Pearl Jam Groundworks 2001 HD Master

Options
24

Comments

  • Posts: 10,889
    mrk2 said:
    If I remember correctly, it was Pearl Jam's choice to not headline over REM.

    I only found that out later.  At the time, we're like, why would R.E.M. choose to play after PJ in their home town?

    It was a crazy experience watching so much of the audience leave between PJ and R.E.M.'s set, and then even more people leaving as R.E.M. played.  I will say, it didn't help that they only played a couple of hits.   I didn't know most of the newer music they were playing, so I figure if they had played a set designed for a more casual audience, it might have kept more people from leaving (at least while they were playing).

    I thought Alanis and Artis the Spoonman did amazing jobs.   Just last last bit, with having PJ and REM in the wrong order.   45 minutes of PJ also isn't enough.  I think peoples appetites weren't even wetted let alone satiated. 

    We do wonder if is worth the trip to see the show, especially after the 3 hour barn burner in Seattle the previous year, but I suppose it was.  That was the only time I got a chance to see R.E.M. :(
  • Posts: 97,224
    Strange. This killer HD video comes out now & Rahat Fateh Ali Khan is in the news for this ..



  • Earth Posts: 2,845
    demetrios said:
    Strange. This killer HD video comes out now & Rahat Fateh Ali Khan is in the news for this ..



    I think that is probably a remarkable coincidence unless Barry Steelman is a weird front for Rahat.  He released about 4 videos from the event.  
    His eminence has yet to show. 
    http://www.hi5sports.org/ (Sports Program for Kids with Disabilities)
    http://www.livefootsteps.org/user/?usr=3652

  • Posts: 10,889
    I still can't believe it's in HD.   This must of been in the very infancy in the format.  I think I got my first HD TV around 2007.  HD had been out for a few years but it was still pretty new, and there wasn't alot to watch in HD quality.

    I didn't think anything from 2001 was filmed in HD, so this was an amazing surprise.

    Hopefully the poster puts the raw video somewhere to watch one day (and maybe a few of the other sets from Groundwork).
  • New Jersey Posts: 29,111
    how much of the audience left after pj? are we talking half?!
    I'll ride the wave where it takes me......
  • Posts: 28,621
    Zod said:
    I still can't believe it's in HD.   This must of been in the very infancy in the format.  I think I got my first HD TV around 2007.  HD had been out for a few years but it was still pretty new, and there wasn't alot to watch in HD quality.

    I didn't think anything from 2001 was filmed in HD, so this was an amazing surprise.

    Hopefully the poster puts the raw video somewhere to watch one day (and maybe a few of the other sets from Groundwork).
    Wasn't HD talked about in the 90s or something?
    I miss igotid88
  • Indiana Posts: 1,501
    Short-haired Eddie always make me do a double take. 
    1998: Noblesville, IN 08-17
    2000: Noblesville, IN 08-18
    2003: Noblesville, IN 06-22
    2006: Cincinnati, OH 06-24
    2010: Noblesville, IN 05-07
    2016: Lexington, KY 04-26, Wrigley Field 2 08-22
    2018: Wrigley Field 1 08-18, Wrigley Field 2 08-20
    2022: St. Louis, MO 09-18
    2024: Noblesville, IN 08-26, Wrigley Field 1 08-29, Wrigley Field 2 08-31
    2025: Pitt 1 05-16, Pitt 2 05-18
  • Earth Posts: 2,845
    igotid88 said:
    show previous quotes
    Wasn't HD talked about in the 90s or something?
    The first HD quality film was shot in 1987, the first commercial players with HD and consumer cameras came about in 2006.  Attack of the clones was produced in 4K in 2002.  Bottom line this was probably shot with a very high quality professional camera that was either HD or just extremely high end widescreen. 
    His eminence has yet to show. 
    http://www.hi5sports.org/ (Sports Program for Kids with Disabilities)
    http://www.livefootsteps.org/user/?usr=3652

  • Posts: 2,667
    edited February 2024
    igotid88 said:
    show previous quotes
    Wasn't HD talked about in the 90s or something?

