The New PQ Tier thread for Blu-Ray - Discussion - Page 10 - AVS Forum

AVS Forum > Blu-ray & HD DVD > Blu-ray Software > The New PQ Tier thread for Blu-Ray - Discussion

Blu-ray Software

Icemage's Avatar Icemage
01:39 PM Liked: 10
post #271 of 22084
06-20-2007 | Posts: 1,978
Joined: Feb 2007
There is something that bothered me a lot about Fettastic's original list, and continues to bother me about this one.

The idea of ranking titles within a tier is a noble one, but what seems to happen is that people argue a lot not just about the actual tier, but placement within a tier. This is going to become very unmanageable once there are not hundreds, but thousands of titles.

I feel we should do away with the pecking order inside of tiers, and flatly indicate that all titles within a tier are roughly equal in eye candy factor. We should worry more about the tier it belongs to, not where it belongs in comparison to many other titles in the same category. After all, the practical usage of this list is (as it seems to me) to inform new buyers of what titles to flatly avoid if they're interested in a good visual experience. This shouldn't be a pissing contest between individual movies.

---

I also think that Art Sonneborn brought up a good point regarding obvious director's intent. I think a second list is not a good idea, but perhaps an asterisk marking to indicate that a film has an obvious excellent transfer, but has a visual style that keeps it from being at the top of the list (case in point: Sky Captain and the World of Tomorrow). One might make the same notation for Sleepy Hollow, and perhaps Chronos as well.
BigSexy's Avatar BigSexy
01:41 PM Liked: 10
post #272 of 22084
06-20-2007 | Posts: 19
Joined: Mar 2007
Quote:
Originally Posted by AustinSTI View Post

Ok...I give in. It's now Tier 1 by popular Demand below CL and Open Season.

I watched the movie all the way through - finally got through the scene where he's chomping on boar nuts - and I saw what people were referring to. Tier 1 yes; Now I haven't seen Crank to compare so its above Crank but below CL/Open Season...

Satisfactory?

I still think it's quite a bit too high, but at least this is a more logical location for it (since it does have such obvious PQ issues). Above Crank? I'd say Crank is much more consistent, has amazing detail, and really pops. However, I don't know how to describe it, but the image is... well... over-pure and harsh, if that makes any sense. I think technically that Crank should clearly be rated above Apocalypto in terms of picture quality. However, I can understand how folks would prefer the PQ of Apocalypto, even though it's technically not superior. But since Crank is ahead of PotC1 and others, that seems to imply that it's actual PQ that matters.

For me, the grain in Apocalypto is just so grating. The constant switching is so annoying that it takes me out of the movie. To me, it's like seeing the dot telling theatres when to change the reel. Once you notice it, you can't help but notice it. However, the grain occurs far more often than said dot.

GoCeltics, you may be surprised to know this, but I think you may be right. While the list looks more reasonable now (sorry Rob, I haven't seen Night at the Museum - is it worth buying?), I believe Austin may have just opened a can of worms. What do you do when you let popular opinion dictate placement, but popular opinion is so obviously wrong? Do you allow the integrity of the list to be compromised by allowing popular opinion to rule, or do you compromise the system so that the list's integrity can be maintained? This, IMO, is the largest issue with using popular opinion for this list.

And you never answered my question. Are you a Fleet Center fan (or whatever it's called this week), or a Garden fan?

-BS
oleus's Avatar oleus
01:59 PM Liked: 14
post #273 of 22084
06-20-2007 | Posts: 3,576
Joined: Apr 2002
I have watched CRANK and APOCALYPTO several times and I can't understand how anyone would put CRANK above APOCALYPTO. CRANK has too much edge enhancement for it to be so worshipped...it looks really really good but it just screams "this is video". APOCALYPTO blows it out of the water (to my eyes at least) with its blend of digital HD video and film elements, none of which have any edge enhancement.
John Ballentine's Avatar John Ballentine
02:25 PM Liked: 10
post #274 of 22084
06-20-2007 | Posts: 5,084
Joined: Nov 2003
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rob Tomlin View Post

Why hasn't Night at the Museum been raised (well) above Tier 3? This is by far the worst placement of any title on this list that I have seen.


