or Connect
AVS › AVS Forum › Blu-ray & HD DVD › Blu-ray Software › Film Reference and Analysis
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Film Reference and Analysis - Page 5

post #121 of 1897
Quote:
Originally Posted by sharkcohen View Post

I can see this thread becoming a valuable list, but I don't think the focus should necessarily be Artistic Intent.

I agree. As I've mentioned before, both the well meaning "artistic intent" and the more pedestrian "3D-pop" arguments have attracted the attention and energy of many threads around here, when in fact I believe both arguments are merely distractions from the main issue.

And the main issue is that a BRD is a REPRODUCTION of an original work of art and should make every attempt to capture all the detail in the original print, whether it was intended to be there or not. If the original print is damaged (or otherwise compromised), any addition or subtraction should be made with the lightest possible touch, with the rule being that it should move it closer to the original print visually, as opposed to further away.

So with that said, many will be wondering what use a thread like this can be. I say it can be of great use!

For starters, any BRD that's loaded up with obvious post-processing artifacts (excessive DNR, EE, mpeg compression artificating, aliasing, etc.) obviously loses points.

Secondly, if we know something about the film stock and the quality of cameras/lighting used (as in big budget vs. independent, 35mm vs. handycam, soft-focus vs. filtered vs. not) we should have some idea of the level of detail that should be available in the original print by viewing other high quality transfers of similar films.

I fear that purists (such as myself) may have a tendency to be too forgiving of overly soft transfers that leave detail on the table, especially if those transfers don't have any obvious digital artifacting.
post #122 of 1897
Quote:
Originally Posted by DavidHir View Post

They are still noticably better, but agreed slight. However, they are filmlike and don't appear digitally manipulated although Rocky does have some EE. Wall Street impressed me more than Rocky.

That may be the first time I've seen anyone use the word "impress" together with WALL STREET. For me that's as worthless a BD disc as there is, even if it has no DNR.
post #123 of 1897
Quote:
Originally Posted by DM2006RI View Post

That may be the first time I've seen anyone use the word "impress" together with WALL STREET. For me that's as worthless a BD disc as there is, even if it has no DNR.


Is the PQ really that bad? Is it at least an upgrade over the DVD?
post #124 of 1897
Please add "The Professionals" to the list. I hadn't completely watched it while making this recommendation but I have done so now and on two different displays and two different players!

Anyone seeing this for the first time and watching the BD will have their jaw drop!
post #125 of 1897
If you need more endorsements of The Sand Pebbles, check this thread: http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?t=1039230
post #126 of 1897
Quote:
Originally Posted by DM2006RI View Post

That may be the first time I've seen anyone use the word "impress" together with WALL STREET. For me that's as worthless a BD disc as there is, even if it has no DNR.

Obviously, you're unaware that Wall Street was filmed on 80's filmstock and given a darker type of look. This movie is not meant to look like eye candy and replicates the source. It doesn't have a ton of detail, nor is it an eye popping film. The bottom line is it looks like film and there is minimal processing--- and it IS an improvement over the DVD. Film grain is very evident throughout the movie (unlike compression artifacting on the DVD). Detail is better and colors are more natural too. Maybe you're forgetting the intent of this thread? It's not a Tier/PQ/eye candy thread which seems to be your issue.
post #127 of 1897
Quote:
Originally Posted by Brian81 View Post

Is it at least an upgrade over the DVD?

Yes on my 60" display it is....but don't expect eye candy.
post #128 of 1897
The 5th Element (Re-mastered version)




No DNR or EE that I can see (Plenty of pores or skin bumps/bruises), overall picture not as consistent as Live free die hard or black hawk down.
post #129 of 1897
Quote:
Originally Posted by DavidHir View Post

Obviously, you're unaware that Wall Street was filmed on 80's filmstock and given a darker type of look. This movie is not meant to look like eye candy and replicates the source. It doesn't have a ton of detail, nor is it an eye popping film. The bottom line is it looks like film and there is minimal processing--- and it IS an improvement over the DVD. Film grain is very evident throughout the movie (unlike compression artifacting on the DVD). Detail is better and colors are more natural too. Maybe you're forgetting the intent of this thread? It's not a Tier/PQ/eye candy thread which seems to be your issue.

