Topic: Volume 7 Comparison Screenshots

[luke795]

Can somebody do comparison screenshots for volume 7?

[luke795]

I'd like to see comparison screenshots of Spooks, Pardon my Backfire, Goof on the Roof, Income Tax Sappy, Musty Musketeers, Pals and Gals, Knutzy Knights, Shot in the Frontier, and Scotched in Scotland.

[ThumpTheShoes]

Pardon My Backfire
Homebrew, full frame, full-colour anaglyph (left eye red) made from an interlaced bootleg (shutter glasses type):


Australian dvd release, full frame, flat, Magna Pacific, 2003 (PAL format):


New Sony dvd, widescreen, flat:


New Sony dvd, widescreen, half-colour anaglyph:


This particular shot is framed beautifully for widescreen and does, I think, show off what the shorts can look like when shot and matted properly.
I can do more tomorrow but, tonight, I'm beat!

[Sadistic Stooge]

wow nice work can't wait to see more .

[xraffle]

Thanks Thump for doing these. Most of the widescreen shorts do look nice. So far, it's only "Goof on the Roof" that looks funny. I wonder why.

BTW, from those screenshots, you can tell that Sony didn't just crop the top and bottom of the screen and pass it off as widescreen. These are indeed the original widescreen versions. So even though some shorts may look cramped and awkward, this is how they were originally released. So, I still hope Sony continues to provide the widescreen version on the next volume despite those complaints at Amazon.

[dimelives]

Here here^

[ThumpTheShoes]

Spooks!
3d homebrew, anaglyph, full frame, VHS

GoodTimes VHS, full frame, flat

Sony dvd, widescreen, flat

Sony dvd, widescreen, anaglyph

[ThumpTheShoes]

Now, the one everyone wants.. Goof on the Roof

1

Sony DVD, widescreen

Columbia VHS, full frame

2

Sony DVD, widescreen

Columbia VHS, full frame

3*

Sony DVD, widescreen

Columbia VHS, full frame

4

Sony DVD, widescreen

Columbia VHS, full frame

5

Sony DVD, widescreen

Columbia VHS, full frame

6

Sony DVD, widescreen

Columbia VHS, full frame

7

Sony DVD, widescreen

Columbia VHS, full frame

8

Sony DVD, widescreen

Columbia VHS, full frame

Many of the framing problems shown above could be alleviated by shifting (or tilting) the matte up to the top 2/3 of the frame. There's a consistent amount of "dead" area, or unecessary visual information at the bottom of the full frame. It could be corrected on a shot by shot basis, but I'd guess that this one just wasn't actively composed for widescreen viewing.

Either that or the DP had no CLUE about headroom and framing a shot, which I'm sure was not the case. It is inconsistent with the bulk of the Stooges' output and, besides, no director would ever allow such bad framing as presented in the widescreen version. Hell, if I was the producer of this film and I saw that bit in screenshot 3 with the talent's face out of frame.. there'd be trouble!

*Note: Screenshot 3 looks like one of those optical zooms often utilised in the Stooges' films as an afterthought brought in during editing. This time, it looks like it was done to show off Moe's extra goofy facial expression as he enjoys that delicious "cheese" sandwich and vinegar. An odd choice of framing in the zoom, though, since we can't see the label "VINEGAR" on the bottle and part of his head is cut off, even in the full frame. Why not tilt the image up with that lab effect to focus on Moe's hamming it up? Still, I'm sold on the shot in full frame, however, it's kinda (kinda?!) spoiled in the current widescreen format.

[falsealarms]

Great work, Thump!

[xraffle]

Thanks Thump! Great screenshots, bad cropping. I can't believe they released that short in theaters like that.

I remember when "Back To The Future" came out on DVD. Parts 2 and 3 were matted improperly and Universal had to recall that and offer replacements. They replaced them with the properly matted widescreen versions. I hope that's not the case here, though it sure does look like it.

[ThumpTheShoes]

Thanks for the kind words, folks! I do think that the case of Goof.. is similar to the B2F problem, but I also think that, just the same, it is unintentional. In this very volume, I think Sony has made the all-out attempt to give fans what they want (or wanted, or thought they wanted!    ) with un-tampered-with shorts, and the novelty of 3d and widescreen (for the first time, ever on video!).

There are issues, we know, but the anomalies, likely, appear out of pure naiveté of and for the material. Beyond the framing problems, I have seen no instances of tampering, yet, with these shorts and there are numerous places where tweaks could have been made but, Thankfully (with a capital Tee!), haven't! Like, A Missed Fortune: extraneous audio when the shot changes to Larry doctorin' his pancakes! And no pitch-tweaking in Scotched...

