Total Recall Special Edition (1990) - Page 10 - AVS Forum
Forum Jump: 
Reply
 
Thread Tools
post #271 of 547 Old 07-26-2012, 03:29 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 NagysAudio View Post

The new release looks terrific and film like! Some of the posts on here are very puzzling indeed.
The new release is more film like, however it's also true that the colors seem a bit washed out and there's little to no actual black displayed in any of the screen shots. Yes, the DE release is blown out, but that doesn't mean the new release is accurate or attractive when it comes to colors and contrast.
Deviation is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #272 of 547 Old 07-26-2012, 04:19 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
Oh, I know that the blacks are crushed in the old release. The problem is the (almost?) complete lack of actual black in the new release. Neither is correct, IMO.
Deviation is offline  
post #273 of 547 Old 07-26-2012, 04:27 PM
Member
 
Dion250's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 79
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by Deviation View Post

Oh, I know that the blacks are crushed in the old release. The problem is the (almost?) complete lack of actual black in the new release. Neither is correct, IMO.

New one is director approved transfer / color. It is correct.
Dion250 is offline  
post #274 of 547 Old 07-26-2012, 04:31 PM
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 NagysAudio View Post

DJ Mike, your statement boggles my mind. The complete 100% opposite is true. The old DE release's contrast is nasty overblown. The new Rekall edition looks perfect. The new edition has more detail. All I see in the old release is severe EE, blown out contrast, completely wrong color grading, digital sharpening, blotchy grain, etc. Some detail in the old ugly transfer is more apparent because of the nasty EE, contrast boosting, and sharpening. The new release has all of the detail visible in the old master times at least two. Virtually nothing is lost in the contrast, or shadows.
The new release looks terrific and film like! Some of the posts on here are very puzzling indeed.

Judging from the screenshots (As I have not seen the disc myself) I have to agree with you. I look forward to watching this next week. I sold my UK copy about a year ago for the exact reasons you stated: "severe EE, blown out contrast, completely wrong color grading, digital sharpening, blotchy grain, etc." And thankfully I see none of that in this new release.
InspectorToschi is offline  
post #275 of 547 Old 07-26-2012, 04:57 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 Dion250 View Post

New one is director approved transfer / color. It is correct.
Director approved and years down the line is not the same as correct.
Deviation is offline  
post #276 of 547 Old 07-26-2012, 05:18 PM
 
Steeb's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Vegas
Posts: 3,268
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 54
Quote:
Originally Posted by Deviation View Post

Director approved and years down the line is not the same as correct.
Of course. Clearly, when presented with two opinions on the look of this release - one being that of the film's director and the other that of an anonymous poster who likely hasn't even watched the disc in question (and has had absolutely nothing to do with any part of the film's creation or release,) we should defer to the random poster... rolleyes.gif


Me? I'll reserve judgement until I pick this bad boy up for roughly $5 (with DVD trade-in) at Best Buy when it's released.
Steeb is offline  
post #277 of 547 Old 07-26-2012, 05:36 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 Steeb View Post

Of course. Clearly, when presented with two opinions on the look of this release - one being that of the film's director and the other that of an anonymous poster who likely hasn't even watched the disc in question (and has had absolutely nothing to do with any part of the film's creation or release,) we should defer to the random poster... rolleyes.gif
Me? I'll reserve judgement until I pick this bad boy up for roughly $5 (with DVD trade-in) at Best Buy when it's released.

Dracula Star Wars and French Connection show directors are fallible
dvdmike007 is offline  
post #278 of 547 Old 07-26-2012, 07:40 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 NagysAudio View Post

Why do so many of you want this excellent release to fail? What's the hidden agenda? Director approved color grading, new modern 2K scan from the negative, zero DNR, zero EE, filmlike grain, no excessive digital sharpening, etc. It seems like there's nothing left to pick on in this release, so color grading it is. Maybe we can also pick on the Blu-Ray's cover? Or the font?
You're inventing conflicts in your head.

Maybe you missed the part where I said the new release is better? Or that I had pre-ordered it and was keeping my pre-order despite my misgivings? Has anybody actually said that they wanted the release to "fail"?
Deviation is offline  
post #279 of 547 Old 07-26-2012, 07:48 PM
Advanced Member
 
jd213's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: less than 10 minutes from Akihabara
Posts: 749
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3 Post(s)
Liked: 14
Quote:
Originally Posted by DJ Mike TJG View Post

The contrast is blown out so badly in this shot the explosion has no detail left:
http://caps-a-holic.com/hd_vergleiche/multi_comparison.php?art=part&x=685&y=305&action=1&image=4&hd_multiID=63&cap1=10597&cap2=12468&disc1=1092&disc2=1314&lossless=1#vergleich
I'm sticking with my cheap UK original.

