The Terminator (1984) - 4 DVDs vs Blu-ray comparison PIX - Page 13 - AVS | Home Theater Discussions And Reviews
Baselworld is only a few weeks away. Getting the latest news is easy, Click Here for info on how to join the Watchuseek.com newsletter list. Follow our team for updates featuring event coverage, new product unveilings, watch industry news & more!


Forum Jump: 
 
Thread Tools
Old 09-26-2012, 03:51 PM
Member
 
supersonic395's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Posts: 38
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by KMFDMvsEnya View Post

What happened with SW is a completely different can of worms. Much of it has to do with incompetence, lack of: quality control -consistency -integrity, and being cheap rather than any thing else.

I think this is rather inaccurate. Lucasfilm, ILM and Skywalker Sound are exemplary in regards to their theatrical and especially their home video releases. (Not sure how one could say what you wrote with a straight face to be frank).

But that's rather off topic.

I think James Cameron knows what he's doing and I can't wait to finally see a colour corrected version of the Terminator come Saturday once more.
supersonic395 is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Old 09-26-2012, 03:52 PM
AVS Special Member
 
raoul_duke's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 2,312
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4 Post(s)
Liked: 32
Quote:
Originally Posted by NagysAudio View Post

The Lowry's Star Wars original trilogy is my reference go to discs.
TROLL CLOAKING DEVICE MALFUNCTION!!!!
raoul_duke is offline  
Old 09-26-2012, 04:02 PM
AVS Special Member
 
KMFDMvsEnya's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: SLC, UT
Posts: 1,257
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 51 Post(s)
Liked: 136
Here is some reading that covers some of the issues.

http://savestarwars.com/specialeditionfail.html
http://savestarwars.com/gout.html

http://www.dvdactive.com/editorial/articles/star-wars-the-changes-part-one.html
http://www.dvdactive.com/editorial/articles/star-wars-the-changes-part-two.html
http://www.dvdactive.com/editorial/articles/star-wars-the-changes-part-three.html

The BRs of the SW OT are decent but are not reference nor worthy of the fanboy biased praise they have received.

Best Regards
KvE

Politics is like a corral, no matter where you are you'll always be shovelling it.

KMFDMvsEnya is offline  
Old 09-26-2012, 04:03 PM
 
dvdmike007's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: UK
Posts: 8,687
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by supersonic395 View Post

I think this is rather inaccurate. Lucasfilm, ILM and Skywalker Sound are exemplary in regards to their theatrical and especially their home video releases. (Not sure how one could say what you wrote with a straight face to be frank).
But that's rather off topic.
I think James Cameron knows what he's doing and I can't wait to finally see a colour corrected version of the Terminator come Saturday once more.

the-wire-bunk-gifjaj8v.gif

Releasing a garbage 1080p, that is 1080p not even full 2k HDTV scan on a disc and charging premium price in 2011 was the biggest joke Lucas has ever pulled.
Corrected???? yeah just no, find me one 80's film shot with a digital teal bias, go on try it.
There was no way of shooting that way in 1983.
It was a no budget film, and yet he shot the same way Bay shot revenge of the fallen?
dvdmike007 is offline  
Old 09-26-2012, 04:11 PM
Member
 
supersonic395's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Posts: 38
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by dvdmike007 View Post

the-wire-bunk-gifjaj8v.gif
Releasing a garbage 1080p, that is 1080p not even full 2k HDTV scan on a disc and charging premium price in 2011 was the biggest joke Lucas has ever pulled.
Corrected???? yeah just no, find me one 80's film shot with a digital teal bias, go on try it.
There was no way of shooting that way in 1983.
It was a no budget film, and yet he shot the same way Bay shot revenge of the fallen?

I think your personal bias against Lucasfilm, Ilm and Skywalker sound is undermining both your opinion and their excellent work.

Also, if you look at the film To Catch a Thief with John Roby the Cat, the green and black night time colour was not done digitally either, so I'm not sure what you're trying to say to be honest.
supersonic395 is offline  
Old 09-26-2012, 04:15 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
Quote:
Originally Posted by dvdmike007 View Post

There was no way of shooting that way in 1983.
Some types of lights look greenish on film, add some blue and you're there.
The Warriors, for example, has loads of it.
42041 is offline  
Old 09-26-2012, 04:18 PM
 
dvdmike007's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: UK
Posts: 8,687
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 50
130245864639.gif

LOL my personal bias, I have heard it all now!
14 posts in and you are calling out people, stay classy
dvdmike007 is offline  
Old 09-26-2012, 04:21 PM
 
dvdmike007's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: UK
Posts: 8,687
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by 42041 View Post

Some types of lights look greenish on film, add some blue and you're there.
The Warriors, for example, has loads of it.

