or Connect
AVS › AVS Forum › Blu-ray & HD DVD › HD DVD Software › Grand Prix (1966) comparison *PIX*
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Grand Prix (1966) comparison *PIX* - Page 2

post #31 of 92
Interestingly, it does look like most of the detail is still there but the tweed jacket is more in your face.There appears to be way more dynamic range in the film scan as well with whites way up there while there is still more detail at the low end.

Art
post #32 of 92
Quote:
Originally Posted by MovieSwede View Post

So wich one has the most correct information?

The 70mm scan, you cannot create information like that, only simplify or leave away as is the case with the HD-DVD.

Quote:
Originally Posted by MovieSwede View Post

my guess is that it has to do with the print quality

It does not, the structure is just too fine to be resolved properly at the low resolution used.
The print looks immaculate for its age and is one of the most detailed 70mm prints I have witnessed, the detail is absolutely stunning.


Quote:
Originally Posted by MovieSwede View Post

combined with the poor scanning.

This being a downconversion of a larger scan I am at a loss as to why you would be able to make any comment about the scanning process from what you see here.
It is too bad that we cannot look at a higher resolution scan as I am sure this would clear things up pretty fast.
post #33 of 92
post #34 of 92
Quote:
Originally Posted by Art Sonneborn View Post

Interestingly, it does look like most of the detail is still there but the tweed jacket is more in your face.There appearsto beway more dynamic range in the film scan as well with whites way up there while there is still more detail at the low end.

Art

Absolutely true, the dynamic range of the film print scan looks to be much higher and this is also something that I was aware of while watching the film. The other interesting thing is that at least at this resolution basically all information that is in the scan is still there in the HD-DVD but fine detail is lacking in amplitude - this is not just the result of the edgyness that can be seen but also a trait of 70mm imo, edge transitions are just sharper than with comparable 35mm movies and so far I have yet to see this reproduced properly on HDmedia. As for difference of appearance maybe the most important difference to me is that there is some kind of structure everywhere in the scan, not just picture information but also the film grain itself is evident and it makes for a completely different appearance. This is one of the reasons why I think that the preservation of film grain is so important - it gives film a completely different look.
post #35 of 92
Quote:
Originally Posted by MovieSwede View Post

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nyquist...als_and_images

This is what we seeing.

Yes, that looks like it, good find !

Now judging by how the pattern looks I would wager a guess that at 1920 x 1080 resolution it should look more than acceptable, especially when carefully downconverted from a 4k scan, but then maybe there would have been problems with such a fine pattern in motion.
post #36 of 92
Just for fun I took the HDDVD image sharpened it,added contrast, reduced color added more blue and grain.

Here is the scan:

post #37 of 92
I hate to say it, but I think that 70mm scan looks horrible. If that's what the print really looked like, I'd rather watch the HD DVD.
post #38 of 92
I'm pretty sure the print didn't have EE. The colors might be that way though. Did it fade or is the HD version "corrected"?
post #39 of 92
@Josh and Kram Sacul:

As I said before the film was already leaning to the pink/magenta side so the colors were definitely adjusted by one way or another, that's why I never said too much about them as I think they are not that meaningful.

Would be better to have it in 1920x1080 and without the added edginess - wonder if the scanner used already adds this by default, or if the small pic was produced by something like bicubic/sharpen in photoshop.

@Art: Nice try, but now the HD-DVD version looks more edgy
The contrast of the print was definitely more like the scan, but then it had already faded and it definitely would have leaned more to the less contrasty side back then.

Maybe I should better not have posted it - the way it looks now there are too many ifs and buts.
post #40 of 92
Thread Starter 
I dont think its fair too complain too much of the 70mm scan posted. Lots of factors were involved to get that screengrab.

If thats Patton I don't care if its too edgy LOL! I will frakking use it on that thread.
post #41 of 92
Quote:
Originally Posted by Oliver Klohs View Post

@Art: Nice try, but now the HD-DVD version looks more edgy
The contrast of the print was definitely more like the scan, but then it had already faded and it definitely would have leaned more to the less contrasty side back then.

