Lord of the Rings (TE) - Page 4 - AVS Forum
Forum Jump: 
Reply
 
Thread Tools
post #91 of 2590 Old 04-10-2009, 06:04 PM
Senior Member
 
zinfamous's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Chicago, IL
Posts: 379
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by jayrader View Post

I mean whoever is to blame. I just want it to be correct.

iirc, the problems with the Dark Knight were unavoidable due to the processing applied to the master print in order to match the 35mm footage with the 70mm.

as far as LoTR goes, I would not be surprised if the BD is HUGELY disappointing. Not so much that there is extreme fan love for these films couple with high expectations (so there will always be some level of dissatisfaction), but that nearly every shot in all 3 films contains some level of digital enhancement.

A lot of transfers of high-effect films, in my experience, tend to suffer quite a bit depending on the nature of the effects. I think Silver Surfer worked quite well, and Iron Man, b/c these were bright films, bright effects. Not so with LOTR (esp TT). While I really love grain, I suspect there will be an overabundance in these transfers to mask the digital seams. Much like you see with 300.

Also, consider that as far as digital technology goes, LOTR is aging quickly. Not old films, but the tech involved in those effects is not as good as today. Expect more seams.

After watching TT on cable HD, and I'm thinking of the scene with the worg rider attack during the exodus to Helm's deep...I don't have high hopes for this.

Hopefully, though, I'm completely wrong.
zinfamous is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #92 of 2590 Old 04-10-2009, 08:35 PM
AVS Special Member
 
bplewis24's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Sacramento, CA.
Posts: 7,743
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 14
Quote:
Originally Posted by Matt_Stevens View Post

Too many soundtracks can hog valuable video bits. Hopefully there will be one uncompressed soundtrack, one 5.1 track and only one foreign language 5.1 track and that is IT.

Hopefully you mean one lossless track, and not uncompressed

Brandon

Brandon 

 


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

bplewis24 is offline  
post #93 of 2590 Old 04-10-2009, 09:49 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 spectator View Post

There's so much delicious stuff on the docket this year, theatrical-only releases won't tempt me in the slightest. I'll be too busy watching:

Alien...


And that's just the ones I know about by early April!

Woah, how did I miss the ALIEN announcement?


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 #94 of 2590 Old 04-10-2009, 10:15 PM
Advanced Member
 
dargo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: USA
Posts: 712
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 10 Post(s)
Liked: 42
Quote:
Originally Posted by wish View Post

+1
I'll take the extended cut in SD over the theatrical versions in HD.

+1
take those SD BD and stick them were the sun don't shine why anybody double dip knowing full well the director cut will come out at some point
dargo is offline  
post #95 of 2590 Old 04-10-2009, 10:33 PM
Senior Member
 
elezzar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 458
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 12
Extended cut blu-ray all the way for me !!! Those movies should look and sound amazing on blu. Also the extended cut can be on one bluray disc and the extras in the second disc. Not getting up from the couch to change discs to finish the movie is a plus in my book..... ( I know , I know..... I'm a lazy bastard)
elezzar is offline  
post #96 of 2590 Old 04-10-2009, 11:47 PM
AVS Special Member
 
MovieSwede's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Gothenburg
Posts: 6,770
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 18 Post(s)
Liked: 37
Quote:
Originally Posted by erkq View Post

Isn't a BD25 a single layer disk? He's not asking for "less space". He's looking for THAT space.

As an aside, constant bitrate is a waste. There's no advantage if there's nothing going on in the scene. Unless, of course, high action scenes are allowed to clip in absolute bandwidth, folding the clipped data back into the leftover bandwidth in low action scenes. Then when the disk is played the codec gathers and buffers this "overflow" data and uses it to complete the clipped high action scene to come.

Yes and add that the motionblur that happend during fast action scenes also needs less bits then a actionscene wiith little motionblur.
MovieSwede is offline  
post #97 of 2590 Old 04-11-2009, 04:56 AM
Member
 
Johnpv's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: New Jersey
Posts: 133
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by dargo View Post

+1
take those SD BD and stick them were the sun don't shine why anybody double dip knowing full well the director cut will come out at some point


Well for me, I don't always feel like watching the EEs. Some times I feel like watching the Theatrical cuts and some times I want to watch the EE. It would be nice to have it all in one package which I'm sure they could do with branching but they won't.
Johnpv is offline  
post #98 of 2590 Old 04-11-2009, 05:31 AM
Senior Member
 
akosoft's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Netherlands
Posts: 218
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
I,m a sucker for these movies and will be happy to own the tc in high def. The ee will come anyway, someday....and yup i will buy them to, silly me
akosoft is offline  
post #99 of 2590 Old 04-11-2009, 06:10 AM
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 Dave Mack View Post

Woah, how did I miss the ALIEN announcement?

