Jurassic Park trilogy - Page 22 - AVS Forum
Forum Jump: 
Reply
 
Thread Tools
post #631 of 1995 Old 10-09-2011, 11:53 AM
AVS Special Member
 
lgans316's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Barking, Essex, London
Posts: 6,863
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 41 Post(s)
Liked: 24
Pre-ordered the trilogy at Argos Entertainment for $26 (16 GBP). Hope they process my order. Keeping my fingers crossed.

Blu-ray : 340
lgans316 is online now  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #632 of 1995 Old 10-09-2011, 11:55 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 lgans316 View Post

Pre-ordered the trilogy at Argos Entertainment for $26 (16 GBP). Hope they process my order. Keeping my fingers crossed.

Wow
dvdmike007 is offline  
post #633 of 1995 Old 10-09-2011, 11:55 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Fanboyz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Minnesota
Posts: 2,436
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 30 Post(s)
Liked: 19
Because Lucasfilm calls the shots on Indiana Jones.

The proper setting for sharpness is always0.
Also my Oppo BDP-103D is region free.
That makes me awesome.
Fanboyz is offline  
post #634 of 1995 Old 10-09-2011, 11:59 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 Fanboyz View Post

Because Lucasfilm calls the shots on Indiana Jones.

Exactly, Berg was a director for hire
dvdmike007 is offline  
post #635 of 1995 Old 10-09-2011, 12:06 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Fanboyz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Minnesota
Posts: 2,436
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 30 Post(s)
Liked: 19
Also I imagine he has more control of Paramount due to Dreamworks and such.

The proper setting for sharpness is always0.
Also my Oppo BDP-103D is region free.
That makes me awesome.
Fanboyz is offline  
post #636 of 1995 Old 10-09-2011, 08:03 PM
AVS Special Member
 
PRO-630HD's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 3,131
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 12
Well I saw ther 1080p trailer for the trilogy on the Fast Five bluray. I can't say I was overly impressed. An 11 year old master on bluray WTF! Simply put it looks very dated and isn't going to blow anyone away concerning picture detail. Speilberg's films even if you aren't a fan are so stunning from a visual sense due to the 4K masters they are given from his Paramount releases. Honestly this would have been a big deal back in 2007 if released on HDDVD with the current masters, but not on bluray. Why are films of this importance getting 1.9K 11 year old masters?
PRO-630HD is offline  
post #637 of 1995 Old 10-09-2011, 08:11 PM
AVS Special Member
 
42Plasmaman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Seattle, WA
Posts: 5,055
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 20 Post(s)
Liked: 37
Quote:
Originally Posted by PRO-630HD View Post

Well I saw ther 1080p trailer for the trilogy on the Fast Five bluray. I can't say I was overly impressed. An 11 year old master on bluray WTF! Simply put it looks very dated and isn't going to blow anyone away concerning picture detail. Speilberg's films even if you aren't a fan are so stunning from a visual sense due to the 4K masters they are given from his Paramount releases. Honestly this would have been a big deal back in 2007 if released on HDDVD with the current masters, but not on bluray. Why are films of this importance getting 1.9K 11 year old masters?

I seen the same trailer and at least the film grain appeared to be intact and no heavy DNR.
One thing I noticed is that some of the CGI dinosaurs looked very fake now due to the clarity compared to DVD.

2014
42Plasmaman is offline  
post #638 of 1995 Old 10-09-2011, 10:38 PM
AVS Special Member
 
LexInVA's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 2,007
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 63 Post(s)
Liked: 47
Quote:
Originally Posted by PRO-630HD View Post

Well I saw ther 1080p trailer for the trilogy on the Fast Five bluray. I can't say I was overly impressed. An 11 year old master on bluray WTF! Simply put it looks very dated and isn't going to blow anyone away concerning picture detail. Speilberg's films even if you aren't a fan are so stunning from a visual sense due to the 4K masters they are given from his Paramount releases. Honestly this would have been a big deal back in 2007 if released on HDDVD with the current masters, but not on bluray. Why are films of this importance getting 1.9K 11 year old masters?

