"The Dark Knight" PQ issues. - Page 13 - AVS Forum
Forum Jump: 
 
Thread Tools
post #361 of 1074 Old 11-23-2008, 02:30 PM
AVS Special Member
 
John Ballentine's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Los Angeles, Ca.
Posts: 5,084
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by Alan Gouger View Post

I run with a 235:1 screen & I chose to keep the entire movie in scope and be done with it. For myself it was not worth the hassle making the changes. I always prefer scope visuals on my system anyway so give me the slightest reason to hit that scope button and Ill take it

Glad to know we can just watch it in scope and not notice the changing aspect ratios (I was concerned this would not be the case)
John Ballentine is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #362 of 1074 Old 11-23-2008, 02:31 PM
AVS Special Member
 
curtishd's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Posts: 1,742
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Liked: 13
On the Br does the transition from 2.35 to imax have a transition like it is opening or is it just there on scene and gone in the next scene?
curtishd is offline  
post #363 of 1074 Old 11-23-2008, 02:59 PM
Advanced Member
 
paul nyc's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 672
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 11
Quote:
Originally Posted by curtishd View Post

On the Br does the transition from 2.35 to imax have a transition like it is opening or is it just there on scene and gone in the next scene?


The latter of what you said is correct. It also alternates within a sequence. For example, the hospital explosion sequence has the joker outside with the detonator (IMAX), next shot is people within the bus (35mm) then back to Joker running from the explosion (IMAX).
paul nyc is offline  
post #364 of 1074 Old 11-23-2008, 03:12 PM
Senior Member
 
Shadowknight's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Charlotte, NC
Posts: 392
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by Brent L View Post

Could someone let me know where you're getting it early as well?

The shots look fine to me so far, but I'm by not means an expert when it comes to this sort of thing.

Could someone PM me this info as well?
Shadowknight is offline  
post #365 of 1074 Old 11-23-2008, 03:35 PM
AVS Special Member
 
rdclark's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Philadelphia Vicinity
Posts: 4,162
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 26 Post(s)
Liked: 188
Quote:
Originally Posted by zinfamous View Post

"that invisible screen that forever separates the audience from the stage."

another part of the definition, found in you wiki link, that you conveniently left out.

Sorry, but I've gone through too many film, literature, and postmodernism classes and seminars to have a cherry-picked definition from wikipedia convince me that the concepts that I have learned over the previous decade have been a gigantic lie.

One must, I think, allow for the possibility that a new generation of audiences perceives the division differently, especially with film. There is no more mystery about the filmmaking process; indeed, by the time high-profile films like TDK reach the screen, much of the audience is aware of the bulk of its content and many details concerning its making.

The fourth wall is not the rigid, immovable structure it once might have been.

I understand your point that immersiveness is the traditional sine qua non of filmmaking, and that changing aspect ratios, as they serve to repeatedly "take the audiience out of the film," would appear to conflict directly with that necessary characteristic.

But I think it's likely that for many members of today's audience, it's possible to hold in their heads the fact that they're watching a crafted work while still staying within the story. People grow up differently nowadays.

I'm not one of them, and my first reaction was the same as yours. I don't like the changing aspect ratios, because it feels like I'm watching a workprint cut into sections of a finished film.

I simply offer up the possibility that I'm not a member of the audience for which Nolan was crafting the BD version of the movie, and that for the target audience, who have grown up in a world where image borders are always arbitrary and mutable, the issue simply doesn't come up.

Wide Awake

on the Edge

of the World

 

rdclark is offline  
post #366 of 1074 Old 11-23-2008, 03:44 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Megalith's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Posts: 2,655
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2 Post(s)
Liked: 13
Uhhh, why do the BD captures look like upscaled DVD shots?

Can Warner get a damn brain.
Megalith is online now  
post #367 of 1074 Old 11-23-2008, 03:48 PM
Senior Member
 
teiresias's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Chester, VA
Posts: 393
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Ugh, debates on what the hell "fourth wall" means and aspect ratio discussions. The AR discussion I can understand, but for the vast majority of people, I'd think the AR issues are secondary to the EE and DNR issues. Whether that's the result of a lousy encoding job or because they used an IMAX DMR master, I don't know. Regardless, one should expect better from a release of this stature.

