Indiana Jones Trilogy - Page 28 - AVS Forum
Forum Jump: 
Reply
 
Thread Tools
post #811 of 1202 Old 09-17-2012, 04:40 PM
AVS Special Member
 
thirdkind's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Columbus, OH
Posts: 2,514
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 19
I'd take the color timing of Raiders on TOD and Last Crusade if it meant new masters for those two without all the edginess. They look fine, but they're not as good as they could've been.

The most disappointing aspect of DVD, and now Blu-ray, is that all the tinkering and poor processing caused the format not to reach its full potential. Most DVDs could've looked way better than they did, and the trend has continued with Blu-ray. Makes me wonder if there's any point at all in a home 4K format.

I'll probably pick this one up when it's on sale over the holidays. I'm holding out on a lot of big stuff this month that I'd normally buy on release day.
thirdkind is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #812 of 1202 Old 09-17-2012, 04:41 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
Sharpness or no there is more detail in the old scans
dvdmike007 is offline  
post #813 of 1202 Old 09-17-2012, 05:09 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Fanboyz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Minnesota
Posts: 2,400
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3 Post(s)
Liked: 17
Quote:
Originally Posted by dvdmike007 View Post

Fine is good enough?

No, as no visible EE or DNR and not as teal/ orange as most remasters.

As far as discs paramount has released it is the best.

The proper setting for sharpness is always0.
Also my Oppo BDP-103D is region free.
That makes me awesome.
Fanboyz is offline  
post #814 of 1202 Old 09-17-2012, 05:24 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
The effects shots DNR is very visible
dvdmike007 is offline  
post #815 of 1202 Old 09-17-2012, 07:59 PM
AVS Special Member
 
IanD's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2000
Posts: 1,826
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 20
Quote:
Originally Posted by thirdkind View Post

The most disappointing aspect of DVD, and now Blu-ray, is that all the tinkering and poor processing caused the format not to reach its full potential. Most DVDs could've looked way better than they did, and the trend has continued with Blu-ray. Makes me wonder if there's any point at all in a home 4K format.

The studios have already well and truly demonstrated their attitude to the home video format and I fully expect this to continue in any future format, 4K included.

However, you can sort of understand why they do it: once you give the consumer the best practical quality, there is little incentive to keep spending and sadly $ is what it is all about. If you dangle a carrot in front of a donkey, it will want to keep stepping forward, even when the carrot remains out of reach.

I think 4K will eventually become mainstream by default, because that is the hardware the manufacturers will provide, not because the consumer actually wants it: IMO the same thing has happened with 3D. 4K does have advantages of providing greater passive 3D resolution, but beyond that I don't think the average consumer will care.

But bringing discussion back to the Indiana Jones Collection, I think all this tinkering disrespects the original art and that really needs to be preserved above everything else: tinkering can be done during playback, if necessary, but you can't properly reverse tinkering once it has been imposed.
IanD is offline  
post #816 of 1202 Old 09-17-2012, 08:04 PM
AVS Special Member
 
ack_bk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Maple Grove, MN
Posts: 8,787
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3 Post(s)
Liked: 98
If this is the color timing that Steven Spielberg envisioned for home video, I will reserve my judgement until after I have watched the first three movies. From the screencaps, I am not sure how feel about it. Certainly cannot judge a movie by a few screenshots...
ack_bk is online now  
post #817 of 1202 Old 09-17-2012, 08:09 PM
AVS Club Gold
 
Mark Booth's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Beautiful California
Posts: 1,503
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Liked: 24
Those of you with Costco stores nearby (they'll have Indy for $61.99), keep in mind Costco's liberal return policy! If, for instance, the set goes on sale on Black Friday, you could buy a second set and return it unopened to Costco for the $61.99 refund.

Just sayin'!

I won't be doing that because, one, I feel $61.99 is a fair price and, two, I seriously doubt the set is going to be much cheaper anytime soon.

Mark
Mark Booth is offline  
post #818 of 1202 Old 09-17-2012, 08:51 PM
Member
 
jimbotron's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 187
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 11
So does Raiders have the original matte painting or the CGI seen in some cable broadcasts?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e_sFW8grQtU
jimbotron is offline  
post #819 of 1202 Old 09-18-2012, 12:55 AM
Senior Member
 
khronikos's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 287
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 15
- The 4K scan is so detailed that it's now scary how low budget this movie looks. Film speed up, matte paintings, dozens of out of focus shots, etc. are all clear as day. This was a real eye opener for me.

