or Connect
AVS › AVS Forum › Blu-ray & HD DVD › Blu-ray Software › Indiana Jones Trilogy
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Indiana Jones Trilogy - Page 27

post #781 of 1202
Quote:
Originally Posted by eNoize View Post

Here's a screengrab of the scene everyone showed some concern over. Review already up at HDD. smile.gif
raiders.jpg
Looks like you might have forgotten to turn off the noise reduction and/or processing in the video card drivers before taking those screenshots (I made the same mistake not too long ago.) Also there are chroma upsampling errors.

Shame about the sharpening/aliasing on the older transfers. I think I may wait until Raiders is available separately.
post #782 of 1202
Quote:
Originally Posted by eNoize View Post

Here's a screengrab of the scene everyone showed some concern over. Review already up at HDD. smile.gif
raiders.jpg


Still concerned here, my original comment I got chewed out over stands
post #783 of 1202
Temple is the weakest looker of the four, but it's still pretty impressive. The sharpening does have a damaging effect on wider shots, but they're brief. Halos are so small you can barely make them out, while the edgy quality can remain. It feels more digital than it probably should, but tinkering in terms of color timing is non-existent as far as I can tell.

http://www.doblu.com/2012/09/16/indiana-jones-and-the-temple-of-doom-review/
post #784 of 1202
They only changed Raiders
post #785 of 1202
Quote:
Originally Posted by oink View Post

The guy is a troll and will eventually draw the attention of the mods.wink.gif

Hahahah... LMAO.

Troll... really...?

I CHALLENGE YOU to report my posts from this thread. I've done nothing but point out that it seems there are a lot of people reviewing the video of these Blu Ray versions without having seen them first hand. Those are the people that should be reported to the mods. Are you one of those members...?
But alas… in a few days, there will be more credibility on this forum because the movies will then actually be out on Blu Ray.
post #786 of 1202
Quote:
Originally Posted by SaxCatz View Post

Now that our own Mr. Potts' review is up and predominately positive, I wonder if the fussing will quiet down or if screenshot pseudo-scientists around here who haven't even seen the releases will start to flame Ralph too. rolleyes.gif
* All due respect to those who HAVE actually viewed the discs. *

+1 for this entire post...! cool.gifcool.gif
post #787 of 1202
Quote:
Originally Posted by Strevlac View Post

Without nitpicking on this and other internet forums we would still be getting crap like The Longest Day and the first Gladiator BD and we wouldn't have a re-done BD of Patton to look forward to.

Except those cited examples contained appalling inexcusable errors that affected the entirety of those films.
In (hesitant) defense of Suffolk, that is not picking "nits."
Edited by SaxCatz - 9/16/12 at 8:46am
post #788 of 1202
Quote:
Originally Posted by 42041 View Post

lol, sure... the sort of people who always complain about "nitpicking" were just as happy with that trash.
As far as I'm concerned, whining about complaining/nitpicking on HT forums (while offering no insight on why the complaints are wrong) is a long way to say "I have no idea what I'm talking about". Anyone who cares or knows a thing about how movies look should realize just how many home video releases are shockingly inept (in fact, ineptitude is the norm for catalog transfers).

To further my comment above, I agree that the level of ineptitude typically on display in home video releases these days is sickening.
For that reason, I have no problem with folks wanting to "nitpick" each and every release.
What I DO take issue with is the over-the-top reaction of many here when the do find a "nit" to pick. A "nit" here- not a shocking error that compromises the entire film like the aforementioned examples- results in shouts for recalls and/or boycotts and has members tearing at each others' throats like feral dogs. I feel that the reaction should be in balance with the enormity (or lack thereof) of the defect.
post #789 of 1202
Quote:
Originally Posted by Strevlac View Post

Without nitpicking on this and other internet forums we would still be getting crap like The Longest Day and the first Gladiator BD and we wouldn't have a re-done BD of Patton to look forward to.

