Total Recall Review Thread - Page 4 - AVS Forum
Forum Jump: 
Reply
 
Thread Tools
post #91 of 134 Old 02-21-2012, 12:55 PM
Member
 
Captainjoe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 108
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by Josh Z View Post

The UK Blu-ray's audio also sounds to me like a stereo source that's been processed into 5.1. It's not unlistenable by any means, but the disc is pretty middle-of-the-road in terms of audio. The video does look much better than the domestic Lionsgate edition, though. I prefer the UK Blu-ray overall.

You're probably right about it being a processed stereo track, the title sequence sounds so lifeless. The image is improved over the Lionsgate but many of the matte and special effects shots have some of the worst noise reduction artifacts I've ever seen. I'd love for this to get a new remaster
Captainjoe is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #92 of 134 Old 02-21-2012, 01:33 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Geoff D's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Swanage, Engerland
Posts: 2,401
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 128 Post(s)
Liked: 210
I thought that the opticals looked very respectable on the UK disc, all things considered.
Geoff D is online now  
post #93 of 134 Old 02-21-2012, 02:37 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Thebarnman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Scottsdale AZ
Posts: 3,164
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Liked: 13
8K pretty much equals what 35mm film will hold.

The standard for theatres is 2K and 4K. Once the digital projection switch over takes place in the next two years...there will be talk of 6K and 8K standards for theatres.

At that point, 4K for home video simply won't be enough...since that's only about half of what film can hold and it's less than what you can at the theatres.

So now us home video enthusiasts will have to go through several format changes (starting with Blu-ray) before we ultimately end up at 8K.

The thing I can't stand is the current HDTV format really has not even fully switched over just yet. There are those who still have 4:3 TVs and some who have HDTVs and don't yet have HD sources or only tune into the SD channels.

Many current HDTV broadcasters limit the available bandwidth and many current Blu-ray releases don't even get proper scans (or film materials,) or utilize the highest (best) quality audio format.


There was talk of HDTV standards (an improvement over NTSC) since the 70s...however it took about 25 years of working on a standard...and adopting one of them in the United States till we even had our first HDTV broadcast around February 19th 2009.


The talk of 4K is all nice and sweet. However, I can see it now...in the mix of releases there will be upconverted 2K material, digitally filtered grain from filmed sources to help give the look of digital cinema...and audio limited to compressed Dolby Digital. In the end, maybe it won't matter...since by the time there are standards for 4K and actual product released...there will be a whole generation or two who grew up only watching digitally recorded, digitally projected movies.

Before moving ahead, everything currently wrong with Blu-ray need to be worked on. Such as Blu-rays being released with compressed audio soundtracks...filtering applied where it has no business in the first place, using digital "masters" that were intended for older formats and a whole host of other misuses.

Blu-ray when done right is gorgeous. However, those are the exceptions. When outstanding Blu-ray releases start becoming standard and we get used to it's quality...I would think at that time is when people might really want to start upgrading to something even more outstanding when compared to Blu-ray.

Right now I see 4K home video as a solution to a so called problem named Blu-ray. However if we don't learn our lessons with our current outstanding format (Blu-ray,) we will again be setting ourselves up for more disappointments.

Movies must be OAR, sports and movies must also have 5.1 audio, No EE or NO SALE!
Thebarnman is offline  
post #94 of 134 Old 02-21-2012, 03:17 PM
 
audio/videoman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 353
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Total Recall is a great movie.

I watched it straight through (more or less) and the UK version is just gorgeous. It takes on almost a new-ish print 3 dimensionality once the dirty print problems pass after the first 7 minutes or so.

For $15, not bad.
audio/videoman is offline  
post #95 of 134 Old 02-21-2012, 05:02 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: 1 Post(s)
Liked: 15
Quote:
Originally Posted by Captainjoe View Post

The image is improved over the Lionsgate but many of the matte and special effects shots have some of the worst noise reduction artifacts I've ever seen. I'd love for this to get a new remaster

Yeah, some shots do look worse on the UK. Found my big screenshot posts again if anyone wants to take a look. I also totally forgot about the altered framing.
msgohan is offline  
post #96 of 134 Old 02-21-2012, 08:20 PM
Member
 
Foxarwing42's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 198
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 11
Quote:
Originally Posted by Thebarnman View Post

8K pretty much equals what 35mm film will hold.

The standard for theatres is 2K and 4K. Once the digital projection switch over takes place in the next two years...there will be talk of 6K and 8K standards for theatres.

