This is a follow up to a post i just read about BHD's grainyness, i dont know how it got put in tier 0...i should start a petition to get it in at tier 1 at best ...just kidding :cool:

but seriously its not the best picture, of all the movies i have its the one i least like to show off because the picture is nothing THAT spectacular and the 5.1 is surprisingly weak for a movie of this caliber...i was expecting to hear helicopter wings in all directions and was disappointed.

I much prefer Underworld, its much louder, the thunderstorms are loud and booming around you. Plus the picture is very sharp

BHD has great closeups, but its very very grainy and while i know exactly that this is directors intent...it wouldve been enjoyable to see a little bit more grain-less per say?

as for the 5.1, please dont harass me for not having a 7.1 receiver with HDMI support because lets face it, one can only afford so much even though i would LOVE to have one.

I hate to rant, but i also like to bring this up to hear some opinions because this movie is ranked incredibly high on the picture scale and i truly believe of all the movies i have seen it is not spectacular. I have Speed and might be able to say i enjoy that picture a little more.

Other than that, everyone have a nice Sunday and lets take advantage of that Buy one get one free at Best Buy!!

How do you have your Blu Ray player hooked up to your receiver?

I actually thought that the LPCM track is pretty impressive. As far as the grainy look, that is the way it was intended to be.

You must not be set up correctly. The LPCM track, though not 24 bit (rats!), is one of the best out there in terms of a holosonic 360 degree sound field. Children of Men should also be quite good if mastered properly. That has some very creative sound mixing to be sure. It's far more aggressive in nature than BHD (it harkens back to the day when we had directionalized dialog rather than a mono blob and it even steers dialog to the surrounds), but BHD is more atmospheric rather than bombastic.

Dan

Except that Children of Men is from Universal, so you won't be seeing it on BD.

BHD will be one of the first movies I rent when I manage to find a 20 gigger at a local BB. I've heard it's great so I have some high expectations myself.

My rant is that Tier 0 to me is considered the best of the best of the best. Only a select few would ever be in that tier while the most should be in Tier 1.

I agree that the grain at the beginning should take it out of Tier 0 and into Top of Tier 1.

i do not have an HDMI capable receiver....so i cannot use the Linear PCM track. All i have is a 5.1 receiver that has a optical cable so i can get dolby digital 5.1

From what i heard i cannot use the PCM track because optical cables only allow the PCM to use 2 speakers?

Anyone clarify for me?

BHD has great closeups, but its very very grainy and while i know exactly that this is directors intent...it wouldve been enjoyable to see a little bit more grain-less per say?

I hate to rant, but i also like to bring this up to hear some opinions because this movie is ranked incredibly high on the picture scale and i truly believe of all the movies i have seen it is not spectacular. I have Speed and might be able to say i enjoy that picture a little more.

----------------------------
TIER 0- A deeply immersive experience. Flawless or near flawless transfers.

The Wild (PCM)
Crank (PCM)(IME)
Kingdom of Heaven (MA)
Black Hawk Down (BW)(PCM)
Ice Age: The Meltdown (MA)
Corpse Bride
The Ant Bully
--------------------------------
Makes me wonder who is ranking these films? I see over and over about how BD is grainy compared to HD and that "the director wanted it that way or its more film like". And that HD is more pristine and not film like.

This is a turnoff for BD in my mind.

^^^^^ disagree...black hawk down is the one grainy movie i have seen

every other movie is sharp. i have both Blu-Ray and HD-DVD and prefer Blu-Ray by a good margin. HD-DVD is not as crisp in my opinion. The distance shots in the few movies i have seen have been very poor. The closeups are good but not as good as say Crank for BD.

When i go to the store Blu-Ray looks far more appealing to my wallet than an HD-DVD. Not to mention that there are no exclusives at all for HD DVD anymore it seems. Not only will exclusives give Blu-Ray a HUGE boost above HD DVD, in the end the decision will be between picking a BD version or HD DVD for many movies. I choose Blu-Ray over HD DVD in that catagory.

^^^^^ disagree...black hawk down is the one grainy movie i have seen

every other movie is sharp. i have both Blu-Ray and HD-DVD and prefer Blu-Ray by a good margin. HD-DVD is not as crisp in my opinion. The distance shots in the few movies i have seen have been very poor. The closeups are good but not as good as say Crank for BD.

When i go to the store Blu-Ray looks far more appealing to my wallet than an HD-DVD. Not to mention that there are no exclusives at all for HD DVD anymore it seems. Not only will exclusives give Blu-Ray a HUGE boost above HD DVD, in the end the decision will be between picking a BD version or HD DVD for many movies. I choose Blu-Ray over HD DVD in that catagory.