Just had to add:
By that same token, nitpicking the original Predator BD got us Predator: Ultimate Wax Mannequin Hunter Edition.eek.gifsmile.gif
post #790 of 1202
Quote:
Originally Posted by paku View Post

Looks like you might have forgotten to turn off the noise reduction and/or processing in the video card drivers before taking those screenshots (I made the same mistake not too long ago.) Also there are chroma upsampling errors.
Shame about the sharpening/aliasing on the older transfers. I think I may wait until Raiders is available separately.
Quote:
Originally Posted by dvdmike007 View Post

Still concerned here, my original comment I got chewed out over stands


Nope, all processing in the video card are off. Those are direct pics without adding anything or taking anything away. And Mike, I understand what you mean: this release is not the perfection fans were hoping for, especially coming from a new restoration and 4K scan. It looks good for what it is, but I prefer my swastika flags a bright, vivid red as they are supposed to be, not the fiery orange we actually see in motion.


Quote:
Originally Posted by dvdmike007 View Post

The opticals were DNR'd so that would not matter I think he is referring to the many focus issues in Raiders, it is not a very well shot film in places


That's precisely what is meant by the review. Personally, I think it important to consider the cinematography and director intent along with how well an individual title compares to other BDs of movies from the same general period.
post #791 of 1202
Quote:
Originally Posted by suffolk112000 View Post

Hahahah... LMAO.
Troll... really...?
I CHALLENGE YOU to report my posts from this thread. I've done nothing but point out that it seems there are a lot of people reviewing the video of these Blu Ray versions without having seen them first hand. Those are the people that should be reported to the mods. Are you one of those members...?
But alas… in a few days, there will be more credibility on this forum because the movies will then actually be out on Blu Ray.

He's talking about me. His feelings are hurt because I occassionally call him out on his complete ignorance of films and how they should look.

Quote:
Originally Posted by SaxCatz View Post

Except those cited examples contained appalling inexcusable errors that affected the entirety of those films.
In (hesitant) defense of Suffolk, that is not picking "nits."

My comment was directed at suffolk112000's assertion that we should just quit complaining and buy movies and enjoy them. He's changed his tune slightly now. First it's quit your bitching, now all of a sudden "some" bitching is ok, just not the bitching in this thread. I don't necessarily agree or disagree with the color timing changes because I have a terrible memory for color, but I think the comments are interesting and I like reading people's honest opinions. I think that's a big difference from "just buy it and shut the hell up" which is what this suffolk guy was essentially saying.

Quote:
Originally Posted by SaxCatz View Post

Just had to add:
By that same token, nitpicking the original Predator BD got us Predator: Ultimate Wax Mannequin Hunter Edition.eek.gifsmile.gif

Well, those nitpickers were wrong obviously.
post #792 of 1202
Quote:
Originally Posted by talon95 View Post

I've seen the Raiders of the Lost Ark Bluray. Video quality is ok for an older movie, although I've certainly seen better. Some scenes are very grainy ( special effects shots like when the car goes off the cliff). There are also 2 or 3 spots where it goes blurry for just a second or 2 in a normal shot. Kinda odd.

If that's what the film actually looks like, would you consider that a flaw in the transfer?
post #793 of 1202
Quote:
Originally Posted by suffolk112000 View Post

Hahahah... LMAO.
Troll... really...?
I CHALLENGE YOU to report my posts from this thread. I've done nothing but point out that it seems there are a lot of people reviewing the video of these Blu Ray versions without having seen them first hand. Those are the people that should be reported to the mods. Are you one of those members...?
But alas… in a few days, there will be more credibility on this forum because the movies will then actually be out on Blu Ray.
Ummm, you didn't read post closely....look at the quote below.

And FWIW, in all the years I have been here, I have NEVER once reported ANYONE for ANYTHING to the Mods....real men simply don't.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Strevlac View Post

He's talking about me.

