Let Warner know we want a new transfer. I am trying to replace FMJ w/ EWS in my order to make sure they get the point. Since EWS includes the unrated version I decided to go ahead with it and wait and see with the FMJ transfer.

My e-mail:
Would it be possible to replace:

Full Metal Jacket: Deluxe Edition (BD)
Blu-Ray
Price $14.96 (Savings $4.99)
ADVANCED ORDER
Estimated Street Date 10-23-2007

with

Eyes Wide Shut: Special Edition (BD)
Blu-ray?

Order number is *******. I'd like to change because I worry Warner will reuse the bobbed transfer from the original Full Metal Jacket on HD DVD. After verifying that Eyes Wide Shut will include the unrated version, I'd like to replace Full Metal Jacket with Eyes Wide Shut and wait to see if Full Metal Jacket gets a new transfer before re-ordering.

I also sent an e-mail to their CS department asking about the FMJ transfer.

I grabbed a ton of titles with that coupon code on the Warner site, but held off on Full Metal Jacket for this very reason.

This is a good move coz the buyer shouldn't feel pi**ed off even after double dipping the title.

Isn't the TrueHD track enough?
Warner got Grand Prix and Forbidden Planet right. I think they can fix this.

I didn't think Full Metal Jacket was that bad.

It wasn't fantastic but it was never a very pretty movie.

I think Warner has to do a new encode (with a newer version of the encoder) just because the old one had such a high bitrate (from the numbers I saw here it averaged over 25Mbps) and I think they need to lower the video bitrate to fit TrueHD in there, but if the master is really bad it might not make much difference.

--Darin

With full rez TrueHD the max bitrates available are around CBR@26.84Mbps. Seems to be right on the borderline. Thanks for the info. I remember someone confirming better masters are available, so things could be looking up. Still hope I can make the switch and get FMJ (my fav of the five) later if it turns out as it should.

How bad is the encode?

Are we talking 5th element bad or Traffic bad perhaps?

Can you see aliasing and macroblocks or is it just soft looking with no pop?

With full rez TrueHD the max bitrates available are around CBR@26.84Mbps. Seems to be right on the borderline.Depends on whether there is other stuff like any other audio choices and subtitles. I can't think of any disc where Warner didn't back the TrueHD with a DD+ track. Also, by "full rez TrueHD" did you mean 16/48? For this movie the master might have been just that, but for 24/48 masters I would call "full rez TrueHD" 24/48 (although I'm okay with compromising to 20/48).

--Darin

How bad is the encode?

Are we talking 5th element bad or Traffic bad perhaps?

Can you see aliasing and macroblocks or is it just soft looking with no pop?Based on memory I think even worse than 5th element bad. Good movie, but horrible looking grain like stuff and blockiness or posterization on some parts is what I recall from memory (although it has been a long time since I looked at it). Seemed to me like maybe somebody tried to clean it up and did a really bad job of it.

--Darin

Depends on whether there is other stuff like any other audio choices and subtitles. I can't think of any disc where Warner didn't back the TrueHD with a DD+ track. Also, by "full rez TrueHD" did you mean 16/48? For this movie the master might have been just that, but for 24/48 masters I would call "full rez TrueHD" 24/48 (although I'm okay with compromising to 20/48).

--Darin

I meant 5.1 24/48, sorry. Not sure what the master is though in this example. Do all audio tracks/subtitles contribute to the maximum audio+video combined bitrate or only the chosen ones? HD DVD30 should have about 3.35GB left after the encode mentioned before assuming those extra tracks and subtitles don't need inclusion. I thought only seemless branching needed overhead (raw data transfer minus maximum audio+video combined bitrate) beyond what's already in the specs but I'm not really sure. It sure would be nice to have one chart with all the info neatly laid out.

I used the info here to extrapolate my data.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_high_definition_optical_disc_formats

I meant 5.1 24/48, sorry.For 24/48 I think the peaks might be over 4Mbps. The average should be lower, but peaks can be a problem.
Do all audio tracks/subtitles contribute to the maximum audio+video combined bitrate or only the chosen ones?Unfortunately, all of them. This is one of those things where Amir was claiming that HD DVD had plenty of bandwidth for lots of audio because only the audio being played at the time counted (after pulling the "I'm an expert and you're not, so you have to trust me" kind of thing on me just a few posts before), and then had to come back and apologize for claiming I and others were wrong. I would have pointed it out if he hadn't anyway though. :)

I know this surprises people, but it is the same way DVD has always worked. All the audio choices come off the disc even if not being played and are made ready for quickly switching to them.

--Darin

Thanks. I figured the overhead could take care of that. Probably shouldn't post this in this forum, but that makes BD's already sizeable bitrates advantage even more important. However, including two lossless tracks probably is a bad idea then on both formats. Even BD would have to sacrifice some video bitrate then. (HD DVD always does regardless)

I guess my OAR and OAL (original audio language in lossless, no other audio tracks on the disk) mantra is also based on science as well as preference. That also makes DTS-MA all the more appealing as well. Probably the best lossy and lossless audio available in one package. (ducks and covers knowing I am one of the few who likes DTS-MA)

Seamless branching is also probably a big no-no on both formats as well IMO.

Based on memory I think even worse than 5th element bad. Good movie, but horrible looking grain like stuff and blockiness or posterization on some parts is what I recall from memory (although it has been a long time since I looked at it). Seemed to me like maybe somebody tried to clean it up and did a really bad job of it.

--Darin

?
I haven't watched the movie in full since getting a 1080p pj, but on my last pj, I noticed no macroblocking, stairstepping, moire or any of the other various ailments that denote a compromised transfer or encoding.
The film is generally soft/diffused, the colors muted, and the grain structure frequently visible- all aspects that don;t strike me as being far off from the theatrical viewing I saw.
This shouldn't look like The Untouchables with deep inky black levels and exagerated shaprness, and deep colors (then again, I didn't remember the Untouchables looking like that theatrically either).
I won't be surprised if Warner does go in and pump the contrast and the colors and add a little EE all in the cause of giving the Tier thread habituaes something to be 'happy' with.
Give the people what they want after all, and what they want is pretty- not accurate.

I don't want any "enhancements". I just want a non-bobbed version. Stair-stepping is the only complaint I know about. FMJ isn't a looker, but still a must have.

I ordered the new version during the Warner sale, but I won't be opening it until someone else plays guinea pig. I can always ebay it and probably at least break even with a sealed copy.

FYI,
I wouldn't be expecting too much from the FMJ soundtrack.
The original was mono.
One would hope that the new transfer would take care of artifacts and yield a good rendering of the master.

I don't want any "enhancements". I just want a non-bobbed version. Stair-stepping is the only complaint I know about. FMJ isn't a looker, but still a must have.


by stair-stepping you mean aliasing?

I can accept a title for what it is even if it doesn't pop in HD, but
if it has a technical problem I don't want it.

Grain doesn't bother me at all, I actually like it.

But ANY kind of EE should be tossed out for HD mastering.
It looks so awful in HD I can't figure why anyone would EE anything in HD.
At least with DVD on a tube TV it was barely noticeable.

by stair-stepping you mean aliasing?

Yes, edges have an aliased look to them. I believe the problem was confirmed to be a result of the vertical domain filtering used.

To see what the problem looks like, check out these screen grabs (http://www.hdmovies.co.nz/hddvd.php?id=Full%20Metal%20Jacket) provided by forum member "gooki".

This is a problem that I sincerely hope will be addressed in the upcoming release of Full Metal Jacket.

How bad is the encode?

Per take a look for yourself:
http://www.hdmovies.co.nz/hddvd.php?id=Full%20Metal%20Jacket

PS i've never seen it in the theatre so can;t comment how it compares to the actual film.

Grain doesn't bother me at all, I actually like it.


Same here, I think it adds a theatricality to the video that's actually a bit immersive..

(But grain in moderation though! ;)

that's definitely a bobbed transfer, but it still doesn't look nearly as bad as "traffic" ... "traffic" was an absolute mess. it almost looked like it came from an old LD transfer or something. it definitely came from an SD transfer.



Order number is *******. I'd like to change because I worry Warner will reuse the bobbed transfer from the original Full Metal Jacket on HD DVD. After verifying that Eyes Wide Shut will include the unrated version, I'd like to replace Full Metal Jacket with Eyes Wide Shut and wait to see if Full Metal Jacket gets a new transfer before re-ordering.


you do realize that this will be read by a low-level customer service monkey who will have no clue whatsoever what you're talking about, right?

Same here, I think it adds a theatricality to the video that's actually a bit immersive..

(But grain in moderation though! ;)


yeah no kiddin.

My living room feels more like a theatre when I see the wonderful grain! :)