In terms of AR, I think it's pretty clear they decided not to pillar box to simulate the experience when you saw it in IMAX - that is, suddenly the picture expands to fill the entire screen you're seeing the movie on. Pillar boxing would sort of reduce that effect given that it would get taller but also narrower.
teiresias is offline  
post #368 of 1074 Old 11-23-2008, 04:12 PM
AVS Special Member
 
jkcheng122's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Houston, TX
Posts: 5,481
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Liked: 30
just watched a mkv version of this with the aspect ratio change intact. no complaints from me, didnt distract me in the least bit. sound was pretty good even in the 640kbps format. can't wait til my disc arrives.

there are several places where aspect ratio changes within a sequence as the setting changes between outside and inside like in the hong kong extraction sequence.
jkcheng122 is offline  
post #369 of 1074 Old 11-23-2008, 04:47 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
Quote:
Originally Posted by MovieSwede View Post

How many first time BD buyers gonna wonder why the black bars keep changing on their new purchased BD player?

BING-O....


How many returns too? "My disc is defective!" Unless there is a disclaimer. Would LOVE to see it though...

The black bars appearing and disappearing on your TV are NORMAL for this disc...

Dave Mack is offline  
post #370 of 1074 Old 11-23-2008, 05:22 PM
 
Thunderbolt8's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 643
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Imax AR is 1.44 according to imdb. so even the BB imax scene is a little zoomed in already and the BD even more?
Thunderbolt8 is offline  
post #371 of 1074 Old 11-23-2008, 05:41 PM
Senior Member
 
CollinViegas's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 497
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 11
Quote:
Originally Posted by spectator View Post

So, you've spent all that money on a screen set-up and you can't watch any 1.78:1 framed films on it?!? What were you thinking?

Right now I use manual masking for the sides when I zoom out to watch a 1.78 film, this is what will have to be done with Dark Knight. However the reason I am so Disappointed with the way this was released is because It is alot of wasted screen real estate for the 135 mins the film is shot in 2.40...

Most of my money went on the room itself, equipment can always be added later which adding a lens to avoid this situation is in the plans. However people who bought the Panasonic AE3000, bought it for the Zoom feature and if this trend continues that advancement in CIH setups has become pointless.

Judging by your post my guess is you have no experience with CIH or the benefits it brings to Home Cinema... thanks for the personal attack on what I must have been thinking...
CollinViegas is online now  
post #372 of 1074 Old 11-23-2008, 07:05 PM
Advanced Member
 
mzupeman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 930
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 12
I've seen people discussing watching the film in just one aspect ratio in here... is that even possible? Or is it something you're doing with your hardware, or is it an option to watch the IMAX material matted?
mzupeman is offline  
post #373 of 1074 Old 11-23-2008, 07:08 PM
Senior Member
 
Maxwell Everett's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 283
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 14
Nolan should have just filmed TDK in Super Panavision 70 (aka Panavision System 65) at a consistent 2.20:1 aspect ratio and it would have saved him, his crew and us a whole lot of trouble. You can't really see the added resolution of 15-perf IMAX in standard 35mm theaters or on Blu-ray anyway... unless you intentionally downgrade the 35mm anamorphic stuff.
Maxwell Everett is offline  
post #374 of 1074 Old 11-23-2008, 07:13 PM
Senior Member
 
Maxwell Everett's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 283
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 14
Quote:
Originally Posted by mzupeman View Post

I've seen people discussing watching the film in just one aspect ratio in here... is that even possible? Or is it something you're doing with your hardware, or is it an option to watch the IMAX material matted?

If you have a projector with a 2.35:1 electronic masking option, then you can watch the movie in a consistent AR. The truth is though, Warner could have included an optional 2.35:1 masking overlay on the Blu-ray so people could watch it that way if they wished, regardless of their display. Why they didn't do this is beyond me.
Maxwell Everett is offline  
post #375 of 1074 Old 11-23-2008, 07:20 PM
AVS Special Member
 
MattGuyOR's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Portland, OR
Posts: 1,401
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 11
Quote:
Originally Posted by Maxwell Everett View Post

If you have a projector with a 2.35:1 electronic masking option, then you can watch the movie in a consistent AR. The truth is though, Warner could have included an optional 2.35:1 masking overlay on the Blu-ray so people could watch it that way if they wished, regardless of their display. Why they didn't do this is beyond me.

