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 63

post #1861 of 1897
Quote:
Originally Posted by cinemasoul View Post

So are the blu-rays of Breaking Bad worth getting to watch on a 50" plasma? The dvds to me look good on a computer screen but on my plasma it is absolutely atrocious and pretty much unwatchable because it just looks that bad on my 50" plasma on dvd.

Do the blu-rays do the show justice for a 50" plasma?
Are the blu-rays done well?

I hope so, because I love that show.
The resolution is good, it's a big upgrade over a DVD.
post #1862 of 1897
I would like to nominate Breakfast at Tiffany's to the list. This blu-ray is incredible, and very film like, and I feel it deserves a spot on the list.

The version I'm mentioning does not say 50th Anniversary on it anywhere but it does say on the back of the box that the blu-ray was made in 2011.

I'm not sure if there is a difference in this version and the 50th Anniversary version or not.
post #1863 of 1897
Quote:
Originally Posted by scowl View Post

Film grain tends to look more like noise in HDTV resolution, especially with slow film.
Because he's underexposing and pushing in post. Studios don't generally have enough light for ISO 50 film any more. It's strange and usually pointless to use slow film on interiors but Vince Gilligan's hero Quentin Tarantino used it for Pulp Fiction and Reservoir Dogs so that's the look he's going for I guess.
They're shooting the 50D film out in the New Mexico deserts... should be plenty of light. They switch to a 500T film for interiors and 200T for stuff in between.
I guess we'll have to agree disagree. BD can certainly distort grain to some extent, but a lot of what I'm seeing in the BB blurays (again, I've only seen seasons 1-2) is like a much less extreme case of the video noise crud you see on many of the Italian films Blue Underground puts out, like this http://media.cinemasquid.com/blu-ray/titles/django/12756/screenshot-lrg-01.png (supposedly due to a poorly maintained CRT telecine the facility doing the scans uses). Maybe they're adding it in post, who knows, doesn't look terribly filmic to me either way.
post #1864 of 1897
Quote:
Originally Posted by cinemasoul View Post

I would like to nominate Breakfast at Tiffany's to the list. This blu-ray is incredible, and very film like, and I feel it deserves a spot on the list.

The version I'm mentioning does not say 50th Anniversary on it anywhere but it does say on the back of the box that the blu-ray was made in 2011.

I'm not sure if there is a difference in this version and the 50th Anniversary version or not.
I'm not sure there is anyone actively maintaining this particular thread and list. It was abandoned awhile back, so it's now just a focal point of discussion for fine film transfers.
post #1865 of 1897
Quote:
Originally Posted by cinemasoul View Post

Also, I notice that in the list it has "Crash".. but since there are more than 1 movie called Crash and also a tv seriers, it ends up leaving me wondering if this is the
2004 Crash that won best picture or the David Cronenberg Crash...

Cronenberg's Crash is not available on Blu-ray, so that would rule that one out.
Quote:
Another example where I am scratching my head trying to figure out what version of the blu-ray is on the list because it leaves us guessing is Poltergeist.
There are 2 different versions of that movie on blu-ray when I go looking to buy it.. there is the "book packaging" version that came out in 2008 and there is the
other version that came out in 2010... so which one is the one on the list referring to???? Just listing "Poltergeist" is not letting anyone know which version fits the list or if
both versions do or whatnot.

These are both the same disc. Only the packaging differs.
post #1866 of 1897
Oh that's too bad because this is the exact kind of list I have been looking for. Does anyone know of any blu-ray review sites that judge blu-rays based off of similar criteria of the list and thread?

Well, Breakfast at Tiffany's is one the best blu-ray transfers from film that does it respectfully and with integrity to the actual film. There were only 2 quick parts in the whole entire run length of the movie where the contrast seemed a bit overly strong and weird (both of the quick parts are exterior shots and last for only a few seconds and were not enough to bother me) but other than that, this was pretty much a perfect transfer and represents film very well. Very filmic, and properly restored with integrity and respect of the FILM.

Here are a couple of blu-rays that I've recently seen and my quick opinions on them as far as the criteria of this list goes.

