or Connect
AVS › AVS Forum › Blu-ray & HD DVD › Blu-ray Software › Jaws - Robert Harris review (see post #1 for link)
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Jaws - Robert Harris review (see post #1 for link) - Page 16

post #451 of 754
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Geoff D View Post

Sorry bro, haven't quoted the rest because you lose all credibility when you can't spot an optical.

I was going to leave it as I am the wrong person to pick a fight with on that title, glad someone got in tho.

Also that is NOT edge enhancement.
post #452 of 754
Quote:
Originally Posted by d3code View Post

because of the bluray, it was the first time i actually noticed the meteor or UFO or whatever it is in the background at nighttime.
before i never noticed it. but today i did. awesome bluray transfer for most of the time. there are a few scenes that look out of place, unsharp so to speak. maybe out of focus or DNR to heavy i dont know.
that said i am very happy with this release. lots better then the dvd. is it perfect. no. but well worth the money for me.

Now when you said it i got some weird flashback that i've seen it in some movie, but was it this movie? Can you give me that time mark when it happens in jaws?
post #453 of 754
Also that is NOT edge enhancement

Well sir, what is then.. a real ghost maybe.eek.gif

I was going to leave it as I am the wrong person to pick a fight with on that title, glad someone got in tho.

Why not fight, ghostbusters blu-ray have some nasty noise, some black crush and ee. Sony is very good, but i'm not sure about perfection.
post #454 of 754
Thread Starter 
It just is not EE, it is a matte line!!!
Edited by dvdmike007 - 8/11/12 at 5:24pm
post #455 of 754
Quote:
Originally Posted by dvdmike007 View Post

It just is not EE, it is a matte line!!!

I should to know that.redface.gif:rolleyes:
post #456 of 754
You'd think the other buildings not having the line would have been a dead giveaway.
post #457 of 754
Ah, I just realised it's probably an in-camera matte rather than an optical comp - making a mockery of my own statement above - but the point still stands: it's an effects shot, with all the related artefact therein.
post #458 of 754
Thread Starter 
Pretty sure the tree is an optical
post #459 of 754
Yeah, the tree is an optical element for sure, as it's moving over top of the matte painting, but the detail on the live action element at the bottom is VERY nice for a comp, so I thought it might have been packed in-camera somehow. That said, the opticals look surprsingly awesome throughout Ghostbusters on Blu-ray, many of them exhibiting less grain than the non-FX shots. AFAIK they weren't shot on VistaVision, but a quick search of the internets reveals that they were shot large format on 65mm, hence the superior quality. It's even said in this transcribed Starlog article that Boss Film "actually [had] to degrade the effects shot to match the live action".

So I may not have been wrong about that shot being an optical after all. biggrin.gif
post #460 of 754
Thread Starter 
Plus I never recall saying everything Sony do is perfection, just that they can produce discs that I would class as such, also Fox when they bother.
post #461 of 754
Mono for me, thank you.
post #462 of 754
I've heard from some Jaws superfreaks who are happy (but not 100% satisfied) with the 7.1 audio, so that's piqued my interest in the remix. I'll give a listen to both tracks, gives me an excuse to watch it twice.
post #463 of 754
I just about wet myself when Jaws status went to "Shipping Soon" on Amazon !!! biggrin.gif
post #464 of 754
Quote:
Originally Posted by Otter0911 View Post

I just about wet myself when Jaws status went to "Shipping Soon" on Amazon !!! biggrin.gif

So, it really isn't safe to go back in the water! biggrin.gif
post #465 of 754
Quote:
Originally Posted by Otter0911 View Post

I just about wet myself when Jaws status went to "Shipping Soon" on Amazon !!! biggrin.gif

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dan Hitchman View Post

So, it really isn't safe to go back in the water! biggrin.gif

It may not be safe to answer the door when the delivery guy knocks... it may be the landshark!
post #466 of 754
Quote:
Originally Posted by neveser View Post

It may not be safe to answer the door when the delivery guy knocks... it may be the landshark!

I think it will be fine he's just a Dolphin !!
post #467 of 754
I think the new BluRay version looks outstanding, probably as good as it could look considering. There are some shots that look blurry and some CA on the closing credits, but in general there isn't much edge enhancement, the opening credits (white) don't have any halos. I think it's a great job and if everything they released of a film this age was this quality I'd have no problem with it.