I'm fairly certain they may actually be older than that if any of this is true. There are specific visual anomalies from the telecine that you can pick out on the original home video releases (VHS, LD, and DVD) that are present in the broadcast HD masters and they are likely present in these Blu-Rays as well if they have not gone back to the film negative to create these or corrected them digitally. For example, there is a specific gate-weave pattern that is present in the opening credits that I have seen in all releases that have been seen by my eyes.
LexInVA is offline  
post #639 of 1995 Old 10-09-2011, 10:44 PM
Senior Member
 
sub24ox7's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 239
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
It certainly appears to be from the same masters as the HDTV broadcasts I am almost certain and they are indeed VERY old but it could be worse as its Universal:/ As old a Masters these are most likely from at least they are decent
but nowhere near what the first movie deserves and how good they could look.
sub24ox7 is offline  
post #640 of 1995 Old 10-10-2011, 01:22 AM
Advanced Member
 
XxDeadlyxX's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: NSW, Australia
Posts: 737
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by CountDeleteo View Post

Maybe Spielberg didn't want a brand new scan done because enhancing it would only make the CGI distractingly obvious? At least if the entire film has a slightly soft, dated appearance, the CGI blends in better?

That shot of the Rex in the rain looks flawless to my eyes, but with a new scan, who knows if that illusion would be shattered?

It would still look a hundred times better than Terra Nova
XxDeadlyxX is offline  
post #641 of 1995 Old 10-10-2011, 01:31 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
oink's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Shuloch
Posts: 26,553
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 70 Post(s)
Liked: 818
Quote:
Originally Posted by CountDeleteo View Post

Maybe Spielberg didn't want a brand new scan done because enhancing it would only make the CGI distractingly obvious? At least if the entire film has a slightly soft, dated appearance, the CGI blends in better?

I doubt it...ILM's work was considered state of the art at the time and wowed everyone that seen it.

A.P.S. deserve our protection....join the cause today!
oink is offline  
post #642 of 1995 Old 10-10-2011, 02:04 AM
AVS Special Member
 
MovieSwede's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Gothenburg
Posts: 6,774
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 18 Post(s)
Liked: 37
Quote:
Originally Posted by oink View Post

I doubt it...ILM's work was considered state of the art at the time and wowed everyone that seen it.

And the master was considered state of the art at the time it was created. Also every scene with CGI was created with a 1993 scan. A new master would maybe get a bit uneven.
MovieSwede is offline  
post #643 of 1995 Old 10-10-2011, 04:09 AM
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
Quote:
Originally Posted by CountDeleteo View Post

Maybe Spielberg didn't want a brand new scan done because enhancing it would only make the CGI distractingly obvious? At least if the entire film has a slightly soft, dated appearance, the CGI blends in better?

That shot of the Rex in the rain looks flawless to my eyes, but with a new scan, who knows if that illusion would be shattered?

It would look about the same. The background plates for the CG shots are locked at whatever they were originally were scanned at so there's no more detail to be gained. The 99% rest of the film would benefit though.

All this nonsense about a modern 4k scan ruining the cgi is the same kind of BS that popped up in the Jaws thread. It was shot and projected in 35mm and was shown on huge screens but suddenly there's a fear the illusion will fall apart in our living room.
Kram Sacul is offline  
post #644 of 1995 Old 10-10-2011, 04:15 AM
AVS Special Member
 
PRO-630HD's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 3,131
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 12
+1
PRO-630HD is offline  
post #645 of 1995 Old 10-10-2011, 04:26 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
Nearly all early 90's cgi heavy flicks have that darker grainy look due to how they comped it
dvdmike007 is offline  
post #646 of 1995 Old 10-10-2011, 08:48 AM
 
Gamereviewgod's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Toledo, OH
Posts: 2,187
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 22
Quote:
Originally Posted by PRO-630HD View Post

Well I saw ther 1080p trailer for the trilogy on the Fast Five bluray. I can't say I was overly impressed. An 11 year old master on bluray WTF! Simply put it looks very dated and isn't going to blow anyone away concerning picture detail. Speilberg's films even if you aren't a fan are so stunning from a visual sense due to the 4K masters they are given from his Paramount releases. Honestly this would have been a big deal back in 2007 if released on HDDVD with the current masters, but not on bluray. Why are films of this importance getting 1.9K 11 year old masters?

