The New PQ Tier thread for Blu-Ray - Discussion - Page 55 - AVS Forum
Forum Jump: 
 13Likes
Reply
 
Thread Tools
post #1621 of 21642 Old 12-22-2007, 09:37 AM
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 Schlotkins View Post

I'm surprise Die hard hasn't been commented on. I'm on a 50" Pioneer 5070 from about 7-8 feet playing at 1080p24 out of a PS3 firmware 2.1. My reference is the "five star" DVD versions of these films. Not sure if they were the latest and greatest or not.

Die Hard: this movie looks better than the original DVD, but sadly, I can't say it's MUCH better. There is more detail, but not a ton. I'd say mid Bronze level.

Die Hard III: This movie is a big upgrade from the SD version. I would say Silver tier in the top third.

Let the bidding begin!
Chris

Excellent timing, since I just watched Die Hard 3 last night!

I was pretty happy with the PQ of this one, considering its a slightly older title. Definitely MUCH better than the SD DVD. Not the best of the best compared to many of the newer movies, but I think anyone who is a fan of this movie would be quite happy with the PQ here.

I completely agree with top third or even top 1/4 in the Silver Tier.
Rob Tomlin is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #1622 of 21642 Old 12-22-2007, 02:59 PM
Member
 
Rob G68's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 42
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by ajamils View Post

any word about Mr. and Mrs Smith ?

I watched Mr. and Mrs. Smith last night and I thought it looked great.
Also watched the Simpsons movie this week and it was incredible looking.

Panasonic Plasma TH-42PX77U (768P)
PS3-HDMI
10-12'
Rob G68 is offline  
post #1623 of 21642 Old 12-22-2007, 06:00 PM
Advanced Member
 
mr stroke's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 570
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 11
Got around to watching Tekkon Kinkreet last night and was very pleased, love the animation style of the film hand drawn/cg, colors pop off the screen and everything is really sharp
Id put in upper Tier 1

Sony BDPs1@1080i
Panny plasma 768
7 feet away
mr stroke is offline  
post #1624 of 21642 Old 12-22-2007, 07:44 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Kevin12586's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: NY
Posts: 4,057
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 17
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rob Tomlin View Post

Finally!

I don't have Directv, but I do get HDNetMovies, so I will have access to it.

They have been teasing us with this for quite a while now. Good to see that they have finally scheduled it!

I will be doing the same thing with this as I have with several other movies on HDNet: save it to my DVR's hard drive until the Blu-ray version is released! It makes for interesting comparisons.

Merry Christmas, I thought you would like the news
Kevin12586 is offline  
post #1625 of 21642 Old 12-23-2007, 05:39 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Schlotkins's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Posts: 1,871
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
A few more to report:

1) Rat: Unbelievable... enough said.

2) Bladerunner Final Cut: This was the first time I've seen this movie. The picture was good and there were some sharp shots. However, there was also som soft shots. I would say this movie is right around the quality I saw of 2001, except a tick better in my opinion. That would be near the top of the Silver tier or low end of the gold thread.

Chris
Schlotkins is offline  
post #1626 of 21642 Old 12-23-2007, 09:22 AM
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 Schlotkins View Post

A few more to report:



2) Bladerunner Final Cut: This was the first time I've seen this movie. The picture was good and there were some sharp shots. However, there was also som soft shots. I would say this movie is right around the quality I saw of 2001, except a tick better in my opinion. That would be near the top of the Silver tier or low end of the gold thread.

Chris

I agree.
patrick99 is offline  
post #1627 of 21642 Old 12-23-2007, 09:24 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
I watched Rush Hour 3 last night. Definitly very good picture quality on this one. I'd put it in the middle of Tier 1 for sure.

42" Panny Plasma (768p)
6-7 ft.
PS3 though HDMI

Panasonic 42PX75U Plasma
PS3 60 GB
Xbox 360 Elite
Toshiba HD-A2
Pioneer VSX-1018
Polk Audio RM6750
maverick0716 is offline  
post #1628 of 21642 Old 12-23-2007, 09:33 AM
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 Schlotkins View Post

....

