transition (I’ve said this before)
and the film section is far from
its final form. There will be a
“mix” of reviews, short to long,
with more material being cov -
ered, but I’m not running a cata -
log of quickie impressions. Other
magazines, as you so helpfully
noted, do that.
3.No problem here. We will talk at
some length about the differences.
(Another reason why the percep -
tion of movies ought to be taken
into account in our reviews, thus
adding to their length.)
4.I remain unrepentant. We shall
continue to cover film technology
because it is at the heart of the
experience of cinema in the
home. The “old” TPV had it right.
5.Agreed.
6.Not unless we’re recreating a Cin -
erama equipped local theater. Oh,
Paul Allen, the nation looks to you.
What Not To See on DVD
Editor:
The Perfect Vision exceeds all my
expectations in terms of its control of the
subject and originality. I predict it will be
a great success. I found “Outtakes” espe-
cially useful [Issue 25]. DVDs vary enor-
mously in quality and are bought blindly.
Alerting buyers is thus a great service.
My candidates for disappointments are
Fox Lorber films. For a few, such as
Tampopo, they got the original print
used for transfer to video. But in most
cases – e.g., L’Enfer, Ran, Nostalgia,
Swept Away – they just dumped video
(with its 200? lines) onto DVD.
ED EPSTEIN
MANHATTAN
Edepstein @worldnet.att.net
Digital Cinema: The Good
& the Bad of It
Editor:
…It was… a surprise to see TPV on
the shelf of my local Borders. Somehow
I guess I hadn’t really expected you to
hew to the publication schedule right
out of the gate. Guess this means you’re
really back.
Once again, an outstanding read –
probably even more so than the first
“new” issue, although I have to admit that
I skipped the more technical articles on
first pass in favor of the letters page,
movie reviews, and Allen Daviau inter-
view. Daviau’s story about the $130 pro-
jector lenses at local multiplexes is a
heartbreaker. Of course, I always wel-
come think pieces on the differences
between theater viewing and
ater viewing, though this issue’s article on
the topic reminded me that TPV had run a
similarly provocative piece back in the
day. Did you see Walter Murch’s article in
The New York Times a month or so back
about the implications of a digital cinema?
Greg Rogers remains nothing if not
exhaustive in both knowledge and tem-
perament. Good to see him handling his
end of things – he’ll keep the hardware
guys on their toes. (I saw him beat a
Sony rep into submission at CES over
the lack of
the DVP-S7700.)
Speaking of hardware, saw Texas
Instruments’ DLP Cinema in action over
last weekend in Secaucus [the digitized
Star Wars]; was impressed. Particularly
stunning was the richness of color and
the
the screen. The line structure was occa-
sionally visible, however, and the dark-
est scenes looked murky, with little in
the way of shadow detail. I suspect that
movies that don’t have Star Wars in the
title might not lend themselves quite
this well to digital projection.
Of course, we’re showing this off
to a generation of filmgoers whose stan-
dards have been systematically lowered
by a lack of even a token effort at 70mm
exhibition and poor quality 35mm the-
atrical prints. It’s no wonder that, with
no 70mm
sake, lots of folks think this system
looks “better” than 35mm film. It’s com-
parable to a clean 35mm print, and it’s
not much else. Any thoughts?
BRYANT FRAZER
bfrazer@panix.com
Bryant Frazer is a film critic (and pen
pal of HP’s) whose website, Deep Focus,
contains his intelligent and stimulat -
ing writing about movies. HP considers
him one of the best young film critics in
the country. Vide, his review of David
Cronenberg’s Videodrome for starters.
John Eargle: Lossy Data
Compression & DVD
Sound
Editor:
I want to thank The Perfect Vision
for the excellent coverage of surround
sound by Robert Harley and Tom Miiller
in your May/June issue. I hadn’t intend-
ed to discuss lossy data compression as
such, but the subject did come up
obliquely in TOM’s DVD reviews. I’d like
to make the following
additional comments:
I consider the major
lossy data compression
systems
MPEG2) to be virtually on a par with
each other. If I had felt that
example, was not up to the job required
of it in producing the Delos DVDs, then
the DVDs would not have been issued
at all. As it is, I have A/B’d the 1812
Overture surround sound mix via all
three of the
tems, and they all sound, to a first
approximation, like the uncompressed
original.
My remark about future media and
the prospects of not “worrying about
any lossy data compression” reflects
not so much a current problem with
those systems, but rather the simple
fact that future systems will not require
them. I think everyone would be in
agreement that, all else being equal,
lossless is better than lossy.
JOHN EARGLE
DELOS RECORDS
TV Is TV
Editor:
Have received two issues of TPV.
Both have remained in the plastic wrap.
I am no fan of TV. I believe that analog
recordings on vinyl are all that is needed
to satisfy the needs of music lovers. Dig-
ital recordings and TV are not part of my
life, and will not become a part.
RODNEY
Rabsba @earthlink.net
HP: Do you think I care? The point of
The Perfect Vision is film and the con -
tent of other media we experience via
television. This is not an either/or
proposition and I think you are being
narrowly as you choose.
RAB: Sir: I did not ask for TPV. La
Strada is Film. I do not think Film is the
content of the Digital Age. Film is an
analog experience from the get go to the
end of the optic nerve. The Digital expe-
rience does not accomplish that which
is Film. I was at Hi Fi ’97, my first and
only.
peakers to demo wall of noise with spe-
cial visual effects is not Film. I am a
character in the film Clean Slate, you
can use my outhouse anytime – yes I
concur with a narrow path through the
woods – much better than a crowded