The warriors does not look like a modern film
dvdmike007 is offline  
Old 09-26-2012, 04:23 PM
Member
 
supersonic395's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Posts: 38
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by dvdmike007 View Post

130245864639.gif
LOL my personal bias, I have heard it all now!
14 posts in and you are calling out people, stay classy

Well, let's be honest here, I think your post above is symptomatic of being unable to really provide anything beyond "lol lucas iz a hack".

And gifs?

I'm not calling anyone out. I think we should have nice wholesome discussion and omit the gifs please.

I provided a pre-80s example, and another chap has provided the Warriors.

I do look forward to this release.
supersonic395 is offline  
Old 09-26-2012, 04:49 PM
 
dvdmike007's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: UK
Posts: 8,687
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by supersonic395 View Post

Well, let's be honest here, I think your post above is symptomatic of being unable to really provide anything beyond "lol lucas iz a hack".
And gifs?
I'm not calling anyone out. I think we should have nice wholesome discussion and omit the gifs please.
I provided a pre-80s example, and another chap has provided the Warriors.
I do look forward to this release.

You said I had a personal bias and read what you wanted, that is libel matey and wholesome after you accuse me of something baseless.
May the gifs continue, and there is no example on this page that looks like the Terminator.
dvdmike007 is offline  
Old 09-26-2012, 04:49 PM
 
dvdmike007's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: UK
Posts: 8,687
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by NagysAudio View Post

The gifs are making scrolling jerky frown.gif

No that would be you
raoul_duke likes this.
dvdmike007 is offline  
Old 09-26-2012, 04:57 PM
AVS Special Member
 
wuther's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 1,676
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 259 Post(s)
Liked: 54
Quote:
Originally Posted by dvdmike007 View Post

Every step of the way? Even at the bottom of the ocean and while filming avatar? I am done replying to you as it is just a total waste of time.
You are basing the Remix on blind faith also lol
And people care about the old master as it had the exact same attention you just listed, so your totally hypercritical as well!

The waste of time clue should of been with the poster's 'Lowery is the best' comment. He could always top it with 'Lowery is the best of the best'.
Quote:
Originally Posted by supersonic395 View Post

Well, in relation to the original colour timing that Jim Cameron decided back in 1984. What did you think?
The blu ray technology can now finally show us that correct colour timing, and no doubt Cameron was heavily involved with this. The awful vhs/dvd/ld tech produced that red push.
I don't understand why you guys are against this new correct colour grade. James Cameron is right, it's fairly simple imo.

And if it's teal you will no doubt make the bogus claim that was the original color grade. Just like it has been made with LOTR and Apocalypse Now. I saw Terminator, LOTR and Apocalypse Now in the first theater releases and yes I do not have a bad memory like some and do remember what they looked like.

Terminator did not have teal or any other strong saturation, the 80's film 'look' was muted saturation, in fact, to this day it's still the film 'look' . Any strong saturation you see was digitally induced.

If you claims were correct then Titanic would be exactly the same colors for the stereovision version and the mono version, but they are not proving you are way off.
wuther is offline  
Old 09-26-2012, 05:03 PM
AVS Special Member
 
wuther's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 1,676
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 259 Post(s)
Liked: 54
I love it when I am proven right.
wuther is offline  
Old 09-26-2012, 05:05 PM
Member
 
supersonic395's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Posts: 38
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by dvdmike007 View Post

You said I had a personal bias and read what you wanted, that is libel matey and wholesome after you accuse me of something baseless.
May the gifs continue, and there is no example on this page that looks like the Terminator.

