The Fifth Element REMASTERED edition*PIX* + review - Page 4 - AVS Forum
Forum Jump: 
Reply
 
Thread Tools
post #91 of 600 Old 07-09-2007, 08:56 AM
AVS Special Member
 
JaylisJayP's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Port St. Lucie, FL
Posts: 1,250
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 11
Hmmm, is it just me...or is it that even though there's a noticeable difference, the remaster still looks below average?

Blu-ray = 775
JaylisJayP is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #92 of 600 Old 07-09-2007, 08:57 AM
Advanced Member
 
desmond212's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 580
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by mhafner View Post

The detail on a master and the technical form of the master are different things. This comes from a real new 1080p transfer. The IP used may indeed have at times not more than the equivalent of 720p detail, though. Your examples are all sfx shots with generational loss (negative -> scanned at (presumably) 2K, processed -> put on negative -> copied to IP -> scanned again to 1080p).

bingo...
desmond212 is offline  
post #93 of 600 Old 07-09-2007, 09:00 AM
Advanced Member
 
desmond212's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 580
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by mhafner View Post

Yes, but one is a direct scan from the negative (newer film stock too) and the other at best a scan from a copy of the negative. So King Kong should be sharper on average. But there should also be 1080p sharp stuff on the TFE transfer when we see unmanipulated live action footage.

fully agree; 2nd generation element will not match 1st.
desmond212 is offline  
post #94 of 600 Old 07-09-2007, 09:06 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Rudy1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Ft. Lauderdale, FL
Posts: 3,092
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 32 Post(s)
Liked: 99
I suppose only a shot-on-digital remake will satisfy the purists.
Rudy1 is offline  
post #95 of 600 Old 07-09-2007, 09:20 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Kram Sacul's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Posts: 5,257
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Liked: 10
I think you'll find the same conclusion for many "older" films. I tried it with some of The Matrix screenshots and the fine detail remains pretty close. So does that mean The Matrix comes from a 720p master too?

Of course some CG material will show a loss since it can be much closer to resolving all of the resolution of 1080p than most film transfers we've seen.

Regarding the shot of Anne in Kong's hand.... The original film element of her was most likely much larger in the frame, using much more of the negative space. It was then shrunk and positioned accordingly in post, which is why it's so crisp. The non-vfx shots in Kong are not nearly as sharp but they are better detailed than The Matrix and of course 5E. Not really surprising though given the age and elements used for telecine (8/10 years old IP vs 2005 OCN).
Kram Sacul is offline  
post #96 of 600 Old 07-09-2007, 09:25 AM
AVS Special Member
 
jkcheng122's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Houston, TX
Posts: 5,481
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Liked: 30
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rudy1 View Post

I suppose only a shot-on-digital remake will satisfy the purists.

ppl seem to want everything to look like potc/apocalypto. i'd only expect that out of new titles, not something 10 years old. the fact that there is a re-issue plus the fact that there is dramatic improvement should be reason enough to get this title. i've not seen this movie b4 so i think i may give it a rental first unless it's going to be at fry's for $12.50.
jkcheng122 is offline  
post #97 of 600 Old 07-09-2007, 09:27 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Goatse's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Pineapple under the sea
Posts: 3,876
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 13 Post(s)
Liked: 12
every film should be shot using 70mm film stock
Goatse is offline  
post #98 of 600 Old 07-09-2007, 09:48 AM
Advanced Member
 
MarekM's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Slovakia
Posts: 993
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by FrancescoP View Post

I did the usual "Downscaling-Upscaling" Test. DU Test for short.

If downscaling the original 1080p image to an X resolution and upscaling it back to 1080p it doesn't loose any detail, then the X resolution is likely to be near the original. You can do it yourself with Photoshop using the screenshots posted by Xylon. Just remember to use the best upscaling/downscaling algorithm available in Photoshop.

Here's the DU Test for King Kong HD DVD, a reference movie known to be from a true 1080p master:


You can clearly see the loss of details in the DU process.

And there is the DU Test for Fifth Element Remastered (AVC):


As you can see, there is no loss of detail in the DU process, so the master must be around the 720p resolution (+-100).

Well I can clearly see a loss of detail ... so no, master is no around 720p

Marek
MarekM is offline  
post #99 of 600 Old 07-09-2007, 10:16 AM
AVS Special Member
 
WriteSimple's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: KL, Malaysia.
Posts: 3,206
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by FrancescoP View Post

I did the usual "Downscaling-Upscaling" Test. DU Test for short.

