"Despicable" Patton comparison *PIX* - Page 10 - AVS Forum
Forum Jump: 
Reply
 
Thread Tools
post #271 of 930 Old 06-18-2008, 10:40 AM
AVS Special Member
 
rdclark's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Philadelphia Vicinity
Posts: 4,167
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 29 Post(s)
Liked: 189
Quote:
Originally Posted by s2mikey View Post

Ah well, the horse is beaten and staying in this argument just means me taking more of a beating. I will say that I HOPE Blu-ray continues to clean up old films to make them enjoyable for newer generations that prefer cleaner images and more vibrant colors.

Just wait until they take something that means a lot to you, that you know well, and arbitrarily change it to make it more palatable to new audiences so they can sell more copies.

*cough*greedoshotfirst*cough*


Wide Awake

on the Edge

of the World

 

rdclark is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #272 of 930 Old 06-18-2008, 10:43 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
Rob Tomlin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: SoCal
Posts: 13,752
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 11
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dave Mack View Post

It's ok, Rob. We don't have to agree.



I'd also rather listen to an old album on vinyl with pops and hiss with the correct volume levels of instruments in relation to one another than many of these new "digitally remastered!!!" CDs where they brickwall compress everything and all the instruments are now at the same level.

Fair enough Dave.


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
Rob Tomlin is offline  
post #273 of 930 Old 06-18-2008, 11:05 AM
Advanced Member
 
surap's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 954
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Liked: 13
But technically speaking, a new transfer could be done immediatly? I assume that DNR is applyed after the master and could easily be removed before manufacturing?
surap is offline  
post #274 of 930 Old 06-18-2008, 11:07 AM
 
louigi222's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Albuquerque NM
Posts: 437
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ken H View Post

Yes, and if the screen shots are accurate, which based on Xylon's previous work in this area would be the case, then the Patton Blu-ray transfer is a disservice to the original film.

Yesssss......that's quite a big "IF" in my opinion. Is it fair to base judgment on the "look" of a motion picture on screen shots from a DVD/BR disc? I would give this assessment more credence if Xylon's managed to get a hold of 70mm footage and than......did his comparisons. The way it stands now...why that's almost like judging a book by its cover.
Quote:


Film is a very flexible media, with which the film industry has extensive long term experience. It can be technically manipulated using a wide variety of techniques, which result in a wide variety of visual results. When you are viewing the film theatrically (short of a technical issue at that specific theater), you can be 100% sure if it looks 'dull, lifeless, grainy, and flat' to you, that's the way it's intended to look.
The same film on Blu-ray should be an accurate reproduction, nothing more, nothing less. It's that simple.

I wish it was that simple.
Each studio, and that's what we're talking about here, may each have a totally different criteria that controls how they wish to present their BD 'creations.' I'm sure some take into consideration the director's intent and even get his/her approval before the disc goes into production. Others may not and simply spend as little on their discs as possible.
As a consumer do you propose boycotting Fox's releases? Is now the time to take such a stand? After all....these recently released Fox catalog titles are real gems and blow away the SD DVD versions. What about the consumers that are satisfied with Patton's PQ? Fox has dragged its feet all along in supporting BR and will the powers that be simply say..."the hell with it...lets do a Toshiba and stick with SD DVD and push DD for now."
louigi222 is offline  
post #275 of 930 Old 06-18-2008, 11:20 AM
AVS Special Member
 
mhafner's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Switzerland
Posts: 4,605
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 6 Post(s)
Liked: 28
Quote:
Originally Posted by louigi222 View Post

Yesssss......that's quite a big "IF" in my opinion. Is it fair to base judgment on the "look" of a motion picture on screen shots from a DVD/BR disc? I would give this assessment more credence if Xylon's managed to get a hold of 70mm footage and than......did his comparisons. The way it stands now...why that's almost like judging a book by its cover.

How often do you go to the cinema and watch prints? How many older films have you seen from prints? I'd say very very few or you wouldn't talk like this. Once you have seen enough you know what film basically looks like, and how it never looks in a case like Patton (65mm from the 70s). The same way you know you look at an orange and not at an apple. It's not a book with seven seals what these films look like. Really.
mhafner is online now  
post #276 of 930 Old 06-18-2008, 11:25 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
Dave Mack's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: NYC
Posts: 11,966
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 12
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rob Tomlin View Post

Fair enough Dave.



Let's hope Lawrence doesn't get the mannequin look!