Quote:
His feelings are hurt because I occassionally call him out on his complete ignorance of films and how they should look.
I tried to warn ya, but obviously, it didn't take.rolleyes.gif

OK, the game's afoot....
Shall we begin a battle of words or will you run....again?
post #794 of 1202
Quote:
Originally Posted by Strevlac View Post

He's talking about me. His feelings are hurt because I occassionally call him out on his complete ignorance of films and how they should look.
My comment was directed at suffolk112000's assertion that we should just quit complaining and buy movies and enjoy them. He's changed his tune slightly now. First it's quit your bitching, now all of a sudden "some" bitching is ok, just not the bitching in this thread. I don't necessarily agree or disagree with the color timing changes because I have a terrible memory for color, but I think the comments are interesting and I like reading people's honest opinions. I think that's a big difference from "just buy it and shut the hell up" which is what this suffolk guy was essentially saying.
Well, those nitpickers were wrong obviously.

Those in the know tried to warn everyone, and it was not the "nitpickers" who see flaws it was the cheap seats who say "it is the best it has ever looked" about every transfer.
post #795 of 1202
I watched all three, Raiders of the Lost Arc does have * some teal and orange going on. y9yha6as.jpg
Edited by Fanboyz - 9/16/12 at 2:21pm
post #796 of 1202
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fanboyz View Post

I watched all three, Raiders of the Lost Arc does have * some teal and orange going on.

Yes it does- though most people watching this (and reviewing it , and lauding it) lack an artists eye to be able to distinguish the difference between endless variations in shade and saturation of one or two hues, and a broader more natural range of hues.
While the Bd may indeed look 'warmer' than the DVD and HDTV transfers- the latter two were more naturally balanced in terms of color. The Bd to the contrary has clearly had digital gymnastics performed to eek out teal shadings while at the same time increasing the orange tones in the skin.

This is just as unnatural and inorganic as going in and scrubbing out the grain.
The difference is, it doesn't necessarily take an artists eye to detect the difference between a slight granular texture to an image and one that is shiny, waxy and missing the finest detail. Which is why every layman seems to seize on this one metric when evaluating how true to a film-like look a given Bd is.

OTOH it takes someone who is more tuned into color to notice there is a difference between an image containing both ultramarine and cobalt blues (two completely different hues), and one that just has varying degrees in vividness and shade of a solitary aqua blue.
post #797 of 1202
Quote:
Originally Posted by eNoize View Post

Nope, all processing in the video card are off. Those are direct pics without adding anything or taking anything away.
I doubt it. Compare this one to the shot from the same scene in the Blu-ray.com review, yours is missing a ton of grain.
post #798 of 1202
Quote:
Originally Posted by pjvader View Post

its always been there(same as the blue line and the smudge, which are now gone) it just shows up alot clearer in HD or on a big screen, i dont think there is a definitive answer for it but it comes down to (these are the answers ive heard over the years)
a- the focus was incorrect when it was shot and no time to reshoot
b- problem with the camera used at the time (same with the smudge and blue line only on certain shots so probably a wonky camera!)
c- type of lens it was shot with i.e. artisitic preferrence anamorphic or some such
d- original neg was damaged and cant be rectified digitally
e- spielberg is fine with it

Seen the movie a thousand times and never noticed this before today frown.gif

Might not help that this is the first time watching it in 1080p on a ten foot wide screen. It was so glaringly obvious this time that I thought my system was acting up and I came right over to the boards to see if this was an issue with the movie or with my playback...guess it is the movie. It's pretty bad, I was going to show the movie off to some family but that bad focus won't make for a good demo.
post #799 of 1202
Do Last Crusade and Temple deserve marks above 4/5 when they've been sharpen filtered this bad? You be the judge.


lc1.png
lc2.png
lc3.png
lc4.png

Hey look, I can ruin stuff the same way without millions of dollars and fully paid staff. Just needed 30 seconds with Photoshop.

lc5.jpg
Edited by FitzRoy - 9/16/12 at 7:24pm
post #800 of 1202
Quote:
Originally Posted by dvdmike007 View Post

It is not the colour in that scene that is the issue, their shadows used to be a crisp black in contrast to the sky, so that when the hat went on you knew who it was straight away.