If downscaling the original 1080p image to an X resolution and upscaling it back to 1080p it doesn't loose any detail, then the X resolution is likely to be near the original. You can do it yourself with Photoshop using the screenshots posted by Xylon. Just remember to use the best upscaling/downscaling algorithm available in Photoshop.

As you can see, there is no loss of detail in the DU process, so the master must be around the 720p resolution (+-100).

I don't know where you got the idea that 1080p->720p->1080p will get you to the original image or closer to it. These kinds of image resize/reduction algorithm is just not going to fill up data that already was lost when you went to 720p to begin with.

Even on the photos you posted of King Kong I can see detail loss and that's to be expected of those reduction. I can't even say that the King Kong 1080p->720p->1080p image was close to the original 1080p.

So the simplest reason must be true. Either King Kong and T5E were both mastered from 720p per the DU conversion OR the DU conversion is crap theory and both films are taken from 1080p masters. I'll go with the latter.


fuad

"DonÂt let them tell you who you are is not enough, that itÂs wrong and that you wonÂt find love. DonÂt let them use my life to put your future down, or tell you that happiness canÂt be found."
WriteSimple is offline  
post #100 of 600 Old 07-09-2007, 10:18 AM
AVS Special Member
 
JE3146's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Oregon
Posts: 1,530
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by MarekM View Post

Well I can clearly see a loss of detail ... so no, master is no around 720p

Marek


As could I....

59 Blu-rays and counting...
JE3146 is offline  
post #101 of 600 Old 07-09-2007, 10:30 AM
Advanced Member
 
jewing1043's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: CT, USA
Posts: 726
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by obispo21 View Post

It's not glaringly obvious, but the original didn't have a Dolby True HD soundtrack - which is listed on the back now.



Thanks for the quick response

Just wish more people could see and play in True HD

Console and Format Nuetral

psn - jimmyz
jewing1043 is offline  
post #102 of 600 Old 07-09-2007, 10:34 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Mongoos150's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Tucson, AZ
Posts: 1,531
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
It looks better... but still a fairly crappy transfer

Bear Down!
See how your Blu-Ray movies stack up. Visit the Blu Ray Tier thread today.
Blu Ray Titles: 17
PSN=Neko150
Mongoos150 is offline  
post #103 of 600 Old 07-09-2007, 10:36 AM
AVS Special Member
 
FrancescoP's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 1,174
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by WriteSimple View Post

Even on the photos you posted of King Kong I can see detail loss and that's to be expected of those reduction.

I think you completely missed the point.

DU Test theory is based on the opposite: the more difference and detail loss between the DU image and the original, the more the master must be better than the tested resolution (in this case, 720p).

In the case of Fifth Element, the difference is negligible, so the master is not better than 720p.

In the case of King Kong, the difference is very noticeable, so the master must be a lot better than 720p.

We can chose another movie, for example Casino Royale:



The master here is clearly above 720p, because the difference in sharpness is noticeable.
FrancescoP is offline  
post #104 of 600 Old 07-09-2007, 10:36 AM
AVS Special Member
 
DaViD Boulet's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 1999
Location: Washington DC area
Posts: 6,427
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 38
Quote:


Yes, but one is a direct scan from the negative (newer film stock too) and the other at best a scan from a copy of the negative. So King Kong should be sharper on average. But there should also be 1080p sharp stuff on the TFE transfer when we see unmanipulated live action footage.

Exactly. Are all the members here understanding this? You can either scan the original *negative* to digital, and then "master" for the release print in the digital domain (and use this digital master to derive the HD and DVD encodes) or, more commonly, you can take a film print or interpositive (one or more generations removed from the original negative) and scan that into the digital domain.

The results will all look very different. The closer to the source (camera negative) you scan, the sharper and more detailed things will look. But dependig on the way the film was produced (special effects etc.) that might not even be possible, in which case an interpositive or print is the earliest-generation "final" form of the film that can be obtained... as with T5E.

Rather than talking about a "720p transfer" a more meaningful, and accurate, way to desribe it might be to say that "this 1080p transfer has an effective resolution of about 720p"-- meaning that regardless of how many pixels you use to scan, you're only seeing a real-world result of about 720p due to other limitations, such as the source material.