I thought this one was low budget sounding and looking from the start. I can barely watch it without laughing these days but I'm not a HUGE fan of the series. It will be fun to see the film with a nice restoration though.
khronikos is offline  
post #820 of 1202 Old 09-18-2012, 03:14 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Paulidan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 1,953
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by NagysAudio View Post

Yes, Raiders has all original matte paintings and effects, nothing has been changed except for the reflection in the glass between Ford and the cobra.
My rather quick review. In one word the set is AMAZING.
Let's get some stuff out of the way first...
- None of the films have been digitally altered except for the said reflection.

This is incorrect as Raiders most definitely has been 'digitally altered'. I realize that you are probably using the phrase with a very narrow set of attributes in mind (I'm guessing- EFX shots changed with Cg or overzealous DNR which changes the surface texture) but the new color grading, and the specific look it now imposes on the film, could not be achieved with anything but digital software and some tech sitting at a terminal. I agree that the film was slightly 'warmer' in original release compared to the all the previous director overseen, 'painstakingly remastered' DVD, LDs, VHS releases- but teals don't manifest themselves organically when you push the color to emphasize orange faces and golden hues.

So, people need to understand the fundamental fact that Raiders HAS been digitally altered for this release.


Quote:
Originally Posted by NagysAudio View Post

- Raiders of the Lost Ark has great new color timing, which match the rest of the series.
- All four movies look awesome and as good as they ever did and most likely ever will.
...
- The opening scene seemed a little washed out, but everything quickly became normal as we land in Nepal. There, the blacks are rich and deep, etc. and they stay that way for the remainder of the movie.
...
- I understand why Spielberg wanted a new 4K scan for Raiders. Other than a slightly new color grading to match the other movies, he wanted to give us Raiders of the Lost Ark EXACTLY how it is on 35mm film.
Yes, apparently it was important for this release that the visual look of Raiders be shifted slightly to match the look of Crystal Skull (which is the only other film in the series that pushes the golden haze, orange faces, and ...teals).
Ironically, as was the case with SW, the only film in the series that is truly worth a damn is the one that must be altered to fit better with most recent, and least worthy entry.
TOD and TLC both have color balances and hues that look authentic to their 80's made origin.

I saw the film many times over the years, the first being a sneak preview weeks before it's initial release. shadows and black levels were always deep, moody, and a big reason the opening has always packed such a whallop.
This new effort doesn't have anything on how this used to or should look. And while the DVD could have stood to be timed a little warmer- it wasn't that far off, imo (in terms of overall color relationships, black levels, contrast, etc). The Bd is two steps forward in this regard, and a big step back.

This is not how Raiders looked originally on 35 mm. Right off the bat, the teal (in all it's various shades and intensities) is a dead give away this is not the 'genuine' article. There are other lame quirks to the image here and there as well, but you really don't need to go any farther than that to classify this effort just as inauthentic and revisionist as if Spielberg has chose to DVNR all the grain out of the film, or replace matte paintings with seamless digital recreations.
It's six of one and half dozen of another.

Doesn't matter a whole lot though since a whole generation of people have grown up watching some of the ugliest, most ridiculously stylized looking films of all time in the last decade- and now find this aesthetic completely natural. When something like this comes along, that isn't as in your face obnoxious about it's T&O agenda as something like a Michael Bay movie, people are apt to wrongly concluded it must be reverential and faithful to the source, when it really isn't.
Paulidan is offline  
post #821 of 1202 Old 09-18-2012, 05:13 AM
Senior Member
 
khronikos's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 287
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 15
Is it really the only film worth a damn in the series? I find the first one to be terribly hammy and low budget as said before. I haven't viewed it on Bluray though and have no idea how the series looks and sounds in high-def. I can't imagine that awful sound design is much better than it was on DVD through headphones. I was literally laughing out loud at the effects in the forest both visually and sonically. I know it's old but this ain't no Blade Runner that is for damn sure.

Now saying that I really wish someone great would have directed the Newer Indiana because this series always had the template for a great film I just don't think it ever went past a childhood fancy for me and yeah that newer one was purely awful in all ways.

"color balances and hues that look authentic to their 80's made origin."

