AVS › AVS Forum › Blu-ray & HD DVD › Blu-ray Software › The Lord Of The Rings Extended
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

The Lord Of The Rings Extended - Page 118

post #3511 of 5278
7/7/11 at 5:01pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Davinleeds View Post

Then take it to PM if you can't agree with him.

IMO, a plant to derail thread and have it locked, set to ignore.

You honestly think that Warner Brother is planting people on forums to get them locked? Really?

Has that ever actually happened? I'm asking because I sincerely don't know, but it just seems so far fetched.
Reply
Reply

Gear mentioned in this thread:

post #3512 of 5278
7/7/11 at 5:05pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by adrift View Post

But that's the problem... A lot of people don't see the green tint, or if they do they think it looks intentional.

And again, what's so strange, is that so many people are not seeing that its out of whack.. Probably even the majority of viewers so far. I mean, some of these people are highly experienced AV gurus and respected on this and other forums. And then again, you have experienced and respected individuals who do think its some sort of mistake.

You bring up many good points in your post adrift. As far as why some people aren't seeing the green or do see it but are not bothered by it, I suspect that it has to do with the brain 'adjusting' to the data from the eyes. If you haven't seen it the post in the link below illustrates:

http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showt...4#post20643204
Reply
Reply
post #3513 of 5278
7/7/11 at 5:07pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by adrift View Post

But that's the problem... A lot of people don't see the green tint, or if they do they think it looks intentional. According to the poll here, the majority of those people who've bought the boxset found it to be above average quality.

Since you've implied you haven't bought the EE blurays yourself, I'm assuming you haven't seen the film in motion yet. There have been a number of people on other forums who were incredibly vocal about their frustration with the look of the films based on the screenshots alone, and were very embarrassed to admit that their preconceptions were totally off base once they actually had the discs in hand. Obviously a lot of people are seeing and are bothered by the green tint, but again, for whatever reason, some are not able to see any major issues even when they're looking for them. Its a very curious situation, and if I were you I wouldn't pass these up just because some people are bothered by the coloring, I'd just wait till you can rent the blurays to make your own judgement call.



In every thread I've seen on this subject that youtube video of Jackson's coloring commentary has been brought up about a dozen times. I think it needs to be taken into consideration by those who are debating the subject, but isn't it at all plausible that Jackson has either a.) changed his mind (how old is that documentary anyways?) or b.) was at the time putting on a happy face, selling the idea of the original color timing to fans of the film, but internally not really liking it all that much?



And again, what's so strange, is that so many people are not seeing that its out of whack.. Probably even the majority of viewers so far. I mean, some of these people are highly experienced AV gurus and respected on this and other forums. And then again, you have experienced and respected individuals who do think its some sort of mistake.

I think the reason the debate over the coloring issue keeps getting to melt down levels is that everyone is convinced that what they're seeing on their systems is what everyone else is seeing. There really should be some sort of balance in the discussion. Maybe try to figure out why people aren't seeing the film the same on different setups. I'd love to hear about a person A. of the debate to go to a person B.'s house and see what they're seeing, and vice versa.

It doesn't matter what people are seeing. The colours were posted from Photoshop as numbers. Numbers do not lie. Numbers are the true colours sent to the TV's. The numbers were RGB with a value well towards green.
Reply
Reply
post #3514 of 5278
7/7/11 at 5:25pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by adrift View Post

You honestly think that Warner Brother is planting people on forums to get them locked? Really?

Has that ever actually happened? I'm asking because I sincerely don't know, but it just seems so far fetched.

Would you keep arguing about this junk? Read the responses. It's like a drunken I don't care cause I said so. And then be arrogant that I know better. Whatever, my position is this is a change not done before and now just for BD we have massive change. We are paying attention and these supporters and Warner say tuff MANURE.
Reply
Reply
post #3515 of 5278
7/7/11 at 5:28pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by D-Nice View Post

Do you guys comphrehend artistic intent???? Seriously! Movies are not suppose to look like the real world unless the director wanted it to. A very specifc tone has now been applied to this film.

I suspect most members here fully comprehend "artistic intent". And while you believe that Peter Jackson wanted the film title and credits to be green, please do understand that most of us understand such a coloring adjustment to be essentially unheard of and basically preposperous.

