The Lord of the Rings: Fellowship of the Ring HDTV vs Blu-ray Comparison - Page 22 - AVS Forum
Forum Jump: 
 
Thread Tools
Old 04-09-2010, 12:14 AM
AVS Special Member
 
MovieSwede's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Gothenburg
Posts: 6,773
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 18 Post(s)
Liked: 37
Quote:
Originally Posted by KMFDMvsEnya View Post

In general I agree with you MovieSwede, although this thread has a few caps that show that some additional DNR was applied to the FC in addition to whatever they have needed to for the restoration.

Could be a compression error also (but I must watch the sequense in motion to be really sure). Since the promo should have come from the same master. But in the case of LOTR that clear after watching it that it is a DNR filter they used.

See if I can screencap a very good example later.
MovieSwede is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Old 04-09-2010, 02:52 AM
AVS Special Member
 
mhafner's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Switzerland
Posts: 4,611
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 9 Post(s)
Liked: 29
Quote:
Originally Posted by Robert George View Post

E. The Blu-ray is an accurate reflection of the filmmaker approved master and the people on this and other forums that continue to second guess and insult not only the extremely talented professionals that transfer and master theatrical features into consumer video products, but the actual filmmakers that spend years of their lives to make these films are entitled to their opinions, worthless though they are.
.

It may well be that current masters used for the BDs are Peter Jackson approved. That does not change one bit the fact that additional DNR compared to the source elements was added to the master(s) used, and I find this highly undesirable and degrading the image quality. In addition the DNR/filtering used was at least some times of poor quality. I don't support poor quality filtering, director approved or not. If you want to filter there is high end software on the market that does a good job and does not leave tons of artifacts behind.
mhafner is offline  
Old 04-09-2010, 05:46 AM
Advanced Member
 
Pincho's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 720
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
It's the sparkly eyes that I find particularly strange looking. Half DNR, and half untouched. Does the HD TV version also have the same look to it with the sparkly eyes?

Genius is an insult to my intelligence!

Pincho is offline  
Old 04-09-2010, 07:17 AM
AVS Special Member
 
DaViD Boulet's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 1999
Location: Washington DC area
Posts: 6,428
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 38
Quote:
Originally Posted by Robert George View Post

Okay, Swede, for just 30 seconds I'll accept the explanation that the master used for the BD is indeed less detailed than the master used for the HDTV broadcast and I will also make the leap of faith that these are, in fact, sourced from the same master.

Here's where the AVS logic takes you...

A. One of the largest and wealthiest media conglomerates in the world relegated one of their most prized assets to some bush league post house who then botched the transfer.

B. Typically professional and capable post house was given the project but upon seeing the master for the first film decided it was better to make the disc look worse than the master but left the other two films alone.

Or maybe...

C. The HDTV caps and the BD caps are coming from completely different sources. The BD source having been approved by the Director and the Cinematographer and the HDTV source being completely unknown.

D. The HDTV master was oversharpened due to the fact that the additional processing and manipulation that takes place in the broadcast chain can result in some loss of fine detail.

E. The Blu-ray is an accurate reflection of the filmmaker approved master and the people on this and other forums that continue to second guess and insult not only the extremely talented professionals that transfer and master theatrical features into consumer video products, but the actual filmmakers that spend years of their lives to make these films are entitled to their opinions, worthless though they are.

A and B simply fly in the face of any sort of logic and C and D are possible, but still only speculation. That only leaves E as my choice as the most likely and most probable scenario.

It doesn't need to be that extreme and we don't need to consider this "botched" etc. for the HDTV encode to show more real, actual picture detail.

Firstly, the image detail gain in the HDTV encode is SLIGHT, very, very slight. Also, some of the comparison shots we've seen are from images that in the film are in-motion... they are not captures taken from still/stationary moments in the film. This means that even mild DNR might appear more destructive in the captures than it really appears in the moving scene to the eye (DNR removes the most detail during motion).

And finally, it's quite possible that the grain/noise in the original image was considered more of a problem than the very slight loss of fine detail from the DNR... so it's quite possible that trained WB techs, and even Jackson's own eyes, preferred this "clean" looking master to the (possibly) less-processed one used for the HDTV encode.

While the real visible improved image detail is apparent to me from the captures, I also consider the difference to be slight, and it's possible that the other improvements in the master used for the BD caused the powers that be to consider it an overall better image.