At that point, 4K for home video simply won't be enough...since that's only about half of what film can hold and it's less than what you can at the theatres.

So now us home video enthusiasts will have to go through several format changes (starting with Blu-ray) before we ultimately end up at 8K.

The thing I can't stand is the current HDTV format really has not even fully switched over just yet. There are those who still have 4:3 TVs and some who have HDTVs and don't yet have HD sources or only tune into the SD channels.

Many current HDTV broadcasters limit the available bandwidth and many current Blu-ray releases don't even get proper scans (or film materials,) or utilize the highest (best) quality audio format.


There was talk of HDTV standards (an improvement over NTSC) since the 70s...however it took about 25 years of working on a standard...and adopting one of them in the United States till we even had our first HDTV broadcast around February 19th 2009.


The talk of 4K is all nice and sweet. However, I can see it now...in the mix of releases there will be upconverted 2K material, digitally filtered grain from filmed sources to help give the look of digital cinema...and audio limited to compressed Dolby Digital. In the end, maybe it won't matter...since by the time there are standards for 4K and actual product released...there will be a whole generation or two who grew up only watching digitally recorded, digitally projected movies.

Before moving ahead, everything currently wrong with Blu-ray need to be worked on. Such as Blu-rays being released with compressed audio soundtracks...filtering applied where it has no business in the first place, using digital "masters" that were intended for older formats and a whole host of other misuses.

Blu-ray when done right is gorgeous. However, those are the exceptions. When outstanding Blu-ray releases start becoming standard and we get used to it's quality...I would think at that time is when people might really want to start upgrading to something even more outstanding when compared to Blu-ray.

Right now I see 4K home video as a solution to a so called problem named Blu-ray. However if we don't learn our lessons with our current outstanding format (Blu-ray,) we will again be setting ourselves up for more disappointments.

Where did you get your info from? 4K is kind of ridiculous for smaller screens (unless you use to it to make-up for the loss of detail in passive or autostereoscopic 3D TV's, but that's a different subject altogether), and unless we see TV's that go higher than 100", 1080p is fine (and more than enough for smaller screens). While I'd love to have a 4K screen the difference would be completely negligible for most people, unlike the jump from SD to HD.

The US made their HDTV standards official back in 1998 with sets available at the same time, so I don't know where you got that date from. If you're talking about the digital switchover that was in June 2009, and there were plenty of shows airing in 1080i and 720p (as it still is now), with 3D now added to the mix (still 1080i) a year later.

HD DVD player: HD-XA2.
Blu-ray player: PS3.
My entire collection: http://foxarwing42.dvdaf.com/owned
Foxarwing42 is offline  
post #97 of 134 Old 02-21-2012, 08:41 PM
AVS Special Member
 
skibum5000's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Boston, MA
Posts: 3,569
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2 Post(s)
Liked: 26
Quote:
Originally Posted by Foxarwing42 View Post

Where did you get your info from? 4K is kind of ridiculous for smaller screens (unless you use to it to make-up for the loss of detail in passive or autostereoscopic 3D TV's, but that's a different subject altogether), and unless we see TV's that go higher than 100", 1080p is fine (and more than enough for smaller screens). While I'd love to have a 4K screen the difference would be completely negligible for most people, unlike the jump from SD to HD.

The US made their HDTV standards official back in 1998 with sets available at the same time, so I don't know where you got that date from. If you're talking about the digital switchover that was in June 2009, and there were plenty of shows airing in 1080i and 720p (as it still is now), with 3D now added to the mix (still 1080i) a year later.

if people can tell 720p from 1080p on a 24" monitor I think you can tell 2k from 4k on a 50" HDTV (assuming the material has more than 2k detail)
skibum5000 is offline  
post #98 of 134 Old 02-21-2012, 09:05 PM
 
audio/videoman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 353
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
The difference between 720 and 1080 even on a 32" screen is very obvious. 1080 to 4K will be an even bigger leap.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Foxarwing42 View Post

Where did you get your info from? 4K is kind of ridiculous for smaller screens (unless you use to it to make-up for the loss of detail in passive or autostereoscopic 3D TV's, but that's a different subject altogether), and unless we see TV's that go higher than 100", 1080p is fine (and more than enough for smaller screens). While I'd love to have a 4K screen the difference would be completely negligible for most people, unlike the jump from SD to HD.