I do not recall any other film that was color graded by having a hue adjustment applied over the entire feature, title elements and all. As I've stated in another forum, if a videographer were to "color grade" a wedding video with such a lazy technique he/she would likely find themselves on the wrong end of a Stop Payment. I can't imagine such a sloppy process being reqested by Peter Jackson for a billion dollar fim.
Reply
Reply
post #3516 of 5278
7/7/11 at 5:29pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by D-Nice View Post

I'm defending the change????? I could have sworn I have already posted that I did not like the change HOWEVER I respect the art. I do not like director, colorist, etc. making drastic changes to older films for new releases.... especially since the changes on this film make it look just like every other current film out there.

I understand what is going on with the film. That does not mean I have to agree with it.

What art is there to respect here? Not one "Artist" has some forth and said that the blu ray looks like it is supposed to look, and why. So Again, you seem to be defending the change and I'm not really sure why.

I understand what is going on with the film, and I can plainly see that there is something wrong with the way the film looks on Blu Ray.
Reply
Reply
post #3517 of 5278
7/7/11 at 5:33pm
I'd just like to point out that comparing Fotr to the latter two films in terms of "intentionality" is rather pointless because those films have always looked exactly as the filmmakers intended. Correct me if I'm wrong, but every previous home video release of Fotr ultimately traces back to a transfer from some kind of film element and not a DI. This is the first time we've seen the finished DI. No, that doesn't necessarily mean the green tint wasn't a mistake, but the older transfers were never completely intentional in their color timing. All we need is a detailed question posed to PJ and Lesnie, but let's face it, even if it was a mistake we're not gonna get an answer any time soon, not when the sets have barely been on the shelves a week.
Reply
Reply
post #3518 of 5278
7/7/11 at 5:35pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fang Zei View Post

I'd just like to point out that comparing Fotr to the latter two films in terms of "intentionality" is rather pointless because those films have always looked exactly as the filmmakers intended. Correct me if I'm wrong, but every previous home video release of Fotr ultimately traces back to a transfer from some kind of film element and not a DI. This is the first time we've seen the finished DI. No, that doesn't necessarily mean the green tint wasn't a mistake, but the older transfers were never completely intentional in their color timing. All we need is a detailed question posed to PJ and Lesnie, but let's face it, even if it was a mistake we're not gonna get an answer any time soon, not when the sets have barely been on the shelves a week.

At the same time, the prints in theaters wasn't from the DI either, they would've been printed from a color-timed interpositive, likely the same element used for previous transfers; though there's no way to know if the previous transfer is actually accurate to the IP.
Reply
Reply
post #3519 of 5278
7/7/11 at 5:41pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by D-Nice View Post

How about YOU focus on figuring out the definition of "artistic intent" and stop worrying about my post to madshi. I have known madshi for years... far longer than I have or will know you.

I know this much about artistic intent: unless your name is Peter Jackson, Andrew Lesnie, or Peter Doyle, it is something where your opinion on the matter is worth precisely the same as anyone else's in this thread. If I need an authoritative answer on whether my Kuro is calibrated, I'll ask you, but I'll look elsewhere for authority on this matter.
Reply
Reply
post #3520 of 5278
7/7/11 at 5:47pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sherbona View Post

You bring up many good points in your post adrift. As far as why some people aren't seeing the green or do see it but are not bothered by it, I suspect that it has to do with the brain 'adjusting' to the data from the eyes. If you haven't seen it the post in the link below illustrates:

http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showt...4#post20643204

Yeah, I read that, and I think it makes a very convincing point, and goes a long way in explaining the differences of opinion on the subject, but it doesn't seem to entirely account for those who are seeing a major problem with the coloring shift almost immediately, and are never able to shake it, even without a reference point.

It'd be one thing if everyone was like "yeah, I see it, but its not really that distracting... I can live with it" (and I admit, there are some who have voiced that opinion), but there are people on both sides of the debate who are passionately declaring either a.) "the color shift, is barely noticeable, and where it is, its absolutely obvious its the filmmakers intent". or b.) "The color shift is soooo blatantly off that it absolutely must be an egregious error".

Are these opinions based on something that each party is just not seeing on their setups? I don't know... maybe it is just the mental perception of white without a reference, but it seems like there's something more going on. Its almost like there are two different copes of the boxset being distributed, though everything I've read on this and other forums seems to suggest that that can't be the case.

Thanks for your reply by the way.
Reply
Reply
post #3521 of 5278
7/7/11 at 5:48pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by D-Nice View Post


I understand what is going on with the film. That does not mean I have to agree with it.