I agree 100%. Should be MUCH higher than tier 3. Even Road Warrior is rated higher than Night At The Museum! Unbelievable!
Xylon's Avatar Xylon
02:26 PM Liked: 11
post #275 of 22084
06-20-2007 | Posts: 7,380
Joined: Dec 2005
Quote:
Originally Posted by oleus View Post

I have watched CRANK and APOCALYPTO several times and I can't understand how anyone would put CRANK above APOCALYPTO. CRANK has too much edge enhancement for it to be so worshipped...it looks really really good but it just screams "this is video". APOCALYPTO blows it out of the water (to my eyes at least) with its blend of digital HD video and film elements, none of which have any edge enhancement.

OMG, someone I agree with 100%.
maverick0716's Avatar maverick0716
02:43 PM Liked: 10
post #276 of 22084
06-20-2007 | Posts: 2,096
Joined: Dec 2004
I just watched this one the other night and found it to be very soft for the most part.....In my opinion, it should be lowered to the bottom of Tier 2.
egy971's Avatar egy971
03:49 PM Liked: 10
post #277 of 22084
06-20-2007 | Posts: 269
Joined: Jan 2007
Bridge to Terabithia looks really good. Definitely a high tier 2.
oleus's Avatar oleus
05:08 PM Liked: 14
post #278 of 22084
06-20-2007 | Posts: 3,576
Joined: Apr 2002
Quote:
Originally Posted by Icemage View Post

There is something that bothered me a lot about Fettastic's original list, and continues to bother me about this one.

The idea of ranking titles within a tier is a noble one, but what seems to happen is that people argue a lot not just about the actual tier, but placement within a tier. This is going to become very unmanageable once there are not hundreds, but thousands of titles.

I feel we should do away with the pecking order inside of tiers, and flatly indicate that all titles within a tier are roughly equal in eye candy factor. We should worry more about the tier it belongs to, not where it belongs in comparison to many other titles in the same category. After all, the practical usage of this list is (as it seems to me) to inform new buyers of what titles to flatly avoid if they're interested in a good visual experience. This shouldn't be a pissing contest between individual movies.

---

I also think that Art Sonneborn brought up a good point regarding obvious director's intent. I think a second list is not a good idea, but perhaps an asterisk marking to indicate that a film has an obvious excellent transfer, but has a visual style that keeps it from being at the top of the list (case in point: Sky Captain and the World of Tomorrow). One might make the same notation for Sleepy Hollow, and perhaps Chronos as well.


I'm with Icemage on ALL COUNTS......these simplifications (and stylistic asteriks for director's intent, not another list) would give us all a lot more time to watch more discs instead of nitpicking placements WITHIN individual tiers......and certainly save us time from another list!!!!!!!
goceltics34's Avatar goceltics34
06:01 PM Liked: 10
post #279 of 22084
06-20-2007 | Posts: 190
Joined: Dec 2006
Quote:
Originally Posted by BigSexy View Post


And you never answered my question. Are you a Fleet Center fan (or whatever it's called this week), or a Garden fan?

-BS

The old Boston Garden will never be replicated. Ever! I have been to the Fleet Center, now called the TD Banknorth Garden, and although nice, it lacks something.... Oh yeah, a winning team.
Iggster's Avatar Iggster
07:28 PM Liked: 11
post #280 of 22084
06-20-2007 | Posts: 1,684
Joined: Mar 2007
destinys child live in atlanta isnt on the tier

its very low tier 3 or high tier 4. imo

{edit} thought it was still the old system

it belong right below xxx.
BigSexy's Avatar BigSexy
07:41 PM Liked: 10
post #281 of 22084
06-20-2007 | Posts: 19
Joined: Mar 2007
Quote:
Originally Posted by goceltics34 View Post

The old Boston Garden will never be replicated. Ever! I have been to the Fleet Center, now called the TD Banknorth Garden, and although nice, it lacks something.... Oh yeah, a winning team.

Don't forget the leprechauns. My last few weeks living in Boston, I saw the Garden being torn down. It ripped my heart out every time I drove by it. It seemed to me the Celtics became a different team after that.

Quote:
Originally Posted by oleus View Post

I have watched CRANK and APOCALYPTO several times and I can't understand how anyone would put CRANK above APOCALYPTO. CRANK has too much edge enhancement for it to be so worshipped...it looks really really good but it just screams "this is video". APOCALYPTO blows it out of the water (to my eyes at least) with its blend of digital HD video and film elements, none of which have any edge enhancement.

