• Most new users don't bother reading our rules. Here's the one that is ignored almost immediately upon signup: DO NOT ASK FOR FANEDIT LINKS PUBLICLY. First, read the FAQ. Seriously. What you want is there. You can also send a message to the editor. If that doesn't work THEN post in the Trade & Request forum. Anywhere else and it will be deleted and an infraction will be issued.
  • If this is your first time here please read our FAQ and Rules pages. They have some useful information that will get us all off on the right foot, especially our Own the Source rule. If you do not understand any of these rules send a private message to one of our staff for further details.
  • Please read our Rules & Guidelines

    Vote now in wave 1 of the FEOTM Reboot!

"The Thing" from 1951

Thanks. I don't know the first thing about upscaling, but good to know the scene is available in some form. I guess if any edit could get away with including lower res footage then it's probably one made to look older! I'm gonna check to see if those shots pop up on a doc in my blu ray somewhere, and if not I might have to hunt down that dvd
 
Ok, so I've revisited the clip I shared the other day and attempted to incorporate some of the stop motion that was cut from the film. Turns out the footage was included on my blu-ray, just not listed. It is in terrible shape, and one particular shot I wanted to use I just decided wasn't worth it. No matter what I tried it just looked too dark and you really can't make out the image very easily, especially when it's a brief shot. However, the rest of the shots I have upscaled to 1080p, which provided a marginal improvement, and I tried to adjust the lighting so that we can see the creature better.

I quite like having the shots there, personally, especially given the edit concept, but I'm also aware that the difference in quality is huge. Would love to know people's thoughts.

"Option 1" (without extra stop motion) I posted the other day here. "Option 2" (with extra stop motion) can be seen here:


And here also is a three-way comparison of the original and the two alternate options:

 
I actually like the disparate quality. It adds to the 1951 aesthetic in my opinion.
 
I'm a big fan of stop motion, and this is really cool to see, but as much as I hate to say it, I think the quality difference is a bit too distracting in my opinion.
 
I don't think the quality is that big of a problem. Cutting to the stop motion for the first shot looks jarring, the rest cut into the montage do not.  How about moving the first shot to 2nd place, so we see a closeup first.  Also the contrast look very different.  The stop motion is much brighter, more contrasty, whiter highlights.

50839651596_682b1a48ff_b.jpg


I did a closeup of the stop motion shot, sort of matching the framing of the blu ray shot.  As you can see the contrast is very different.  I then had a go at adjusting it too look closer.  It's not very good but you get the idea. It would also hide some problems.  You could increase the contrast in the bluray shot to make it match the other way.

It would be very cool to use the stop motion considering the project goals.
 
Thanks all for the feedback.

TM2YC - Yes, I agree it's quite a bit brighter, though I found it to be barely visible when matching closer to how dark the other shots are. But maybe I can try adjusting the blu ray shots instead as you suggest, or maybe meet halfway.

TM2YC said:
How about moving the first shot to 2nd place, so we see a closeup first.
Click to expand...

Just to clarify, do you mean having the film shot of the jaws/roar (0:42) first, then the stop motion shot (0:38)?

I did consider that order, but thought it might be jarring in the sense that we see the wide shot without the dog, then jump to the dog on the chest, whereas having the close up of the jaws I felt gave time for the dog to believably emerge "offscreen". I can try it and see how it sits though.
 
I would suggest not to pan the shot when it first burst out of the floor. Keep it on The Thing. Then second shot of it grabbing the detonator pans to right.
 
My option would be a combo of option 1 and 2.
I would just have the close up shots of the Thing until McReady is aiming to throw the dynamite and then we see/reveal the Full size of the Thing.
So the full size is just for one or two shots until it's blown up.

Amazing work so far Mr Scribb!
 
Any extra stop animation would be best, imo. Have you looked into the film restoration options using avisynth and virtual dub?
here's some examples of what it can do. Might give you a cleaner shot for the stop animation. The left over artifacts could then be painted out on the few frames that might need it?
 