The stuff that made it look less than perfect to my eyes was in the original film, namely those ugly gaussian soft focus blooming on everything bright white, similar to Superman 1 if I recall. Not sure why some around here seem to think it could have been better, but whatever.
post #468 of 754
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sean_O View Post

I think the new BluRay version looks outstanding, probably as good as it could look considering. There are some shots that look blurry and some CA on the closing credits, but in general there isn't much edge enhancement, the opening credits (white) don't have any halos. I think it's a great job and if everything they released of a film this age was this quality I'd have no problem with it.
The stuff that made it look less than perfect to my eyes was in the original film, namely those ugly gaussian soft focus blooming on everything bright white, similar to Superman 1 if I recall. Not sure why some around here seem to think it could have been better, but whatever.

Common, Dude, you know that everything 'looked' bloomy in the 70ies, even in real life rolleyes.gif check your history books...Chicks wore soft gaussian dresses...it's THERE tongue.gif
Edited by KBMAN - 8/14/12 at 4:00am
post #469 of 754
On my way to pick this up. I've never wanted to toss in a disk and quickly sample the AUDIO so bad before, which is kinda crazy when I think of all the incredible, more 'current' "wow" type movies that had me drooling to hear them...but after checking out that nifty comparison clip someone posted, I'm fully prepared to experience a good old fashioned mono 2.0 flick from way back when.
post #470 of 754
Mine just arrived! smile.gif

I'll have to wait until tonight to experience it on my 119" diagonal screen. I have an exam to take in a few hours. frown.gif
post #471 of 754
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sean_O View Post

I think the new BluRay version looks outstanding, probably as good as it could look considering. There are some shots that look blurry and some CA on the closing credits, but in general there isn't much edge enhancement, the opening credits (white) don't have any halos. I think it's a great job and if everything they released of a film this age was this quality I'd have no problem with it.
The stuff that made it look less than perfect to my eyes was in the original film, namely those ugly gaussian soft focus blooming on everything bright white, similar to Superman 1 if I recall. Not sure why some around here seem to think it could have been better, but whatever.
As far as I'm concerned diffusion filters and zoom lenses are the teal and orange of 70s cinematography.

Got my disc, will watch it after work. Hope I'm not too disappointed.
post #472 of 754
Quote:
Originally Posted by 42041 View Post

As far as I'm concerned diffusion filters and zoom lenses are the teal and orange of 70s cinematography.
Got my disc, will watch it after work. Hope I'm not too disappointed.

Nice to know you already know you'll be disappointed in some way. Amazing.
post #473 of 754
On this board, many here don't enjoy movies, they relish the chance to dissect it and when they find an imperfection somewhere that last mere seconds, it gives them the opportunity to loudly proclaim the transfer's garbage and the movie can't be enjoyed because there was softness here or EE there for 3 seconds. Never mind that 95% of the rest of the transfer is fantastic, all they need is that 5% to get on their high horse.

You can't possibly enjoy a movie if you are distracted by trying to find imperfections. Its absolutely ridiculous. I understand that some transfers can be so bad that it is distracting but Jaws is not one of them. Once I read about people trashing The Thin Red Line BR then it was pretty obvious that people do it for attention.

Jaws is an excellent transfer, I'm astounded by what I saw today and kudos to Universal for putting the time and effort into restoring it properly. There is no such thing as a perfect transfer and I'm sure many here are disappointed that Universal didn't butcher it like they expected so they could say "I told ya so". All that's left now is nitpicking and its funny how many are attacking the audio of a 1970's film because the picture is so good. I would much rather enjoy the movie which has never looked better.
post #474 of 754
Quote:
Originally Posted by haineshisway View Post

Nice to know you already know you'll be disappointed in some way. Amazing.

LOL
post #475 of 754
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Yosemite Dan View Post

On this board, many here don't enjoy movies, they relish the chance to dissect it and when they find an imperfection somewhere that last mere seconds, it gives them the opportunity to loudly proclaim the transfer's garbage and the movie can't be enjoyed because there was softness here or EE there for 3 seconds. Never mind that 95% of the rest of the transfer is fantastic, all they need is that 5% to get on their high horse.
You can't possibly enjoy a movie if you are distracted by trying to find imperfections. Its absolutely ridiculous. I understand that some transfers can be so bad that it is distracting but Jaws is not one of them. Once I read about people trashing The Thin Red Line BR then it was pretty obvious that people do it for attention.
Jaws is an excellent transfer, I'm astounded by what I saw today and kudos to Universal for putting the time and effort into restoring it properly. There is no such thing as a perfect transfer and I'm sure many here are disappointed that Universal didn't butcher it like they expected so they could say "I told ya so". All that's left now is nitpicking and its funny how many are attacking the audio of a 1970's film because the picture is so good. I would much rather enjoy the movie which has never looked better.

