The Thing comparison *PIX* - Page 3 - AVS Forum
Forum Jump: 
Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
post #61 of 120 Old 10-01-2008, 01:12 PM
Senior Member
 
Vriess's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 342
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Bah, thank you for making my HD-DVD's collectible uni.
Vriess is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #62 of 120 Old 10-01-2008, 01:15 PM
Advanced Member
 
Kadath's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 857
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 10 Post(s)
Liked: 25
Quote:
Originally Posted by Xylon View Post

Why is it NONE of the online reviewers mentioned any of this? The change in PQ is drastic on my setup (see my profile). The helicopter fly-by in the beginning of the movie alerted me of the grain scrubbing. I don't understand why they missed all of this.

For me it's simple, the difference isn't that apparent at 720p and I really find it pointless to drag out the HD DVD to see things in static screen shots that arent bothering me in motion. Maybe if I was watching these at 1080p and at less than one screen length away it would be different but so far it's not.

I find it interesting that you haven't mentioned the one thing that really DID bother me and that is the annoying ring halos around the sled dog in the opening sequence, can you put up a shot or two of the dog running through the snow directly at the camera? I can get you the timecode of the shot if you like but it should be REALLY obvious if I can see it at 720p and with a smoothscreen pj.

In the grand scheme of things I would MUCH rather people jump down Universal's throat over the BUTCHER job they did on the extras and their unwaveringly sticking to this U-Control tool that is a solution in search of a problem. I really hate most U-Control features and implementations tho.... I don't want to have to watch movies 4 times to get all the extras, put em in a freaking menu and you are DONE.

Buncha savages in this town....

Sam Posten
Kadath is offline  
post #63 of 120 Old 10-01-2008, 01:22 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: 13
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dan P. View Post

The digest review (http://bluray.highdefdigest.com/1662/thing1982.html) gives it 4.5; very high. The reviewer also mentions he has it on HD-DVD. Don't know if the comment "Perhaps a bit soft by modern standards, 'The Thing' still looks sharp enough..." refers to the DNR. He also mentions that "There are no appreciable differences with the previous HD DVD", but obviously he would not have done the extreme detailed comparisions done by xylon.

send him an email with a link to this thread. Maybe he sold his HDdvd awhile back.
Dave Mack is offline  
post #64 of 120 Old 10-01-2008, 01:32 PM
 
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 Kadath View Post

For me it's simple, the difference isn't that apparent at 720p and I really find it pointless to drag out the HD DVD to see things in static screen shots that arent bothering me in motion. Maybe if I was watching these at 1080p and at less than one screen length away it would be different but so far it's not.

That's not really the point....The point is why are these studio's doing it....Why make it worse than the HD DVD edition. It simply shouldn't happen and there has to be a reason that it is happening....Do they think Blu Ray owners want a smoother look ? I think that's what they are thinking...They think Blu Ray owners hate grain....It really is that simple and reviewers who call grain noise are making the problems worse and unfortunately there are a lot of them about.

It might not bother you now but what about when you upgrade your equipment.....I think long term when i make my purchases....So yes this is really bad. I also have a 720pj with smoothscreen ( Panasonic ) It bothers me a lot and i do notice the smoother look when i see it.....Smoothscreen elimates screen door while retaining sharpness and a film type look and has nothing to do with the smoothing over of Blu Rays by DNR just in case anybody brings it up.....Panasonic did a great job with their technology....They didn't simply unfocus things like some uneducated people are writing...Their technology works.
FoxyMulder is offline  
post #65 of 120 Old 10-01-2008, 01:39 PM
Advanced Member
 
Kadath's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 857
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 10 Post(s)
Liked: 25
I'm not changing my score either after seeing this thread Dave. Going down the slippery slope of second guessing yourself based on static screenshots or how something looks on something other than your own system does readers no good. You can make a case that I should have a better PJ than what I currently do and I won't argue that point. But I won't base my scores on anything I can't see in motion in my own home. And frankly I continue to think those of you who base your entire buying decision on static screenshots are out of your mind but you are entitled to spend your money (or not) as you see fit =)

Buncha savages in this town....

Sam Posten
Kadath is offline  
post #66 of 120 Old 10-01-2008, 01:44 PM
Advanced Member
 
Kadath's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 857
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 10 Post(s)
Liked: 25
Quote:


Why make it worse than the HD DVD edition

Again, I am no apologist for Universal or for DNR in general but as Xylon quite rightly points out, it is 'pick your poison'. It's a complex balancing act and I guarantee that the people who encoding these movies are MUCH MUCH more concerned with how something looks in motion than they are in static screenshots. You also have to factor in artistic intent. Who is to say that the HD DVD encodes weren't overly grainy or accurately represent what the director/DP intended 100%? If they were in charge of the encode which factor would they 'slide the scale's weight' to?

