The Floyd Sell Out?

[madhombre]

At this point with The Wall they should just throw it all out. If the can’t make money. I see the amount of effort people put in. I am sure people would line up to make it the best it can be

[ILuvHoney]

I would put the odds of a Wall concert film release at nearabouts zero regardless what the contract terms are. The band deemed it too poor in quality to release by 1980s standards, it will not have gotten better with age, and it would not make a blip on Sony's profits from this deal.

I see two ways of figuring out what this deal might mean for unreleased material. The first is to review the actual contract and see what it says about it rather than going by secondhand media accounts - not an option. The next best thing is to wait and see what they do next year for Wish You Were Here. It will be the album's 50th anniversary and the customary occasion for a super deluxe edition anniversary release. Yes, of course we have already had one but that never stops anyone. If they release material we haven't heard before, then that bodes well for the future. If they just put out a blu-ray of a Dolby Atmos version or whatever, then there is less reason to think this deal will yield anything we care about.

As to the quality concern and how this hasn't gotten better with age, I tend to disagree for several reasons.

When they decided to leave the footage in the vaults in 1981, the question was never whether to release it as a standalone concert film at all (somebody correct me if they have evidence that I am wrong, but I don't even think that was considered at that point). It was deemed inferior to be included in the high-profile, expensive blockbuster cinema production that was The Wall movie. And I think this is more done to the perfectionism and quality standards of the band, rather than the fact that it was objectively too bad quality to be appreciated by consumers. I am also pretty sure that the way the script evolved made the inclusion of said live footage a bit awkward, at least for the songs they intended to use (which would have been Happiest Days of Our Lives, possibly Another Brick in the Wall Pt 2, Mother and Hey You). Once the decision to have Geldof as the protagonist of the movie rather than Roger himself, the live footage would not fit in as well anymore. With Roger as protagonist, the inclusion of footage showing him singing some of the songs would make perfect sense, but not as much with Geldof in the character of Pink. Another thing to note is how Pink Floyd always maintained their anonymity in the 1970s, and how little footage they actually allowed (from 1973-1977 there's nothing at all as far as I am aware). With time, of course, this lack of video documentation only makes fans long even more for video footage of the classic era Pink Floyd. And of course the high popularity of the album at the time made the expectations and demands for what could be included in it very high; perfectly watchable concert footage would be easy to discard despite being completely adequate, as of course the film needed to be perfect quality to conform to Pink Floyd's reputed very high standards and do the highly popular rock opera on the screen. Furthermore, Roger (and I think Pink Floyd generally at the time) were not very interested in live releases at all; at the time the first disc of Ummagumma was the closest and only thing resembling a live album by them available, and their only released concert film was Live at Pompeii which has to be said was anything but a normal concert setting. And Roger had to be convinced by his son even to give green light for releasing ITAOT in 2000; he simply did not understand why people would be interested in live recordings, which I also think explains his reluctance to release the footage, both back in the days and later.

I also think it is much easier to release a concert film as a historical document decades later than it would have been back when it was new. And when looking back, back in the 70s/early 80s concert films (and live albums for that matter) were a lot less common than they are today. In the past 25 years lots of footage of old classic rock concerts from the 60s/70s/80s has been released, much of it is not exactly in perfect quality, and I seriously doubt that the actual quality of the footage is much worse than the vast majority of 1970s/80s concert films released in the past 25 years. The things that led them to write it off in 1981 was mostly that the lighting was not faithfully reproduced on film, and that it did not look as good as they hoped it too, but I think most fans would easily forgive that and it would also be easier to correct those things with today's technology than it would have been back then. A more serious challenge is how far the film itself has detoriated from decades of storage, but with a lot of care from a professional it could very likely be restored. The real concern is whether they will bother to restore it, rather than whether they will judge the quality to be good enough. I mean, didn't Sony release a Michael Jackson concert film sourced from a VHS tape(!) a few years ago? The Wall live is certainly going to look a hell of a lot better than VHS-sourced video, at least! The snippets we have seen in Roger's promo videos and documentaries suggest that both 1980 and 1981 footage is perfectly watchable, at least comparable to most concert films from concerts from the same era, and could likely look better with some proper remastering.

