels. In 1993, THX remastered the movie for the Ultimate Oz VHS and laserdisc, and this print was later released on another VHS, laserdisc, and the initial DVD release. Warner Bros. remastered it again in 1999, and they seem to remaster it again for every edition of it.
Shane Rollins Actually the TV version have aired *_in color_* since the beginning (1956) but it was commonly seen in black and white, as only certain CBS affiliates in different parts of the country aired the film in color while others aired the film in B&W. The only time CBS planned to air the film in black and white completely was in 1961, because the film's TV sponsors refused to pay for color broadcasts.
Also prior to the 1989 video and 1990 CBS broadcast of the film, "Wizard of Oz" had the Kansas sequences in B&W instead of the original sepia tone, while *every other scene* in the film was in color
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Wizard_of_Oz_on_television
Ummm..no. 4k is NOT the equivalent of DVD. Heck Blu Ray alone is 6 times the resolution of DVD. Sure, Blu Ray isn't 4k, but it's as good as we're gonna get at this moment in time. I've been very happy with it the last few years and have amassed over 350 BDs. Is it going to be the final format, no. But it's a damn good one for the time being.
And now we have 4k :)
Wow..these people are super intelligent & good at what they do👌
There is a flaw in the Blu-ray of "Oz" which I am surprised wasn't caught during the restoration. It occurs after Dorothy wakes up in her bed in Kansas and you can see a piece of dirt on the film at the middle bottom of the frame at 1:39:36 over Dorothy's arm. It lasts about 50 seconds. Would love to know how they got past them.
I’ve watched TWOOz countless times and never really noticed the surface (?) noise on the soundtrack until I watched this video
Thank you to the people that loves and respect film making the Old, and New ways, of making movies. Taking time for proper restoration of old films. Not just rushing it, just to make money.
I think Disney should start taking notes on this one.
The old 3-strip color process. This means these negatives have at least 3 times the resolution of the newer single-strip safety film. I used to watch movies in theaters a lot, but I never saw a film that was not projected from safety film. I've seen a wide range of film quality of theatrical prints, mostly average to substandard. Have movies been printed on positive film that was relatively cheap and disposable? I used to think that all they showed was all you could get and nothing better. Except for movies on 70mm. I used to ask "Why can't all movies look as good as THIS?" Since digital projection came along, most movies really do look as good as "THIS". Digital projection is in 4K ultra HD, no wonder.
4K has been around for a while then...
Very well done.
Projected film is the only true way to view cinema.
The visual restoration is near perfection but they ruined the soundtrack by rolling off the high frequencies. All the 'presence' of the sound is removed and especially the violins are muted and dull.
Well, I wish I could say I've heard it...... But what occurs to me is that
no modern movie theater sound system, or even 99% of high end home theatre sound systems can hold a candle to some of the old school fully horn loaded, mono sound systems as far as transient response goes .... If you can't tell, I'm a huge fan of properly designed horns, nothing can touch them .....
Yes to that comment! Horns!!😃
Fair point, but the only way they were able to remove the artefacts in the audio was by reducing the presence in the higher frequency bands, still I agree that it lost it's impact.
This mоviе is now available to watch hеre => twitter.com/7aef42b2f50531def/status/795843325437689856 Remastering procсccess of the movie The Wizard of Oz
Why would anyone want it to be polished beyond recognition? Why should they take a shot at that? What would be gained?
yes it was highly experimental colour for the time and it worked beautifully.
These guys done a great job on this film, looks so fresh and new wow its crazy how much time and effort they put into this but it;s so worth it because it looks amazing!
I enjoyed the pseudo-3D version.It looked as if it was made in 3d, with some throwing at the camera scenes with it.How ?Well, good 2d cinema photography is shot in psychological 3d. a background with a subject in the foreground, etc.All academy award winning cinema photography is shot in flat 3d.
It's very interesting to see how modern innovative technology, and people with proper respect for the source material, can help preserve our film heritage for future generations to enjoy.
Here I am feeling like a clown trying to see a remasterized version of a 1939 movie in a video with 480p resolution.
I mean, you can still spot the difference at the end when they show unrestored part, there's really bad hissing in the audio, there's a lot of dirt and scratches, all that's cleaned up in the remastered version, all that is pretty visible even on a DVD.
That guy at the 5:36 mark seems familiar. Hmmm.
amazing
Wow. Technology is scary AND amazing to me. This is such an awesome option to get the new generations interested in watching classic.
alrite Eisenstein
It's odd because I understand the original negative for the black and white sections was destroyed in a fire in the 1970s. Along with the negative for Singing In the Rain and others.
