or Connect
AVS › AVS Forum › Blu-ray & HD DVD › Blu-ray Software › Gladiator Master Blu-ray Comparison and Review Thread
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Gladiator Master Blu-ray Comparison and Review Thread - Page 38

post #1111 of 2846
Quote:
Originally Posted by s2mikey View Post

Its not silly - it just isnt representative of what you'll actually see while watching the motion picture. Actually, the "right" way to judge picture quality objectively is to watch the movie in 24fps since thats how it while be watched. I have nothing against screenshots and they have some usefulness. They can help point out issues, just as they have in this thread. But, my overall judgement of this release will happen when I watch the movie on my 50" KURO in my living room. Thats the ultimate acid-test.

I know that the gurus think the average BD buyer is just a stoopid, DNR-loving moron. Thats fine. However, if they dont see this artifacts and they dont effect them, should they lie and pretend its an issue?

Tough call... not sure how this will play out. Not that anyone cares but I'll post MY own findings when I watch this film hopefully Tuesday night. My somewhat modest system based on a 50" KURO and probably represents what average people have.


how is it then that what people are seeing in the screen shots represent exactly what people are saying about the movie after they watch it??

Gear mentioned in this thread:

post #1112 of 2846
Quote:
Originally Posted by vancouver View Post

how is it then that what people are seeing in the screen shots represent exactly what people are saying about the movie after they watch it??

I dunno, perhaps a little bit of the 'ol "Preconceived prejudices" syndrome applies here? I would like to know how many people have actually watched the film from start to finish and what gear they watched it on. It hasnt even been released yet so most of us havent even had a chance to see it. No freeze-frames, no pausing....just watch the movie.

Im not doubting there are problems with it. I can see the haloing in some of the screenshots that have been posted. OTOH, the DVD-Beaver screenshots look pretty darned good.... how is that so? Lets see the reviews come in after its released and its in the hands of a larger sampling of viewers and a more diverse range of video gear. That seems fair to me.
post #1113 of 2846
24fps = 24 screenshots a second. You can't ignore that. The only things that are variable are grain (if there is any) and compression artifacts. DNR and EE don't magically go away while in motion.
post #1114 of 2846
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kram Sacul View Post

24fps = 24 screenshots a second. You can't ignore that. The only things that are variable are grain (if there is any) and compression artifacts. DNR and EE don't magically go away while in motion.

I agree. I pointed this out to Penton-Man over at Blu-Ray.com but he did not respond.

What does affect EE and DNR is screensize and viewing distance. Clearly someone watching this on a 120" screen from 13-14ft back, the DNR/EE will be much more noticeable vs someone watching this on a 42" and under screen from 8ft+ away.
post #1115 of 2846
Quote:
Originally Posted by s2mikey View Post

I dunno, perhaps a little bit of the 'ol "Preconceived prejudices" syndrome applies here? I would like to know how many people have actually watched the film from start to finish and what gear they watched it on. It hasnt even been released yet so most of us havent even had a chance to see it. No freeze-frames, no pausing....just watch the movie.

Im not doubting there are problems with it. I can see the haloing in some of the screenshots that have been posted. OTOH, the DVD-Beaver screenshots look pretty darned good.... how is that so? Lets see the reviews come in after its released and its in the hands of a larger sampling of viewers and a more diverse range of video gear. That seems fair to me.

Here is how it goes.

1.) First screen shots were posted (before any reviews or comments from people who have seen the movie) which pointed out DNR and EE to the point where things were actually missing from the film.

2.) Second some people saw the movie including reviewers who confirmed exactly what the screenshots show

3.) Those same people who reviewed the film said at the same time that the issues everyone saw originally in the screen caps are present in the film, but at the same time said screen caps dont work


I dont see how it can be any clearer. Not only that I personally have confirmed many times with many movies that what I have seen in screen caps prior to buying the movie mirrors the movie almost perfectly. This isnt the first movie we have done these comparisons to. The list is actually huge and has proven time and time again to be accurate. No one is saying the screen caps for Braveheart arnt accurate. I look at them and they look perfect....which also mirrors exactly what people are saying about the movie who have see it. Coincidence?

