The Fifth Element: Sony remaster vs Gaumont remaster Comparison - Page 7 - AVS Forum
Forum Jump: 
Reply
 
Thread Tools
post #181 of 232 Old 02-06-2011, 02:39 AM
Senior Member
 
BenUK's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Solihull, England, United Kingdom
Posts: 278
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Does the Japanese one have blown out highlights like the Gaumont re-master?
BenUK is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #182 of 232 Old 02-06-2011, 03:43 AM
Advanced Member
 
QuiGonJosh's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Posts: 869
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 24 Post(s)
Liked: 25
Quote:
Originally Posted by Patsfan123 View Post

Hopefully they release the remaster in the US one day.. The US version just looks old. Seems like Sony spruced up the old master.

It's amazing just how dark and drab it looks. I remember it being very bright and bold in theaters. The Gaumont release looks more accurate.

Is there a list of releases that use the Gaumont transfer? I noticed Fox is releasing one in the UK this month. I wonder which transfer they will use.
QuiGonJosh is online now  
post #183 of 232 Old 02-06-2011, 05:35 AM
Senior Member
 
wesslan1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 204
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 12
It might be old and a little too dark but it has so much better detail and no soft surfaces. Sharpness is overall better on US, you can almost read the text on the missile. The remaster is clearly too bright and have blown lights everywhere. Though it would be interesting to see a newer US remaster with brighter colors and a bit more brightness but keep the detail/contrast.
wesslan1 is offline  
post #184 of 232 Old 02-06-2011, 10:34 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
Josh Z's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Planet Boston, source of the spice, Melange.
Posts: 20,340
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 505 Post(s)
Liked: 424
Quote:
Originally Posted by shpitz View Post

1. The Japanese release is longer, 2:06:32 compared to 2:05:53.

I would assume that's just due to different studio logos at the beginning.

Josh Z
Writer/Editor, High-Def Digest (Blog updated daily!)
Curator, Laserdisc Forever

My opinions are my own, and do not necessarily reflect those of my employers.

Josh Z is offline  
post #185 of 232 Old 02-06-2011, 11:05 AM
Senior Member
 
BenUK's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Solihull, England, United Kingdom
Posts: 278
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by wesslan1 View Post

It might be old and a little too dark but it has so much better detail and no soft surfaces. Sharpness is overall better on US, you can almost read the text on the missile. The remaster is clearly too bright and have blown lights everywhere. Though it would be interesting to see a newer US remaster with brighter colors and a bit more brightness but keep the detail/contrast.

Not sure on that mate.

I own the US disc too, and whilst its watchable, to me it looks a bit "digital". Regarding the extra detail / grain. Is it possible that what you are seeing is the sharpened grain (I presume the master was artificially sharpened). The grain is a fair bit clumpier and bigger than the Gaumont remaster. Whilst the grain is less prominent on the Gaumont, it looks finer to me.
BenUK is offline  
post #186 of 232 Old 02-06-2011, 11:35 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 Josh Z View Post

I would assume that's just due to different studio logos at the beginning.

That was my thinking also
dvdmike007 is offline  
post #187 of 232 Old 02-06-2011, 11:44 AM
Advanced Member
 
Turrican4D's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 765
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 118 Post(s)
Liked: 73
Quote:
Originally Posted by BenUK View Post

Not sure on that mate.

I own the US disc too, and whilst its watchable, to me it looks a bit "digital". Regarding the extra detail / grain. Is it possible that what you are seeing is the sharpened grain (I presume the master was artificially sharpened). The grain is a fair bit clumpier and bigger than the Gaumont remaster. Whilst the grain is less prominent on the Gaumont, it looks finer to me.

Yep, nut the curtain behind Milla in the hotelroom ist blown out in the new release.

Prof. Dr. Turrican M.D.
Turrican4D is offline  
post #188 of 232 Old 05-21-2011, 06:51 AM
Member
 
LetoAtreides82's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 190
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 11
The Sony version looks much better to me, the Gaumont version loses too much detail.