Now, to continue. This time, we have Shot in the Frontier-- this short looks perfectly fabulous in the widescreen frame, as I think these pics will show.

Sony DVD, widescreen

GoodTimes VHS, full frame

From the sprawling opening titles to, seemingly, panoramic views of all of the actors together onscreen, right down to the comedy mask of the end card, this short is all one big widescreen showcase. If this short suffers at all from the matting, it is simply due to the cinematography overshadowing the script! Is that OTT for a description? Not in my opinion. Look again at the photographic compositions above-- every single one is a winner, with great attention to detail, subject placement and viewer focus.
The Boys sure look better here*, in this low-budget short comedy, than in the slightly up-budget-B-picture-big-deal Gold Raiders. Marvelous!

*Yeah, opinion time.

[xraffle]

Now that's more like it. "Shot in the Frontier" definitely looks better in widescreen. I always wondered all these years why some words got cut off on the headstone.

That's the exact shot I was referring to in the other thread.

Good woik!

[Dunrobin]

I haven't had a chance to watch Goof on the Roof yet, so I wasn't sure what everyone was complaining about, but now I understand.  Yikes!  

What the hell happened here, Sony?  Somebody dropped the ball on this one, big time.  Didn't anyone do a quality control check before this disk was compiled?  

I love Goof on the Roof, and I am severely disappointed to see this piss poor excuse of a "remastering" job in what has been an excellent set, up to this point.  I hope Sony admits that they totally pooched this one and at least make good with a corrected version on the next volume.  

At least it looks as though the rest of the volume is more in line with the quality we've come to expect.  Very nice job on the screen shots, Thump.  Thanks!  

UPDATE:  Since the widescreen version is apparently the way Columbia released the short back in 1953, I withdraw and apologize for my complaint against Sony.  Jules White deserves the eye poke on this one.  Sorry for jumping to conclusions, Sony, but I kind of wish you had at least included a remastered full screen version as well.

[Sadistic Stooge]

Nice work  ThumpTheShoes  . I think Sony should of just made the Widescreen shorts in Letterbox and not fucked things up with Matted .

Why Sony Why ? Grrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr !!!!

[locoboymakesgood]

I love Goof on the Roof, and I am severely disappointed to see this piss poor excuse of a "remastering" job in what has been an excellent set, up to this point.  I hope Sony admits that they totally pooched this one and at least make good with a corrected version on the next volume.   

Goof on the Roof has always been one of my favorite shorts so it is really disappointing. I wouldn't expect the short to be fixed and thrown on the next volume.. the only thing I could see them doing is what Universal did for the Back to the Future Parts II & III framing issue which was simply issuing a replacement. You call an 800 number and they sent you the new discs in the mail.. that's how most "replacement" programs work. I think Fox did one with Slumdog Millionaire earlier this year, too.

We need to let Sony know there's an issue. Doesn't that one guy post over on that Monsters board?

[Sadistic Stooge]

Goof on the Roof has always been one of my favorite shorts so it is really disappointing. I wouldn't expect the short to be fixed and thrown on the next volume.. the only thing I could see them doing is what Universal did for the Back to the Future Parts II & III framing issue which was simply issuing a replacement. You call an 800 number and they sent you the new discs in the mail.. that's how most "replacement" programs work. I think Fox did one with Slumdog Millionaire earlier this year, too.

We need to let Sony know there's an issue. Doesn't that one guy post over on that Monsters board?

I think everyone on this site should call Sony up or e mail them and give them a ear full !

[metaldams]

Goof on the Roof has always been one of my favorite shorts so it is really disappointing. I wouldn't expect the short to be fixed and thrown on the next volume.. the only thing I could see them doing is what Universal did for the Back to the Future Parts II & III framing issue which was simply issuing a replacement. You call an 800 number and they sent you the new discs in the mail.. that's how most "replacement" programs work. I think Fox did one with Slumdog Millionaire earlier this year, too.

We need to let Sony know there's an issue. Doesn't that one guy post over on that Monsters board?

Even one of the greatest cultural artifacts of our time - the 2 CD Deluxe Edition of Twisted Sister's STAY HUNGRY - got a botched remastering job and had a replacement plan complete with a signed apology from the guitarist!  So yes, you're right Loco, precedents have been set with companies keeping the consumers happy with shitty product - though I don't think this entire volume seems shitty.  Perhaps one of the 18 Stooges the Forrester brothers talked about years back is still with us and can sign an apology the way good ol' J.J. French did.

