quote: Joe Redifer

---

Is this burning body... alive?????

---

quote: Joe Redifer

---

Also, are there any giraffes in this flick?

---

quote: Joe Redifer

---

I wonder if the "Earth" Blu-ray will be better than this.

---

quote: Bobby Henderson

---

The only flaws I noticed were a couple of overlooked specks of dirt and a little grain on the otherwise very cool motion controlled time lapse shots at the end of the movie.

---

Those are birds. When viewed in time lapse, they appear as dirt. The director specifically didn't want to remove them.

By the way, Chris Rena was the man behind the blu-ray restoration. He has successfully set the standard for which ALL other blu-rays are judged. Even if there are no flaming giraffes in this movie or you feel you may be bored to tears, you will be blown away by the quality.
 

---

Posted by Mark J. Marshall (Member # 1409) on 11-04-2008, 01:42 PM:
 
I've never even heard of this movie for some reason. After reading your review, and some of the reviews on IMDB, I'll have to check it out. Thanks for the tip!
 

---

Posted by Joe Redifer (Member # 3) on 11-04-2008, 03:56 PM:
 
Does it have fancy menus, director commentaries, outtakes, a Spanish language track, trailers, a "making of" featurette, BD-Live games, trivia, a fold-out map, interviews with the cast and lots of unskippable FBI warnings? I cannot live without any of those great features that DVD and Blu-ray have brought us to make the format soooooo much better than LaserDisc and VHS.

I do appreciate the fact that Baraka is Ultradigital. That means it is even more digital than just regular digital. That rocks!

quote: Bobby Henderson

---

Was Earth photographed in the splendor of 70mm?

---

quote: Brad Miller

---

He has successfully set the standard for which ALL other blu-rays are judged.

---

quote: Joe Redifer

---

By that logic the IMAX scenes in Batman The Black Knight should look friggin' incredible, blowing the hell outta Baraka with their megadigitalness.

---

I expect the IMAX-sourced footage of The Dark Knight to look great. However, since that movie is really dark and often dreary in color tone it's not going to have the same kind of glossy coffee table book "pop" to its imagery the way Baraka does.
 

---

Posted by Mike Heenan (Member # 392) on 11-04-2008, 06:30 PM:
 
Is an 8k digital intermediate "good" enough to produce a new 70mm print? Seems like it should be higher, considering that some effects for Blade Runner were scanned at that rez and I believe those were shot in 35mm.
 

---

Posted by Steve Guttag (Member # 268) on 11-04-2008, 07:37 PM:
 
8K would be good enough for future video releases...but no, it will not capture all of the information in a 65/70mm image.
 

---

Posted by Joe Redifer (Member # 3) on 11-04-2008, 08:06 PM:
 
I decided I wanted this, so I went to my local retailer and selected the least-crushed copy I could find. I bolted home and popped it in. I expected a documentary on Barak Obama, hence the name, but instead it was something completely different. It should be called "National Geographic on a Disc". That is exactly what it is, nothing more, nothing less. Good thing National Geographic is pretty cool (though I don't know why people collect them like crazy). Featuring a travel budget of more than a hundred dollars the filmmaker just went wherever and basically turned the camera on.

The imagery is spectacular. Some of it is a tad awkward, though. The filmmaker's sole directing ability seems to be to tell others to stare into the camera with a blank expression for 45 seconds. Ummm, OK... cut? Next scene, please? Hello? Why are these three girls staring at me? Did I accidentally press pause? Did my disc freeze? Can that much 65mm film even fit into a camera to last this long? Anyway, aside from those moments it is quite awesome. The image quality doesn't seem to hit you right away (especially with the super-grainy night scene at the beginning), but it definitely grows on you. It just gets better and better.

And how about that 24-bit, 96Khz audio? It's certainly not CD quality. In fact, it is quite amazing. Some of them music is quite awesome and sometimes even a bit spooky. Very spatial, tight, ambient and fitting. If you haven't already taken out a second mortgage, be sure to do so as soon as possible to upgrade your audio system so it can play back this lossless track instead of the default Dolby Digital track.

The disc comes in a paper box because the manufacturer is cheap. Not being one to remain content with mediocrity, I made my own box by scanning the original in an ultradigital 8K process (and removed the recycling logos while I was at it):







I'd definitely appreciate it if you all could be a bit more jealous of me than usual.
 