Easy Rider - (FAIL)
It's weird, even though there is film grain and all there is just something about this blu-ray transfer seems very 'video' and not very 'film' The motion and flow on this blu-ray seems very video like. I was creeped out by it and could not finish watching it because it looked too 'video' shot despite the obvious film grain.

Vicky Cristina Barcelona - (PASS)
This is a newer Woody Allen film. The blu-ray does not show a lot of grain but it is there ever so slightly and the movie does look more film like than video like. I think this was shot with very light grain, so it's ok that the grain is very very slight on the blu-ray.

Butch Cassidy and the Sundance Kid - (PASSSSSSSSS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!)
One of thee best film to blu-ray transfers that represent the original film look! If you believe in the criteria of this list and thread, then do not hesitate to get this blu-ray!!

Psycho 50th Anniversary Edition - (PASS) Very clean yet nice filmic and beautiful restoration. I was very impressed with this restoration.

Citizen Kane - (pass and FAIL)
While the moving images in this film look very filmic, the writing that comes up in between scenes seems as if it has been replaced entirely by brand new computer fonts... way too BRIGHT and CLEAN and NEW and POLISHED and COMPUTERic and looks is very intrusive to the whole 'filmic' integrity of the transfer. The brand new replaced BRIGHT white computer font writing comes up so much in this movie and it is so off putting and clashes so bad with the 'film' that for me it was unwatchable and I had to shut it down.


ALIEN - (Pass)
I thought this was a nice restoration and transfer over all. Watching this blu-ray is like watching this movie for the first time in a whole new light. So many details and elements are now evident that never were before giving it a whole new feel yet at the same time it is still filmic. This is a good blu-ray over all.



I just ordered 4 blu-rays and am waiting for them in the mail and can't wait to see how they fair to the criteria of this list/thread.
The ones I ordered are:
1.) Moon
2.) Taxi Driver
3.) Hustle and Flow
4.) Something Wild (Criterion)
Edited by cinemasoul - 1/28/13 at 2:14am
post #1867 of 1897
Huh? Easy Rider (the Sony disc, haven't seen the Criterion version) looks fantastic. Nothing video about it.
post #1868 of 1897

cinemasoul,

 

Two other related (and somewhat more recent) threads for your consideration...

 

Best Catalog Film Transfers?

Most Film-like Transfers?

post #1869 of 1897
Quote:
Originally Posted by cinemasoul View Post

ALIEN - (Pass)
I thought this was a nice restoration and transfer over all. Watching this blu-ray is like watching this movie for the first time in a whole new light. So many details and elements are now evident that never were before giving it a whole new feel yet at the same time it is still filmic. This is a good blu-ray over all.

The reason threads like this ultimately fail is that one person's definition of "film like" can be completely different than another person's. For example, in giving Alien a pass, you apparently missed that the whole movie has been digitally recolored into the modern teal & orange color palatte, contrast boosted, and zoomed in so that it loses picture on all four sides of the frame.
post #1870 of 1897
The zooming in that they did for Alien is just a side effect if 4K-1080P conversion. I don't agree either that it has any teal/orange look. Mixing 3200k lights and 5600k lights gives that effect without digital tweaking. Haven't seen the movie in theater, but its special edition trailer had a very cold\warm color scheme in theater, and that was made before the remaster.

But I agree, one mans filmlook is another mans videolook.
post #1871 of 1897
ALIEN is one of the few films where I distinctly remember the color from the theater (I saw it often enough).

Although not as drastic as others, the color has definitely been adjusted. HR Giger used a creepy bio-mechanical gray-green (we used to call it Giger-green) and this is now a safer, more neutral gray.

-Bill
post #1872 of 1897
The number of older films now that make it to Blu-ray without having the color-timing tweaked, can be counted on one hand. Digital tools simply make it too easy to tweak a film's colors, making the temptation too great for the studios to ignore. Sometimes the new choices look aesthetically better than the original film stock, sometimes it doesn't.
post #1873 of 1897
Quote:
Originally Posted by MovieSwede View Post

The zooming in that they did for Alien is just a side effect if 4K-1080P conversion.

You say this as though there were no choice but to crop the movie on all four sides of the frame. The image should have been scaled appropriately, rather than lazily chopped.
Quote:
I don't agree either that it has any teal/orange look.