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
Dave Mack is offline  
post #277 of 930 Old 06-18-2008, 11:27 AM
 
louigi222's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Albuquerque NM
Posts: 437
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by robertc88 View Post

Maybe a thread about what expectation one has from Blu Ray may really show where folks are coming from and when they do indeed decide to pull the trigger on a title.

Actually, the only "expectation" I have from Blu-ray is that EVERY favorite title that I purchase will have PQ/AQ vastly superior to SD DVD.
I have not been disappointed.....so far.
louigi222 is offline  
post #278 of 930 Old 06-18-2008, 11:29 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
Ken H's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: Metro Detroit
Posts: 45,876
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 12
Quote:
Originally Posted by louigi222 View Post

Yesssss......that's quite a big "IF" in my opinion. Is it fair to base judgment on the "look" of a motion picture on screen shots from a DVD/BR disc? I would give this assessment more credence if Xylon's managed to get a hold of 70mm footage and than......did his comparisons. The way it stands now...why that's almost like judging a book by its cover.

No, it's not.

If you know Xylon's work, and the reputation of others like Art, whose home theater I've been to, then for me it's more than fair to use that as a basis for a purchasing decision. Also, I may try to see it at someone else's system, at some point in the future. You can make your decision how ever you want to.


Quote:


I wish it was that simple.
Each studio, and that's what we're talking about here, may each have a totally different criteria that controls how they wish to present their BD 'creations.' I'm sure some take into consideration the director's intent and even get his/her approval before the disc goes into production. Others may not and simply spend as little on their discs as possible.
As a consumer do you propose boycotting Fox's releases? Is now the time to take such a stand? After all....these recently released Fox catalog titles are real gems and blow away the SD DVD versions. What about the consumers that are satisfied with Patton's PQ? Fox has dragged its feet all along in supporting BR and will the powers that be simply say..."the hell with it...lets do a Toshiba and stick with SD DVD and push DD for now."

It is very simple. The market will determine what happens.

If misguided efforts like Patton don't sell, they will surely take note. If they do sell, then were all screwed, because you can soon expect to see other alterations to films released on Blu-ray. Like what, you ask? I think there is no end to what some studios would do to sell more product; edited for content or time, soundtrack, effects, who knows? It's a slippery slope when you start messing with art. And for anyone who does not think film is art, like I said before, you may want to reconsider your participation here.

The goal here is to educate others to what the studios are doing, and let the chips fall where they may.

'Better Living Through Modern, Expensive, Electronic Devices'

Ken H is offline  
post #279 of 930 Old 06-18-2008, 11:31 AM
 
louigi222's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Albuquerque NM
Posts: 437
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by mhafner View Post

How often do you go to the cinema and watch prints? How many older films have you seen from prints? I'd say very very few or you wouldn't talk like this. Once you have seen enough you know what film basically looks like, and how it never looks in a case like Patton (65mm from the 70s). The same way you know you look at an orange and not at an apple. It's not a book with seven seals what these films look like. Really.

What are you talking about?
louigi222 is offline  
post #280 of 930 Old 06-18-2008, 11:35 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
Ken H's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: Metro Detroit
Posts: 45,876
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 12
Quote:
Originally Posted by louigi222 View Post

What are you talking about?

He's trying to imply all you know is video, and that's what you want film to look like.

'Better Living Through Modern, Expensive, Electronic Devices'

Ken H is offline  
post #281 of 930 Old 06-18-2008, 11:35 AM
AVS Special Member
 
s2mikey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Upstate, NY
Posts: 2,527
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 18
Quote:
Originally Posted by rdclark View Post

Just wait until they take something that means a lot to you, that you know well, and arbitrarily change it to make it more palatable to new audiences so they can sell more copies.

*cough*greedoshotfirst*cough*


Amen. You're preaching to the choir about the "updated" Star Wars movies. I dislike them as much as you guys....but thats actual content being changed. Its a HUGE difference between that and cleaning up an older transfer that might NOT appeal to all that many people.

HD Digest had the right idea behind the video quality review of Patton when they said that it "looks better than any other home video incarnation" which, IMO is the REAL point of Blu-ray. Capturing the original thetarical look and feel is likely impossible anways...ya know? So then, gimme the BEST video transfer you can give me and I'll be happy.

s2mikey is offline  
post #282 of 930 Old 06-18-2008, 11:38 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
Ken H's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: Metro Detroit
Posts: 45,876
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 12
Quote:
Originally Posted by s2mikey View Post

Capturing the original thetarical look and feel is likely impossible anways...ya know?

