or Connect
AVS › AVS Forum › Blu-ray & HD DVD › Blu-ray Software › Akira comparison *PIX*
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Akira comparison *PIX* - Page 3

post #61 of 175
Quote:
Originally Posted by MrGonk View Post

i honestly don't know why people are complaining. soft? the f'in movie itself is soft. looks like a great transfer - no noise, a little bit of grain, no apparent DNR abuse, no EE at all. looks nice and clean with vivid, balanced colors to me. looks to me like this shows plenty of signs of being faithful to the film presentation. oh sure, it's not "TIER ONE LIKE KING KONG WOOOooooo" but some movies just don't look like king kong. deal with it.

I agree. Having seen AKIRA dozens of times from VHS, LD, and DVD I am very pleased with the transfer. Saying this blu-ray looks soft is just silly. To me it looks like a film print and that is what I want from my blu-ray's.

-Will
post #62 of 175
I don't think it looks much softer than I would expect to see. It may be soft, but the rest of the picture looks pristine to me. In order to sharpen the image, wouldn't EE have to be utilized?
post #63 of 175
Quote:
Originally Posted by xradman View Post

Why the *&^$ is it windowboxed??? Someone needs to tell Bandai that most HDTVs now are fixed pixel displays and have no overscan.

I'm curious about that, too. What is the purpose of windowboxing?
post #64 of 175
Quote:
Originally Posted by TayC View Post

I don't think it looks much softer than I would expect to see. It may be soft, but the rest of the picture looks pristine to me. In order to sharpen the image, wouldn't EE have to be utilized?

yep. i mean, look, there's essentially no detail in this movie that should not have shown up in the DVD. so the fact that this BR looks like the dvd, except with better color, WAY less noise and no EE is about as good as i could imagine it looking. this movie has always had a soft look to it -- on dvd, on ld, on vhs, anywhere i've seen it. it's from 1988. i don't care what they did with sleeping beauty. this isn't sleeping beauty, this is akira, and to me it looks exactly the way it should.
post #65 of 175
Quote:
Originally Posted by TayC View Post

I'm curious about that, too. What is the purpose of windowboxing?

It used to done to compensate for TV overscan, so that you get the entire picture with nothing being cutout by your TV. It was more common with Japanese DVDs and anime. However as more and more HDTV are now LCDs and Plasma displays, overscan is becoming a thing of the past. They should retire windowboxing scheme.
post #66 of 175
Quote:
Originally Posted by TayC View Post

In order to sharpen the image, wouldn't EE have to be utilized?

No, they just needed to skip the noise reduction. When the guys who made the transfer say they used NR, it isn't as sharp as it could be. That's just sort of what NR does.

There are some NR artifacts on the transfer, they just aren't constant. It's nowhere near as bad as, say, FUNimation's transfer of the Dragonball Z movies, but it still isn't perfect.
post #67 of 175
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kentai View Post

No, they just needed to skip the noise reduction. When the guys who made the transfer say they used NR, it isn't as sharp as it could be. That's just sort of what NR does.

There are some NR artifacts on the transfer, they just aren't constant. It's nowhere near as bad as, say, FUNimation's transfer of the Dragonball Z movies, but it still isn't perfect.

May not be perfect buy I think it's close.

-Will
post #68 of 175
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kentai View Post

The restoration crew have already admitted here that they used NR as a means to get rid of dirt; "After an automated pass, where the computer identifies what it believes to be print damage or debris and then eliminates it, the real work begins."

Dirt & scratch removal is not the same thing as DNR. DNR is applied to filter the entire image of a layer of high frequency detail. Dirt and scratches are often painted out individually. Not the same thing at all.
post #69 of 175
Quote:
Originally Posted by xradman View Post

It used to done to compensate for TV overscan, so that you get the entire picture with nothing being cutout by your TV. It was more common with Japanese DVDs and anime. However as more and more HDTV are now LCDs and Plasma displays, overscan is becoming a thing of the past. They should retire windowboxing scheme.

I'm watching the MGM Hong Kong release of Army Of Darkness on DVD at the moment and it's windowboxed the same as Akira. It's not even an issue to me.
post #70 of 175
Josh Z: Reading it a second time, you're probably right. The article could well have been talking about actual human-aided scratch removal (which was also done on the Pioneer restoration), but the wording still made me nervous. FUNimation's bragging about how their Dragon Ball Z HD telecine "removed millions of scratches and pieces of dirt" with no actual scratch removal stage in the transfer has seemingly made me a little paranoid. For that I apologize.