If it weren't for the constant switching between grain and beauty between Apocalypto, I would also prefer the look. Heck, I prefer the look of some "softer" movies to the look of Crank (we're talking tier-2 and lower). That said, Crank is better in terms of Picture Quality. It's not the look I prefer, but the extreme detail and near-flawlessness cannot be argued.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Icemage View Post

The idea of ranking titles within a tier is a noble one, but what seems to happen is that people argue a lot not just about the actual tier, but placement within a tier.

I feel we should do away with the pecking order inside of tiers, and flatly indicate that all titles within a tier are roughly equal in eye candy factor. We should worry more about the tier it belongs to, not where it belongs in comparison to many other titles in the same category.

The problem is that the difference between the top of tier-2 and the bottom of tier-2 is far greater than the bottom of tier-2 and the top of tier-3. I prefer the relative rankings more than the tier-classifications. When Fett ranked Coming to America between The Italian Job and Superman Returns on his list at another site, I knew exactly what the picture quality would be. If he would have simply said tier-3, I wouldn't know if I was getting better than Italian Job or worse than XXX.

Good luck y'all.

-BS



-BS
Icemage's Avatar Icemage
11:22 PM Liked: 10
post #282 of 22084
06-20-2007 | Posts: 1,978
Joined: Feb 2007
Quote:
Originally Posted by BigSexy View Post

The problem is that the difference between the top of tier-2 and the bottom of tier-2 is far greater than the bottom of tier-2 and the top of tier-3. I prefer the relative rankings more than the tier-classifications. When Fett ranked “Coming to America” between “The Italian Job” and “Superman Returns” on his list at another site, I knew exactly what the picture quality would be. If he would have simply said tier-3, I wouldn’t know if I was getting “better than Italian Job” or “worse than XXX”.

This seems to me like it would indicate that another tier should be added by splitting the current Tier 2. If there's enough difference between top and bottom to make a difference to enough people, there should be a separate classification.

The essence of what I'm trying to get across is that pontificating over whether X movie is visually superior to Y is wasteful micromanagement. Just list the titles alphabetically in each category so there's no arguments, and if there's enough discrepancies, split a tier and make the categories themselves do the work of separating The Good, The Bad, and the Ugly (heh!).
Supermans's Avatar Supermans
02:01 AM Liked: 34
post #283 of 22084
06-21-2007 | Posts: 3,086
Joined: Nov 2005
I just watched Bridge to Terabithia on my Ps3 and I have to say it is even more impressive picture quality than Pirates of the Caribbean: Dead Man's Chest. 99% of the film is crystal clear perfect High Def. It was as sharp as anything I have ever seen in HD and that is quite a lot.. Let me know what you think about it. It has become my new reference disc in my house..... I would place it above Pirates DMC on this list after doing multiple A&B comparisons during different scenes...
dpags's Avatar dpags
07:40 AM Liked: 10
post #284 of 22084
06-21-2007 | Posts: 1,750
Joined: Dec 2001
Not sure I would put it POTC levels, but Bridge is certainly highly ranked in my collection.
AustinSTI's Avatar AustinSTI
08:05 AM Liked: 11
post #285 of 22084
06-21-2007 | Posts: 723
Joined: Jan 2007
Quote:
Originally Posted by goceltics34 View Post

Bad move. For a few people complaining you move it? So all it takes is a little complaining from the minority and you cave? You got to go with the majority here if in fact that is the intention of this thread.

No I finally had to site down and watch the movie myself; after doing so and watching past the first scene I was able to see WHY people felt it was upper Tier 1. Though its hard to compare to animated movies I tend to agree. In either case its still reference/demo material and quite frankly I still think the Tier 0/1 split causeses more confusion than anything else. If tier 0/1 merged I don't think anyone would have issue with the placement...
AustinSTI's Avatar AustinSTI
08:06 AM Liked: 11
post #286 of 22084
06-21-2007 | Posts: 723
Joined: Jan 2007
Quote:
Originally Posted by John Ballentine View Post

I agree 100%. Should be MUCH higher than tier 3. Even Road Warrior is rated higher than Night At The Museum! Unbelievable!


