or Connect
AVS › AVS Forum › Blu-ray & HD DVD › Blu-ray Software › Jurassic Park trilogy
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Jurassic Park trilogy - Page 8

post #211 of 1995
Quote:
Originally Posted by coolcat4843 View Post

JP will be the BD that will put 7.1 lossless audio on the map.

I bet there will be a ton of people who will be upgrading to 7.1 HT setups.

Thinking about the T-Rex actually just made me smile.
post #212 of 1995
Quote:
Originally Posted by coolcat4843 View Post

JP will be the BD that will put 7.1 lossless audio on the map.

I bet there will be a ton of people who will be upgrading to 7.1 HT setups.

already have one. just need discrete content to feed it.

jeff
post #213 of 1995
Quote:
Originally Posted by pepar View Post

already have one. just need discrete content to feed it.

jeff

Ditto.
post #214 of 1995
Quote:
Originally Posted by mike171979 View Post

I had the great experience of watching a film, BEFORE COMING ON AVS, and what do you know, I was able to enjoy it.

Usually I come here first, read tons of negativity that trains my eye to look for certain things, which I of course then see, and then am disappointed.

Maybe I should start watching a movie first more often, I sure seem to enjoy the film more that way. But then I would end up buying movies like Patton, which was done so horribly it sickens me.

All I remember on my first viewing of all 3 is that they cleaned up the night time scenes too much resulting in some wax figurine looking faces, and that the overall picture has a slight sharpened look. But neither of those 2 things bugged me all that much, and overall I enjoyed it very much.

I'll say this.... there's a number of movies I bought on Blu-ray without first reading reviews or opinions on that featured sub-standard transfers. Often because they were movies that ranked high on my favorites list. Some issues on these discs were instantly noticeable to me, some not. I will say there's a few of these flawed releases that I would have bought anyway but the majority I would have passed on had I known beforehand of issues with the presentation.

I am far more picky now about checking on opinions and reviews of new Blu-ray releases before buying because I am of the mindset that after over 3 decades of buying many titles on home video from vhs tape, laserdisc, dvd and now Blu-ray, often several different "upgrades" prior to Blu-ray, I feel studios *must* provide me a significant technically superior release for me to spend money on their product yet again. For example, they met that criteria with the Blu-ray release of "Close Encounters Of The Third Kind," a movie I bought once on vhs, three times on laserdisc and once on dvd prior to the Blu-ray release.

On the other hand, there's a number of beloved titles (many by Universal for instance) that I have passed on buying on Blu-ray after hearing consistent negative opinions about despite buying on previous home video formats multiple times - "Animal House" is the latest example.

Blu-ray was originally advertised as a huge step up from dvd. I took that to mean the overall quality of the presentation, not just the fact the disc holds more data and the resolution of the A/V is higher.
post #215 of 1995
Quote:
Originally Posted by pepar View Post

already have one. just need discrete content to feed it.

jeff

Yup. Been there, done that...I've been running >5.1 since 2000 and 7.1 since 2003.
post #216 of 1995
http://www.cineworld.co.uk/films/4635 should, like Blues Brothers and Back to the Future be a good indicator of disc quality.
post #217 of 1995
Quote:
Originally Posted by Partyslammer View Post


Blu-ray was originally advertised as a huge step up from dvd. I took that to mean the overall quality of the presentation, not just the fact the disc holds more data and the resolution of the A/V is higher.

The digital delivery container of Blu-ray is a huge step up from DVD in terms of the amount of data that can be stored there and the speed at which it can be delivered. But unless the source/content is higher resolution than DVD, it is wasted. I recently watch the BD of 28 Days Later and was very unhappy with the quality; I felt ripped off.

Jeff
post #218 of 1995
Quote:
Originally Posted by pepar View Post

The digital delivery container of Blu-ray is a huge step up from DVD in terms of the amount of data that can be stored there and the speed at which it can be delivered. But unless the source/content is higher resolution than DVD, it is wasted. I recently watch the BD of 28 Days Later and was very unhappy with the quality; I felt ripped off.

Jeff

28 Days was shot Sd and still the Bluray blows away the dvd
post #219 of 1995
Quote:
Originally Posted by dvdmike007 View Post

28 Days was shot Sd and still the Bluray blows away the dvd

That's sad.
post #220 of 1995
Quote:
Originally Posted by pepar View Post

That's sad.