Never heard that one before.
From Wikipedia, referring to Singin' In the Rain: "according to the audio commentary on the 2002 Special Edition DVD, the original negative was destroyed in a fire."
When you watch it now you can tell that copies are not from an original neg.
Thanks for the info, I either forgot about it, or never heard it before.
Going to Wikipedia!
There is no black and white section.
you obviously dont know about technicolor. do some research
machines are not dumb, your knowledge of how to take advantage of machines are dumb
The restored sound imo sucks. They removed noise and crackles, but also part of the trebles, it's dull and flat, without brilliance now. They missed the opportunity to restore the precious hi freq content, which was retained in original sound negative. But of course they had to put it in fake fancy surround.
But I believe they did at least good job with image, hoping they didn't try to remove film grain and totally stabilize it, which would make sterile video out of it.
They should remaster this video too....
Einfach schön. 👍👍👍
He's a troll. An incredibly obvious one at that.
I guess 200TB was a big deal in 2005.
Wow
Very exciting project…..the next movie project would have to be ‘Gone with the Wind’ in 4K or 8k?
I have 7.1
Make a 7.1 mix that would be pretty cool
Or even one that uses Dolby atmos
Cool.
Just wow! It isn''t *that* far in the past.....
1:19 Dat voice crack tho.
congrats, you got the joke
@@OnimirareBut do I suck like McBain?
I didn't notice a huge difference between the original and the restored sound. Except that they took a bit of the static-y parts out. :/
The brief inserts showing the "film" have too many sprocket holes.
I watch a lot of old movies and I never see any that are in color and if they are, they're colorized ("Casablanca" "The March of The Wooden Soldiers")
Your second paragraph makes no sense at all; you say there were technicolor silent movies but then you say that they couldn't record sound on technicoor until it started to be used!
Make up your mind; all I get is conflicting info from everyone here; the only consistent thing you people say is that I'm wrong but I must actually be right this way
I hope so :P
Why isn't this video in HD! Grrrr
+icarus550 This is just a bonus video from the blu-ray disc. I thought it is worth uploading. Why the resolution is kept on NTSC standard is unknown to me.
All you have to know is how they went back to an original negative to properly colorize the film.
The people doing the restoration claim that their version is BETTER than the original!
they should of showed how they erased the hanging munchkin
brittany watts ha good joke
I'm still trying to make evens or odds out of that one. I can't figure out whether it's a Munchkin or a bird honestly. On the 1949 trailer at the end of the 1999 VHS, it is a bird. I need to do some more research on that.
brittany watts It was meant to be a crane (bird) that was added to provide atmosphere in the forest scenes in the land of Oz.
Shane Rollins If you check out my channel, I debunk the Hanging Munchkin.
ua-cam.com/video/Ny6Qz2aZdDA/v-deo.html
true dat
So at 4K resolution the BLU-RAY actually is the equivalent of a DVD. So you people will be re-buying it when we switch to the 320GB DVD that Toshiba is working on. Mind you a good percentage of dopey consumers don't understand all the "Bits and Mega Bytes", their just buying BLU-RAY's because they think it's all the rage.
See? Remastering does not invole monkeying with the imagery. And why would a Munchkin be caught hanging himself on camera anyway? That myth is complete crap.
I want to see the raw scanned movie without any restoration.
The restored movie is better than the original. They removed dirt and scratches and colour corrected the image.
Felix Müller it is but to me the movie should have an old, vintage feel to it. I appreciate the 4K restoration but I’ll always prefer my old Oz VHS tape, back when the movie was B&W instead of Sepia.
Bailey Crawly Why should it have an old, vintage feel to it? No movie had that when they came out.
Rilumai it didn’t when it came out but like all vintage things as time has taken its toll it’s gotten that feel to it. As should this movie. 4K is beautiful but we should be able to see the original scans as the film was when they pulled it out. The only improvement that should be done are to line the film records up. M
Bailey Crawly Sure an old print has that feeling to it now because of time, but why would you ever want to watch a movie in a damaged state and not its original state? Especially for a movie like Jaws, for example, where there were giant tears in some of the frames to the point where it was distracting and immersion breaking. Would you want to watch an old, damaged print of Interstellar in 50 years or a well-kept print representative of how it originally looked?
fascinating video! @10 min = am I the only one who thinks the "restored" audio sucked all the life & authenticity out of the original version?
The only flaw in the wizard of oz is that it happened to be made before widescreen was the standard.