Naturally, what would have been the best choice would have been to have Lowry do their own proprietary clean-up to keep all of the detail possible while at the same time presenting the improvements the WB team were after. But again, the loss of detail between the HDTV encode and BD is slight, and if you knock out the scene with Gandalph's beard as he stands in front of that arched opening--which was an "in motion" scene from the film, the differences appear even less significant. Yes, they are there, but not night and day and the new disc doesn't have to be "botched" for the HDTV encode to indeed present a slight gain in image detail.

1080p and lossless audio. EVERY BD should have them both.
DaViD Boulet is offline  
Old 04-09-2010, 07:23 AM
AVS Special Member
 
DaViD Boulet's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 1999
Location: Washington DC area
Posts: 6,428
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 38
Quote:


And I've heard some say the audio is only a slight upgrade over the EE DVDs (which I've not heard any complaints about in the audio department). Kinda makes one wonder if these are even much of an upgrade with all the different opinions.

???

These blu-ray Discs, even with whatever flaws they may have, are LIGHT YEARS ahead of the DVDs in both picture and sound quality. Dramatically so.

1080p and lossless audio. EVERY BD should have them both.
DaViD Boulet is offline  
Old 04-09-2010, 09:28 AM
AVS Special Member
 
ChuckZ's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Pittsburgh, PA
Posts: 1,097
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2 Post(s)
Liked: 10
eric.exe, would you mind doing captures to match the ones from this guy?

http://www.cornbread.org/FOTRCompare/index.html

Let's see how your HD broadcast capture matches his and how the Blu-ray release matches his HD broadcast capture.
ChuckZ is offline  
Old 04-09-2010, 09:50 AM
Advanced Member
 
bimmerfreak0's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Oblivion
Posts: 972
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3 Post(s)
Liked: 15
Quote:
Originally Posted by ChuckZ View Post

eric.exe, would you mind doing captures to match the ones from this guy?

http://www.cornbread.org/FOTRCompare/index.html

Let's see how your HD broadcast capture matches his and how the Blu-ray release matches his HD broadcast capture.

Is it just me or are the HD shots darker, by a good chunk.
bimmerfreak0 is offline  
Old 04-09-2010, 12:14 PM
AVS Special Member
 
ChuckZ's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Pittsburgh, PA
Posts: 1,097
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2 Post(s)
Liked: 10
You're seeing a difference in color spaces.

DVD and Blu-ray have different color primaries. It's also possible that there are slight luminance changes between the two masters.
ChuckZ is offline  
Old 04-09-2010, 05:19 PM
Senior Member
 
jruser's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 389
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 11
Quote:
Originally Posted by jruser View Post

I just watched FotR and I must say that the disc is much more film-like than the screen shots show. Most of the DNR happens towards the beginning of the film. After they get out of the shire, it seems to have a pretty consistent grain level. It isn't the sharpest picture ever, but it is way above tons of catalog releases.

I think most people should try to get their hands on the disc and see for themselves. Any fan of the series is really missing out on a good, but not flawless, release.

As much as these threads of screenshots have helped bring attention to some poor releases, I feel the constant nitpicking is beginning to hurt some good releases.

EDIT: I have also read of the special effects being bad or jarring in HD. I honestly didn't see any major issues in the first film. I found the special effects in Avatar (2D theater showing) to be far more jarring.

EDIT 2: IMHO this DTS track should not be missed by anyone.

Quoting myself here, but I got around to watching The Two Towers last night. I saw a much sharper and more consistent image overall than Fellowship.

I still stand my my position that this set is much better than the credit it is getting. For the extremely vocal people few that demand flawless demo material, I see your point in that it could be better.

For everyone else, I still say this is worth the purchase.

Also, both films destroyed the theatrical and extended DVD's that I have here.

For reference, watching about 8ft from a 52inch XBR4, using Oppo BDP-83.
jruser is offline  
Old 04-10-2010, 03:17 AM
AVS Special Member
 
mike171979's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Chino Hills
Posts: 1,415
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 11
I have a question that is a bit off topic.

How the heck did they manage to get ROTK's 200 min. film on only one Bluray Disc while maintaining an average bitrate of 23mbps????