Compare this shot from the Sony:
http://img18.imageshack.us/img18/9294/25afe.png

With the Gaumont version:
http://img33.imageshack.us/img33/4599/25b.png

The Gaumont version her eyes are blurry, and her face looks too smooth. As for color the Sony version looks more natural to me.

Sony:
http://img821.imageshack.us/img821/5804/18ae.png

Gaumont:
http://img265.imageshack.us/img265/5937/18b.png

Look at how blurry the multipass is on the Gaumont version.
LetoAtreides82 is offline  
post #189 of 232 Old 05-21-2011, 07:41 AM
AVS Special Member
 
madshi's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 5,482
Mentioned: 9 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 70 Post(s)
Liked: 140
Quote:
Originally Posted by LetoAtreides82 View Post

The Sony version looks much better to me, the Gaumont version loses too much detail.

There's zero detail loss. Don't confuse sharpness with detail. Two totally different things.

Quote:
Originally Posted by LetoAtreides82 View Post

The Gaumont version her eyes are blurry, and her face looks too smooth. As for color the Sony version looks more natural to me.

I totally disagree. Look at the light reflection on her nose. Her skin looks oily to me on the Sony screenshot, and more natural on the Gaumont. And in the Sony screenshot it looks like she should better wash her hair. In the Gaumont version her hair looks natural and fine. Her eyes are not "blurry" in the Gaumont shot, they are artificially sharpened in the Sony shot. To me, the Gaumont shot looks natural, and the Sony shot looks digital / overprocessed.

Quote:
Originally Posted by LetoAtreides82 View Post

Look at how blurry the multipass is on the Gaumont version.

It's less blurry on the Sony shot because it's sharpened. You can't read the small fonts in either shot.

Look at Milla's iris in your multipass screenshots and compare them to these 2 photos:

http://www.celebs101.com/gallery/Mil...a_Jovovich.jpg
http://wallpapers-diq.org/wallpapers...Supermodel.jpg

You should notice that the border of Milla's iris is much darker in the Sony shot compared to the Gaumont shot. The 2 photos linked above show that the Gaumont shot is nearer to true nature. The dark iris border in the Sony shot is caused by ringing which is caused by the artificial sharpening / edge enhancement.

In the 2 photos you'll also see that Milla doesn't have big blotches on her face, like the Sony shot suggests. Thanks to makeup her skin is very soft and even, like in the Gaumont shots. Just compare the screenshots to the photos and you should see that Gaumont is more natural, although a bit softer (since it's not artificially sharpened, like Sony is).
madshi is offline  
post #190 of 232 Old 05-21-2011, 07:45 AM
 
Thunderbolt8's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 643
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
sony transfer just got owned by real pics
Thunderbolt8 is offline  
post #191 of 232 Old 05-21-2011, 08:38 AM
AVS Special Member
 
KMFDMvsEnya's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: SLC, UT
Posts: 1,209
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 15 Post(s)
Liked: 47
Quote:
Originally Posted by eric.exe View Post


Sony left, Gaumont right.

I'll have to disagree, this does not bode well for the Gaumont release yet the Sony has its own issues. A nice medium of the two would probably be more satisfying for all.

I do prefer the Sony release to the blown-out Gaumont.

Best Regards
KvE

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

KMFDMvsEnya is offline  
post #192 of 232 Old 05-21-2011, 08:57 AM
AVS Special Member
 
madshi's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 5,482
Mentioned: 9 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 70 Post(s)
Liked: 140
Yeah, the Gaumont transfer does have blown highlights, which is a disadvantage. And some people may not like the color balance. Still, to my eyes the Gaumont transfer looks significantly better overall. Especially in motion.
madshi is offline  
post #193 of 232 Old 05-21-2011, 09:08 AM
AVS Special Member
 
raoul_duke's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 2,304
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2 Post(s)
Liked: 32
Quote:
Originally Posted by Thunderbolt8 View Post

sony transfer just got owned by real pics

Maybe in an alternate universe.
raoul_duke is offline  
post #194 of 232 Old 05-21-2011, 03:59 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Patsfan123's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Quincy, MA
Posts: 1,845
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
This comes out in the UK on June 6th.. Released by Fox Pathe. I have high hopes for this release. Hopefully not locked as indicated.