2) Bladerunner Final Cut: This was the first time I've seen this movie. The picture was good and there were some sharp shots. However, there was also som soft shots. I would say this movie is right around the quality I saw of 2001, except a tick better in my opinion. That would be near the top of the Silver tier or low end of the gold thread.

Chris

I think anyone that is familiar with Blade Runner, and saw it in the theater would know to expect that there is going to be some softness.

I have this saved on my DVR from HDNet, and the biggest improvement that I was hoping for is in the area of contrast. Based on the screen caps in another thread, the improvement in contrast appears quite noticeable.
Rob Tomlin is offline  
post #1629 of 21642 Old 12-23-2007, 09:37 AM
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
28 Weeks Later

Not bad, not great. I will agree with Tier 2, but I think it is too high in Tier 2. Some scenes were pretty soft. The contrast wasn't great, so you really didn't get much depth.

I don't think this looked better than titles like Hellboy (which should be in Tier 1 anyway), Sahara, or Ghost Rider.

Slightly above mid Tier 2 for me.
Rob Tomlin is offline  
post #1630 of 21642 Old 12-23-2007, 03:37 PM
Member
 
jjwinterberg's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Redondo Beach, Ca.
Posts: 194
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 11
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rob Tomlin View Post

I think anyone that is familiar with Blade Runner, and saw it in the theater would know to expect that there is going to be some softness.

I have this saved on my DVR from HDNet, and the biggest improvement that I was hoping for is in the area of contrast. Based on the screen caps in another thread, the improvement in contrast appears quite noticeable.

I watched The Final Cut last night on my AE1000 projected on a 120" screen and I was blown away by the film. Both PQ and AQ are absolutely astounding. Given the age of the film and the exceptionally difficult lighting that Ridley was shooting with (lots of fog/rain and many shots into the setting sun) I was not disappointed with the sharpness at all. But Rob hit it right it's the contract and the black levels that just blew me away. I also have to say that the audio was about the best I've heard. I'm not one who appreciates an overblown soundtrack so when I say how good the audio is I'm referring to how well it was integrated across the sound field and how well it complimented the movie.

If it were me I would rate the movie in the lower half of the tier 1 discs.
jjwinterberg is offline  
post #1631 of 21642 Old 12-23-2007, 05:48 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 jjwinterberg View Post

I watched The Final Cut last night on my AE1000 projected on a 120" screen and I was blown away by the film. Both PQ and AQ are absolutely astounding. Given the age of the film and the exceptionally difficult lighting that Ridley was shooting with (lots of fog/rain and many shots into the setting sun) I was not disappointed with the sharpness at all. But Rob hit it right it's the contract and the black levels that just blew me away. I also have to say that the audio was about the best I've heard. I'm not one who appreciates an overblown soundtrack so when I say how good the audio is I'm referring to how well it was integrated across the sound field and how well it complimented the movie.

If it were me I would rate the movie in the lower half of the tier 1 discs.

I just finished watching it.

The above is a great post, and saves me some typing!

I am just tickled pink (haven't used that one in a while) with this disc! It has exceeded all of my expectations. The movie has never looked better. And....as mentioned above, it has never sounded better either! The TrueHD soundtrack is simply superb.

Disclaimer: I am a huge fan of this film. It may be having an impact on my objectivity in terms of overall picture quality. Then again, being such a huge fan of the movie means that I would also have pretty high expectations. As said above, they have been exceeded.

As I said in the Blade Runner thread, this is my favorite HDM disc I own yet (in terms of everything coming together: fantastic movie with excellent picture and sound).

Can't wait to get to the extras.

Damn I love this movie.
Rob Tomlin is offline  
post #1632 of 21642 Old 12-23-2007, 08:02 PM
Member
 
SteelSD's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 21
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by patrick99 View Post

I agree.

I disagree. Blade Runner was nowhere near the PQ of 2001 and I watched them back-to-back tonight (both holiday gifts) on a properly calibrated 40" Samsung LNT-4066F at @7 feet at 24fps.

While the PQ of Blade Runner is the best it's ever been, the 2001 PQ is simply outstanding, and not just for a movie that old. Incredible detail and solid pop throughout. While I wouldn't place 2001 in Tier 0, it's certainly better than the current Tier 2 placement (and Blade Runner belongs in low Tier 2).