Buncha savages in this town....

Sam Posten
Kadath is offline  
post #67 of 120 Old 10-01-2008, 01:50 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: 13
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kadath View Post

I'm not changing my score either after seeing this thread Dave. Going down the slippery slope of second guessing yourself based on static screenshots or how something looks on something other than your own system does readers no good. You can make a case that I should have a better PJ than what I currently do and I won't argue that point. But I won't base my scores on anything I can't see in motion in my own home. And frankly I continue to think those of you who base your entire buying decision on static screenshots are out of your mind but you are entitled to spend your money (or not) as you see fit =)

I hear ya. But I must say in many instances where I HAVE spent the $ like Dark City, Xylon's screenshots have been right on the money. Gangs of New York clearly showed the hideousness of that BD, (THAT I just netflixed but would have bought) I already own The Thing on HDdvd. IF the image had been the same it might have been worth it but it's clearly not. That's one thing screenshots CAN do. Show that there is a difference and that they are not identical. That plus the doc being reduced to a PIP window? ack
Dave Mack is offline  
post #68 of 120 Old 10-01-2008, 01:52 PM
 
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 Kadath View Post

Again, I am no apologist for Universal or for DNR in general but as Xylon quite rightly points out, it is 'pick your poison'. It's a complex balancing act and I guarantee that the people who encoding these movies are MUCH MUCH more concerned with how something looks in motion than they are in static screenshots. You also have to factor in artistic intent. Who is to say that the HD DVD encodes weren't overly grainy or accurately represent what the director/DP intended 100%? If they were in charge of the encode which factor would they 'slide the scale's weight' to?

Well we know pre-1982/1983 that film stock contained more grain...Thats a fact...Low grain film stock was introduced after this film was made.

Its not just the grain that is removed....It's the detail with it....You can see that in motion....Or some people can and it's not dependent on the projector being 720p or 1080p....

You have to really take into consideration Universals recent record of degraining HD DVD ports.....Once you take this into account it's not too hard to come to an educated opinion that they have degrained the film just like they did with U-571.....

At the end of the day people can say "well it's what it's supposed to look like" but that doesn't explain the detail removal that went with the grain....I must also point out that natural grain seen in a moving image looks great so people just viewing screenshots should not worry about it and think it will look terrible on their system as it doesn't but DNRed grain tends to introduce unwanted side effects and sometimes looks like a clumpy mess...It can ruin the cinematic experience that Blu Ray can give you.

Whilst you might not want to change your score for this film i believe as a reviewer you should point out the degraining to your readers and then let them make their own minds up.
FoxyMulder is offline  
post #69 of 120 Old 10-01-2008, 02:38 PM
AVS Special Member
 
gooki's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Queenstown, New Zealand
Posts: 3,812
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:


It's a complex balancing act and I guarantee that the people who encoding these movies are MUCH MUCH more concerned with how something looks in motion than they are in static screenshots.

Bollocks. By the way things are going, it seems they're simply following a scripted process.

1) clean up scratches/defects (but not to the point of perfection)
2) run DNR filter
3) encode with least visible artifacts

It really feels like very little personal effort is going into these.

I also think a lot of people aren't aware that natural grain can give the illusion of additional resolution.

International HDDVD Screenshot Archive (Full 1080p Images): www.hdmovies.co.nz
gooki is offline  
post #70 of 120 Old 10-01-2008, 03:10 PM
Advanced Member
 
Honey1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 568
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
As I did in the past, I can only add my voice to those complaining about (excessive) use of DNR in recent BD transfers. That being said, I don't think the problem lies entirely with DNR. I compared on my gear the Harry Potter HD DVD and BD editions. I am not aware that more DNR was applied to the BD than to the HD DVD, but the HD DVD looks substantially sharper, even in motion. I know of several people who have done the same test and all of them recognize in private that the Potter HD DVDs are sharper. But none of them wants to put it in writing. I know I am going to get flamed, but what the H**l !
Honey1 is offline  
post #71 of 120 Old 10-01-2008, 03:18 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
No offense to online reviewers but the excuse that these anomalies will simply disappear or not noticeable when in motion is getting old.

Why is that to others the PQ on screenshots always match what they see on their calibrated viewing sets? Yes, while watching the movie.

