The blu-ray for Young Guns is the most horrible transfer I've ever seen. It has major, major stairstepping issues. I'm actually really shocked this ever made it to disc. It's that terrible.

It's so bad, I kept checking my controllers to make sure I didn't have some zoom feature enabled or something.

I'm viewing at 1080i from a PS3 into a 1366x768 TV, by the way.

I found these screen grabs, which look exactly like my TV:

http://www.hdimage.org/viewer.php?file=sc87rfq4255a22k8bh5f_snapshot20080918121031. png

http://www.hdimage.org/viewer.php?file=p4mal7q2mcwct1ra8lp4_snapshot20080918120757. png

http://www.hdimage.org/viewer.php?file=bpudfzi52lmkdigvtdw_snapshot20080918121113.p ng

It's an artifact from horizontal filtering. A handful of Warner tiles share the same problem.

Is it possible that they upsampled the original content (using a very primitive algorithm) from a lesser resolution (540p or 720p?) to the 1080p24 result on the disc?

Is it possible that they upsampled the original content (using a very primitive algorithm) from a lesser resolution (540p or 720p?) to the 1080p24 result on the disc?

I think kram is right on this one.

It should be noted that these filtered older transfers are different than newer transfers that exhibit jaggies (1408, Dirty Dancing, Next, etc). No one knows what went wrong with those yet.

What is horizontal filtering supposed to achieve?

What is horizontal filtering supposed to achieve?

To make a interlace scan converted to progressive.

To make a interlace scan converted to progressive.
I could see that if the horizontal lines were affected, i.e. through line doubling, but here (and on the Warner titles) it's instead column doubling (?), how does that relate to interlaced/progressive?

I could see that if the horizontal lines were affected, i.e. through line doubling, but here (and on the Warner titles) it's instead column doubling (?), how does that relate to interlaced/progressive?

True, never saw that the first look.

And that aliasing.

Reason could be upscaling (closest neighbour) or sharpening, but im sure there could be a third reason I have missed.

Thanks MovieSwede.

I noticed exactly what you did jvillain- hence, my suspicion that crude upsampling may be involved.

I would hope that the BDA (in its own best interest) would try and "encourage" studios to not take any short cuts and simply upscale and release "HD" versions of their movies on Blu-Ray.

Having invested in the technology it is also in my own best interest for them not to screw up the implementation and growth.

I think we are still at least somewhat challenged with selling the cost / rewards / value aspect to non-HT enthusiasts. Taking shortcuts and releasing obviously sub-par presentations is NOT in the BDA's or our best interest. I strongly feel that we are still in make or break position for long term wide scale adoption. This may continue throughout 2009 before any significant trends can be seen to indicate if BD will take off. I think the BDA should still be in a "format war" like heightened sensitivity state to ensure success. Do it right. DO It Right. DO IT RIGHT lol. Or as my fave character from Armageddon would say, "Do a good job"

Frankly, if you cannot deliver an quality HD version of a movie with a noticeable upgrade on the DVD version I would prefer you do not release it at all. Maybe at some later date you can create a Blu-Ray category with some fancy marketing name that tells people: "These are older movies that we have transferred to Blu-Ray for your enjoyment and convenience. While every attempt has been made to provide the best quality, in some cases we are limited by the source"

Then at least you have a heads up that it may not go next to The Rat in your reference section.

Cheers

Warner fixed this and re-released Full Metal Jacket.

the initial release had the same problem right?

yeah FMJ had aliasing issues as well as the odd visible compression artifact.

My FMJ jacket grabs are here (before the re-release):
http://www.hdmovies.co.nz/hddvd.php?id=Full%20Metal%20Jacket