Why?
post #221 of 1995
The end of the film was shot on 35mm and looks great though

post #222 of 1995
Quote:
Originally Posted by dvdmike007 View Post

Why?

Shooting in standard definition was an artistic choice of the director?
post #223 of 1995
Quote:
Originally Posted by pepar View Post

Shooting in standard definition was an artistic choice of the director?

That is not sad then, it is the best version of a film that close to beats the 35mm blow ups made.
post #224 of 1995
We clearly have different ideas of what is acceptable video quality for movies.
post #225 of 1995
Directors Intent, that is all that matters
post #226 of 1995
Quote:
Originally Posted by dvdmike007 View Post

Directors Intent, that is all that matters

Director off my list until he can afford a $300 hand held hi-def camera ...
post #227 of 1995
If you can't stop the attacks of each other, both will be banned from posting in this thread.
post #228 of 1995
Quote:
Originally Posted by dvdmike007 View Post

28 Days was shot Sd and still the Bluray blows away the dvd

Considering the upscaling horsepower that a studio "could" bring to bear for a Bluray (compared to what the average consumer would have available in their playback chain), I would hope that a Bluray would beat a DVD any day even if the source was SD.

We must also remember that a DVD is a lossy encode of the source and so can lose quality compared to the source. If the source is carefully upscaled and encoded with a more efficient codec, theoretically it should look better, unless it was originally shot as SD mpeg2.

I have always preferred that the studios upscale SD source material to HD, using the best quality equipment available, when releasing as Bluray, rather than utilising a lossy mpeg2 encode and relying on the consumer's often less than fabulous upscaling chain: it's more efficient to do it well at the single source point than poorly at the distributed consumer end point.
post #229 of 1995
Quote:
Originally Posted by IanD View Post

Considering the upscaling horsepower that a studio "could" bring to bear for a Bluray (compared to what the average consumer would have available in their playback chain), I would hope that a Bluray would beat a DVD any day even if the source was SD.

We must also remember that a DVD is a lossy encode of the source and so can lose quality compared to the source. If the source is carefully upscaled and encoded with a more efficient codec, theoretically it should look better, unless it was originally shot as SD mpeg2.

I have always preferred that the studios upscale SD source material to HD, using the best quality equipment available, when releasing as Bluray, rather than utilising a lossy mpeg2 encode and relying on the consumer's often less than fabulous upscaling chain: it's more efficient to do it well at the single source point than poorly at the distributed consumer end point.

I'm sorry are you proving my point and telling me off at the same time?
post #230 of 1995
Quote:
Originally Posted by IanD View Post

Considering the upscaling horsepower that a studio "could" bring to bear for a Bluray (compared to what the average consumer would have available in their playback chain), I would hope that a Bluray would beat a DVD any day even if the source was SD.

We must also remember that a DVD is a lossy encode of the source and so can lose quality compared to the source. If the source is carefully upscaled and encoded with a more efficient codec, theoretically it should look better, unless it was originally shot as SD mpeg2.

I have always preferred that the studios upscale SD source material to HD, using the best quality equipment available, when releasing as Bluray, rather than utilising a lossy mpeg2 encode and relying on the consumer's often less than fabulous upscaling chain: it's more efficient to do it well at the single source point than poorly at the distributed consumer end point.

Upscaling "horsepower" ?

I don't care if you threw the entire Bitcoin hashing network at upscaling a standard definition movie. It's still going to look like ass until someone invents a magical upscaling algorithm that can pull details that were lost out of thin air. Arguing over whether a DVD or an upscaled copy of that movie on Blu-ray looks better is like arguing over which pile of **** smells less.

At this point movie studios are better off worrying about releasing native HD material on Blu-ray as 99% of the HD material out there is not available on this format yet.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Osirus23 View Post

If they screw up JP half as bad as they did BTTF they will have a revolt on their hands.

More like they'll have the #1 best selling title on Amazon.

That piece of crap Big Lebowski transfer that Universal just shat out is selling like hot cakes. Universal is going to keep butchering this format, all the big mainstream review sites will continue giving their awful catalog releases great reviews, and the sheep will continue lapping up these releases that are so bad they might as well be upscales.