Actually, from other Blu-ray releases, we know this is incorrect.

'Better Living Through Modern, Expensive, Electronic Devices'

Ken H is offline  
post #283 of 930 Old 06-18-2008, 11:42 AM
AVS Special Member
 
s2mikey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Upstate, NY
Posts: 2,527
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 18
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ken H View Post

Actually, from other Blu-ray releases, we know this is incorrect.

Ok, cool.... but how did other home video formats do in this regard for said titles? Did the DVDs also look "correct"? Just trying to get an idea of whether or not Blu-ray is only considered an "upgrade" if it matches theater presentations or if its also considered a worthy "upgrade" if its much better than the DVD or Laserdisc transfer/presentation.
s2mikey is offline  
post #284 of 930 Old 06-18-2008, 11:47 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
Ken H's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: Metro Detroit
Posts: 45,876
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 12
Quote:
Originally Posted by s2mikey View Post

Ok, cool.... but how did other home video formats do in this regard for said titles? Did the DVDs also look "correct"? Just trying to get an idea of whether or not Blu-ray is only considered an "upgrade" if it matches theater presentations or if its also considered a worthy "upgrade" if its much better than the DVD or Laserdisc transfer/presentation.

At first, due to a number of factors, initial DVD releases were hit and miss. Some were great, some were terrible, most were somewhere in the middle. As time went on, they got better.

Equipment got better, technicians got better, and the expectations got higher. The same will occur with Blu-ray, if consumer expectations demand it. That's what this is all about.

'Better Living Through Modern, Expensive, Electronic Devices'

Ken H is offline  
post #285 of 930 Old 06-18-2008, 12:11 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
Dave Mack's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: NYC
Posts: 11,966
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 12
amen.


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
Dave Mack is offline  
post #286 of 930 Old 06-18-2008, 12:21 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
DavidHir's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 10,409
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 163 Post(s)
Liked: 428
Exactly, Ken H.

DavidHir is offline  
post #287 of 930 Old 06-18-2008, 12:46 PM
AVS Special Member
 
JBlacklow's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: A state of uncertainty
Posts: 4,692
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ken H View Post

At first, due to a number of factors, initial DVD releases were hit and miss. Some were great, some were terrible, most were somewhere in the middle. As time went on, they got better.

Equipment got better, technicians got better, and the expectations got higher. The same will occur with Blu-ray, if consumer expectations demand it. That's what this is all about.

Quote:


At this juncture it's important to remember that AVS is a home theater enthusiasts web site. This particular forum is for those interested in the highest level of accuracy in film reproduction possible, within their budget of course. Those who do not share this interest should expect to find disagreement with their opinions, and may want to reconsider their participation here.

Frankly, I think it's time that these two statements from Ken should be stickied or something.

"When I get sad I just stop being sad and be awesome instead. True story."
--Barney Stinson, How I Met Your Mother


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
JBlacklow is offline  
post #288 of 930 Old 06-18-2008, 12:57 PM
AVS Club Gold
 
Art Sonneborn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Battle Creek,MI USA
Posts: 22,307
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 13 Post(s)
Liked: 49
Quote:
Originally Posted by mhafner View Post

Once you have seen enough you know what film basically looks like, and how it never looks in a case like Patton (65mm from the 70s). The same way you know you look at an orange and not at an apple.

Yes, as I've said film has a look and ,although the BD of Patton looks better than the DVD, it no longer looks like film and it is a pretty safe bet that the grain reduction (DNR) is responsible.

I'm not sure why over and over the question is asked if we have seen this particular film. In every human endeavor one must extrapolate to draw conclusions. Using the logic thrown around here at times we would have to have seen every single film ever made to conclude that one looks excessively manipulated and not be questioned when we make that conclusion.

Art


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.



iRule rules my theater
 

"If she's amazing she won't be easy,if she's easy she won't be amazing"

 

Bob Marley

Art Sonneborn is offline  
post #289 of 930 Old 06-18-2008, 01:01 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Jgatie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 1,566
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by s2mikey View Post

They have seen it on the big screen...but most of them saw it a loooong time ago. Memory only works so well. It was just a point that I felt was worth mentioning. The more recent you saw a movie at the theater, the more vivid the images are presentation would be. Hence, like I said, I dont remember Star Wars in the theater other than the actual movie itself. I dont remember the color pallette or how much stylized grain there was.

Nope, I had never seen the film before and I thought it looked pretty darnmed good. Of course I cant say whether or not it matched the original release....I would have no way of doing that.