I'll take you at your word that you really do know what you are talking about. And I do mean that. As a calibrator, you should have insight many of us do not. My honest questions would be:

1) Why are the open titles greenish as well as the credits?
2) Is it true there are no white values over 220 and why would that be the case
3) Why are certain scenes so dark that detail is hard to make out (prolog, Moria)?
4) Why would they not regrade the other 2 films to have the trilogy match?

I ask these not to question your knowledge, but to draw upon it in a sincere attempt to understand why these things are the way they are. I don't think the film looks nearly as bad as many feel it does, but I do have some questions about things that just don't make sense. I prefer this releases new grading of certain scenes, but some of the green that appears to be a layer overtop of the grading is objectionable to me. It is still the best FOTR has ever looked....I just think it could look even better.
Reply
Reply
post #3522 of 5278
7/7/11 at 6:00pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pincho View Post

It doesn't matter what people are seeing. The colours were posted from Photoshop as numbers. Numbers do not lie. Numbers are the true colours sent to the TV's. The numbers were RGB with a value well towards green.

Very very few are arguing that there is absolutely no color shift. Its the radical take on how intrusive the color shift is that I find interesting.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Davinleeds View Post

Would you keep arguing about this junk?

If I could not see what you see, or you could not see what I can, then yes, I can understand why people find the urge to convince others of their point of view. I'm sort of like Switzerland here. I haven't actually seen the blu-rays myself yet. I'm going to rent them and then come to a decision. But I totally understand why people on both sides of the argument are vocal about the issue. I also understand that people adore these films, but I think everyone could probably take it down a notch or two. I've never heard of a major film studio planting saboteurs on websites to ensure threads get locked so the truth don't come out... I suppose its not completely impossible, but it just sounds way too conspiracy theorist-like. WB would have had to plant some of these posters years in advance of this particular version of the films. Seems simpler to just get the film right the first time if it's really a mistake they're trying to cover up.
Reply
Reply
post #3523 of 5278
7/7/11 at 6:03pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by philnerd View Post

I suspect most members here fully comprehend "artistic intent". And while you believe that Peter Jackson wanted the film title and credits to be green, please do understand that most of us understand such a coloring adjustment to be essentially unheard of and basically preposperous.

I might be mistaken, but I was under the impression on another forum that the green tint did not extend all the way through the credits. Its only noticeable at the very beginning of the credits. Is that accurate or am I remembering incorrectly?
Reply
Reply
post #3524 of 5278
7/7/11 at 6:09pm
My credits are not green, though they have a "tacked on" look, with aliasing and telecine wobble not present elsewhere.
Reply
Reply
post #3525 of 5278
7/7/11 at 7:11pm
Just wondering if anyone could post evidence of the subtitles having a green tint with Photoshop?
Reply
Reply
post #3526 of 5278
7/7/11 at 7:16pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fang Zei View Post

I'd just like to point out that comparing Fotr to the latter two films in terms of "intentionality" is rather pointless because those films have always looked exactly as the filmmakers intended. Correct me if I'm wrong, but every previous home video release of Fotr ultimately traces back to a transfer from some kind of film element and not a DI. This is the first time we've seen the finished DI. No, that doesn't necessarily mean the green tint wasn't a mistake, but the older transfers were never completely intentional in their color timing. All we need is a detailed question posed to PJ and Lesnie, but let's face it, even if it was a mistake we're not gonna get an answer any time soon, not when the sets have barely been on the shelves a week.

This film has had a 100% complete DI since late 2002! The TE bluray would have been sourced from that. This is revisonist history nothing more. Why do the Shire, Isengard, Minas Tirith look so different in FOTR than TTT or ROTK? My guess is Jackson intends to color grade TTT and ROTK in a similiar fashion as well in the near future.
Reply
Reply
post #3527 of 5278
7/7/11 at 7:40pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by PRO-630HD View Post

My guess is Jackson intends to color grade TTT and ROTK in a similiar fashion as well in the near future.

Yikes! I hope not.
Reply
Reply
post #3528 of 5278
7/7/11 at 8:03pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by adrift View Post

I might be mistaken, but I was under the impression on another forum that the green tint did not extend all the way through the credits. Its only noticeable at the very beginning of the credits. Is that accurate or am I remembering incorrectly?

Watch the end credits as they fade to black. Instead of fading white->gray->black they fade white->olive->black.

I noticed it immediately in full motion, obviously its extremely clear if you frame advance.
Reply
Reply
post #3529 of 5278
7/7/11 at 8:14pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by D-Nice View Post

Well, if you think you, or anyone else in this thread will get a "Whoops! We made an error with the color." response from Peter Jackson or anyone else affiliated with this release, the end result is going to be failure and disappointment.

