Die unendliche Geschichte aka The Neverending Story comparison *PIX* - Page 4 - AVS Forum
Forum Jump: 
Reply
 
Thread Tools
post #91 of 159 Old 03-22-2010, 09:48 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
scowl's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Portland, OR
Posts: 10,479
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 32 Post(s)
Liked: 21
Quote:
Originally Posted by NetworkTV View Post

There have been a large number of BD releases in the last several months with what many would consider anywhere from "very increased" to "excessive" contrast levels. It seems we have a growing trend of cranking the blacks and whites to the point where all detail is lost in them in order to make the releases appear more "contrasty" and "film like".

They believe they're matching the light and color levels to what high end consumer displays are capable of these days. DVDs often look flatter because they were intended to look acceptable on most people's NTSC and PAL televisions.

Don't assume that just because the DVD looks a certain way that it must be correct. There was a lot of destructive tinkering around with DVD releases. For example, the scenes that look almost monochromatic (like they had been shot through an orange filter) may have actually been shot that way and intended to look that way but had been "corrected" to look more "realistic" for the DVD release. There were proven cases of someone "correcting" the color of scenes for DVD releases that were intended to have a color bias (Halloween was the most famous example). These were only fixed when someone involved with the film production cared enough to complain.

This was especially true for films that bombed at the box office but were popular on cable after the colors had been "fixed" for the broadcast release. Most people never knew what the original film looked like.

NOW: my post on AVS Forum.
NEXT: someone else's post on AVS Forum.
scowl is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #92 of 159 Old 03-22-2010, 09:57 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
NetworkTV's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: CT
Posts: 15,612
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 167 Post(s)
Liked: 442
Quote:
Originally Posted by scowl View Post

They believe they're matching the light and color levels to what high end consumer displays are capable of these days. DVDs often look flatter because they were intended to look acceptable on most people's NTSC and PAL televisions.

Don't assume that just because the DVD looks a certain way that it must be correct. There was a lot of destructive tinkering around with DVD releases. For example, the scenes that look almost monochromatic (like they had been shot through an orange filter) may have actually been shot that way and intended to look that way but had been "corrected" to look more "realistic" for the DVD release. There were proven cases of someone "correcting" the color of scenes for DVD releases that were intended to have a color bias (Halloween was the most famous example). These were only fixed when someone involved with the film production cared enough to complain.

This was especially true for films that bombed at the box office but were popular on cable after the colors had been "fixed" for the broadcast release. Most people never knew what the original film looked like.

OK, first, I clearly stated the DVD is obviously wrong. Second, I stand by what I said about a lot of recent BD releases crushing levels. Even the most recent release of North By Northwest exhibits this in places, such as the cropduster scene which now looks like it takes place at dusk.

Further, matching a disc to "current TV technology" is a bad idea. TV technology should be matched to what is correct and the discs should be an example of that, not matched to what one of many possible display technologies is capable of. Between CRTs, rear projection, front projection, LCD and Plasma, there are too many variables to tweak a disc too. The only proper solution is to provide a correct look and rely on calibration of the display to render it as closely as possible.

Finally, the DVD never looked right on any display. It was always washed out, like many DVDs of movies of that particular vintage.

BTW: Halloween is a bad example since there is actually version out there that represents the true source just like with The French Connection and so many other releases with jacked levels.

There has never been a "correct" version of TNES.
NetworkTV is offline  
post #93 of 159 Old 03-22-2010, 10:03 AM
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 the assumption a release print would capture all the dynamic range of an earlier generation element (which would presumably be the source for the transfer)? I have no expertise on this matter, but if motion picture film prints are anything like B&W photographic prints, you're losing quite a bit of dynamic range between the negative and the paper.
42041 is offline  
post #94 of 159 Old 03-22-2010, 10:25 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
NetworkTV's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: CT
Posts: 15,612
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 167 Post(s)
Liked: 442
Quote:
Originally Posted by 42041 View Post

Why the assumption a release print would capture all the dynamic range of an earlier generation element (which would presumably be the source for the transfer)? I have no expertise on this matter, but if motion picture film prints are anything like B&W photographic prints, you're losing quite a bit of dynamic range between the negative and the paper.