The trailer is running at 1.0 MBPS. It's streamed, so it's not a great indicator of quality.
Gamereviewgod is offline  
post #647 of 1995 Old 10-10-2011, 09:14 AM
AVS Special Member
 
DM2006RI's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 1,983
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by CountDeleteo View Post

So the question is why did Spielberg stop Paramount from releasing the Indy trilogy on BD based on the 2003 4K transfers, but JP gets released with a 2000-era transfer? I know they're older films and all, but, WTF?

I fear for Jaws and ET.

The HDTV master of Jaws looks great. Unless they douse it with DNR or EE I wouldn't worry about it.
DM2006RI is offline  
post #648 of 1995 Old 10-10-2011, 09:17 AM
AVS Special Member
 
DM2006RI's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 1,983
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by 42Plasmaman View Post

I seen the same trailer and at least the film grain appeared to be intact and no heavy DNR.
One thing I noticed is that some of the CGI dinosaurs looked very fake now due to the clarity compared to DVD.

My review copy came in and I took a glance at the first JP. Basically I agree with the main sentiment on here, that these are likely from an older master but on the positive side, they have not been filtered or DNR applied from what little I've seen.

One thing that did stick out is what you alluded to -- when you see the brontosaurus for the first time in the wide open day time, it's very clear the CG doesn't look as defined as the rest of the shot, even appearing a bit blurry. This has to be one of the drawbacks of HD, on DVD you wouldn't have seen this with the reduction in quality.

Not a big problem but an unavoidable one really.
DM2006RI is offline  
post #649 of 1995 Old 10-10-2011, 09:24 AM
AVS Special Member
 
nick_danger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 1,405
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by DM2006RI View Post

My review copy came in and I took a glance at the first JP. Basically I agree with the main sentiment on here, that these are likely from an older master but on the positive side, they have not been filtered or DNR applied from what little I've seen.

One thing that did stick out is what you alluded to -- when you see the brontosaurus for the first time in the wide open day time, it's very clear the CG doesn't look as defined as the rest of the shot, even appearing a bit blurry. This has to be one of the drawbacks of HD, on DVD you wouldn't have seen this with the reduction in quality.

Not a big problem but an unavoidable one really.

Good news, thanks. Even from the stills of the Blu-ray, the CG dinos looked slightly out of place. I'd rather have it that way than the alternative.
nick_danger is offline  
post #650 of 1995 Old 10-10-2011, 10:12 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
Quote:
Originally Posted by DM2006RI View Post

My review copy came in and I took a glance at the first JP. Basically I agree with the main sentiment on here, that these are likely from an older master but on the positive side, they have not been filtered or DNR applied from what little I've seen.

One thing that did stick out is what you alluded to -- when you see the brontosaurus for the first time in the wide open day time, it's very clear the CG doesn't look as defined as the rest of the shot, even appearing a bit blurry. This has to be one of the drawbacks of HD, on DVD you wouldn't have seen this with the reduction in quality.

Not a big problem but an unavoidable one really.

Would you care to give a first impression PQ score for what you viewed, it would be appreciated.