Again I have to say I'm sorry some people are not able to make the connection between screen caps and the actual movie when it comes to things like DNR and EE. Too bad for them....works for me.

Tomorrow when its released my money is on the fact people will confirm what was seen in the screen caps. When that happens I wonder if opinions on screen caps will change...or at the very least people will stop telling others that its not possible to see what they see.
post #1116 of 2846
Quote:
Originally Posted by shadowrage View Post

That's not the reasoning. People aren't buying it because the disc was lazily put together, labeling it as a high end brand only adds insult to injury. People don't want to support the mediocrity that Paramount has demonstrated with a number of Catalog titles. They aren't buying it because the aren't happy with the product.

Clearly I need to update my sig to include a note on new transfers for titles older than four (?) years. :P

Quote:


Here's the best solution. Warner does all of Paramounts catalog titles. Paramount handles all of Warner's new titles. Together they make one good BD team

I don't know about that, not all of Warners catalog titles are necessarily good. But I do agree they're at least consistent.
post #1117 of 2846
Quote:
Originally Posted by vancouver View Post

Here is how it goes.

1.) First screen shots were posted (before any reviews or comments from people who have seen the movie) which pointed out DNR and EE to the point where things were actually missing from the film.

2.) Second some people saw the movie including reviewers who confirmed exactly what the screenshots show

3.) Those same people who reviewed the film said at the same time that the issues everyone saw originally in the screen caps are present in the film, but at the same time said screen caps dont work


I dont see how it can be any clearer. Not only that I personally have confirmed many times with many movies that what I have seen in screen caps prior to buying the movie mirrors the movie almost perfectly. This isnt the first movie we have done these comparisons to. The list is actually huge and has proven time and time again to be accurate. No one is saying the screen caps for Braveheart arnt accurate. I look at them and they look perfect....which also mirrors exactly what people are saying about the movie who have see it. Coincidence?

Again I have to say I'm sorry some people are not able to make the connection between screen caps and the actual movie when it comes to things like DNR and EE. Too bad for them....works for me.

Tomorrow when its released my money is on the fact people will confirm what was seen in the screen caps. When that happens I wonder if opinions on screen caps will change...or at the very least people will stop telling others that its not possible to see what they see.

Screencaps are obviously a resource to use when judging a movie. But you also have to factor in screen size, viewing distance, and your overall tolerance to DNR/EE. Judging by the posts in threads like Baraka, TDK, Star Trek, etc, some people have a lower tolerance to DNR than I do. I am not saying they are wrong, or that I am right, but I still felt that those movies were a big upgrade over the DVD to me, and they were movies I wanted to own on home video. It is really an individual thing. So I definitely appreciate the work folks put into the screencaps, but I don't always trust their opinion as to what is right for me.

And it does bother me when people around here get bent out of shape when somebody comes along and says that they have looked at the screencaps, but feel that the Blu-Ray is a big enough jump for them to buy it. Their money. Let them buy it. There is also the AQ and extra features to consider and if somebody is a huge fan of a movie, those additional upgrades may be worth the price of the Blu-Ray by itself.

I will admit that I am tempted by the Best Buy sale on Braveheart and Gladiator. It is a pretty good deal. But I have decided to rent Gladiator first and view it with my own eyes on my own gear in my own environment first.
post #1118 of 2846
Quote:
Originally Posted by vancouver View Post

Here is how it goes.

1.) First screen shots were posted (before any reviews or comments from people who have seen the movie) which pointed out DNR and EE to the point where things were actually missing from the film.