Well, James Cameron didn't make The Warriors or To Catch a Thief. They were merely used as examples of films with similar (artistically) colour grading, and that teal was/is possible. I don't think any films look like The Terminator (the combination of the cast, crew, locations, photography, colour timing is unique to that film, so I don't understand the demand for another film to look like that...confused.gif)

I only read the written words in your posts. Besides as far as I know blu rays only go up to 1080p for home movies, so I'm not sure what the 2K claim against Lucasfilm is. Are there any examples of 2K blu rays? Surely this expectation is unreasonable given the technology adoption of the current day. Is the 2K claim valid for other films?
supersonic395 is offline  
Old 09-26-2012, 05:09 PM
Member
 
supersonic395's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Posts: 38
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by wuther View Post

And if it's teal you will no doubt make the bogus claim that was the original color grade. Just like it has been made with LOTR and Apocalypse Now. I saw Terminator, LOTR and Apocalypse Now in the first theater releases and yes I do not have a bad memory like some and do remember what they looked like.

I don't think I'm going to indulge the "my memory is better/more accurate than your memory" stance; it's rather ludicrous.

I did not see LOTR or Apocalypse now in the cinema, but I would take the respective filmmaker's decision over your statements.
supersonic395 is offline  
Old 09-26-2012, 05:11 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
Quote:
Originally Posted by NagysAudio View Post

Lowry is one of the best, if not THE best. Incredible directors like Spielberg and Cameron use them. So do nearly every large movie studio. But what do they know, right?
good ol' argumentum ad populum...
If I made films I wouldn't let those guys near 'em.
42041 is offline  
Old 09-26-2012, 05:16 PM
AVS Special Member
 
raoul_duke's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 2,312
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4 Post(s)
Liked: 32
50639aeb6f0bd.jpg
raoul_duke is offline  
Old 09-26-2012, 05:32 PM
AVS Special Member
 
KMFDMvsEnya's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: SLC, UT
Posts: 1,257
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 51 Post(s)
Liked: 136
Quote:
Originally Posted by supersonic395 View Post

Besides as far as I know blu rays only go up to 1080p for home movies, so I'm not sure what the 2K claim against Lucasfilm is. Are there any examples of 2K blu rays? Surely this expectation is unreasonable given the technology adoption of the current day. Is the 2K claim valid for other films?

What he is describing is that the OT digital workflow was done below the now long time standard minimum of 2K. He is not claiming that the BR spec supports anything beyond 1080P.

His argument is that Lucas opted to do the bare minimum over the years.

Lucas could have rescanned the OT OCNs, and conform them to his SE+ versions, at 2K, 4K, or even 6K years ago. Though he decided not to, for various paper thin excuses such as insufficient funds to do it again. LFL made a big brouhaha on how they had been working on the OT over a 3 year period for the BR release. I do not doubt that work was being done on them throughout that period but 'actively' is such a dubious term especially with the end results.

There are still plenty of visual discrepancies in the original and the SE special effects throughout the films. Fraked up lightsabers is a prime example that even the apologists concede.

NA, has argued that the DNR is seamless which unfortunately is incorrect. Haloing, smearing, static grain, along with other annoyances are visible throughout the OT. Nevermind that smoothie mess of TPM but as Mythbusters has proven you can polish a turd yet it doesn't change the fact it's still POS.

Prime example of the haloing are shots of C3PO in the desert. Uggh it is so bad. Yes, there is black crush and that is not a myth.

If you actually read the links provided you will come to realize how disingenuous LFL has been over the years about blatant errors and flaws in the various releases.

Best Regards
KvE

Politics is like a corral, no matter where you are you'll always be shovelling it.

KMFDMvsEnya is offline  
Old 09-26-2012, 05:40 PM
Member
 
supersonic395's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Posts: 38
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Interesting articles, but reading his post again, I disagree.
Quote:
Originally Posted by dvdmike007 View Post

the-wire-bunk-gifjaj8v.gif
Releasing a garbage 1080p, that is 1080p not even full 2k HDTV scan on a disc and charging premium price in 2011 was the biggest joke Lucas has ever pulled.

He's take issue with the fact that Lucasfilm only released a 1080p disc and not a 2k HDTV scan.

Pretty straightforward.

Thankfully the Terminator release will be 1080p derived from a 4k scan. It's not a 2k disc, so he may take issue with this too :confuses:
supersonic395 is offline  
Old 09-26-2012, 05:52 PM
AVS Special Member
 
KMFDMvsEnya's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: SLC, UT
Posts: 1,257
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 51 Post(s)
Liked: 136
No he is not arguing for SW to be in 2K on BR the issue that LFL only scanned the OT at 1080P and never in recent years deemed it necessary to redo the OT restorations at superior resolution with more powerful toolsets. Whereas Raiders has had three digital restorations over the years. Two of which I know of were done at 4K.