They have to ask themselves of all the screenshots posted here on AVS for comparison PIX which set doesn't match what they see on their TV?
Xylon is offline  
post #72 of 120 Old 10-01-2008, 03:27 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Mr. Hanky's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 6,078
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 8 Post(s)
Liked: 32
Quote:
Originally Posted by gooki View Post

It really feels like very little personal effort is going into these.

I think this particular point really cuts to the heart of the matter. Not so much personal effort, but budgeted scale of the project. With the exception of the most high-profile restorations, a lot of these older movies are just not going to justify the nth degree of tlc (from the standpoint of whatever beancounter ok's the project). It's on a skeleton budget to push the project out the door with the least amount of investment/effort. I'm not trying to say this is "ok", though. I'm just saying it is the pragmatic reality. The foremost goal, unfortunately, is to simply make the title available on br, rather than make the best release of the title that is technically possible from the master.

I guess that would be one of the most poignant catch-22's of a brand new hi-def format. It was devised to facilitate the highest possible resolution for video and sound, wide open bitrates, and the best codecs of the day, but if the material, itself, is not up to the task, its not going to even come close to exploiting the technical specs of the format. The premium looking hd doesn't just happen by accident or incidentally. It is a concerted effort/expertise to ensure the quality of the material is optimally expressed through the entire workflow. When things are left to "autopilot", the shortcomings of the result become only that much more apparent on a high-performance medium.

I need your sweet love, Rosetta Stone girl!
Mr. Hanky is offline  
post #73 of 120 Old 10-01-2008, 03:32 PM
AVS Special Member
 
xradman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Northern VA
Posts: 3,017
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 11
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr. Hanky View Post

When things are left to "autopilot", the shortcomings of the result become only that much more apparent on a high-performance medium.

Could it be possible that Blu-ray's higher bitrate ceiling and space is leaving more of the disc encoding to autopilot resulting in suboptimal output???

Addicted to shiny round discs with HD content

My Home Theater
My Movie Collection
BDP-83 EAP (second group)
xradman is offline  
post #74 of 120 Old 10-01-2008, 03:38 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 Honey1 View Post

As I did in the past, I can only add my voice to those complaining about (excessive) use of DNR in recent BD transfers. That being said, I don't think the problem lies entirely with DNR. I compared on my gear the Harry Potter HD DVD and BD editions. I am not aware that more DNR was applied to the BD than to the HD DVD, but the HD DVD looks substantially sharper, even in motion. I know of several people who have done the same test and all of them recognize in private that the Potter HD DVDs are sharper. But none of them wants to put it in writing. I know I am going to get flamed, but what the H**l !

I did a comparison PIX of Harry Potter 5 between BD and HD DVD. I did not notice any difference between them. The transfer of course has mild DNR applied but both are identical. Never checked the other Harry Potter movies.

I will take a look again this weekend.
Xylon is offline  
post #75 of 120 Old 10-01-2008, 03:38 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
Xylon is offline  
post #76 of 120 Old 10-01-2008, 03:39 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Mr. Hanky's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 6,078
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 8 Post(s)
Liked: 32
As long as the bitrate is allowed to "run free" to exploit that ceiling, I would not expect it to be particularly responsible for suboptimal output. Leaving a dnr process to run on autopilot, otoh, would seem to be just begging for issues to crop up. Similarly, restricting QC to mere "spot checks" over the entire length of the movie is just begging for issues to sneak through in whatever areas are not checked. These are all aspects that come from defining the scope of the project, rather than any technical specs of the target medium.

I need your sweet love, Rosetta Stone girl!
Mr. Hanky is offline  
post #77 of 120 Old 10-01-2008, 03:45 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Mr. Hanky's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 6,078
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 8 Post(s)
Liked: 32
...and man, does that last pic give me the willies! Nothing turns my stomach like scenery from The Thing.

I need your sweet love, Rosetta Stone girl!
Mr. Hanky is offline  
post #78 of 120 Old 10-01-2008, 04:06 PM
AVS Special Member
 
sharkcohen's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 6,281
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 17
Quote:
Originally Posted by Xylon View Post


In that shot you can clearly see that DETAIL was removed on the BD.

Back off man, I'm a scientist.
sharkcohen is offline  
post #79 of 120 Old 10-01-2008, 04:06 PM
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
I "borrowed" one of your comparison pictures(the one with the zoomed hand) and posted them in our swedish forum. This makes me so sick I have to use your pictures for education.

Please, dont go ballistic on me Xylon. Please PM me if you think I did something wrong.