---

Posted by Mark J. Marshall (Member # 1409) on 11-04-2008, 09:14 PM:
 
I'm jealous.
 

---

Posted by Brad Miller (Member # 2) on 11-04-2008, 10:59 PM:
 
Joe, I'm going to need an improved box!!!
 

---

Posted by Bobby Henderson (Member # 840) on 11-04-2008, 11:09 PM:
 

quote: Mike Heenan

---

Is an 8k digital intermediate "good" enough to produce a new 70mm print? Seems like it should be higher, considering that some effects for Blade Runner were scanned at that rez and I believe those were shot in 35mm.

---

quote: Joe Redifer

---

The disc comes in a paper box because the manufacturer is cheap. Not being one to remain content with mediocrity, I made my own box by scanning the original in an ultradigital 8K process (and removed the recycling logos while I was at it)

---

That's a pretty nice job.

I don't have any empty Blu-ray disc cases right now, but I could order some from Amazon.com. I may create some cover art to work for the CD jewel case I'm currently using to store the disc. I'll put together something different than the cover art used on the present design. I'm thinking along the lines of something more understated. I'll still use the Michelangelo typeface used in the title. But I'll say no to the Trajan. Combining Michelangelo and Trajan in the same design is like wearing clothes with clashing colors.
 

---

Posted by Joe Redifer (Member # 3) on 11-04-2008, 11:46 PM:
 
While I can't provide the sweet-ass blue boxes, I can provide the printable insert:

Right click here to download 56.18 MB 400dpi (8K UltraDigital)

You may need to adjust the gamma on the image depending on how your printer is set up. Go to the thrift store and buy a cheap BD just for the case. Please note that there are two different styles of BD cases, the type with a rounder top and the type with a more squared-off top. It shouldn't matter which you use as they both seem to use the same size of inserts.
 

---

Posted by Jesse Skeen (Member # 586) on 11-05-2008, 05:23 AM:
 
If you like Baraka, also check out Koyaanisqatsi (though it's not on Blu-Ray yet). It's the same sort of movie, absolutely no dialogue or story, you just stare at it and you either get it or you don't.
 

---

Posted by John Wilson (Member # 269) on 11-05-2008, 10:55 AM:
 
I had the pleasure of running BARAKA in 70mm at least once a week for about 6 years. Quite often it was the highlight of the week.

It's an excellent show and it's pleasing that they seem to have done such a great job. Looking forward to the sequel 'Samsara'..also being shot in 65mm. It apparently comes out in 2009.

Koyaanisqatsi (1982) was photographed and edited by Baraka's director, Ron Fricke. Powaqqatsi (1988) is another in that line but 2 things go against it. 1...George Lucas has a producer credit and 2...Fricke had nothing to do with it.

Naqoyqatsi (2002 is the third in that series...I haven't seen that one.

The first 2 were shot on 35mm while the third was shot on video.

Making Baraka

The entire film is also on YouTube...

There's a scene from BARAKA in Ice Age 2. I always thought it was just so obscure to put it in. I enjoyed it though. I tried to find it YouTube but this is as close as I could find. It happens at 21 seconds...don't blink or you'll miss it.
 

---

Posted by Mike Schindler (Member # 1309) on 11-05-2008, 11:12 AM:
 
Fricke also shot effects footage for STAR WARS: EPISODE III--REVENGE OF THE SITH. All of the volcano footage was his.
 

---

Posted by John Wilson (Member # 269) on 11-05-2008, 11:30 AM:
 
Perhaps he was looking for ways to finance Samsara.
 

---

Posted by Joe Redifer (Member # 3) on 11-05-2008, 02:11 PM:
 
Isn't Koyaanisqatsi (boy, that sure rolls off the toungue) in the inferior 4:3 format (or 1.33 or whatever). I don't think I could take too much of the same thing, but I am looking forward to the sequel just as long as there are no 35mm or DC "prints" struck. There aren't many venues in my city that can still run 70mm, and even fewer operators who are competent enough. I remember Hamlet at the Mayan or Esquire (they are the same to me) was scratched in the first week.
 

---

Posted by Mike Schindler (Member # 1309) on 11-05-2008, 03:02 PM:
 
Koyaanisqatsi is actually in 1.85:1. It's quite good. Way better than BARAKA, even if it's not as impressive from a technical standpoint.