From all that I've read, it isn't just as simple as masking the top and bottom of the screen during the IMAX sequences. Nolan carefully extracted his 2.35:1 compositions from the IMAX shots after it was filmed. So some shots, he might have framed more at the top of the negative, others more at the bottom. I'd be interested in hearing those with CIH setups after they've seen it and how it ended up looking.
MattGuyOR is offline  
post #376 of 1074 Old 11-23-2008, 07:32 PM
Senior Member
 
Maxwell Everett's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 283
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 14
Quote:
Originally Posted by MattGuyOR View Post

From all that I've read, it isn't just as simple as masking the top and bottom of the screen during the IMAX sequences. Nolan carefully extracted his 2.35:1 compositions from the IMAX shots after it was filmed. So some shots, he might have framed more at the top of the negative, others more at the bottom. I'd be interested in hearing those with CIH setups after they've seen it and how it ended up looking.

I suppose one could compare the DVD to the Blu-ray with a consistent matting and see if they match. The thing is though, isn't Nolan already cropping his 1.44:1 IMAX footage to 1.78:1? If so, why couldn't he center the 1.78:1 IMAX footage on the Blu-ray such that it would crop correctly if matted to 2.35:1?

Also, usually when cropping is done on film, they either crop straight across the middle of the frame with equal bars at the top and bottom... or they cheat it toward the top of the frame in a process called "common top framing." They don't usually frame near the bottom of the image.
Maxwell Everett is offline  
post #377 of 1074 Old 11-23-2008, 07:41 PM
Senior Member
 
xlr231's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Fort Wayne, IN
Posts: 247
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
In the last 2 screen caps from post#75 you can see the DK framing not only cuts a lot off the bottom of the image, but also adds more image at the top of the frame. So it looks like they did more than just crop the IMAX footage to 1.78, the image is totally re-framed.
xlr231 is offline  
post #378 of 1074 Old 11-23-2008, 09:00 PM
Advanced Member
 
Beta Tester's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 604
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by Maxwell Everett View Post

Warner could have included an optional 2.35:1 masking overlay on the Blu-ray so people could watch it that way if they wished, regardless of their display. Why they didn't do this is beyond me.

Double-dip.
Beta Tester is offline  
post #379 of 1074 Old 11-23-2008, 09:49 PM
Advanced Member
 
kdssrugby's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: The Great White North
Posts: 680
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Dvdbeaver has their review up:
http://www.dvdbeaver.com/film2/DVDRe...ht_blu-ray.htm

No mention of DNR and EE on his 104 inch screen. His only real criticism was that the difference btw IMAX and 35mmshots weren t as noticeable as in theatres.
kdssrugby is offline  
post #380 of 1074 Old 11-23-2008, 10:13 PM
AVS Special Member
 
chinch's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: NJ
Posts: 2,038
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
it's alot and it's distracting. major scenes.

the imax shots looks mis-composed. it's also closer to 1.78:1

Quote:
Originally Posted by f300v10 View Post

As someone who has not scene this movie yet, in terms of percentage, how much is 1.85 (IMAX) ratio, and how much is 2.4? With my scope setup if I watch this in 1.85, the 2.35 stuff will be boxed on all sides which does not sound appealing at all. Also, how many times does the AR change during the film, less than 5, more than 5, more than 10?


DVD's are about movies & people watch them in living rooms, how many people actually use their computer drives to sit and watch movies- Bluray's Andy Parsons
chinch is offline  
post #381 of 1074 Old 11-23-2008, 10:52 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Kram Sacul's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Posts: 5,257
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by kdssrugby View Post

Dvdbeaver has their review up:
http://www.dvdbeaver.com/film2/DVDRe...ht_blu-ray.htm

No mention of DNR and EE on his 104 inch screen. His only real criticism was that the difference btw IMAX and 35mmshots weren t as noticeable as in theatres.

The picture quality seems to range from very good (IMAX scenes) to just godawful and it's directly tied to the the amount of EE and whatever unnecessary NR filtering was applied.

I know the capture on DVDBeaver is further compressed and is not the same frame but compare it to a frame of the same scene from the the online trailer:

Blu-ray


h.264 trailer
Kram Sacul is offline  
post #382 of 1074 Old 11-23-2008, 11:02 PM
AVS Special Member
 
shadowrage's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 3,780
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Whoa!?

