Albert Hall EH release

[johanincr]

Stone Free ......... Included
Effects .......... None, well not any that you reference!

Source?

[Fenders Fingers]

From what I have been informed. How reliable that is does remain questionable but it is from someone who saw this!

[Fenders Fingers]

And meanwhile we still don't have reliable answers to the questions: (1) Is "Stone Free" included? (2) Are the in-camera 'psychedelic" effects excluded? I know a couple of people who have seen the movie, but they aren't astute enough fans to answer those basic questions.

See your own post #300 in this very thread!

Maybe others may want to review posts here too :-)

[Roland Stone]

See your own post #300 in this very thread!

Maybe others may want to review posts here too :-)

That was based on hearsay. Without resurrecting the debate on the reliability of that source, what I'm grousing about is that its two years later and NOBODY HERE ON CTT has reported on their personal observations of what's in the movie. It's all still just hearsay. I recently spoke with someone who claims to have seen the movie a dozen times. He also claims to have a "trailer" for the movie. But while raving about the film no end, mainly about its visual attributes and IMAX potential, he still couldn't answer those two simple questions.

[Fenders Fingers]

But information from your "someone" would remain by your terms hearsay!

If I were to say I had seen the film / doc, and A,B, and C where included while X,Y and z omitted / edited that too would be hearsay!!

[Roland Stone]

If you testify to what you have personally seen that is not hearsay. If CTT is the "court" then hearsay is a statement made outside the court by someone else. When you come to CTT and say "she told me she saw 'Stone Free', that is considered less reliable than if you told us you saw it yourself because we can "cross-examine" you with questions about the details to test your memory and credibility. Her uncorroborated hearsay remains unconvincing until she comes here to CTT herself to answer questions about what she saw.

[Fenders Fingers]

Wow, CTT is a court. I never knew :-)

[Roland Stone]

Wow, CTT is a court. I never knew :-)

CTT is the highest authority for all matters concerning Jimi Hendrix. And by "highest" I mean, not necessariy stoned, but beautiful!

[themusocat]

l see no reason why the concert wasnt completely filmed, so why would they leave out such a ripper of a song such as stone free from the film

[Roland Stone]

There was a rumour that someone accidentally destroyed it, or that the cameras weren't rolling yet. Who knows. Just like why would they put in those stupid in-camera effects and how did they get rid of them, if they did.

[themusocat]

please dont ruin my buzz, this will be the high light of my life if l could see this in high definition quality at a very unreasonable sound level

[Fenders Fingers]

All hearsay of course!

All this is already covered in this thread I believe.

[Fenders Fingers]

And meanwhile we still don't have reliable answers to the questions: (1) Is "Stone Free" included? (2) Are the in-camera 'psychedelic" effects excluded? I know a couple of people who have seen the movie, but they aren't astute enough fans to answer those basic questions.

So the viewers you know / spoke to cannot see if sparklers were added to the movie they saw?

You don't need to be astute to be able to answer that question so maybe they never saw it in the first instance?

[johanincr]

Hey, I know a handful of people who heard the Black Gold tape, does that mean i can have a copy? No!

The RAH DVD/BR will be released in February 2019, and pre-orders will be taken well before Christmas 2018.

I didnt hear that from anyone, i made it up just then!

Seriously though if 'they' dont get their 'act' together by then, I really dont think it could become a financial success, all the fans who were at the show(s) will be gone and the piratebay/youtube generation wont buy.....

[Ezy Rider]

Hey, I know a handful of people who heard the Black Gold tape, does that mean i can have a copy? No!

The RAH DVD/BR will be released in February 2019, and pre-orders will be taken well before Christmas 2018.

I didnt hear that from anyone, i made it up just then!

Seriously though if 'they' dont get their 'act' together by then, I really dont think it could become a financial success, all the fans who were at the show(s) will be gone and the piratebay/youtube generation wont buy.....

I want to see it in the cinema with a big screen and massive sound!

Edit:

With Stone Free
And without sparkles
Please.

[Sharpstat]

There was a rumour that someone accidentally destroyed it, or that the cameras weren't rolling yet. Who knows. Just like why would they put in those stupid in-camera effects and how did they get rid of them, if they did.

I was under the impression that the first concert was filmed but after processing it they discovered that it was underexposed (dark). Henceforth the second concert has the house lights up for proper exposure. The effects were done post production as it is impossible to hold a sparkler in front of a camera and achieve that effect. I am hoping that the actual full film does not have that issue as it seems we all got a "dubbed" copy.

[Roland Stone]

I was under the impression that the first concert was filmed but after processing it they discovered that it was underexposed (dark). Henceforth the second concert has the house lights up for proper exposure. The effects were done post production as it is impossible to hold a sparkler in front of a camera and achieve that effect. I am hoping that the actual full film does not have that issue as it seems we all got a "dubbed" copy.

I'm no expert. Can you explain why its impossible to get those effects "in camera" through multiple exposure?

[themusocat]

There was a rumour that someone accidentally destroyed it, or that the cameras weren't rolling yet. Who knows. Just like why would they put in those stupid in-camera effects and how did they get rid of them, if they did.

k, well, if so, there should still be something there. l mean , multiple camera angles, if a master copy had been destroyed, there would still be the multiple camera angles left thoe, would'nt there, so not everything would of been destroyed, or am l missing something here

[Sharpstat]

I'm no expert. Can you explain why its impossible to get those effects "in camera" through multiple exposure?

Sure it could be done using a double exposure. I am going by what was told to me by RLB.