Maybe I should better not have posted it - the way it looks now there are too many ifs and buts.


I just thought it interesting that the two images had similar detail before but even playing with the HDDVD image the dynamics look more similar. The amplitude of the detail comment made gave me the idea to add grain since the images that Amir did taught me that adding grain (or perhaps keeping it) increases the apparent MTF.

Art
post #42 of 92
Quote:
Originally Posted by Art Sonneborn View Post

I just thouight it interesting that the two images had similar detail before but even playing with the HDDVD image the dynamics look more similar. The amplitude of the detail comment made gave me the idea to add grain since the images that Amir did taught me that adding grain (or perhaps keeping it) increases the apparent MTF.

Art

I just tried it myself and with some additional outlining one can come pretty close to how the scan looks. Of course I would want the MTF without the outlining, but still a very interesting test
post #43 of 92
Thread Starter 
I'm actually impressed with Art's photoshop skills
post #44 of 92
Quote:
Originally Posted by Xylon View Post

I dont think its fair too complain too much of the 70mm scan posted. Lots of factors were involved to get that screengrab.

If thats Patton I don't care if its too edgy LOL! I will frakking use it on that thread.

Get one of Patton. There isn't enough detail left in Patton to even do the things I did here.

Art
post #45 of 92
Quote:
Originally Posted by Xylon View Post

I'm actually impressed with Art's photoshop skills

Yep, now I am not so sure if I can trust his screenshots anymore being the Photoshop wiz that he is - before this I thought he could hardly point a camera

Quote:
Originally Posted by Xylon View Post

If thats Patton I don't care if its too edgy LOL! I will frakking use it on that thread.

I will keep that in mind if I run across a Patton scan of similar or bigger size
post #46 of 92
What generation is the filmscan?
post #47 of 92
Here's a question: Why is it that the Grand Prix HD DVD looks so much better than the Patton Blu-ray? The picture is amazingly sharp and detailed, with none of the softness or waxy facial features that plague Patton. And yet, I'm pretty sure that it also had some digital grain removal done, because there is next to no grain at all visible in the entire movie. Solid colors in things like billboards also tend to look a little too pure, like they've been digitally cleaned up. But it's not objectionable at all in Grand Prix, where similar tinkering was very distracting in Patton.
post #48 of 92
Quote:
Originally Posted by Oliver Klohs View Post

so first we have the HD-DVD:


I watched Grand Prix today, and that guy's gray blazer has more detail on my screen than is visible in your screen cap, Oliver. It's a very quick shot, but the pattern was more distinct than it looks here.
post #49 of 92
Quote:
Originally Posted by Josh Z View Post

Here's a question: Why is it that the Grand Prix HD DVD looks so much better than the Patton Blu-ray? The picture is amazingly sharp and detailed, with none of the softness or waxy facial features that plague Patton. And yet, I'm pretty sure that it also had some digital grain removal done, because there is next to no grain at all visible in the entire movie. Solid colors in things like billboards also tend to look a little too pure, like they've been digitally cleaned up. But it's not objectionable at all in Grand Prix, where similar tinkering was very distracting in Patton.


I agree, great question. No doubt ,no grain at all but still a nice looking film. The colors particularly reds look like they may have been manipulated,just a gut feeling.

Art
post #50 of 92
Quote:
Originally Posted by Oliver Klohs View Post

Yep, now I am not so sure if I can trust his screenshots anymore being the Photoshop wiz that he is - before this I thought he could hardly point a camera

I thought I had done pretty well. My screen shots are are cropped that's it. If I thought no one else would ever have the same source......

My last avatar, I removed my bifocals ;that is about the hardest thing I've ever done with photoshop !


Art
post #51 of 92
Josh is correct. Watching the HD DVD,there is more detail in the blazer jacket, plus the guy next to him, you can see what looks like a tie pin, in the white of his tie. Then again maybe I just caught a speck of dirt slightly off the same frame.