You have your profile blocked; you are not to be communicated with and anyway, I don't deal with nasty people, either; have a nice day and may I return both your "compliment" and your blocked profile by giving you a heart-felt drop dead.
This is why you can't just let the computer do all the work.
1:18 obligatory voice crack
That fucking annoyed me tbh. And he seemed a little akward about it instantly afterwards cause no one laughed.
Smh they prob should have redone that 😂
😝😁
How did he even make it that long xD
It seemed like he was doing it intentionally
it was obviously intentional. I imagine these people don't know much about human interaction XD
Instead of recording the orchestra on a single track back in the day, they had the remarkable foresight to record separate 'audio angles'. This to me is more impressive than the picture restoration; allowing the original audio to be presented in proper 5.1!
The original music tracks were recorded in two channel. They had stereo recording as early as 1937. But they had to do a monaural mix down since theaters could not play stereo then. Walt Disney's FANTASIA, presented in "Fantasound" was the first film to be shown in stereophonic sound in its premier at Radio City Music Hall. It also suffered from the limitations of the standard sound systems in theaters outside of New York, and the affects of WWII stopped the installation of the multichannel systems intended for what was planned as a "Roadshow" exhibition.
I love the sound of the unrestored audio. So organic and natural to our ears.
Original sound engineers wouldn't be happy with the cracks, pops, wow and flutter in that "organic" original.
@@toad8840 the flaws of analogue sound and film recordings became nostalgic traits only in the electronic and digital eras. Many sound engineers and cinematographers from the analog era are still alive and working and continue to strive for cleaner image & sound. Unless we were going for a specific stylize, we minimize both sound and image noise as much as possible. Kodak didn't spend millions on developing finer grain film stock for nothing. Filmmakers tell stories for the world, not just for nostalgic film buffs enjoying the crackling audio and grainy image.
In fact, much of our notion of "retro" artifacts in film and photography was not the hallmark of bygone eras, but undesirable artifacts of aging stock. Retro Instagram filters, for example, simulate the redshift and wearing out of stored prints and film stock that didn't look like that when originally shot.
@@samgod DNR does, sometimes, take away some high-frequency content along with noise. In fact, the noise might even mask the absence of said high frequency content in the first place. That might be what OP is referring to, not "nostalgia".
@@TobiaTesan no doubt, good point. Hence the need for higher quality DNR that better distinguishes between noise and high frequency content. This is one of the benefits of using machine learning for image restoration.
@@samgod That does bring an interesting question forward. Suppose that the high original frequency audio content _or_ spatial detail is for the best part gone. How would you feel about a release treated with something like alexjc's neural-enhance, ie. something that hallucinates detail that's _plausible_ but not necessarily the original? I think it would be okay for most consumers, but I can see cinephiles bringing out the pitchforks.
I wish they'd shoot more films with 70mm. I know, I know. It's outrageously expensive. But the results are stunning.
Warner Bros. has done a beautiful job remastering this timeless classic. Even if this is dated, it just shows that they've been doing a good job with restorations.
This is a soundtrack heavy film, so it needs to be done properly. When sound overlaps dialogue that causes problems. I'm just glad they didn't do what Universal did with "Smokey and the Bandit"
These guys are really amazing! Warner Bros. has released The Wizard of Oz on home video 4 times, and one time in IMAX 3D, and each time they managed to make it look and sound better than before. And they also did a great job with the 3D conversion.
Sound better? You mean more modern? Less of the pinched sonics of the old movies? That would require de-noising.
whoever cleverly edited in relevant quotes from the film to 'respond' to the interviewees deserves their own award
This is the reason why I have been saying for years,when the scene went from B&W to color that alone should have won this movie a full Academy Award
technicolor ... not so easy to do back in the day ... still not so easy to do at the age of digital restoration ... but man ... the great results are well worth the hard efforts!
Loved the 4k restoration great vid
Ya just gotta love that they put this description of their 4K transfer up... AT 480!!!! :(
FAIIIIIIIIIIL!
Well, it got uploaded in 2011.
Amazing work. But world gone crazy about picture only. I search for audio restoration but 90% of the UA-cam/google results are about picture restoration. It's pathetic guys. Even maximum documentaries or content available online is about picture. Come on🤔. Audio is half cinema🙏🤷♂️
1:25 "...4K, 16 bit linear digital color space"
The caption here writes "16 bit = 65,536 colors available to pixel"
What actually is meant is 16 bit *per channel* (or subpixel), not per pixel.