I am WELL aware about '80s film stock. That transfer is a joke, pure and simple. Already I can see the extremists taking control of this thread, when junk transfers like WALL STREET are held up as some kind of shining example of the "purity" of non-DNR transfers. I hate to tell you, but if this kind of transfer is going to be your rallying cry for why we don't need DNR and EE, I think you're doing a disservice to your own cause.
post #130 of 1897
Quote:
Originally Posted by DM2006RI View Post

I am WELL aware about '80s film stock. That transfer is a joke, pure and simple. Already I can see the extremists taking control of this thread, when junk transfers like WALL STREET are held up as some kind of shining example of the "purity" of non-DNR transfers. I hate to tell you, but if this kind of transfer is going to be your rallying cry for why we don't need DNR and EE, I think you're doing a disservice to your own cause.

Already I can see extremists in this thread who know little about film and expect eye candy on every release.

Seriously, you're better off sticking in the Tier thread for your "3-D pop."
post #131 of 1897
I think Bram Stroker's Dracula should be added to the list. Very filmlike.
post #132 of 1897
Just asking a question here guys: Was the Wall-Street BRD sourced from the same HD master used to source the DVD (assuming one existed), or was it re-mastered for BRD?

A lot of the older HD Masters were unnecessarily soft and don't hold up well compared to the new ones (not sure why this is, but perhaps others could comment on it.)

I have not seen Wall Street on BRD, but wanted to throw this out there.
post #133 of 1897
Quote:
Originally Posted by DM2006RI View Post

I am WELL aware about '80s film stock. That transfer is a joke, pure and simple. Already I can see the extremists taking control of this thread, when junk transfers like WALL STREET are held up as some kind of shining example of the "purity" of non-DNR transfers. I hate to tell you, but if this kind of transfer is going to be your rallying cry for why we don't need DNR and EE, I think you're doing a disservice to your own cause.

The only disservice here is you believing it's being 'extreme' to want the Blu-ray reproduction to look the same as the original film.

(note this was edited to correct an error in posting)
post #134 of 1897
Quote:
Originally Posted by DavidHir View Post

I think Bram Stroker's Dracula should be added to the list. Very filmlike.

I thought I read somewhere that there were color decoding problems with that title. I could be wrong about that.
post #135 of 1897
Quote:
Originally Posted by gremmy View Post

I thought I read somewhere that there were color decoding problems with that title. I could be wrong about that.

The BD definitely differs in color in many scenes from previous video releases for sure. However, Coppola's assistant (and presumably Coppola) signed off on it and Robert Harris gave it a nice recommendation. Some Blu-ray insiders have also stated all was approved and the BD release stems from the answer film print.
post #136 of 1897
Is there any point in asking things to be added when FoxyMulder said he's leaving the forum?
post #137 of 1897
Quote:
Originally Posted by msgohan View Post

Is there any point in asking things to be added when FoxyMulder said he's leaving the forum?

Yes.

Whether any one individual leaves the forum or not, the issues are the same.
post #138 of 1897
Quote:
Originally Posted by msgohan View Post

Is there any point in asking things to be added when FoxyMulder said he's leaving the forum?

Where did he say this? Link?

Edit: nevermind, I found it.

If he isn't going to be around to maintain the first post, someone should start a new thread (who is willing to undertake such responsibility).
post #139 of 1897
Quote:
Originally Posted by DavidHir View Post

The BD definitely differs in color in many scenes from previous video releases for sure. However, Coppola's assistant (and presumably Coppola) signed off on it and Robert Harris gave it a nice recommendation. Some Blu-ray insiders have also stated all was approved and the BD release stems from the answer film print.

That's excellent news, David. I'll have to check this one out then. I saw it in the theater but I can't say that I really recall what the colors were supposed to have looked like.
post #140 of 1897
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vern Dias View Post

This may not be possible, but I would like to see if the people contributing here comply with at least the SMPTE, but preferably the THX max viewing distance guidelines. Check out this diagram http://hd1080i.com/chart.gif . And here is the entire article: http://hd1080i.blogspot.com/2007/01/...0-to-eyes.html

Vern

Vern ,
I'm right at SMPTE minimum.

Art
post #141 of 1897
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by msgohan View Post

Is there any point in asking things to be added when FoxyMulder said he's leaving the forum?

I haven't left i just needed a break from all the DNR stuff....I said i'd be back later in the year to post but i'll pop in and add to this thread if people keep contributing.....I also still come here to read.

