The New PQ Tier thread for Blu-Ray - Discussion - Page 16 - AVS Forum
Forum Jump: 
 58Likes
Reply
 
Thread Tools
post #451 of 21905 Old 07-14-2007, 08:05 PM
Wireless member
 
pepar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Quintana Roo ... in my mind
Posts: 25,039
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 102 Post(s)
Liked: 156
Es "un momento, por favor?"


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
- it's never done!


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.



To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
pepar is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #452 of 21905 Old 07-14-2007, 09:00 PM
Advanced Member
 
Mikeoz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Posts: 531
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
What is the general PQ difference between Tier 2 and 3? I've been reluctant to pick up some Tier 3 titles because I'm concerned the PQ may not be that good, but maybe I'm overly concerned?

I currently have all Tier 1/2 titles (POTC, Casino Royale, Black hawk down, Layer Cake) and find the PQ outstanding. I will be buying a few other movies that I like KOH, Fifth Element, and some others, but do Tier 3 titles have very good PQ as well? I'm curious if there's a big (very noticeable) step down in PQ. Thanks!
Mikeoz is offline  
post #453 of 21905 Old 07-14-2007, 09:34 PM
AVS Special Member
 
ajamils's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Richmond, Tx
Posts: 1,676
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Just finished watching the remastered version of Fifth Element. It has some soft scenes but overall picture was great. I think that it should be in the middle of Tier 1.

[color=Blue]
psn id: hunter4life
Live Gamertag: huntre4life (notice "re" not "er" in hunter)
ajamils is offline  
post #454 of 21905 Old 07-14-2007, 09:48 PM
AVS Special Member
 
maverick0716's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: BC, Canada
Posts: 2,096
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mikeoz View Post

What is the general PQ difference between Tier 2 and 3? I've been reluctant to pick up some Tier 3 titles because I'm concerned the PQ may not be that good, but maybe I'm overly concerned?

I currently have all Tier 1/2 titles (POTC, Casino Royale, Black hawk down, Layer Cake) and find the PQ outstanding. I will be buying a few other movies that I like KOH, Fifth Element, and some others, but do Tier 3 titles have very good PQ as well? I'm curious if there's a big (very noticeable) step down in PQ. Thanks!

The picture quality on Tier 3 titles is still very good......much better than any regular DVDs.

Panasonic 42PX75U Plasma
PS3 60 GB
Xbox 360 Elite
Toshiba HD-A2
Pioneer VSX-1018
Polk Audio RM6750
maverick0716 is offline  
post #455 of 21905 Old 07-15-2007, 12:50 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Supermans's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 3,086
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 34
Quote:
Originally Posted by maverick0716 View Post

The picture quality on Tier 3 titles is still very good......much better than any regular DVDs.

A tier 3 title is not "Very Good"..
Tier 3 means Few 3D effects, some digital noise/artifacting. Fantastic 4 does not look much better than the upconvert SD-DVD and is the best tier 3. Spend your money on Tier 0, 1 and 2 titles to get your money's worth unless it is a must have favorite movie that just got a mediocre transfer/encode..

These below are tier 3 titles I would consider but nothing more..

Fantastic 4
King Arthur
The Brothers Grimm
Eragon
Supermans is offline  
post #456 of 21905 Old 07-15-2007, 06:18 AM
Senior Member
 
akrias's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 232
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
i bought dead mans chest when i got my ps3, i have it connected to a mits diamond 46" lcd via hdmi.

in the scene where jack parrow falls through the bridges and lands on the ground, right after the stick spears the ground hethe camera shows him looking at the stick from the side. the entire background of vegatation is just a mottled mess of compression artifacts for me.

also, chapter 4, jack sparrow grabs the lanterns goes below deck, in the scene right after he turns the key in the lock, when he swings the lantern around in the darkened room i saw 2 different colored sets of pixilized artifact things.

i got rid of those by turning down my brightness, but even still, bright or not, should i be seeing that? and there is no helping the veg in the stick scene.