Robert
surap is offline  
post #80 of 120 Old 10-01-2008, 04:23 PM
Advanced Member
 
Stevie76's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Arvika, Sweden
Posts: 842
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
**** YOU UNIVERSAL!! **** YOU!!!
The Thing is my ABSOLUTE NR.1 favorite movie and they screwed it up.
That´s it, no more catalog titles from Universal!!
Stevie76 is offline  
post #81 of 120 Old 10-01-2008, 04:32 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Malcolm_B's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: CLASSIFIED
Posts: 2,808
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 13
I really sucks that Universal is doing this to one of my favorite movies. Oh well, I still have the HD DVD.

Blu Ray... 3-D TV... 4K... I Like New STUFF!!!

Malcolm_B is offline  
post #82 of 120 Old 10-01-2008, 04:42 PM
AVS Special Member
 
General Kenobi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Kalifornistan
Posts: 5,938
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 91 Post(s)
Liked: 365
Xylon - Do you have any plans to compare the UK or JP releases?

My Rig

Kenobi's 31 Days of Horror:

 

2012

2011

2010

2009

General Kenobi is offline  
post #83 of 120 Old 10-01-2008, 05:17 PM
AVS Special Member
 
jostenmeat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 2,298
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
What a shame. Maybe I'll buy that backup HD-DVD player after all...

This movie is really something else on HD-DVD. Why mess with a "perfectly" good thing? I've watched it twice now, once with the friend who bought it for me, and once more as a demo. My friends were utterly speechless. They were besides themselves. They couldn't believe it. They didn't know that dude wore a nose-ring.

*sigh*

Darkman is another excellent title on HD-DVD and is Universal I believe. Oh I hope they don't mess that one up too if they bring it to BD.

 

 

jostenmeat is offline  
post #84 of 120 Old 10-01-2008, 05:29 PM
AVS Special Member
 
sharkcohen's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 6,281
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 17
I've been looking for the HD DVD at my local Fry's for weeks, but it seems to be the one title they no longer have

Back off man, I'm a scientist.
sharkcohen is offline  
post #85 of 120 Old 10-01-2008, 05:37 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Mr. Hanky's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 6,078
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 8 Post(s)
Liked: 32
I procured the following sample pic in a future timeline where The Thing actually got a newly remastered release (though not a full-out restoration). Temporal indicators are still phasey at this time (due to unavoidable Butterfly Effect issues), but predictive enhancement suggests such a release may appear around 2011.

This is what could have been in the 2008 release, but will now have to wait for approx. 2011:



2008 release (cropped):

LL
LL

I need your sweet love, Rosetta Stone girl!
Mr. Hanky is offline  
post #86 of 120 Old 10-01-2008, 05:43 PM
AVS Special Member
 
xradman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Northern VA
Posts: 3,017
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 11
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr. Hanky View Post

I procured the following sample pic in a future timeline where The Thing actually got a newly remastered release (though not a full-out restoration). Temporal indicators are still phasey at this time (due to unavoidable Butterfly Effect issues), but predictive enhancement suggests such a release may appear around 2011.

This is what could have been in the 2008 release, but will now have to wait for approx. 2011:

If the predicted 2011 release has that much grain, then I would prefer the 2008 release. Grain for grain sake does not make much sense IMO.

Addicted to shiny round discs with HD content

My Home Theater
My Movie Collection
BDP-83 EAP (second group)
xradman is offline  
post #87 of 120 Old 10-01-2008, 05:46 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Mr. Hanky's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 6,078
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 8 Post(s)
Liked: 32
You would be surprised how much of that grain was inherently still part of the image (just laying dormant).

I need your sweet love, Rosetta Stone girl!
Mr. Hanky is offline  
post #88 of 120 Old 10-01-2008, 05:58 PM
Senior Member
 
HiddenDepth's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Germany
Posts: 427
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
very nice, i really like how they cleaned up the Blu-ray version, it definitely looks more like high def wwithout those "dirt" and grain.

Well sorry guys but the studios are cleaning the old transfers because most ppl want to see it clean (without grain, dirt) ect. you guys here on the forums are just the minority, as hard as it sounds to you guys

I'm Captain Jack Sparrow...Savvy?
HiddenDepth is offline  
post #89 of 120 Old 10-01-2008, 06:02 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: 13
oh dear...
Dave Mack is offline  
post #90 of 120 Old 10-01-2008, 06:03 PM
AVS Special Member
 
eapleitez's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 2,472
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 6 Post(s)
Liked: 15
Glad I had better sense than to sell off my HD DVDs.

Nevertheless, this practice needs to STOP!

_____________________________
eapleitez is offline  
Closed Thread Blu-ray Software

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