But, if you need proof that DNR was used on this transfer:



If that isn't DNR, I'd love to know what it is.

(Screencap can be found in this review.)
post #71 of 175
Quote:


to me it looks exactly the way it should.

Do a search on ebay for some of the cels that are for sale from "Akira", they look nice and sharp. Putting them to film added grain, but shouldn't have blurred them up like you can see in some of the shots on page 1.
post #72 of 175
just got this in the mail when i got home from work. i'm watching it right now on my calibrated xbr960 - i won't deny based on the above screencaps that there's a little bit of dnr going on, however, if you guys think this isn't a good transfer, you're crazy. despite the bit of dnr, the image is very filmlike, smooth, sharp but not unnaturally sharp.

also, the 192/24 soundtrack is AMAZING. purists won't like all the new foley work - and there is a good bit of it, but it sounds ridiculous. if i didn't know it was 192/24 and someone told me it was just uncompressed 48/16, i'd certainly believe them. it's definitely not a night and day difference, or even all that noticeable a difference. but the soundstage is absolutely huge, the dynamic range is crazy, the clarity is flawless, with plenty of bass but not too much bass. the new mix is also extremely aggressive, maybe a little too aggressive, which is basically the only fault i'd site. an overall epic disc.
post #73 of 175
Quote:
Originally Posted by MrGonk View Post

just got this in the mail when i got home from work. i'm watching it right now on my calibrated xbr960 - i won't deny based on the above screencaps that there's a little bit of dnr going on, however, if you guys think this isn't a good transfer, you're crazy. despite the bit of dnr, the image is very filmlike, smooth, sharp but not unnaturally sharp.

Cool
post #74 of 175
DISCLAIMER: I have not read the thread nor have I seen the disc.

As a professional video person the second set of comparison pictures caught my eye. There is a person on a conveyor and under the person is a set lines in a arced pattern. This pattern is similar to one of many test patterns we use for testing video response.

Note the DVD lines that are ≥ 45° (CCW) vs. the same ones in the Blu-ray version. The DVD ones smear and blend together, the ones on Blu-ray are nice and distinct. This implies much greater video bandwidth (detail) and that is as it should be for the Blu-ray.

Sorry for the interruption, now back to your regular arguing .
post #75 of 175
to the 192/24 audio most surrond sounds cant even processe that format so you are not going to notice but if we all a system that could, i would think it would be big difference.
post #76 of 175
my ps3 is decoding it correctly and outputting it as 192/24 5.1 LPCM to my onkyo 605 and it sounds like butter. i'm just saying there's no way i'd be able to tell the difference between this and a well-mastered 48/16 truehd/dts-ma/LPCM track. and i'm not listening on a small system. i have full-range floor standing polk audio l/r speakers and timbre matched multi-driver center and surround speakers. by no means is it a top-of-the-line or even high-end system, not by a long shot, but it's no HTIB. all things considered, i'd say the surround mix on the blade runner final cut is better than this one - it's more subtle, dynamic and directional. and it's like 1/3 of the data as in this one. i just don't think there's much you gain by going beyond 48/16.... nevertheless, it does sound phenomenal.
post #77 of 175
Honneamise is the new Criterion.
post #78 of 175
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ruined View Post

Honneamise is the new Criterion.

Yeah, but doesn't Criterion put like a lot of extras on discs (well, at least their DVDs, I don't know about their Blu-rays.)
post #79 of 175
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kentai View Post

Josh Z:
But, if you need proof that DNR was used on this transfer:

[edit]

If that isn't DNR, I'd love to know what it is.

We know there is DNR use. Who said there isn't?
post #80 of 175
Quote:
Originally Posted by joekun View Post

Do a search on ebay for some of the cels that are for sale from "Akira", they look nice and sharp. Putting them to film added grain, but shouldn't have blurred them up like you can see in some of the shots on page 1.

Maybe so, but the transfers aren't made from the cells unfortunately. They are made from dusty films of those cells. And that's a very big difference.
post #81 of 175
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kentai View Post

Josh Z: Reading it a second time, you're probably right. The article could well have been talking about actual human-aided scratch removal (which was also done on the Pioneer restoration), but the wording still made me nervous. FUNimation's bragging about how their Dragon Ball Z HD telecine "removed millions of scratches and pieces of dirt" with no actual scratch removal stage in the transfer has seemingly made me a little paranoid. For that I apologize.