Also, I would have to very strongly disagree that color timing in this age is all bad. I cannot even watch Blade Runner's old color timing without thinking it's just awful. The new one sets the film in stone for me as a futuristic film that is hardly dated at all where as that 80s red push is beyond hideous IMO. I am glad they left it alone for the old ones but would have been shattered if they hadn't changed it for The Final Cut. Not everyone wants to live in the 80s forever. Many of these directors had no choice in these matters during that time.
khronikos is offline  
post #822 of 1202 Old 09-18-2012, 06:31 AM
Senior Member
 
burdell1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 202
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Please post more screenshots smile.gif they will make great wallpapers for my computer
burdell1 is offline  
post #823 of 1202 Old 09-18-2012, 08:43 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 NagysAudio View Post

- There was very little restoration done here, other than a standard clean-up of dirt, damage, etc.
I don't understand why people keep saying stuff like this (mostly on another forum). What are the symptoms of "little restoration"? What would "a lot of restoration" look like?
42041 is offline  
post #824 of 1202 Old 09-18-2012, 09:14 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 NagysAudio View Post

Little restoration:
Raiders of the Lost Ark
Total Recall
Heavy restoration:
Jaws
Aliens
Titanic
Blade Runner
That's a list of movies, not an answer. What are the visual characteristics of "heavy restoration" versus "little restoration"? Is it obnoxious DNR and sharpening? Does Raiders have film tears and scratches everywhere?
42041 is offline  
post #825 of 1202 Old 09-18-2012, 09:17 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Fanboyz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Minnesota
Posts: 2,400
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3 Post(s)
Liked: 17
I really didn't have any problems with it.
Everything is Teal and Orange now, Raiders wasn't hit that hard.

The proper setting for sharpness is always0.
Also my Oppo BDP-103D is region free.
That makes me awesome.
Fanboyz is offline  
post #826 of 1202 Old 09-18-2012, 09:35 AM
Member
 
AVS_MVP's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 34
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
I never really liked these Indiana Jones movies, but for some reason I want the Blu-ray set.I bought the DVD set when it was released, watched it once and then sold it. I dont know if I should pick it up today knowing it has an mediocre transfer.I'm also a bit confused about the review score. The review on this site scored it 84 for video, which is excellent
AVS_MVP is offline  
post #827 of 1202 Old 09-18-2012, 09:39 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
It is excellent if you compare it to DVD
dvdmike007 is offline  
post #828 of 1202 Old 09-18-2012, 09:41 AM
AVS Special Member
 
TitusTroy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: New York City
Posts: 2,635
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 6 Post(s)
Liked: 85
so I guess the verdict is that it looks better then it ever has on Blu-ray but it's not reference demo material
TitusTroy is offline  
post #829 of 1202 Old 09-18-2012, 09:45 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
If your only experience of it was DVD then yes, best it has ever looked
dvdmike007 is offline  
post #830 of 1202 Old 09-18-2012, 10:43 AM
AVS Special Member
 
tfoltz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: CA
Posts: 3,504
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 7 Post(s)
Liked: 57
tfoltz is offline  
post #831 of 1202 Old 09-18-2012, 11:29 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 NagysAudio View Post

Is that clear enough?
Clear enough, but we have a very different idea of what constitutes "full restoration". To me, the word implies having to repair a film and return it to something approximating its original state. As far as I'm concerned, the idea of "restoring" a film in perfectly good condition like Titanic is nonsense, and things like degraining, new effects, etc, are revisionism, not restoration.
42041 is offline  
post #832 of 1202 Old 09-18-2012, 11:36 AM
 
dvdmike007's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: UK
Posts: 8,687
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by 42041 View Post

Clear enough, but we have a very different idea of what constitutes "full restoration". To me, the word implies having to repair a film and return it to something approximating its original state. As far as I'm concerned, the idea of "restoring" a film in perfectly good condition like Titanic is nonsense, and things like degraining, new effects, etc, are revisionism, not restoration.