Watch it again. I didn't notice the teal/orange on my first watch either, until someone complained about it. So I went back, and by god, there's teal and orange all over the damn place.
Quote:
Mixing 3200k lights and 5600k lights gives that effect without digital tweaking.

No, it doesn't. Teal is not blue. They are not the same color. The teal/orange color scheme is a digital color grading effect.
Quote:
Haven't seen the movie in theater, but its special edition trailer had a very cold\warm color scheme in theater, and that was made before the remaster.

The 2003 "Director's Cut" is when Scott started tealing up the movie.
post #1874 of 1897
Quote:
Originally Posted by Josh Z View Post

You say this as though there were no choice but to crop the movie on all four sides of the frame. The image should have been scaled appropriately, rather than lazily chopped.

Scaling vs cropping have their pros and cons. One crops the image and one creates scaling artifacts.

To bad we couldn't have a HD format that matched the studios format better.
post #1875 of 1897
Moonstruck is a very filmic blu ray that has plenty of 'evidence' that it was shot on film such as specks and film pops every once in a while. A very nice restoration and transfer. It looks AMAZING and it looks very much like film.

Also, Taxi Driver is the most amazing blu ray!! The restoration is incredible.

Hustle and Flow is also a great blu ray transfer, and looks very much like film with consistent film grain throughout.
post #1876 of 1897
Quote:
Originally Posted by 42041 View Post

Huh? Easy Rider (the Sony disc, haven't seen the Criterion version) looks fantastic. Nothing video about it.

No, not the Criterion, I haven't seen that one yet, but the blu ray of Easy Rider I saw did have film grain and all of that but yes at the same time it did have a weird digital feel to it IMO. Something about it just didn't feel authentic.
post #1877 of 1897
I have the Easy Rider Criterion disc and I think it looks aces, not digital at all. I'm not certain but I'd bet dollars to donuts it's the same transfer as the Sony stand-alone disc. The rest of the Criterion box is fantastic as well.

I also don't undertand your comlains with Citizen Kane....computer fonts on words between scenes? I'll have to go back and look but I thought that disc was great.
post #1878 of 1897
Quote:
Originally Posted by cinemasoul View Post

No, not the Criterion, I haven't seen that one yet, but the blu ray of Easy Rider I saw did have film grain and all of that but yes at the same time it did have a weird digital feel to it IMO. Something about it just didn't feel authentic.
Well, I'll have to disagree. It's been a couple years since I've seen it but it looked very much like a good print to me, as Sony's remastering efforts tend to do.
post #1879 of 1897
Quote:
Originally Posted by Strevlac View Post

I have the Easy Rider Criterion disc and I think it looks aces, not digital at all. I'm not certain but I'd bet dollars to donuts it's the same transfer as the Sony stand-alone disc. The rest of the Criterion box is fantastic as well.

I also don't undertand your comlains with Citizen Kane....computer fonts on words between scenes? I'll have to go back and look but I thought that disc was great.


Easy Rider: Yes, it was the sony disc not the disc that I saw.

Citizen Kane: Yeah the font looks waaaay too NEW and white and bright in comparison to the film itself. To me it just looks like they completely replaced all of the text with brand new computerized version of the text where they just tried to closely match the font. The text just does not look authentic for that time period. To me it looks as if it was completely replaced instead of just 'cleaned up.'

It was probably easier for them to just replace it than bother restoring it in those 'text only' area of the film... but it just looks wrong. The rest of the movie looks great though.
post #1880 of 1897
Please post the time code of a couple of sections where you think the text was replaced when you get a chance. I'd like how those look to me.
post #1881 of 1897
PSYCHO (50th Anniversary) now there is an impressive restoration and blu ray transfer of a film. Keeps the film grain intact and looks and feels very film like, yet at the same time is a mind blowing restoration of a classic film.
post #1882 of 1897
Quote:
Originally Posted by NJPete View Post

Please post the time code of a couple of sections where you think the text was replaced when you get a chance. I'd like how those look to me.


I don't own the blu ray of this... I got it from the library one day... I will try to check it out again at some point and give it a second viewing and a second chance to see if I still see it that way or not.
post #1883 of 1897
So Easy Rider looks like video, but Psycho looks very filmlike?