Of course, I'm also the guy who produced posts nominating Galapagos for high Tier 1 or Tier 0 status. Nothing was done, yet now it's just above The Patriot? That's a joke. Unfortunately, maybe I don't have enough posts yet for my opinion to be credible even though I have a high-end 1080p set that's properly calibrated and fighter pilot vision (20/10).

Sorry to everyone for the mini-rant there, but it's starting to become obvious that this thread is open to AV "elitists" only, and that all contributions are not weighed equally.
SteelSD is offline  
post #1633 of 21642 Old 12-23-2007, 09:34 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 SteelSD View Post

I disagree. Blade Runner was nowhere near the PQ of 2001 and I watched them back-to-back tonight (both holiday gifts) on a properly calibrated 40" Samsung LNT-4066F at @7 feet at 24fps.

I have to completely disagree.

If anything Blade Runner has better picture quality than 2001. I think they are pretty close overall, but Blade Runner still has a clear edge in my opinion. And I watched these within a few days of each other, and I am very familiar with both movies.

Quote:


While the PQ of Blade Runner is the best it's ever been, the 2001 PQ is simply outstanding, and not just for a movie that old. Incredible detail and solid pop throughout. While I wouldn't place 2001 in Tier 0, it's certainly better than the current Tier 2 placement (and Blade Runner belongs in low Tier 2).

2001 does not have "outstanding" PQ throughout in my opinion. And it is too soft overall. There are screen caps that prove this.

Quote:


Of course, I'm also the guy who produced posts nominating Galapagos for high Tier 1 or Tier 0 status. Nothing was done, yet now it's just above The Patriot? That's a joke. Unfortunately, maybe I don't have enough posts yet for my opinion to be credible even though I have a high-end 1080p set that's properly calibrated and fighter pilot vision (20/10).

Sorry to everyone for the mini-rant there, but it's starting to become obvious that this thread is open to AV "elitists" only, and that all contributions are not weighed equally.

Stop playing the poor martyr. It isn't very becoming.

Several of my preferences haven't been moved to where I would prefer either, but I don't start crying about "AV Elitists".
Rob Tomlin is offline  
post #1634 of 21642 Old 12-23-2007, 10:25 PM
AVS Special Member
 
chris0's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Bay Area, CA
Posts: 1,808
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rob Tomlin View Post

Can't wait to get to the extras.

Damn I love this movie.

You need to make "Dangerous Days" on disc 2 your next stop. There's some really, really good stuff in there.

Pics from my TV here and here.
chris0 is offline  
post #1635 of 21642 Old 12-23-2007, 10:44 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 chris0 View Post

You need to make "Dangerous Days" on disc 2 your next stop. There's some really, really good stuff in there.

Thanks for the heads up. I was considering going to Disc 3 next, but I will just go to #2 based on your recommendation. Thanks.
Rob Tomlin is offline  
post #1636 of 21642 Old 12-24-2007, 01:38 AM
AVS Special Member
 
bplewis24's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Sacramento, CA.
Posts: 7,743
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 14
Quote:
Originally Posted by SteelSD View Post

Of course, I'm also the guy who produced posts nominating Galapagos for high Tier 1 or Tier 0 status. Nothing was done, yet now it's just above The Patriot? That's a joke. Unfortunately, maybe I don't have enough posts yet for my opinion to be credible even though I have a high-end 1080p set that's properly calibrated and fighter pilot vision (20/10).

I don't think that many have seen Galapagos yet, unfortunately. I have it in my netflix queue because of your original post a few weeks ago, but it's still wayyy down on the list so I won't see it for a while.

And btw, this thread really isn't an elitist type thread. There is complete turnover from the people that used to dominate the old thread and it's moderator/admin. I rarely ever posted in the old one and have begun to contribute more so to this one now that I've picked up on the hobby a bit more. I think the admins here just want a few corroborating opinions before they make a move with a title.

Brandon
bplewis24 is offline  
post #1637 of 21642 Old 12-24-2007, 04:18 AM
Senior Member
 
Jason One's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Posts: 453
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by ndjr View Post

How can IMAX: Roving Mars be TIER 1 -GOLD ! it`s one of the worst and unnatural HD I have seen!