Knew I liked you
dvdmike007 is offline  
post #833 of 1202 Old 09-18-2012, 11:40 AM
Advanced Member
 
lfe man's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Finland
Posts: 844
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Liked: 29
Quote:
Originally Posted by dvdmike007 View Post

Evil Dead,

Evil dead blu-ray have very bad black crush, hard to see jack **** about that last melting scene compared to elite dvd. Also the sound is thinny and lackin bass.mad.gif
lfe man is offline  
post #834 of 1202 Old 09-18-2012, 11:50 AM
Senior Member
 
InspectorToschi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 308
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by lfe man View Post

Evil dead blu-ray have very bad black crush, hard to see jack **** about that last melting scene compared to elite dvd. Also the sound is thinny and lackin bass.mad.gif

Let's not forget the numerous digital alterations. But it still looks amazing and I won't complain.
InspectorToschi is offline  
post #835 of 1202 Old 09-18-2012, 11:57 AM
Advanced Member
 
Strevlac's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 554
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 14
Nagys, you do know that grain isn't a characteristic of "age" right? I.e. films stock doesn't get grainer over the years that it sits on a shelf. It's simply an inherent characteristic of film. The level of grain depends on the film stock used, the lighting conditions on the set, generation loss from optical printing generation and/or general duplication from printing.

Before digital there was always at least some grain, and grain levels could be variable from scene to scene for a number of different reasons. Why would erasing all of the grain that was there in the first place, constitute "restoration" in your opinion? Because doing so does not fall under the definition of the word "restore."
Strevlac is offline  
post #836 of 1202 Old 09-18-2012, 12:02 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 lfe man View Post

Evil dead blu-ray have very bad black crush, hard to see jack **** about that last melting scene compared to elite dvd. Also the sound is thinny and lackin bass.mad.gif

An old 16mm micro budget mono film is lacking bass?
dvdmike007 is offline  
post #837 of 1202 Old 09-18-2012, 12:13 PM
Advanced Member
 
Strevlac's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 554
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 14
Quote:
Originally Posted by NagysAudio View Post

Yes, of course I know that. I just gave examples of heavy restoration. I don't necessarily agree with all of them them. If you guys are going to pick on the word restoration, then maybe I should have used remaster instead. Either way, I think Raiders looks excellent.

I generally agree about Raiders. I think the resolution and texture is very good. I dunno about the color. Subjectively it looks nice but I'm not sure that's what audiences saw back in 1981. Even though I have seen Raiders on film dozens of times I have a terrible memory for color.

That said, I think it's time to retire the word "restoration" for good. It's thrown around far too casually with the implication that there is something wrong with the original elements and that there has been some herculean effort to restore them to their original state. Simply transfering elements that are generally fine into the digital domain and then twiddling a bunch of knobs with wild abandon so it looks nice and sharp and clean and colorful on an HDTV in no way constitutes a restoration. A remaster is what that is...but of course that is a buzz word that has lost it's marketing potential.
Strevlac is offline  
post #838 of 1202 Old 09-18-2012, 12:43 PM
Member
 
Dark Light's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Posts: 15
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by NagysAudio View Post

TitusTroy, the verdict is that it looks as good as it can. Raiders of the Lost Ark looks like a fairly low budget movie. What else can be possibly done? Watching the Blu-ray is like watching a pristine 35mm print. The only way to make this movie look more modern is via major digital alterations, think Star Wars. Is that what you guys really want? George Lucas was right, you guys are a bunch of hypocrites.

But Raiders shouldn't look like a low budget movie, as its estimated budget was 18,000,000, according to IMDB (like Empire Strikes Back). And also shouldn't really look any worse than its sequels. Not that I complain about a softer shot here or there, if thats how it was filmed, my only complaint here is not the quality of the transfer (or the "restoration") itself but the major (digital) alteration of the colors into unnatural yellow. Since the yellow push not only changes the colors but also washes them out, lowers the contrast and makes the image look rather flat. (And I suspect this is also the reason many feel the detail level seems not to be that good). So I belive Raiders could (and should) look a lot better, only if they didn't decide to significantly change the colors (ironically probably in an attempt to make it look more modern).
Dark Light is offline  
post #839 of 1202 Old 09-18-2012, 12:43 PM
Advanced Member
 
lfe man's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Finland
Posts: 844
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Liked: 29
Quote:
Originally Posted by InspectorToschi View Post

Let's not forget the numerous digital alterations. But it still looks amazing and I won't complain.

Was there more than that robert taper missing in bridge scene? I think i can live with that.tongue.gif

Quote:
Originally Posted by dvdmike007 View Post

An old 16mm micro budget mono film is lacking bass?

I mean that the bass levels are weak compared to elite dvd. One good example is where that demon watches those fellas trough cabin window. I know you have it in your collection, just compare them and you'll hear it.biggrin.gif
lfe man is offline  
post #840 of 1202 Old 09-18-2012, 12:48 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
But what is correct?
dvdmike007 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