Interesting... confused.gif
post #1884 of 1897
Quote:
Originally Posted by 42041 View Post

So Easy Rider looks like video, but Psycho looks very filmlike?

Interesting... confused.gif


To me yes. I think that the Sony Easy Rider had the grain and 'film look', but not so much the 'film feel' at all times. Don't get me wrong, it does have the film feel at times yes, but not enough of it IMO. There were too many times in the sony version where it just kind of felt too digitally weird.

I guess there is a difference that I'm just starting to realize. Some films of blu ray can 'look like' film but still 'feel' un- film like and have a certain digital weirdness to them that is hard to put into words. I think it may have to do with the movements of things in the Sony Easy Rider that feels a little un- film like to me.

I think that Psycho has more of a film like feel to it as well as a film like look. Yes Psycho does look like film... it has all kinds of film grain flecks going on throughout if you look. The movements in the film feel natural for a film too.

To me, it can look like film but if it doesn't 'feel' like film as well as look like film, then I can't completely escape in it as a film.

The film 'Moonstruck' on blu ray is a curious case to me... it looks VERY much like film... so much so it blew me away. I was in all my glory watching it even though I don't really care for the movie itself. It also felt like film throughout most of it. HOWEVER, there were very brief moments here and there in it where even though it still looked like film there were moments here and there that loose the film like feel and just suddenly look weirdly digital. Thankfully those 'weird' moments were very brief and didn't happen often, so all in all Moonstruck is a very good film like blu ray. With Sony's Easy Rider, it was the same thing as moonstruck but there were just too many of those 'weird digital' moments for me to be able to relax and enjoy it as a film.

For a blu ray to be 'film like' it believe it should not only look like film, but have the film feel to it as well.

If this doesn't make sense or doesn't compute, then it is just because I explained it poorly. I apologize for the sloppy and not so clear description of what I'm trying to say, but this is actually a new revelation that I'm just starting to come to a realization about. I will try to think of how to better explain it once I can get my mind wrapped fully around what I am trying to say here...
Edited by cinemasoul - 1/30/13 at 12:07am
post #1885 of 1897
Quote:
Originally Posted by cinemasoul View Post

I think it may have to do with the movements of things in the Sony Easy Rider that feels a little un- film like to me.

Forgive the dumb question, but are you sure that you've turned off all frame interpolation features (MotionFlow, Smooth Motion, Auto Motion Plus, etc.) in your TV?
post #1886 of 1897
Quote:
Originally Posted by Josh Z View Post

Forgive the dumb question, but are you sure that you've turned off all frame interpolation features (MotionFlow, Smooth Motion, Auto Motion Plus, etc.) in your TV?


Yeah, I've turned all of those things off. I do have a 50" plasma... maybe because the screen is so big it magnifies any and all 'digital weirdness'...

What size tv did you watch the sony Easy Rider blu ray on? You may not notice the same things on a 32" as you might on a bigger screen.
post #1887 of 1897
Quote:
Originally Posted by cinemasoul View Post

Yeah, I've turned all of those things off. I do have a 50" plasma... maybe because the screen is so big it magnifies any and all 'digital weirdness'...

What size tv did you watch the sony Easy Rider blu ray on? You may not notice the same things on a 32" as you might on a bigger screen.
His screen should be roughly double the size of yours - he's using a front projector.
post #1888 of 1897
Actually, I think Cinemasoul has a point re Citizen Kane, if he is referring to the title cards in the cinema on the march sequence. It's been a while since I've watched it but here is an exchange I had with someone on another forum back when the BD came out:
Quote:
11-28-2011, 07:58 PM #815
Strevlac
Special Member


Member since:Dec 2010
Blu-ray collection:384
DVD collection:199
Blu-ray reviews:5


Quote:
Originally Posted by Oblivion138
There's a lot more to say than just that. haha We could talk, for instance, about the phony freeze-frame-and-digital-dissolve in the News on the March title card that seems entirely out of place in an otherwise gorgeously filmic transfer. But I guess no one wants to acknowledge that, as it was roundly ignored when I brought it up.http://www.caps-a-holic.com/hd_vergl...less=1#auswahl

I wouldn't be surprised if the title card was a full digital recreation...I've seen that kind of thing before. If it's a case where the original elements have irreparable damage or are too dupey to match with the rest of the film....well OK I guess but it still kind of irks me. I cannot stand digital credits on old movies, The African Queen and Deliverance are the two worst that I've seen.


