The Lord Of The Rings Extended - Page 159

And the compression artifacts are just horrible...

LMAO

Clearly your monitor isn't calibrated properly.

Tee Hee!!!

It's just our eyes adjusting...I mean if that sky is green, what color are those hills?

No seriously...look:



Attachment 235160

Not to worry its directors newly intended intent for this specific copy. Not the directors intended intent for theatrical release or for any previous release. Most certainly to follow lucusonian principle whereby it will be newly intended in future copies as to make the newest version the must have copy as its King Peter Jacksons intents.

I just hope the new white isn't rainbow in the next release.

By the way...have you guys noticed that there is NO green tint and
NO underexposure in the 'The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey' trailer?

>>>

most of the time directors don't make the trailer and the film is not yet finished so it has not been color graded, green tint could show up in the finished film.

This struck as funny for some reason.

The entire film hasn't yet been graded, but the shots used in the trailer most definitely were.

Watch the Hobbit production diaries and you'll see they had to oversaturate the world (in real life) because the RED digital camera literally eat up reds and purple like no tomorrow.

Its a fascinating look at the logistics of a major movie.

That is not correct.
It has nothing to do with the cameras.
It is partly the mirrors in the 3D rig that "eats color"(most red), but it was also necessary to add red make-up to the faces of the dwarfs because they should have a more "ruddy" facial complexion than the rest of the cast.

No. The Red camera does not eat colors. Please learn what "literally" means before using it in another sentence.

That's why it's called a RED camera, right?

If you don't care for the movie, then you probably shouldn't post in this thread.

More off topic posts have been removed. Further off-topic posts will be removed without noticed and the member banned from further posting in this thread.

Hope this isn't off topic.

Latest Production video:
https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?v...12&src=EMKM212

Maybe some of the shots in that video can be used as a comparison for the Hobbit commercials, trailers, final release?

Just visited their site to check on prices and got a message saying due to problems with their stock they are referring customers to other vendors; not specifing what the problems are but from reading this thread I can pretty much guess what it is.

From Amazon:

While this item is available from other marketplace sellers on this page, it is not currently offered by Amazon.com because customers have told us there may be something wrong with our inventory of the item, the way we are shipping it, or the way it's described here. (Thanks for the tip!)

We're working to fix the problem as quickly as possible.

And your guess would be wrong.

Amazon does this all the time. It takes about 2 complaints to trigger a temporary moratorium on sales and, at one time or another, most of the titles they sell get that same message.

They'll be selling it again soon.

Still no fix on the horizon or word from Jackson as to his intent? Doesn't help my opinion of the studio or the director any.

From the desk of Peter Jackson

To do for 20 February, 2012:

[X] The Hobbit

[ ] ease the delicate mind of "Sean_O"

seriously, LOL

Okay, it's been a while and I don't want to rummage through this thread again.

So give it to me straight: has there been or not been any sort of "favorable" resolution to the green tint problem? i.e. official comments?

It's the Amazon gold box deal of the day.

Nope

I could do your homework for you but, unfortunately, I don't want to rummage through this thread again, either. I guess we'll just have to wait for some valiant young hobbit to come along and heroically take up the cause of answering your question. Perhaps a hearty second breakfast can power him through.

If they re-release the extended cuts individually as they did the theatrical cuts and the FOTR extended transfer is still the same, I think that'll be a fairly good indicator that the look was intentional.

No, it'll just be an indicator that the studio doesn't give a **** about such an obvious ****-up. No one here is even considering the idea that this is intentional. There's not a cinematographer on this planet that would do that to a film.

I remember a certain 2004 DVD set having terrible flaws that were said to be deliberate "artistic choices".

Is there a technical explanation on how this could happen? Is there no QC at warner?

( Judging from some of their releases i would say no)

If you added a few hundred names to that punchline (possibly more) then it would be more accurate. Many people want to know WTF and the heretofore fan friendly director refuses to address either the mistake or his intent.

At least you got a laugh out of someone. :-)

+1