Ah well, the horse is beaten and staying in this argument just means me taking more of a beating. I will say that I HOPE Blu-ray continues to clean up old films to make them enjoyable for newer generations that prefer cleaner images and more vibrant colors.

You speak as though everyone has the same knowledge, education, interest and capabilities vis. film as you do. That simply isn't the case. What do you say to the fact that one of the premeire film restoration experts in the world, the man who was put in charge of The Godfather restorations, has said Patton
Quote:


didn't look like film. It looked like scrubbed data, shorn of its high frequency information. I'm certain that the film has more information than I'm seeing

and
Quote:


a "plastic" look is a very good word. High frequency information in faces, fabrics, walls, etc. is gone

This is a man who's entire career rests on his ability to reproduce what a picture looked like in a theater and he says it didn't look like the Blu-ray in the theater. Are we supposed to ignore his expertise just because you forgot what Star Wars looked like when you were 6 years old?
Jgatie is offline  
post #290 of 930 Old 06-18-2008, 01:44 PM
Senior Member
 
Russ Younger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Meridian ID
Posts: 365
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
The thing that struck me most when I got into HDDVD two years ago was the way that movies looked more like film than any other time I had watched video on my setup. Finally I was able to see composed shots and special optical effects the way they were ment to be seen. This includes the grain.

I'm glad that I waited to purchase this disc because the early reviews were glowing, and then later after the release we finally see some shots of the picture quallity that shows heavy use of DNR. This frankly sucks. I was really looking forward to Patton.
Russ Younger is offline  
post #291 of 930 Old 06-18-2008, 02:10 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
Ken H's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: Metro Detroit
Posts: 45,876
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 12
Unproductive posts removed.

'Better Living Through Modern, Expensive, Electronic Devices'

Ken H is offline  
post #292 of 930 Old 06-18-2008, 03:46 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
Rob Tomlin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: SoCal
Posts: 13,752
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 11
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dave Mack View Post



Let's hope Lawrence doesn't get the mannequin look!

I am confident that it wont. From Robert Harris:

Quote:


I don't have an exact date for LoA on BD, but can tell you that Columbia's Grover Crisp has been giving it a great deal of his time for over two years. It is currently being revisited, and I have every feeling, now that David Bishop is in place in home video, that the release will be perfect.

Having seen and worked with Mr. Crisp on the current master, I can tell you that when release it will be stunning.

http://forum.blu-ray.com/showthread.php?t=31889&page=2



To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
Rob Tomlin is offline  
post #293 of 930 Old 06-18-2008, 05:36 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
Gary Murrell's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Kentucky
Posts: 10,927
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
bottom line, Sony has not went the DNR route on anything that I can think of so far and I have nearly every title of theirs

Sony in fact has been the best after a little trouble early on, straight shooting unfiltered no DNR releases with super high AVC bitrates and always offering PCM/TrueHD, like I said, the best IMHO

I read here somewhere that Sony was using very very large monitors for their work and it shows, these other clown shoe mastering houses are many times using 13" pro monitors ... "slap some EE on there boys, it isn't *popping* enough on our monitor"

-Gary
Gary Murrell is offline  
post #294 of 930 Old 06-18-2008, 05:40 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
Gary Murrell's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Kentucky
Posts: 10,927
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by surap View Post

But technically speaking, a new transfer could be done immediatly? I assume that DNR is applyed after the master and could easily be removed before manufacturing?

that would be very nice if it was the case, but sadly it's not, the master is ruined with these filtering and DNR techniques and even in some cases EE, which means that a new master needs to be done

I used to think that until talking with insiders and seeing HD versions of the same film on multiple formats and broadcastings only to see the exact same issues on every single one

The Mummy and U-571 for example, bad EE on D-Theater and HD-DVD, the BD releases will be the same because it is in the master

-Gary
Gary Murrell is offline  
post #295 of 930 Old 06-18-2008, 05:52 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
Rob Tomlin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: SoCal
Posts: 13,752
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 11
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gary Murrell View Post

bottom line, Sony has not went the DNR route on anything that I can think of so far and I have nearly every title of theirs

Sony in fact has been the best after a little trouble early on, straight shooting unfiltered no DNR releases with super high AVC bitrates and always offering PCM/TrueHD, like I said, the best IMHO

I read here somewhere that Sony was using very very large monitors for their work and it shows, these other clown shoe mastering houses are many times using 13" pro monitors ... "slap some EE on there boys, it isn't *popping* enough on our monitor"

-Gary

I agree that Sony is the best thus far when it comes to NOT using DNR, including their older catalog titles.