Coincidentally, I just watched THE MATRIX RELOAD on BD, and noticed that scenes from BARAKA appear on the wall of monitors in the Architect scene.
 

---

Posted by Claude S. Ayakawa (Member # 1401) on 11-05-2008, 06:39 PM:
 
I first saw BARAKA at the now defunct Varsity Theatre in Honolulu during the Hawaii Film Festival sometime in the early nineties in 35mm . The print I saw was in terrible shape with scratches throughout the film but I still enjoyed it very much. This is the third time it was released on DVD and the first time in BD. I bought the first disc but was not too impressed with the picture quality and gave it away to a friend. I decided to pass when it was released again despite the fact that it had received very favorable reviews. After reading advance press announcement for the current DVD when it was acknowledged that it was going to be replicated from the original 65mm negative source in a very high bit rate, I could not wait to get hold of a copy. Because I still do not yet have BD player, I purchased the SD version and I was very impressed after I played it. The picture and sound quality was so awesome, I had the feeling I was watching it in a theatre in 7omm. Because of my reaction watching the SD version and all of the great reviews of BARAKA in BD I had read, I went to Best Buy and purchased the high definition version because of my plans to purchase a Blur-Ray player very soon.

-Claude
 

---

Posted by Paul Mayer (Member # 355) on 11-05-2008, 08:15 PM:
 
If you guys like Ron Fricke's photography, also check out his 1985 IMAX pic Chronos . 42 minutes of all time-lapse images of places and things that you wouldn't think would lend themselves to the time-lapse treatment, but it works. Music by Michael Stearns. It is available on the Blu disc.
 

---

Posted by Tom Doyle (Member # 1474) on 11-06-2008, 10:40 AM:
 
Bobby, thanks for the heads up. I don't keep up on home video releases, but this is one more reason I should get a HD setup sometime. I'm sure some of my friends will be picking this up soon.

I'm glad someone mentioned Samsara in this thread. I don't hear much about it. Didn't the disk have any information on it? Even just a teaser trailer? It seems like they're missing out on a good promotional opportunity.

Anyway, if anyone wants to REALLY see and hear Baraka, Trinity College in Hartford is once again doing a week of 70mm showings in December:
http://www.cinestudio.org
 

---

Posted by Joe Redifer (Member # 3) on 11-06-2008, 10:56 AM:
 
I doubt 70mm mag could compare with lossless 24-bit 96Khz audio (though I'm sure the same wackos who insist that vinyl sounds better than real life would argue against that since digital is ALWAYS inferior). Also, it is a college. I do not approve of colleges. They're not even real people yet.
 

---

Posted by Bobby Henderson (Member # 840) on 11-07-2008, 10:56 PM:
 
I wonder if someone can help me about a piece of music in Baraka. In Chapter 19, "Varanasi Sunrise," it starts out with a piece of uplifting music that seems strangely familiar. This is the chapter late in the movie where people are praying in India's Ganges river and burning the dead next to its banks. I can't quite place the music, but I swear I have heard it in some other movie or TV commercial or something. I'm sorry, but it's really bugging me.
 

---

Posted by Steve Guttag (Member # 268) on 11-08-2008, 08:46 AM:
 
Joe,

It is likely that 70mm magnetic would compare favorably to 24/96 in most respects. Of course, the source elements and any digital processing that might have been done to them would narrow the gap or close it.

Of those I know in the professional recording end of things, when straight analog goes up agains straight digital...in terms of accuracy of sound reproduction, analog always wins. More recently, one of my collegues described it...when comparing identical recordings of an orchestra, the pure analog version captured the whole sound stage and more accurately reproduced what was heard in the actual hall. The Digital version, sounded like two speakers. Not that it sounded bad but there were many sensory cues that seemed to have been lost in the bits.

There is no getting around the fact that most of recorded sound starts in the analog rehlm and so long as speakers/ears are used, it will need to end in analog. Going through an A/D and D/A will give you only a facimilie of what was originally picked up. How the signal is converted and how it is treated in the digital side of things will determine the final result.

As with DCinema...people confuse crispness for detail...in truth the digital repersentation often has far LESS detail. But since the bits are accurately (Sharply) presented, people, at first, see a much sharper picture or in the case of sound, it is very clean. Digital also clearly wins in the "Self-cleaning" side of things via error-correction.