Michael

Collection: DVD | High-def
Patsfan123 is offline  
post #195 of 232 Old 05-21-2011, 04:27 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Geoff D's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Swanage, Engerland
Posts: 2,486
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 181 Post(s)
Liked: 249
The Sony version looks so very, very 'edgy' (for want of a better word), and those caps of Milla's face say it all. There's no extra detail there, just exaggerated sharpness. The colour looks soooo much better than the drab Sony transfer.
Geoff D is offline  
post #196 of 232 Old 05-21-2011, 04:59 PM
 
SteveMo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: The Shop
Posts: 3,564
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 12
They both look unnatural.
SteveMo is offline  
post #197 of 232 Old 06-09-2011, 08:44 PM
Member
 
Mentasm's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 57
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 11
I've just got the Fox release to compare it with the Sony disc. As others have said it looks slightly more natural than the Sony disc in some respects, but I'm not a fan of the contrast/colours. Having said that, has anyone in this thread pointed out that the old region 2 DVD Special Edition looked exactly the same? All this talk about it being revisionism etc., well if it is it started in 2003...
Mentasm is offline  
post #198 of 232 Old 06-10-2011, 01:12 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Geoff D's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Swanage, Engerland
Posts: 2,486
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 181 Post(s)
Liked: 249
Heh. I remember how blown-out the old UK DVD looked, and the Gaumont Blu does appear to be very similar. I could never stomach that DVD because it was just too harsh; the 'boosted' look plus the usual DVD foibles of compression artefacts and edge halos did not make for comfortable viewing. But without those DVD drawbacks, I really dig the 'new' transfer.
Geoff D is offline  
post #199 of 232 Old 06-10-2011, 01:34 PM
AVS Special Member
 
raoul_duke's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 2,304
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2 Post(s)
Liked: 32
Oh God, like a Nam flashback, I've just remembered that Pathe UK DVD.

It had more shimmer than a gay pride festival.
raoul_duke is offline  
post #200 of 232 Old 09-07-2012, 12:43 PM
Advanced Member
 
QuiGonJosh's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Posts: 869
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 24 Post(s)
Liked: 25
I finally imported the French Gaumont release and am watching it right now. Gone is the harsh digital look of the US release and present in a very filmlike appearance that calls to mind the way it look projected in theaters. A lovely transfer all around! So happy I imported this release of the film. Couldn't be happier.
QuiGonJosh is online now  
post #201 of 232 Old 09-07-2012, 01:00 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
Would the UK release not be cheaper?
dvdmike007 is offline  
post #202 of 232 Old 09-07-2012, 01:16 PM
Senior Member
 
emgesp's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 415
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
I doubt either master comes from an OCN source. I'd love to see a new 4k remaster.
emgesp is offline  
post #203 of 232 Old 09-07-2012, 01:25 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Deviation's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Coon Rapids, MN
Posts: 2,780
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 16
Quote:
Originally Posted by dvdmike007 View Post

Would the UK release not be cheaper?
According to the image above, the UK release is region locked - but then again, I haven't seen any confirmation on that, as region listings on the box are not always accurate. Is the French release region locked?
Deviation is offline  
post #204 of 232 Old 09-07-2012, 01:44 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Patsfan123's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Quincy, MA
Posts: 1,845
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Fifth Element, The
US - AVC, LPCM/Dolby TrueHD 5.1, fewer extras
DE - VC-1, DTS-HD HR 6.1, more extras (Region free)
UK - AVC, DTS-HD MA 5.1, director approved transfer, extras (Region B locked)
FR - AVC, DTS-HD HR 5.1, director approved transfer, no English subs (Region free)


The UK release is most definately Region B locked. I have 3 copies of this movie on BD now.
Gaumont
UK - B Locked - Mainly have for extras
JP - A Locked - First Gaumont edition

Sony
Remaster..

