QueenZone discussion #1059627
Rainbow 74 - video or film ?
| pittrek 24.11.2007 12:17 |
I just finished a little Rainbow project, so I'm talking from memory here. Brian wrote on his web that Rainbow was shot on film, but NOTHING indicates that the video was some times playing with 24 fps. The video doesn't have a "film-ish feel", and the best thing - you can see a VIDEOTAPE EDITOR in the closing credits. Is here anybody who can finally confirm any of these two theories ? |
| Negative Creep 24.11.2007 13:13 |
It was transferred to film for use in cinemas. It doesn't look like it was shot on film, but it looks fucking amazing! Much better picture quality than Wembley and MK. |
| John S Stuart 24.11.2007 16:49 |
Negative Creep wrote: It was transferred to film for use in cinemas. It doesn't look like it was shot on film, but it looks fucking amazing! Much better picture quality than Wembley and MK.Thinking about this has done my head in! As Mr. Creep so correctly wrote, this gig was originally shot on video tape. From the video tape it was transfered to film to be shown on the big screen. (I recal when it was the second feature to both 'Saturday Night Fever' and 'Enter The Dragon'. (Of course there were other movies it played along with - but these are the two I recall seeing it with). The 'Box Of Trix' video version, as far as I am aware, was transfered from the film - not video version. So this is the point where I loose the plot... As the film version cannot be 'better' than the original video master, and as the 'Box of Trix' VHS cannot be better than the film it is transfered from, why is the 'Box of Trix' version such good quality? Surely, common-sense dictates that the original video master should be the best version around - instead of some two generation removed copy? |
| Mustapha_Ibrahim 24.11.2007 19:12 |
John S Stuart wrote:...which means that maybe (MAYBE) we can be presented to a real treat from QP soon.Negative Creep wrote: It was transferred to film for use in cinemas. It doesn't look like it was shot on film, but it looks fucking amazing! Much better picture quality than Wembley and MK.Thinking about this has done my head in! As Mr. Creep so correctly wrote, this gig was originally shot on video tape. From the video tape it was transfered to film to be shown on the big screen. (I recal when it was the second feature to both 'Saturday Night Fever' and 'Enter The Dragon'. (Of course there were other movies it played along with - but these are the two I recall seeing it with). The 'Box Of Trix' video version, as far as I am aware, was transfered from the film - not video version. So this is the point where I loose the plot... As the film version cannot be 'better' than the original video master, and as the 'Box of Trix' VHS cannot be better than the film it is transfered from, why is the 'Box of Trix' version such good quality? Surely, common-sense dictates that the original video master should be the best version around - instead of some two generation removed copy? But this would only be possible if the video master is still there (alive and well) and QP are keen in taking the chance of releasing something that would sell substantially less than their previous DVD releases... |
| Roger Meadows Tailor 25.11.2007 03:55 |
Mustapha_Ibrahim wrote:Oh god...John S Stuart wrote:...which means that maybe (MAYBE) we can be presented to a real treat from QP soon. But this would only be possible if the video master is still there (alive and well) and QP are keen in taking the chance of releasing something that would sell substantially less than their previous DVD releases...Negative Creep wrote: It was transferred to film for use in cinemas. It doesn't look like it was shot on film, but it looks fucking amazing! Much better picture quality than Wembley and MK.Thinking about this has done my head in! As Mr. Creep so correctly wrote, this gig was originally shot on video tape. From the video tape it was transfered to film to be shown on the big screen. (I recal when it was the second feature to both 'Saturday Night Fever' and 'Enter The Dragon'. (Of course there were other movies it played along with - but these are the two I recall seeing it with). The 'Box Of Trix' video version, as far as I am aware, was transfered from the film - not video version. So this is the point where I loose the plot... As the film version cannot be 'better' than the original video master, and as the 'Box of Trix' VHS cannot be better than the film it is transfered from, why is the 'Box of Trix' version such good quality? Surely, common-sense dictates that the original video master should be the best version around - instead of some two generation removed copy? I feel another box set thread coming on... STOP IT.STOP IT NOW.PLEASE SOMEBODY LISTEN!!! |
| Tero 25.11.2007 06:02 |
Mustapha_Ibrahim wrote:...which means that maybe (MOST PROBABLY) we can be presented with nothing from QP for a long time. ;)John S Stuart wrote:...which means that maybe (MAYBE) we can be presented to a real treat from QP soon. But this would only be possible if the video master is still there (alive and well) and QP are keen in taking the chance of releasing something that would sell substantially less than their previous DVD releases...Negative Creep wrote: It was transferred to film for use in cinemas. It doesn't look like it was shot on film, but it looks fucking amazing! Much better picture quality than Wembley and MK.Thinking about this has done my head in! As Mr. Creep so correctly wrote, this gig was originally shot on video tape. From the video tape it was transfered to film to be shown on the big screen. (I recal when it was the second feature to both 'Saturday Night Fever' and 'Enter The Dragon'. (Of course there were other movies it played along with - but these are the two I recall seeing it with). The 'Box Of Trix' video version, as far as I am aware, was transfered from the film - not video version. So this is the point where I loose the plot... As the film version cannot be 'better' than the original video master, and as the 'Box of Trix' VHS cannot be better than the film it is transfered from, why is the 'Box of Trix' version such good quality? Surely, common-sense dictates that the original video master should be the best version around - instead of some two generation removed copy? |
| pittrek 25.11.2007 06:35 |
So it was shot on video, and the cinema version was a Video > film transfer ? Weird, but sounds reasonable |
| KevoM 27.11.2007 12:17 |
I'm pretty sure that the Box Of Trix version was transferred from the video version, no way that looks 'film like 24fps'. Either way, I don't think a HD version would be of any benefit. 'You can't make a silk purse out of a sow's ear' It needs to be originally filmed in 35mm (super 16mm at a minimum) to qualify as 'high def' status. |
| Benn 28.11.2007 04:16 |
Roger Meadows Taylor, re: >>Oh god... I feel another box set thread coming on... STOP IT.STOP IT NOW.PLEASE SOMEBODY LISTEN!!! Now, THAT was funny. ';-> |
| Indo77 02.12.2007 08:08 |
The version I have is def shot on videotape and is extremely high quality. |