Topic: Sony DVD box set up for pre-order on Amazon

[xraffle]

I didn't convert anything from VHS, but the quality of professionally encoded DVDs is always superior than VHS sources.   I work for a professional DVD authoring & post-production company.  VHS is the poorest quality of all formats.   The DVD sets vs. home converted VHS sets would be a no brainer for me.

However, I'm not trying to disaprage what you did.  You've put in a lot of time and money into your collection, and if you are happy with it, that's understandable.  You may not want to put down $20 per set for these.   But the fact is, if these DVD sets are released, fan support will be essential to ensure future sets (the complete collection) is released.

You make a good point there. Fan support is very essential because if sales don't do well on the first few sets, then Sony may not want to continue releasing future sets. And besides, there are many shorts I have, and I do mean many, that aren't the best quality. I could use better copies of several shorts such as A Pain In the Pullman, Three Little Beers, Even As IOU, So Long Mr. Chumps, and many many others. And $20 per set is a very reasonable price indeed. And the fact that 12 sets will be spread out over the course of 2 years, I'm really not going to be spending that much. Thanks for the encouragement. I appreciate it.

If you hadn't convinced me, I probably will still end up buying it anyway. Somehow, I always get tempted into buying Stooge DVDs. I bought so many of the earlier releases. When it comes to the stooges, the temptation is irresistible.

[bubbadersh]

If the DVD has the Stooge shorts in the original theatrical release aspect ratio than I'll be very very happy. Full screen sucks if the sides of the original picture are cut off to fit the standard TV screen shape.

This is what I want:
The shorts should be the full unedited version as  shown in the theatrical release.
The shorts should be  in the original aspect ratio shown in the theatrical release.

Edit: I had assumed that the early Stooge shorts were filmed in a screen shape aspect ration wider than the 1.33:1 mentioned in the next few posts below. I originally said things like "the original wider theatrical release" and "original wider aspect ratio" in this post. I meant to say I want the shorts to stay in the original screen shape aspect ration  shown in the theatrical release, whatever that may be.  I changed the post and I want to thank the posters who pointed it out.

[ThumpTheShoes]

The Stooge films weren't all made for a widescreen exhibition. Their early shorts shorts, 'till about the time of Shot in the Frontier (you can kinda tell by the placement of the film titles), were filmed in that tall, 1.33-1 ratio. Full screen would be the proper aspect ratio for all the Curly's and a little over half the Shemp's. Crop those early films to widescreen and the composition would be way too tight. This example shows the loss of picture information at the top and bottom of the frame:


Now, on the opposite side, the only Stooge films I've seen, theatrically, were the Besser ones (at the Crown Theater, to be exact. Now torn down but was in Florence, SC) and, occasionally, they were so very widescreen (cropped, out of pure laziness, no doubt, to match the aspect ratio of the main feature) that you couldn't see their names during the opening credits! I'd guess those films were meant to be 1.85 or 1.79:1 or thereabouts. Not ultrawide panavision, 2.35:1, like the Crown would show them!

A couple of the Besser's are framed way up or way down to facilitate stock footage from the older, 1.33-1 ratio pictures. Pies and Guys springs to mind as an example. When shown cropped to 1.85:1 or similar ratios, the old, stock footage looks like it is framed too tight.

As for the feature films of the 60's, I always assumed they would accomodate either 1.33 or 1.85 or anywhere in between. The matting on the dvds leaves me wondering, though, whether or not full screen makes for a better exhibition, especially the last two films.

What worries me is, with the advent of widescreen tv's, what'll happen to the older "fullscreen" films, since many people really don't like the black/grey bars on the sides of the picture? Will those films be cropped to fit the screen? Are folks really happy with stretching and distorting the image to fit the screen?

-ThumpTheShoes

[scgenres]

I am very excited and hope the releases happen as this thread seems convinced they will. But, in raising the point of proper aspect, let's not forget that all of the feature releases thus far have not been true widescreen, but pan-and-scan cropped to look widesceen. Let's hope that Sony and C3 have developed enough respect for stooge fans to market these products in their original aspect, whatever that may be.