BTW, even when this 1080 > 720 > 1080 scaling test is performed and shows a 720p-effective resolution, it doesn't mean that the in-motion video won't still benefit from 1080p encoding. The reason for this is that motion video has to undergo filtering for high-frequency detail to avoid aliasing artifacts pixel-by-pixel. This means that a motion image scanned with 1280 x 720 might not look as sharp/detailed as a static image captured at the same resolution. With 1080 video scanning "low resolution" film-stock, you've got more headroom for fine details, like film-grain, that can shift subtly and be better preserved in the in-motion image.

1080p and lossless audio. EVERY BD should have them both.
DaViD Boulet is online now  
post #105 of 600 Old 07-09-2007, 10:43 AM
AVS Special Member
 
DaViD Boulet's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 1999
Location: Washington DC area
Posts: 6,427
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 38
Quote:


In the case of Fifth Element, the difference is negligible, so the master is not better than 720p

Francesco,

you're contribution to this thread is greatly appreciated. But let's be sure and all acknowledge that the *reason* that a master may only dispay 720p "effective resolution" (much more correct than saying a "720p transfer") cannot be concluded to be faulty mastering out-of-hand.

It could be that the print itself only exhibits 720p effective resolution.

In discussions like this it's important that we all move down the path of understanding based on expressed assumptions. I'm not suggesting you've said that the mastering for this transfer is necessarily faulty, but many readers who lack a better understanding of the complexity of film-to-digital transfering may make that (possibly false) assumption based on the tenor of the conversations here.

1080p and lossless audio. EVERY BD should have them both.
DaViD Boulet is online now  
post #106 of 600 Old 07-09-2007, 10:50 AM
 
Steeb's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Vegas
Posts: 3,268
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 54
Quote:
Originally Posted by FrancescoP View Post

Nice improvement, but they are still using 720p upscaled master IMO.

Quote:
Originally Posted by FrancescoP View Post

In the case of Fifth Element, the difference is negligible, so the master is not better than 720p.

You can't manipulate the image numerous times and then deduce that it came from a 720p master. Do you honestly think that Sony would risk another hit to their reputation by pulling a stunt like the one you're suggesting? Not likely.

I'm giving Sony the benefit of the doubt (and I've been pretty vocal with my feelings about the first version of TFE.) Those new screenshots look pretty good to me and I can't wait to get this new version. Kudos, Sony.
Steeb is offline  
post #107 of 600 Old 07-09-2007, 11:05 AM
AVS Special Member
 
jkcheng122's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Houston, TX
Posts: 5,481
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Liked: 30
Quote:
Originally Posted by Steeb View Post

You can't manipulate the image numerous times and then deduce that it came from a 720p master. This is retarded. Do you honestly think that Sony would risk another hit to their reputation by pulling a stunt like the one you're suggesting? Not likely.

I'm giving Sony the benefit of the doubt (and I've been pretty vocal with my feelings about the first version of TFE.) Those new screenshots look pretty good to me and I can't wait to get this new version. Kudos, Sony.

i actually see noticeably more detail on the 1080p -> 720p -> 1080p screen he showed of mila's face, so i guess he is actually hleping prove that the remaster did not come from a 720p source.
jkcheng122 is offline  
post #108 of 600 Old 07-09-2007, 11:09 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Kram Sacul's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Posts: 5,257
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Thank you for being fair and posting the Casino Royale shot, Francesco.

I'm thinking this method of testing the resolution of HD screenshots can be really useful. It's not accurate for judging the quality of an entire movie/transfer because detail can vary from shot, but it can tell you how much resolution a frame is displaying.

On the basis of what I've experiemented with and seen here so far:

960-1080p real resolution - King Kong, Casino Royale
720-960p - POTC 1 & 2
720p - The Matrix 1 & 2, Fifth Element (reissue)
Below 720p - Fifth Element (original), HOFD, Spartacus,
480p and below - Traffic (Universal release)
Kram Sacul is offline  
post #109 of 600 Old 07-09-2007, 12:07 PM
AVS Special Member
 
solo88's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Vienna, Va., USA
Posts: 1,411
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by jkcheng122 View Post

i actually see noticeably more detail on the 1080p -> 720p -> 1080p screen he showed of mila's face, so i guess he is actually hleping prove that the remaster did not come from a 720p source.

Same here. Though using FX shots that had to have involved optical compositing probably isn't the best idea, since it adds a few more generations of film, hence lower resolution.

Maybe Lowry can restore it all some day and totally muck up the intended colors and contrast like the Star Wars films!