Strevlac
View Public Profile
Send a private message to Strevlac
Find More Posts by Strevlac
Add Strevlac to Your Contacts

11-29-2011, 12:20 AM #816
Oblivion138
Special Member




Member since:Nov 2010
Blu-ray collection:1011
Blu-ray reviews:2


Quote:
Originally Posted by Strevlac
I wouldn't be surprised if the title card was a full digital recreation...I've seen that kind of thing before. If it's a case where the original elements have irreparable damage or are too dupey to match with the rest of the film....well OK I guess but it still kind of irks me. I cannot stand digital credits on old movies, The African Queen and Deliverance are the two worst that I've seen.

Since it's the News on the March sequence, they could have easily kept all the damage, as it's supposed to look scratched up and dirty, anyway. But yeah, that title card is quite obviously a digital recreation. It's just (very clean) stills of the two title cards, with an obviously digital dissolve in between. It looks fine, but it's a bit jarring, considering how absolutely filmic and faithful the rest of the transfer is. And as I said, it's especially baffling since the News on the March sequence is supposed to be "dirtied up."
post #1889 of 1897
I have to say something that really irks me. When a movie is on blu ray and it looks extremely film like and is perfect in every way as far as a true representation and restoration of the film, where you can no doubt tell that it is very filmic BUT they decide to not care and go ahead destroy the audio track.

I am in the middle of watching The Who's TOMMY on blu ray and it looks and feels so amazingly film like that I just want to jump for joy, BUT as soon as the Christmas kid scene comes up, the audio all of a sudden starts to sound extremely tinny like the treble is completely blown out and the whole movie is ruined by this to the point where it is barely watchable because of the horrendous tin can audio that sounds like a broken tweeter and the audio starts to really fluctuate. Every time someone who doesn't have a really deep voice starts to sing the whole sound goes waaay down and takes a few seconds after they stop singing to slowly fade back up to normal level...and it sounds so so soooooo bad. Like I said, it sounds like the movie is being played through blown out and busted up tweeters.

I even put on another disc to see if it was my headphones and nope... other discs sound fine, so it is without a doubt the Tommy blu ray.

It's such a sad sad shame, because like I said, this movie on blu ray looks so much like film that it would have been a dream come true to have the sound quality match the picture quality.

This really burns my britches.


I am editing this post now because I have just finished watching the movie and now have a full opinion.
It is not unwatchable...but the bad sound mix does get in the way of being able to thoroughly enjoy the movie.
You can hear how bad it is especially when the letter 'S' is used. It soundssss ssssso horrendousssssss.

BUT WOW!! This blu ray LOOKS INCREDIBLE and very very film like... The part with The Pinball Wizard (Elton John's part) is such a wild experience on this blu ray.
Very very VERY impressed with the visual presentation of this blu ray and utterly disappointed with the audio presentation of it. If the audio quality only matched the visual quality this would be the best blu ray ever, but unfortunately the audio does fail and is just not solid at all.
Edited by cinemasoul - 1/30/13 at 8:37pm
post #1890 of 1897
Quote:
Originally Posted by cinemasoul View Post

I have to say something that really irks me. When a movie is on blu ray and it looks extremely film like and is perfect in every way as far as a true representation and restoration of the film, where you can no doubt tell that it is very filmic BUT they decide to not care and go ahead destroy the audio track.

I am in the middle of watching The Who's TOMMY on blu ray and it looks and feels so amazingly film like that I just want to jump for joy, BUT as soon as the Christmas kid scene comes up, the audio all of a sudden starts to sound extremely tinny like the treble is completely blown out and the whole movie is ruined by this to the point where it is barely watchable because of the horrendous tin can audio that sounds like a broken tweeter and the audio starts to really fluctuate.

And you're absolutely certain that this is due to the studio deciding to "destroy" the audio track, and isn't just a case of a movie having typical 1970s audio fidelity problems?
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