Haven't seen it so where should it go? I put it in Tierr 2 by Bridge for now...
AustinSTI's Avatar AustinSTI
08:13 AM Liked: 11
post #287 of 22084
06-21-2007 | Posts: 723
Joined: Jan 2007
Quote:
Originally Posted by egy971 View Post

Bridge to Terabithia looks really good. Definitely a high tier 2.

Done
AustinSTI's Avatar AustinSTI
08:14 AM Liked: 11
post #288 of 22084
06-21-2007 | Posts: 723
Joined: Jan 2007
Quote:
Originally Posted by Don H View Post

Battle of the Bulge. Tier 0. Blu


Spoiler....... Germany loses the War.


Bottom of Tier 0; I haven't seen this so would like confirmation.
AustinSTI's Avatar AustinSTI
08:16 AM Liked: 11
post #289 of 22084
06-21-2007 | Posts: 723
Joined: Jan 2007
Quote:
Originally Posted by Iggster View Post

destinys child live in atlanta isnt on the tier

its very low tier 3 or high tier 4. imo

{edit} thought it was still the old system

it belong right below xxx.

Done (though why you watched this I don't know)
G''s Avatar G'
11:10 AM Liked: 10
post #290 of 22084
06-21-2007 | Posts: 22
Joined: Apr 2007
awesome thread. keep up the work its greatly appreciated!
Iggster's Avatar Iggster
11:20 AM Liked: 11
post #291 of 22084
06-21-2007 | Posts: 1,684
Joined: Mar 2007
Quote:
Originally Posted by AustinSTI View Post

Done (though why you watched this I don't know)

I told fettastic when he has a thread he never added it. My girl bought it, but I also watch it...

Three words


Beyonce+wet shirt=
ajamils's Avatar ajamils
01:26 PM Liked: 10
post #292 of 22084
06-21-2007 | Posts: 1,676
Joined: Jan 2007
Quote:
Originally Posted by Iggster View Post

Three words


Beyonce+wet shirt=

Now that alone makes me wanna watch it but too bad my wife watches all the movies with me and she won't let me *enjoy* it
JosephShaw's Avatar JosephShaw
02:02 PM Liked: 12
post #293 of 22084
06-21-2007 | Posts: 1,835
Joined: Apr 2005
Quote:
Originally Posted by Icemage View Post

There is something that bothered me a lot about Fettastic's original list, and continues to bother me about this one.

The idea of ranking titles within a tier is a noble one, but what seems to happen is that people argue a lot not just about the actual tier, but placement within a tier. This is going to become very unmanageable once there are not hundreds, but thousands of titles.

We had a system worked out for this based on ranking them by their vote score. The polling/scoring system AustinSTI and I developed would have been resistant to a single person or even a small group from adversely affecting the rating of the video, would have counted everyone's vote, and would have placed the video in an absolute ranking in the tiers, which would have made it amazingly easy to rank things based on their overall score. However, Alan/AVS initially went along with what we were trying to do, but they quickly decided to implement their own review forum (their right and more power to them as this is their house and we are but guests) that doesn't really provide what we need. I was hoping it would help us, but unfortunately it does not.

Of course, where there are thousands of titles on the market, it will be far too cumbersome to keep this list in a forum post.

Quote:


I feel we should do away with the pecking order inside of tiers, and flatly indicate that all titles within a tier are roughly equal in eye candy factor.

I disagree, as this list was always about pecking order. Being too granular would be suicide, but saying there aren't wild differences between the top and bottom of a tier is ludicrous. It doesn't matter so much in the extreme upper and lower tiers, but matters a great deal in the middle tiers (2-4)

Quote:


I also think that Art Sonneborn brought up a good point regarding obvious director's intent. I think a second list is not a good idea, but perhaps an asterisk marking to indicate that a film has an obvious excellent transfer, but has a visual style that keeps it from being at the top of the list (case in point: Sky Captain and the World of Tomorrow). One might make the same notation for Sleepy Hollow, and perhaps Chronos as well.

That is not a bad idea at all. It would certainly be workable, but really only for films where the directors intent is obvious. Still, I see no reason to add it, provided it's used within reason.
maverick0716's Avatar maverick0716
03:12 PM Liked: 10
post #294 of 22084
06-21-2007 | Posts: 2,096
Joined: Dec 2004
Quote:
Originally Posted by AustinSTI View Post

Bottom of Tier 0; I haven't seen this so would like confirmation.