That seems almost impossible to me.
mike171979 is offline  
Old 04-10-2010, 03:33 AM
Member
 
TGWTG's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 78
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
The BD looks too DNR'd to me compared to the very natural looking HDTV shots. Gandalf's beard looks atrocious! I'll just have to wait for the Extended versions and see how that one goes.
TGWTG is offline  
Old 04-10-2010, 03:34 AM
AVS Special Member
 
MovieSwede's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Gothenburg
Posts: 6,773
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 18 Post(s)
Liked: 37
23mbit and 200 min = 34,5 GB
MovieSwede is offline  
Old 04-10-2010, 06:55 AM
AVS Special Member
 
robertc88's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Central NJ
Posts: 3,639
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
FOTR was a disappointment, I didn't buy this release, and I'm already looking towards some good catalogs to be released shortly.

Funny what some nice weather, opening of the baseball season, and The Masters has done to something a month or so ago I couldn't wait for.
robertc88 is offline  
Old 04-10-2010, 07:10 PM
 
Fast Fizzy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 56
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by TGWTG View Post

The BD looks too DNR'd to me compared to the very natural looking HDTV shots. Gandalf's beard looks atrocious! I'll just have to wait for the Extended versions and see how that one goes.

Greetings. First post here.

I agree some shots in the first film are a bit soft, though I recall these always looking like this. I am curious what you mean about Gandolph's beard, though. "Atrocious" in what way? I don't think it is the best looking fake beard in the history of Hollywood, but it does kind of fit the part, don't you think?
Fast Fizzy is offline  
Old 04-10-2010, 07:21 PM
AVS Special Member
 
erkq's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 5,541
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 18 Post(s)
Liked: 97
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fast Fizzy View Post

Greetings. First post here.

I agree some shots in the first film are a bit soft, though I recall these always looking like this. I am curious what you mean about Gandolph's beard, though. "Atrocious" in what way? I don't think it is the best looking fake beard in the history of Hollywood, but it does kind of fit the part, don't you think?

Some shots are just mush. You can't see the individual strands. It may be a bad beard, but it still has strands, not mush.
erkq is offline  
Old 04-10-2010, 07:34 PM
CIH USER
 
Franin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Western Australia
Posts: 17,593
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 299 Post(s)
Liked: 299
Quote:
Originally Posted by erkq View Post

Some shots are just mush. You can't see the individual strands. It may be a bad beard, but it still has strands, not mush.

where exactly was it mush?

_________________________

Frank
Franin is offline  
Old 04-10-2010, 08:08 PM
AVS Special Member
 
erkq's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 5,541
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 18 Post(s)
Liked: 97
Quote:
Originally Posted by Franin View Post

where exactly was it mush?

Here. and see the attached pic where I outline it in red.

http://img100.imageshack.us/img100/7283/13120731.png
LL
erkq is offline  
Old 04-10-2010, 08:24 PM
Senior Member
 
PoorGuySansTV's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 224
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
OK, so I have the EE DVDs and am impressed with the audio. Is the audio any worse on the blu-ray release?
PoorGuySansTV is offline  
Old 04-10-2010, 08:36 PM
AVS Special Member
 
tbird8450's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 2,010
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 31 Post(s)
Liked: 49
I'm not sure why you think it might be, but it's not. It's definitely much better overall.
tbird8450 is offline  
Old 04-10-2010, 09:08 PM
Senior Member
 
PoorGuySansTV's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 224
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by tbird8450 View Post

I'm not sure why you think it might be, but it's not. It's definitely much better overall.

If you are replying to my comment, then I guess it is possible that they use a different/inferior mix for the blu-ray release. If it is better and not the same, then this is also interesting - presumably a different mix or encoding explains that?
PoorGuySansTV is offline  
Old 04-10-2010, 09:16 PM
AVS Special Member
 
tbird8450's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 2,010
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 31 Post(s)
Liked: 49
All else being equal, lossless audio > lossy audio.
tbird8450 is offline  
Old 04-10-2010, 09:57 PM
Member
 
TGWTG's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 78
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fast Fizzy View Post

Greetings. First post here.

I agree some shots in the first film are a bit soft, though I recall these always looking like this. I am curious what you mean about Gandalf's beard, though. "Atrocious" in what way? I don't think it is the best looking fake beard in the history of Hollywood, but it does kind of fit the part, don't you think?