2.) Second some people saw the movie including reviewers who confirmed exactly what the screenshots show

3.) Those same people who reviewed the film said at the same time that the issues everyone saw originally in the screen caps are present in the film, but at the same time said screen caps dont work


I dont see how it can be any clearer. Not only that I personally have confirmed many times with many movies that what I have seen in screen caps prior to buying the movie mirrors the movie almost perfectly. This isnt the first movie we have done these comparisons to. The list is actually huge and has proven time and time again to be accurate. No one is saying the screen caps for Braveheart arnt accurate. I look at them and they look perfect....which also mirrors exactly what people are saying about the movie who have see it. Coincidence?

Again I have to say I'm sorry some people are not able to make the connection between screen caps and the actual movie when it comes to things like DNR and EE. Too bad for them....works for me.

Tomorrow when its released my money is on the fact people will confirm what was seen in the screen caps. When that happens I wonder if opinions on screen caps will change...or at the very least people will stop telling others that its not possible to see what they see.

Perhaps you are correct. Maybe this release will validate screen-caps for many people once and for all.? Honestly, there have been releases where screen-caps have not been as "sure-fire" as some would have hoped. Some releases were deemed awful and once the initial dust settled, most people where like "what was all the fuss about"? Or it turned out that the screen-caps grossly over-stated the magnatude of the problem.

And you still have the problem with screen sizes ranging from 40 inches up to 120 inches or larger. The 120" crowd is certainly affected MUCH more by these issues than the smaller screens. Just something to consider.

I think everyone deserves to get to see it with their own eyes and their own gear. Im not trying to argue, just stating what I think some people are probably feeling about all of this.
post #1119 of 2846
I don't understand how could there ever be any doubt. Screencaps reflects exactly what's on the disc. Unless of course they were molested, no player or display set would 'remaster' what's on the disc to make it actully look better, get rid of DNR or EE. It doesn't maky any sense.

Whatever is on the screencap, is what you get on the disc. It can't be ny different.

If one takes a set of random screencaps, with no post processing. It will probably be very indicative of what the whole disc looks like. In statistics, random sampling techinques are very effective to make inferences of the whole population.
post #1120 of 2846
Quote:
Originally Posted by s2mikey View Post

Perhaps you are correct. Maybe this release will validate screen-caps for many people once and for all.? Honestly, there have been releases where screen-caps have not been as "sure-fire" as some would have hoped. Some releases were deemed awful and once the initial dust settled, most people where like "what was all the fuss about"? Or it turned out that the screen-caps grossly over-stated the magnatude of the problem.

When? I've never seen such a situation. Screen caps are by far the most informative tool there is for judging PQ before making a purchase (short of spending additional money to rent).
post #1121 of 2846
Put this into some perspective, if we will not complain about stuff like this, who will?
post #1122 of 2846
Quote:
Originally Posted by MovieSwede View Post

Put this into some perspective, if we will not complain about stuff like this, who will?

Very true indeed
post #1123 of 2846
I'm going to pick Gladiator up with the Best Buy deal. I have the DTS version on DVD and never picked up the extended edition. I'm guessing the Blu Ray may be a marginal improvement, but I definitely understand why everyone is upset. Hopefully someday they will remaster, but I doubt that will happen anytime soon.
post #1124 of 2846
Quote:
Originally Posted by ack_bk View Post

Screencaps are obviously a resource to use when judging a movie. But you also have to factor in screen size, viewing distance, and your overall tolerance to DNR/EE. Judging by the posts in threads like Baraka, TDK, Star Trek, etc, some people have a lower tolerance to DNR than I do. I am not saying they are wrong, or that I am right, but I still felt that those movies were a big upgrade over the DVD to me, and they were movies I wanted to own on home video. It is really an individual thing. So I definitely appreciate the work folks put into the screencaps, but I don't always trust their opinion as to what is right for me.

It's as simple as this: people know what film looks like, and it doesn't look like these. These have spent too much time in the enhancement oven.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VrH3uRryiGw#t=4m2s
post #1125 of 2846
Quote:
Originally Posted by s2mikey View Post

Its not silly - it just isnt representative of what you'll actually see while watching the motion picture. Actually, the "right" way to judge picture quality objectively is to watch the movie in 24fps since thats how it while be watched. I have nothing against screenshots and they have some usefulness. They can help point out issues, just as they have in this thread. But, my overall judgement of this release will happen when I watch the movie on my 50" KURO in my living room. Thats the ultimate acid-test.