First shot original HD DVD shot, then my screenshot, not cap.

post #52 of 92
Josh,

all I found of the film print was that reduction from a scan that was 1123 pixels wide. So I downconverted the HD-DVD, too as otherwise it would not make much sense to compare the two. Yes, the jacket has more detail in the full size screen grab that I could not post due to size limits on imageshack, but it still looks completely different from the jacket on the scan, which was the first thing I noticed when I saw the two side by side. I have made a few tests myself with Grand Prix and as good as it looks there is very little detail that goes beyond a 1280 x 720 resolution, so for most other purposes than the jacket not very much is missing by downconverting to 1123 x 632

Regarding the grain reduction: I would think that Warner might have worked with Lowry for that title and according to Robert A Harris they have the best grain reduction algorythms in the business. But I think one of the reasons this is not quite up to the best of the best is that there is so little grain - it looks a bit strange. It could also have been that the transfer was filtered a little to go below a certain bit rate and therefore most of the grain, being very fine, disappeared, too.

As for Patton the guy who had worked on it in another function said that they have an inhouse "wiz" that does DNR and grain reduction at their facility and I can only say that he probably does not really know when to stop

Oliver
post #53 of 92
Quote:
Originally Posted by Blasst View Post

Josh is correct. Watching the HD DVD,there is more detail in the blazer jacket, plus the guy next to him, you can see what looks like a tie pin, in the white of his tie. Then again maybe I just caught a speck of dirt slightly off the same frame.

I just answered to Josh
I wanted to get the best possible picture quality with downconversion so I used bicubic downscaling, it is what it is and everybody wopuld get the same results with photoshop and Bicubic.

Your screenshot has several artefacts introduced that reinforce my belief in direct screenshots being nice to look at, but that's it: There is both added edginess and also the Jacket now looks as if it has stripes, which is definitely not the case.

Plus it shows that screenshots are very bad at capturing the colors and contrast range of what you see on screen.
post #54 of 92
Quote:
Originally Posted by MovieSwede View Post

What generation is the filmscan?

Removed from the original scan ? At least one generation, maybe more.
post #55 of 92
Quote:
Originally Posted by Art Sonneborn View Post

I thought I had done pretty well. My screen shots are are cropped that's it. If I thought no one else would ever have the same source......

Well, as it would be too expensive to pay everybody that has been at your place for their praise I tend to believe you

Quote:
Originally Posted by Art Sonneborn View Post

My last avatar, I removed my bifocals ;that is about the hardest thing I've ever done with photoshop !
Art

Until now You got your eyes lasered at some point or do you only use the glasses for driving and home theater ?
post #56 of 92
Quote:
Originally Posted by Josh Z View Post

I hate to say it, but I think that 70mm scan looks horrible. If that's what the print really looked like, I'd rather watch the HD DVD.

The 70mm is improperly downscaled to 1080p. As it is it would look horrible in motion since it's severly aliased. With proper downsampling it would look not much different than the HD-DVD but some.
post #57 of 92
Quote:
Originally Posted by mhafner View Post

The 70mm is improperly downscaled to 1080p. As it is it would look horrible in motion since it's severly aliased. With proper downsampling it would look not much different than the HD-DVD but some.

It is even downscaled to only 632p if we keep the 16:9 AR.

I agree on the aliasing, how would one go about filtering from let's say 4k while keeping as much detail as possible without introducing artefacts ?

I would think that a scene by scene approach might give the best results, although the kind of jacket that is causing the most problems here seems to have been very much in vogue back then - half the cast was wearing something like it and there are probably many more problematic scenes with that kind of structure
post #58 of 92
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Oliver Klohs View Post

Of the HD-DVD ? Very much the same, but I cannot post it due to a file size limit on imageshack. Maybe Xylon can help, apparently he can post large files at photobucket.

Done

post #59 of 92
Quote:
Originally Posted by Oliver Klohs View Post

I have made a few tests myself with Grand Prix and as good as it looks there is very little detail that goes beyond a 1280 x 720 resolution,

How exactly would you determine something like that?
post #60 of 92
The screen capture above has above 720p details in it. Mostly the guy's jacket and the lines of the shirt.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: HD DVD Software
AVS › AVS Forum › Blu-ray & HD DVD › HD DVD Software › Grand Prix (1966) comparison *PIX*