[xraffle]

If the DVD has the Stooge shorts in the original wider theatrical release aspect ratio than I'll be very very happy. At amazon.com it sadly says it will be Full Screen. Full screen sucks since the sides are cut off to fit the standard TV screen shape.

This is what I want:
The shorts should be the full unedited version as  shown in the theatrical release.
The shorts should be  in the original wider aspect ratio shown in the theatrical release.

That doesn't make any sense. You do realize that these shorts were not filmed in widescreen. They were filmed in full screen (1.33:1). So, if Sony were to release these in widescreen, I would be one angry guy because in order to make the shorts widescreen, that would require A LOT of picture cropping, which is what ThumpTheShoes just pointed out.

[bubbadersh]

Regarding screen shape aspect ratio: If the original shorts were originally shot in 1.33 to 1 aspect ratio (which happens to be the exact same aspect ration as standard television) then by all means do not change them. I always hope for a "high quality" release which should be faithful to the screen shape (the aspect ratio) that was originally intended.

---I don't want the top or bottom cropped to fit the screen shape.
---I don't want the sides cropped to fit the screen shape.
---I don't want it stretched or distorted in any way to fit the standard 4:3 screen shape or the wider 16:9 screen shape of today or the whatever screen shapes of tomorrow.
---I have no problem with letterbox bars or side bars as long as the entire image is shown in the original aspect ratio, whatever that may be.
---I just want to be able to see the entire original image.
---Are folks really happy with stretching and distorting the image to fit the screen? Soitanly not me !!!!       That makes me very unhappy.

Regarding edited versions: On a DVD release there is no real reason to not provide the full, original, unedited version as  shown in the theatrical release. What can I say? I'm sure Larry Fine would have had some great Yiddish expression to describe what I am trying to say.

Regarding colorization: For me colorization is different and I have no problem with colorization of the Stooge films for a number of reasons. First of all todays colorization is done well enough that it is not a distraction and as a side effect you tend to get a cleaned up and restored image. Second of all you always have the option of watching it with the color turned all the way down. Third of all there were never any artistic reasons for The Three Stooges to be watched in black and white, they just happened to be that way for technological and budgetary reasons.

[bubbadersh]

What worries me is, with the advent of widescreen tv's, what'll happen to the older "fullscreen" films, since many people really don't like the black/grey bars on the sides of the picture? Will those films be cropped to fit the screen? Are folks really happy with stretching and distorting the image to fit the screen? 

I am of the opinion that there will be far less opposition to having black/gray bars on the sides than there was to the letterbox format with the bars on the top and bottom.

When watching a widescreen image on a standard 4:3 TV (in the letterbox format with filler bars on the top and bottom) It looks like the top and bottom of the image is missing. At first it is hard to see  that the problem is with losing the sides of a widescreen image. It is not immediately obvious that pan and scan and other methods of expanding the image to fill the screen would chop off the sides.

When watching a standard 4:3 image on a widescreen TV (with filler bars on the sides) it looks like it is the sides of the image that are missing. It is immediately obvious.

I hope watching a sort of square inside a wider rectangle is less unnatural than a squat rectangle within a square. People seem more used to the idea especially since computers show windows of different shapes all the time.

[ThumpTheShoes]

Third of all there were never any artistic reasons for The Three Stooges to be watched in black and white, they just happened to be that way for technological and budgetary reasons.

A fair enough assumption. However, keep in mind that sets, colour schemes (temperatures), costumes, makeup, lighting and exposure timing were all composed for black-and-white photography-- an art form in itself that I still do not fully grasp to this day!


       "Hey, Moe! What colour is ketchup in black-and-white?"

As a novelty, I find that colourisation, particularly as an addition to the Stooge films, to be little more than distracting as I try to discern why the folks twiddling the knobs (Heh, heh! Knobs!) picked certain colours. Sky hues never look normal, skin range from peachy to orange, and anywhere there are shadows, dust, blurs and such the colour goes freakish. Besides palette choices, look closely at a colourised Stooges dvd and you'll find that the colour versions are over-compressed anyway, with mucho mpeg artifacts, mosquito noise... and NTSC colour "blow-out" is quite evident, as well. Colourising is just something that can be done, but shouldn't.