Steve
 

---

Posted by Adam Martin (Member # 641) on 11-08-2008, 09:28 AM:
 

quote: Steve Guttag

---

with DCinema...people confuse crispness for detail...in truth the digital repersentation often has far LESS detail. But since the bits are accurately (Sharply) presented, people, at first, see a much sharper picture or in the case of sound, it is very clean.

---

I really like the way you describe this.
 

---

Posted by Joe Redifer (Member # 3) on 11-08-2008, 11:02 AM:
 
But Steve, a 70mm mag track that has been played a whole mess of times through a dusty MPU-1 (I think there are more dusty MPU-1s than people) on a soundhead which has not had proper maintenance in years? The source track played for the first time would obviously win, no contest. But at that level of digital resolution, do you really think you could hear the difference between a tape copy and a 96/24 digital copy?
 

---

Posted by Brad Miller (Member # 2) on 11-08-2008, 01:58 PM:
 
Sadly Joe has a very valid point here. How many 70mm magnetic prints are TRULY still in existence that have not had any sound deterioration? Sure there are plenty that still sound great, but oxide flakes (if FG is not used) and most idiots didn't keep their systems properly demagnetized either. As a result, I would say none of the 70mm prints in shipping warehouses actually are representative of what the format is capable of.

This also goes for picture quality. If you compare a 70mm blowup vs. an original 35mm print vs. a recent reprint (no restoration) on polyester base T-grain filmstock...the 70mm will blow away the original 35mm print, but the reprint on T-grain polyester filmstock will blow the 70mm away in terms of picture quality! That's life.
 

---

Posted by Bobby Henderson (Member # 840) on 11-08-2008, 04:36 PM:
 
I'd like to see some new movies filmed in 65mm and printed on 70mm T-grain polyester film stock. That would be pretty nice, even if you merely have DTS (or some other synchronized audio) playing alongside the print.

Even with 70mm projection largely defunct (unless you count IMAX theaters), Baraka shows an obvious difference can be seen even on Blu-ray when a movie is filmed in 65mm as opposed to the usual 35mm methods and digital video. The rich color, deep contrast and sharp detail has a balance to it that you don't see with smaller film formats. Even if you take a 35mm movie and do a 8K scan and DI with the elements it's still not going to have the same kind of quality seen with 70mm.

Chances are slim to none that Hollywood studios will take notice of what Baraka achieved in Blu-ray release and start shooting major features in 70mm again. Still, it would be nice if they did. The benefits of using 70mm don't just play out in 70mm equipped movie theaters.
 

---

Posted by Brad Miller (Member # 2) on 11-08-2008, 07:32 PM:
 
Bobby, Baraka on blu-ray looks so good because the original photography was spectacular, and the amount of effort that went into the blu-ray disc was above and beyond. I'm sure you agree with me that it is the lack of compression that makes it look so good.

Quality 35mm photography on today's filmstocks scanned in at 8k and carefully mastered to blu-ray would look just as good on blu-ray. That being said I would love to see what a 70mm movie shot on today's filmstocks and projected in 5/70 would look like. The Baraka filmmakers are gearing up to do just this. I've already put in a note that I will gladly convert a theater in Dallas to handle 70mm at my cost if they will allocate a print to the market.
 

---

Posted by Steve Guttag (Member # 268) on 11-08-2008, 09:35 PM:
 
Joe, why would you compare a poorly maintained 70mm system (And the MPU could care less that it is dusty) to a new digital soundtrack? That is like saying that digital sound sucks because you can take the media and get unreadable sections to cause dropouts and hangs...that is not really comparing the two media...just showing their respective weaknessess.

As to the "SOUND" of the two...what would happen to a 70mm print with successive plays is perhaps some HF roll off as the head wears or perhaps the track. However, the current type heads that came out about 1980 don't put anywhere NEAR the wear on the film the way the old heads did from the 50s-70s .

The AFI recently ran a 70mm magnetic print of Lawrence...no problems with the mag track that I'm aware of. The same could not be said about a print of 2001 where there was a "tick" on the last 1/3 of the film on one of the tracks. However, even with the "Tick"...as annoying as it was, does not discount the fact that the analog process captures more of the recorded audio than the digital did. So now you have a tick superimposed on top of the recorded audio.