The set is $49.99 on Amazon, I haven't checked elsewhere. I'm still planning on renting them first though. That price is pretty good for three movies upon release and I'd probably go for it if I feel the PQ isn't meh but like I stated earlier, I do like the 1st movie much better than the others.
robertc88 is offline  
post #651 of 1995 Old 10-10-2011, 12:10 PM
AVS Special Member
 
KBMAN's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Grass Valley, CA
Posts: 2,897
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 34 Post(s)
Liked: 45
here's a flashback + thoughts. I owned the LD copy of this when it came out (when I was in college), and was just FLORED at the picture (at the time it was the best you could get), and the audio was very engaging; great bass, and active surrounds, even for pro-logic. Since the home presentation at that time was low in resolution in all departments, I felt 'in' the movie because the CGI blended so well with the rest of the movie. This was, and is a special movie for me and will probably wait 'till they release them individually for the first film only. Little trivia, my good friend from college worked for ILM just out of college around '97 and he worked a lot of the CGI on the 3rd film, along with all the Star Wars prequels. Now he's doing 3D work....hope it pans out for him!

Terrence
"Hey Vasquez, have you ever been mistaken for a man?...."No, have you?" -ALIENS

KBMAN is offline  
post #652 of 1995 Old 10-10-2011, 03:11 PM
Member
 
jala12's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 55
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Screenshot comparison between two images.

http://forum.blu-ray.com/5316551-post1627.html
jala12 is offline  
post #653 of 1995 Old 10-10-2011, 03:14 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 jala12 View Post

Screenshot comparison between two images.

http://forum.blu-ray.com/5316551-post1627.html

That Grant / Lex shot shows the bump in detail
dvdmike007 is offline  
post #654 of 1995 Old 10-10-2011, 03:27 PM
Member
 
jala12's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 55
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
I was pretty impressed by the first shot. The fabric detail on Grant's blue shirt now stands out as do the many scales of the triceratops and cracks in its horns.

I guess those jpg screens were pretty misleading after all? I'd like to see more PNG shots soon and not just from the first movie.
jala12 is offline  
post #655 of 1995 Old 10-10-2011, 03:31 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Partyslammer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Posts: 1,281
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 14 Post(s)
Liked: 42
Quote:
Originally Posted by jala12 View Post

Screenshot comparison between two images.

http://forum.blu-ray.com/5316551-post1627.html

Based on those caps, it's clearly a significant bump up in image quality from dvd, but I'm not overly impressed. IMO, there's a lot of room for improvement had Spielberg/Universal gone the extra mile on this release.
Partyslammer is offline  
post #656 of 1995 Old 10-10-2011, 03:44 PM
Member
 
iBob57's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 87
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 11
Quote:
Originally Posted by Partyslammer View Post

Based on those caps, it's clearly a significant bump up in image quality from dvd, but I'm not overly impressed. IMO, there's a lot of room for improvement had Spielberg/Universal gone the extra mile on this release.

Based on what?
iBob57 is offline  
post #657 of 1995 Old 10-10-2011, 03:46 PM
Advanced Member
 
Urlacher5454's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 651
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 6 Post(s)
Liked: 11
Quote:
Originally Posted by iBob57 View Post

Based on what?

That's what I would like to know. I think the jump in detail is remarkable. It looks to me to be a great transfer.
Urlacher5454 is offline  
post #658 of 1995 Old 10-10-2011, 03:52 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
It looked great on a full sized cinema screen (same master) so was not expecting anything less
dvdmike007 is offline  
post #659 of 1995 Old 10-10-2011, 04:07 PM
Senior Member
 
LordAwesome's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Posts: 209
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 13
Headline: BLU-RAY IN LOOKING BETTER THAN TEN YEAR OLD DVD SHOCKER.
LordAwesome is offline  
post #660 of 1995 Old 10-10-2011, 04:18 PM
Member
 
jala12's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 55
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by LordAwesome View Post

Headline: BLU-RAY IN LOOKING BETTER THAN TEN YEAR OLD DVD SHOCKER.

Believe it or not but there are some blus out there that look worse than DVDs. Luckily this is not one of them but the point is that we're eager to see how much better they look.
jala12 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