    Roger Ebert was writing about it as early as 1988.


    Post edited by darthvedder on
  • Posts: 31,453
    edited February 2024
    Zod said:
    I still can't believe it's in HD.   This must of been in the very infancy in the format.  I think I got my first HD TV around 2007.  HD had been out for a few years but it was still pretty new, and there wasn't alot to watch in HD quality.

    I didn't think anything from 2001 was filmed in HD, so this was an amazing surprise.

    Hopefully the poster puts the raw video somewhere to watch one day (and maybe a few of the other sets from Groundwork).
    HD video has existed long before that. This is 91/92:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jmk0AVNRBIY


    "Mostly I think that people react sensitively because they know you’ve got a point"
  • Seattle Posts: 715
    Pretty sure VH1 had an hour-long special on this event. I think it only had one or two Pearl Jam songs. I'm guessing this video comes from that recording.
  • Posts: 31,453
    PB11041 said:
    show previous quotes
    The first HD quality film was shot in 1987, the first commercial players with HD and consumer cameras came about in 2006.  Attack of the clones was produced in 4K in 2002.  Bottom line this was probably shot with a very high quality professional camera that was either HD or just extremely high end widescreen. 

     Attack of the Clones was not shot in 4K. It was shot on Sony HD-CAM and matted for ~1920x800.

    And what exactly do you mean by "high end widescreen" compared to HD?
    "Mostly I think that people react sensitively because they know you’ve got a point"
  • Posts: 28,621
    BloodMeridian80 said:
    Pretty sure VH1 had an hour-long special on this event. I think it only had one or two Pearl Jam songs. I'm guessing this video comes from that recording.
    Yes. Better Man and Long Road
    I miss igotid88
  • Finland Posts: 2,091
    The whole event was also streamed online some time afterwards. Pretty decent quality for back in the day too.
    225xxx - 6/28/00, 10/20/01, 10/22/01, 9/11/06, 9/22/06, 9/23/06, 6/18/07, 6/26/07, 8/15/09, 6/25/10, 6/30/10, 7/4/12, 7/5/12, 7/7/12, 7/10/12, 6/26/14, 6/28/14, 7/3/18, 7/5/18
  • Earth Posts: 2,845
    Spiritual_Chaos said:
    show previous quotes

     Attack of the Clones was not shot in 4K. It was shot on Sony HD-CAM and matted for ~1920x800.

    And what exactly do you mean by "high end widescreen" compared to HD?
    I didn't say attack of the clone was shot in 4K, I said it was produced, and it was, produced using 4k resolution standards.

    And I mean a very high end camera that would work best with widescreen versus lesser cameras that do not because they would need to be converted which is distorting.
    His eminence has yet to show. 
    http://www.hi5sports.org/ (Sports Program for Kids with Disabilities)
    http://www.livefootsteps.org/user/?usr=3652

  • Posts: 10,889
    Spiritual_Chaos said:
    show previous quotes
    HD video has existed long before that. This is 91/92:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jmk0AVNRBIY


    I was referring to digital, not film.

    Film isn't a precise resolution, but something like 35mm film carries more detail than 1080p video.  It's just that it was really rare back in the day to film concerns on actual film.  Cost, and size of equipment were much larger.   That's why finding classic concerts on film is like winning the lottery.  They're so far and few between.  Especially in the 80s/90's when videotape was so much cheaper.

    I guess Groundwork 2001 could of been on film, but the poster mentioned digital files.   HD quality digital in 2001 would of been in it's infancy?  That's before there would of been much of anything to watch it on.