On a DVD release there is no real reason to not provide the full, original, unedited version as  shown in the theatrical release. What can I say? I'm sure Larry Fine would have had some great Yiddish expression to describe what I am trying to say.

Agreed and amplified! There is no excuse for what happened with Three Little Beers, nor would there be any reason to bring in the PC police to sanitise the films as they have been-and-gone-and-done in the past.

Also, from the Studio's end (all the major and minor players), proper aspect ratios are something that can and should be achieved on any modern telecine/transfer job. I am curious to see what will happen with the later Stooge shorts and their Columbia features, particularly as we face the High-Def and 16:9 screen era. Only time will tell, as Sony seems to want to keep an air-tight lid on this currently-proposed, currently vaporware project until the zero hour.

-ThumpTheShoes

[scgenres]

I recorded Myrt and Marge off Showtime in the late 80s, and agree that it is a classic. Healy and the Stooges stole this movie!!! If there is one Healy-era movie not currently available that truly deserves a DVD release, this it it.

[bubbadersh]

As a novelty, I find that colourisation, particularly as an addition to the Stooge films, to be little more than distracting as I try to discern why the folks twiddling the knobs (Heh, heh! Knobs!) picked certain colours. Sky hues never look normal, skin range from peachy to orange, and anywhere there are shadows, dust, blurs and such the colour goes freakish. Besides palette choices, look closely at a colourised Stooges dvd and you'll find that the colour versions are over-compressed anyway, with mucho mpeg artifacts, mosquito noise... and NTSC colour "blow-out" is quite evident, as well. Colourising is just something that can be done, but shouldn't.

Well I do hate all the compression artifacts and noise and such. I just never chalked it up to the effects of colorization per se.

I have a feeling if I paid enough attention to the colorization issues you raise I would notice them more.

[Sadistic Stooge]

Was the joe shorts Filmed in wide screen or any of the Columbia shorts (not just stooges) from 1953 to 1958 ?

[Justin T]

A fair enough assumption. However, keep in mind that sets, colour schemes (temperatures), costumes, makeup, lighting and exposure timing were all composed for black-and-white photography-- an art form in itself that I still do not fully grasp to this day!

As a novelty, I find that colourisation, particularly as an addition to the Stooge films, to be little more than distracting as I try to discern why the folks twiddling the knobs (Heh, heh! Knobs!) picked certain colours. Sky hues never look normal, skin range from peachy to orange, and anywhere there are shadows, dust, blurs and such the colour goes freakish. Besides palette choices, look closely at a colourised Stooges dvd and you'll find that the colour versions are over-compressed anyway, with mucho mpeg artifacts, mosquito noise... and NTSC colour "blow-out" is quite evident, as well. Colourising is just something that can be done, but shouldn't.

Agreed and amplified! There is no excuse for what happened with Three Little Beers, nor would there be any reason to bring in the PC police to sanitise the films as they have been-and-gone-and-done in the past.

Also, from the Studio's end (all the major and minor players), proper aspect ratios are something that can and should be achieved on any modern telecine/transfer job. I am curious to see what will happen with the later Stooge shorts and their Columbia features, particularly as we face the High-Def and 16:9 screen era. Only time will tell, as Sony seems to want to keep an air-tight lid on this currently-proposed, currently vaporware project until the zero hour.

-ThumpTheShoes

As usual Thump, I couldn't agree with you more my friend. I myself don't really care if some shorts get the colour treatment
as I prefer watching them as they were back in the day, black and white. Just give me the B&W please.

As for unedited, I second what you said. It was ridiculous how they edited Three Little Beers for the Three Smart Saps DVD and I hope that with the first of these new chronological sets they dont even dare attempt to do that again. Columbia/Sony should have learned their lesson by now you would think.

I recorded Myrt and Marge off Showtime in the late 80s, and agree that it is a classic. Healy and the Stooges stole this movie!!! If there is one Healy-era movie not currently available that truly deserves a DVD release, this it it.