It looks muddy, and not from the new color timing.

That aint gooood.
Must resist... pointing.... out... what codec the trailer is in......ahhhh I eff it I can't. Warner needs to let another studio handle there releases. VC-1, AVC, MPEG1-6, Warner sucks.

Ridiculous codec tier sig gone. Still AVC/24bit lossless fanboy.

Studio quality tier
Most Major studios>Small Studios>dogs>cats>Warner(the guys that do new movies)
shadowrage is offline  
post #383 of 1074 Old 11-23-2008, 11:06 PM
AVS Special Member
 
42041's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: USA
Posts: 3,289
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 54
Why in the hell do they need to apply EE to film that's already razor sharp
42041 is offline  
post #384 of 1074 Old 11-23-2008, 11:15 PM
AVS Special Member
 
spectator's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Posts: 2,036
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 17
Quote:
Originally Posted by CollinViegas View Post

Judging by your post my guess is you have no experience with CIH or the benefits it brings to Home Cinema...

Believe what you will. I'm not sure what in the world gives you that impression. I think I explained pretty clearly the way any CIH system can be set to display this movie properly.

Quote:
Originally Posted by CollinViegas View Post

thanks for the personal attack on what I must have been thinking...

I'm sorry if you interpreted that as a personal attack; I sure didn't mean it to be one. It was a joke intended to illustrate the idea that this BD release can be seen as having an effective single aspect-ratio, the same as any other release with a 1.78:1 framing.

I don't feel special...
spectator is offline  
post #385 of 1074 Old 11-23-2008, 11:23 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
Quote:
Originally Posted by 42041 View Post

Why in the hell do they need to apply EE to film that's already razor sharp

AND contrast boosting too it seems.

People gotta have that "PoP!!!!!!"


Dave Mack is offline  
post #386 of 1074 Old 11-23-2008, 11:39 PM
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
Is it downscaled from 8K?

Just askin'

Oh and I dont trust screenshots! Bogus! You have to watch the movie to make the EE and DNR go away!
Xylon is offline  
post #387 of 1074 Old 11-23-2008, 11:40 PM
AVS Special Member
 
spectator's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Posts: 2,036
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 17
Quote:
Originally Posted by rdclark View Post

I understand your point that immersiveness is the traditional sine qua non of filmmaking, and that changing aspect ratios, as they serve to repeatedly "take the audiience out of the film," would appear to conflict directly with that necessary characteristic.

But I think it's likely that for many members of today's audience, it's possible to hold in their heads the fact that they're watching a crafted work while still staying within the story. People grow up differently nowadays.

Good point, but another... *ahem* aspect of this situation revolves around the film's frame-line as an essential element of storytelling and the audience's awareness of it in a way which does not necessarily "take them out" of the story.

I find it highly ironic that so many folks are having trouble adjusting to the idea of multiple aspect ratios appearing in a film... that's adapted from comics. If there's any place an audience might be prepared to accept the storytelling value of a changing frame-line...

I don't feel special...
spectator is offline  
post #388 of 1074 Old 11-24-2008, 12:16 AM
Advanced Member
 
Haroon Malik's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: UK
Posts: 688
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Wow! The difference in the screenshots posted above by Kram Sacul is quite significant. The online trailer screenshot easily trumps the blu-ray screenshot which is as messed up as The Joker was in the movie!

I really like Disney's blu-rays. For me, they are the best nowadays for both video and audio.

I strongly believe that Warner will make most people double dip for this movie in blu-ray cashing in on the strong success in cinemas. This movie deserved royal treatment. It should have been the showcase movie for Blu-Ray's capability.
Haroon Malik is offline  
post #389 of 1074 Old 11-24-2008, 12:27 AM
Member
 
Steen DK's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Copenhagen, Denmark
Posts: 134
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 13
Thanks for that comparison, Kram. I've promptly cancelled my pre-order.
Steen DK is offline  
post #390 of 1074 Old 11-24-2008, 12:31 AM
Member
 
Ferdopa's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 54
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Could someone send me a MP with the store, please? Thanks a lot!
Ferdopa is offline  
Closed Thread 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