Where are you getting that this was done from a release print? That's only done as a last resort if no other good source exists. For example, "To Kill A Mockingbird" made some use of release prints for some scenes due to the lack of a single undamaged print. At times, release prints have been used for releases of some older movies shot on nitrate stock due to the risk of fire in handling them.

If Warner doesn't still have the master from a movie from 1984, then they are surely more incompetent than any of us can possibly imagine.
NetworkTV is offline  
post #95 of 159 Old 03-22-2010, 10:33 AM
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 NetworkTV View Post

Where are you getting that this was done from a release print? That's only done as a last resort if no other good source exists. For example, "To Kill A Mockingbird" made some use of release prints for some scenes due to the lack of a single undamaged print. At times, release prints have been used for previous releases of some older movies shot on nitrate stock due to the risk of fire.

If Warner doesn't still have the master from a movie from 1984, then they are surely more incompetent than any of us can possibly imagine.

No, what I'm saying is, it's NOT from a release print. I may well be talking completely out my ass since I know little about how 35mm prints were made, but perhaps when it was projected, you couldn't see as deep into the shadows as what's on the earlier generation film element that was telecine'd for this transfer, hence boosted contrast to make it more like the theatrical appearance.
42041 is offline  
post #96 of 159 Old 03-22-2010, 10:47 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
NetworkTV's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: CT
Posts: 15,612
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 167 Post(s)
Liked: 442
Quote:
Originally Posted by 42041 View Post

No, what I'm saying is, it's NOT from a release print. I may well be talking completely out my ass since I know little about how 35mm prints were made, but perhaps when it was projected, you couldn't see as deep into the shadows as what's on the earlier generation film element that was telecine'd for this transfer, hence boosted contrast to make it more like the theatrical appearance.

I doubt it.

1) In the 80's, they still had these guys on staff called "projectionists" who were responsible for making sure the print was projected correctly.

2) A lot of theaters were still only 1 or 2 screens in 1984. The multiplex hadn't yet really taken off. This meant more attention to those couple of movies.

3) In recent years, it's become common to run projector lamps at reduce brightness in the (mistaken) hope they'll last longer. That means the overall image was brighter. As a result, it was more likely you'd see more detail in the shadows.

4) Screens were often bigger in those 1 or 2 screen theaters (as were the theaters themselves), meaning you were more likely to see more image detail that was there. Once multiplexes started popping up, the theaters (and the screens) got smaller since fewer people would be sitting in on each screening. When a big movie with a large audience would come out, they would just run it on more screens.

5) Fire regulations didn't require stairway and exit lights to be bright enough to allow you to see the person 3 seats over. As a result, the theaters were darker, which allowed you to see more detail in the dark parts of the image.
NetworkTV is offline  
post #97 of 159 Old 03-22-2010, 11:29 AM
AVS Special Member
 
MovieSwede's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Gothenburg
Posts: 6,772
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 18 Post(s)
Liked: 37
I dont know if this is correct, but here we have an example when the homevideoformat shows to much info in the blacks.

Quote:


These are hand-drawn garbage mattes. A garbage matte is a technique of blotting out unwanted areas of a shot, such as the greyish boxes appearing around spacecraft in some scenes, where the matte was used to cut out mounting pylons for the models and other areas not covered by bluescreen. In this instance the black shapes were drawn over top of an area near Ian McDiarmid's face in order to block out a defect in his makeup that had gone unnoticed during filming. In a theatrical presentation, these garbage mattes are generally invisible; however, the lower range of colors and grayscale supported by home video standards often causes these effect artifacts to show up when viewed on DVD or VHS versions.

MovieSwede is offline  
post #98 of 159 Old 03-22-2010, 11:40 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
NetworkTV's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: CT
Posts: 15,612
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 167 Post(s)
Liked: 442
Quote:
Originally Posted by MovieSwede View Post

I dont know if this is correct, but here we have an example when the homevideoformat shows to much info in the blacks.