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
Rob Tomlin is offline  
post #296 of 930 Old 06-18-2008, 06:16 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Stew4msu's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Wylie, Texas, USA
Posts: 7,079
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3 Post(s)
Liked: 15
I'm all for maintaining accuracy and intent, but I also want the movie to look good. I think that sometimes we assume how directors/producers wanted something to look when we don't know for sure. Maybe, the director enjoys EE, but didn't know how to do it back then (obviously not, but you get the idea).

Hypothetically speaking, if Mr. Schaffner were alive today and endorsed this Blu Ray version (i.e. I love it. The movie looks just like I would have wanted it to look if I would have had todays technology back then), what would everyone's opinion be then?

The whole "directors intent" argument would go out the window, wouldn't it?

"The dream never dies, just the dreamer."

Stew4msu is offline  
post #297 of 930 Old 06-18-2008, 06:53 PM
AVS Special Member
 
lgans316's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Barking, Essex, London
Posts: 6,834
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 23 Post(s)
Liked: 20
Quote:
The Mummy and U-571 for example, bad EE on D-Theater and HD-DVD, the BD releases will be the same because it is in the master

I am confident that Universal have created a brand new DI for Mummy 1 & 2 though I can't comment on U-571 & 40 YOV which had very bad EE.

Blu-ray : 340
lgans316 is offline  
post #298 of 930 Old 06-18-2008, 07:57 PM - Thread Starter
AVS Special Member
 
Xylon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Liecheinstein
Posts: 7,380
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 11
Quote:
Originally Posted by DangerousK View Post

Someone who truly considers themselves a "movie lover" for lack of a better word, would have an interest in preserving the quality of films so they can be viewed as they were intended to be. What this means, is that the addition of artificial enhancements such as EE and DNR do not preserve quality of a film, whether it be Patton, or something else.

I know people with a ton of movies, and they couldn't even tell you what EE or DNR do to the picture of a film. Saying you own X numbers of DVD's or other multimedia forms that movies were distributed on do not mean anything because you continue to think what Fox has been doing is ok.

Speaking as a historian, Fox is doing an incredible disservice to people whether they are casual BD viewers or not. It is no different from altering historical documents or paintings of great artists as I mentioned in a previous thread. The only way we can see a proper version of Patton now is to get our hands on whats locked in the vaults currently. It's a film that is a part of history, and we can't even get an accurate reproduction of it.

What I find incredibly naive about your statements is that you express ignorance to the whole issue of Patton.

This is not the best the film has ever looked....it's quite sad when people HERE cannot grasp the understanding that properly restored, films shot with 65mm will outshine a large number of HD broadcasts. They do not need this sort of artificial junk added...it kills me that it even happened because there was absolutely zero reason to do any of this.

I agree. Ignorance is bliss. Some people really need to be educated about film history. All of it.

The counter argument is "Well its better than DVD right? So what's the problem?"

The frustrating thing about Patton is the film elements are in excellent condition. You can see it. Its there. Just hiding behind those hideous DNR. Its mocking us


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

 


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
,
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
,
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

Xylon is offline  
post #299 of 930 Old 06-18-2008, 08:05 PM - Thread Starter
AVS Special Member
 
Xylon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Liecheinstein
Posts: 7,380
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 11
Quote:
Originally Posted by sperron View Post

http://www.americancinematheque.com/.../70mm_2008.htm



It was shown as recently as May 30th in 70mm. If you read the original post, Xylon said he had attended a showing of Patton in 70mm, so he's definitely qualified to speak about this transfer and how it relates to what it looked like at the theater.

Thank you.

Another point I like to repeat and repeat again. I did not see this during its original theatrical run. Patton can be watched in its 70mm glory at the theaters. Right now. Just check the schedules.

So to the others who keeps ignoring this fact, please stop this nonsense about not remembering the PQ of a 38 year old movie.


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

 


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
,
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
,
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

Xylon is offline  
post #300 of 930 Old 06-18-2008, 08:07 PM - Thread Starter
AVS Special Member
 
Xylon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Liecheinstein
Posts: 7,380
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 11
Quote:
Originally Posted by Art Sonneborn View Post

And in fact this is the most discouraging thing. If the release transfer is substandard this may be the only version we see for many years.

Art

Very frustrating. Unless a miracle happened.


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

 


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
,
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
,
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

Xylon 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