I assume DM7 is taking issue with the tealization and claims that is the original correct colortiming, which it is not. He has always been favor of 2K+ scans and workflows that are later converted down for BR.

Best Regards
KvE

Politics is like a corral, no matter where you are you'll always be shovelling it.

KMFDMvsEnya is offline  
Old 09-26-2012, 06:02 PM
Advanced Member
 
Strevlac's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 554
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 14
Quote:
Originally Posted by supersonic395 View Post

Interesting articles, but reading his post again, I disagree.
He's take issue with the fact that Lucasfilm only released a 1080p disc and not a 2k HDTV scan.
Pretty straightforward.
Thankfully the Terminator release will be 1080p derived from a 4k scan. It's not a 2k disc, so he may take issue with this too :confuses:

A modern 2K scan downscaled to 1080p is more ideal than a 10 year old 1080p telecine thrown on a BD. Even then, from what can tell most studios don't even downscale 2K scans, they just slightly crop the image so it falls within 1080. And remember, 2K isn't twice as much as 1080...2K refers to horizontal resolution wereas 1080 refers to verticle. They are actually very close to the same resolution.

And it's not just that they are ancient 1080p telecines, but they went and threw a lot of digital tweaking and Lowry's patented noise reduction on top of that! It's a double whammy of pure ****.
Strevlac is offline  
Old 09-26-2012, 06:56 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
Quote:
Originally Posted by dvdmike007 View Post

The warriors does not look like a modern film
Nor does it look like brightened, homogenized DVD-era video rubbish, which some blu-ray reviewers and HT enthusiasts tend to confuse with "not looking like a modern film". It has very considerable quantities of various shades of teal in the (fantastic-looking) print I saw, not an unusual sight in artificially-lit scenes in 70s/80s movies... though obviously without any sort of hyper-saturated digital orange complement. Teal is just green and blue, nothing inherently digital about it. Regardless, I'll happily take a bit of unnatural teal over a bargain-bin turd like the original release.

Curiously, I was looking for it on youtube, and noticed that this version of the trailer has marginally less teal than the 1080p version posted earlier in the thread...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D3S_y4-BsQ4
42041 is offline  
Old 09-26-2012, 07:04 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
Quote:
Originally Posted by NagysAudio View Post

Again, the hypocrisy is mind numbing. I don't see anyone complaining about the 2K DI for Avengers, or TDKR, or Avatar, or Prometheus, or every other big budget movie made in the past 10 years. Just like all of those movies, Star Wars will most likely forever be stuck with a 1.9K DI. Live with it.
It's a marvelous, painstaking, and beautiful restoration of some of the very best movies in cinema's history.
The Star Wars transfers were made on a Cintel CRT-based telecine onto HDCAM-SR tape. HD telecine is not the same as 2K data from a film scanner. These terms have specific meaning in the post-production world and are not interchangeable.
http://www.lasergraphics.com/us/pages/telecine-vs-scanning.html
BTW, TDKR didn't use a 2K DI. The 35mm prints were analog, the 70mm prints had analog 70mm footage, the digital cinema version was 4K, made from 6K scans of the interpositive.
KMFDMvsEnya likes this.
42041 is offline  
Old 09-26-2012, 07:13 PM
Advanced Member
 
jd213's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: less than 10 minutes from Akihabara
Posts: 758
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 8 Post(s)
Liked: 15
Quote:
Originally Posted by NagysAudio View Post

This thread is bordering on lunacy. The haloing, out of focus, and soft shots in Star Wars are part of the negative and the way it was shot. What else can Lowry/Lucas do to make it look better? And if they did use heavy digital manipulation, everyone would cry regardless. There's no satisfying anyone around here. And no, there is no black crush.

[insert Iraqi Information Minister pic here]
Quote:
Just because someone took a few screen caps, where the video card was crushing the black, does not prove anything. If we view proper caps from Xylon, or Capsaholics, there's virtually no black crush to be found anywhere.

