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

Titanic - Page 3

post #61 of 244
Quote:
Originally Posted by oink View Post

^I can't wait for my copy....smile.gifsmile.gif

Nor can I Im looking forward to it. They told me hopefully this week. smile.gif
post #62 of 244
Quote:
Originally Posted by vc2002 View Post

adr5vvfE.jpg acxy56Xa.jpgabksuZrv.jpg abxs3ELI.jpgadtD5q8T.jpg acxrsCVK.jpg

Interesting that they clipped off some of Rose's stray hair in the 3-D version. I guess little details like that are just too much of a bitch to convert.
post #63 of 244
Also interesting is there seems to be some contrast differences between the 3D/2D versions. Could be a byproduct of capturing the different streams though.

I am curious whether those errant stray hairs are consistently brushed out or do they flicker in length. Mmm. Inquiring OCD minds need to know.

The 3D version has some DNR applied, not egregious but is notable, causing less defined film grain as well a tad softer.
In the iconic shot of Jack and Rose at the front of the ship, via http://www.blu-raydefinition.com/reviews/titanic-limited-3d-edition-blu-ray-review.html, it exhibits the 'force field effect' clearly around Rose's arm in particular.

2D
http://cdn.blu-raydefinition.com/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2012/09/Titanic-2D-BD_10.jpg?d9c344

3D
http://cdn.blu-raydefinition.com/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2012/09/Titanic-3D-BD_2.jpg?d9c344


Pretty clear difference in grain structure.
2D
http://hcd-1.imgbox.com/abxs3ELI.png?st=FJJOIEp0Q0Xh0rLVvmsxKg&e=1346592382

3D
http://hcd-1.imgbox.com/abksuZrv.png?st=bjXgiFhKHt1D-5dt1YH_JA&e=1346592381


Wish I had an enormous projection screen; perhaps Panasonic will finally dethrone my display with a shiny 65" next year.
Thus far looks like an awesome release with the overall edge in detail with the 2D version.

Best Regards
KvE
Edited by KMFDMvsEnya - 9/2/12 at 8:23am
post #64 of 244
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kram Sacul View Post

Interesting that they clipped off some of Rose's stray hair in the 3-D version. I guess little details like that are just too much of a bitch to convert.

What I find more interesting is how the perspective changes between shots, like the wooden panelling behind Rose, and the slightly flattened angle of the shoulder of the chair. The laziest conversions always seem to be content with simply shifting the background a bit, instead of trying to sell the effect using the foregound as well. It's no wonder, then, that Titanic's 3D conversion took so long and cost so much ($18m), because it's one of the best theatrical 3D presentations I've ever seen, bested only by Avatar.
post #65 of 244
Thread Starter 
Pretty sure degraining is a huge part of the conversion process
post #66 of 244
Quote:
Maybe I missed it in this thread, but I'm surprised that no one's commented on the dreaded and ubiquitous tealing of the Blu-ray, compared to the DVD. This is such a sad, sad trend. (I'm not seeing as much amberfying as usual, though. Some good news.)
post #67 of 244
Quote:
Originally Posted by Penman View Post

Maybe I missed it in this thread, but I'm surprised that no one's commented on the dreaded and ubiquitous teal and amber-fying of the Blu-ray, compared to the DVD. This is such a sad, sad trend.
I don't care about the DVD. The movie did not look teal in its IMAX 3D presentation. It doesn't look teal here.
post #68 of 244
Any definitive word yet on whether the 3D version (16:9) is playable on a 2D BD player? Would like to have the option of 16:9 and scope versions but don't want to pay for the 3D package if I can't play it...
post #69 of 244
Quote:
Originally Posted by NagysAudio View Post

No teal? I knew there was a reason I disagreed with you on Jaws. If you can't see the teal in the Titanic shots, then WOW!
No teal? Titanic has teal. It is a color that exists in the world. But there is nothing revisionist about the colors on the new digital master (which, incidentally, I saw without split-screening it with the DVD). It looks like Titanic. The whole second half would be a perfect opportunity to teal things up, but what do ya know, it looks blue as usual. The first half has the warm tones it always has. Of course some of the people here see teal in their sleep, and as usual, hold the DVD as the golden standard of color reproduction, which tells you everything you need to know.
Edited by 42041 - 9/2/12 at 2:13pm
post #70 of 244
Quote:
Originally Posted by 42041 View Post