The big problem with the 1981 footage, rather than the quality, is that the only close-ups filmed were filmed in a faux live setting afterwards and only for a few songs (yeah, they kept at least some cameras on and filmed much of the show from one angle or another but what was actually shot is more uncertain, and in terms of close-up it is a definitive no). Which leads me to believe that the 1980 Earls Court shows will definitely be used for a lot of a possible concert film (my guess would be that the film would be mostly 1980 footage with only some parts from 1981). I think the fact that most of the snippets seen in Roger's The Wall EPK videos are from 1980 (although he also owns all the 1981 reels and had them digitized) is a clear indication of this. We do know that three whole shows (7/8/9 August 1980) were filmed, with both several cameras from the distance and close-up shots on stage for the whole show, and although the colour reproduction of the uMatic format used for shooting those shows leaves much to be desired, the colours might probably still be better than that of the detoriated 1981 film and the colours can today probably be restored rather efficiently with digital technology. Again,that is if they bother of course, which I'm not certain they will; neither for the 2007 DVD release nor the recent Blu-ray release did they bother to get somebody to restore the colours on Pulse, although I am pretty certain a lot could be done with today's tech in that department. The fact that many of the camera angles used in documentaries and promo videos differ from that seen on the VHS-sourced bootleg derived from Lamden's final edit suggest that Roger likely has the original raw tapes from the cameras for 1980 (probably for all the nights that were shot), and the inclusion of close-up shots for The Trial (although none appear on the bootleg) in Behind the Wall suggests that close-up shots were indeed likely filmed for the entire shows and that the tapes from each camera are most likely in his prosession. The problem of course with the 1980 footage is that it was shot on uMatic tape rather than film, which means it will never be HD or even full SD due to the limits of the format. But the same is also true of a lot of other 70s, 80s and 90s concert films, a large share of which were also shot on videotape, but it doesn't lead them to be withdrawn from circulation for that matter; on the contrary the labels have continued to release tape-sourced concert films simply because there is a lot of demand for seeing footage of old concerts. Due to the historical significance of the footage, and the fact that this would be the only full concert movie of an actual Pink Floyd concert in their most successful era, the demand is there and I think the public will be very forgiving that the movie might not be up to HD standards. The footage is over 40 years old after all, I doubt many people will knock on it for not being top notch in terms of quality. Yeah some videophile might complain but the vast majority will not. Some of the stuff Pink Floyd included in their Early Years box set is also far from perfect quality either (certainly most of it is worse than the 1980-81 footage), but despite the occassional complaining from people on R&D about the sources used for some of the stuff there, the general consensus at the time of its release was praise over the fact that so much was finally released, and never have I heard anyone say they hoped they left all that stuff in the vaults. Obviously the public is rather forgiving about the quality of 40+ old footage as long as it is watchable and they get a chance to see and hear their heroes in their prime. They are even quite forgiving over the quality of much more recent things; like how many times have you heard anyone demand that Pulse be withdrawn from sale due to its far from perfect video quality?