the rest of the movie is indeed pretty much flaewless, but how could you all have missed these 2 scenes i picked up on the first time i watched? its a T0 deal breaker imo.
akrias is offline  
post #457 of 21905 Old 07-15-2007, 08:25 AM
Member
 
wmitchell23's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Indianapolis, IN
Posts: 61
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by akrias View Post

i bought dead mans chest when i got my ps3, i have it connected to a mits diamond 46" lcd via hdmi.

in the scene where jack parrow falls through the bridges and lands on the ground, right after the stick spears the ground hethe camera shows him looking at the stick from the side. the entire background of vegatation is just a mottled mess of compression artifacts for me.

also, chapter 4, jack sparrow grabs the lanterns goes below deck, in the scene right after he turns the key in the lock, when he swings the lantern around in the darkened room i saw 2 different colored sets of pixilized artifact things.

i got rid of those by turning down my brightness, but even still, bright or not, should i be seeing that? and there is no helping the veg in the stick scene.

I saw none of what you are describing in either scene. My equipment: PS3 connected through HDMI to a Samsung 1080p DLP.

Unless you're talking about the dirt that flys up when the stick first penetrates the ground or the fact that the background is out of focus, I see absolutely no artifacts.

If everyone else experienced what you have seen on your display, then there's no way this title would've stayed at tier 0 for as long as it has. A title is only as good as it's worst flaw.

My setup:50" DLP 1920x1080p@60hz
Viewing distance: 7ft
wmitchell23 is offline  
post #458 of 21905 Old 07-15-2007, 09:43 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Supermans's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 3,086
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 34
Quote:
Originally Posted by akrias View Post

i bought dead mans chest when i got my ps3, i have it connected to a mits diamond 46" lcd via hdmi.

in the scene where jack parrow falls through the bridges and lands on the ground, right after the stick spears the ground hethe camera shows him looking at the stick from the side. the entire background of vegatation is just a mottled mess of compression artifacts for me.

also, chapter 4, jack sparrow grabs the lanterns goes below deck, in the scene right after he turns the key in the lock, when he swings the lantern around in the darkened room i saw 2 different colored sets of pixilized artifact things.

i got rid of those by turning down my brightness, but even still, bright or not, should i be seeing that? and there is no helping the veg in the stick scene.

the rest of the movie is indeed pretty much flaewless, but how could you all have missed these 2 scenes i picked up on the first time i watched? its a T0 deal breaker imo.

This sounds like a problem with your HDTV's image settings. You may have Digital Noise Reduction or a color image enhancer being applied or some other external issue like your color or brightness too high if you are seeing something strange or wrong with that scene. This movie is tier 0 as mentioned above and is at the top of the tier list for a reason. If the movie did have problems with that scene you would have described, it would be upper tier 1 perhaps or lower...
Supermans is offline  
post #459 of 21905 Old 07-15-2007, 12:01 PM
AVS Special Member
 
ditch-digger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: In the middle of the woods New Hampshire
Posts: 1,124
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 11
Quote:
Originally Posted by maverick0716 View Post

That's interesting to hear........because I would compare Pirates 2 to King Kong on HD DVD as one of the best film based HD transfers I've seen.


no way....poc is awesome..

king kong breathtaking....possibly the best pq on any format..
ditch-digger is offline  
post #460 of 21905 Old 07-15-2007, 02:51 PM
Senior Member
 
akrias's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 232
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
maybe someone can help me then? im far from a professional here at this, and i live in a pretty rural part of AZ so theres noone really i can hire to pro calibrate my set. you guys are the closest things to pro help i have at my disposal, and you're free =P

all joking aside, my specific tv medel is LT-46231 as i said before it is a mits diamond sticker says manufactuired in may 2007. i have a PS3 for my blu ray player. small detail probably of minor importance here, my HDMI cable is really generic, 12$ for a 6 foot stretch from the local dish installation place. it is actually HDMI to DVI then i have a small 2 inch long DVI to HDMI thing on the end of it. picture quality is generally really good, i am blown away.

