Why so few "King Kong"-quality transfers? - Page 2 - AVS Forum
Forum Jump: 
Reply
 
Thread Tools
post #31 of 59 Old 05-21-2007, 11:12 PM
AVS Special Member
 
shadowrage's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 3,780
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
This thread should be closed. OTA vs. HD optical, old news.

Ridiculous codec tier sig gone. Still AVC/24bit lossless fanboy.

Studio quality tier
Most Major studios>Small Studios>dogs>cats>Warner(the guys that do new movies)
shadowrage is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #32 of 59 Old 05-21-2007, 11:15 PM
Senior Member
 
thalazy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Brentwood, CA
Posts: 428
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 6 Post(s)
Liked: 12
Your TV must not be properly calibrated because The Scorpion King on my small 30'' Widescreen 1080i CRT television looked stunning, It's a shame the movie is just ok or I would have purchased it rather than rented it. I find HD DVD movies to look marginally superior to OAR broadcast I am only basing it on just a few movies I have seen on HD DVD and OAR such as king Kong, Batman Begins and heck even House of Wax.
thalazy is offline  
post #33 of 59 Old 05-21-2007, 11:53 PM
Member
 
gorbag's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 79
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Starz really has some of the nicest 'broadcast HD" I've seen yet.

Which is great, because they play whoppers like "Dead Man's Chest" and "Cars", and I don't intend on purchasing a BR player (not that I could watch Cars on a BR player! )
gorbag is offline  
post #34 of 59 Old 05-21-2007, 11:57 PM
Senior Member
 
thalazy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Brentwood, CA
Posts: 428
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 6 Post(s)
Liked: 12
Quote:
Originally Posted by gorbag View Post

Starz really has some of the nicest 'broadcast HD" I've seen yet.

Which is great, because they play whoppers like "Dead Man's Chest" and "Cars", and I don't intend on purchasing a BR player (not that I could watch Cars on a BR player! )

I will agree with that I saw Underworld Evolution and man was that a stunner.
thalazy is offline  
post #35 of 59 Old 05-21-2007, 11:57 PM
AVS Special Member
 
shadowrage's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 3,780
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by gorbag View Post

Starz really has some of the nicest 'broadcast HD" I've seen yet.

Which is great, because they play whoppers like "Dead Man's Chest" and "Cars", and I don't intend on purchasing a BR player (not that I could watch Cars on a BR player! )

Not cool.
I don't like to reminded that my BD player can play Click and not Pixar movies.

I'm gonna go check out the highway chase on Reloaded.

But honestly this thread should be closed. Broadcast is not HD-DVD.

Ridiculous codec tier sig gone. Still AVC/24bit lossless fanboy.

Studio quality tier
Most Major studios>Small Studios>dogs>cats>Warner(the guys that do new movies)
shadowrage is offline  
post #36 of 59 Old 05-22-2007, 12:06 AM
AVS Special Member
 
skibum5000's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Boston, MA
Posts: 3,587
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 6 Post(s)
Liked: 26
Quote:
Originally Posted by vladi123456 View Post

Last night my gf and I were watching Scorpion King on HD DVD, which happens to be a tier 1 title, and I accidentally pushed the Channel button on my TV remote and switched to channel 5 NBC which I get with an over the air HD antenna. And it was showing National Treasure with Nicolas Cage. That over the air movie in high definition looked a lot better than my Scorpion King HD DVD - it made me wonder what's up. Can anyone explain in simple English why HD movies (both HD DVD and especially Blu-Ray) for the most part don't look all that better than standard DVDs? And how can over the air HD broadcast look so much better? I think the difference was more noticeable than between standard DVD and HD DVD? Do they use different codecs for broadcast or is there any other reason? I'm just being curious....