I recently obtained a copy of Myrt and Marge off E-Bay and made another copy of it for ThumpTheShoes. I was suprised how good it was. Like I said in a earlier post, I really hope that someday Universal releases it on DVD. That movie, along with Columbia's Time Out for Rhythm and Rockin' In The Rockies are the three full length Three Stooges Movies I want most on DVD. I'm glad I have all 3 on DVDR for the time being.

[ThumpTheShoes]

Was the joe shorts Filmed in wide screen or any of the Columbia shorts (not just stooges) from 1953 to 1958 ?

Judging, solely, by the way the opening credit sequences are laid out, I'd say that 99.9% of all the Stooge films from Spooks! right on up to The Outlaws is Coming! were composed for at least a 1.78:1 screen format. Two of the shorts, Shot in the Frontier and Pies and Guys (in my humblest of humblies, of course!) would look purty good with a widescreen matting. Frontier has a cinematic look and feel with the background music and old west sets (wasn't that town set used in the Monkees' movie in 1967? I don't have a copy to check...), and the blocking from the new footage of Pies makes full use of the 1.85:1 canvas.

As for the other stuff that Columbia was putting out at the time, 2reelers might be able to answer that one? I would hazard a guess that filmmaking sensibilities made a shift toward big, wide screens just to upstage the ol' boob tube. I'm just not aware of Columbia's output from that time, other than the obligatory Stooginess!

Just to add my 2 pence to the comments from JustinT and scgenres about the underrated picture Myrt and Marge-- This is a good, solid piece of entertainment and it is a much better Stooge movie (even though they're not "the" stars) than, say, the Harrold Romm cash-in picture Have Rocket, Will Travel. It is a character-driven picture with a real story, a couple-a memorable songs and no talking horse-unicorn things! It's nothing like the DeRita pictures and, and, AND Ted Healy is good in it, too. Universal (or whoever distributes their videos, now) should release this one or license it to someone who will.

-ThumpTheShoes

[bubbadersh]

I did some research on the net and I found that some sites claim that until the 1950's films were created in an screen aspect ratio of  1.37:1 which was called the "Academy Ratio". Is this true? Can someone confirm that?

It that is the case then I would expect the early Stooge shorts were shot in this aspect and not in the 1.33:1  TV aspect ratio. Can someone help clear this up?

[ThumpTheShoes]

I did some research on the net and I found that some sites claim that until the 1950's films were created in an screen aspect ratio of  1.37:1 which was called the "Academy Ratio". Is this true? Can someone confirm that?

It that is the case then I would expect the early Stooge shorts were shot in this aspect and not in the 1.33:1  TV aspect ratio of 1.33:1. Can someone help clear this up?

The outside of the black box is 1.33:1.
The outside of the centered title card is 1.37:1.

When zoomed in to full-frame, any image information lost on the sides is considered negligible in most cases, and not worth losing resolution to "picture-box" the entire film.

-ThumpTheShoes

[bubbadersh]

I respectfully disagree. If you consider the  zoomed-in full frame picture loss from the sides as negligible then the amount of resolution loss from having a tiny band on the top and bottom is also negligible. I would prefer the tiny band.

[ThumpTheShoes]

I respectfully disagree. If you consider the zoomed-in full frame picture loss from the sides as negligible then the amount of resolution loss from having a tiny band on the top and bottom is also negligible. I would prefer the tiny band.

Really, I think that pictureboxing (or, pillarboxing) when done right, like on the Soup To Nuts dvd, is a definite asset to the presentation. That picture had an incredibly tall, rectangular shape at a ratio of about 1.20:1 (alot like the contemporary silent pictures which could be as narrow as 1.17:1). On the dvd, there are only very thin bars on the sides preserving the shape of the image which, I would assume, would be the entire exposed frame. Subtle, but it is an effective presentation. On a regular, 4:3 television with typical 2-3% overscan, you'd probably not notice the bars.


                          Ladies and gentlemen, Ted "Heel" and the Boys!

