or Connect
AVS › AVS Forum › Blu-ray & HD DVD › Blu-ray Software › The Fifth Element: Sony remaster vs Gaumont remaster Comparison
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

The Fifth Element: Sony remaster vs Gaumont remaster Comparison - Page 7

post #181 of 232
Does the Japanese one have blown out highlights like the Gaumont re-master?
post #182 of 232
Quote:
Originally Posted by Patsfan123 View Post

Hopefully they release the remaster in the US one day.. The US version just looks old. Seems like Sony spruced up the old master.

It's amazing just how dark and drab it looks. I remember it being very bright and bold in theaters. The Gaumont release looks more accurate.

Is there a list of releases that use the Gaumont transfer? I noticed Fox is releasing one in the UK this month. I wonder which transfer they will use.
post #183 of 232
It might be old and a little too dark but it has so much better detail and no soft surfaces. Sharpness is overall better on US, you can almost read the text on the missile. The remaster is clearly too bright and have blown lights everywhere. Though it would be interesting to see a newer US remaster with brighter colors and a bit more brightness but keep the detail/contrast.
post #184 of 232
Quote:
Originally Posted by shpitz View Post

1. The Japanese release is longer, 2:06:32 compared to 2:05:53.

I would assume that's just due to different studio logos at the beginning.
post #185 of 232
Quote:
Originally Posted by wesslan1 View Post

It might be old and a little too dark but it has so much better detail and no soft surfaces. Sharpness is overall better on US, you can almost read the text on the missile. The remaster is clearly too bright and have blown lights everywhere. Though it would be interesting to see a newer US remaster with brighter colors and a bit more brightness but keep the detail/contrast.

Not sure on that mate.

I own the US disc too, and whilst its watchable, to me it looks a bit "digital". Regarding the extra detail / grain. Is it possible that what you are seeing is the sharpened grain (I presume the master was artificially sharpened). The grain is a fair bit clumpier and bigger than the Gaumont remaster. Whilst the grain is less prominent on the Gaumont, it looks finer to me.
post #186 of 232
Quote:
Originally Posted by Josh Z View Post

I would assume that's just due to different studio logos at the beginning.

That was my thinking also
post #187 of 232
Quote:
Originally Posted by BenUK View Post

Not sure on that mate.

I own the US disc too, and whilst its watchable, to me it looks a bit "digital". Regarding the extra detail / grain. Is it possible that what you are seeing is the sharpened grain (I presume the master was artificially sharpened). The grain is a fair bit clumpier and bigger than the Gaumont remaster. Whilst the grain is less prominent on the Gaumont, it looks finer to me.

Yep, nut the curtain behind Milla in the hotelroom ist blown out in the new release.
post #188 of 232
The Sony version looks much better to me, the Gaumont version loses too much detail.

Compare this shot from the Sony:
http://img18.imageshack.us/img18/9294/25afe.png

With the Gaumont version:
http://img33.imageshack.us/img33/4599/25b.png

The Gaumont version her eyes are blurry, and her face looks too smooth. As for color the Sony version looks more natural to me.

Sony:
http://img821.imageshack.us/img821/5804/18ae.png

Gaumont:
http://img265.imageshack.us/img265/5937/18b.png

Look at how blurry the multipass is on the Gaumont version.
post #189 of 232
Quote:
Originally Posted by LetoAtreides82 View Post

The Sony version looks much better to me, the Gaumont version loses too much detail.

There's zero detail loss. Don't confuse sharpness with detail. Two totally different things.

Quote:
Originally Posted by LetoAtreides82 View Post

The Gaumont version her eyes are blurry, and her face looks too smooth. As for color the Sony version looks more natural to me.

I totally disagree. Look at the light reflection on her nose. Her skin looks oily to me on the Sony screenshot, and more natural on the Gaumont. And in the Sony screenshot it looks like she should better wash her hair. In the Gaumont version her hair looks natural and fine. Her eyes are not "blurry" in the Gaumont shot, they are artificially sharpened in the Sony shot. To me, the Gaumont shot looks natural, and the Sony shot looks digital / overprocessed.

Quote:
Originally Posted by LetoAtreides82 View Post

Look at how blurry the multipass is on the Gaumont version.

It's less blurry on the Sony shot because it's sharpened. You can't read the small fonts in either shot.

Look at Milla's iris in your multipass screenshots and compare them to these 2 photos:

http://www.celebs101.com/gallery/Mil...a_Jovovich.jpg
http://wallpapers-diq.org/wallpapers...Supermodel.jpg

You should notice that the border of Milla's iris is much darker in the Sony shot compared to the Gaumont shot. The 2 photos linked above show that the Gaumont shot is nearer to true nature. The dark iris border in the Sony shot is caused by ringing which is caused by the artificial sharpening / edge enhancement.

In the 2 photos you'll also see that Milla doesn't have big blotches on her face, like the Sony shot suggests. Thanks to makeup her skin is very soft and even, like in the Gaumont shots. Just compare the screenshots to the photos and you should see that Gaumont is more natural, although a bit softer (since it's not artificially sharpened, like Sony is).
post #190 of 232
sony transfer just got owned by real pics
post #191 of 232
Quote:
Originally Posted by eric.exe View Post


Sony left, Gaumont right.

I'll have to disagree, this does not bode well for the Gaumont release yet the Sony has its own issues. A nice medium of the two would probably be more satisfying for all.

I do prefer the Sony release to the blown-out Gaumont.

