Terminator 2: Judgement Day comparison *PIX* PART DEUX - Page 2

There looks to be some aftifacting on the mop handle in the Skynet pic that is not there in the HD-dvd pic or even to a lesser extent in the Artisan pic

I believe you are referring to the Japanese Geneon Entertaiment Premium Edition.

Is that the one with extra special stuff and dynamic packaging?

We can't trust the "experts" because there is a conflict of interest. I'd rather trust my own eyes.

Eventually a definitive T2 cut will be released with a superb transfer.

The fact of the matter is that we have renegade encoders out there who don't believe in protecting the integrity of film and digitally scrub away all the grain and fine detail. Just my opinion.

He's referring to the Skynet edition...

I'd be really curious to figure out what the 'effective' resolution of the skynet edition is. Anybody think it even has 720p detail?

I'm not really sure I understand the question, but there is more information concerning this release in the Terminator 2: Judgment Day (comparison) on DVD Beaver.

Wow.... I'm amazed at how little the bit-rate difference is. I know the Skynet has lossless audio and other extras, but surprised. Not that the extra bit-rate would even be needed for this smoothie.

I was making a joke on the name length of the T2 edition you refered to. I actually thought you were joking also (Japanese Geneon Entertaiment Premium Edition).

how can you call skynet the best of the three? It looks hideously waxy and unreal? encoding styles don't do that unles you are like talking HUGE differences in bitrate and encoder, like 40 vs 5 or something.

I do lots of still photography and it looks an awful lot to me what some NR plug-ins can do when turned up a bit.... I don't get why you don't think that looks at all like NR, when that exact look has shown up on tons of digital still photography forums....




one thing that does seem a bit odd though is all the chroma looking noise on the various versions. This was shot on film and film usually doesn't get sort of look, maybe when they scanned it for SFX back in the day their scanner was not the cleanest and introduced some digital-looking chroma noise? Or perhaps that is just something in the encoding.



very glad I cancelled my pre-order
sticking with my UK HD-DVD for now

Can you do some caps from the extended footage and the extra extended footage Xylon to see if they are of the same vintage

So glad I kept my HD DVD import...another blu-ray worse than it's HD DVD counterpart.

Well, let's be fair; there is already an identical quality Blu-ray counterpart out there.

Van Ling said he was looking into what happened with this and I'm interested to see what he finds.

Personally I think all three look hideous. Of the three, the Skynet has the least artifacting, etc added to the part which looks to be the original DI. I said too how the other two have lots of chroma noise too. It doesn't look like NR, but more Gaussian blur. Unless you consider a Gausian blur a form of noise reduction? I Also think a mild amount of unsharpen like mask was added before the application of Gaussian blur. I also think the original DI was fiddled with, similar to how you can use various processing to a camera raw using Photoshop ACR before loading a image.

The chroma noise, IMHO, is hiding and masking the problems in the other two. So they aren't necessarily better. But this is like arguing which soup tastes the least bad.

Basically, I'm thinking, no matter if you were to have a pixel for pixel representation of the DI used for this, it'd still look like garbage. Therefore, again IMHO, the Skynet is the closest in my eyes to what this particular DI looks like.

Love it! Go DrDon and enjoy your weekend!

the HD-DVD import from Europe is pretty good, it has a substandard slightly mushy master by todays 4k standards but it looks pretty good

can't wait for a super nice 4k pristine remaster and release from whoever, must be with directors cut though, it will be the last time I buy this film if something fits that bill comes along

-Gary

Its the theatrical cut that is the directors cut, the extended cut is more a "look what we left out" cut

Ditto.

I think both cuts have their merrits. Since we have now seen two HD releases that include both (the Skynet BD and the French HD-DVD), let's hope the studios won't dare to release a lesser version in the future ...

Me too.
As I already have the french HD DVD (and the old Lionsgate blu-ray) I will skip this blu-ray and wait for the "final" 4k.

Singulus
Vienna Calling

Dont forget the super extended version is hidden on there too like the dvd

You'll have to define what you mean by "this particular DI".

Terminator 2 was released in 1991. It was not common practice at that time for movies to use a Digital Intermediate during post-production. A DI may have been used for selected VFX shots to facilitate the digital compositing, but almost certainly not for the entire movie. I'm pretty sure the first movies to use a full DI stage were much later (Amelie and O Brother Where Art Thou? were the first that brought it to my attention).

If you mean the digital master created for the "Extreme Edition" DVD that's been the basis of every subsequent video release, I don't think it's accurate to call that a "DI".

Not even the Phantom menace used a DI.

there is no comparison between the theatrical and directors IMHO, I can no longer what the theatrical version

-Gary

You missunderstand, the Theatrical cut is the cut James Cameron sees as a Directors cut.

The extended cut was things they for various reason decided to leave out.

Now I do believe the extended cut is marketed as directors cut, but the director doesnt call it directors cut.

But if you like directors(extended) cut more, thats a whole different issue I cant really argue against.

I don't believe I've ever seen anything where James Cameron says conclusively that he prefers one cut over the other. He has stated that the theatrical cut was the best version for theaters, and the extended cut was better suited for home video. Everything I've read has implied that he likes them both equally, for different reasons.

That third version with the stupid flash-forward ending, however, was just put together as a joke and was not ever meant to be taken seriously.

Are you sure you are not mixing this with what Peter Jackson said about LOTR?

I still have the doc, so I can recheck it later and see exactly what he said.