Fargo! - Page 4 - AVS Forum
Forum Jump: 
Reply
 
Thread Tools
post #91 of 108 Old 05-25-2009, 07:09 AM
Newbie
 
Kitsuneko's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 14
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Watched the movie this weekend. The movie was highly enjoyable. But then so was watching the DVD when I purchased it several years back. I bought the Blu-ray (too late cancelling my order when the first screenshots appeared) because I wanted an upgrade in video quality. The BD may have more detail than the DVD, but that doesn't actually make it any better looking at all.

I wish I could take screenshots as there are some examples of EE in the movie that are just blindingly obvious. Apart from the bird's eye view of the snowed down parking lot, there is a side shot of a police car against the snow that is absolutely ridiculous - there's basically more 'enhancement' than what is left of the original image in some parts.

I would also like to point out that edge enhancement doesn't necessarily just affect edges. It makes the entire picture more coarse. In some scenes the outlines are barely visible, but the general coarseness in the picture is still there. If the studios are worried about customers shunning grainy transfers, they certainly shouldn't be adding EE as that only makes the grain stand out even more.

Bottom line: I consider the Fargo BD wasted money if you already own the DVD. If this movie is ever remastered I will need to shell out again, thus rewarding MGM for their shoddy work. So I do not feel happy with my purchase, even if the video is technically of a higher resolution than on the DVD.

I'm watching on a 40" Sony LCD btw. I have no trouble spotting EE or DNR on this screen, the idea that these artifacts are only visible on large screens - or even that they make the picture look better on them - isn't the case at all. In fact, I could say the same of my old 32" CRT.
Kitsuneko is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #92 of 108 Old 05-25-2009, 07:51 AM
Member
 
David_W's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Land of Coen, MN
Posts: 122
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
This one is drawing some very diverse opinions, even from knowledgeable people whose opinions I respect. I watched 'Fargo' projected to an image size of 65" diagonal, and I was not pleased. At first, I thought being a Coen-head made me hyper-sensitive about it, but many people seem to echo my opinion.

Here's one review and another thread, both from HTF, that echo the contrary viewpoint.

http://www.hometheaterforum.com/htf/...iew-fargo.html

http://www.hometheaterforum.com/htf/...-fargo-bd.html

I thought that some scattered scenes looked rather good, but certainly not enough of them to warrant overall enthusiasm. I noticed EE, not only along lines of high contrast, but among scenes that are dominated by middle tones and lower contrast.
David_W is offline  
post #93 of 108 Old 05-25-2009, 08:31 AM
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 Kitsuneko View Post

I'm watching on a 40" Sony LCD btw. I have no trouble spotting EE or DNR on this screen, the idea that these artifacts are only visible on large screens - or even that they make the picture look better on them - isn't the case at all. In fact, I could say the same of my old 32" CRT.

Trust me - these artifacts (EE, DNR) look even worse on a larger screen (106" vs my 50").
My buying decision was based on this review:
http://www.blu-ray.com/movies/movies...52&show=review
Guess I need to start renting the title first (I'm too impulsive w/ my pre-buys) so I can be the judge.
Buyer beware.
John Ballentine is offline  
post #94 of 108 Old 06-07-2009, 10:01 AM
 
ChrisWiggles's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Seattle
Posts: 20,730
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 14
I just watched this last night, and while it's quite a shame that they sharpened it so much, it does look great overall other than that. It's hard to tell whether the grain is brought out because of the excessive sharpening, but it most likely is worsened, however I don't have a problem with grain so that didn't bother me. The ringing/halos definitely bothered me, but again it's such a great film and this transfer was really quite good that the movie takes you right past the EE. There is a lot of detail though, easily noticed in a lot of the very fine textures of materials in the film, that was pretty impressive. If the EE weren't there, it would be quite the excellent transfer IMO.
ChrisWiggles is offline  
post #95 of 108 Old 06-07-2009, 10:24 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
oink's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Shuloch
Posts: 26,553
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 63 Post(s)
Liked: 814
Quote:
Originally Posted by ChrisWiggles View Post

I just watched this last night, and while it's quite a shame that they sharpened it so much, it does look great overall other than that. It's hard to tell whether the grain is brought out because of the excessive sharpening, but it most likely is worsened, however I don't have a problem with grain so that didn't bother me. The ringing/halos definitely bothered me, but again it's such a great film and this transfer was really quite good that the movie takes you right past the EE. There is a lot of detail though, easily noticed in a lot of the very fine textures of materials in the film, that was pretty impressive. If the EE weren't there, it would be quite the excellent transfer IMO.