Roger might still think it is too poor for release, but that is because he is a perfectionist; I doubt Sony shares the same reservations, the questions are rather whether they will have access to the tapes and reels, whether they realize the importance of this footage (and of course that will only come down to whether they believe it to be profitable to release it), and what they would do with the footage (in terms of editing and possible restoration) before releasing it if they decide to do this. The high number of people asking for its release on social media, the high views and interest the bootlegs of the tour get on YouTube despite their low quality, much of it certainly not coming from the hardline bootleg fans on this page, and casual fans I know also wondering why it hasn't been released, is an indication that the footage is of high interest for fans, including those not normally very interested in bootlegs and live recordings. I don't think it's an overestimation to assume that a 1980-81 concert film is the most demanded unreleased Pink Floyd recording still lying in the vaults; it has assumed an almost legendary status, and I am sure it will receive a lot of interest if it is released. Does Sony realize its potential? Probably, probably not. Will they do the footage justice? Unclear. Do they have access to the masters, and if so, the right to release it? Well, that depends on the stipulations of the agreement. And to be honest, after so many years having passed without its release, my hopes are not very high about its release anymore. But if they do judge it to be a likely profitable success, and they do have access and rights to the masters, I am pretty sure they will not let any concerns about its quality stop them. They are far from any audiophile or videophile label, they are a major company in a capitalist economy, aiming to earn money from their releases - which might of course be both a bad thing and a good thing compared to leaving the decision to the constantly arguing and probably exaggaratedly perfectionist surviving band members.

[lvri]

In fact, is it really important if the quality is not perfect ? Pulse can't be improved with today's standard. But it's still a wonderful concert to watch.

It's certainly more complexe for The Wall (sources, age, ...), but whatever. Maybe a documentary full of images and sound can be done instead of a "fake" live.
If it's clearly explained that the live comes from multiple sources, from different moments and dates, what is the problem ?
IMHO, it seems important to me to not buried this important moment of the History of Music. The Wall live deserve a real edition. And if it's only in SD, whatever. They can add a documentary which explain why and how it was done.

Now that the band have sold the catalogue, it's time to let all their history coming out without any fight about liner notes or other craps... !

[Sorrow2024]

I'm pretty sure Sony are well aware of The Wall 80-81 footage and the demand for it and its historical context and will get the footage out eventually

[Sorrow2024]

Also if Roger has given away his rights too all The Wall as part of the sale and has had to hand over all his archive to them, then Sony can do what they want from his vault. When talk of the sale first originated, it was mentioned that their solo material was also part of the deal. Does anyone know if that was mentioned in the FT article of the sale going thru?

[ILuvHoney]

In fact, is it really important if the quality is not perfect ? Pulse can't be improved with today's standard. But it's still a wonderful concert to watch.

It's certainly more complexe for The Wall (sources, age, ...), but whatever. Maybe a documentary full of images and sound can be done instead of a "fake" live.
If it's clearly explained that the live comes from multiple sources, from different moments and dates, what is the problem ?
IMHO, it seems important to me to not buried this important moment of the History of Music. The Wall live deserve a real edition. And if it's only in SD, whatever. They can add a documentary which explain why and how it was done.

Now that the band have sold the catalogue, it's time to let all their history coming out without any fight about liner notes or other craps... !

I totally agree with most of you said, but I want to clarify a few things.

The 7, 8 and 9 August 1980 Earls Court shows were indeed shot in full with multiple cameras, so there won't be any need to fill in with still images or anything like that because they have footage from the entirity of those shows. This is confirmed due to the presence of the famous Earls Court 1980 bootleg which is based on VHS copies of the final edit Howard Lamden made of the 3 concerts he shot in full with several cameras, and also due to the fact that different shots from the same shows (with camera angles different from Lamden's final edit) have showed up in various documentaries over the years. Lamden intended to use the footage in a documentary (nowadays known as the famous "Lost Documentary", which is available but with the live footage edited out) which is probably the reason why he chose to use videotape rather than film.

The only problem is that the 1980 shows were shot to uMatic videotape rather than film so in terms of resolutions it will be visibly inferior to a film source, but obviously the same is true of a lot of 70s/80s/90s concert movies so it should not be a major issue considering the historical significance of the film.

