The Lord Of The Rings Extended - Page 175

Originally Posted by lordcloud 

I don't think any of those are too dark actually. But I'm also viewing them on my crappy work laptop.................

Originally Posted by BobearQSI 

Computer monitors (especially cheap displays) often have the gamma way too low, thus making shadow detail really light. On a properly calibrated display with a 2.2 gamma curve, the difference is noticeable.

EDIT: Oops, I didn't look at the screenshots you were referring to. My comments are about all the shadow detail in FOTR, not those screenshots. Those screenshots don't look too dark to me on a calibrated display, either.

Originally Posted by BobearQSI 

Everything is simply reduced in brightness by a percentage, but all the detail is essentially still there. But when you have barely visible shadow detail, and you reduce it's brightness, it becomes too dark to really see anymore with a proper black level, even though it you increase the brightness a whole bunch you can see that it is still there.

For example, values of RGB 235 (peak white) have been reduced to about 220. Values in the 20-30 range (shadow detail), are now in the 16-20 range, so while they haven't been technically "crushed," it pretty much the same as you can't see it like you can on all other versions.

Thus, the adjustment can be corrected for by raising your white level (usually the 'contrast' control) to stretch 220 to 235 while you watch.

(BTW, RGB level 16, the proper black level, is IRE 7.5)

Originally Posted by Steeb 


The sad reality is, that wouldn't help, at least not with all of you. As I've said before, Peter Jackson could release a video with him not only confirming that the changes were done at his behest, but also showing, scene-by-scene, what was changed and why, and there would still be screams of "shill" and "he's just toeing the company line" by those who refuse to consider that the conclusion they've drawn may be incorrect.

Originally Posted by AVfile 

I'm really not interested in the semantic debate. There is nothing PJ himself could say that will change my opinion of this release. A statement from him might change my respect for him as a film maker, but will not change what's on the discs.

Originally Posted by Steeb 

I'm amazed at how many of you on here are far less concerned about what's "correct" or "intended" and instead are more concerned about what you personally prefer/like.

At least you're honest about your disregard for a filmmaker's intent. The eye candy tier thread should be right up your alley - you'll find plenty of people there with the same lack of respect for artists.

Originally Posted by lordcloud 

I am all about artistic intent, and being able to see what the artist intended. Except when the artist makes an absolutely horrible mistake

Originally Posted by 42041 

The only thing that suggests anything unintentional is the low/greenish white point.

Originally Posted by lordcloud 

I am all about artistic intent, and being able to see what the artist intended. Except when the artist makes an absolutely horrible mistake

Originally Posted by spectator 

If you think that's the only thing that suggests an error, you've got about 175 pages of thread to go back and re-read.

Originally Posted by 42041 

That someone doesn't like the color grading does not suggest it was unintentional.

Originally Posted by spectator 

... but that it involves (among other things) an unprecedented blanket value-change applied across the entire film and that it also impacts elements not modified in typical practice (the credits, etc.) does rather suggest as much, doesn't it?

Originally Posted by 42041 

The only thing that suggests is that the blanket value-change was unintentional. It's probably the result of something applied at pretty much the last step of the process, like print film emulation or color space conversion. If you get rid of the blanket tint, the color grade is still completely different.

Originally Posted by 42041 

If you get rid of the blanket tint, the color grade is still completely different.

Originally Posted by AVfile 

Steeb - I'm actually more concerned about the possibility that PJ and Lesnie sat down to remaster it and weren't able to finish the job completely and consistently. It is my theory that what we ended up with was an inconsistent re-grading job, due to time or budget constraints not their artistic ability which I have great respect for - despite WB's official statement about meeting the artists' intent and all that.

Originally Posted by 42041 

The only thing that suggests anything unintentional is the low/greenish white point. If you correct for that, you've still got a completely different looking transfer.
As far as the overall color grading differences and increased gamma, there's nothing to suggest it wasn't completely intentional. Scene-by-scene color grading doesn't happen by accident.

Originally Posted by lordcloud 

the opinion that they make the movie look a lot worse than it's ever looked in those areas

Originally Posted by 42041 

Fixed.

Like I said, I don't believe the lower brightness (that is, the white point, not "black levels" or whatever; as far as I can tell the image is compressed within the RGB range, not shifted down, if that makes any sense) is intentional, though perhaps a side-effect of something that was.
I do believe the new color grading, minus the lower brightness and green shift, is completely intentional.

Originally Posted by lordcloud 

So you believe that the lowered brightness and green tint are unintentional.......if so, then where exactly are we in disagreement?

Originally Posted by lordcloud 

So you believe that the lowered brightness and green tint are unintentional.......if so, then where exactly are we in disagreement?

Originally Posted by Steeb 

Do you have any evidence to support that "theory?" Because from here, that seems like a whole lot of baseless conjecture...

Originally Posted by 42041 

I don't believe it is significantly detrimental to the film on a high-end display in a dark environment. Hell, chances are the average cinema screening was dimmer than FOTR on my TV. And I don't think the overall higher contrast/higher gamma/whatever, which pushes the shadows closer to black, can be called a transfer flaw, unless your standard is how closely it matches the old transfer.

Originally Posted by 42041 

I don't believe it is significantly detrimental to the film on a high-end display in a dark environment. Hell, chances are the average cinema screening was dimmer than FOTR on my TV. And I don't think the overall higher contrast/higher gamma/whatever, which pushes the shadows closer to black, can be called a transfer flaw, unless your standard is how closely it matches the old transfer.

Films always have more latitude in the highlight and shadow parts of the image than ends up on the cinema screen. That's just how the analog process works: the DP might want a scene very dark, but he would likely expose the negative normally and make it dark in the printing process. Then some telecine colorist will scan the film back in and make it look all nice and bright and neutral for palatable TV viewing.

Originally Posted by AVfile 

Of course it is conjecture, and I already gave my reason but people just want to hear the same old green tint debate. Given all that's been said about it, we should encourage some new ideas not beat them down.

Originally Posted by lordcloud 

As long as you don't believe it. But I do. I only watch movies in a darkened room, and my TV is no slouch in the black level area, and I can tell you that the problems with this transfer are very detrimental for me. Particularly when you've watched the dvd so many times. Now if I had never watched the dvd, or not used it as a reference of sorts, then I could see not taking issue with the way the blu ray looks. Similarly, if there was a significant change to TFE or the second POTC, I'd notice those immediately. I've also come to discover that I'm seemingly far more discerning when it comes to audio and video than most people around these parts, and that might play into it as well. But for me, the darkness and green tint are jarring.

Originally Posted by Steeb 

Yeah, that must be the explanation....