Originally Posted by KMFDMvsEnya
Now we have devolved to being snarky and ad hominem attacks.
I am familiar with how film actually looks like and this transfer is decent but not accurate. Never mind the contrast changes are not representative of how it most likely looked back when it was first assembled and released.
Again where is your proof that this is how John Bailey intended his film to look or that GC supervised and approved it?
I have no qualms to admitting being incorrect, simply require some viable evidence.
If the dynamic range of the contrast were always intended to be blown out back then, even the imperfect DVD would replicate that characteristic as well. The reality is that sort of aesthetic was not as commonly used as it has in the past decade. Same for cooler color temps and/or retiming to T&O.
Transfers that are well done I praise or do not raise any objections. Those that appear to have issues I do comment on.
Examples of where Sony did things correctly such as Taxi Driver is excellent with no complaints. An older release The Fifth Element, the reissue is vastly superior to the original release. In those cases the screen caps were representative of the final products.
I'm gonna say it one more time - you have not seen this transfer. There is NOTHING in this transfer that wasn't as it was. There is no discussion here. Sorry. "How it most likely looked" - so, on top of not having seen this Blu-ray, you apparently haven't even seen the film projected. So, exactly how would you know how it looked? It's amazing how expert someone can be without actually having seen this film projected or its transfer. I have not attacked you. I have questioned how you have the temerity to say anything without having seen this disc.
I have seen enough of John Bailey's work projected in theaters to know what his work looks like. I also know what James Brooks likes. I'm going to leave it to you because there is simply no winning here - it's like having a discussion with a wall and a wall without knowledge of the item being discussed. I just feel that someone has to step up and defend work that is good from those who decry it. When someone makes a statement, "I am familiar with how film actually looks like (sic) and this transfer is decent but not accurate." Again: You have not seen the transfer. The End.
From Robert A. Harris:
One of Mr. Nicholson's more interesting character studies, James L. Brook' As Good as it Gets, is given a quality treatment by Columbia for it's Blu-ray premiere via Twilight Time.
Color, densities, shadow detail, and image stability all fall into line for a quality product.
Finally a new release of a catalog title that holds up in projection.
From the HTF review:
The 1.78:1 1080p transfer is outstanding in every respect. The images are highly detailed, with solid, accurate colors, outstanding shadow detail and excellent contrast. There are a few close-ups which are slightly on the soft side, but this appears to be as it was intended by the director.
From the Bluray.com review:
As Good As It Gets is presented on Blu-ray courtesy of Twilight Time with an AVC encoded 1080p transfer in 1.85:1. This is yet another really nice looking high definition presentation culled from the Columbia assets catalog, with beautifully saturated colors and excellent sharpness and clarity. Fine object detail is often exceptional and many of the exterior location shots provide great depth of field. The film feels just a little dark at times, with contrast perhaps not pushed quite as far as some would hope, which leads to some minimal loss of shadow detail in some interior and night scenes. That said, there doesn't appear to have been any excessive digital tweaking (if indeed much of any at all), giving this presentation a very natural filmic quality. The elements are in excellent condition all the way through the film. This continues Twilight Time's generally superior track record in releasing high quality high definition transfers.
Funny, not only does he not think there has been contrast boosting, he feels it wasn't pushed quite far enough. We can't ALL be wrong.Edited by haineshisway - 6/21/12 at 7:44pm