The US made their HDTV standards official back in 1998 with sets available at the same time, so I don't know where you got that date from. If you're talking about the digital switchover that was in June 2009, and there were plenty of shows airing in 1080i and 720p (as it still is now), with 3D now added to the mix (still 1080i) a year later.

audio/videoman is offline  
post #99 of 134 Old 02-22-2012, 12:48 AM
Member
 
Captainjoe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 108
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by msgohan View Post

Yeah, some shots do look worse on the UK. Found my big screenshot posts again if anyone wants to take a look. I also totally forgot about the altered framing.

Yeah the shot with the guards firing at the hologram you can see the noise reduction smoothing on the back on the guards clothing on the right.
Captainjoe is offline  
post #100 of 134 Old 02-22-2012, 05:39 AM
AVS Special Member
 
nick_danger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 1,405
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
I always love the statements that go like this:

"X% of people can only see Xp from Xft on a X" screen. Anything more than X makes no difference."

While I fully understand and appreciate "optimum" seating placement relative to screen size and resolution, there is no end all be all magic formula. Some people have better eye sight than others, some people like to sit farther away, some closer... and some people just let their furniture and room layout decide for them.

My 15" laptop has a 1080p native display and the increased pixel density is wonderful. Soon there will be 1080p 9" tablets. We've already got 720p smartphones. Pretty soon 1080p on anything larger than 17" is going to look too pixelated and by that time 4K displays will be ready for consumption.

And to keep this thread slightly on topic, I hope there's a remastered, unfiltered 4K version of Total Recall available.
nick_danger is offline  
post #101 of 134 Old 02-22-2012, 06:48 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
DavidHir's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 10,291
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 95 Post(s)
Liked: 400
Quote:
Originally Posted by Thebarnman View Post

Blu-ray when done right is gorgeous. However, those are the exceptions. When outstanding Blu-ray releases start becoming standard and we get used to it's quality...I would think at that time is when people might really want to start upgrading to something even more outstanding when compared to Blu-ray.

I see what you are saying, but realistically "outstanding" Blu-ray releases will never become standard. It's a business at the end of the day and while restorations and new scans will take place on selective movies/catalogs, they will be the exception. It's just like DVD - there were relatively few outstanding DVDs and even that format was never optimized as it easily could have been. So many DVDs used older laser disc non-anamorphic transfers and still excessive DNR and EE in a lot of cases with anamorphic releases. Personally, I would love to see outstanding BD releases become the norm before moving to 4K, but I doubt it will happen.....and we're likely to see the same thing yet again with 4K.

DavidHir is offline  
post #102 of 134 Old 02-22-2012, 10:21 AM
Senior Member
 
chadsdsmith's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 306
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 12 Post(s)
Liked: 21
Quote:
Originally Posted by audio/videoman View Post

The difference between 720 and 1080 even on a 32" screen is very obvious. 1080 to 4K will be an even bigger leap.

I don't really agree here. Unless I am fairly close to a 32" screen, it is pretty difficult for me to tell the difference between a GOOD 720/768p set and a
1080p one. My eyesight is fine btw. (just trying to avoid the inevitable "have you had your eye sight checked lately?" comment.) I think the problem nowadays is that a 720p set is generally a bottom of the barrel set, so other aspects of picture quality come in to play, making the picture seem that much worse. Some of the older 768p sets, those that were top of the line for their time, would be hard to pick apart from a 1080 set unless you were standing right in front of it. I tend to agree with those people who think that 4k will be useless to most people unless we are talking 65+" sets at thx or less viewing distances. I would bet that your avg joe six pack sits almost double that distance away, and clearly won't tell a difference (especially if he has had a couple six packs )
chadsdsmith is offline  
post #103 of 134 Old 02-22-2012, 10:46 AM
 
audio/videoman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 353
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
It's really not that difficult to "remaster" film nowadays. As with Total Recall, it wasn't even physically cleaned; it was simply subject to a cleaning algorithm. Voila, clean print.

As far as "not being able to tell the difference," that's ridiculous. I could easily spot the one 1080 tv in a row of 720's 3 years ago when helping someone buy a tv. 1080i and 1080p look different as well.