Wrong. See Xylon's SW BD thread for yourself: http://www.avsforum.com/t/1361140/star-wars-comparison-pix-and-vid#post_20965213
jd213 is offline  
Old 09-26-2012, 10:35 PM
AVS Special Member
 
KMFDMvsEnya's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: SLC, UT
Posts: 1,257
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 51 Post(s)
Liked: 136
Warning: Spoiler! (Click to show)
Quote:
Originally Posted by NagysAudio View Post

This thread is bordering on lunacy. The haloing, out of focus, and soft shots in Star Wars are part of the negative and the way it was shot. What else can Lowry/Lucas do to make it look better? And if they did use heavy digital manipulation, everyone would cry regardless. There's no satisfying anyone around here. And no, there is no black crush. Just because someone took a few screen caps, where the video card was crushing the black, does not prove anything. If we view proper caps from Xylon, or Capsaholics, there's virtually no black crush to be found anywhere.
Not everything was scanned from the original negative, some footage was damaged beyond repair. Who knows what sources Lucas has used, interpositive, etc. Yes, some shots look slightly more grainy than others and lower quality, but Lowry has used the bare minimum of DNR and re-grain to make it all look as consistent and seamless as a 30+ year old low budget movie can.
1.9K, or 2K are practically identical scans. Anyone arguing otherwise is obviously misinformed, or has an agenda against Lucas. The new special effects were done at 1.9K essentially making this the Star Wars DI. To re-scan at 4K, George would have to redo the entire movie AGAIN! What would be the reason for George to disturb the negative yet again for a 4K scan? And re-add the special effects yet again? And redo the painstaking major restoration, yet again? Sure, it would look slightly better, but is it really that big of a deal breaker? And do you guys have any idea on how much that would cost? The special editions cost 15+ million dollars. To make a new DI, he would have to redo EVERYTHING and it would cost close to that amount.
Again, the hypocrisy is mind numbing. I don't see anyone complaining about the 2K DI for Avengers, or TDKR, or Avatar, or Prometheus, or every other big budget movie made in the past 10 years. Just like all of those movies, Star Wars will most likely forever be stuck with a 1.9K DI. Live with it.
It's a marvelous, painstaking, and beautiful restoration of some of the very best movies in cinema's history.

Quote:
Originally Posted by NagysAudio View Post

42041 - I stand corrected regarding TDKR. What about the CGI? What were they rendered at? As for telecine (1920X1080) versus 1.9K, or even 2K scanning, at that resolution I'm willing to bet that you won't see a difference whatsoever.
Jd213 - I've watched the Xylon's comparison and there's ZERO black crush.
P.S. 42041 - That YouTube trailer that you've posted has significantly less teal than the 1080P trailer. It looks more Aliens and probably more representative on what we'll see on the actual disc.

I have not made any mention of issues with soft focus and no that is not one of anomalies with the DNR I am referring to. No the haloing is not part of the OCN, nor misconstruing chromatic aberrations, it is the fault of the DNR used years ago. It is painfully obviously in a lot of shots with C3PO in the desert with the sky behind him.

There have many releases with blatantly heavy usage of DNR that have been given stellar reviews and few ever question them. Least of all the easily placated.
You keep saying there is no black crush along with no visible DNR artifacts which are both patently false. The BRs exhibit it on my calibrated display and it is there on all the other screencaps by various venues, including CAH and Xylon.

As 42041 has mentioned they were scanned via the old telecine method which produces adequate results but things have progressed significantly that new 2K scans of the same film will produce more detail and greater accuracy in regards to color and dynamic range than with telecines of old. That in itself would be worth the effort to redo the OT.

For such important and popular titles the effort of creating scans that fully resolve the effective resolution found on the OCN for posterity sake alone is sufficient reason to do it again. 6K essentially taps out all the effective detail found on 35mm.

You claim light usage of DNR with nothing to back up those claims, best to quit asserting otherwise. Either way it was done in the early days of Lowry digital scrubbing were artifacts were painfully visible, beside if the DNR had no negative affect on the detail then why bother regraining? If it looked fine there is no reason to do so unless to coverup their sins, as in visual DNR artifacts.

Lucas is a billionaire and SW will continue to make enormous profits, to attempt to justify not redoing the OT due to cost is an apologist of the worse degree and foolish. Lucas could pay for the most amazing restoration for the OT by the interest in his bank account alone. And he is guaranteed a profitable return on them as well.