I know that the gurus think the average BD buyer is just a stoopid, DNR-loving moron. Thats fine. However, if they dont see this artifacts and they dont effect them, should they lie and pretend its an issue?

Tough call... not sure how this will play out. Not that anyone cares but I'll post MY own findings when I watch this film hopefully Tuesday night. My somewhat modest system based on a 50" KURO and probably represents what average people have.


I think a worse problem is, with the Average BD Buyer, when they realize that the movies don't look that much better than DVD, so they just outright stop buying the format. They don't realize WHY the BD's look sub-par, or that they have the ability to look better; they just get a bad taste in their mouths regarding the fact that they just dropped another $30 on a disc that doesn't look any better than they own already.


I've ran into SO many people at the Blu section at the store -- SOME EMPLOYEES INCLUDED -- who wind up making comments like, "I don't see the point of this. It doesn't look any different anyway."


While Blu-Ray may have "won the war" vs HD-DVD; it still has a bigger market it needs to SUCCESSFULLY crash: The Public. The companies need to still produce STELLAR Blu-Ray releases, not only to answer the call of enthusiasts like us, but to help create MORE fans of the format and drag them away from those who will wind up sticking with cheaper DVD's.


I have no doubt in my mind that many Average Joes who will pick up Gladiator will realize that SOMETHING is wrong with Gladiator, but since they don't peruse forums like this, they won't realize WHAT is wrong, and just be underwhelmed and annoyed, and less likely to pick up more catalog titles in the future if what they own already is good enough for them. They don't know they can complain; that if the film was actually treated well it could have looked phenomenal and what they received was a poor product.
post #1126 of 2846
I'll be buying this, with the hope that if indeed it is as bad as people are saying, that Paramount will have the same respect for it's customers as Disney had when they sent out corrected copy's of one of the Pirates movies. Granted that was a different problem based on bad Cropping. By I can always "hope". Or they will re-release it like what happened with the Fifth Element, and I will sell my first copy on ebay.
post #1127 of 2846
I understand why some are upset but unless someone like the director or the studio has guilty feelings or has a change of heart about this presentation,this maybe what we're stuck with. Hopefully they will remaster as they did to a few other titles but we all know the are going to make a sh*t load off this BD no matter what is said over the net. I personally cancelled my amazon order to jump on the BB deal because I have to see with my own eyes first. Just my 2cts.
post #1128 of 2846
In regards to screencaps, I've seen enough movies in the theater and in the home on multiple formats to know what film is supposed to look like. I can look at screencaps from a Blu-ray and know what the movie is going to look like 'in motion'. I have yet to be surprised at how a Blu-ray looks after having first seen screencaps. I'm baffled by 'professional' reviewers, Hollywood insiders, and technical people insisting that we cannot judge a release based on screencaps.

I guess this makes me a 'screenshot scientist'.
post #1129 of 2846
Quote:
Originally Posted by sharkcohen View Post

In regards to screencaps, I've seen enough movies in the theater and in the home on multiple formats to know what film is supposed to look like. I can look at screencaps from a Blu-ray and know what the movie is going to look like 'in motion'. I have yet to be surprised at how a Blu-ray looks after having first seen screencaps. I'm baffled by 'professional' reviewers, Hollywood insiders, and technical people insisting that we cannot judge a release based on screencaps.

I guess this makes me a 'screenshot scientist'.

A number of years back, when I first started out in the world of DVD reviewing, I used to hear the "screenshots aren't indicative of watching the disc" argument all the time. It turned out that, in most cases, the people using that argument were used to watching their DVDs on their interlaced CRT televisions, which obviously would mask a lot of the defects that were readily apparent when looking at screenshots on a computer screen. They therefore (incorrectly) assumed that their TVs were displaying the image "properly" and that computer screens were somehow "degrading" it, when it reality it was of course the other way round.