That does indeed look better in the old release. Another bit is that the "SHARPER" neon sign looks like it's been turned off in the new release (this has already been mentioned elsewhere):
http://caps-a-holic.com/hd_vergleiche/multi_comparison.php?disc1=1092&disc2=1314&cap1=10602&cap2=12473&art=full&image=9&hd_multiID=63&action=1&lossless=1

For the most part, the new release looks better to me (you can plainly see the white crush in the old release in the neon sign directly below the "SHARPER" one), but something seems fishy about it, like some kind of filter was used or something.
jd213 is offline  
post #280 of 547 Old 07-26-2012, 08:12 PM
Member
 
Dion250's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 79
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by Deviation View Post

Director approved and years down the line is not the same as correct.

While I sometimes agree a director doesn't know alot about PQ and banding issues on a bluray. They always get the color right as they envisioned it. And the new one has better PQ anyways. So it wins on both levels.. Color and PQ..
Dion250 is offline  
post #281 of 547 Old 07-26-2012, 09:26 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 DJ Mike TJG View Post

The contrast is blown out so badly in this shot the explosion has no detail left:
http://caps-a-holic.com/hd_vergleiche/multi_comparison.php?art=part&x=685&y=305&action=1&image=4&hd_multiID=63&cap1=10597&cap2=12468&disc1=1092&disc2=1314&lossless=1#vergleich
I'm sticking with my cheap UK original.
The contrast is not "blown out". The new transfer has lower contrast in that shot. The tonal range in the highlights is compressed to emulate the look of a film print, as is often the case with new transfers.
Here's what you get if you increase the contrast around the highlights in photoshop and make some attempt to match the color timing: http://img23.imageshack.us/img23/3179/tr2r.jpg
42041 is offline  
post #282 of 547 Old 07-26-2012, 09:44 PM
AVS Special Member
 
msgohan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Alberta, Canada
Posts: 2,856
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 15
Yeah, people keep throwing around the term "contrast boosting." If there's a problem with contrast on this new release, it's the opposite of that.
msgohan is offline  
post #283 of 547 Old 07-27-2012, 01:03 AM
Member
 
DJ Mike TJG's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 180
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 11
"Blown out" was a poor choice of words - I do in fact mean, by all respects, the contrast in this film is almost non-existent. So some people are saying that this is because it emulates the look of a film print. Be that as it may, I have trouble believing the film would have ever looked this dull and lifeless in the cinema. Since it has been 20 years since this film was at the cinema, unless someone has an actual print copy of the film they'd like to demonstrate, I doubt we're going to get an answer beyond hearsay and "what people remember".

To me, the remaster looks too dull. Yes, it is (slightly) more detailed, the grain is natural, there is a lack of edge enhancement and DNR. These are positives. But the original Blu-ray isn't a Patton-esque or BTTF or Star Wars travesty. To me, the colour of the original is just more natural and pleasing.
DJ Mike TJG is offline  
post #284 of 547 Old 07-27-2012, 01:31 AM
AVS Special Member
 
KBMAN's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Grass Valley, CA
Posts: 2,846
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 12 Post(s)
Liked: 36
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dion250 View Post

New one is director approved transfer / color. It is correct.

Most Directors do one thing...direct. When it comes to color and other aspects of post is that a 'director approved' print means nothing to me....I've seen too many examples of this to really hold true. I know the DE (or '08 UK) version looks molested, but I definatly prefer that version over this flat and drab version that is 'approved'....to each his own, and I'm am not doing a re-buy cool.gif

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

KBMAN is offline  
post #285 of 547 Old 07-27-2012, 02:13 AM
Member
 
Dion250's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 79
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by KBMAN View Post

Most Directors do one thing...direct. When it comes to color and other aspects of post is that a 'director approved' print means nothing to me....I've seen too many examples of this to really hold true. I know the DE (or '08 UK) version looks molested, but I definatly prefer that version over this flat and drab version that is 'approved'....to each his own, and I'm am not doing a re-buy cool.gif

Right.. I guess Schindler's list should be in color then :P

The DE has contrast problems. And that is a fact not my opinion.