^^^ I have not. I don't do a lot of heavy visual editing. That video looks impressive though! I will look into it, thanks :)
 
Malthus said:
I actually like the disparate quality. It adds to the 1951 aesthetic in my opinion.
Click to expand...

I think it would have looked ok if all of the special effects had the degraded quality, but just having a couple of seconds of bad quality mixed in with the rest of it is jarring.
 
I did have a good look into restoring the footage and tried a few different things, but the results really haven't been worth it. I think either the footage is just too damaged, or it's beyond my skillset. With that in mind, it will be a case of incorporating the footage as is, or just leaving it (unless there's someone who thinks they can do a decent job at restoration and would like to have a go themselves).

In the meantime, I'll be focusing on other aspects of the edit and will return to this scene at a later date. Assuming the footage remains as is, if it gets incorporated and there are those strongly opposed or who find it particularly jarring, maybe I will make available two versions: one with the footage incorporated, and one without.
 
Last edited:
This is today's work. A tricky scene due to the centre channel being bathed in synth. The dialogue audio varies in quality due to what I had to due to remove the score, and sound fx have been reworked throughout most of it (flares, footsteps, tape machine, shuffling, lamp buzzing, background ambience, etc.) - from when the score starts fading in and Mac starts playing with the tape recorder. Hopefully it comes across ok...


Needing to replace the audio on the tape recorder actually gave me an opportunity to fix something that's always bugged me: the fact that MacReady saying "nobody trusts anybody now" is obviously a different take to when he plays it back on the tape. Since that audio couldn't be used, I re-used the first instance of that line and then EQ'd it to fit sound of the tape playback.
 
I continue to be very excited for this edit. The score sounds just right and I think you've done a great job with the rest of the audio work in this sample.
 
This is honestly a wonderful project and i cant wait to see it finished. though im surprised on how much more barren the night shots are now, did you adjust the lighting & contrast there or was it the color doing the magic?
 
freemanforgothispassword said:
This is honestly a wonderful project and i cant wait to see it finished. though im surprised on how much more barren the night shots are now, did you adjust the lighting & contrast there or was it the color doing the magic?
Click to expand...

Thanks. Are there any specific shots you're referring to?

There is a slight overall levels adjustment to stop the darks from being too muddy in black and white, but otherwise I've left it untouched as it looks pretty good as is. Occasionally I'll tweak it for specific shots, but nothing specific with the night locations yet. Do you mean that it looks too dark or washed out?

Here is a before and after for some outside scenes so you can compare (not all of these are finished btw).


There is certainly a lot of colour in the nighttime scenes which gives them a lot of character, and naturally that is lost when converting to black and white. I think in the last clip I could probably bring some more depth back to compensate for the bright lights.
 
The Scribbling Man said:
Thanks. Are there any specific shots you're referring to?

There is a slight overall levels adjustment to stop the darks from being too muddy in black and white, but otherwise I've left it untouched as it looks pretty good as is. Occasionally I'll tweak it for specific shots, but nothing specific with the night locations yet. Do you mean that it looks too dark or washed out?

Here is a before and after for some outside scenes so you can compare (not all of these are finished btw).


There is certainly a lot of colour in the nighttime scenes which gives them a lot of character, and naturally that is lost when converting to black and white. I think in the last clip I could probably bring some more depth back to compensate for the bright lights.
Click to expand...
Honestly i wasnt expecting a full comparision for this thats really nice i appreciate the effort, but no i wasnt referring to any particular shots its just that the night scenes really stood out to me and i assume a lot of people they have a great use of color so seeing them in black and white cought me a bit off-guard they look fine.
Lastly a suggestion, if possible for the scene where they're dousing the bodies in gasoline i suggest moving the shot with them using the jerry cans before the barrel, because in the original the color of the liquid introduced what was going on. its the small details that mount up to create a mood
 
freemanforgothispassword said:
Lastly a suggestion, if possible for the scene where they're dousing the bodies in gasoline i suggest moving the shot with them using the jerry cans before the barrel, because in the original the color of the liquid introduced what was going on. its the small details that mount up to create a mood
Click to expand...

That's a good point. Thanks for the suggestion :) I'll try moving that shot and see how it sits.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom