Film Reference and Analysis - Page 16 - AVS Forum
Forum Jump: 
Reply
 
Thread Tools
post #451 of 1897 Old 09-11-2008, 09:55 AM
Advanced Member
 
Lookilook's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: LA, CA
Posts: 713
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 12
Quote:
Originally Posted by DavidHir View Post

Watched Kill Bill I tonight - I totally agree with Lookilook. Fantastic presentation.

Whoever was responsible for this presentation needs to work on ALL of Disney's Blu-rays whenever possible.

QFT!! I believe the same person(s) also worked on Vol.2 as well. I've only watched 30mins or so, but so far its the same great transfer as Vol.1.

On a side note, its a great feeling to see movies like this unmolested on BRD... the wait was worth it!
Lookilook is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #452 of 1897 Old 09-12-2008, 10:46 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
DavidHir's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 10,441
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 181 Post(s)
Liked: 433
Watched Kill Bill II - also requesting to add to list. Same thoughts as I.

Some of the close-up shots of faces have amazing detail - especially Bill's father figure (can't think of character's name).

DavidHir is offline  
post #453 of 1897 Old 09-12-2008, 12:52 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
Josh Z's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Planet Boston, source of the spice, Melange.
Posts: 20,226
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 417 Post(s)
Liked: 397
Quote:
Originally Posted by DavidHir View Post

Some of the close-up shots of faces have amazing detail - especially Bill's father figure (can't think of character's name).

I assume you're referring to the character Esteban, the retired pimp she visits to find out Bill's location.

In case anyone didn't realize it, the same actor (Michael Parks) who played Esteban was also the Texas sherrif in Vol. 1.

Josh Z
Writer/Editor, High-Def Digest (Blog updated daily!)
Curator, Laserdisc Forever

My opinions are my own, and do not necessarily reflect those of my employers.

Josh Z is offline  
post #454 of 1897 Old 09-12-2008, 04:35 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Phantom Stranger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Between the known and the unknown...
Posts: 3,166
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 79 Post(s)
Liked: 99
I have to nominate The Doors. This is one of the better film-like transfers I've seen from a catalog title recently. No apparent DNR and very little edge enhancement is present. I'm not sure this film can ever look better given the style Stone shot the movie.
Phantom Stranger is offline  
post #455 of 1897 Old 09-13-2008, 12:27 PM - Thread Starter
 
FoxyMulder's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Scotland
Posts: 5,860
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
I have added Kill Bill Volume 1 and Volume 2 to the main list and added The Doors to the nomination list.....I always remember The Doors as being shot in a softer focus kind of way as i recall seeing this fine film in the cinema years ago and thinking it looked a lil softer (but still detailed) than other films i was watching at the time so if it retains that on Blu Ray i think that's great.
FoxyMulder is offline  
post #456 of 1897 Old 09-14-2008, 08:19 AM
Advanced Member
 
Whiggles's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Glasgow, Scotland
Posts: 750
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
I took a look at KILL BILL VOLUME 2 last night. There's definitely some grain reduction going on, but it isn't the horrible DARK CITY kind that makes everything look waxy. Instead, it's the milder type that retains some grain rather than sucking it all out and results in some mild trailing on textures and facial features if you know what to look for. It's a very nice presentation overall, but it's not completely unmolested.

I do, however, have a feeling that this is an accurate representation of the master. I say this because I seem to recall that, at the time of the films' release, Tarantino stated that he wasn't entirely happy with the look of the DIs (digital intermediates) prepared for them, feeling that they were too clean and failed to successfully recreate the gritty texture of the films he was aping. (I'm afraid I haven't been able to dig up a source for this - sorry.) I wonder if the cleanness he complained about was in fact the level of temporal noise reduction that has been applied to the material. The closest equivalent I can think of is FLIGHTPLAN, also from Buena Vista and also with the NR applied at the DI stage (a fact confirmed independently on IMDB and by my brother, who noticed the artefacts when he saw the film at the cinema).

What's particularly interesting is that, on certain occasions, particularly the extended Pai Mei section, the NR is either turned off completely or at least lowered to an acceptable level, which I take as further evidence pointing to this having been done at the DI stage rather than some inept technician simply flicking a switch when the Blu-ray transfer was being encoded. The result is that the Pai Mei sequence is the best-looking part of the film, despite the fact that I get the feeling Tarantino shot it with an eye to it looking like the roughest, lowest budget segment.

So, overall what we have is a reasonably pleasing-looking disc that has a slightly synthetic feel to it but is, ultimately, a massive upgrade on the rather mediocre-looking standard definition release. For the most part, all 1080 lines of resolution are being put to use and many scenes feature a per-pixel level of detail. It's too bad about the NR, but, if my suspicions are correct, then nothing much can be done about that short of going back to the original camera elements and redoing all the post production work.

I haven't received my copy of VOLUME 1 yet, but if my suspicions are correct then I suspect it will look more or less exactly the same.

Screen captures here, although they don't really show up the NR because the effect is fairly subtle on the individual frames and becomes most noticeable in motion.


By the way, I'd like to nominate the following titles as examples of how film grain SHOULD be represented:

Inside Man
Resident Evil: Extinction
Casino Royale
Enchanted
The Descent (version with AVC encode)
Silent Hill (ideally the German release from Contender, although the US release from Sony is very film-like too, albeit with noticeable compression artefacts)
Doomsday
Across the Universe
I, Robot
Black Snake Moan
Aeon Flux
Mission Impossible III
Transformers
300
Pirates of the Caribbean: Dean Man's Chest
Norbit (yes, I know...)
Blades of Glory (yes, I know...)
Dreamgirls
Babel
Gone Baby Gone
Juno
Black Book
Resident Evil: Apocalypse
Layer Cake
28 Weeks Later
Babel
Kingdom of Heaven
Underworld


Film-like but with minor issues:

Spider-man 3 (a handful of shots have been EE'd, probably at the DI stage; the rest is flawless and has an overwhelming level of detail)
The Life Before Her Eyes (light temporal NR)
Pirates of the Caribbean: Curse of the Black Pearl (very light EE throughout)
Kill Bill Volume 2 (light temporal NR)
The Rock (some occasional moderate ringing)
Pearl Harbor (some occasional moderate ringing)
Run Lola Run (questionable colour balance when compared to earlier releases)
The Devil's Rejects (very film-like but marred by compression issues)


And a few negatives:

Pan's Labyrinth (UK release - much better than its US counterpart but still with some moderate NR applied)
House of 1000 Corpses (noticeable NR and mild EE throughout)
The Fifth Element (remastered edition - still overly processed-looking and with EE throughout)
Black Hawk Down (prominent EE and a very muddy picture overall, seriously lacking in fine detail)
Gangs of New York (pathetic)
Scary Movie (pathetic)
Batman Begins (heavily filtered with little detail)


Apologies for throwing in so many at once but I really should have noticed this thread before.
Whiggles is offline  
post #457 of 1897 Old 09-14-2008, 08:51 AM
AVS Special Member
 
msgohan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Alberta, Canada
Posts: 2,856
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Liked: 16
Blade Runner FC has plenty of DNR. Or am I just seeing things?
msgohan is offline  
post #458 of 1897 Old 09-14-2008, 09:09 AM
Advanced Member
 
Whiggles's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Glasgow, Scotland
Posts: 750
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by msgohan View Post

Blade Runner FC has plenty of DNR. Or am I just seeing things?

It doesn't look significantly DNR'd to me, but on closer inspection the fairly low bit rate is choking the grain in some scenes, causing some mild artefacting. It's practically unnoticeable in motion, but when you slow it down or pause it to look at the individual scenes, you can see some problems. I certainly wouldn't call it DNR'd, though.
Whiggles is offline  
post #459 of 1897 Old 09-14-2008, 09:15 AM - Thread Starter
 
FoxyMulder's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Scotland
Posts: 5,860
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by Whiggles View Post

I took a look at KILL BILL VOLUME 2 last night. There's definitely some grain reduction going on, but it isn't the horrible DARK CITY kind that makes everything look waxy. Instead, it's the milder type that retains some grain rather than sucking it all out and results in some mild trailing on textures and facial features if you know what to look for. It's a very nice presentation overall, but it's not completely unmolested.

I do, however, have a feeling that this is an accurate representation of the master. I say this because I seem to recall that, at the time of the films' release, Tarantino stated that he wasn't entirely happy with the look of the DIs (digital intermediates) prepared for them, feeling that they were too clean and failed to successfully recreate the gritty texture of the films he was aping. (I'm afraid I haven't been able to dig up a source for this - sorry.) I wonder if the cleanness he complained about was in fact the level of temporal noise reduction that has been applied to the material. The closest equivalent I can think of is FLIGHTPLAN, also from Buena Vista and also with the NR applied at the DI stage (a fact confirmed independently on IMDB and by my brother, who noticed the artefacts when he saw the film at the cinema).

What's particularly interesting is that, on certain occasions, particularly the extended Pai Mei section, the NR is either turned off completely or at least lowered to an acceptable level, which I take as further evidence pointing to this having been done at the DI stage rather than some inept technician simply flicking a switch when the Blu-ray transfer was being encoded. The result is that the Pai Mei sequence is the best-looking part of the film, despite the fact that I get the feeling Tarantino shot it with an eye to it looking like the roughest, lowest budget segment.

So, overall what we have is a reasonably pleasing-looking disc that has a slightly synthetic feel to it but is, ultimately, a massive upgrade on the rather mediocre-looking standard definition release. For the most part, all 1080 lines of resolution are being put to use and many scenes feature a per-pixel level of detail. It's too bad about the NR, but, if my suspicions are correct, then nothing much can be done about that short of going back to the original camera elements and redoing all the post production work.

I haven't received my copy of VOLUME 1 yet, but if my suspicions are correct then I suspect it will look more or less exactly the same.

Screen captures here, although they don't really show up the NR because the effect is fairly subtle on the individual frames and becomes most noticeable in motion.


By the way, I'd like to nominate the following titles as examples of how film grain SHOULD be represented:

Inside Man
Resident Evil: Extinction
Casino Royale
Enchanted
The Descent (version with AVC encode)
Silent Hill (ideally the German release from Contender, although the US release from Sony is very film-like too, albeit with noticeable compression artefacts)
Doomsday
Across the Universe
I, Robot
Black Snake Moan
Aeon Flux
Blade Runner (final cut)
Mission Impossible III
Transformers
300
Pirates of the Caribbean: Dean Man's Chest
Norbit (yes, I know...)
Blades of Glory (yes, I know...)
Dreamgirls
Babel
Gone Baby Gone
Juno
Black Book
Resident Evil: Apocalypse
Layer Cake
28 Weeks Later
Babel
Kingdom of Heaven
Underworld


Film-like but with minor issues:

Spider-man 3 (a handful of shots have been EE'd, probably at the DI stage; the rest is flawless and has an overwhelming level of detail)
The Life Before Her Eyes (light temporal NR)
Pirates of the Caribbean: Curse of the Black Pearl (very light EE throughout)
Kill Bill Volume 2 (light temporal NR)
The Rock (some occasional moderate ringing)
Pearl Harbor (some occasional moderate ringing)
Run Lola Run (questionable colour balance when compared to earlier releases)
The Devil's Rejects (very film-like but marred by compression issues)


And a few negatives:

Pan's Labyrinth (UK release - much better than its US counterpart but still with some moderate NR applied)
House of 1000 Corpses (noticeable NR and mild EE throughout)
The Fifth Element (remastered edition - still overly processed-looking and with EE throughout)
Black Hawk Down (prominent EE and a very muddy picture overall, seriously lacking in fine detail)
Gangs of New York (pathetic)
Scary Movie (pathetic)
Batman Begins (heavily filtered with little detail)


Apologies for throwing in so many at once but I really should have noticed this thread before.

Some of them should throw up a few arguments ( Batman Begins )

Scary Movie and Gangs Of New York are on the Not Recommended don't buy at any costs list ( ok made the last part up but you get my meaning ) but it's always good to get another negative for bad releases.

Black Hawk Down was on the minor issues list with one negative...Yours will make two and one more will see it removed from these pages.

Second negative for The Fifth Element with regards digital processed look and now with EE added.

Second negative for House of 1000 Corpses.

Will add this first negative for Pans Labyrinth UK edition....I actually seconded the nomination for Batman Begins to be on the main list and still think it looks detailed and was actually shot softer focus with regards the indoor scenes where we see certain bland looking faces...I had a link for that somewhere but forget where but nevermind i will add your negative for the film.

I did actually see mild EE/Ringing? on The Rock especially during the last ten minutes of the film and i went and checked my Criterion edition as it's sourced from the same print....The Criterion which was called reference when it came out has a lot of EE visible...The Blu Ray is minor....I will add it to the minor issues list along with the others you noted.

Lot of good films on the minor issues list but i still recommend people watch them as the issues don't generally get in the way of your enjoyment unless you are very picky about the problems these transfers have.

I'll add the others to the nomination and main lists.

With regards Blade Runner - Final Cut....I know it has some drastic color changes which i personally am not fond of but unsure about heavy DNR....maybe light DNR was applied...I know there were screenshots floating about here showing a comparison between the final cut and the directors cut and the director edition looked better to my eyes just from the screenshots but maybe that was more to do with the color changes applied....Perhaps someone can dig them out so i and everyone can see them again.

Remember everyone....Check the front page and nominate or negative a release....Give your reasons and if you have evidence such as screenshots then it's very welcome too...Views will sometimes conflict and remember to check your seating distance from your screen using our recommendations on page 1....Discussion is welcome on any film on the lists or not on them yet regarding the transfers and image quality.
FoxyMulder is offline  
post #460 of 1897 Old 09-14-2008, 09:19 AM
AVS Special Member
 
AlexBC's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 1,095
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by msgohan View Post

Blade Runner FC has plenty of DNR. Or am I just seeing things?

No you ain't. I recently posted some screen cap comparisons between the FC and the archival versions. The difference is huge, and the bitrate budget is more generous on the archival.

The caps can be found on the Ereaser, Outbreak, Undersiege budget Warner titles Thread.

The caps are courtesy of Whiggles.
AlexBC is offline  
post #461 of 1897 Old 09-14-2008, 09:20 AM
Advanced Member
 
Whiggles's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Glasgow, Scotland
Posts: 750
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by AlexBC View Post

No you ain't. I recently posted some screen cap comparisons between the FC and the archival versions. The difference is huge, and the bitrate budget is more generous on the archival.

The caps can be found on the Ereaser, Outbreak, Undersiege budget Warner titles Thread.

Have you got a link to that comparison, Alex? I'd be really interested to see.
Whiggles is offline  
post #462 of 1897 Old 09-14-2008, 09:32 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
DavidHir's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 10,441
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 181 Post(s)
Liked: 433
I believe Ridley Scott approved the Blu-ray, correct?

DavidHir is offline  
post #463 of 1897 Old 09-14-2008, 10:13 AM - Thread Starter
 
FoxyMulder's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Scotland
Posts: 5,860
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by DavidHir View Post

I believe Ridley Scott approved the Blu-ray, correct?

I added all the entries and updated the front page.

Shame on you whiggles for watching Norbit lol........Glad to see Kingdom Of Heaven make the list though...I originally nominated that ages ago...Never liked the theatrical cut but enjoyed the directors longer edition.

I have a separate list for digital camera shot films...Was 300 shot digitally or with film ?

Here's a link to the Blade Runner pictures on the second page....It does look filtered of it's grain structure on those few pics.

http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showt...1048526&page=2
FoxyMulder is offline  
post #464 of 1897 Old 09-14-2008, 10:19 AM
Advanced Member
 
Whiggles's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Glasgow, Scotland
Posts: 750
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by FoxyMulder View Post

Shame on you whiggles for watching Norbit lol........

My only defence is that it was part of a dare with a bad movie aficionado. Between us we've made our way through some pretty horrendous stuff. Pray the Tom Green's FREDDY GOT FINGERED never gets a Blu-ray release.

Quote:


I have a separate list for digital camera shot films...Was 300 shot digitally or with film ?

It was shot digitally, with the grain added in post.
Whiggles is offline  
post #465 of 1897 Old 09-14-2008, 10:45 AM
AVS Special Member
 
msgohan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Alberta, Canada
Posts: 2,856
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Liked: 16
Quote:
Originally Posted by FoxyMulder View Post

Here's a link to the Blade Runner pictures on the second page....It does look filtered of it's grain structure on those few pics.

http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showt...1048526&page=2

Actually here.

So far I only got through the first 15 minutes or so but it seemed like every establishing effects shot had most of the grain removed.
msgohan is offline  
post #466 of 1897 Old 09-14-2008, 10:58 AM
Advanced Member
 
Whiggles's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Glasgow, Scotland
Posts: 750
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by FoxyMulder View Post

Here's a link to the Blade Runner pictures on the second page....It does look filtered of it's grain structure on those few pics.

http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showt...1048526&page=2

Quote:
Originally Posted by msgohan View Post

Actually here.

So far I only got through the first 15 minutes or so but it seemed like every establishing effects shot had most of the grain removed.

Hmm... The fact that the Final Cut has less grain than the theatrical versions isn't necessarily evidence that the Final Cut has had grain removed. Remember that, for the FC, they actually went back to the original source elements and, I believe, recreated most of the process shots that way. When you do process shots in the film (analogue) realm, you need to do multiple exposures, each of which will add an additional level of grain. For the FC, on the other hand, the negative was manipulated primarily in the digital realm, and while some shots with multiple exposures will still be present (and will, as a result, be appropriately grainier), I would expect the film to look less grainy as a whole. As a result, it doesn't surprise me that the FC shows less grain, as the material would have passed through fewer generations than the other versions.

Having said that, in the shot of the pilot in the link you posted, it does look like there is slightly less detail in the FC. Could be the result of the contrast boosting obscuring some of the fine details, could be the result of some other form of digital manipulation... it's a tough one. If there has been some tampering done, I'd say it's more likely to be spatial filtering than noise reduction. That can have the effect of perceptually lessening the grain because it removes high frequency details, but it's not the same thing as DNR.
Whiggles is offline  
post #467 of 1897 Old 09-14-2008, 02:33 PM
AVS Special Member
 
paku's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Sweden
Posts: 1,618
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by Whiggles View Post

It was shot digitally, with the grain added in post.

Actually, 300 was shot on film. But there was so much post-processing applied I think it might as well have not been. In any case I'm pretty sure the grain was all (or at least mostly) digitally generated.
paku is offline  
post #468 of 1897 Old 09-14-2008, 02:46 PM
AVS Special Member
 
paku's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Sweden
Posts: 1,618
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
There was an article or video, I forget which, about the creation of the Final Cut of Blade Runner where one of the guys responsible for the transfer specifically mentioned reducing grain in certain scenes to bring them in line with the rest of the film. I wouldn't be surprised if they made a very light general grain-reduction pass as well. Of course this would be at the film creation stage as opposed to the disc creation, so that would presumably all be supervised and signed off on by Ridley Scott.

I suspect that if any additional filtering was done after that, it would be due to the insufficient bitrate of the encode (as evidenced by blocking.)
paku is offline  
post #469 of 1897 Old 09-14-2008, 06:17 PM
Advanced Member
 
cnikirk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Bloomington, IN
Posts: 583
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
I just finished watching "How The West Was Won". It's a fantastic presentation and feel that it should be on the list.
cnikirk is offline  
post #470 of 1897 Old 09-15-2008, 01:10 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Oliver Klohs's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Leipzig, Germany
Posts: 2,534
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 13 Post(s)
Liked: 12
Quote:
Originally Posted by Whiggles View Post

Film-like but with minor issues:

Spider-man 3 (a handful of shots have been EE'd, probably at the DI stage; the rest is flawless and has an overwhelming level of detail)
The Life Before Her Eyes (light temporal NR)
Kill Bill Volume 2 (light temporal NR)

Wow Chris,

these are some tough ones, especially as due to the problems possibly being DI related all of these titles may have looked like that in the theater and are therefore as good as they have ever been on any medium.

I would rather have them on the main list with a note in parentheses, we also kept Crank despite the EE that was probably also added at the DI stage as it keeps with the look in the cinemas.

And I second the criticism of Batman Begins as looking filtered, it always struck me as very soft, especially for being a potentially best in class release like Spiderman 3, Transformers or Casino Royale. I have a hard time imagining that this is the intended look for the film and would like to add that even the exterior shots of skylines and other stuff that usually look very detailed have a softness to them that I do not think was the intended look for the film.

@foxymulder:

The movie The Life Before Her Eyes is on the list twice, once with a typo (minor issues) and once correctly (nominations)
Oliver Klohs is offline  
post #471 of 1897 Old 09-15-2008, 02:32 AM - Thread Starter
 
FoxyMulder's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Scotland
Posts: 5,860
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by Oliver Klohs View Post

Wow Chris,

these are some tough ones, especially as due to the problems possibly being DI related all of these titles may have looked like that in the theater and are therefore as good as they have ever been on any medium.

I would rather have them on the main list with a note in parentheses, we also kept Crank despite the EE that was probably also added at the DI stage as it keeps with the look in the cinemas.

@foxymulder:

The movie The Life Before Her Eyes is on the list twice, once with a typo (minor issues) and once correctly (nominations)

Thanks will fix the typo.......Perhaps there should be no minor issues list and instead place film like quality transfers on the main list but place notes next to each title regarding minor issues so as to encourage people that they are worthy of a place in their rental queue or are quality transfers but for a few niggles......Opinions on this are welcome.

Quote:
Originally Posted by cnikirk View Post

I just finished watching "How The West Was Won". It's a fantastic presentation and feel that it should be on the list.

I will add How The West Was Won to the nomination list.
FoxyMulder is offline  
post #472 of 1897 Old 09-15-2008, 03:03 AM
Member
 
micnic77's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Leipzig, Germany
Posts: 98
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Yesterday I rewatched Donnie Brasco (it's on the nomination list) and I would put it on the minor issues list. I looks very good but the EE is a shame and creates a slight artificial look. It could have been reference material without it.
The EE ist far from being strong but it is still noticable with a high enough viewing angle (40° for me yesterday).

I'm not sure about Married Life, I watched the other night. It also looks not bad at all with no DNR visible but the EE is even stronger than in Donnie Brasco. Maybe the minor issues list but maybe not at all. Other comments?
micnic77 is offline  
post #473 of 1897 Old 09-15-2008, 06:58 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Oliver Klohs's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Leipzig, Germany
Posts: 2,534
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 13 Post(s)
Liked: 12
Quote:
Originally Posted by micnic77 View Post

Yesterday I rewatched Donnie Brasco (it's on the nomination list) and I would put it on the minor issues list. I looks very good but the EE is a shame and creates a slight artificial look. It could have been reference material without it.
The EE ist far from being strong but it is still noticable with a high enough viewing angle (40° for me yesterday).