No teal? Titanic has teal. It is a color that exists in the world. But there is nothing revisionist about the colors on the new digital master (which, incidentally, I saw without split-screening it with the DVD). It looks like Titanic. The whole second half would be a perfect opportunity to teal things up, but what do ya know, it looks blue as usual. The first half has the warm tones it always has. Of course some of the people here see teal in their sleep, and as usual, hold the DVD as the golden standard of color reproduction, which tells you everything you need to know.

The only shot that looks "wrong" to me from the caps-a-holic link is #8. The sky in the DVD looks like how I've always remembered that scene. But then that's from years of watchng it on VHS and DVD, so maybe (and probably more likely) they were wrong. The night scenes look perfec with that trademark Cameron blue.

If there is a teal push it is a slight one and nowhere near as bad as the likes of Demolition Man or other Warner titles.
post #71 of 244
Quote:
Originally Posted by Morpheo View Post

the movie is impeccable, certainly a masterpiece in the real sense of the word.
There are good reasons why Titanic won the Best Picture Academy Award and was also the biggest money-maker of all time when it was released. Other than for fuddy-duddies who like to dismiss a movie for one small reason or another, Titanic succeeded on many levels. Historic accuracy and attention to detail in many ways, a great disaster story, a classic villain or two, and yes, even the romance all came together very well.
post #72 of 244
I don't see any over abundance of teal in any of those screenshots. If anything, the color looks far more natural on the Bluray on my calibrated computer monitor. But people do love to over-exaggerate around here.
post #73 of 244
I'm sure it won't matter so much viewing in isolation, but anyone who denies that there isn't a teal push from the DVD to the Blu-ray at capsaholic, well...I don't know what to tell you.

Maybe the DVD was timed wrong and the Blu-ray now corrects that. Possibly.

Maybe capsaholic's captures are imperfect. Conceivable.

Perhaps my monitor(s) are wonky. I suppose.

But given the undeniable trend of major directors (Ridley Scott, I'm looking at you) to tealify their catalog releases, isn't it just a teensy weensy teeny tiny bit coincidental that the Titanic Blu-ray shows the same tealification, even allowing for the foregoing variables?

I mean, if Cameron really were "correcting" the DVD's mistiming, why wouldn't the Blu-ray be, say, redder? More yellow? Purplier? Nope. It just happened to shift tealwise.
post #74 of 244
Quote:
Originally Posted by Penman View Post

I'm sure it won't matter so much viewing in isolation, but anyone who denies that there isn't a teal push from the DVD to the Blu-ray at capsaholic, well...I don't know what to tell you.
Well, that's the thing. If it doesn't matter in actual viewing, I'm not going to deny it or not deny it: I just don't care. The bottom line is that the overall viewing experience in IMAX 3D was not teal or "modernized" or whatever, it looked well-balanced and natural, and this appears to be the same in terms of color. I'll leave the pedantry and screenshot colorimetry (which I consider completely silly, given how poorly humans percieve absolute color) to others.
Maybe the digital colorist erred on the side of teal in some shots. I'm still struggling to understand why a teal push is worse than any other color push, aside from the fact that's it fashionable to whine about. Maybe the colorist made it too red or blue for the old transfer. What matters is the color on the original prints, and neither of us have one handy. From my experience, the considerable majority of DVD-era video transfers have colors/contrast/brightness that are way off from the prints.
Edited by 42041 - 9/2/12 at 7:54pm
post #75 of 244
Cool color palette is a signature trademark of Cameron's work.

This is why I feel that this 'teal/orange' ire is a non-issue. Titanic has been judicially and expertly timed which is completely consistent and complimentary to Cameron's visual aesthetic and intended look for this film.