EDIT: Changed the original text a bit - I'm not trying to say HD DVD looks bad - I just like the over the air HD Broadcast better. I've read somewhere that over the air HD broadcast is better than cable/satellite HD because the latter use more compression. Which I don't think would the case here

are you sure you don't have your HD playes hooked up S-video or something?!
i looked at national treasure last night for a second and the broadcast didn't even like fully like a HD broadcast, only SD DVD quality pretty much. if you found that better than HD DVD or blu-ray something is, for real, seriously wrong with hwo you have your hi-def stuff connected or something. or you are trolling?
skibum5000 is offline  
post #37 of 59 Old 05-22-2007, 12:10 AM
AVS Special Member
 
skibum5000's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Boston, MA
Posts: 3,587
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 6 Post(s)
Liked: 26
Quote:
Originally Posted by DrCrawn View Post

The 5-6x increase in resolution is real. I think it comes down to the display, particularly the size. In other words, the displays are limiting the experience at this point. Imagine watching HD DVD or BD on 60" or bigger CRT.

people do have different densities of cones and rods in their retinas. perhaps that explains a few cases? even on my 24" 1080p display, pretty small, hi-def looks rather clearly noticeably better to me. maybe some of it is also using a poor component input on 720p displays too?
skibum5000 is offline  
post #38 of 59 Old 05-22-2007, 09:19 AM - Thread Starter
AVS Special Member
 
vladi123456's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: DFW
Posts: 1,084
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 11
Quote:
Originally Posted by skibum5000 View Post

are you sure you don't have your HD playes hooked up S-video or something?!
i looked at national treasure last night for a second and the broadcast didn't even like fully like a HD broadcast, only SD DVD quality pretty much. if you found that better than HD DVD or blu-ray something is, for real, seriously wrong with hwo you have your hi-def stuff connected or something. or you are trolling?

No, not trolling. I was just expressing my opinion and a little bit of a dissapointment, I guess. So far the only movies I've seen in both formats that looked great to me were King Kong, Sahara, both Mummy movies, Underworld Evolution and Catch and Release - maybe a few more - but that is all I could think off the top of my head. I rent from Blockbuster online, so I watch 2-3 HD movies every week. I wasn't trying to start anything - was just stating that to my eyes the broadcast movie looked more pleasant than most rentals I had seen. And my second point was that why isnt there more movies of King Kong quality - it's just dissapointing to me to buy a $25 HD disk over a $4.99 SD disk only to find that the PQ is just a little better - not 5 times better as the price suggests. Everybody knows the tier thread on this forum, so I guess it's pretty much accepted by most that some hd movies look better than others. So what's the deal with that? Codecs? Original PQ of a movie? I'm not talking about older movies. But for example, if they could transfer the original Matrix that was made 10 years ago and make it a tier 0 movie - why not make all newer movies tier 0?
vladi123456 is offline  
post #39 of 59 Old 05-22-2007, 11:13 AM
Senior Member
 
beagle five's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 234
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
its important to know that a 1080p HD-DVD looks less sharp then a 720p broadcast on a 720p display.

and that the term "better" means different things to everybody, not everybody see macroblocking as a problem since all displays show macroblocking in different ways.
and the overall picture quality may still be better even though there is some flaws to the image! its all about personal taste and what you look for in an image!
beagle five is offline  
post #40 of 59 Old 05-22-2007, 01:41 PM
AVS Special Member
 
thehun's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Wine country CA
Posts: 7,346
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 49 Post(s)
Liked: 49
Quote:
Originally Posted by DrCrawn View Post

The 5-6x increase in resolution is real. I think it comes down to the display, particularly the size. In other words, the displays are limiting the experience at this point. Imagine watching HD DVD or BD on 60" or bigger CRT.

I can only imagine the geometrical distorsion that CRT tube produce on that size. I'm guessing you were refering to RP TVs or FPs?

sent via Morse code...........