  • Posts: 31,453
    edited February 2024
    PB11041 said:
    show previous quotes
    I didn't say attack of the clone was shot in 4K, I said it was produced, and it was, produced using 4k resolution standards.
    What are you even talking about here
    Post edited by Spiritual_Chaos on
    "Mostly I think that people react sensitively because they know you’ve got a point"
  • Posts: 10,889
    PB11041 said:
    show previous quotes
    The first HD quality film was shot in 1987, the first commercial players with HD and consumer cameras came about in 2006.  Attack of the clones was produced in 4K in 2002.  Bottom line this was probably shot with a very high quality professional camera that was either HD or just extremely high end widescreen. 
    I was referring to digital.   If you count film, most film has more detail than HD video.   So anything put on film, especially 35mm or better, can easily be scanned and put out as HD.

    I was thinking in terms of digital.  There's no way storage devices were big enough in the 80's or 90s to do digital HD video.  Sounds like one of those articles was trying to do it via analog much earlier than when it took off with digital.

    I'll stop rambling, but pretty much anything put onto film is technically HD or better (16mm might be grainy bit still has the detail).   It's just that it's really rare to see concerts put on film due to cost and larger size of equipment.   The poster for Groundwork mentioned he had the original digital files, which is something almost unheard of in 2001.   That's when the DVD craze was going on, pretty much everything accessible to the public was still in SD in 2001.

    Still I could swear I remember hearing that the 2002 gold medal game was going to be broadcast in HD, so this is right around the time HD started to creep in.
  • Posts: 31,453
    Zod said:
    show previous quotes
    I was referring to digital, not film.

    Film isn't a precise resolution, but something like 35mm film carries more detail than 1080p video.  It's just that it was really rare back in the day to film concerns on actual film.  Cost, and size of equipment were much larger.   That's why finding classic concerts on film is like winning the lottery.  They're so far and few between.  Especially in the 80s/90's when videotape was so much cheaper.

    I guess Groundwork 2001 could of been on film, but the poster mentioned digital files.   HD quality digital in 2001 would of been in it's infancy?  That's before there would of been much of anything to watch it on.




    I have not mentioned film
    "Mostly I think that people react sensitively because they know you’ve got a point"
  • Posts: 10,889
    edited February 2024
    Spiritual_Chaos said:
    show previous quotes
    I have not mentioned film

    You did.  The Tori Amos video you linked was sourced from 35mm film. It was implied.   You were making an argument that HD video existed for a long time, then linked a video from the montreux concerts which were filmed on 35mm film.

    I was pointing out that HD as we currently know it (the digital format) didn't really become a thing until the 21st century.  Anything from the 90s or older, that's in HD, was sourced from old school analog film.  Not HD video.   Film doesn't have a precise resolution, but 35mm film has picture quality in excess of 4k digital video.  The analog film gets scanned and digitized for video release.

    Most concerts aren't recorded on film.  There's gems through out history.  Led Zeppelin's The Song Remains the Same, Nirvana's Live at the Paramount, The GNR bluray in the use your illusion boxset, etc, but it's super rare because of how expensive it was at the time.  So many concerts were put onto video tape in the 80s/90s/early 00s.   Videotape is stuck in SD.  Film is nearly timeless.  This is why it's like winning the lottery when a band uncovers a concert recorded on film in their archives.  It's the only way to so old school classic concerts to be released in HD.

    That's why the groundwork release amazed me.   It wouldn't of been a show they'd shell out to film in 35mm, but it was a few years before HD went mainstream.   To have a show from 2001 recorded in digital HD video is pretty rare, and a pretty cool find by that poster on youtube.

    Short version:  You supported your argument with a video that was sourced from 35mm film.  That's why I discussed film in my post.  It's also possible I'm being pedantic and people just intertwine film quality with HD quality, but they're not exactly the same thing :)

    I also wonder if Pearl Jam as ever recorded their classic shows on 35mm (or even 16mm), it would be amazing to see a classic PJ show in HD.

    **Technically there were places that tried different versions of analog HD in the 20th century but they never really caught on and were footnotes in history then something widely used, classic concerts in HD still all come from film**
    Post edited by Zod on

Welcome!

It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started.
Sign In
Register

Quick Links

Categories