I just watched this tonight, and I completely agree. This is clearly a case of extreme noise reduction. Everything in the image has that fake plastic look, lacking any texture. It looks horrible. There is also very obvious edge ringing throughout.

In fact, if you watch the making-of documentary (Mars: Past, Present & Future), you can see clips of the movie before the noise reduction was applied, and it looks far, far better.

I'm sad to say that this BD deserves a tier 4 ranking at best. It is a big disappointment, especially for an IMAX film.
Jason One is offline  
post #1638 of 21642 Old 12-24-2007, 04:45 AM
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 bplewis24 View Post

I don't think that many have seen Galapagos yet, unfortunately.

I watched a bit of this a while ago after seeing someone rave about it. It didn't look good to me. Soft.
patrick99 is offline  
post #1639 of 21642 Old 12-24-2007, 10:30 PM
Member
 
SteelSD's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 21
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rob Tomlin View Post

I have to completely disagree.

If anything Blade Runner has better picture quality than 2001. I think they are pretty close overall, but Blade Runner still has a clear edge in my opinion. And I watched these within a few days of each other, and I am very familiar with both movies.

2001 does not have "outstanding" PQ throughout in my opinion. And it is too soft overall. There are screen caps that prove this.

Screen caps might suggest such, but they don't "prove" such. In any case, feel free to link me. I'm not trying to be abrasive. I'd just like to compare those screenshots to what I'm seeing on my display.

Take a look at Blade Runner at @17:21 into the film (our introduction to Rachael). Maybe that example of blurry-face soured me, but I don't think so. I paused quite a bit during Blade Runner and saw many examples of soft picture quality. To be fair, we also see a good number of crisp scenes with excellent detail.

I've viewed "2001" a second time now. I've seen excellent detail and solid pop from many scenes. Early on, I wondered about softness with the scene in which the pen was floating, but that was a narrow-focus scene. The pen was crystal clear while the background was fuzzy. We see that in other scenes, and I might suggest that our attention is drawn away from the camera target because we expect everything to be crystal clear. My only concerns about the film after a second viewing are the lack of truly deep blacks and possibly some color degradation toward green on the edges over a couple of space scenes. It's not Tier 0, but it's certainly ahead of Blade Runner, IMO.

That doesn't mean my opinion is the end-all-be-all as to PQ, but I see a noticable difference between the two films, and it's not in Blade Runner's favor.

Quote:
Stop playing the poor martyr. It isn't very becoming.

Several of my preferences haven't been moved to where I would prefer either, but I don't start crying about "AV Elitists".

No one is playing the "martyr". But when feedback is asked and then not considered (for weeks), I get a little grumpy. The comments I made about "elitism" were borne of frustration. For that, I apologize.
SteelSD is offline  
post #1640 of 21642 Old 12-24-2007, 10:55 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 SteelSD View Post

Screen caps might suggest such, but they don't "prove" such. In any case, feel free to link me. I'm not trying to be abrasive. I'd just like to compare those screenshots to what I'm seeing on my display.

Screen caps don't prove it by themselves, but help support my opinion based on what I saw with my own eyes on my own screen.

Quote:
Take a look at Blade Runner at @17:21 into the film (our introduction to Rachael). Maybe that example of blurry-face soured me, but I don't think so. I paused quite a bit during Blade Runner and saw many examples of soft picture quality. To be fair, we also see a good number of crisp scenes with excellent detail.

I know exactly what scene you are talking about, and I very seriously doubt that anyone here will argue with you: that scene is, indeed, "soft"! But as you say, there were also a good number of "crisp" scenes with excellent detail. I thought that there were many more of those types of scenes than I was expecting, which was a fantastic surprise.

Quote:
I've viewed "2001" a second time now. I've seen excellent detail and solid pop from many scenes. Early on, I wondered about softness with the scene in which the pen was floating, but that was a narrow-focus scene. The pen was crystal clear while the background was fuzzy. We see that in other scenes, and I might suggest that our attention is drawn away from the camera target because we expect everything to be crystal clear. My only concerns about the film after a second viewing are the lack of truly deep blacks and possibly some color degradation toward green on the edges over a couple of space scenes. It's not Tier 0, but it's certainly ahead of Blade Runner, IMO.

