Latest on MJJC

Dangerous Short Films are currently being upscaled to 4K on YouTube!

Theoretically, you could upscale the VFX and overlay them onto the 35mm. and if the seperate VFX tape doesnā€˜t exist anymore and just tapes with a final edit, you can upscale the parts that have VFX with AI to come close to the original and edit them together. Very easy to do, have done this a lot
 
mjfp said:
Theoretically, you could upscale the VFX and overlay them onto the 35mm. and if the seperate VFX tape doesnā€˜t exist anymore and just tapes with a final edit, you can upscale the parts that have VFX with AI to come close to the original and edit them together. Very easy to do, have done this a lot
Click to expand...
All of this would require the slight effort of paying someone money to do it for them.
 
So maybe the plans are, release MOFI HIStory before the biopic, Volum 1 & 2 of the videos, and perhaps a release in Between the two films hopefully invincible
 
alexbism said:
I doubt they would re-release the HIStory video 1 & 2 since Vision is supposed to have taken it's place now
Click to expand...
Nope at all, they are updating the version of the videos to the oficial library, even version of vision are really the same of the VHS masters
 
someplace_else said:
Yeah, I think using different sources and cutting them together wouldn't look good... maybe upscaling the film without special effects and re-build the effects would be best, but very time and money - consuming (they could do that, but... šŸ‘€ ).

I never thought about in which format all the short films were filmed. Is there a list/info which ones can really be transferred to 4K?

I think the AI upscaling looks like when you sharpen a jpeg too much and reduce the noise...not a big fan. But it would be okay-ish, if there is really no other possibility and they didn't use the wrong tape in the first place.

But again I have to ask myself how can all these tapes be lost. I am a photographer and I always have back-ups of important shootings, raw files included. So in this case I would assume they have back-ups of back-ups of back-ups etc. šŸ« 
Click to expand...
Not to defend the estate's actions, since we know they tend to follow the "whatever's cheapest/easiest" route, but there could be a number of reasons for not doing a proper film scan. Obviously the biggest one is time/money, and that's probably the reason here. Especially considering so many other artists have opted for the cheap and easy 4K upscale without much controversy (look at Janet for example). Going back to the film source and re-scanning/restoring to 4K is a timely and costly procedure; one I'd argue is worth while for an artist that re-defined the music video art form, but also I can kind of understand why you'd focus on only the most important/iconic videos.

Now, let's say they wanted to do new film scans, it is theoretically possible that the source is missing/hard to locate and these AI versions are stopgaps. In the case of THRILLER we know that work took quite some time, was initially done for the 3D conversion, and that some music exec had a 35mm print of the short (presumably the estate did too but based on the stories we heard about record keeping its entirely possible they didnt).

But let's now say they even DID find the original negatives to scan, the reality is this videos going to have a couple shots that simply will not exist in any form other than video -- namely those (at the time) groundbreaking digital effects. They were made in the early 90s and cannot simply just be "recreated" as some people assume (the software is likely obsolete, the original working files likely missing, and the source material for those shots may not even exist anymore to attempt to "rebuild" from scratch). You could do a close approximation, sure, but then people would be complaining that it's slightly different (technology has come a long way since then, but those effects truly were groundbreaking and required lots of manual adjustments - there's no way to simply do it again perfectly). The only solution for those effects are to upscale those shots. The limitations are entirely technical.

Now, could you still intercut them with properly scanned footage? Absolutely. This isn't entirely uncommon, especially with films of this era. There'd be a noticeable dip in quality, but considering most of the shorts are relatively VFX free, it really shouldn't be a huge deal.

I'm still holding out that we'll get a proper home video release of all the short films, properly scanned from the source, and with as little up-scaling as possible, being used only when absolutely necessary. But I'm not holding my breath... we still haven't got the HIStory Munich 3D release that's done and dusted and just sitting waiting to release. Not to mention when they uploaded Ghosts it wasn't the HD scan that's out there.

Is the AI upscale disappointing? Yeah. Is it an improvement over the terrible quality, compressed 480p versions we previously had, I'd say yes (barring the new censorship). Is this par for the course for this team? 100%
 
i have it and am watching it on my tv, clearly an upscale looks better than before but yk, has the usual issues with a simple upscale
 
Y
Galactus123 said:
I really hope at least one of these is in real 4K.
Click to expand...
I hope so too, the next one to come out is in the closet and it has NO effects so I hope they will mount the video from 0 by scanning the original negatives

the other thing is that the direction they are going... for years the ones I most wanted to see in real 4K was remember the time and who is it and apparently they will still go to climb it and don't expect much from Heal the world and Gone to soon, from the video of dangerous that are mostly a source of tape, with which they deliver the scanner from the best source available , No artificial intelligence please
 
adamschoales said:
Not to defend the estate's actions, since we know they tend to follow the "whatever's cheapest/easiest" route, but there could be a number of reasons for not doing a proper film scan. Obviously the biggest one is time/money, and that's probably the reason here. Especially considering so many other artists have opted for the cheap and easy 4K upscale without much controversy (look at Janet for example). Going back to the film source and re-scanning/restoring to 4K is a timely and costly procedure; one I'd argue is worth while for an artist that re-defined the music video art form, but also I can kind of understand why you'd focus on only the most important/iconic videos.

Now, let's say they wanted to do new film scans, it is theoretically possible that the source is missing/hard to locate and these AI versions are stopgaps. In the case of THRILLER we know that work took quite some time, was initially done for the 3D conversion, and that some music exec had a 35mm print of the short (presumably the estate did too but based on the stories we heard about record keeping its entirely possible they didnt).