What does this have to do with this movie? The only blue screen work was with the flying scenes with Falkor. Everything else was matted over black which allowed for traveling matte technology to be employed for some scenes, while hard mattes were employed for shots where parts of a set were included in the shot. Those elements were then combined with painted scenes with black areas so the live elements could be exposed into them. It's what is known as an optical composite.
NetworkTV is offline  
post #99 of 159 Old 03-22-2010, 11:50 AM
AVS Special Member
 
colombianlove41's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Gotham, DE
Posts: 1,081
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Liked: 11
guys come on, the transfer sucks....

"How long were you in Mexico?"
" uh...a week, no, no, a day..."
"Well, which is it a week or a day?
"uh...a weekday?"
colombianlove41 is offline  
post #100 of 159 Old 03-22-2010, 11:55 AM
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 colombianlove41 View Post

guys come on, the transfer sucks....

I don't know... does it? I never saw the film how it was meant to be seen, anything else is guesswork without some known point of reference. Many modern horror movies and suspense thrillers are colored in shades of cold blue, but that probably isn't what the camera saw. If you saw the un-graded images and didn't know it was intended to be aggressively colored a certain way you might just think the transfer is screwed up.
42041 is offline  
post #101 of 159 Old 03-22-2010, 12:05 PM
AVS Special Member
 
MovieSwede's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Gothenburg
Posts: 6,772
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 18 Post(s)
Liked: 37
Quote:
Originally Posted by NetworkTV View Post

What does this have to do with this movie? The only blue screen work was with the flying scenes with Falkor. Everything else was matted over black which allowed for traveling matte technology to be employed for some scenes, while hard mattes were employed for shots where parts of a set were included in the shot. Those elements were then combined with painted scenes with black areas so the live elements could be exposed into them. It's what is known as an optical composite.

It wasnt that I was refering to, just that video can show to much information in the blacks that wasnt visible in theaters. Film has greater range then video and hold alot of information that you cant see without lifting it up in post.

The handmatted mask on the emperors face isnt as visible in theater as it is on video. But it was still there on the theatrical print.

So its hard to judge how much information that really should be visible in the black area.
MovieSwede is offline  
post #102 of 159 Old 03-23-2010, 12:51 AM
Senior Member
 
Jason One's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Posts: 460
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4 Post(s)
Liked: 13
Quote:
Originally Posted by scowl View Post

They believe they're matching the light and color levels to what high end consumer displays are capable of these days. DVDs often look flatter because they were intended to look acceptable on most people's NTSC and PAL televisions.

Don't assume that just because the DVD looks a certain way that it must be correct. There was a lot of destructive tinkering around with DVD releases. For example, the scenes that look almost monochromatic (like they had been shot through an orange filter) may have actually been shot that way and intended to look that way but had been "corrected" to look more "realistic" for the DVD release. There were proven cases of someone "correcting" the color of scenes for DVD releases that were intended to have a color bias (Halloween was the most famous example). These were only fixed when someone involved with the film production cared enough to complain.

This was especially true for films that bombed at the box office but were popular on cable after the colors had been "fixed" for the broadcast release. Most people never knew what the original film looked like.

My problem with this theory is that there have been multiple DVD releases of this film (plus the Netherlands BD) from different studios, and they all shared a fairly consistent look (e.g. white throne room). The US BD is alone with its drastically different color timing.

Combined with the suspicious missing highlight and shadow detail, I find it very hard to believe that the US BD is more accurate than every previous release. Especially since we know for a fact that Wolfgang Petersen was not involved with the US BD.
Jason One is online now  
post #103 of 159 Old 03-23-2010, 06:13 AM
AVS Special Member
 
MovieSwede's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Gothenburg
Posts: 6,772
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 18 Post(s)
Liked: 37
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jason One View Post

Combined with the suspicious missing highlight and shadow detail, I find it very hard to believe that the US BD is more accurate than every previous release. Especially since we know for a fact that Wolfgang Petersen was not involved with the US BD.

He doesnt need to be involved to get a correct transfer. If they have access to a 35mm copy they should know what color it actually has.