First of all, I would like to commend you on your description of what you are seeing on 2001. Well done, and this is what this thread is about, as it helps further the analysis and discussion of the movies PQ.

I just found the overall quality of Blade Runner to be better than 2001. Blade Runner had fewer artifacts than 2001, better contrast and "pop", and even slightly better detail overall.....in my opinion.

I'm not saying there is a night and day difference, because there certainly isn't. They are fairly close.

Quote:
That doesn't mean my opinion is the end-all-be-all as to PQ, but I see a noticable difference between the two films, and it's not in Blade Runner's favor.

I feel exactly the same way, except I would say not in 2001's favor.


Quote:
No one is playing the "martyr". But when feedback is asked and then not considered (for weeks), I get a little grumpy. The comments I made about "elitism" were borne of frustration. For that, I apologize.

Fair enough.

Keep up the good work with your excellent descriptions as you have done here, and believe me, your comments will definitely be considered.

The people who are maintaining this list admittedly do not update it on a daily basis. In fact, it may only be weekly if that. But once they do update it, they tend to do a pretty good job and usually catch all of the titles that have been discussed for movement on the list (up or down).
Rob Tomlin is offline  
post #1641 of 21642 Old 12-25-2007, 11:45 AM
AVS Special Member
 
bplewis24's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Sacramento, CA.
Posts: 7,743
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 14
Quote:
Originally Posted by SteelSD View Post

Screen caps might suggest such, but they don't "prove" such. In any case, feel free to link me. I'm not trying to be abrasive. I'd just like to compare those screenshots to what I'm seeing on my display.

http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showt...6#post12477256

Some screen caps start there and there are more on the final page of the thread.

Brandon
bplewis24 is offline  
post #1642 of 21642 Old 12-25-2007, 12:50 PM
Member
 
goplay912's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 114
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 11
Shakira Oral Fixation Tour, lower Tier 1

Mitsubishi HC1500 720P
100" Projection
12-ft.
goplay912 is offline  
post #1643 of 21642 Old 12-25-2007, 02:14 PM
Member
 
SteelSD's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 21
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by bplewis24 View Post

http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showt...6#post12477256

Some screen caps start there and there are more on the final page of the thread.

Brandon

Thanks very much. I was able to find a number of "2001" screen shots that Rob noted comparing the BD/HD formats to the HD broadcast. The reason I asked Rob for those reference shots is that I wanted to go through the film again and compare. After doing so, I have to say that my display does not show the kind of image quality degradation evident in the BD/HD comparison shots. In the initial space station arrival scenes, the image I'm getting is actually superior to the HD broadcast screen shot. I see bright starfields- not the muted blips of white as displayed in the screen shots.

I don't know how to resolve that versus what I'm seeing in the screen shots other than to trust my player, my display, and my eyes. In some shots, I do see softness around the periphery of the image, but the focus is crystal clear on the subject.

Now onto the issues I do see:

Some of the image periphery (both sides) makes me wonder about film degradation. For example, at @47:10 in the shuttle we see what appears to be a good deal of fuzziness on both sides of the frame. The most evident is what, at first glance, looks to be artifacting in the window behind Dr. Floyd's head. But I have a hard time thinking it's macro blocking. This type of thing shows up in a good number of other shots as well. At @37:30, the sides of the screen are significantly lighter than mid-screen. Ditto at 38:05 where a green bleed starts to creep in on each side as the shuttle comes in for a landing.

Anyone have thoughts on whether this is likely an issue with the master versus the transfer?
SteelSD is offline  
post #1644 of 21642 Old 12-25-2007, 02:20 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 SteelSD View Post

Thanks very much. I was able to find a number of "2001" screen shots that Rob noted comparing the BD/HD formats to the HD broadcast. The reason I asked Rob for those reference shots is that I wanted to go through the film again and compare. After doing so, I have to say that my display does not show the kind of image quality degradation evident in the BD/HD comparison shots. In the initial space station arrival scenes, the image I'm getting is actually superior to the HD broadcast screen shot. I see bright starfields- not the muted blips of white as displayed in the screen shots.