The Hun
thehun is offline  
post #41 of 59 Old 05-25-2007, 04:43 PM
Member
 
dalcm's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 151
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
I got it.
You're Stevie Wonder.
dalcm is offline  
post #42 of 59 Old 05-25-2007, 05:40 PM
Member
 
SoulOnice's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Toronto
Posts: 188
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
I am shocked when people say there not a significant upgrade from standard dvd to hd-dvd. I am only using a 720P TV (albeit professionally calibrated) and the picture quality is always gorgeous and always significantly better than standard DVD.
SoulOnice is offline  
post #43 of 59 Old 05-27-2007, 06:57 PM
AVS Special Member
 
TrevorS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Posts: 6,232
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 11
Quote:
Originally Posted by vladi123456 View Post

Everybody knows the tier thread on this forum, so I guess it's pretty much accepted by most that some hd movies look better than others. So what's the deal with that? Codecs? Original PQ of a movie? I'm not talking about older movies. But for example, if they could transfer the original Matrix that was made 10 years ago and make it a tier 0 movie - why not make all newer movies tier 0?

The deal is exactly what you said "Original PQ of a movie". It's up to the director how a film is going to look, and once it looks that way, the mastering and transfering to HD DVD is not going to change that (or at least, it most DEFINITELY SHOULDN'T).

The Tier thread has virtually nothing to do with how well a film was transfered, it's all about what will show off your system. If you want films that look spectacular, go to your favorite top tiers. If you want films that look the way the way they should, forget the tiers.

PS. Given I don't see any response from you regarding the display calibration with the HD DVD, it would appear your comparison is indeed without calibration. If that's the case, you haven't seen what the HD DVD titles actually look like yet.
TrevorS is offline  
post #44 of 59 Old 05-27-2007, 07:27 PM
AVS Special Member
 
maingon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 1,112
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Underworld Evolution is a King Kong quality transfer
maingon is offline  
post #45 of 59 Old 05-27-2007, 08:31 PM
AVS Special Member
 
lgans316's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Barking, Essex, London
Posts: 6,863
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 41 Post(s)
Liked: 24
I think the quality depends upon the broadcasters too. In Japan the HD broadcast quality is top class. The difference between the Blu-ray version of POTC / HD DVD version of Underwater evolution and the HD broadcast was subtle. The blu-ray had more contrast and color but rest of it was almost the same. However movies like Batman Begins looked better in HD DVD when compared to the broadcast. There are some paid HD movie channels which runs the entire movie uninterrupted without any breaks. So it becomes customary for people to go for HD recorders than HD players.

Cable HD sometimes broadcasts movies that aren't released in the HD DVDs which means that the HD master of the film is already available. Eventually the HD DVD version using the same master may arguably have the same PQ which disappoints normal viewers. May be Videophiles are able to extract more info out of the picture.

Blu-ray : 340
lgans316 is offline  
post #46 of 59 Old 05-27-2007, 10:38 PM
AVS Special Member
 
CMRA's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: San Diego, Ca.
Posts: 7,080
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Well, I won't call foul. I find HD broadcasts and HDDVD can be both excellent or wanting. Both have the capacity to deliver, but don't always do so.
What always bothers me is when a title is released that I really want and the studio denies me their best effort. The Sting is just such a title. Mutiny turned out to be another.
Perhaps life really is "like a box of chocolates". The HDDVD life included.

BTW, before everybody gets on the 'old' film bandwagon watch the The Searchers (1956) on HDDVD.
CMRA is offline  
post #47 of 59 Old 05-27-2007, 11:50 PM - Thread Starter
AVS Special Member
 
vladi123456's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: DFW
Posts: 1,084
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 11
Quote:
Originally Posted by TrevorS View Post

The deal is exactly what you said "Original PQ of a movie". It's up to the director how a film is going to look, and once it looks that way, the mastering and transfering to HD DVD is not going to change that (or at least, it most DEFINITELY SHOULDN'T).

The Tier thread has virtually nothing to do with how well a film was transfered, it's all about what will show off your system. If you want films that look spectacular, go to your favorite top tiers. If you want films that look the way the way they should, forget the tiers.

PS. Given I don't see any response from you regarding the display calibration with the HD DVD, it would appear your comparison is indeed without calibration. If that's the case, you haven't seen what the HD DVD titles actually look like yet.