The debate is completely academic; there are already 4k monitors and projectors and sources. It's here and will be available to consumers at a market price in about 4 years or so for early adopters.
audio/videoman is offline  
post #104 of 134 Old 02-22-2012, 11:39 AM
Senior Member
 
chadsdsmith's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 306
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 12 Post(s)
Liked: 21
I was never implying that we were not going to get 4k. I agree that it is coming very soon, I just don't yet believe it will benefit all of us. The whole "can't tell the difference" thing I guess is just a difference of opinion. Can you honestly say you can tell two 32" tvs apart by resolution from more than say 6 or so feet away? I ask because I see a lot of people saying things like "I can tell the difference between my 32" 1080p sony and the 32" 720p poloroid in the other room", which isn't really a fair comparison. As for 1080i and p, there really aren't any 1080i sets around anymore. No flat panels ever had this resolution, but if you are talking about an older crt or something, I guess I can see where you are coming from, but then again its older hd tech vs newer, so there are other factors contributing to overall picture quality. I honestly have not seen many screens above 1080p rez, so I hope to be pleasantly surprised by the difference with 4k, I just don't see it given that the difference (to me...and its not ridiculous) between 720p and 1080p is not huge on smaller sets. I would love to have a 70"+ inch 4k oled though, that would be perfect!!!! On a side note, sorry to move this thread way off topic.
chadsdsmith is offline  
post #105 of 134 Old 02-22-2012, 12:18 PM
AVS Special Member
 
nick_danger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 1,405
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by chadsdsmith View Post

Can you honestly say you can tell two 32" tvs apart by resolution from more than say 6 or so feet away?

69ppi
Quote:
Originally Posted by chadsdsmith View Post

I would love to have a 70"+ inch 4k oled though, that would be perfect!!!!

63ppi

Looks like you would be taking a step back in overall image quality...

I'm only foolin'!
nick_danger is offline  
post #106 of 134 Old 02-22-2012, 12:25 PM
Senior Member
 
chadsdsmith's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 306
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 12 Post(s)
Liked: 21
funny... I guess I proved my own point.... I still want a 70" 4k oled though..
chadsdsmith is offline  
post #107 of 134 Old 02-22-2012, 01:47 PM
AVS Club Gold
 
Art Sonneborn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Battle Creek,MI USA
Posts: 22,302
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 12 Post(s)
Liked: 44
Quote:
Originally Posted by chadsdsmith View Post

I was never implying that we were not going to get 4k. I agree that it is coming very soon, I just don't yet believe it will benefit all of us. The whole "can't tell the difference" thing I guess is just a difference of opinion.

It matters in that there is a significant difference which is visible when one compares. Now, do you care about the difference, that is the opinion portion.

Art

My HT


iRule rules my theater
 

"If she's amazing she won't be easy,if she's easy she won't be amazing"

 

Bob Marley

Art Sonneborn is offline  
post #108 of 134 Old 02-22-2012, 02:13 PM
Senior Member
 
chadsdsmith's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 306
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 12 Post(s)
Liked: 21
Quote:
Originally Posted by Art Sonneborn View Post

It matters in that there is a significant difference which is visible when one compares. Now, do you care about the difference, that is the opinion portion.

Art

I guess what I should have said instead of "opinion" is that it is all relative to what one defines as normal viewing distance, and whether your eyesight is sufficient. To me, I have a hard time believing that the majority of people buying tvs today can tell the difference between a 720p tv (say 40" or less) and a 1080p tv at the kind of viewing distance most are watching from, assuming they are both good quality sets. When I am at the store, I can definitely tell the difference between a 720p set and 1080p, even on a smaller tv. However, that is at a closer distance than what most people are viewing their tvs from.
chadsdsmith is offline  
post #109 of 134 Old 02-22-2012, 02:45 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Kalani's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Studio City, CA
Posts: 1,443
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 30 Post(s)
Liked: 16
Quote:
Originally Posted by chadsdsmith View Post

I guess what I should have said instead of "opinion" is that it is all relative to what one defines as normal viewing distance, and whether your eyesight is sufficient. To me, I have a hard time believing that the majority of people buying tvs today can tell the difference between a 720p tv (say 40" or less) and a 1080p tv at the kind of viewing distance most are watching from, assuming they are both good quality sets. When I am at the store, I can definitely tell the difference between a 720p set and 1080p, even on a smaller tv. However, that is at a closer distance than what most people are viewing their tvs from.

This would seem to be germane to the discussion:

http://carltonbale.com/does-4k-resolution-matter

I'm all for 4k, but it's probably somewhat pointless on a 65" TV viewed from 8' away. Once I get a 120" screen and projector, however, it starts to become a different discussion. And there are quite a few HT enthusiasts out there with 120" screens...