I wasn't referring to the prop, i was referring to the heavily DNR'd blu-ray screencap that makes Gandalf's beard looks crappy compared to the HDTV shot. You must be a hardcore Rings fan to register and make a post to defend his beard. Again i must stress, it has nothing to do with Gandalf's fake beard just the quality of the blu-ray screencap. :P

ps. I was referring to these two shots:
Bluray: http://img27.imageshack.us/img27/4505/lotr7bd.png <==atrocious pastel beard
HDTV: http://img228.imageshack.us/img228/3821/lotr7tv.png <==great looking beard!
TGWTG is offline  
Old 04-10-2010, 10:47 PM
 
Fast Fizzy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 56
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by TGWTG View Post

I wasn't referring to the prop, i was referring to the heavily DNR'd blu-ray screencap that makes Gandalf's beard looks crappy compared to the HDTV shot. You must be a hardcore Rings fan to register and make a post to defend his beard. Again i must stress, it has nothing to do with Gandalf's fake beard just the quality of the blu-ray screencap. :P

ps. I was referring to these two shots:

No. I'm not some "fanboy" out to defend a movie. My having just registered is only coincidental with the timing of this release. I've actually lurked this forum for some time but did not register to post due to the often hostile nature of many members and the very poor moderation of some of these forums. Unfortunately, too many people are allowed to post things in these public forums that simply should not be allowed. Insults toward filmmakers, insults toward studios, not to mention any other member that disagrees with them. But, I digress.

My question about the beard was genuine. I had not seen the images you were referring to so I did not understand the "atrocious" comment. After looking at the image you posted, I pulled out the actual disc and watched the scene where Gandolph is entering Bilbo's study. Actually, I watched it several times and even still/stepped through. I see maybe two frames between adjacent frames where some fine detail blurs then gets sharp again. I've see this sort of thing on other video material as well. I believe it is a result of how video compression sometimes works.

Looking at the image you posted, I have to say it is not indicative of the moving image from the disc. In fact, it looks different enough to me that I would be inclined to think that image is not from the Blu-ray disc at all, or has been altered. At the very least, whoever captured that image most certainly stepped through many frames to find the worst looking single frame. Perhaps the person responsible has an agenda other than trying to provide accurate information about this disc. I would encourage anyone that sees this captured image and has NOT seen the actual disc to not base any opinion on that frame alone, or any captured frame posted on an interent forum. You don't know where it came from, you don't know how it was captured, and you don't know if it was manipulated or not. I most certainly would not take the word of a stranger on it.

Tune your TV properly, buy or rent the disc, play the movie, judge for yourself.
Fast Fizzy is offline  
Old 04-10-2010, 10:57 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 Fast Fizzy View Post

I see maybe two frames between adjacent frames where some fine detail blurs then gets sharp again. I've see this sort of thing on other video material as well. I believe it is a result of how video compression sometimes works.

It's a result of how sloppy temporal DNR algorithms work. They can confuse moving textures with noise.
42041 is offline  
Old 04-10-2010, 11:12 PM
Member
 
TGWTG's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 78
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fast Fizzy View Post

My question about the beard was genuine. I had not seen the images you were referring to so I did not understand the "atrocious" comment. After looking at the image you posted, I pulled out the actual disc and watched the scene where Gandolph is entering Bilbo's study. Actually, I watched it several times and even still/stepped through. I see maybe two frames between adjacent frames where some fine detail blurs then gets sharp again.

Those screenshots are not posted by me. They're posted by the op: eric.exe on the 1st post/page.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Fast Fizzy View Post

I would encourage anyone that sees this captured image and has NOT seen the actual disc to not base any opinion on that frame alone, or any captured frame posted on an interent forum. You don't know where it came from, you don't know how it was captured, and you don't know if it was manipulated or not. I most certainly would not take the word of a stranger on it.
Tune your TV properly, buy or rent the disc, play the movie, judge for yourself.

eric.exe(and Xylon) are veteran screencap guys in this forum. Their shots can be trusted and sometimes even more trustworthy than DVDBeaver's and other review sites(if you've been here long enough you'll know that) It's most definitely not been manipulated. Don't confuse DNR sharpning with natural film noise. The smooth out pastel picture you see in the BD is a direct result of excessive DNR. It happens to a lot of BD including the Skynet Edition of Terminator 2.

*The beard still look atrocious in BD. Almost a plastic quality to it due to DNR.
TGWTG is offline  
Old 04-10-2010, 11:40 PM - Thread Starter
AVS Special Member
 
eric.exe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Atlanta
Posts: 2,344
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 6 Post(s)
Liked: 15
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fast Fizzy View Post

No. I'm not some "fanboy" out to defend a movie. My having just registered is only coincidental with the timing of this release. I've actually lurked this forum for some time but did not register to post due to the often hostile nature of many members and the very poor moderation of some of these forums. Unfortunately, too many people are allowed to post things in these public forums that simply should not be allowed. Insults toward filmmakers, insults toward studios, not to mention any other member that disagrees with them. But, I digress.