You didn't. It hasn't been announced yet, it's just in the works. Sorry if I misled you- I wasn't talking about stuff that's been announced, just stuff I know is coming.

I don't feel special...
spectator is offline  
post #100 of 2590 Old 04-11-2009, 06:13 AM
 
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 spectator View Post

You didn't. It hasn't been announced yet, it's just in the works. Sorry if I misled you.

30th anniversary this year of the original film so i fully expect it to be released later this year sometime.
FoxyMulder is offline  
post #101 of 2590 Old 04-11-2009, 08:34 AM
Senior Member
 
Kyle_D's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 208
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Meanwhile, Fellowship has numerous scenes completed at 2K and the master itself is 2K, which explains why the HD versions shown are somewhat softer than those for TWO TOWERS and ROTK, which might be 4K mastered.

Two Towers and RotK were both completed at 2K and mastered from a DI. About 70-80% of Fellowship was 2K DI, but the rest was photochemically graded and print masters had to be struck with an optical printer. I'd hypothesize that the reason Fellowship looks softer is that it was likely transferred from a telecine master, while the latter films were transfered directly from the digital intermediates.

4K DIs didn't come into play until 2004 with Spider-man 2.
Kyle_D is offline  
post #102 of 2590 Old 04-11-2009, 11:19 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Faceless Rebel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Posts: 1,421
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 42 Post(s)
Liked: 15
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dan Hitchman View Post

4) Each movie split onto two BD-50's for optimal PQ. Maximum video bitrates! No seamless branching. The theatrical cuts can be on separate discs.

There is no justifiable reason for this. A BD-50 can already fit about 2 hours of video at full mux, and no movie ever needs to run at full mux for it's entire duration. The Extended Versions can very comfortably and with absolute image quality (well, as absolute as Blu-ray's spec allows) fit on a single BD-50 as long as there is no space dedicated to extras, just the film only, with a single DTS-HD Master Audio soundtrack and a few lower bitrate commentary tracks. Remember that Blu-ray dedicates 9 mbps of bandwidth exclusively to audio and video cannot ever enter that space, so if Warner preferred a TrueHD soundtrack and accompanying 640kbps DD5.1 soundtrack plus commentaries that would still not use up 9 mbps, leaving more than adequate space for the video.
Faceless Rebel is offline  
post #103 of 2590 Old 04-11-2009, 11:44 AM
AVS Special Member
 
MovieSwede's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Gothenburg
Posts: 6,770
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 18 Post(s)
Liked: 37
Quote:
Originally Posted by Faceless Rebel View Post

Remember that Blu-ray dedicates 9 mbps of bandwidth exclusively to audio and video cannot ever enter that space, so if Warner preferred a TrueHD soundtrack and accompanying 640kbps DD5.1 soundtrack plus commentaries that would still not use up 9 mbps, leaving more than adequate space for the video.

Thats just reserved for peak (40 + 8). Avarage bitrate isnt reserved that way.

But on the other stuff your are right, there is no need to ever encode a movie at full mux. Because if movie like LOTR needed 40mbs CBR, It really would be that the peak doesnt have enough bandwith. And if the peak isnt enough for this movie, it isnt really enough for any movie.
MovieSwede is offline  
post #104 of 2590 Old 04-14-2009, 12:31 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 spectator View Post

You didn't. It hasn't been announced yet, it's just in the works. Sorry if I misled you- I wasn't talking about stuff that's been announced, just stuff I know is coming.

thanks, spectator. Nice to know it's coming...



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 #105 of 2590 Old 04-14-2009, 08:40 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
R Harkness's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Toronto, Ontario, Canada
Posts: 11,988
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 104 Post(s)
Liked: 325
Oh man, I think I'm just glad I never got into the whole "extended edition" version of movies, so I don't have to spend time griping about not getting them, or putting off purchases of otherwise excellent movies.

Just gimme the movie as it appeared in the theater. I'm happy. No grinding of teeth for some other version.

Rich H


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.
R Harkness is online now  
post #106 of 2590 Old 04-14-2009, 10:25 PM
Advanced Member
 
darkedgex's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: WA
Posts: 734
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 19
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dan Hitchman View Post

4) Each movie split onto two BD-50's for optimal PQ. Maximum video bitrates! No seamless branching. The theatrical cuts can be on separate discs.

Wait, what? What's wrong with seamless branching? As far as I know seamless branching wouldn't hurt the file sizes too much because most of the extended scenes have generally smooth segues. So an extended edition with seamless branching should only be slightly larger than an extended edition by itself.