i did try going direct from HDMI out of PS3 into my DVI on the mits thus negating the DVI to HDMI adapter, the problems in PoC: DMC still exist, exactly as before. no visable PQ difference between the two connection methods, but there are some wierd lines that i dont like when the PS3 is switching resolutions

the copy of POCMC i have is the standard 2 disk set that best buy carries, yes, it is a blu ray disk. im at least pro enough to know i wasnt trying to play a SD dvd =P my daughter is on summer break and has our camera or i would post pictures of the specific issues i am having.

as a side note, the transformers 1080p trailer i downloaded from the playstation store has HIGH levels of compression pixelization (dunno the technical term, but thats what i call it.) the scene where the military is taking down bumblebee on the bridge is absolutly horrid. other scenes like starscream landing in the street are BEAUTIFUL and imo, perfect. my PQ has a high level of variation im not sure im comfortable with considering i just dropped 3k on the set and 500 on the PS3. small change to some, but certainly enough to net myself some quality PQ.

just so you all know where i am, here are my settings i am using, perhaps im just way out of line here with the settings for this set. i tried some of the ones in the set's thread, but be it lighting or what have you, these numbers are what my eyes tell me is right for my environment.

Contrast: 61
Brightness: 33
Color: 31
Tint: 31
Sharpness: 15
Color Temp.: High
Deep Field Imager: On (i know, i know, but it really dosnt crush the blacks as far as i can tell on this set)
Sharp Edge: On (again, i know... but i love it!)
Video Noise: Off (was on low)
Backlight: 30
Picture Mode: Natural

Perfect Color Settings are
Magenta: 31
Red: 31
Yellow: 31
Green: 22
Cyan: 35
Blue: 28

Perfect Tint is default as all colors: 31

I apologise for being so long winded, im just unsure of where the problem lies and i would love for it to go away. thank you all very very much.

any suggestions on another location i should repost this to find more specific help (like lcdsection or PS3 section) would be greatly appreciated.
akrias is offline  
post #461 of 21905 Old 07-15-2007, 03:20 PM
AVS Special Member
 
lrstevens421's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: The Big Apple
Posts: 3,653
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by akrias View Post

maybe someone can help me then? im far from a professional here at this, and i live in a pretty rural part of AZ so theres noone really i can hire to pro calibrate my set. you guys are the closest things to pro help i have at my disposal, and you're free =P

all joking aside, my specific tv medel is LT-46231 as i said before it is a mits diamond sticker says manufactuired in may 2007. i have a PS3 for my blu ray player. small detail probably of minor importance here, my HDMI cable is really generic, 12$ for a 6 foot stretch from the local dish installation place. it is actually HDMI to DVI then i have a small 2 inch long DVI to HDMI thing on the end of it. picture quality is generally really good, i am blown away.

i did try going direct from HDMI out of PS3 into my DVI on the mits thus negating the DVI to HDMI adapter, the problems in PoC: DMC still exist, exactly as before. no visable PQ difference between the two connection methods, but there are some wierd lines that i dont like when the PS3 is switching resolutions

the copy of POCMC i have is the standard 2 disk set that best buy carries, yes, it is a blu ray disk. im at least pro enough to know i wasnt trying to play a SD dvd =P my daughter is on summer break and has our camera or i would post pictures of the specific issues i am having.

as a side note, the transformers 1080p trailer i downloaded from the playstation store has HIGH levels of compression pixelization (dunno the technical term, but thats what i call it.) the scene where the military is taking down bumblebee on the bridge is absolutly horrid. other scenes like starscream landing in the street are BEAUTIFUL and imo, perfect. my PQ has a high level of variation im not sure im comfortable with considering i just dropped 3k on the set and 500 on the PS3. small change to some, but certainly enough to net myself some quality PQ.

just so you all know where i am, here are my settings i am using, perhaps im just way out of line here with the settings for this set. i tried some of the ones in the set's thread, but be it lighting or what have you, these numbers are what my eyes tell me is right for my environment.