Its very unusual that someone adds a tint to a movie, its more common to actually remove tint for homevideo.
MovieSwede is offline  
post #104 of 159 Old 03-23-2010, 06:58 AM
Member
 
TheHutt's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 143
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Which version are the BD based on, actually? The German theatrical cut (with Klaus Doldinger score) or the 6 minutes shorter US cut (with Giorgio Moroder score)?

http://www.schnittberichte.com/schni...php?ID=1439182
TheHutt is offline  
post #105 of 159 Old 03-23-2010, 10:50 AM
Advanced Member
 
dododge's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: MD, USA
Posts: 518
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 11
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheHutt View Post

Which version are the BD based on, actually?

The US and Dutch discs are both based on the non-German cut. They have the Limahl/Moroder song at the start and end.
dododge is offline  
post #106 of 159 Old 03-23-2010, 12:04 PM
Member
 
stevestevenson's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 124
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
What a joke, the dutch version is way way way better. How can people who do that sort of thing work in the business? Don't they have any standards? Don't they have the training and the vision to differentiate what is right and what is way way way wrong?

Its either incredible incompetence and someone left an automatic setting going or somebody is actually determining these adjustments and they don't know or are actively trying to damage black levels, color balance, tint, blow outs, etc... Sad.
stevestevenson is offline  
post #107 of 159 Old 03-23-2010, 12:16 PM
AVS Special Member
 
MovieSwede's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Gothenburg
Posts: 6,772
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 18 Post(s)
Liked: 37
Quote:
Originally Posted by stevestevenson View Post

What a joke, the dutch version is way way way better.

And how do you know that the dutch version is better?
MovieSwede is offline  
post #108 of 159 Old 03-23-2010, 12:17 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
NetworkTV's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: CT
Posts: 15,612
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 167 Post(s)
Liked: 442
Quote:
Originally Posted by MovieSwede View Post

He doesnt need to be involved to get a correct transfer. If they have access to a 35mm copy they should know what color it actually has.

Should...

The problem is, the temptation to tweak things until they've been worked over too far is very, very strong. It's actually a disease many graphics artists have.

Instead of making some proper and warranted adjustments, then stepping back and coming back to review it later, they keep tweaking little stuff until it bears no resemblance to the original.
NetworkTV is offline  
post #109 of 159 Old 03-23-2010, 12:19 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
NetworkTV's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: CT
Posts: 15,612
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 167 Post(s)
Liked: 442
Quote:
Originally Posted by MovieSwede View Post

And how do you know that the dutch version is better?

Because it's closer to every other version? Because it eliminates the obvious, but typical, washed out look on the DVDs while still avoiding crushing the blacks?
NetworkTV is offline  
post #110 of 159 Old 03-23-2010, 12:42 PM
Member
 
AaronMK's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Orlando, FL
Posts: 115
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 8 Post(s)
Liked: 11
Quote:


The only proper solution is to provide a correct look and rely on calibration of the display to render it as closely as possible.

Well said!!

I guess we have to speculate on the original look of the film until someone with authoritative insight chimes in. However, which is more likely to be accurate:

---
1) A single release comes out with a drastically different color scheme from all previous releases available for comparison. The color scheme on previous releases has been fairly consistent, and the director had no knowledge of the new release until it was practically on store shelves. Therefore, the color scheme on the new release must not be accurate.

2) All previous releases had inaccurate color schemes that deviated from theatrical prints in consistent ways. This has gone unnoticed and/or unexplained for 25 years. Since the new release is on a format that can achieve greater color accuracy and detail, it reveals a reddish tint that previous video formats were incapable of conveying.

Inaccuracies of previous releases were not noticed or explained because they are, in fact, just an artifact of previous, less capable home video formats. Therefore, the current release is accurate, and people raising suspicions need to educate themselves about the capabilities of various formats and display technologies. In their research, they might also find out why they don't notice such color scheme variations of a vast majority of other films when released on the more capable format.
---
AaronMK is offline  
post #111 of 159 Old 03-23-2010, 01:37 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
NetworkTV's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: CT
Posts: 15,612
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 167 Post(s)
Liked: 442
Quote:
Originally Posted by AaronMK View Post

Well said!!

I guess we have to speculate on the original look of the film until someone with authoritative insight chimes in. However, which is more likely to be accurate:

---
1) A single release comes out with a drastically different color scheme from all previous releases available for comparison. The color scheme on previous releases has been fairly consistent, and the director had no knowledge of the new release until it was practically on store shelves. Therefore, the color scheme on the new release must not be accurate.