Wow, Tier 0 seems like quite the bold comment......I have this one coming in the mail for rent, so I'll let you know in a few days....but if it really is Tier 0 (which I doubt) then that's incredible for an old movie.

EDIT: Son of a bitch! I have both HD DVD and Blu Ray versions of that movie coming in the mail for rent. I usually put both versions in my queue and when one of them ships, I take the other one off my list.......I forgot this time, haha.
maverick0716's Avatar maverick0716
03:16 PM Liked: 10
post #295 of 22084
06-21-2007 | Posts: 2,096
Joined: Dec 2004
Does anyone else think that this title is way too low in the Tier ranking? I think this is one of the better looking movies I've seen as far as clarity is concerned.......very good looking movie in HD. In my opinion it should be above Layer Cake (I own both).
Icemage's Avatar Icemage
07:50 PM Liked: 10
post #296 of 22084
06-21-2007 | Posts: 1,978
Joined: Feb 2007
Quote:
Originally Posted by JosephShaw View Post

I disagree, as this list was always about pecking order. Being too granular would be suicide, but saying there aren't wild differences between the top and bottom of a tier is ludicrous. It doesn't matter so much in the extreme upper and lower tiers, but matters a great deal in the middle tiers (2-4)

That's sort of the point, though, isn't it? What's the point of having a Tier 2 if you're going to have vast differences within the tier? I think it'd make more sense to split Tier 2 into, say, Tier 2A and Tier 2B or just renumber them entirely to allow the Tier system to do its work rather than having everyone chip in $.02 on where precisely they though a movie belonged based on the results on their screen.

This is particularly true when you have people who are issuing opinions when watching on 720p units versus 1080p units. The amount of lost detail when converting from 1080 to 720 is pretty noticable, so you could have two totally accurate opinions that diverse based on the hardware involved.

Honestly, it's less work to compare a newly released title against the (say) 50 titles in a "Tier 2A" versus the 50 titles in "Tier 2B" instead of saying "Well, this new release looks better than movie X which is on the top of Tier 2, but worse than movie Y which is in the middle of Tier 2 because of reason Z."
oleus's Avatar oleus
08:48 PM Liked: 14
post #297 of 22084
06-21-2007 | Posts: 3,576
Joined: Apr 2002
Quote:
Originally Posted by maverick0716 View Post

Does anyone else think that this title is way too low in the Tier ranking? I think this is one of the better looking movies I've seen as far as clarity is concerned.......very good looking movie in HD. In my opinion it should be above Layer Cake (I own both).


i think it looks stellar. one of the best BD's i've seen.
Iggster's Avatar Iggster
09:22 PM Liked: 11
post #298 of 22084
06-21-2007 | Posts: 1,684
Joined: Mar 2007
Quote:
Originally Posted by Icemage View Post


This is particularly true when you have people who are issuing opinions when watching on 720p units versus 1080p units. The amount of lost detail when converting from 1080 to 720 is pretty noticable, so you could have two totally accurate opinions that diverse based on the hardware involved.

you are VERY right

just an example of pictures ive found on the net of different displays/setup

first 720p and possibly no sound system or terrible imaging,sound stage,reflections, all or some of those apply to that setup. and most likely not even isf calibrated.




Heres a setup that actually looks like they took the time to calibrate everything the right way



Iggster's Avatar Iggster
09:24 PM Liked: 11
post #299 of 22084
06-21-2007 | Posts: 1,684
Joined: Mar 2007
Just to show you guys that we will never get a position where everyone agrees on the placement, cause systems vary greatly.
Garconis's Avatar Garconis
06:16 AM Liked: 10
post #300 of 22084
06-22-2007 | Posts: 48
Joined: Oct 2006
Quote:
Originally Posted by AustinSTI View Post

Bottom of Tier 0; I haven't seen this so would like confirmation.

I'm willing to bet that a film from the 60s, isn't in Tier 0. Probably Tier 1. Hopefully we can get someone else who has seen this to respond. I know HDDigest rated the video quality as 4.5 / 5.
Tags: High Definition , Blu Ray Movies

Reply Blu-ray Software

Subscribe to this Thread

Powered by vBadvanced CMPS v3.2.3