I will add The Professionals to the list as well as 30 Days of Night and Bram Stokers Dracula ( I'm waiting on The Professionals to arrive so i can watch it ) Recently viewed Basic Instinct...Big letdown and it needs to have a new print struck as it had some minor blocking in some scenes and softness throughout which isn't how i remember it from the cinema or even some television showings so i suspect a victim of DNR.

How much edge enhancement does 30 Days of Night have because you have to remember what you will see on a 50inch set could be small compared to what you see on larger projection systems so it's possible that minor edge enhancement on the 50inch set becomes major edge enhancement annoyance on a 100inch projection system......Comments on this title are welcome before i place it into Category 1 status.
post #142 of 1897
I agree Basic Instinct is a letdown. I mean it doesn't have a natural look to the image (although certainly better than the DVD, but that's not saying a whole lot).

Regarding 30 Days of Night, I didn't find the edge enhancement severe at all, but still a bit noticable in some scenes. I'm viewing on an ISF'd 60" SXRD A3000 sitting close to 8' back with a Panasonic BD30 at 1080p/24. Category 1 or 2 is fine IMO as it looked quite analog otherwise.
post #143 of 1897
House of flying dagger...what a waste of BR disk and 1080p. Sound wise was pretty good thou...
post #144 of 1897
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ken H View Post

The only disservice here is you believing it's being 'extreme' to want the Blu-ray reproduction to look the same as the original film.

I disagree...I think there are others evident in this thread as well. I'm completely lost in this thread now that Wall Street and Dracula are being touted, as well as other titles with DNR and EE being added to the list.

Brandon
post #145 of 1897
I'm wondering if anyone else seeing EE on 2001 as I'm seeing some ringing/haloing with it on my system.

The reviews I read don't mention any EE, but as we know, we can't always trust it. I do note that it made tier 2 here, so I'm puzzled.

Other than the ringing (which I realize could be my system), it looks fantastic.
post #146 of 1897
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ian_Currie View Post

I'm wondering if anyone else seeing EE on 2001 as I'm seeing some ringing/haloing with it on my system.

The reviews I read don't mention any EE, but as we know, we can't always trust it. I do note that it made tier 2 here, so I'm puzzled.

Other than the ringing (which I realize could be my system), it looks fantastic.

Yes, there is definitely EE on 2001: ASO.
post #147 of 1897
Quote:
Originally Posted by bplewis24 View Post

I disagree...I think there are others evident in this thread as well. I'm completely lost in this thread now that Wall Street and Dracula are being touted, as well as other titles with DNR and EE being added to the list.

Brandon

My latest boilerplate:

At this juncture it's important to remember that AVS is a home theater enthusiasts web site. This particular forum is for those interested in the highest level of accuracy in film reproduction possible, within their budget of course. Those who do not share this interest should expect to find disagreement with their opinions, and may want to reconsider their participation here.
post #148 of 1897
Thread Starter 
I should add that i don't see every film so i need people to add to our list based on the criteria that has been set out and it might well be that some titles are very film like but have some minor edge enhancement....If this is the case i place those titles in Category 3 with some information next to each film....Titles with very excessive DNR will not be knowingly added to the list ( such as Patton or The Longest Day ) as they cannot be considered film like anymore....Of the titles we have listed here i am not aware that any have major DNR added to them but if this is the case then please post and let us all know so that it can be either removed or a note added.....If several people notice the same problem then it would be removed.

This thread will evolve as time passes and it's at an early stage of it's development.
post #149 of 1897
I haven't seen the BD issue, just the HD DVD, but I assume they're about the same...so, my vote goes to 'Sleepy Hollow'. True, it's a very processed image, but I think the original intent and the heavy grain, was beautifully carried through on the hi-def encode. I realize this title has many detractors out there, but then, so many of the other notables have already been mentioned to death.

I'm also looking forward to the eventual BD of 'Saving Private Ryan'. If they try to subdue the (beautiful) grain in that baby...they might as well turn it into an animated line drawing.
post #150 of 1897
Agreed...Sleepy Hollow is great for this thread. Very filmlike - I have the BD version.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Blu-ray Software
AVS › AVS Forum › Blu-ray & HD DVD › Blu-ray Software › Film Reference and Analysis