2) All previous releases had inaccurate color schemes that deviated from theatrical prints in consistent ways. This has gone unnoticed and/or unexplained for 25 years. Since the new release is on a format that can achieve greater color accuracy and detail, it reveals a reddish tint that previous video formats were incapable of conveying.

Inaccuracies of previous releases were not noticed or explained because they are, in fact, just an artifact of previous, less capable home video formats. Therefore, the current release is accurate, and people raising suspicions need to educate themselves about the capabilities of various formats and display technologies. In their research, they might also find out why they don't notice such color scheme variations of a vast majority of other films when released on the more capable format.
---

I'm pretty sure the real answer is that both of the above are correct.

The previous releases were often lacking in proper black levels, but the US BD swings the complete opposite way, creating too much. My guess is the European BD is the closest to accurate so far.
NetworkTV is offline  
post #112 of 159 Old 03-24-2010, 12:19 AM
AVS Special Member
 
MovieSwede's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Gothenburg
Posts: 6,772
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 18 Post(s)
Liked: 37
1. Its very common to tweak the colors for video, since video always have had a problem handling colors the same way film has. I think some of you would be surprised on how many other movies you own, doesnt have the same colors as the theatrical print.

2. There is a vast difference between the colors of the different versions. Just look at the auryn, its blue and silver on the DVD, and green and gold on the dutch BD. Someone has apperently tweaked out the color red from the DVD.
´
Neither the DVD or Dutch BD looks like film, the new BD looks like film, but I still cant say for sure if its accurate or not. Since it was 25 years ago I saw the correct version. The orange look in the palace do work with my memory, but it could of course be my mind playing tricks with me.

As for the importance of the director involvment, I say there is a bigger chance of something going wrong with the colors when the director gets involved. Since he can do alot of stuff that is not correct to the orginal look.
MovieSwede is offline  
post #113 of 159 Old 03-24-2010, 02:55 AM
Member
 
TheHutt's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 143
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by dododge View Post

The US and Dutch discs are both based on the non-German cut. They have the Limahl/Moroder song at the start and end.

Well, then this discussion is leading to nowhere (for me). I will wait for the German Blu-ray release, to have the longest version with the correct score. Also, they are likely to include the US cut as an extra, anyway (they did for the DVD).
TheHutt is offline  
post #114 of 159 Old 03-24-2010, 04:24 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
NetworkTV's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: CT
Posts: 15,612
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 167 Post(s)
Liked: 442
Quote:
Originally Posted by MovieSwede View Post

1. Its very common to tweak the colors for video, since video always have had a problem handling colors the same way film has. I think some of you would be surprised on how many other movies you own, doesnt have the same colors as the theatrical print.

Actually, I'm impressed with how many major studio titles seem to reproduce the intended theatrical look correctly - for the best example, see the latest Harry Potter movie release.

Quote:


2. There is a vast difference between the colors of the different versions. Just look at the auryn, its blue and silver on the DVD, and green and gold on the dutch BD. Someone has apperently tweaked out the color red from the DVD.

You're ignore the black levels. Color is pretty much irrelevant to what is wrong with this release. The blacks are crushed. The tint is different, but that's something harder to to judge as to how correct it is. Crushed blacks are crushed blacks. There's no way those are correct. They would light up alarms on every video scope on the planet.
´
Quote:


Neither the DVD or Dutch BD looks like film, the new BD looks like film, but I still cant say for sure if its accurate or not.

The new BD looks like film? Why, because of the crushed blacks? That's not the look of film. That's video clipping.

Quote:


As for the importance of the director involvment, I say there is a bigger chance of something going wrong with the colors when the director gets involved. Since he can do alot of stuff that is not correct to the orginal look.

True (we have The French Connection) as an example of that problem. However, I'd bet that's not the case here. I don't think any tweaking he might do would look this bad. Plus, his notable lack of involvement (or even notification or having received a copy from the studio, for that matter) makes this stink of them not giving a damn.