Otherwise I agree with your other points. Also agree with the poster who replied to you about the 4K scan; we'd need to have the effects re-rendered at 4K or higher for it to make the most sense (though for non-effects shots, I'd think 4K might help).

Fight mediocrity: Insist on BD50 discs for all movies longer than 100 minutes, optimized video encodes that fully utilize the available space, lossless audio track, and new masters for catalog titles!
darkedgex is offline  
post #107 of 2590 Old 04-14-2009, 11:29 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 R Harkness View Post

Oh man, I think I'm just glad I never got into the whole "extended edition" version of movies, so I don't have to spend time griping about not getting them, or putting off purchases of otherwise excellent movies.

Just gimme the movie as it appeared in the theater. I'm happy. No grinding of teeth for some other version.

except in this very rare instance, the EE's are MUCH better than the theatrical versions...


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 #108 of 2590 Old 04-14-2009, 11:55 PM
Advanced Member
 
Ed Weinman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 878
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 8 Post(s)
Liked: 18
Quote:
Originally Posted by darkedgex View Post

Wait, what? What's wrong with seamless branching? As far as I know seamless branching wouldn't hurt the file sizes too much because most of the extended scenes have generally smooth segues. So an extended edition with seamless branching should only be slightly larger than an extended edition by itself.

Otherwise I agree with your other points. Also agree with the poster who replied to you about the 4K scan; we'd need to have the effects re-rendered at 4K or higher for it to make the most sense (though for non-effects shots, I'd think 4K might help).

I don't believe hat seamless branching would work, in part, simply because the music cues have been altered and new scoring added for the extended edition.
Ed Weinman is offline  
post #109 of 2590 Old 04-15-2009, 12:08 AM
AVS Special Member
 
erkq's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 5,523
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 8 Post(s)
Liked: 95
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ed Weinman View Post

I don't believe hat seamless branching would work, in part, simply because the music cues have been altered and new scoring added for the extended edition.

The audio track can be independent can't it? An it takes so much less space you wouldn't have to branch. Surely they can do this... right?
erkq is offline  
post #110 of 2590 Old 04-15-2009, 12:15 AM
Senior Member
 
Kyle_D's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 208
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by darkedgex View Post

Otherwise I agree with your other points. Also agree with the poster who replied to you about the 4K scan; we'd need to have the effects re-rendered at 4K or higher for it to make the most sense (though for non-effects shots, I'd think 4K might help).

It's not just the effects shots. The entirety of TTT and RotK had a 2K digital intermediate, meaning that once the raw negative was scanned, all post work (inc. editing, effects, color grading, etc) was done in the digital realm. No negative was cut to make a print. A computer fed the finished film files to a laser printer, which struck the celluloid print masters.

The finished films are limited to 2K resolution. You will never see a higher resolution version of the films. Period.

The ONLY part of the trilogy that might benefit from a 4K scan is the ~20% of Fellowship that didn't have a digital intermediate.

EDIT: To put it summarily, there's really no point to doing a new scan for these films, because the finished versions as we know them originate on hard drives. They're essentially digital films. A telecine film scan of TTT, RotK and the majority of Fellowship would be as misguided as scanning a film print of Toy Story and using that master as the source for video release. The best results are achieved by simply porting the original data files direct to Blu.
Kyle_D is offline  
post #111 of 2590 Old 04-15-2009, 12:17 AM
Senior Member
 
Kyle_D's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 208
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ed Weinman View Post

I don't believe hat seamless branching would work, in part, simply because the music cues have been altered and new scoring added for the extended edition.

New Line released a seamless branching version of the trilogy on DVD a few years ago.
Kyle_D is offline  
post #112 of 2590 Old 04-15-2009, 04:34 AM
AVS Special Member
 
egrady's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: San Antonio, TX USA
Posts: 1,025
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Liked: 13
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dave Mack View Post

except in this very rare instance, the EE's are MUCH better than the theatrical versions...

Agreed, especially the second one.
egrady is offline  
post #113 of 2590 Old 04-15-2009, 05:48 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
R Harkness's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Toronto, Ontario, Canada
Posts: 11,988
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 104 Post(s)
Liked: 325
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dave Mack View Post

except in this very rare instance, the EE's are MUCH better than the theatrical versions...

Fare enough. I haven't seen it. Although virtually every single other "director's cut" or "extended edition" I've seen has only ended with me thinking "Oh, now I understand why they cut that stuff out."