Contrast: 61
Brightness: 33
Color: 31
Tint: 31
Sharpness: 15
Color Temp.: High
Deep Field Imager: On (i know, i know, but it really dosnt crush the blacks as far as i can tell on this set)
Sharp Edge: On (again, i know... but i love it!)
Video Noise: Off (was on low)
Backlight: 30
Picture Mode: Natural

Perfect Color Settings are
Magenta: 31
Red: 31
Yellow: 31
Green: 22
Cyan: 35
Blue: 28

Perfect Tint is default as all colors: 31

I apologise for being so long winded, im just unsure of where the problem lies and i would love for it to go away. thank you all very very much.

any suggestions on another location i should repost this to find more specific help (like lcdsection or PS3 section) would be greatly appreciated.

Maybe you should discuss that here in the LT-46131/231 owners thread.

Making the most out of what I got.
lrstevens421 is offline  
post #462 of 21905 Old 07-15-2007, 04:12 PM
Senior Member
 
akrias's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 232
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
i reposted my question there, thanks for the advice.
akrias is offline  
post #463 of 21905 Old 07-15-2007, 08:47 PM
Advanced Member
 
roller11's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Posts: 649
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 18 Post(s)
Liked: 16
Quote:
Originally Posted by lgans316 View Post

Some serious corrections required

TIER 1

Pearl Harbor (Though the presentation is grainy this is one among the SHARPEST and COLORFUL transfer that is available in Blu-ray)

TIER 2

Enemy of the State (Should be promoted to TIER 2)

TIER 3

Kung Fu Hustle (Doesn't deserve to be in Tier 2)

BY FAR the biggest goof on this list is "Black Hawk Down" ...Tier 1 ?!?
Are you kidding me? It should be at best Tier 4, probably tier 5, as
it is extremely grainy. So much so, it almost doesn't look like high
definition.
Anyone who gets this title will be extremely disappointed if they believe
a ranking of tier 1.

Also, I mildly disagree with 'The Prestige ' at tier 2, should be tier 1. Very sharp,
great colors. Only thing holding it back is it is a little bit grainy,
certainly less grainy than 90% of all the titles out there.
roller11 is offline  
post #464 of 21905 Old 07-15-2007, 08:56 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
Rob Tomlin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: SoCal
Posts: 13,752
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 11
Quote:
Originally Posted by roller11 View Post

BY FAR the biggest goof on this list is "Black Hawk Down" ...Tier 1 ?!?
Are you kidding me? It should be at best Tier 4, probably tier 5, as
it is extremely grainy. So much so, it almost doesn't look like high
definition.
Anyone who gets this title will be extremely disappointed if they believe
a ranking of tier 1.

Also, I mildly disagree with 'The Prestige ' at tier 2, should be tier 1. Very sharp,
great colors. Only thing holding it back is it is a little bit grainy,
certainly less grainy than 90% of all the titles out there.

This post is both ridiculous and plain naive.

Do you realize that all film has grain? ALL film! Calling a title "so grainy" that "it almost doesn't look like high definition" doesn't even make sense.


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
Rob Tomlin is offline  
post #465 of 21905 Old 07-15-2007, 08:57 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Iggster's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: signal hill, cali
Posts: 1,684
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 6 Post(s)
Liked: 11
Quote:
Originally Posted by roller11 View Post

BY FAR the biggest goof on this list is "Black Hawk Down" ...Tier 1 ?!?
Are you kidding me? It should be at best Tier 4, probably tier 5, as
it is extremely grainy. So much so, it almost doesn't look like high
definition.
Anyone who gets this title will be extremely disappointed if they believe
a ranking of tier 1.

I wont lie, but when I bought my copy which was the 2nd blu ray title ive ever owned I was extremely disappointed, but it isnt tier 5... it belongs somewhere in lower tier 2.


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
Iggster is offline  
post #466 of 21905 Old 07-15-2007, 09:24 PM
Advanced Member
 
roller11's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Posts: 649
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 18 Post(s)
Liked: 16
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rob Tomlin View Post

Calling a title "so grainy" that "it almost doesn't look like high definition" doesn't even make sense.