But, if you need proof that DNR was used on this transfer:

If that isn't DNR, I'd love to know what it is.

(Screencap can be found in this review.)

I'm not saying that the disc wasn't DNR'ed. I received my copy yesterday, but so far haven't watched more than 2 minutes of it on a small monitor to verify that the TrueHD track was working with my equipment. I really have no opinion on the video transfer yet. All I mean is that the quote you pulled doesn't sound to me like an admission of guilt.
post #82 of 175
Quote:
Originally Posted by someone else View Post

Maybe so, but the transfers aren't made from the cells unfortunately. They are made from dusty films of those cells. And that's a very big difference.

Not saying it's going to be perfect, just that some of those shots don't look very sharp, and some of them do. This shot for example seems very blurry, and I don't think that was intentional for this scene:

post #83 of 175
Quote:
Originally Posted by Xylon View Post

We know there is DNR use. Who said there isn't?

Nobody. Sorry if I'm being dramatic, I just wanted to establish what got me so upset that I wasn't thinking straight.

Several people on forums, review sites and the like (not just here) have said it looks "fantastic", "pretty much perfect", and all sorts of other overly excited things. I disagree. It's not a bad transfer, and heaven knows I own worse, but it's neither as good as Bandai Visual has done in the past, nor as good as the film deserves. Even if Akira is soft by nature, there are DNR artifacts, and particularly on a release touting its' own prestige and quality, I find that inexcusable.

And why would Akira be any softer than Patlabor, Honneamise or Memories? Not trying to be difficult, I'm just curious if there's any part of the creation process I don't know that would lead to it being overly soft? I'll be renting the disc to see for myself if it's worth the investment. For $50 with several key DVD extras missing, I think I can be just a little greedy in asking for a perfect transfer.

joekun, my guess is that the shot with Kaneda and co. in the station was an optically printed effect, with the kids themselves overlaid on the original animation of the police at their desks. That would explain the heavy outlines (matte lines), and also why the shot is soft, and yet has a lot of grain. Maybe there were just too many layers of cels, and they couldn't properly photograph it all at once?
post #84 of 175
That shot of Keneda and the kids looks intentional, as if the kids are the focus, not the rest of the room or the cops.
post #85 of 175
I say that we make a big deal about this, just like people did with sleeping beauty (a few random shots had wonky focus). We should definitely boycott this release and demand they re-do it. [/sarcasm]
post #86 of 175
I do not know the technical background aspects of the film but here are some possibilities.

Some of the softness can be from various factors:

1. Film stock that was used could have been very different from other productions of the time.

2. Lenses that were used could lend a softer look.

3. The animators smoked like chimney stacks and all that atmospheric haze got in the way of the lens. ;}~

4. The originating source that was used for the (re)master(s) had deteriorated a degree and caused some softness.

5. The auto DNR software initially used before hand restoration fudged a bit.

6. Akira has always had some softness to it. -The pioneer release has such strong EE that I think that perhaps which ever elements used were a tad soft.

7. Combination of all of the above.

8. Insert you own theories here...


One thing from the various shots I've seen, still debating the hefty price tag, the color rendition is fantastic and a major plus for the video aspect, many claim the audio is an awesome upgrade as well but hopefully it hasn't been cooked.

Best Regards
KvE
post #87 of 175
I've never seen this movie. Would you recommend I buy the BD version?
post #88 of 175
Quote:
Originally Posted by unclepauly View Post

I've never seen this movie. Would you recommend I buy the BD version?

Might as well see the movie in the best presentation available. Trust me you won't be disappointed.
post #89 of 175
Quote:
Originally Posted by unclepauly View Post

I've never seen this movie. Would you recommend I buy the BD version?

I'd recommend renting any movie first that you haven't seen.
post #90 of 175
Quote:
Originally Posted by sharkcohen View Post

I'd recommend renting any movie first that you haven't seen.

Well I'm a fan of anime in general. Haven't seen too much but from the little I've seen it's really a unique experience. It's hard for me to put in a short post but it just transports me to another place more so than other types of movies. I can't get enough.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Blu-ray Software
AVS › AVS Forum › Blu-ray & HD DVD › Blu-ray Software › Akira comparison *PIX*