Nowadays, the displays we watch movies on are by and large far closer, technically speaking, to a computer screen than an old tube TV, both in terms of resolution and the fact that they are non-interlaced. As such, looking at screen captures on a computer really should now be considered an accurate way of assessing image quality. I honestly suspect that a lot of the resistance towards so-called "screenshot science" has its roots in the discrepancy between what you see on your average interlaced CRT television and your average high resolution, progressive scan computer screen.

So, you can consider me to be at least one example of a reviewer who DOES see the value in direct screen captures. I rely on them heavily with my reviews - it is, after all, a hell of a lot easier (and less open to interpretation, too) to explain to someone what a transfer looks like by providing visual examples than to describe it with words (although I always make an effort to do both).
post #1130 of 2846
Quote:
Originally Posted by Blasst View Post

I was able to get my hands on a copy of Gladiator and Braveheart, both on BD of course.

Time to fire up the PJ this weekend. I also have a DVHS copy of Gladiator, so I'll be able to do some comparisons with that also. Not that I'm expecting anything different from what I've seen so far.



Watched Gladiator BD last night. Great movie, fantastic soundtrack, nice to revisit for the film itself.

Used 101" wide screen with Benq W5K PJ. I have 20/10 vision

I was disappointed in the overall image. Everything that has been shown to us, and told to us is spot on.

The picture quality just doesn't have that "pop" overall that I was hoping for.

I'm going to pass on buying it.

Many of the general public will not notice the issues talked about, particularly if they watch on smaller displays.
post #1131 of 2846
I'll suggest an analogy here. Checking screencaps is the modern day equivalent of a projectionist inspecting frames on a film print. Inspecting a film frame with a loupe is a valid way to check for film damage caused by wear and tear. Just because a viewer doesn't notice artifacts on a damaged print during a single viewing (which could be for any number of reasons) doesn't mean the print isn't damaged. Checking screencaps in a video release serves a similar purpose.

Let me ask this: If I'm a film student studying Ridley Scott's frame composition and I freeze frame Gladiator to evaluate a frame what am I supposed to think when I see obvious digital tampering (DNR, EE, etc.) in the composition, in this case imagery crudely wiped away in an obvious manner?
post #1132 of 2846
Thanks to all those that have viewed it so far and took the time to post their opinions. Much appreciated.

A copy is on its way from Netflix and I'll have it tomorrow to view as soon as it comes!
post #1133 of 2846
Quote:
Originally Posted by robertc88 View Post

A copy is on its way from Netflix and I'll have it tomorrow to view as soon as it comes!

Didn't know they had it yet.
Put in at the top of my queue.
post #1134 of 2846
LOL

How can anyone argue the screenshots are not a representation of whats on the disc, when EVERYONE who watches the entire movie, agrees that it looks like the screenshots?
post #1135 of 2846
Quote:
Originally Posted by 18 Brumaire View Post

Sums it up well, IMO. I got into HD DVD and Blu-ray for the upgrade in quality. Any release that is not an upgrade is not going to be purchased by yours truly. I do not understand the "I'll get it as long as it's blu" mentality, but, hey, it's their money (or credit card balance).

This is why I didn't get rid of my DVDs.

Regarding DarinP2's post that you were replying to; this is exactly what many of us were saying about these posters years ago. These same people who once championed Blu Ray's superior potential now take the "it's good enough" stance because they care about promoting the format over all.

Anyone who was behind Blu Ray because they calimed it could deliver a superior presentation has absolutely no business defending this release.
post #1136 of 2846
Quote:
Originally Posted by Whiggles View Post

Nowadays, the displays we watch movies on are by and large far closer, technically speaking, to a computer screen than an old tube TV, both in terms of resolution and the fact that they are non-interlaced. As such, looking at screen captures on a computer really should now be considered an accurate way of assessing image quality.