Believe it or not. Some Director approved transfer are correct. Esp when it comes to color.
Dion250 is offline  
post #286 of 547 Old 07-27-2012, 03:56 AM
Member
 
DJ Mike TJG's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 180
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 11
I wonder if this release is cinematographer-approved.
DJ Mike TJG is offline  
post #287 of 547 Old 07-27-2012, 07:25 AM
Senior Member
 
rezpekt's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 267
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
rezpekt is offline  
post #288 of 547 Old 07-27-2012, 09:12 AM
Member
 
homogenic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 111
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2 Post(s)
Liked: 12
Quote:
Originally Posted by DJ Mike TJG View Post

"Blown out" was a poor choice of words - I do in fact mean, by all respects, the contrast in this film is almost non-existent. So some people are saying that this is because it emulates the look of a film print. Be that as it may, I have trouble believing the film would have ever looked this dull and lifeless in the cinema. Since it has been 20 years since this film was at the cinema, unless someone has an actual print copy of the film they'd like to demonstrate, I doubt we're going to get an answer beyond hearsay and "what people remember".
To me, the remaster looks too dull. Yes, it is (slightly) more detailed, the grain is natural, there is a lack of edge enhancement and DNR. These are positives. But the original Blu-ray isn't a Patton-esque or BTTF or Star Wars travesty. To me, the colour of the original is just more natural and pleasing.
Jost Vacano, the cinematographer, detest the release prints. They were too dull, flat, and under saturated for his intentions.
I never saw it theatrically. The initial home video version is thickened up in certain scenes with pumped saturation and others left to reveal the thinness of the source itself. I'm glad the direction of this release wasn't to emulate modern sensibility but to treat Total Recall as the visually fragile house of cards it actually is.
homogenic is offline  
post #289 of 547 Old 07-27-2012, 11:10 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 homogenic View Post

Jost Vacano, the cinematographer, detest the release prints. They were too dull, flat, and under saturated for his intentions.
I never saw it theatrically. The initial home video version is thickened up in certain scenes with pumped saturation and others left to reveal the thinness of the source itself. I'm glad the direction of this release wasn't to emulate modern sensibility but to treat Total Recall as the visually fragile house of cards it actually is.

Teal and orange with hot whites are not modern?
dvdmike007 is offline  
post #290 of 547 Old 07-27-2012, 12:42 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Geoff D's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Swanage, Engerland
Posts: 2,374
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 97 Post(s)
Liked: 200
Everyone who's saying (without having watched the new one) that the colour is now perfect will get a nice surprise as they watch the ambient light of Mars change between pink, orange and red depending on the shot, sometimes even from cut to cut within a scene. The old transfer had a nice constant orange glow.

And it's not about "wanting this release to fail". People need to keep the conspiracy theories to themselves and look at this transfer with an objective eye. If they do, then they will notice the incredibly flat contrast, washed-out blacks, fluctuating colour and the strangely dirty opticals. (Yes, I KNOW that opticals will incur their share of such artefacts, but the rest of the movie has obviously been cleaned up, so why overlook the spottiest parts of the movie?)

The grain and the detail reproduction are exemplary on the new transfer, they really are, but that's not enough to rank it as great in my book.
Quote:
Originally Posted by homogenic View Post

Jost Vacano, the cinematographer, detest the release prints. They were too dull, flat, and under saturated for his intentions.
I never saw it theatrically. The initial home video version is thickened up in certain scenes with pumped saturation and others left to reveal the thinness of the source itself. I'm glad the direction of this release wasn't to emulate modern sensibility but to treat Total Recall as the visually fragile house of cards it actually is.

Was it really shot as thin as the new transfer suggests? Even the background on the end credits is a dull grey rather than black. Still, I've made my peace with this transfer by taking your advice and treating it as the antithesis of every colour corrected, contrast boosted, DNR'ed crapfest that we've been subjected to over the years. And for that, I salute the eternally barmy Paul Verhoeven.
Geoff D is offline  
post #291 of 547 Old 07-27-2012, 01:58 PM
AVS Special Member
 
msgohan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Alberta, Canada
Posts: 2,856
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 15
Quote:
Originally Posted by dvdmike007 View Post

Teal and orange with hot whites are not modern?

Where are you seeing any of that? Whites are dull beige, on the yellow spectrum. "Hot" to me would describe the blooming whites of the previous transfers.

Maybe everyone already knows this, but the new version can be compared to any of the three previous BDs (Euro AVC, Euro VC-1, US MPEG-2) here. Also a historical perspective, new DVD vs old DVDs.