Best Regards
KvE
post #192 of 232
Yeah, the Gaumont transfer does have blown highlights, which is a disadvantage. And some people may not like the color balance. Still, to my eyes the Gaumont transfer looks significantly better overall. Especially in motion.
post #193 of 232
Quote:
Originally Posted by Thunderbolt8 View Post

sony transfer just got owned by real pics

Maybe in an alternate universe.
post #194 of 232
This comes out in the UK on June 6th.. Released by Fox Pathe. I have high hopes for this release. Hopefully not locked as indicated.

post #195 of 232
The Sony version looks so very, very 'edgy' (for want of a better word), and those caps of Milla's face say it all. There's no extra detail there, just exaggerated sharpness. The colour looks soooo much better than the drab Sony transfer.
post #196 of 232
They both look unnatural.
post #197 of 232
I've just got the Fox release to compare it with the Sony disc. As others have said it looks slightly more natural than the Sony disc in some respects, but I'm not a fan of the contrast/colours. Having said that, has anyone in this thread pointed out that the old region 2 DVD Special Edition looked exactly the same? All this talk about it being revisionism etc., well if it is it started in 2003...
post #198 of 232
Heh. I remember how blown-out the old UK DVD looked, and the Gaumont Blu does appear to be very similar. I could never stomach that DVD because it was just too harsh; the 'boosted' look plus the usual DVD foibles of compression artefacts and edge halos did not make for comfortable viewing. But without those DVD drawbacks, I really dig the 'new' transfer.
post #199 of 232
Oh God, like a Nam flashback, I've just remembered that Pathe UK DVD.

It had more shimmer than a gay pride festival.
post #200 of 232
I finally imported the French Gaumont release and am watching it right now. Gone is the harsh digital look of the US release and present in a very filmlike appearance that calls to mind the way it look projected in theaters. A lovely transfer all around! So happy I imported this release of the film. Couldn't be happier.
post #201 of 232
Would the UK release not be cheaper?
post #202 of 232
I doubt either master comes from an OCN source. I'd love to see a new 4k remaster.
post #203 of 232
Quote:
Originally Posted by dvdmike007 View Post

Would the UK release not be cheaper?
According to the image above, the UK release is region locked - but then again, I haven't seen any confirmation on that, as region listings on the box are not always accurate. Is the French release region locked?
post #204 of 232
Fifth Element, The
US - AVC, LPCM/Dolby TrueHD 5.1, fewer extras
DE - VC-1, DTS-HD HR 6.1, more extras (Region free)
UK - AVC, DTS-HD MA 5.1, director approved transfer, extras (Region B locked)
FR - AVC, DTS-HD HR 5.1, director approved transfer, no English subs (Region free)


The UK release is most definately Region B locked. I have 3 copies of this movie on BD now.
Gaumont
UK - B Locked - Mainly have for extras
JP - A Locked - First Gaumont edition

Sony
Remaster..
post #205 of 232
Quote:
Originally Posted by raoul_duke View Post

It had more shimmer than a gay pride festival.
Sorry, but I think this is a very inappropriate term.

They call it "flare", not "shimmer" in a gay pride parade...and it looks fabulous... wink.gif
post #206 of 232
Quote:
Originally Posted by Patsfan123 View Post

Fifth Element, The
US - AVC, LPCM/Dolby TrueHD 5.1, fewer extras
DE - VC-1, DTS-HD HR 6.1, more extras (Region free)
UK - AVC, DTS-HD MA 5.1, director approved transfer, extras (Region B locked)
FR - AVC, DTS-HD HR 5.1, director approved transfer, no English subs (Region free)
The UK release is most definately Region B locked. I have 3 copies of this movie on BD now.
Gaumont
UK - B Locked - Mainly have for extras
JP - A Locked - First Gaumont edition
Sony
Remaster..

Ah, I have the US remaster and the UK
post #207 of 232
Quote:
Originally Posted by QuiGonJosh View Post

I finally imported the French Gaumont release and am watching it right now. Gone is the harsh digital look of the US release and present in a very filmlike appearance that calls to mind the way it look projected in theaters. A lovely transfer all around! So happy I imported this release of the film. Couldn't be happier.
I don't remember my retinas being scorched in the theater. wink.gif
post #208 of 232
Quote:
Originally Posted by raoul_duke View Post

I don't remember my retinas being scorched in the theater. wink.gif
Please.

The transfer looks amazing - vibrant, dynamic, and rich just as this movie should look. None of the ugly digital noise and artifacts on the U.S. release. And despite the French release "only" have a DTS-HD HR English track, it seems to sound more dynamic than what I remember the U.S. release sounding. I watched the U.S. disc many times and I don't remember the surround channels being as active as they are on the French disc.

The UK disc has been confirmed as region locked I believe, otherwise I would have imported that one. The French disc is region free.
Edited by QuiGonJosh - 9/7/12 at 5:18pm
post #209 of 232
Quote:
Originally Posted by QuiGonJosh View Post

Please.
Please.
The transfer looks amazing - vibrant, dynamic, and rich just as this movie should look. None of the ugly digital noise and artifacts on the U.S. release. And despite the French release "only" have a DTS-HD HR English track, it seems to sound more dynamic than what I remember the U.S. release sounding. I watched the U.S. disc many times and I don't remember the surround channels being as active as they are on the French disc.
The UK disc has been confirmed as region locked I believe, otherwise I would have imported that one. The French disc is region free.

It is better than the US disc 100% but not one of the older Besson movies had blown out hot whites originally
post #210 of 232
Quote:
Originally Posted by QuiGonJosh View Post

Please.
Please yourself. I do actually own the UK disc, so carry on.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Blu-ray Software
AVS › AVS Forum › Blu-ray & HD DVD › Blu-ray Software › The Fifth Element: Sony remaster vs Gaumont remaster Comparison