Rich H


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.
R Harkness is online now  
post #114 of 2590 Old 04-15-2009, 06:06 AM
AVS Special Member
 
MovieSwede's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Gothenburg
Posts: 6,770
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 18 Post(s)
Liked: 37
The last battle of the first movie, was really terrible in the extendend edition. In the Theatrical it was almost flawless.
MovieSwede is offline  
post #115 of 2590 Old 04-15-2009, 06:07 AM
 
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
Kyle says they only have a digital intermediate at 2K. I accept that.

The original negatives though of the actual shot footage which is no doubt stored in a vault somewhere were filmed in 35mm and they will be a much higher resolution.

I also remember reading somewhere that CGI effects need to be done below the actual film resolution otherwise they appear too good in relation to the film shot footage and they need to blend that in seamlessly. Maybe what i read was wrong but i remember reading that.
FoxyMulder is offline  
post #116 of 2590 Old 04-15-2009, 06:16 AM
AVS Special Member
 
MovieSwede's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Gothenburg
Posts: 6,770
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 18 Post(s)
Liked: 37
Quote:
Originally Posted by FoxyMulder View Post

I also remember reading somewhere that CGI effects need to be done below the actual film resolution otherwise they appear too good in relation to the film shot footage and they need to blend that in seamlessly. Maybe what i read was wrong but i remember reading that.

Yes film may have more resolution but the resolution isnt as defined as it is with digital. Lines are more grey then black. So a digital image may be percieved as higher resolution, because its keeps the black lines more black at higher resolution. Thats why you have different resolution result if you do a MTF50 or a MTF30 test.

Also a 2K scan doesnt give us 2K in practical resolution.
MovieSwede is offline  
post #117 of 2590 Old 04-15-2009, 09:10 AM
Senior Member
 
ICBM99's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: West Texas
Posts: 488
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Somehow I've managed not to see the EE. I don't really know how other than I didn't really want to double dip. Hell even RTOK is in "Full Screen" (Birthday Present). While I would like to wait for the EE, I'll probably end up picking up both on BD. I can always give the TC to someone else that has a BD player.
ICBM99 is offline  
post #118 of 2590 Old 04-15-2009, 09:12 AM
Advanced Member
 
darkedgex's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: WA
Posts: 734
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 19
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kyle_D View Post

It's not just the effects shots. The entirety of TTT and RotK had a 2K digital intermediate, meaning that once the raw negative was scanned, all post work (inc. editing, effects, color grading, etc) was done in the digital realm. No negative was cut to make a print. A computer fed the finished film files to a laser printer, which struck the celluloid print masters.

Right, but this doesn't stop them from going back to the original film elements, scanning them at a higher resolution (4K or 8K) and then repeating the processes doing in the digital realm again (afterall, I'm sure a professional group like the ones behind LOTR kept notes/files/logs on what was changed in the digital realm). That leaves the effects shots, which may not even be a problem.

Quote:
The finished films are limited to 2K resolution. You will never see a higher resolution version of the films. Period.

I disagree, of course.

I agree that a scan of the finished film would be pointless because it wouldn't include anything the DI didn't. But a "restoration" effort, if ever undertaken, could do much better if they wanted.

Fight mediocrity: Insist on BD50 discs for all movies longer than 100 minutes, optimized video encodes that fully utilize the available space, lossless audio track, and new masters for catalog titles!
darkedgex is offline  
post #119 of 2590 Old 04-15-2009, 10:02 AM
Senior Member
 
Kyle_D's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 208
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by FoxyMulder View Post


The original negatives though of the actual shot footage which is no doubt stored in a vault somewhere were filmed in 35mm and they will be a much higher resolution.

Yes, but as darkedgex notes, to take advantage of that, you'd need to find and rescan all the raw camera negative that was used in the finished films, clean it up for dirt and scratches, log it into the AVID with the EXACT same metadata as the existing 2K scans, hope and pray that the AVID off-line is able to connect to the new 4K elements, spend weeks finding and fixing the log files for the media that inevitably won't reconnect, re-do all the color timing according to the original logs, and re-composite and re-render/upscale all the effects for 4K.

^ this is likely a gross simplification of what would be required, and the increase in PQ would be marginal on Blu.

Perhaps in the distant future, if 4K ever becomes a standard on home video and Warner believes a full restoration like the one described above would be financially viable, we MIGHT see a 4K (or higher) LotR happen. I wouldn't hold my breath however. Hope that the AVID timelines, effects shots, and color logs are backed up securely somewhere, because if that data is lost, such a restoration would be impossible.
Kyle_D is offline  
post #120 of 2590 Old 04-15-2009, 11:12 AM
Senior Member
 
steel_breeze's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 403
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 18
Amazon pre-order page... with cover art. Just added on Blu-ray.com. Still no date.

http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B00...=bluray-060-20
steel_breeze 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