I'm not sure about Married Life, I watched the other night. It also looks not bad at all with no DNR visible but the EE is even stronger than in Donnie Brasco. Maybe the minor issues list but maybe not at all. Other comments?

Strong EE throughout IMO is not a minor issue.

I think a point can be made for very little EE or EE only in some scenes, same goes for DNR which probably is present to some degree in almost all transfers anyway.

I nominated Felon and it has EE but of the rather unobstrusive variety as the transfer is dominated so heavily by the immense amount of grain that was obviously intended by the director to add to visually complement the gritty story.
Oliver Klohs is offline  
post #474 of 1897 Old 09-15-2008, 07:04 AM - Thread Starter
 
FoxyMulder's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Scotland
Posts: 5,860
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by Oliver Klohs View Post

Strong EE throughout IMO is not a minor issue.

I think a point can be made for very little EE or EE only in some scenes, same goes for DNR which probably is present to some degree in almost all transfers anyway.

I nominated Felon and it has EE but of the rather unobstrusive variety as the transfer is dominated so heavily by the immense amount of grain that was obviously intended by the director to add to visually complement the gritty story.

I take it thats a negative for Donnie Brasco which i will add next to it......
FoxyMulder is offline  
post #475 of 1897 Old 09-15-2008, 10:51 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
Josh Z's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Planet Boston, source of the spice, Melange.
Posts: 20,226
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 417 Post(s)
Liked: 397
Quote:
Originally Posted by Whiggles View Post

By the way, I'd like to nominate the following titles as examples of how film grain SHOULD be represented:

Resident Evil: Extinction
Casino Royale

The Casino Royale Blu-ray has about 1/10th the amount of grain that was present in the theatrical prints. It's a nice-looking disc, but don't have any illusions that no grain reduction was done on it. Didn't paidgeek even confirm as much?

I would nominate the first Resident Evil over Extinction. Extinction had so much digital manipulation done at the DI (including all the digital airbrushing of Milla Jovovich's face) that it's very hard to evaluate how much filtering is intentional and how much was applied at the video transfer.

Josh Z
Writer/Editor, High-Def Digest (Blog updated daily!)
Curator, Laserdisc Forever

My opinions are my own, and do not necessarily reflect those of my employers.

Josh Z is offline  
post #476 of 1897 Old 09-15-2008, 11:01 AM
Advanced Member
 
Whiggles's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Glasgow, Scotland
Posts: 750
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by Josh Z View Post

The Casino Royale Blu-ray has about 1/10th the amount of grain that was present in the theatrical prints. It's a nice-looking disc, but don't have any illusions that no grain reduction was done on it. Didn't paidgeek even confirm as much?

I would nominate the first Resident Evil over Extinction. Extinction had so much digital manipulation done at the DI (including all the digital airbrushing of Milla Jovovich's face) that it's very hard to evaluate how much filtering is intentional and how much was applied at the video transfer.

I think 1/10th is going a bit too far. I remember paidgeek confirming that it had been grain reduced, but, to me, grain reduction alone is not grounds for immediate dismissal: like you say, it's still a nice-looking disc - and EXTREMELY nice-looking disc, in fact. Grain reduction, if done subtly and carefully, can still leave you with a very film-like image.

As for RESIDENT EVIL, sorry, but the first RE looks pretty unwhelming on Blu-ray. Detail is unimpressive and murky, little better than the lambasted Japanese BIOHAZARD HD DVD release except in terms of its compression. EXTINCTION, on the other hand, barring the airbrushed shots of Jovovich, looks absolutely beautiful, absolutely stellar both in terms of its detail and grain reproduction. It's one of these discs ever put out on Blu-ray. You only need to look at shots of Jovovich's face where the airbrushing hasn't been applied (which is actually the bulk of them, if I remember correctly). And, with all due respect, I think it's pretty clear how much of the manipulation was done at the DI stage: all of it. I highly doubt that a compressionist is going to sit down and filter out an actress' zits in select shots.
Whiggles is offline  
post #477 of 1897 Old 09-15-2008, 11:15 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
DavidHir's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 10,441
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 181 Post(s)
Liked: 433
Quote:
Originally Posted by Whiggles View Post

I think 1/10th is going a bit too far. I remember paidgeek confirming that it had been grain reduced, but, to me, grain reduction alone is not grounds for immediate dismissal: like you say, it's still a nice-looking disc - and EXTREMELY nice-looking disc, in fact. Grain reduction, if done subtly and carefully, can still leave you with a very film-like image.