The 1981 Earls Court shows, on the other hand, were shot on actual 35mm film with the intention of using clips off them in The Wall movie, but the main problem is they did not have any cameras filming close-ups of the band members on stage. Instead they chose to film close-ups of the band performing The Happiest Days of Our Lives and Mother (possibly only the first verse of the latter) in a faux live setting and mix them together with the distance footage from the actual live concerts. Of course, it would not be NECESSARY to use any of the faux live footage in a possible concert movie as they have footage of 3 full 1980 shows with close-ups and all, filmed during the actual shows. But it is POSSIBLE that they might include some of it anyway, due to the advantage that this was filmed with actual film and could actually be replicated in HD. However, I am not sure any of the faux live footage will be used, the problem being that Roger was wearing white headphones in 1980 and black headphones in 1981, so if they mixed the 1981 faux live close-ups from 1981 together with 1980 actual live close-ups it would look a bit weird so I don't think they would use a lot of them. I find it more likely they will use 1981 distance shots (from the actual shows) mixed together with close-ups from the 1980 shows, which would mean that all of it would be live footage but in somewhat varying quality. Of course it would be possible to only use 1980 footage, but I am pretty sure at least some 1981 footage will be included, one reason being that it is shot on film. And of course there is also a famous piece of footage of Roger singing the last verse of Hey You behind the wall in Earls Court 1981, included in several documentaries over the years, where the camera gradually moves upwards along the wall and over it; it is such a cool piece of footage that I would be very surprised if it wasn't included.

As for Pulse, it can obviously never be turned into true HD because it was shot in SD, but I'm not convinced nothing could be done to upgrade its quality. One more noticeable flaw that is more noticeable is how the colours are reproduced (that is, rather poorly, appearing pretty washed out and the musicians looking pale as zombies). It's very evident on DVD, and from what I have seen or heard the Blu-ray is not much better. I do believe more could be done with modern technology to correct the colours, at least when they mastered it for Blu-ray in 2019, and probably even when it was released on DVD in 2007. After all, they have all resources and could easily have hired the most professional editors in the world to work on it, so I am surprised they were not able to improve it more, at least when I see what "amateurs" on the internet manage to achieve with much worse source material. I am not a video expert so somebody correct me wrong, but I am not really convinced that nothing could be done to improve its quality, especially in terms of colour correction.

[Frankymole]

Again,that is if they bother of course, which I'm not certain they will; neither for the 2007 DVD release nor the recent Blu-ray release did they bother to get somebody to restore the colours on Pulse, although I am pretty certain a lot could be done with today's tech in that department.

I thought P.U.L.S.E was videotaped rather than on film, so the colours would not have changed over time? Though it may be a grading issue. It looks a lot better than the shades-of-blue of the DSOT video though.

[ILuvHoney]

Not the colours on the actual tape, no, but hasn't a lot happened in terms of digital video editing capabilities? I assume some colour correction would be possible?

[NuffM]

I totally agree with most of you said, but I want to clarify a few things.

The 7, 8 and 9 August 1980 Earls Court shows were indeed shot in full with multiple cameras, so there won't be any need to fill in with still images or anything like that because they have footage from the entirity of those shows. This is confirmed due to the presence of the famous Earls Court 1980 bootleg which is based on VHS copies of the final edit Howard Lamden made of the 3 concerts he shot in full with several cameras, and also due to the fact that different shots from the same shows (with camera angles different from Lamden's final edit) have showed up in various documentaries over the years. Lamden intended to use the footage in a documentary (nowadays known as the famous "Lost Documentary", which is available but with the live footage edited out) which is probably the reason why he chose to use videotape rather than film.

The only problem is that the 1980 shows were shot to uMatic videotape rather than film so in terms of resolutions it will be visibly inferior to a film source, but obviously the same is true of a lot of 70s/80s/90s concert movies so it should not be a major issue considering the historical significance of the film.