As for Total Recall, I own far too many version of this film (had two, then bought a third just for the commentary, what a mistake that was, then bought the BR), but would still happily buy yet another for a properly mastered disc.
Kalani is offline  
post #110 of 134 Old 02-22-2012, 03:30 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: 1 Post(s)
Liked: 15
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kalani View Post

had two, then bought a third just for the commentary, what a mistake that was

What are you talking about, the commentary is amazing!

msgohan is offline  
post #111 of 134 Old 02-22-2012, 04:26 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Fanboyz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Minnesota
Posts: 2,418
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 18 Post(s)
Liked: 18
There was a lot of controversy over Arnold's commentary because he got paid a lot to do it.

The proper setting for sharpness is always0.
Also my Oppo BDP-103D is region free.
That makes me awesome.
Fanboyz is offline  
post #112 of 134 Old 02-22-2012, 04:55 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Kalani's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Studio City, CA
Posts: 1,443
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 30 Post(s)
Liked: 16
Quote:
Originally Posted by msgohan View Post

What are you talking about, the commentary is amazing!


ROFL

Yup.



Silly me, I was hoping for some sort of discussion on the merits of dream vs. non-dream, and which was intended, and instead was treated to two inane hours of them patting themselves on the back for making it impossible to know, because, "you see what we did there, you can't know, because it could go either way" and similar comments. *gag*
Kalani is offline  
post #113 of 134 Old 02-22-2012, 06:39 PM
AVS Special Member
 
BIG ED's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: California Wine Country
Posts: 3,290
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 12
Quote:
Originally Posted by msgohan View Post

What are you talking about, the commentary is amazing!


"... no more dick-tatter-ship & all that..."
Thanks for sharing & thanks for reminding me I don't need too buy this.
However, as always, its interesting too say the least how much diff releases vary!

"I wonder if any of the releases had slipcovers though."
"Are these comfirmed to have slipcovers?"
"They look nice in those slips."
"This slipcover looks too good to pass up."
BIG ED is offline  
post #114 of 134 Old 02-22-2012, 07:23 PM
 
audio/videoman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 353
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
I didn't realize this was such a popular title.
audio/videoman is offline  
post #115 of 134 Old 02-23-2012, 04:25 AM
AVS Special Member
 
CAVX's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Brisbane, Australia
Posts: 8,372
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 18 Post(s)
Liked: 42
How many versions have been released? I first saw this on HD DVD and had to have a copy. So I bought my copy when it first came out on BD. I haven't watched it for a while, but I seem to remember it being quite impressive revealing the limits of the special FX of the time (1990?).

Mark Techer

I love my Constant Image Height system!
CAVX is offline  
post #116 of 134 Old 02-23-2012, 05:55 AM
AVS Special Member
 
nick_danger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 1,405
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
You seem to all be leaving out the single most important part of this film's legacy:

Tripleboob.
nick_danger is offline  
post #117 of 134 Old 02-23-2012, 09:03 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Jon S's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: Sunny Hawaii
Posts: 2,678
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 15 Post(s)
Liked: 42
The worst Blu-Ray disc out there is the 40 Year Old Vrgin... They used the exact same master as the DVD, which had edge enhancement halos all over the place..

The Blade Runner Blu-Ray is not a bad transfer considering its age, but unfortunately, the audio is Dolby Digital only, no lossless track.

If it's not a BIG screen, it's not a theater...
Jon S is online now  
post #118 of 134 Old 02-23-2012, 09:16 AM
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 Jon S View Post

The worst Blu-Ray disc out there is the 40 Year Old Vrgin... They used the exact same master as the DVD, which had edge enhancement halos all over the place..

The Blade Runner Blu-Ray is not a bad transfer considering its age, but unfortunately, the audio is Dolby Digital only, no lossless track.

There's nothing wrong at all with the transfer on Blade Runner. The problem there is the encode.
Deviation is offline  
post #119 of 134 Old 02-23-2012, 09:51 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
DavidHir's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 10,291
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 95 Post(s)
Liked: 400
Blade Runner still looks great.

DavidHir is offline  
post #120 of 134 Old 02-23-2012, 11:47 AM
AVS Special Member
 
raoul_duke's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 2,301
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 32
Is it Matrix Glitch day around here?
raoul_duke is offline  
Reply Blu-ray Software

User Tag List

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page


Forum Jump: 

Posting Rules  
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off