Michael

Collection: DVD | High-def
Patsfan123 is offline  
post #205 of 232 Old 09-07-2012, 01:47 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
NetworkTV's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: CT
Posts: 15,632
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 179 Post(s)
Liked: 458
Quote:
Originally Posted by raoul_duke View Post

It had more shimmer than a gay pride festival.
Sorry, but I think this is a very inappropriate term.

They call it "flare", not "shimmer" in a gay pride parade...and it looks fabulous... wink.gif
NetworkTV is offline  
post #206 of 232 Old 09-07-2012, 02:03 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 Patsfan123 View Post

Fifth Element, The
US - AVC, LPCM/Dolby TrueHD 5.1, fewer extras
DE - VC-1, DTS-HD HR 6.1, more extras (Region free)
UK - AVC, DTS-HD MA 5.1, director approved transfer, extras (Region B locked)
FR - AVC, DTS-HD HR 5.1, director approved transfer, no English subs (Region free)
The UK release is most definately Region B locked. I have 3 copies of this movie on BD now.
Gaumont
UK - B Locked - Mainly have for extras
JP - A Locked - First Gaumont edition
Sony
Remaster..

Ah, I have the US remaster and the UK
dvdmike007 is offline  
post #207 of 232 Old 09-07-2012, 03:59 PM
AVS Special Member
 
raoul_duke's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 2,304
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2 Post(s)
Liked: 32
Quote:
Originally Posted by QuiGonJosh View Post

I finally imported the French Gaumont release and am watching it right now. Gone is the harsh digital look of the US release and present in a very filmlike appearance that calls to mind the way it look projected in theaters. A lovely transfer all around! So happy I imported this release of the film. Couldn't be happier.
I don't remember my retinas being scorched in the theater. wink.gif
raoul_duke is offline  
post #208 of 232 Old 09-07-2012, 05:24 PM
Advanced Member
 
QuiGonJosh's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Posts: 869
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 24 Post(s)
Liked: 25
Quote:
Originally Posted by raoul_duke View Post

I don't remember my retinas being scorched in the theater. wink.gif
Please.

The transfer looks amazing - vibrant, dynamic, and rich just as this movie should look. None of the ugly digital noise and artifacts on the U.S. release. And despite the French release "only" have a DTS-HD HR English track, it seems to sound more dynamic than what I remember the U.S. release sounding. I watched the U.S. disc many times and I don't remember the surround channels being as active as they are on the French disc.

The UK disc has been confirmed as region locked I believe, otherwise I would have imported that one. The French disc is region free.
QuiGonJosh is online now  
post #209 of 232 Old 09-07-2012, 05:34 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 QuiGonJosh View Post

Please.
Please.
The transfer looks amazing - vibrant, dynamic, and rich just as this movie should look. None of the ugly digital noise and artifacts on the U.S. release. And despite the French release "only" have a DTS-HD HR English track, it seems to sound more dynamic than what I remember the U.S. release sounding. I watched the U.S. disc many times and I don't remember the surround channels being as active as they are on the French disc.
The UK disc has been confirmed as region locked I believe, otherwise I would have imported that one. The French disc is region free.

It is better than the US disc 100% but not one of the older Besson movies had blown out hot whites originally
dvdmike007 is offline  
post #210 of 232 Old 09-08-2012, 06:47 AM
AVS Special Member
 
raoul_duke's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 2,304
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2 Post(s)
Liked: 32
Quote:
Originally Posted by QuiGonJosh View Post

Please.
Please yourself. I do actually own the UK disc, so carry on.
raoul_duke is offline  
Reply Blu-ray Software

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