So, according to you, all film has grain, so all film is the same. No difference
in quality, tier 0 = tier 1 = tier 2,etc.
That makes your post not only ridiculous, but just plain wrong.
roller11 is offline  
post #467 of 21905 Old 07-15-2007, 10:13 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Supermans's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 3,086
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 34
Quote:
Originally Posted by roller11 View Post

BY FAR the biggest goof on this list is "Black Hawk Down" ...Tier 1 ?!?
Are you kidding me? It should be at best Tier 4, probably tier 5, as
it is extremely grainy. So much so, it almost doesn't look like high
definition.
Anyone who gets this title will be extremely disappointed if they believe
a ranking of tier 1.

Also, I mildly disagree with 'The Prestige ' at tier 2, should be tier 1. Very sharp,
great colors. Only thing holding it back is it is a little bit grainy,
certainly less grainy than 90% of all the titles out there.

Do you want all the movie's to look like CSI: Miami?
Supermans is offline  
post #468 of 21905 Old 07-15-2007, 10:54 PM
AVS Special Member
 
MidnightWatcher's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: The Great White North
Posts: 6,011
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by roller11 View Post

BY FAR the biggest goof on this list is "Black Hawk Down" ...Tier 1 ?!?
Are you kidding me? It should be at best Tier 4, probably tier 5, as
it is extremely grainy. So much so, it almost doesn't look like high
definition.
Anyone who gets this title will be extremely disappointed if they believe
a ranking of tier 1.

Also, I mildly disagree with 'The Prestige ' at tier 2, should be tier 1. Very sharp,
great colors. Only thing holding it back is it is a little bit grainy,
certainly less grainy than 90% of all the titles out there.

To each their own. I think a film could be quite grainy and still be Tier 1 if it is intentional grain. This was the director's intent. For titles like this though it might be good to note "Intentional Grain" on the tier list.

From what I recall, 300 was very grainy as well in the theater. It'll be interesting to see your take on this title.

Please feel free to visit
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
or follow my NEWS feed on
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
.
MidnightWatcher is offline  
post #469 of 21905 Old 07-16-2007, 08:16 AM
Advanced Member
 
roller11's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Posts: 649
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 18 Post(s)
Liked: 16
Quote:
Originally Posted by Supermans View Post

Do you want all the movie's to look like CSI: Miami?

No. "CSI", maybe, "Everybody Hates Chris" definitely!...but not "CSI: Miami".
roller11 is offline  
post #470 of 21905 Old 07-16-2007, 09:52 AM
Advanced Member
 
BBS G35's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 952
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 15
So what titles have changed position in the Tier Thread the most over the past couple months or so?
BBS G35 is offline  
post #471 of 21905 Old 07-16-2007, 10:12 AM
AVS Special Member
 
youknowryan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 1,342
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by roller11 View Post

BY FAR the biggest goof on this list is "Black Hawk Down" ...Tier 1 ?!?
Are you kidding me? It should be at best Tier 4, probably tier 5, as
it is extremely grainy. So much so, it almost doesn't look like high
definition.
Anyone who gets this title will be extremely disappointed if they believe
a ranking of tier 1.

Also, I mildly disagree with 'The Prestige ' at tier 2, should be tier 1. Very sharp,
great colors. Only thing holding it back is it is a little bit grainy,
certainly less grainy than 90% of all the titles out there.


Black Hawk Down is most certainly a tier 1 film, as is The Prestige for that matter. Not all films have a glossed over or softened presentation. BHD is supposed to look that way and the transfer is 100% on the money. Now whether or not you like that look is another issue. If that is the case then a good number of BD and HD DVDs will not appeal to you. OTOH since you liked the Prestige and if you have an HD DVD player try Batman Begins, it looks very much the same and you will like it.

TOPIC CHANGE:

When will the rerelease of the 5th element be added to the tier list?