There is no inherent reason why a 70mm magnetic print should quickly decay though. Up until recently (2005)...the Williamsburg Visitor Center was using 70mm mag (now it is 70mm DTS)...they would get at least a year on a print before replacing it just as a procedural thing, not due to some horrible damage. They ran 70mm magnetic for over 40-years and their equipment is nothing more than Century JJs

If you were to fire up you dusty MPU-1, with Cat 92Cs in it (also Dusty)...they would most likley sound just as good today. As for the mag heads...if you have a Teccon or like head...odds are, you have not worn it out yet. A Teccon is good for 20 million feet of film...do the math...that is a lot of shows. Most cinemas did not run that many in 70mm...those that did...changed the heads!

70mm film running at 24fps amounts to 22ips tape...which is fast enough to capture a really good recording.

The realities are though...most everything in a film today is "created"...which basically means it was made or altered in the digital domain...that would take the edge away from 70mm magnetic because the source didn't have the signal to begin with, not that 70mm wasn't capable.

Steve
 

---

Posted by Mark Gulbrandsen (Member # 72) on 11-08-2008, 09:41 PM:
 
Sorry guys... its not JUST the analog tracks that make those recordings good... alot of what you hear is the old style mic technique that was used before the days of 100 channel mixing boards and the present tactic of placing 60 mics on a symphony orchestra to dial in a certain type of overall sound... those 6 or 7 mics used in the old days to to a "live take" are why many of those soundtracks sound so dam good, ditto for old analog r to r tapes and records.

Mark
 

---

Posted by Bobby Henderson (Member # 840) on 11-08-2008, 11:49 PM:
 

quote: Brad Miller

---

The Baraka filmmakers are gearing up to do just this. I've already put in a note that I will gladly convert a theater in Dallas to handle 70mm at my cost if they will allocate a print to the market.

---

Brad, if you can manage it, I would literally kill to be there to check out a screening of it. True 70mm film-making deserves a huge audience.
 

---

Posted by Tony Bandiera Jr (Member # 2365) on 11-08-2008, 11:50 PM:
 
I installed a pair of Simplex 70mm machines at the producer's house so he can run his personal 70mm print.

His screening room has the most awesome look and sound too, nice large screen, CP-200, DA-20 for 35mm.

The decor is awesome too...
 

---

Posted by Joe Redifer (Member # 3) on 11-08-2008, 11:52 PM:
 
But Steve, I asked if you could hear a difference between a 96/24 digital copy of a source (doesn't matter what the source is for the comparison, let's say it was the best thing ever recorded) and a tape copy, that tape being 70mm mag, let's say the very first time it is run. Both formats presented on the best maintained systems possible. Could YOU hear the difference? You may like to think you could, but I doubt you could without seeing which one is playing, in a blind test so to speak. It is possible that there would be an audible difference due to playback equipment alone, but would the 70mm mag definitely, absolutely be the better of the two?
 

---

Posted by Carl Martin (Member # 1146) on 11-09-2008, 06:13 AM:
 
unfortunately, according to imdb, samsara will use a digital intermediate.

whenever i've seen baraka in 70mm, it's looked fantastic. it was made in the no-fade era. why on earth would a new print be made from a d.i.?
 

---

Posted by Steve Guttag (Member # 268) on 11-09-2008, 09:09 AM:
 
Joe,

It would be hard for me to say at this point but my guess is "probably". Just like for digital images...my eyes see them as very flat...for sound, digital sounds clean but there are audible cues (harmonics and such) that seem to be missing.

I'd say and A-B comparison would make the differences all that more startling. The source material would also be critical since if the source ever went through digital processing (pretty tough not to do today), it is going to affect things. 24/96 is a big improvement over 16/44...then again many people think 16/44 is the greatest thing.

I will say, the best film soundtracks I've personally have heard, remain in 70mm...not in any of the digitals, includng DCinema. Of the film digitals, SDDS did sound the best to me on any track I A-B or A-B-Ced.

Steve
 

---

Posted by Bobby Henderson (Member # 840) on 11-09-2008, 12:19 PM:
 

quote: Carl Martin

---

whenever i've seen baraka in 70mm, it's looked fantastic. it was made in the no-fade era. why on earth would a new print be made from a d.i.?

---