I notice no one's complaining about the reframing from the 2006 US disc this go-round like they did in 2008.
msgohan is offline  
post #292 of 547 Old 07-27-2012, 02:08 PM
Member
 
homogenic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 111
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2 Post(s)
Liked: 12
Mods delete this post.
homogenic is offline  
post #293 of 547 Old 07-27-2012, 05:18 PM
AVS Special Member
 
tokerblue's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Connecticut
Posts: 4,718
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4 Post(s)
Liked: 19
Boo-urns. Looks like the Blu-Ray is now $7.99 at BestBuy, so it's not coupon eligible unless it goes back up after the release date.
tokerblue is offline  
post #294 of 547 Old 07-27-2012, 06:27 PM
Advanced Member
 
surap's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 954
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Liked: 13
I dont know. I prefer Studio Canals version. It seems so much sharper (maybe I'm fooling myself?) without sharpening artifacts. The only scene where the contrast seemed a little bit high is the scene with Sharon in the kitchen.
surap is offline  
post #295 of 547 Old 07-27-2012, 06:49 PM
AVS Special Member
 
wuther's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 1,265
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 23 Post(s)
Liked: 25
Maybe the Alliance/Universal Schwarzenegger triple pack BD with the TR in it will be better.... teehee....
wuther is online now  
post #296 of 547 Old 07-27-2012, 10:29 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Partyslammer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Posts: 1,264
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2 Post(s)
Liked: 34
Watched the new "Mind Bending" release and did a direct comparison with the original Blu-ray. All I can say is despite the original release's well-documented flaws in the transfer, this new release is a huge step backwards. It's really one of the uglier looking transfers I've seen in some time.

The color is significantly washed out to the point faces are almost sickly pale white or at best, unnaturally pink and there's some weird artifacting in some scenes - for example the early breakfast scene with Arnold and Sharon's characters in front of the wall tv screen - look right after she kisses Arnold, there's a white blocky artifact on Arnold's ear and in the following few seconds, there's large black speckles that looks like major dirt specks on the film but they almost look digital. None of these issues were present on any previous home video release I've seen of this movie. And then there's the "grain." It's so pronounced in some scenes, it frankly looks like a dupey 16mm print or excessive digital noise. And for the record, I know and understand many scenes in this movie originally looked fairly grainy due to film stock, effects, etc.

I highly recommend sticking with or seeking out the old release versus this one.
Partyslammer is online now  
post #297 of 547 Old 07-28-2012, 10:31 AM
AVS Special Member
 
KBMAN's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Grass Valley, CA
Posts: 2,846
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 12 Post(s)
Liked: 36
Thanks for the heads-up on this, Partyslammer! Even the screencaps look worse to me eek.gif

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

KBMAN is offline  
post #298 of 547 Old 07-28-2012, 11:21 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Geoff D's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Swanage, Engerland
Posts: 2,374
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 97 Post(s)
Liked: 200
A lot of that early Arnie scene is an optical (for the viewscreen on the wall), and you can still see how splotchy the grain is on the old transfer, even under some heavy DNR. Apart from the questionable dirt cleanup, I didn't expect it to look any better than it does on the new transfer.
Geoff D is offline  
post #299 of 547 Old 07-28-2012, 12:31 PM
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
So are the screenshots lying now? How can you possibly say this new transfer doesn't look any better?

http://www.caps-a-holic.com/hd_vergleiche/multi_comparison.php?disc1=1314&disc2=1093&art=part&cap1=12464&cap2=10569&hd_multiID=63&lossless=&image=0#auswahl

It shows a clear improvement in every way.
InspectorToschi is offline  
post #300 of 547 Old 07-28-2012, 12:55 PM
AVS Club Gold
 
aaronwt's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Northern VA(Woodbridge)
Posts: 20,939
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 329 Post(s)
Liked: 615
Quote:
Originally Posted by tokerblue View Post

Boo-urns. Looks like the Blu-Ray is now $7.99 at BestBuy, so it's not coupon eligible unless it goes back up after the release date.

Sweet!! Amazon dropped down to $7.99 also. So now I don't need to cancel my Amazon pre-order and order from BestBuy instead. For $8 it's even better. No reason for me to consider canceling since it is so inexpensive.

39TB unRAID1--53TB unRAID2--36TB unRAID3
LED DLP
XBL/PSN: WormholeXtreme

aaronwt is online now  
Reply Blu-ray Software

Tags
Blu Ray Movies , Total Recall Mind Bending Edition Blu Ray , Robocop Blu Ray
Gear in this thread

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