I'm not saying I disagree with you (because I don't) but, we have to remember that many people may not have calibrated there computer screens so, what they see on there PC still doesn't reflect what they see on there HDTV. I know I have spent countless hours calibrating my HDTV but just a few minutes on my computer monitor. Now, i know the PC monitors don't normally have as many settings that need to be adjusted but, there are some settings that could effect the quality of the image. For example, if some folks have there PCs brightness and/or contrast up too high, then some screenshots may look even worse then they really are. Once they get the BD and watch it on there HDTV (that they spent many hours calibrating), they see that the image is not as bad as the screenshot was and they discount all screenshots.

Now, I believe that screenshots are a very good way to judge the PQ of a release but, in no way are they definitive. Some problems that screenshots bring out are just not as evident when in full motion. That doesn't mean that those problems are not there just, less noticeable when in motion. I just think that needs to be considered also instead of just saying that screenshots are the definitive test because, I don't know many people who sit down and watch a movie frame by frame.
post #1137 of 2846
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sean_O View Post

Regarding DarinP2's post that you were replying to; this is exactly what many of us were saying about these posters years ago. These same people who once championed Blu Ray's superior potential now take the "it's good enough" stance because they care about promoting the format over all.

Anyone who was behind Blu Ray because they calimed it could deliver a superior presentation has absolutely no business defending this release.

+1

We all know that Blu-ray is capable of producing some beautiful transfers,
but the problem I have(and many here do also) is a monumental release
like Gladiator should have been treated as such. Throw in the fact that
Paramount dubs this as part of the "Sapphire" collection and they pretty
much cemented into our minds that this transfer is going to be top notch.

....but guess what, the transfer is a mess and those of us who believed
Paramounts marketing crap are pissed.

Is it the end of the world? No, and I feel eventually Paramount will do
the right thing and remaster for a proper Blu-ray release.
post #1138 of 2846
Quote:
Originally Posted by petmic10 View Post

+1

We all know that Blu-ray is capable of producing some beautiful transfers,
but the problem I have(and many here do also) is a monumental release
like Gladiator should have been treated as such. Throw in the fact that
Paramount dubs this as part of the "Sapphire" collection and they pretty
much cemented into our minds that this transfer is going to be top notch.

....but guess what, the transfer is a mess and those of us who believed
Paramounts marketing crap are pissed.

Is it the end of the world? No, and I feel eventually Paramount will do
the right thing and remaster for a proper Blu-ray release.

And that is exactly why this is so bad for the format... as stated earlier in this thread, the average joe will be so excited to get this home and pop it in and then be supremely let down which equals rent/buy less bluray. I mean if there were only a few catalog titles to really give a good release this was one of them. Dvdbeaver did give the audio a solid review and I’m a sucker for steelbook so I am keeping my order with low expectations. I will be watching it on my 58” Pany plasma so I guess I’d be somewhere in the middle as far as screen size and the degree to which these flaws will be rearing their ugly heads.
post #1139 of 2846
Quote:
Originally Posted by s2mikey View Post

Perhaps you are correct. Maybe this release will validate screen-caps for many people once and for all.? Honestly, there have been releases where screen-caps have not been as "sure-fire" as some would have hoped. Some releases were deemed awful and once the initial dust settled, most people where like "what was all the fuss about"? Or it turned out that the screen-caps grossly over-stated the magnatude of the problem.

What titles would they be? The Dark Knight is full of ringing in motion. Baraka has ringing and DNR (downconversion my butt). Gangs of New York... Where is this mythic title that looked like crap in screenshots but was actually decent in motion? We must know and study it.
post #1140 of 2846
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kram Sacul View Post

Where is this mythic title that looked like crap in screenshots but was actually decent in motion? We must know and study it.

LOL

It's so ilogical to believe that what's on the actual disc may differ from the screencaps, that I really don't understand where such arguments are coming from.

ps: don't forget The Dark Knight is also DNRed in addition to the EE.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Blu-ray Software

Gear mentioned in this thread:

AVS › AVS Forum › Blu-ray & HD DVD › Blu-ray Software › Gladiator Master Blu-ray Comparison and Review Thread