USE THE SEARCH BUTTON BEFORE POSTING QUESTIONS.
youknowryan is offline  
post #472 of 21905 Old 07-16-2007, 11:57 AM
Advanced Member
 
roller11's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Posts: 649
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 18 Post(s)
Liked: 16
Quote:
Originally Posted by youknowryan View Post

BHD is supposed to look that way

BHD was not "suppose" to look a certain way, it is what it is. It looks bad/grainy cause
poor quality film was used.
roller11 is offline  
post #473 of 21905 Old 07-16-2007, 12:14 PM
Wireless member
 
pepar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Quintana Roo ... in my mind
Posts: 25,039
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 102 Post(s)
Liked: 156
I think either the point is being missed or some do not understand. When films look "grainy," it's not due to "poor quality film." When films have a shifted and/or muted color palatte that, too, has nothing to do with "poor quality film." These are artistic choices.


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
- it's never done!


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.



To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
pepar is offline  
post #474 of 21905 Old 07-16-2007, 01:25 PM
Advanced Member
 
roller11's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Posts: 649
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 18 Post(s)
Liked: 16
Quote:
Originally Posted by pepar View Post

I think either the point is being missed or some do not understand. When films look "grainy," it's not due to "poor quality film." When films have a shifted and/or muted color palatte that, too, has nothing to do with "poor quality film." These are artistic choices.

No, it is you who doesn't understand. Read the first post of this thread,
specifically:
"Please keep in mind that the list is not intended to reflect the quality of a director's intention and such judgments should be avoided when assessing picture quality."

This thread refers to the visual characteristics/properties of the movie.
It specifically DOES NOT reference what the director was thinking
about while he was filming. So if a film was made with artifacts/graininess/softness/low resolution/blurred/blotchy colors/poor contrast/
crushed blacks/noise/film scratches/ , and all these bad visuals were 'intentional', doesn't matter. It still deserves a low ranking because it looks bad. Doesn't matter
what the director was thinking about, the visual quality is an objective
measure and therefore all that matters to this thread.
roller11 is offline  
post #475 of 21905 Old 07-16-2007, 02:36 PM
AVS Special Member
 
patrick99's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 3,912
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2 Post(s)
Liked: 11
Quote:
Originally Posted by youknowryan View Post

OTOH since you liked the Prestige and if you have an HD DVD player try Batman Begins, it looks very much the same and you will like it.

patrick99 is offline  
post #476 of 21905 Old 07-16-2007, 04:38 PM
Advanced Member
 
roller11's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Posts: 649
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 18 Post(s)
Liked: 16
Quote:
Originally Posted by pepar View Post

just what did you think "Please keep in mind that the list is not intended to reflect the quality of a director's intention and such judgments should be avoided when assessing picture quality" meant?

I appreciate the fact that you resent being proven wrong, but
do you see the phrase

' is NOT intended to reflect director's intention's'

or are you blinded by your
refusal to admit you are wrong?

Read the quote over and over till you see the word "not".
The word "not" makes me right and you wrong.

I'll say it again and again till you finally get it...the tier idea is a way of
communicating how good a given movie looks in Blu-ray. It is NOT a vehical
to arbitrarily and without basis interpret director's intentions.
roller11 is offline  
post #477 of 21905 Old 07-16-2007, 05:11 PM
Wireless member
 
pepar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Quintana Roo ... in my mind
Posts: 25,039
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 102 Post(s)
Liked: 156
Quote:
Originally Posted by roller11 View Post

I appreciate the fact that you resent being proven wrong, but
do you see the phrase

' is NOT intended to reflect director's intention's'

or are you blinded by your
refusal to admit you are wrong?

Read the quote over and over till you see the word "not".
The word "not" makes me right and you wrong.

I'll say it again and again till you finally get it...the tier idea is a way of
communicating how good a given movie looks in Blu-ray. It is NOT a vehical
to arbitrarily and without basis interpret director's intentions.

I think we might be able to stop right here. We're clearly reading it differently. By this "For example, Kingdom of Heaven was intentionally shot with a grainy film stock and different color palettes to fit the subject matter, but this stylistic choice did not hinder the sharp detail of the picture" if the stylistic choice HAD hindered the sharp detail of the picture, it would have lost a tier or two?

While I'd guess that your answer is most likely "yes," I fail to see how, in that case, the director's artistic choices are NOT being arbitrarily judged. And by your explanation of the tier system's purpose, an overly grainy film - again by the director's choice - that is digitally cleaned up, would possibly move up a tier or two?