I agree. I believe in the case of Casino Royale is was also at the wish of the director. I thought I read that somewhere (maybbe I was dreaming). In addition, doesn't every Blu-ray under go at least some DNR?

DavidHir is offline  
post #478 of 1897 Old 09-15-2008, 10:46 PM
Member
 
micnic77's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Leipzig, Germany
Posts: 98
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Was there a missunderstanding regarding Donnie Brasco? It's marked now as "excessive EE". The EE is nowhere near a GONY or something - it's just enough to distraced a bit and makes it less film like if you are sensitive (and sitting close enough). I would still recommend it.
micnic77 is offline  
post #479 of 1897 Old 09-16-2008, 03:38 AM - Thread Starter
 
FoxyMulder's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Scotland
Posts: 5,860
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by micnic77 View Post

Was there a missunderstanding regarding Donnie Brasco? It's marked now as "excessive EE". The EE is nowhere near a GONY or something - it's just enough to distraced a bit and makes it less film like if you are sensitive (and sitting close enough). I would still recommend it.

Sorry i should make it clearer on the page that it's just a negative from someone....When a negative is made i write the reason next to it.

I will try to amend to make it clear it's one person's negative and that you disagree.
FoxyMulder is offline  
post #480 of 1897 Old 09-16-2008, 08:06 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
Josh Z's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Planet Boston, source of the spice, Melange.
Posts: 20,226
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 417 Post(s)
Liked: 397
Quote:
Originally Posted by Whiggles View Post

I think 1/10th is going a bit too far. I remember paidgeek confirming that it had been grain reduced, but, to me, grain reduction alone is not grounds for immediate dismissal: like you say, it's still a nice-looking disc - and EXTREMELY nice-looking disc, in fact. Grain reduction, if done subtly and carefully, can still leave you with a very film-like image.

I agree that it's a great transfer and that the grain reduction is not objectionable. However, you specifically said that it was an example of "how film grain SHOULD be represented". That's too much of a blanket statement, IMO.

Quote:


As for RESIDENT EVIL, sorry, but the first RE looks pretty unwhelming on Blu-ray. Detail is unimpressive and murky, little better than the lambasted Japanese BIOHAZARD HD DVD release except in terms of its compression. EXTINCTION, on the other hand, barring the airbrushed shots of Jovovich, looks absolutely beautiful, absolutely stellar both in terms of its detail and grain reproduction. It's one of these discs ever put out on Blu-ray. You only need to look at shots of Jovovich's face where the airbrushing hasn't been applied (which is actually the bulk of them, if I remember correctly). And, with all due respect, I think it's pretty clear how much of the manipulation was done at the DI stage: all of it. I highly doubt that a compressionist is going to sit down and filter out an actress' zits in select shots.

I really can't agree with this. Extinction is a "pretty good" looking disc, but not a "great" one. It's far too filtered to qualify as that. I wasn't nearly as impressed with the detail in wide shots as you seem to be. The first Resident Evil only seems "murky" because it's a much darker film by design. I felt that it had a better film-like appearance overall than Extinction.

Josh Z
Writer/Editor, High-Def Digest (Blog updated daily!)
Curator, Laserdisc Forever

My opinions are my own, and do not necessarily reflect those of my employers.

Josh Z is offline  
Reply Blu-ray Software

User Tag List

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page


Forum Jump: 

Posting Rules  
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off