And this is where you may fail and be disappointed. You are probably not aware of it, but AVS is by far the largest and most popular A/V forum on the Internet. We are in the top 1800 web sites in the US, and the top 5000 globally. No other A/V related forum ranks higher.

There are many examples of our members voicing their opinions on various like issues, and surprise surprise, we have significant impact on these issues. In some cases, we actually are the catalyst of change. Ask ESPN.
Reply
Reply
post #3530 of 5278
7/7/11 at 8:36pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ken H View Post

And this is where you may fail and be disappointed. You are probably not aware of it, but AVS is by far the largest and most popular A/V forum on the Internet. We are in the top 1800 web sites in the US, and the top 5000 globally. No other A/V related forum ranks higher.

And yet you do not have tapatalk app support yet.
Reply
Reply
post #3531 of 5278
7/7/11 at 8:37pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by bass addict View Post

And yet you do not have tapatalk app support yet.

I hope not. Or is tapatalk that good? PM me.
Reply
Reply
post #3532 of 5278
7/7/11 at 8:51pm
Watching FotR and then TTT (or RotK) in succession is friggin' jarring. FotR now has such a hugely different color timing (and in my opinion, horrendous looking) it completely sets it apart from the following two films. Looks bad, real bad. People can scream "artistic intent" all they like, but I can't imagine what the intent, artistically speaking, of applying a consistent green tint throughout the entire presentation was.... especially considering it once was digitally graded so beautifully and [often] portion-by-portion. I have a hard time believing this change was something instigated by Jackson. This green lean seems to happen very often with remastered Warner releases.... I'm beginning to wonder if they have a particular go-to colorist with a predisposition to giving these presentations this awful green bias.
Reply
Reply
post #3533 of 5278
7/7/11 at 9:12pm
Worst case scenario?

PJ & Co were sent out final discs for review before going to replication, they watched, and they didn't even notice.

The studio and PJ & Co. are all equally surprised by their failure to catch the error and are fighting over who is ultimately responsible for letting it out the door.

If the studio is now made aware of an error but PJ signed off on it, who is left holding the bag? Will it ever be resolved? Perhaps this is why everyone's been so quiet on the issue.

Pure speculation of course, but possible.
Reply
Reply
post #3534 of 5278
7/7/11 at 9:28pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stinky-Dinkins View Post

Watching FotR and then TTT (or RotK) in succession is friggin' jarring. FotR now has such a hugely different color timing (and in my opinion, horrendous looking) it completely sets it apart from the following two films. Looks bad, real bad. People can scream "artistic intent" all they like, but I can't imagine what the intent, artistically speaking, of applying a consistent green tint throughout the entire presentation was.... especially considering it once was digitally graded so beautifully and [often] portion-by-portion. I have a hard time believing this change was something instigated by Jackson. This green lean seems to happen very often with remastered Warner releases.... I'm beginning to wonder if they have a particular go-to colorist with a predisposition to giving these presentations this awful green bias.

No kidding, that's why I think anyone posting FOTR was recolor timed to look like TTT or ROTK is on crack-cocaine.The initial color timing fit with the other 2 films beautifully.

If the other 2 films are regraded I will hold my judgement on FOTR until I see the sequels.
Reply
Reply
post #3535 of 5278
7/7/11 at 9:37pm
To be certain, there are arguments, both good and bad, on both sides of the coin here. If we are to make any real progress though, we need to cut to the heart of the issue and realize what we're really arguing about here. Even though this thread has blown up, I still think there is a mixed reaction on what people are and aren't seeing, etc.

The good thing is that some posters have already revealed what the "smoking gun" is. Unfortunately, there has not been a proper follow-up that we can use as evidence yet. Scene-specific color grading is one thing, but a green hue/tint throughout the entire feature? C'mon, fellas, let's call it like we see it. For the doubters, can someone please post the photoshop files of the intro, closing credit, and even subtitles helping to show that throughout the feature, there is green color information (or the tint) throughout? That's the "smoking gun", and as other posters have mentioned, yes, the numbers don't lie.

Before we keep going off on other things, let's get a consensus on what exactly is going on with the tint issue. If we can prove (with photo/photoshop evidence) that green tint overlaps the entire feature, then we can change the argument and start discussing whether the feature-length green tint was director-approved or not. In my opinion, I strongly, strongly suspect that there was an authoring error and we have a bad transfer that, while it is more than watchable, could potentially be much, much better and on a level of quality matching the other two films.