OK, now wait a minute, Chris.
I am confused here.

You said, "It's hard to tell whether the grain is brought out because of the excessive sharpening, but it most likely is worsened"
Excessive grain is the result of excessive sharpening?
So when I bitch about excessive grain, I should really be bitching about excessive sharpening?

A.P.S. deserve our protection....join the cause today!
oink is offline  
post #96 of 108 Old 06-07-2009, 12:05 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
C'mon oink, you know what he meant. The sharpening process enhanced the detail and the grain, thereby making the latter more apparent than normal. He didn't mean that excessive grain was the result of sharpening.
kdssrugby is offline  
post #97 of 108 Old 06-07-2009, 12:07 PM
 
ChrisWiggles's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Seattle
Posts: 20,730
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 14
Quote:
Originally Posted by oink View Post

OK, now wait a minute, Chris.
I am confused here.

You said, "It's hard to tell whether the grain is brought out because of the excessive sharpening, but it most likely is worsened"
Excessive grain is the result of excessive sharpening?
So when I bitch about excessive grain, I should really be bitching about excessive sharpening?

Well yeah, sharpening works mainly on high frequencies, and though the edges aren't huge in contrast with grain, grain is very high frequency, and sharpening can definitely exaggerate grain or noise that's present in the film/transfer.

That doesn't mean that what note as "excessive" grain is necessarily due to sharpening, but where there is combination of grain in the film AND sharpening being applied, that grain is likely to be made more visible by the sharpening.

That being said, I don't agree that it's fair to gripe about "excessive" grain if that presentation is accurate to the original film. However, it is fair to say that grain that is artificially exaggerated by other processes like sharpening is a departure from an accurate presentation. I don't know that to be the case with Fargo, however, as I've never seen an original film presentation of the film, and the amount of grain varies a good deal through the film, but I would expect it to be fairly accurate the amount of grain that you do see in the film. Some scenes though, are quite grainy, and this might be partly an exaggeration due to the rather significant sharpening that has been applied on the BD version.

Sharpening alone won't create grain or noise on its own, but it can exaggerate what's already there. I don't have any problem with grain or noise that is inherent to the film. Many people wrongly gripe about grain or noise in a DVD or HD transfer which is actually accurate to the original film. If the film was noisy or grainy, I want that preserved as a general principle, because noise reduction applied after the fact is usually (though not always) more harm than good. If DNR type stuff is going to be applied, I want it to be done and overseen by the original filmmakers, not by some studio after the fact because they think people won't like the noise. That, IMO, is crap, just like the crap sharpening that they applied to Fargo.
ChrisWiggles is offline  
post #98 of 108 Old 06-07-2009, 07:03 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
oink's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Shuloch
Posts: 26,553
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 63 Post(s)
Liked: 814
Quote:
Originally Posted by ChrisWiggles View Post

Well yeah, sharpening works mainly on high frequencies, and though the edges aren't huge in contrast with grain, grain is very high frequency, and sharpening can definitely exaggerate grain or noise that's present in the film/transfer.

That doesn't mean that what note as "excessive" grain is necessarily due to sharpening, but where there is combination of grain in the film AND sharpening being applied, that grain is likely to be made more visible by the sharpening.

That being said, I don't agree that it's fair to gripe about "excessive" grain if that presentation is accurate to the original film. However, it is fair to say that grain that is artificially exaggerated by other processes like sharpening is a departure from an accurate presentation. I don't know that to be the case with Fargo, however, as I've never seen an original film presentation of the film, and the amount of grain varies a good deal through the film, but I would expect it to be fairly accurate the amount of grain that you do see in the film. Some scenes though, are quite grainy, and this might be partly an exaggeration due to the rather significant sharpening that has been applied on the BD version.

