How 'Mission Impossible' Made the Leap To 4K and HDR (engadget.com)
In the run up to the release of Fallout, the new movie in the Mission Impossible franchise, Paramount studio re-released the entire Mission Impossible series on 4K Blu-ray last month. The new discs aren't only a huge upgrade for cinephiles -- they're also a fascinating glimpse at how studios can revive older films for the 4K/HDR era. Engadget: "In terms of any re-transfers or remastering that we are doing for our HDR releases, we will go back to the highest resolution source available," Kirsten Pielstick, manager of Paramount's digital mastering group, said in an interview. In the case of Mission Impossible 1 and 2, that involved scanning the original 35mm negatives in 4K/16-bit. As you'd expect, the studio tries to get the original artists involved with any remasters, especially with something like HDR, which allows for higher brightness and more nuanced black levels. Pielstick worked with the director of photography (DP) for the first Mission Impossible film, Stephen H. Burum, to make sure its noir-like palette stayed intact.
[...] "Our mastering philosophy here is always to work directly with the talent whenever possible, and use the new technology to enhance the movie, but always stay true to the intent of the movie," Pielstick said. "You're not going to want to make things brighter just because you can, if it's not the intent of how you were supposed to see things." [...] "You also have to remember that we're not putting in anything that didn't exist on the film [for HD remasters]," Pielstick added. "It was always there we just didn't have the ability to see it. So we're not adding anything new, we're not doing anything to increase those, we're just able to look at the negative in a much clearer way than we ever could before."
[...] "Our mastering philosophy here is always to work directly with the talent whenever possible, and use the new technology to enhance the movie, but always stay true to the intent of the movie," Pielstick said. "You're not going to want to make things brighter just because you can, if it's not the intent of how you were supposed to see things." [...] "You also have to remember that we're not putting in anything that didn't exist on the film [for HD remasters]," Pielstick added. "It was always there we just didn't have the ability to see it. So we're not adding anything new, we're not doing anything to increase those, we're just able to look at the negative in a much clearer way than we ever could before."
Better to remain silent and be thought a fool than to speak and to remove all doubt.
You are welcome on my lawn.
You mean the shot for 1960s TV, 240 lines of interlaced NTSC? I wonder if the original 35mm prints even still exist, much less how well they were maintained.
Shot for 1960's TV but on 35mm film by total pro's using excellent Mitchell cameras. Just like the original Star Trek, which was shot on the soundstage next door, on occasion with the same physical cameras. Dye fading and such could be an issue, but they should have plenty to go on, plus they don't have to rebuild all of the SFX as they did with TOS.
At least a much better chance that ten years newer, when everything had shifted to videotape.
Ugh. Man, what kind of paid advertisement shilling is this anyway? Oh really??? no shit!! 35mm film can be scanned at 4K , my mind is fucking blown. Cinematic classic Mission Impossible seen as never before.
/.
Give me a fucking break,
So do we get to hear Tom Cruise say "War. War never changes."?
I have yet to see any 35mm analog material that comes anywhere close to the quality of 4k videos I can shoot on my mundane digital consumer camera. I don't get how people confuse film grain with actual image detail. Even hyped recent 70mm films like "The hateful Eight" are just sad grainy proof of analog films being overrated. If you want to see some decent 4k quality, have a look at documentaries like "Planet Earth 2" or a very few movies like "Lucy" where resolution is actually used for details, not film grain.