But let's now say they even DID find the original negatives to scan, the reality is this videos going to have a couple shots that simply will not exist in any form other than video -- namely those (at the time) groundbreaking digital effects. They were made in the early 90s and cannot simply just be "recreated" as some people assume (the software is likely obsolete, the original working files likely missing, and the source material for those shots may not even exist anymore to attempt to "rebuild" from scratch). You could do a close approximation, sure, but then people would be complaining that it's slightly different (technology has come a long way since then, but those effects truly were groundbreaking and required lots of manual adjustments - there's no way to simply do it again perfectly). The only solution for those effects are to upscale those shots. The limitations are entirely technical.

Now, could you still intercut them with properly scanned footage? Absolutely. This isn't entirely uncommon, especially with films of this era. There'd be a noticeable dip in quality, but considering most of the shorts are relatively VFX free, it really shouldn't be a huge deal.

I'm still holding out that we'll get a proper home video release of all the short films, properly scanned from the source, and with as little up-scaling as possible, being used only when absolutely necessary. But I'm not holding my breath... we still haven't got the HIStory Munich 3D release that's done and dusted and just sitting waiting to release. Not to mention when they uploaded Ghosts it wasn't the HD scan that's out there.

Is the AI upscale disappointing? Yeah. Is it an improvement over the terrible quality, compressed 480p versions we previously had, I'd say yes (barring the new censorship). Is this par for the course for this team? 100%
Click to expand...
While I see where youā€™re coming from and mostly agree, I think that a lot of this discussion could very easily be quelled with a little transparency.

One of the best things the estate ever did, in my opinion, was release a statement ahead of Bad 25 explaining why they decided to use a VHS scan for the Wembley show. It didnā€™t shield the finished product from criticism, but it was very refreshing to have them lay out their thought process and be upfront about what they did and didnā€™t have. To this day, I still think they made the right choice releasing that copy, even if the actual restoration was less than great.

I see no reason why the same shouldnā€™t apply here. Just a quick email from the Online Team saying, ā€œHereā€™s why we used AI, hereā€™s why we havenā€™t released a proper film restoration.ā€ Even if the answer sucks, at least we have an answer. And if there is a good answer (e.g., the film reels are lost, a 4K scan is coming and this is just a stopgap), why not tell us so we donā€™t flood them with unnecessary hate?
 
IMO itā€™s hard for me to think Michaelā€™s team destroyed or lost the original 35mm films of his short films, at least after MJ called it ā€œshort filmsā€. Itā€™s SHORT FILMS. it means he had a strong to change boring music video ordinary to movie-like right? And he put a lots of budget on these. then how the hell his team or professional could destroy/lose the original 35mm films. This estate is terribly lazy and stingy.
 
JahirSGG said:
I hope so too, the next one to come out is in the closet and it has NO effects so I hope they will mount the video from 0 by scanning the original negatives

the other thing is that the direction they are going... for years the ones I most wanted to see in real 4K was remember the time and who is it and apparently they will still go to climb it and don't expect much from Heal the world and Gone to soon, from the video of dangerous that are mostly a source of tape, with which they deliver the scanner from the best source available , No artificial intelligence please
Click to expand...
If In the Closet isn't real 4K then they just didn't want to put effort and money into it.

Would be interesting to see some alternative cut without the black and white filter. That could be great extra material for Blu-ray/dvd.
 
AlwaysThere said:
While I see where youā€™re coming from and mostly agree, I think that a lot of this discussion could very easily be quelled with a little transparency.

One of the best things the estate ever did, in my opinion, was release a statement ahead of Bad 25 explaining why they decided to use a VHS scan for the Wembley show. It didnā€™t shield the finished product from criticism, but it was very refreshing to have them lay out their thought process and be upfront about what they did and didnā€™t have. To this day, I still think they made the right choice releasing that copy, even if the actual restoration was less than great.

I see no reason why the same shouldnā€™t apply here. Just a quick email from the Online Team saying, ā€œHereā€™s why we used AI, hereā€™s why we havenā€™t released a proper film restoration.ā€ Even if the answer sucks, at least we have an answer. And if there is a good answer (e.g., the film reels are lost, a 4K scan is coming and this is just a stopgap), why not tell us so we donā€™t flood them with unnecessary hate?
Click to expand...
Couldn't agree more. Just communicating their process would at least make it clear they know we care, and that they care to keep us in the loop.
Kazu MJ Wilson said:
IMO itā€™s hard for me to think Michaelā€™s team destroyed or lost the original 35mm films of his short films, at least after MJ called it ā€œshort filmsā€. Itā€™s SHORT FILMS. it means he had a strong to change boring music video ordinary to movie-like right? And he put a lots of budget on these. then how the hell his team or professional could destroy/lose the original 35mm films. This estate is terribly lazy and stingy.
Click to expand...
You need to keep in mind the actual post production process though. When a feature film is shot (on film) and edited digitally, they will sometimes go back and edit the original camera negative to have a record of that finished version of the film as the original source. In other cases, the "digital intermediate" becomes the de facto master version, and home video releases are all made from that. There's a number of high-budget feature films that, as a result, only exist as 2K masters, and the 4K versions you buy today are, in fact, just upscales of that 2K version (albeit very well done, and usually without the use of AI).

In the case of Jackson's short films, the same is true, albeit at a lower standard definition resolution: the film would have been scanned, the edits made digitally, and that SD digital version became the de facto master. Unquestionably the SD masters have been preserved, catalogued, etc.

But the original camera negatives? They likely haven't been touched since they were transferred 30 years ago, and at the time there may not have been any reason to think that they needed to hold onto them: yes Jackson was a revolutionary artist, but they were ultimately "just" music videos.

But, again, as AlwaysThere says, just communicate all this to us. Explain the situation. Then we wouldn't have to speculate.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top