My question about the beard was genuine. I had not seen the images you were referring to so I did not understand the "atrocious" comment. After looking at the image you posted, I pulled out the actual disc and watched the scene where Gandolph is entering Bilbo's study. Actually, I watched it several times and even still/stepped through. I see maybe two frames between adjacent frames where some fine detail blurs then gets sharp again. I've see this sort of thing on other video material as well. I believe it is a result of how video compression sometimes works.

Looking at the image you posted, I have to say it is not indicative of the moving image from the disc. In fact, it looks different enough to me that I would be inclined to think that image is not from the Blu-ray disc at all, or has been altered. At the very least, whoever captured that image most certainly stepped through many frames to find the worst looking single frame. Perhaps the person responsible has an agenda other than trying to provide accurate information about this disc. I would encourage anyone that sees this captured image and has NOT seen the actual disc to not base any opinion on that frame alone, or any captured frame posted on an interent forum. You don't know where it came from, you don't know how it was captured, and you don't know if it was manipulated or not. I most certainly would not take the word of a stranger on it.

Tune your TV properly, buy or rent the disc, play the movie, judge for yourself.

Haha, agenda. Is the paranoid schizophrenia ever going to end? Some need to get over the fact there are poor looking discs out there and people are going to criticize them. What could faking screenshot possibly accomplish? No one's trying to destroy the format. I doubt screenshot threads influence more than 50 purchases, max. They are just for nerds to discuss technical issues since it's interesting to us.

PS: the screenshots are taken 100% accurately.
eric.exe is offline  
Old 04-10-2010, 11:50 PM
 
Fast Fizzy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 56
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by TGWTG View Post

Those screenshots are not posted by me. They're posted by the op: eric.exe on the 1st post/page.


eric.exe(and Xylon) are veteran screencap guys in this forum. Their shots can be trusted and sometimes even more trustworthy than DVDBeaver's and other review sites(if you've been here long enough you'll know that) It's most definitely not been manipulated. Don't confuse DNR sharpning with natural film noise. The smooth out pastel picture you see in the BD is a direct result of excessive DNR. It happens to a lot of BD including the Skynet Edition of Terminator 2.

*The beard still look atrocious in BD. Almost a plastic quality to it due to DNR.

Tell you what, you trust who you want and I'll trust my eyes and equipment. Fair enough?

I really don't care beyond the fact that a lot of people are basing decision on what is, at best, incomplete data, and at worst, outright deception. As I said, you trust one frame that you don't really know the origin of and I'll trust looking at the actual Blu-ray disc on a properly set up system. Not much else to say on this.
Fast Fizzy is offline  
Old 04-10-2010, 11:54 PM
AVS Special Member
 
mike171979's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Chino Hills
Posts: 1,415
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 11
Quote:
Originally Posted by MovieSwede View Post

23mbit and 200 min = 34,5 GB

So I guess fitting the Extended Editions on one disc will be a breeze as well.
mike171979 is offline  
Old 04-10-2010, 11:57 PM
 
Fast Fizzy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 56
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by eric.exe View Post

Haha, agenda. Is the paranoid schizophrenia ever going to end? Some need to get over the fact there are poor looking discs out there and people are going to criticize them. What could faking screenshot possibly accomplish? No one's trying to destroy the format. I doubt screenshot threads influence more than 50 purchases, max. They are just for nerds to discuss technical issues since it's interesting to us.

This is exactly the type of post I referred to above. I wonder how many people are brow beaten and intimidated into not posting their real opinions, or not even posting in this forum at all.

Quote:
PS: the screenshots are taken 100% accurately.

You'll have to excuse me if I don't take your word for it. Or, in the words of Mr. Fletcher in "The Outlaw Josey Wales", don't piss down my back and tell me it's raining.
Fast Fizzy is offline  
Old 04-11-2010, 12:03 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
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fast Fizzy View Post

This is exactly the type of post I referred to above. I wonder how many people are brow beaten and intimidated into not posting their real opinions, or not even posting in this forum at all.

what are you TALKING about? if you attack someone's credibility, don't whine when they respond
42041 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