The 1981 Earls Court shows, on the other hand, were shot on actual 35mm film with the intention of using clips off them in The Wall movie, but the main problem is they did not have any cameras filming close-ups of the band members on stage. Instead they chose to film close-ups of the band performing The Happiest Days of Our Lives and Mother (possibly only the first verse of the latter) in a faux live setting and mix them together with the distance footage from the actual live concerts. Of course, it would not be NECESSARY to use any of the faux live footage in a possible concert movie as they have footage of 3 full 1980 shows with close-ups and all, filmed during the actual shows. But it is POSSIBLE that they might include some of it anyway, due to the advantage that this was filmed with actual film and could actually be replicated in HD. However, I am not sure any of the faux live footage will be used, the problem being that Roger was wearing white headphones in 1980 and black headphones in 1981, so if they mixed the 1981 faux live close-ups from 1981 together with 1980 actual live close-ups it would look a bit weird so I don't think they would use a lot of them. I find it more likely they will use 1981 distance shots (from the actual shows) mixed together with close-ups from the 1980 shows, which would mean that all of it would be live footage but in somewhat varying quality. Of course it would be possible to only use 1980 footage, but I am pretty sure at least some 1981 footage will be included, one reason being that it is shot on film. And of course there is also a famous piece of footage of Roger singing the last verse of Hey You behind the wall in Earls Court 1981, included in several documentaries over the years, where the camera gradually moves upwards along the wall and over it; it is such a cool piece of footage that I would be very surprised if it wasn't included.

All correct. Though I do want to mention that, while, yes, the quality of tape is inferior to film, the quality of the uMatic masters is not BAD either. It's actually miles better than PULSE. Last time Roger showed off the tape, it legitimately could have passed as film if it had the grain.

I've provided two images of the master uMatics below. Sadly they are cropped because of Roger's team, but the quality is incredible for tape at the time. The second one is better and could pass as film, as I said. While the first one isn't as great, it is still incredible and is insanely better than most of what we have seen.

Both shots are from August 7th, 1980. You won't find these shots in the VHS.

[ILuvHoney]

Where did you take those shots from?

[ceejay960]

What I wonder is if a sale would or could impact our little corner of the Internet we have here.

That is my question as well. Do you think Sony will pull all of those wonderful rare live recordings from YouTube? Might have to go back to trading tapes uh?

[NuffM]

That is my question as well. Do you think Sony will pull all of those wonderful rare live recordings from YouTube? Might have to go back to trading tapes uh?

I seriously doubt bootlegs will be affected at all in any large capacity.

[keleven]

I'm pretty sure Sony are well aware of The Wall 80-81 footage and the demand for it and its historical context and will get the footage out eventually

The demand for it is less than negligible in the context of Sony's balance sheet and even in the context of just this deal.

[Emdy]

The demand for it is less than negligible in the context of Sony's balance sheet and even in the context of just this deal.

The idea of a preposterously overpriced box set of the band’s second highest selling album featuring a previously unreleased and epically anticipated live film is anything but negligible in the context of Sony’s balance sheet.

I hope. Pessimistically.

[rontoon]

A $50 million pay off right off the bat! This is how Sony will make it's money back and then some, that is if this story is legit.


https://sportnewscast.co.uk/netflix-secures-50-million-deal-pink-floyd-classic-track-saucerful-secrets-upcoming-movie/?fbclid=IwY2xjawF2kORleHRuA2FlbQIxMQABHcL0xGVGKyg6 VoIotBVEKE30ZXMHUySKZQIvDEHMdUlQzgRTDTM7Cm1Sdw_aem _b10upGE7wOImMZzLpTwIEg

[Floydophile]

Keep that one for April 1st!

;-)

[madhombre]

Has to be STCFTHOFS right? SOS I think would be too hard to fit into the context of a movie

[Emdy]

A $50 million pay off right off the bat! This is how Sony will make it's money back and then some, that is if this story is legit.


https://sportnewscast.co.uk/netflix-secures-50-million-deal-pink-floyd-classic-track-saucerful-secrets-upcoming-movie/?fbclid=IwY2xjawF2kORleHRuA2FlbQIxMQABHcL0xGVGKyg6 VoIotBVEKE30ZXMHUySKZQIvDEHMdUlQzgRTDTM7Cm1Sdw_aem _b10upGE7wOImMZzLpTwIEg

…yeah man.