I think someone in the edit room thought if they did this, it looked more like film...
NetworkTV is offline  
post #115 of 159 Old 03-24-2010, 09:44 AM
AVS Special Member
 
MovieSwede's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Gothenburg
Posts: 6,772
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 18 Post(s)
Liked: 37
Quote:
Originally Posted by NetworkTV View Post

Actually, I'm impressed with how many major studio titles seem to reproduce the intended theatrical look correctly - for the best example, see the latest Harry Potter movie release.

Yes with modern tools they get a better transfer. But that wasnt the case a couple of years ago.

Quote:
You're ignore the black levels. Color is pretty much irrelevant to what is wrong with this release. The blacks are crushed. The tint is different, but that's something harder to to judge as to how correct it is. Crushed blacks are crushed blacks. There's no way those are correct. They would light up alarms on every video scope on the planet.

Im not ignoring black levels, but most people seems to think that because the colors has a strong tint, it must be less correct.

Quote:
The new BD looks like film? Why, because of the crushed blacks? That's not the look of film. That's video clipping.

No because it hasnt washed out blacks.

Quote:
I think someone in the edit room thought if they did this, it looked more like film...

So you really think that if you preserve every information on the negative when you transfer to video, that you get a more accurate presentation? Film has alot more information on it then you actually can see with your eyes in theater, that you can lift up in post. Even a BD has information that can be accessed with some tweaks. But that doesnt equal a true presentation to the movie. Just that you make the footage look more flat.

We talking about to different techs that is not 100% compatible with each other. You always has to compromise in this regard.

I still dont claim that the BD is correct, just that I dont think the other BD is more accurate.
MovieSwede is offline  
post #116 of 159 Old 03-24-2010, 12:27 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
NetworkTV's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: CT
Posts: 15,612
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 167 Post(s)
Liked: 442
Quote:
Originally Posted by MovieSwede View Post

Yes with modern tools they get a better transfer. But that wasnt the case a couple of years ago.

But, in this case, there's no excuse. Those "modern tools" have been around since before Blu-ray.


Quote:


Im not ignoring black levels, but most people seems to think that because the colors has a strong tint, it must be less correct.

I'm not one of those people. My issue is with black levels that make the movie look like Tim Burton's Batman, when I know it wasn't that dark looking in the theater. Believe me, I remember Batman being dark - really dark - in the theater. TNES was nowhere close to that - and I saw both at the same theater when each came out.

Quote:


No because it hasnt washed out blacks.

It doesn't have proper blacks, either. All the grading between light, midtone and black has been clipped to almost nothing.

Quote:


So you really think that if you preserve every information on the negative when you transfer to video, that you get a more accurate presentation? Film has alot more information on it then you actually can see with your eyes in theater, that you can lift up in post. Even a BD has information that can be accessed with some tweaks. But that doesnt equal a true presentation to the movie. Just that you make the footage look more flat.

You misunderstand. I fully agree the DVD is too light. I'm also saying the BD is crushed - severely.

Quote:


We talking about to different techs that is not 100% compatible with each other. You always has to compromise in this regard.

A compromise would look closer to the Dutch version.

Quote:


I still dont claim that the BD is correct, just that I dont think the other BD is more accurate.

The Dutch version may be wrong, too, but the American version is definitely more wrong. There are several scenes where it's so dark, you can't see anything properly.

I'd wonder what the colorists were thinking, but I honestly don't believe they were thinking at all.
NetworkTV is offline  
post #117 of 159 Old 03-24-2010, 01:35 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
In what scenes does the Dutch BD have improper blacks? All the shots Xylon posted look decent to me.
Kram Sacul is offline  
post #118 of 159 Old 03-25-2010, 04:40 PM
Member
 
stevestevenson's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 124
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by MovieSwede View Post

And how do you know that the dutch version is better?

Quote:
Originally Posted by MovieSwede View Post

And how do you know that the dutch version is better?

Some people have perfect pitch and some people are tone deaf, I don't fault people for it but I do think if they hear it enough from others they should take heed. I am therefore respectfully suggesting that perhaps your ability to weigh in on the images is not so good or something like your monitor is preventing you from being able to see the glaring issues.