I'm wondering if Columbia just screwed GOOF ON THE ROOF up in theaters or if Sony just released a bum print.  If it's the former, well, shit happens.  If it's the latter, a shame, but I still say overall this has been a very good run with these volumes.  The older I get, the more I realize few things in life are perfect and you just kind of have to be thankful for what you get and only worry about what you control, but that's just me talking.  Overall, I'm very happy with this run of Stooge shorts, especially compared to the way the shorts have been released in the past.

By the way, I'm expecting my copy next week.

[metaldams]

On a more positive note........SHOT IN THE FRONTIER looks great!   

[BeAStooge]

I'm wondering if Columbia just screwed GOOF ON THE ROOF up in theaters or if Sony just released a bum print.  

GOOF ON THE ROOF (1953), the first wide-screen Stooges comedy produced (but the 3rd one released), played in theatres as you see it on the DVD. Framing problems aside, the DVD presentation is historically correct.

[metaldams]

GOOF ON THE ROOF (1953), the first wide-screen Stooges comedy produced (but the 3rd one released), played in theatres as you see it on the DVD. Framing problems aside, the DVD presentation is historically correct.

Then Sony's not to blame, Columbia, circa 1953, is.  I'm shocked Columbia would allow such an awful framing job to be released to theaters. Then again, we are talking about a department that was both starting budget cutbacks AND dealing with new technology.  Perhaps it's not so surprising after all.

[xraffle]

GOOF ON THE ROOF (1953), the first wide-screen Stooges comedy produced (but the 3rd one released), played in theatres as you see it on the DVD. Framing problems aside, the DVD presentation is historically correct.

Then this set shouldn't be recalled then. The "Back To The Future" movies were not historically correct, so that's why a replacement was issued.

[Stooges#1]

I think that just like the Spooks and Pardon My Backfire shorts where Sony put both a 2-d and 3-d version on this set, they should've added a Full Frame version of Goof on the Roof onto the set (as well as Widescreen) after they saw how the Widescreen version came out.

Just like the comparision shots show the Full-Frame Verson from the Columbia VHS release looks perfect. That would've been the perfect solution, just restore it and thats it.

[locoboymakesgood]

Then this set shouldn't be recalled then. The "Back To The Future" movies were not historically correct, so that's why a replacement was issued.

If they were released fucked up in '53, then that's the way I want it. I wasn't aware that the framing for GOOF was done so poorly back then. I would've thought it was a QC issue now.

I'm totally content - this is a solid volume with the 3D shorts, all of these being in their correct ratio. I really don't think Sony would've dropped the ball on one short when they clearly went above and beyond to give us these shorts the way they were meant to be seen.

Still hard to believe that 2 years ago we were cursing Sony's name for selling us bastardized colorized discs and now we get these. Unbelievable what a couple of years and the internet can do.

[locoboymakesgood]

I think that just like the Spooks and Pardon My Backfire shorts where Sony put both a 2-d and 3-d version on this set, they should've added a Full Frame version of Goof on the Roof onto the set (as well as Widescreen) after they saw how the Widescreen version came out.

Just like the comparision shots show the Full-Frame Verson from the Columbia VHS release looks perfect. That would've been the perfect solution, just restore it and thats it.

The Full Screen version wasn't the way White shot it. It just so happens it looks better since it focuses more on the top and bottom of the picture whereas we get more of the right and left sides. It's just the way it was shot.

Putting a full-screen version in there for absolutely no reason would've mucked up the release. With the 3D versions yes - I'm glad there's two different prints.. but to have the same short with differing ratios just because it looks better would've been foolish.

You could say the same for the remakes which contain the old full frame footage intertwined with new widescreen material. Might as well include the originals again just so we get the full image for the stock footage.


I can see Sony's standpoint on that. I'm just surprised QC back in the early 50s was so poor in the shorts department although by that time I'm sure nobody really cared.

[moelarrycurlyshemp]

i dont care if it is historically correct, i want a full frame version on the next release, i'll pay an extra $100 to get it i don't care.... goof on the roof is one of shemps best's shorts of all time. they goofed and didn't offer both versions on this set, you would think they would watch the finished product to check for problems before releasing it to the public but i guess not as time = money and money being the most important thing to companies wins out.

 Use capital letters when beginning sentences.