I would disagree as far as the tier thread has nothing to do with how a film was transfered - first blu-ray movies were pretty bad transfers - had nothing to do with the initial quality of a film.
My display hasn't been professionally calibrated. But I went to the Sharp forum and read about 150 pages of it, and I got my settings to match those of the forum members' calibrated units.
I'm not trying to make anybody mad or anything - and I really wanna like hi-def - especially after all the money I've spent....
vladi123456 is offline  
post #48 of 59 Old 05-28-2007, 07:16 AM
AVS Special Member
 
SamwisetheBrave's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 2,177
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by shadowrage View Post

This thread should be closed. OTA vs. HD optical, old news.

Then why are you here?
SamwisetheBrave is offline  
post #49 of 59 Old 05-28-2007, 09:06 AM
Member
 
dinb's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 61
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
You might like the look of "real" tv more... I find that yes, TV programs like TV shows, talk shows etc have more of a pop than most HD movies. Take for example Dancing with the Stars, that show has a crazy 3D look to it. If that is what you consider "amazing", then most HD movies will not do that for you, since they are not filmed the same way.
dinb is offline  
post #50 of 59 Old 05-28-2007, 03:47 PM
AVS Special Member
 
TrevorS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Posts: 6,232
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 11
Quote:
Originally Posted by vladi123456 View Post

I would disagree as far as the tier thread has nothing to do with how a film was transfered - first blu-ray movies were pretty bad transfers - had nothing to do with the initial quality of a film.
My display hasn't been professionally calibrated. But I went to the Sharp forum and read about 150 pages of it, and I got my settings to match those of the forum members' calibrated units.
I'm not trying to make anybody mad or anything - and I really wanna like hi-def - especially after all the money I've spent....

I didn't say nothing, I said "virtually nothing" (meaning there can be exceptions). I'm only familiar with the HD DVD Tier thread, but in the very first post (before the tier lists), it clearly points out its purpose. It deliberately ignores the issue of how the film is intended to look, and focuses on eye candy. I presume the BR list is intended to do the same.

Warner had some problematic titles whose transfers themselves were probably fine, but the actual masters were not (vertically filtered 1080i). The Fifth Element was actually transfered from the same master as the Superbit Edition (according to a Sony representative), yet apparently that master fell well short of the needs for the BD release -- they've had to go back to the elements. Don't know what the story was on HOFD, but no doubt there is one.

The problem here being that there is the "transfer" be it an HD DVD or BR effort, and there is the quality of the master, which is yet another issue and has nothing to do with either Format or the available video CODECs. In order to create a restored NEW master, the studio has to spend LOTS of money, and it's understandable they'll apply a lot of discretion in making that decision.

The most you can reasonably expect is that the HD image look exactly like the film did at a good theater. The tier thread doesn't evaluate that.

You don't have to get a professional calibration (ISF), but you really can't trust other's calibrations to be correct for your situation. Pick up a copy of a calibration disc and you can be sure of having an excellent picture for both viewing and comparison purposes.
TrevorS is offline  
post #51 of 59 Old 05-28-2007, 03:51 PM
AVS Special Member
 
TrevorS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Posts: 6,232
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 11
Quote:
Originally Posted by CMRA View Post

Well, I won't call foul. I find HD broadcasts and HDDVD can be both excellent or wanting. Both have the capacity to deliver, but don't always do so.
What always bothers me is when a title is released that I really want and the studio denies me their best effort. The Sting is just such a title. Mutiny turned out to be another.
Perhaps life really is "like a box of chocolates". The HDDVD life included.

BTW, before everybody gets on the 'old' film bandwagon watch the The Searchers (1956) on HDDVD.

Well, if complete restoration was cheap, they'd probaby do it for practically every older title.
TrevorS is offline  
post #52 of 59 Old 05-28-2007, 04:47 PM
Senior Member
 
CPR Jose Ortiz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 387
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
This is the funniest thread I've read in a bit.
Last week I asked a person why they bought a Blu Ray Player; He told me that it was because the player was (and I quote!) progressive scan!