Nope, there is a passion here for movies full stop.
We will all never agree on everything, but even if I disagree with what they say, they only say it due to the love of a movie.
post #476 of 754
Quote:
Originally Posted by haineshisway View Post

Nice to know you already know you'll be disappointed in some way. Amazing.
What can I say, Universal has been very consistent that way. Let me put it this way... I've read the interviews with the restoration techs; if a cook tells you he spit in your food, would it be unreasonable to expect to find spit in your food?

I don't complain about imperfections. I complain about half-assery and deliberate degradation of the transfer. Whether some random internet person thinks that's nitpicking is not my concern.
Edited by 42041 - 8/14/12 at 6:09pm
post #477 of 754
I'll pick mine tomorrow. Can't wait.

Uni's 100th cover sucks I think a proper custom is in order! wink.gif
post #478 of 754
Quote:
Originally Posted by Yosemite Dan View Post

On this board, many here don't enjoy movies, they relish the chance to dissect it and when they find an imperfection somewhere that last mere seconds, it gives them the opportunity to loudly proclaim the transfer's garbage and the movie can't be enjoyed because there was softness here or EE there for 3 seconds. Never mind that 95% of the rest of the transfer is fantastic, all they need is that 5% to get on their high horse.
You can't possibly enjoy a movie if you are distracted by trying to find imperfections. Its absolutely ridiculous. I understand that some transfers can be so bad that it is distracting but Jaws is not one of them. Once I read about people trashing The Thin Red Line BR then it was pretty obvious that people do it for attention.
Jaws is an excellent transfer, I'm astounded by what I saw today and kudos to Universal for putting the time and effort into restoring it properly. There is no such thing as a perfect transfer and I'm sure many here are disappointed that Universal didn't butcher it like they expected so they could say "I told ya so". All that's left now is nitpicking and its funny how many are attacking the audio of a 1970's film because the picture is so good. I would much rather enjoy the movie which has never looked better.

What the HT enthusiast community needs, along with damn near any other areas of 'debate', is less reductive absurdism tactics and more sensible objective discussion.

Instead of relying on ad hominem attacks and straw man arguments to perpetuate agendas of willful ignorance or lack of consistent quality standards, everyone should approach each release, and reviews, with a degree of skepticism until they have made their own, ideally objective, evaluation.

Best Regards
KvE
post #479 of 754
Quote:
Originally Posted by Yosemite Dan View Post

On this board, many here don't enjoy movies, they relish the chance to dissect it and when they find an imperfection somewhere that last mere seconds, it gives them the opportunity to loudly proclaim the transfer's garbage and the movie can't be enjoyed because there was softness here or EE there for 3 seconds. Never mind that 95% of the rest of the transfer is fantastic, all they need is that 5% to get on their high horse.
You can't possibly enjoy a movie if you are distracted by trying to find imperfections. Its absolutely ridiculous. I understand that some transfers can be so bad that it is distracting but Jaws is not one of them. Once I read about people trashing The Thin Red Line BR then it was pretty obvious that people do it for attention.
Jaws is an excellent transfer, I'm astounded by what I saw today and kudos to Universal for putting the time and effort into restoring it properly. There is no such thing as a perfect transfer and I'm sure many here are disappointed that Universal didn't butcher it like they expected so they could say "I told ya so". All that's left now is nitpicking and its funny how many are attacking the audio of a 1970's film because the picture is so good. I would much rather enjoy the movie which has never looked better.
Now that your the end-all on what an "excellent" audio & video transfer is I only have one question:
"Where would science be w/o "nitpicking" the final 5%?"
[because you do realize your on the AVScience Forum, right?!?! rolleyes.gif ]
post #480 of 754
Just watched it tonight. my wife and I could not believe how good the video quality was. The sound was ok....not a lot of room for a lot of sound effects but the video quality was crazy good.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Blu-ray Software
AVS › AVS Forum › Blu-ray & HD DVD › Blu-ray Software › Jaws - Robert Harris review (see post #1 for link)