Blade Runner which does not have remotely the same devotion and fan base has received significantly more effort and care than the OT, in addition to the fact that multiple versions are available to choose from. Only draw back is the low bitrate that holds back, in particular the Final Cut, from it being one of the best sets ever for a catalog Sci-Fi title. Oh and the Dangerous Days documentary never being released in HD as well.

As mentioned before new digital scanners produce superior results to telecines from days of old at the same resolution. Avengers is mostly all digital, minus a few bits that were shot on film.

Best Regards
KvE

PS What surprises me is that anyone can complain about Titanic's SFX looking dated but not call out the OT SE SFX which have not aged gracefully. I am fairly certain that those were not rendered out at 1080P back in the day, even if they were the textures are terrible, looks almost like Toy Story 1 in quality. Being a bit hyperbolic and facetious.
LFL really should redo them all, if Lucas has time and money to make an Ewok blink he can get around to scrounging some change in his couch to fix that stuff.

Politics is like a corral, no matter where you are you'll always be shovelling it.

KMFDMvsEnya is offline  
Old 09-27-2012, 02:04 AM
AVS Special Member
 
QuiGonJosh's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Posts: 1,020
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 120 Post(s)
Liked: 64
Terminator?
reanimator likes this.
QuiGonJosh is online now  
Old 09-27-2012, 02:45 AM
Member
 
supersonic395's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Posts: 38
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by KMFDMvsEnya View Post

I have not made any mention of issues with soft focus and no that is not one of anomalies with the DNR I am referring to. No the haloing is not part of the OCN, nor misconstruing chromatic aberrations, it is the fault of the DNR used years ago. It is painfully obviously in a lot of shots with C3PO in the desert with the sky behind him.

No. Lucas wanted Star Wars to have a real/gritty/documentary-esque look to it. The above is an intentional part of the photography. The above is merely some fiction that Lucas-haters like dvdmike007 make up and spread to rally other uninformed persons to their irrelevant cause (myths like black crush etc). Lucasfilm's quality control is of an industry setting standard and is beyond question. cool.gif
supersonic395 is offline  
Old 09-27-2012, 04:11 AM
 
dvdmike007's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: UK
Posts: 8,687
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by supersonic395 View Post

No. Lucas wanted Star Wars to have a real/gritty/documentary-esque look to it. The above is an intentional part of the photography. The above is merely some fiction that Lucas-haters like dvdmike007 make up and spread to rally other uninformed persons to their irrelevant cause (myths like black crush etc). Lucasfilm's quality control is of an industry setting standard and is beyond question. cool.gif

You need to stop accusing me of things that are just not true before it gets you into trouble
dvdmike007 is offline  
Old 09-27-2012, 04:15 AM
 
dvdmike007's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: UK
Posts: 8,687
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by 42041 View Post

Nor does it look like brightened, homogenized DVD-era video rubbish, which some blu-ray reviewers and HT enthusiasts tend to confuse with "not looking like a modern film". It has very considerable quantities of various shades of teal in the (fantastic-looking) print I saw, not an unusual sight in artificially-lit scenes in 70s/80s movies... though obviously without any sort of hyper-saturated digital orange complement. Teal is just green and blue, nothing inherently digital about it. Regardless, I'll happily take a bit of unnatural teal over a bargain-bin turd like the original release.
Curiously, I was looking for it on youtube, and noticed that this version of the trailer has marginally less teal than the 1080p version posted earlier in the thread...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D3S_y4-BsQ4

It has dnr and that is the only modern look, plus you are assuming when the directors cut was made the colour timing was not changed....
dvdmike007 is offline  
Old 09-27-2012, 04:16 AM
 
dvdmike007's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: UK
Posts: 8,687
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by KMFDMvsEnya View Post

No he is not arguing for SW to be in 2K on BR the issue that LFL only scanned the OT at 1080P and never in recent years deemed it necessary to redo the OT restorations at superior resolution with more powerful toolsets. Whereas Raiders has had three digital restorations over the years. Two of which I know of were done at 4K.
I assume DM7 is taking issue with the tealization and claims that is the original correct colortiming, which it is not. He has always been favor of 2K+ scans and workflows that are later converted down for BR.
Best Regards
KvE

I am not sure logic works on people like this
dvdmike007 is offline  
 
Thread Tools


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