I know everyone has different sets, different calibrations, different eyes, and so forth, but if we reference the master video file directly from the disc, we will have undeniable proof on what's really going on here. Did PJ & company color grade certain scenes or was a blanket green tint put over the ENTIRE feature? Of course, it's more noticeable in some segments than others, but we really need to get proof showing that it is there throughout, even if we can or cannot see it with our eyes due to individual differences.
Reply
Reply
post #3536 of 5278
7/7/11 at 10:19pm
FOTR is my favorite of the three extended films (DVD version), and if the studio has managed to mess up the conversion to BD, I'll definitely eschew it. Thanks for pointing out the problem folks. Damn shame the studios can't be bothered with producing a reasonably quality product -- too much trouble I guess . Guess it's just all about milking the re-releases !
Reply
Reply
post #3537 of 5278
7/7/11 at 10:48pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by TrevorS View Post

FOTR is my favorite of the three extended films (DVD version), and if the studio has managed to mess up the conversion to BD, I'll definitely eschew it. Thanks for pointing out the problem folks. Damn shame the studios can't be bothered with producing a reasonably quality product -- too much trouble I guess . Guess it's just all about milking the re-releases !

watching FOTR right now on encoreHD wow the snow is white. the white wizard is white. Gandalf the grey is grey. WB invited me to post my opinion on the WB store website don't think they will publish it. how anybody could think this green tint was intentional is smoking some green stuff. a cable broadcast looks better than a blu-ray :-(
Reply
Reply
post #3538 of 5278
7/7/11 at 10:51pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stinky-Dinkins View Post

Watching FotR and then TTT (or RotK) in succession is friggin' jarring. FotR now has such a hugely different color timing (and in my opinion, horrendous looking) it completely sets it apart from the following two films. Looks bad, real bad. People can scream "artistic intent" all they like, but I can't imagine what the intent, artistically speaking, of applying a consistent green tint throughout the entire presentation was.... especially considering it once was digitally graded so beautifully and [often] portion-by-portion. I have a hard time believing this change was something instigated by Jackson. This green lean seems to happen very often with remastered Warner releases.... I'm beginning to wonder if they have a particular go-to colorist with a predisposition to giving these presentations this awful green bias.

Exactly. One of the things I've been trying to show with my "fixed" screen shots is what the intentional new color grading of FOTR likely looks like under the green tint and contrast boost. Because the fact is, it HAS been massively regraded, but if my fixes are remotely accurate, it has mostly been regraded to look MORE like TT and ROTK, not LESS like them.

Now, with what I've just said in mind, consider the approach Jackson and Lesnie would have had to take here if the green tint was intentional: they would have had to FIRST go through the whole film and color grade it scene by scene and THEN add the green tint over every frame of the film.

But think about what would have had to have been going through their heads during the scene-specific grading. Instead of adjusting the color timing to get it to the final way they wanted the scene to look, they would have constantly had to be thinking/saying, "Yes! That's exactly the right place to leave the coloring of this shot so that the global green tint we apply later will bring it to exactly what we really intend this scene to look like."

I don't know about anyone else, but that notion seems absolutely absurd to me. And yet, the only alternative would seem to be that they did all the scene-specific grading for the film, then looked at it and said, "Gee, we really screwed the pooch with the color grading we just spent all that time on. Throw a green filter over the whole thing and let's call it a day."

I just don't get how any of this would make any sense.

HeKS
Reply
Reply
post #3539 of 5278
7/7/11 at 11:11pm
Someone asked for comparisons to the flashbacks in Return to the King, make of them what you will (hopefully these aren't spoilers for anyone still following the thread):

FOTR | ROTK






Reply
Reply
post #3540 of 5278
7/7/11 at 11:23pm
I thought I'd give my opinion from a slightly different perspective. Like 10% of men, I'm red/green "color challenged". In my case, I have trouble distinguishing between certain shades of the two colors, as well as some browns.

When I watched FOTR, I really hoped that this would eliminate my perception of the controversy. Sorry to say, it didn't. It's there, and it is not subtle. Some entire scenes are awash with the tint. Most disturbing to me is the Council of Elrond. I mean, it just overpowers everything, and I couldn't ignore it.

With my disadvantage, I might be able to be convinced that the tint isn't true green, but not that it isn't there. I'm viewing with a Panasonic Pt-AE4000U with a 103" wide CIH screen.

I didn't feel that the blacks were as crushed as others did, though. Overall, the transfer is an improvement to me, and the sound is wonderful.
Reply
Reply
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 › The Lord Of The Rings Extended