BHD is exactly how the movie was in THEATRE !
BHD is transparent to the SOURCE so it is exactly as director wanted....
not each movie will be like HDTV TV BROADCAS clean and without grain......

Crank was shot DIGITALY, so yes its perfectly CLEAN.... as should be any movie shot digitaly...

Marek

i understand that....i got it for Christmas and didnt know about this website. From now on I will make sure the movies i get are clean, i just prefer the picture.

BHD is exactly how the movie was in THEATRE !
BHD is transparent to the SOURCE so it is exactly as director wanted....
not each movie will be like HDTV TV BROADCAS clean and without grain......

Crank was shot DIGITALY, so yes its perfectly CLEAN.... as should be any movie shot digitaly...

Marek

The Tier system is NOT to judge how well it is original, but how beautiful looking it is. Some people are getting this confused when talking Tier system.

I love BHD as a movie and for the most part has awesome PQ. However the few beginning scenes it was shot grainy and thats why I believe it should get a Tier 1 instead of a Tier 0.

Why does grain warrant a lower tier if the grain was intended?

We're talking about film here folks; art... not 'get as close to CG as possible.'

Why does grain warrant a lower tier if the grain was intended?

We're talking about film here folks; art... not 'get as close to CG as possible.'

exactly !

Marek

The Tier system is NOT to judge how well it is original, but how beautiful looking it is. Some people are getting this confused when talking Tier system.

I love BHD as a movie and for the most part has awesome PQ. However the few beginning scenes it was shot grainy and thats why I believe it should get a Tier 1 instead of a Tier 0.

so if director take a grainy movie stock for his shoting, because he want such grainy movie feeling....... it should be taken out of top spot because it is NOT CLEAN AS POSSIBLE ?

HIGH DEFINITION IS TO HAVE PERFECT COPY OF MOVIE AS DIRECTOR WANTED...

- OAR
- PICTURE transparent to the SOURCE
- DolbyTrueHD, DTS HD MASTER or PCM soundtrack...

Marek

i do not have an HDMI capable receiver....so i cannot use the Linear PCM track. All i have is a 5.1 receiver that has a optical cable so i can get dolby digital 5.1

From what i heard i cannot use the PCM track because optical cables only allow the PCM to use 2 speakers?

Anyone clarify for me?
Yes, using optical without an HDMI connection is the only way to get 5.1. Unless you can use analog outs. However, your comments on the sound you heard through this connection and not being impressed makes me wonder. I am currently shopping for a new processor, and right now am stuck using optical myself. I just took this movie out of the player, so it's fresh on my mind. I realize that we are probably using different equipment, but to me, this movie sounds fantastic through optical; A smooth high end, absolute bone rattling bass, yet everything has a refined characteristic to it. I wouldn't hesitate using certain scenes as "show off" material. Different ears, I guess. :D

so if director take a grainy movie stock for his shoting, because he want such grainy movie feeling....... it should be taken out of top spot because it is NOT CLEAN AS POSSIBLE ?

HIGH DEFINITION IS TO HAVE PERFECT COPY OF MOVIE AS DIRECTOR WANTED...

- OAR
- PICTURE transparent to the SOURCE
- DolbyTrueHD, DTS HD MASTER or PCM soundtrack...

Marek

Amen! :)

From the look of it, the movie seems to be shot on film which explains the grain. There really isnt much else to say about it.

BHD was a grainy film...so that's what accuracy is going to look like.

The grain is meant to add to the grittiness of the situation. Like the choices of music, the look manipulates the emotional response to the film.

Ridley wasn't trying to create a colourful feel good film here.

Alas, the reaction to this spectacular release is another reason for fearing whether mass adoption will be achievable without digital cleaning and full frame to please the masses.

Gary

I'm so tired of reading PQ complaints from people who think every movie is supposed to look like Discovery HD.

Remember too that a movie can be shot digitally and grain can be added by intentionally by the director for effect (can you say Spielberg?).

so if director take a grainy movie stock for his shoting, because he want such grainy movie feeling....... it should be taken out of top spot because it is NOT CLEAN AS POSSIBLE ?

HIGH DEFINITION IS TO HAVE PERFECT COPY OF MOVIE AS DIRECTOR WANTED...

- OAR
- PICTURE transparent to the SOURCE
- DolbyTrueHD, DTS HD MASTER or PCM soundtrack...

Marek

The PQ Tier thread was specifically for movies with EYE CANDY. Some people need to actually read the thread rather than making statements. Here is straight from the BD PQ Tier Thread that is tacked at the top:

The titles within a tier are also in order of PQ. A title listed above another in the same tier has a slightly higher PQ rating.

A debate we often have here is in regard to "director's intent". Please note that this list does not reflect it. Sky Captain, for example, is purposefully blurry to mirror film stock of the time period it is honoring. However this reduces its placement on the list.