I can only hope everyone's faith in Steven Spielberg having some special power to override what this awful studio wants is not misplaced. I also hope Spielberg is competent enough to know about the evils of old 2k scans, DNR, and edge "enhancement." When the original theatrical release of the Lord of the Rings trilogy got pushed out on Blu-ray, supposedly with Peter Jackson's approval, it became blatantly obvious that there is incompetence at the highest levels of Hollywood.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Strevlac View Post

It's not about wanting the HDTV transfer, and it's not about wanting a "fixer-upper". It's a about wanting a modern scan that looks like the actual film elements. That's all. Bluray isn't about making movies look like nice TV. It's about presenting them accurately.

Blu-ray IS about making movies look "nice on TV." Too bad that's the opposite of what Universal's been doing. Universal's crap jobs look worse than the actual film elements. Disney's a great example of a studio that actually knows how to make movies look better than the actual film elements. Their animated classics with the film grain carefully removed look amazing. You just can't do that with live action, and Universal needs to give up trying and leave whatever they scan in alone.
post #231 of 1995
Does anyone have any info when the individual movies will be released?
post #232 of 1995
Sam Neill needs braces.
post #233 of 1995
I expect Universal to do nothing, or too much.
post #234 of 1995
Quote:
Originally Posted by CountDeleteo View Post

Universal won't be able to get their hands on it.

That's what needs to happen on all of their releases.
post #235 of 1995
Quote:
Originally Posted by CountDeleteo View Post

So I checked up on the people responsible for the amazing Minority Report and Saving Private Ryan 4K restorations, and found this interesting excerpt.

http://www.studiodaily.com/blog/?p=6153

"Levinson is a go-to guy for Spielberg, having worked on digital masters for E.T. the Extra-Terrestrial, Schindler’s List, Jurassic Park, and more of his films. On deck to receive some Baselight TLC is Raiders of the Lost Ark, which will get a full restoration and perhaps a stereo 3D makeover."

That article is dated April this year, but we know the new Raiders master was done a few years ago. What's interesting here is the discovery that the new Indy masters weren't Lowry, Spielberg went to LaserPacific... Unsurprising, given the superior quality of their masters. It's even listed on their official website:
http://www.laserpacific.com/index.ph...n-projects/222

It wouldn't surprise me if Spielberg spent the last 3 years remastering his old films, considering he hasn't been directing much. But if JP (and E.T. and Schindler's for that matter) is in LaserPacific's hands, I think we can all rest easy. Universal won't be able to get their hands on it.

Now LaserPacific, I like they did amazing work on Raiders and with Minority Report.

Scratch that, I love them

Quote:


The look of the movie, as seen in theaters,was further enhanced by utilizing Technicolor's ENR print process - a technique that increases contrast, decreases saturation and increases grain by retaining silver in the final prints.

Now that set my Silver Retentive scenes tingling
post #236 of 1995
I watched E.T. a few weeks ago on HD off DirectTV (HBO if I recall) and it looked pretty honest to the source. Which is to say much of the photography is pretty soft, even murky and often grainy. But it was a significant visual upgrade from the dvd and any other previous home video release in the right way. Also interesting was that it was the original cut, not the CGI-enhanced version released around '02.
post #237 of 1995
Quote:
Originally Posted by Partyslammer View Post

I watched E.T. a few weeks ago on HD off DirectTV (HBO if I recall) and it looked pretty honest to the source. Which is to say much of the photography is pretty soft, even murky and often grainy. But it was a significant visual upgrade from the dvd and any other previous home video release in the right way. Also interesting was that it was the original cut, not the CGI-enhanced version released around '02.

Senor Spielbergo now regrets the CGI
post #238 of 1995
I think you all can rest easy for Jurassic park series.

As for E.T. this is the wowow cap that is the original cut with no CGI and shotguns instead of walkie talkies. I expect a new transfer for E.T. when it comes out though.





post #239 of 1995
I wish we had wowow over here, they are the kings of broadcast
post #240 of 1995
Quote:
Originally Posted by DavidHir View Post

That's what needs to happen on all of their releases.

Truer words have never been spoken! Hear hear!!
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Blu-ray Software
AVS › AVS Forum › Blu-ray & HD DVD › Blu-ray Software › Jurassic Park trilogy