I can't wait to plug my HD DVD Player to an analog tv!

www.FREESTYLE.fm
....Its not who you love...Its how!!!
CPR Jose Ortiz is offline  
post #53 of 59 Old 05-28-2007, 06:49 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
Josh Z's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Planet Boston, source of the spice, Melange.
Posts: 20,341
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 507 Post(s)
Liked: 424
Quote:
Originally Posted by TrevorS View Post

The Fifth Element was actually transfered from the same master as the Superbit Edition (according to a Sony representative),

The Fifth Element Blu-ray is not the same master as the Superbit DVD. Anyone who's compared the two can tell the difference. The Blu-ray has much more dirt and damage on the film elements than the DVD. Paidgeek was incorrect when he initially stated that they were the same master, and later admitted the error.

Josh Z
Writer/Editor, High-Def Digest (Blog updated daily!)
Curator, Laserdisc Forever

My opinions are my own, and do not necessarily reflect those of my employers.

Josh Z is offline  
post #54 of 59 Old 05-28-2007, 06:54 PM
AVS Special Member
 
jwv651's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Castle Rock, CO
Posts: 5,527
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by Josh Z View Post

The Fifth Element Blu-ray is not the same master as the Superbit DVD. Anyone who's compared the two can tell the difference. The Blu-ray has much more dirt and damage on the film elements than the DVD. Paidgeek was incorrect when he initially stated that they were the same master, and later admitted the error.

Do you know if they will exchange the bad BD TFE with the new one. I would think this would be the right thing to do!

Joe V.
jwv651 is offline  
post #55 of 59 Old 05-28-2007, 06:59 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
Quote:
Originally Posted by Josh Z View Post

The Fifth Element Blu-ray is not the same master as the Superbit DVD. Anyone who's compared the two can tell the difference. The Blu-ray has much more dirt and damage on the film elements than the DVD. Paidgeek was incorrect when he initially stated that they were the same master, and later admitted the error.

Do you really think the master used for the Superbit dvd is all that better? Besides less dirt.
Kram Sacul is offline  
post #56 of 59 Old 05-28-2007, 07:08 PM
AVS Special Member
 
TrevorS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Posts: 6,232
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 11
Quote:
Originally Posted by Josh Z View Post

The Fifth Element Blu-ray is not the same master as the Superbit DVD. Anyone who's compared the two can tell the difference. The Blu-ray has much more dirt and damage on the film elements than the DVD. Paidgeek was incorrect when he initially stated that they were the same master, and later admitted the error.

That was what I thought, but was told with references on the UK site that I was wrong. So, the Sony rep was wrong, eh ? Oh, well -- thanks for the correction Josh !
TrevorS is offline  
post #57 of 59 Old 05-28-2007, 07:12 PM
AVS Special Member
 
TrevorS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Posts: 6,232
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 11
Quote:
Originally Posted by jwv651 View Post

Do you know if they will exchange the bad BD TFE with the new one. I would think this would be the right thing to do!

According to Paidgeek, they will!
TrevorS is offline  
post #58 of 59 Old 05-28-2007, 08:08 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 vladi123456 View Post

Why so few "King Kong"-quality transfers?

Because there are "so few" KK picture quality films.

"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 #59 of 59 Old 05-29-2007, 01:38 AM
Member
 
nickelplayer6's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 171
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by BIG ED View Post

Because there are "so few" KK picture quality films.

yea that pretty much sums it up. king kong, as well as the PoTC series and a few other movies, are made primarily to be visual marvels, thuse they end up looking the best in high def. king kong looks even better than other tier 1 and tier 0 stuff like matrix or batman begins becuase of the content in king kong as well. the movie takes place primarily on a tropical landscape, and all the colorful, vivid scenes imo make the best eye candy, besting even the razor sharp images of a darker movie like matrix. this is the same reason most people are saying the PoTC movies and apocolypto are the best blu-ray disks.
nickelplayer6 is offline  
Reply HD DVD Software

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