That is correct. PCM can only be played over HDMI or through the analog outputs of your player.

I have my Blu-Ray player hooked up through optical and I can get 5.1 PCM.

I have my Blu-Ray player hooked up through optical and I can get 5.1 PCM.

No, you can't. If you're getting surround sound, the player must be converting it to Dolby Digital or DTS, or you are not selecting the PCM track.

No, you can't. If you're getting surround sound, the player must be converting it to Dolby Digital or DTS, or you are not selecting the PCM track.

I select the PCM track off the disc and the receiver's LCD says "PCM"

Here's a link to the receiver. (http://www.yamaha.com/yec/products/productdetail.html?CNTID=200503&CTID=5000400)

Here's the user's manual. (http://www.yamaha.com/yec/registration/yecloginredirect.aspx?returnurl=http%3a%2f%2fwww.yamaha.com% 2fyamahavgn%2fDocuments%2fYEC%2fAV_Receivers%2fManual%2fHTR-5950_e_U.pdf)

I can't download the manual without registering, but I just know that there is no way to transmit multichannel PCM over Toslink. Perhaps the player is sending a stereo signal and the receiver is processing that into multichannel, as in Pro Logic II or some other DSP mode?

----------------------------
TIER 0- A deeply immersive experience. Flawless or near flawless transfers.

The Wild (PCM)
Crank (PCM)(IME)
Kingdom of Heaven (MA)
Black Hawk Down (BW)(PCM)
Ice Age: The Meltdown (MA)
Corpse Bride
The Ant Bully
--------------------------------
Makes me wonder who is ranking these films? I see over and over about how BD is grainy compared to HD and that "the director wanted it that way or its more film like". And that HD is more pristine and not film like.

This is a turnoff for BD in my mind.

Then don't review Miami Vice as evidence of HD quality either. It contains a heavy grain just like the director wanted and imo, it's a pretty good transfer.

Actually I think that the most players will take the standard track and down rez it to standard dolby to "fit" on the optical cable. Most players will send a dolby signal out in 5.1 pcm won't they?

Of course you are not even close to getting the full LPCM track.

I am running my players to my Pioneer receiver via HDMi and get the full LPCM signal, and trust me. It is a really really impressive lpcm soundtrack.

If the original poster is not impressed with the soundtrack why not hook up the player via analog outs to the receiver. That should fix the problem. Unless he is using a PS3.

Remember too that a movie can be shot digitally and grain can be added by intentionally by the director for effect (can you say Spielberg?).

Did Spielberg ever have a movie shot digitally? I thought his were all film. Even so, I know what you mean. Grain doesn't bother me so much, but the extremely washed-out, completely blown highlights look his cinematographers have used in several films now (AI, MR, WotW, etc) is getting gimmicky and annoying.


Ridley Scott loves his grain, that's for sure. I think with BHD it worked OK.

The Tier system is NOT to judge how well it is original, but how beautiful looking it is. Some people are getting this confused when talking Tier system.

I love BHD as a movie and for the most part has awesome PQ. However the few beginning scenes it was shot grainy and thats why I believe it should get a Tier 1 instead of a Tier 0.


Those scenes are supposed to be grainy. It adds to the whole effect the director was trying to get at. What you were watching was not supposed to look crisp and clean at all and would have lost its meaning if it was otherwise. I wouldn't be surprised if the grain was enhanced to look more gritty than it was shot as well...

If you want to complain about this movie being tier 0...I wonder how all of you will react once Aliens comes out on BD. Aliens was also shot very grainy on purpose, however it too should be tier 0 if it is 100% tranparent to the original and all of the artifacts from the SD-DVD are gone and the black levels are perfect.

Those scenes are supposed to be grainy. It adds to the whole effect the director was trying to get at. What you were watching was not supposed to look crisp and clean at all and would have lost its meaning if it was otherwise. I wouldn't be surprised if the grain was enhanced to look more gritty than it was shot as well...

If you want to complain about this movie being tier 0...I wonder how all of you will react once Aliens comes out on BD. Aliens was also shot very grainy on purpose, however it too should be tier 0 if it is 100% tranparent to the original and all of the artifacts from the SD-DVD are gone and the black levels are perfect.

HOLY HECK SOME PEOPLE ARE SLOW

Again, I posted this on page 1 and yet you are still haven't read it, so I'll quote it again. This comes straight from the PQ Tier Thread that is tacked at the top.


The titles within a tier are also in order of PQ. A title listed above another in the same tier has a slightly higher PQ rating.

A debate we often have here is in regard to "director's intent". Please note that this list does not reflect it. Sky Captain, for example, is purposefully blurry to mirror film stock of the time period it is honoring. However this reduces its placement on the list.

I also agree that BHD is not Tier 0 material.