When it's done wrong, like on those 15+ year old, WB transfers of the Looney Tunes/Merrie Melodies (you know, the ones with the horrid, coloured pictureboxing?) it's done too much. It is as if there is too much banding around the image to compensate for picture tube overscan. And that's the catch-- very rarely will you find an Academy-ratio film presented with "just enough" filler on the edges to retain the original shape. It's usually framed on all sides, like that Stooges title card I posted. And that much filler on all sides is unnecessary to preserve a 1.37:1 ratio.

With High Definition creeping into the fray, the whole business of picture cropping/loss of resolution and such should be a thing of the past.

Yeah, I don't believe it either!

[bubbadersh]

The outside of the black box is 1.33:1.
The outside of the centered title card is 1.37:1.

1.375 aspect is wider than 1.333 aspect. This example is narrower than 1.333 aspect.

In the Stooge short centered title card example shown:
The outside of the black box is 640x480 which has a 1.333 aspect.
The outside of the centered title card measures approx 590x452 which is a 1.305 aspect.

Please explain.

[ThumpTheShoes]

Please explain.

Cropped. And a bad example.
Never trust a "bonehead"!

Edit: It was still a bad example! And I'm still a bonehead!
 
Here's the same pic as above, straight from the dvd, with the black border removed. Could it be that the image within the black box is more than you'd actually see projected at, roughly, 1.37:1!



The outer edge of the blue box above represents 593 x 434 pixels which'd be 1.366:1. Even cropped, that's still a pretty cozy composition. Well, I'll be! Maybe the Sony folks are opening up the frame and, actually, giving us more picture info than I thought?
-Thump

[Sadistic Stooge]

does any one know where i can get a good copy of Time Out for Rhythm at ?

[Justin T]

does any one know where i can get a good copy of Time Out for Rhythm at ?

Good question.

 I obtained a copy of that movie from one of the fellow posters here on the message board, ThumpTheShoes.
He gave me a excellent copy of the movie on DVD. If you are looking for rare Stooge movies like Rhythm and
perhaps other things its a good idea to post a request in the Swap Meet forum and someone will be sure to
help you out. This place is one of the best to get it, I haven't seen people trying to sell copies of it on places
like E-Bay, although you can get some rare movies there. I know a particular seller there who on a semi-regular
basis sells copies of the following movies the Stooges appeared in-

The Captain Hates The Sea
Start Cheering
and
Myrt and Marge

But definatly ask around here first, the fan community here is pretty friendly and helpful about getting rare stuff
like Time Out For Rhythm. I Hope that helps you.

[Larry Larry]

Not that discussions about aspect ratio and "Time Out for Rhythm" aren't interesting, but back to the subject of this thread:

Has anyone seen an online press release or official announcement from Sony about this suppossed box set?

I can't find one, and it would seem like Sony would be out front w/ this.  I hope they are just days away from giving the official specs.

[ThumpTheShoes]

Has anyone seen an online press release or official announcement from Sony about this suppossed box set?

Rest assured, when it happens, you'll see it here!

Edit: Or, just try and contact Stooged and confused, a member of this site who claims to have ties to Sony's marketing machine!   

the fan community here is pretty friendly and helpful about getting rare stuff

You ain't just whistlin' Dixie, brother!

A good example of a not-so-good trading site would be one who's initials include "sitcoms online" and "message board"! The folks 'round there have crazy demands for trading, like 50-1 trades and the like. Or, they just want money, and alot of it!

...But, I think you still need 10 posts before you can start your own thread at the swap board!

-Thump

[Sadistic Stooge]

ok thanks for all you help
 check out this site I found full of rare movies of  3 stooges and non 3 stooges movies go to www.ioffer.com
I got excellent copies of Abbott And Costello It aint hay and Rio Rita .

[ohmahaaha]

Getting back to the announced DVD box set, in lieu of any official announcement from Sony ... and believe me, I want to see this happen pretty badly ... this just ain't adding up, if the price is right.  The list price is the same for this box set as it is for one of their other DVDs that contains 4 shorts, albeit shorts that are colorized?  I really wish we would see some kind of official announcement from Sony on this.