Amen... an easy way to spot post-coloring issues is when the shadows get tinted whatever color their trying to bump.
post #801 of 1202
eveyone should rise up and call for a Gladiator type of remaster!...either way I love the Indy movies so much I'm still going to buy this flawed or not boxset
post #802 of 1202
Quote:
Originally Posted by TitusTroy View Post

eveyone should rise up and call for a Gladiator type of remaster!...either way I love the Indy movies so much I'm still going to buy this flawed or not boxset

Guaranteed they do this in 12 months time and just like Gladiator they will do it discreetly (no official announcements) to avoid the same type of embarrasment that Paramount endured in the Gladiator blu ray picture quality fiasco. That's why I'm not buying this set, even if they sell it for $1.
post #803 of 1202
Quote:
Originally Posted by daniels1994 View Post

Guaranteed they do this in 12 months time and just like Gladiator they will do it discreetly (no official announcements) to avoid the same type of embarrasment that Paramount endured in the Gladiator blu ray picture quality fiasco. That's why I'm not buying this set, even if they sell it for $1.

the Gladiator exchange program was a free replacement so it's not like you paid extra for it...so if they end up doing the same thing for Indy then at least I'll still get to watch the 4 movies in the time being looking a lot better then the DVD
post #804 of 1202
Quote:
Originally Posted by SaxCatz View Post

What I DO take issue with is the over-the-top reaction of many here when the do find a "nit" to pick. A "nit" here- not a shocking error that compromises the entire film like the aforementioned examples- results in shouts for recalls and/or boycotts and has members tearing at each others' throats like feral dogs. I feel that the reaction should be in balance with the enormity (or lack thereof) of the defect.

Quote:
Originally Posted by TitusTroy View Post

eveyone should rise up and call for a Gladiator type of remaster!...either way I love the Indy movies so much I'm still going to buy this flawed or not boxset

Thank you for providing exactly the type of flagrant over-reaction that I talked about in order to better illustrate my prior post.
post #805 of 1202
Last Crusade is effectively the same as Temple. Still some sharpening, but the effect isn't as damaging to the film as a whole. Exteriors simply appear more precise in their definition. Colors are rich (the stained glass window is excellent), and detail is consistently high. This is arguably the tightest shot film of the first three. It's a looker, but a shame that it wasn't left alone:

http://www.doblu.com/2012/09/17/indiana-jones-and-the-last-crusade-review/

The argument over Raiders' color timing is one worth having despite some persistence otherwise. I don't think it's enough to warrant a boycott of the this, and there's not a chance Paramount will re-release this. It's not Gladiator. BUT, Raiders looks digital, almost glowing because of the changes. The appearance of Temple and Crusade offer a relative base point to compare saturation and color timing. Raiders does stick out.
post #806 of 1202
From the details on this restoration, it sounds as though the color timing was approved by Spielberg. Without having seen the Blu Ray just yet, I don't have a strong opinion on it. My first reaction is that I wish he'd left it alone. But if this is Director approved, I seriously doubt we'll see a remaster/replacement. Still, I'm looking forward to seeing Raiders on the big screen tomorrow evening smile.gif
post #807 of 1202
Whilst it may be the studios movie to do with what they want, it's our money to do with what we want, that they are after, and they need to keep that in mind.

I think the Indiana Jones Collection may just become the equivalent of the Lord Of The Rings Trilogy to those that care about Bluray quality and film transparency.

Voting with the wallet is the only power the consumer has been given in these matters.
post #808 of 1202
Life is too short. I will have the set tomorrow, and will be very pleased.
post #809 of 1202
Raiders Is fine.
post #810 of 1202
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fanboyz View Post

Raiders Is fine.

Fine is good enough?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Blu-ray Software
AVS › AVS Forum › Blu-ray & HD DVD › Blu-ray Software › Indiana Jones Trilogy