My midis bring all the Force to the yard; my midis are better than yours!
solo88 is offline  
post #110 of 600 Old 07-09-2007, 12:32 PM
AVS Special Member
 
DaViD Boulet's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 1999
Location: Washington DC area
Posts: 6,427
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 38
*** laugh ***



Quote:


Maybe Lowry can restore it all some day and totally muck up the intended colors and contrast like the Star Wars films!


1080p and lossless audio. EVERY BD should have them both.
DaViD Boulet is online now  
post #111 of 600 Old 07-09-2007, 01:38 PM - Thread Starter
AVS Special Member
 
Xylon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Liecheinstein
Posts: 7,380
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 11
After all is said and done the PQ improvements are significant. Getting rid most of the macroblocking/artifacts alone are worth noting.

Yes its "ugly" compared to the recent CGI releases but dear Lord we have to take into account the time and technology available in making the film.
Xylon is offline  
post #112 of 600 Old 07-09-2007, 01:45 PM
Advanced Member
 
ptaaty's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Bremerton, WA
Posts: 671
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by Xylon View Post

After all is said and done the PQ improvements are significant. Getting rid most of the macroblocking/artifacts alone are worth noting.

Yes its "ugly" compared to the recent CGI releases but dear Lord we have to take into account the time and technology available in making the film.


I think it is amusing, and somewhat amazing that the previous goal of recreation of a brand new print in theater in home is no longer good enough.

How far we have come...home theater...nay... home "better than" theater.

Paul Taatjes
ptaaty is offline  
post #113 of 600 Old 07-09-2007, 02:02 PM
msv
Member
 
msv's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Germany, BW
Posts: 69
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
msv is offline  
post #114 of 600 Old 07-09-2007, 02:06 PM
Advanced Member
 
desmond212's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 580
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by ptaaty View Post

I think it is amusing, and somewhat amazing that the previous goal of recreation of a brand new print in theater in home is no longer good enough.

How far we have come...home theater...nay... home "better than" theater.


crazy... i wonder how many people saw this movie in theaters ten years ago? it can't be better than the master.
desmond212 is offline  
post #115 of 600 Old 07-09-2007, 02:08 PM - Thread Starter
AVS Special Member
 
Xylon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Liecheinstein
Posts: 7,380
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 11
Quote:
Originally Posted by msv View Post

here are Xylon's screenshots as mouseover images for easy comparison
» http://www.mbmg.de/hd-discs/thefifth...stered/01.html

I love your mouseovers. It looks like you have enough bandwidth to handle the traffic.
Xylon is offline  
post #116 of 600 Old 07-09-2007, 02:32 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Kram Sacul's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Posts: 5,257
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Yeah, you rock, msv.
Kram Sacul is offline  
post #117 of 600 Old 07-09-2007, 02:44 PM
AVS Special Member
 
MEC2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Frisco, TX (D/FW area)
Posts: 1,267
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Liked: 11
Quote:
Originally Posted by Donnie Eldridge View Post


? WTF is your deal? TFE should be a feature release - it's legendary demo material. Now perhaps, as some have stated, it's as good as can be had, in which case, it's clearly better than the first release. I would expect Sony to really go all out to highlight the eye candy that is this movie. If it's a better encoding of a less than optimal transfer, it's not what fans of this flick deserve.

MEC2
MEC2 is offline  
post #118 of 600 Old 07-09-2007, 03:00 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Donnie Eldridge's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Tucson, AZ
Posts: 3,946
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
My sarcasm was noted because you come across as ungrateful and are passing judgment on a product which you haven't even seen.
Donnie Eldridge is offline  
post #119 of 600 Old 07-09-2007, 03:09 PM
Advanced Member
 
Stinky-Dinkins's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: USA
Posts: 912
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 13
Quote:
Originally Posted by msv View Post

here are Xylon's screenshots as mouseover images for easy comparison
» http://www.mbmg.de/hd-discs/thefifth...stered/01.html

Awesome, I dig these things.

Makes it much easier to see the difference.
Stinky-Dinkins is offline  
post #120 of 600 Old 07-09-2007, 03:14 PM
 
Steeb's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Vegas
Posts: 3,268
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 54
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stinky-Dinkins View Post

Awesome, I dig these things.

Makes it much easier to see the difference.

I was thinking the same thing. Well done to both Xylon and msv. Now I just need my copy of the new version...
Steeb 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