I don't know how to resolve that versus what I'm seeing in the screen shots other than to trust my player, my display, and my eyes. In some shots, I do see softness around the periphery of the image, but the focus is crystal clear on the subject.

Now onto the issues I do see:

Some of the image periphery (both sides) makes me wonder about film degradation. For example, at @47:10 in the shuttle we see what appears to be a good deal of fuzziness on both sides of the frame. The most evident is what, at first glance, looks to be artifacting in the window behind Dr. Floyd's head. But I have a hard time thinking it's macro blocking. This type of thing shows up in a good number of other shots as well. At @37:30, the sides of the screen are significantly lighter than mid-screen. Ditto at 38:05 where a green bleed starts to creep in on each side as the shuttle comes in for a landing.

Anyone have thoughts on whether this is likely an issue with the master versus the transfer?

I know exactly what you are talking about, but I really don't know for sure if it is in the master, but my guess would be that it is, and has something to do with the photographic method that was used for those shots.
Rob Tomlin is offline  
post #1645 of 21642 Old 12-25-2007, 04:23 PM
AVS Special Member
 
bplewis24's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Sacramento, CA.
Posts: 7,743
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 14
Quote:
Originally Posted by ajamils View Post

any word about Mr. and Mrs Smith ?

http://bluray.highdefdigest.com/564/mrandmrssmith.html

Brandon
bplewis24 is offline  
post #1646 of 21642 Old 12-25-2007, 08:54 PM
Advanced Member
 
mr stroke's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 570
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 11
Paprika=Middle Tier 3

the PQ is all of the place and no where near the quality of other hand drawn stuff like Simpsons or Tekkon Kinkreet. PQ is soft as a babbies butt, really a let down conisdering how amazing Tekkon looks

Sony S1
Panny 58' 768
6-7 feet
mr stroke is offline  
post #1647 of 21642 Old 12-25-2007, 11:21 PM
Senior Member
 
Lil' Louie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 323
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Perfect placement on the simpsons movie BTW. Wonderful presentation from both the PQ and AQ dept.

Viewed on Sony KDS-55A3000 & PS3 1080/24p @ 7ft:
Lil' Louie is offline  
post #1648 of 21642 Old 12-26-2007, 02:34 AM
AVS Special Member
 
bplewis24's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Sacramento, CA.
Posts: 7,743
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 14
Finally got around to watching Spiderman 3. I thought it showed outstanding black-level throughout, good contrast though a bit on the warm side, and pretty good detail.

I agree it should be in the top half of Tier 1, but I think either it should be moved down a few spots or Fantastic Four: Rise of the Silver Surfer should be moved up a few spots.

Edit: I re-read the review at HDD for Spiderman 3, and I particularly agree with the following:

Quote:


As you would expect from a new release, the source is impeccable, with rich blacks and very bright contrast. Unfortunately, this leads me to my main gripe with the image -- the darker scenes actually look the best and most dimensional. Anything brightly lit or in daylight suffers from hot whites, which flatten out depth somewhat. Fleshtones also suffer, with even close-ups of the actors faces not looking natural in texture.

I got the same impression from the night scenes. A great example is near the beginning when Harry is chasing Spiderman around the city on the hover-board at night. And conversely I got the same impressions from the bright daylight scenes, although it isn't anywhere near bad. Anyhow, very good transfer, and the special effects were very good. Also the audio was pretty good.

Brandon
bplewis24 is offline  
post #1649 of 21642 Old 12-26-2007, 04:04 AM
AVS Special Member
 
lgans316's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Barking, Essex, London
Posts: 6,803
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 17
May I know why Rocky Balboa is in bottom of Silver band ? Should be on top of Tier 2.

Blu-ray : 340
lgans316 is online now  
post #1650 of 21642 Old 12-26-2007, 05:33 AM
Member
 
fareedrizkalla's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Egypt
Posts: 58
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
I think the main post that lists titles under which tier, should also list the defects present so people can get an idea why it is considered to belong to that tier.
fareedrizkalla 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