So the total color count per pixel is 48bit = 2^48 = 281,474,976,710,656 or 281 *trillion colors*. That's exactly 65,536^3. This is the color space of the new digital master, not what you see in your screen. In your screen you can see at most 10 bit per channel color, or about 1 billion colors. That's what a high-end TV can depict, not Blu-ray, which can output only 8 bit per color.
Nikolaos Skordilis What about 4K blu-ray?
4K Blu ray has upgraded color form 8 bit per channel to 10 bit HDR.
Frane Šustić What would it take to see 16 bit on a TV via disc?
@@MegaMacReal Better eyes.
By restoring these classic movies both audio and visually they can all be re released and be enjoyed to watch by younger generations and those who want to watch their past favourites.
Why not go look the info up for yourself? Or, watch the video you're commenting on where they discuss how this film was _shot in Technicolor_?
Well, I'll explain you how is Technicolor® process. First, the camera has 3 films runing syncronize timing, one of those capture all blue tones, other the green tones and 3rd film will capture all red tones. All this thanks to 3 independing colorized crystals in front od each celuloide, these lenses are BLUE, GREEN and RED. Each color and their variations keep in the film. Later, in the process of postproduction, each film is painted in CYAN, MAGENTA and YELLOW (primary colors as pigment).
The restoration of all movie's digitally remastered in colour and stereo, I give 100% perfection, this is what we are looking for, WOW.📽🎬 not just colorized and cleaned up.
It’s really not truthful to say that any detail revealed by the high resolution has “never been seen before.” The film would have looked pristine and beautiful upon its original release. It’s just that we collectively spent another 70 years watching it on bad prints, TV, and VHS.
With the death of home media, this is going to become a lost art. Consumers don't care what version of a movie is available as long as they can click on it in a streaming service. Companies less so, since the financial incentive of movie sales is gone.
It's all gonna be over
wow They had restored allot for this movie I loved this movie when I was a kid,and others. thank you for your hard work on this classic film.
Do you think this process would help to preserve , Who Killed Doc Robbins ,the 1947 Hal Roach project, it's in terrible condition.
You make no sense at all, how old are you?
Wizard of Oz = MK Ultra Program!!!
Thanks for the upload. Very informative video.
You cant tell the difference in sound because this is youtube. Even if this video was uploaded in full hd 5.1, youtube doesnt even support 5.1.
The color parts of the movie were filmed on 3 strip Technicolor film.
I remember first watching the Wizard of Oz broadcast in color on CBS in the fall of 1959. Electronic imaging has moved forward incredibly since then.
It's pretty sad when a 50+ year old guy is trolling.
This is art... 3 layers of film creating the richest most vivid color.
fabulbabe is right. Except for the first reel, which ran about 20 minutes and was shot in black and white, the rest of the film was shot in three strip Technicolor. The first three strip Technicolor feature was "Becky Sharp" in 1935. For many years before that, Technicolor was two colour film, which didn't look as natural as three colour. Quite a few films in the late 1930s and up to the end of the 1940s were black and white with Technicolor sequences, such as "The Secret Garden" (1949).
The Wizard of Oz was an early film using this three-strip Technicolor process. There were other Technicolor processes that date back to the teens. The Depression slowed down the release of color films, but it really took off in the '30s.
Synchronized sound is a separate process; I have no idea why you think one is dependent on the other.
"The Wizard of Oz" came four years after what was the "early" three-strip (negative) process. " A Star is Born" came two years before. To call it "an early" Technicolor film is a bit of a misrepresentation since the process had been established for some time. This is one of the reasons why people think that it was the first Technicolor movie, which it was not.
Where can I find programs to do this kind of restoration on my own super 8 films?
The lab that scans your film most likely does does color correction and noise reduction for you. Most labs however store the footage in lousy MPEG-2 on a DVD. There is a lab in Austria that scans your film in a much higher resolution and in MPEG-4 AVC. fotospeed.at/schmalfilme-digitalisieren/8-mm-schmalfilme/8-mm-premium-hd/index.php
fpm1979 I have the wizard of oz on VHS
RETRO VHS MAN VAULT FROM THE 70S 80S AND 90S me to👍
VinnyAntoine my vhs version is 1986
RETRO VHS MAN VAULT FROM THE 70S 80S AND 90S i got the 50th anniversary vhs and book i got it in 1991 for christmas 👍
Now if only they can fully restore The Wizard of Oz completely uncut with the Jitterbug, reprise of Somewhere the Rainbow and Dorthey's return to Emerald City..