There are numerous problems both technically and historically with it, if you were to take a basic photography class or learn up on digital imaging or anything related to this sort of thing you would be able to see the problems without any magnifying glass.

The dynamic range has been severely compromised. In the green and blue channels the bottom 25 steps were clipped and in the red it looks as though about 40 were cut. There are effectively twice the number of colors in the the dutch film, if the other was SUPPOSED to look like that then the gradients would not be less fine than in the dutch film. The highlights are also severely clipped. Film doesn't clip anything like this and we can see in the dutch transfer the data that is simply gone. Only digital manipulation with truncation and deletion of data somewhere in the pipe would be the cause in this case.

It is beyond doubt that this is a processing screw up, the data tells what happened. This isn't about "whats on the film" or "how it looks", its about "what happened to the data in post".

To make this PAINFULLY obvious, I have taken one of the images and what you see are only the lowest 49 steps. For those that have no idea what this means, I have taken the image and removed all visual information above 49 steps so you are only seeing 49/255 (19%) of the available color resolution for each image.

As you can see, the normal bluray describes MOST of the scene in 19% of the data.


If you view the same 19% of the dutch bluray, you will see that 19% clearly does not provide enough data to describe the scene. You can see that it uses that 19% for lots of detail in the dark areas.


This last image is my attempt to find how many steps were needed for the dutch to describe the same dynamics. As it turns out, it seemed it needed about 95 steps to cover the same range. Of course because the dutch uses 51% more resolution to describe the same range the color resolution is simply much better for the same coverage.


There are other issues in other scenes, but that level of messed up is just unacceptable.
stevestevenson is offline  
post #119 of 159 Old 03-26-2010, 04:26 AM
AVS Special Member
 
MovieSwede's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Gothenburg
Posts: 6,772
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 18 Post(s)
Liked: 37
Steven

Your example say alot of the limits of the current format, not anything about how the source actually looks.

Yes the dutch has more dynamic range preserved, but that is not the question, but how well it actually looks like the 35mm copy. A 35mm copy hold alot of information in the darker area that can be extracted in post or during transfer to video. If one videocopy has extracted more information in the darker area, then we have 2 things. Either they made it brighter in post or they didnt.

But when we put a master on bluray, its not the best format for mastering. So any information that we cant see is going to get destroyed by the compression and the limited 8bit structure. So of course the brightest version is going to preserve more information then the darker. But imagine if the master hand been transfered to a RAW format. Then your example would have given us different results then we have now.

When you master a source that is more dynamic then the final format you have alot of options how you should handle the conversion, you may preserve more information by make the image more flat, but then you may risk deviate on how it looks on film. Yes film doesnt crush blacks the same way video does, therefor it gets problemetic for any presentation that doesnt behave like the orginal format. But film does comes to a point were the different levels of black get harder and harder for the human eye to detect so you will get to a point were its not crushing blacks on film, but it sure reaches that limit.

So whats most true to the theatrical print we cant tell, until we actually can compare it to the theatrical print. Yes obiously the theatrical print hold alot of information that the bluray isnt presenting, but how much of that information was actually seen in theaters I dont know.

But the dutch still looks like film transfered to video with a slightly different gamma/brightness/contrast then the orginal 35mm would give us in theaters. And again its not something unusal for videotransfers. Even if they have gotten alot better in resent years.

And yes I still think they have boosted contrast for the BD release.
MovieSwede is offline  
post #120 of 159 Old 03-26-2010, 06:53 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
NetworkTV's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: CT
Posts: 15,612
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 167 Post(s)
Liked: 442
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kram Sacul View Post

In what scenes does the Dutch BD have improper blacks? All the shots Xylon posted look decent to me.

I never said they were improper. I did say they could be, which is reasonable, because we aren't seeing it on the same calibrated display, but I also said, of all the sources, it appears the most proper.

So, while the levels on the Dutch version appear most correct, we can't outright say they're definitely 100% correct. Most correct, is therefore reasonable and the best we can accurately say.

I think it's all but impossible to go from film, through the scanning process, cleanup, compress, then display and get 100% accuracy. However, you can get darned close and I think that's where the Dutch disc is.
NetworkTV 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