And then there's "A good example of this is the intentional softness of Sky Captain and the World of Tomorrow. While the picture of the film is very good and looks very film-like, it lacks depth." I believe this movie, like so many recently, is purposely shot to be comic book-like and that the flatness referred to is intentional. So here the director's stylistic choices are clearly being arbitrarily judged.

We used to judge the quality of the transfer, i.e. the faithfulness of the DVD to the "reference" - the movie itself. And the first tier's description even says "The picture quality of the transfer is in pristine shape and practically perfect with no visible video artifacts." I find this somewhat self-contradictory, but to substitute "how's it make my home theater look" for that seems superficial.

Just my confused $.02. Perhaps a non-combatant could chime in here with some clarification.


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
- it's never done!


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.



To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
pepar is offline  
post #478 of 21905 Old 07-16-2007, 07:02 PM
Advanced Member
 
roller11's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Posts: 649
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 18 Post(s)
Liked: 16
Quote:
Originally Posted by pepar View Post

"For example, Kingdom of Heaven was intentionally shot with a grainy film stock and different color palettes to fit the subject matter, but this stylistic choice did not hinder the sharp detail of the picture" if the stylistic choice HAD hindered the sharp detail of the picture, it would have lost a tier or two?

While I'd guess that your answer is most likely "yes," I fail to see how, in that case, the director's artistic choices are NOT being arbitrarily judged.

Just like the quote says, KoH has sharp detail, that is the only thing being judged in terms of tier position. Stylistic choice is a subject for a different thread.

Quote:
Originally Posted by pepar View Post

And by your explanation of the tier system's purpose, an overly grainy film - again by the director's choice - that is digitally cleaned up, would possibly move up a tier or two?

Yes, of course it would move up since by definition, less artifacts means
higher ranking. Of course this assumes that no other side effects (e.g.
softness) happen when the artifact 'graininess' is lessened.

Quote:
Originally Posted by pepar View Post

And then there's "A good example of this is the intentional softness of Sky Captain and the World of Tomorrow. While the picture of the film is very good and looks very film-like, it lacks depth." I believe this movie, like so many recently, is purposely shot to be comic book-like and that the flatness referred to is intentional. So here the director's stylistic choices are clearly being arbitrarily judged.

The stylistic choices are mentioned, but not judged. Again, the quote
says that it is judged on "lack of depth".

Quote:
Originally Posted by pepar View Post

We used to judge the quality of the transfer, i.e. the faithfulness of the DVD to the "reference" - the movie itself. And the first tier's description even says "The picture quality of the transfer is in pristine shape and practically perfect with no visible video artifacts." I find this somewhat self-contradictory,

It is contradictory only because it disagrees with your position.
roller11 is offline  
post #479 of 21905 Old 07-16-2007, 10:00 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
Rob Tomlin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: SoCal
Posts: 13,752
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 11
Quote:
Originally Posted by roller11 View Post

So, according to you, all film has grain, so all film is the same. No difference
in quality, tier 0 = tier 1 = tier 2,etc.
That makes your post not only ridiculous, but just plain wrong.

Why are you saying that I said things that I didn't say?

That makes your post not only ridiculous, but just plain wrong.


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
Rob Tomlin is offline  
post #480 of 21905 Old 07-17-2007, 12:06 AM
AVS Special Member
 
maverick0716's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: BC, Canada
Posts: 2,096
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rob Tomlin View Post

Why are you saying that I said things that I didn't say?

That makes your post not only ridiculous, but just plain wrong.

Seriously, every single thread that Roller11 posts in, he gets in a huge argument with at least one person......more often than not, a group of people. His ideas are absolutely ridiculous.

Panasonic 42PX75U Plasma
PS3 60 GB
Xbox 360 Elite
Toshiba HD-A2
Pioneer VSX-1018
Polk Audio RM6750
maverick0716 is offline  
Reply Blu-ray Software

Tags
High Definition , Blu Ray Movies

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