Sharpening alone won't create grain or noise on its own, but it can exaggerate what's already there. I don't have any problem with grain or noise that is inherent to the film. Many people wrongly gripe about grain or noise in a DVD or HD transfer which is actually accurate to the original film. If the film was noisy or grainy, I want that preserved as a general principle, because noise reduction applied after the fact is usually (though not always) more harm than good. If DNR type stuff is going to be applied, I want it to be done and overseen by the original filmmakers, not by some studio after the fact because they think people won't like the noise. That, IMO, is crap, just like the crap sharpening that they applied to Fargo.

Thank you for the explanation.

So, if the film source is grainier than normal, studios should NOT apply sharpening (as this would increase the visual grain).
Someday, somewhere, someone is going to come out with an algorithm that brings out detail sans grain....hopefully.

A.P.S. deserve our protection....join the cause today!
oink is offline  
post #99 of 108 Old 06-07-2009, 09:06 PM
 
ChrisWiggles's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Seattle
Posts: 20,730
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 14
Quote:
Originally Posted by oink View Post

Thank you for the explanation.

So, if the film source is grainier than normal, studios should NOT apply sharpening (as this would increase the visual grain).
Someday, somewhere, someone is going to come out with an algorithm that brings out detail sans grain....hopefully.

I wish they would just leave the stuff alone other than maybe cleaning scratches by hand and other restoration type activities done manually by someone who knows what they're doing and with specific intent. Trying to wipe out grain or other things done globally, or "bringing out" detail is a deviation usually, and should be left well enough alone.
ChrisWiggles is offline  
post #100 of 108 Old 06-07-2009, 09:31 PM
AVS Special Member
 
eric.exe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Atlanta
Posts: 2,340
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Liked: 14
I agree the sharpening makes the grain look nasty, it causes it to almost look like video noise in this case.
eric.exe is offline  
post #101 of 108 Old 08-15-2009, 09:16 PM
Advanced Member
 
tai4de2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: (near) Seattle
Posts: 618
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
The packaging does not list all the subtitle languages that are actually available on the disc. It shows only French and Spanish but several more are actually present.

I just watched with Thai subtitles -- a nice surprise since we have a Thai speaker at home whose understanding is enhanced with subtitles.
tai4de2 is offline  
post #102 of 108 Old 03-25-2014, 10:47 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
rdgrimes's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Nuevo Mexico
Posts: 16,033
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 111 Post(s)
Liked: 199
Does anyone have any info on the "remastered" release of Fargo coming out next weeK
rdgrimes is offline  
post #103 of 108 Old 03-25-2014, 11:57 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
oink's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Shuloch
Posts: 26,553
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 63 Post(s)
Liked: 814
Quote:
Originally Posted by rdgrimes View Post

Does anyone have any info on the "remastered" release of Fargo coming out next weeK
Whoa!
I didn't know about this.smile.gif

A.P.S. deserve our protection....join the cause today!
oink is offline  
post #104 of 108 Old 03-25-2014, 12:06 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Pugnax555's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 1,817
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by oink View Post

Whoa!
I didn't know about this.smile.gif
It looks like there's some talk about it (including comments from someone who got an advance copy) over on blu-ray.com.
Pugnax555 is offline  
post #105 of 108 Old 03-25-2014, 01:30 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
rdgrimes's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Nuevo Mexico
Posts: 16,033
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 111 Post(s)
Liked: 199
rdgrimes is offline  
post #106 of 108 Old 03-25-2014, 01:30 PM
AVS Special Member
 
LexInVA's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 1,873
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 7 Post(s)
Liked: 40
Quote:
Originally Posted by oink View Post

Whoa!
I didn't know about this.smile.gif

It's one of those 4K deals as part of MGM's 4K re-mastering program.
LexInVA is offline  
post #107 of 108 Old 03-25-2014, 02:11 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
oink's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Shuloch
Posts: 26,553
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 63 Post(s)
Liked: 814
Quote:
Thanx for that.

The word from the link is the film is finally done justice by the format.....I'm buying.wink.gif

A.P.S. deserve our protection....join the cause today!
oink is offline  
post #108 of 108 Old 04-01-2014, 06:58 AM
Moderator
 
PooperScooper's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Leominster MA
Posts: 19,770
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 43 Post(s)
Liked: 73
Interesting. This is the first I've seen the news. I'm in no rush.

larry

Opportunity is missed by most people because it is dressed in overalls and looks like work. -- Thomas Alva Edison
PooperScooper 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