Whereas other filmmakers, especially in the past decade, have turned the dial up to 11.
Be it with contemporary films or absolute abominable revisions of films that were never meant to look like oompa loompas blended in a blueberry smoothie.

Need to pick your battles and this really should not be one of them.
Thus far Titanic looks fantastic and I look forward to what the future holds for his other films. Just wish he would get them done and released sooner.

Best Regards
KvE

-Have not watched my SE DVD in years but I do not recall it looking as poor as the German version, perhaps it is the same but I plan to wait for the BR to watch it again.
Edited by KMFDMvsEnya - 9/2/12 at 8:33pm
post #76 of 244
Thread Starter 
post #77 of 244
^After looking at that, I think I'll take the 2D.wink.gif
post #78 of 244
Quote:
Originally Posted by oink View Post

^After looking at that, I think I'll take the 2D.wink.gif

I ordered the amazon exclusive, I'll get everything in every possible color palette wink.gif
post #79 of 244
As good as the 3-D version is the definitive version will always be the original 2D in glorious 2.35:1.

Not seeing blatant teal in any of the shots so far.

This is teal:


This is teal blue which is actually the color that movies are timed with nowadays and makes certain people go nuts:


The night filter in Titanic looks more like:
post #80 of 244
Quote:
Originally Posted by oink View Post

^After looking at that, I think I'll take the 2D.wink.gif

Check out comparison #5, one of Jack's drawings. The letterboxed version has a slight teal push while the 1.78 3D has a warmer tone. And some shots have no colour/contrast changes at all. The differences in framing I find interesting though because it's not a simple open matte job all the way through. Some scenes have been shifted up, others have been stretched (look at #3, it's slight but it's there), and the shots of the ship appear to have been enlarged across the board.
post #81 of 244
Very excited for this release.
post #82 of 244
post #83 of 244
Converted 3D will always have flaws and imperfections. The depth information for the other frame/eye is simply not there and must be faked. The digitally altered frame can sometimes look odd.

The biggest drawback IMO at the moment is that reflections in converted 3-D are almost always left flat.
post #84 of 244
Quote:
Originally Posted by 42041 View Post

Well, that's the thing. If it doesn't matter in actual viewing, I'm not going to deny it or not deny it: I just don't care. The bottom line is that the overall viewing experience in IMAX 3D was not teal or "modernized" or whatever, it looked well-balanced and natural, and this appears to be the same in terms of color. I'll leave the pedantry and screenshot colorimetry (which I consider completely silly, given how poorly humans percieve absolute color) to others.

Setting aside Titanic for a moment, I remember feeling that the trailers for Mission: Impossible - Ghost Protocol were horrifically teal. When I saw that movie in digital IMAX, I found it to be hardly very teal at all. But then the movie came to Blu-ray, and it's nightmarishly teal again. The scene in the secret train car IMF base stands out in particular. I remember how bad that scene looked in the trailers, and specifically taking a hard look at the colors in the theater.

I suspect that the color temperature of lamps in cinema projectors has an impact on this, and that the films' color timers are grading for that without adjusting for D65 in the home video transfers. That's just a preliminary theory, though. I don't have proof of this yet.
post #85 of 244
Wow, very surprise that Redbox will have this on blu ray for Rental. They normally dont have old release on blu ray
post #86 of 244
Quote:
Originally Posted by oink View Post

I couldn't agree more.
Anxiously awaiting my BD copy.wink.gif

Well, I've watched the original DVD for so many times. 3D and then BD? They are awesome as well, yet, I don't quite get it actually. smile.gif
post #87 of 244
"The Blu-ray format has PLENTY of capacity and bandwidth for a +3hr movie, imho"

No, not really. That's a huge overstatement putting PLENTY in caps lol. I have never seen a 3 hour film on bluray that was close to perfect. Sure, many are okay but we all know 4k discs are going to be here in 2 years or so. What the hell is the point for high-end enthusiasts like us to buy every film again.

And the teal people need to go away. Get over it. You guys seriously do see teal in your sleep lol. Just because you watched film in an era where most filmmakers had to choose some awful pinkish 80s blare doesn't mean the filmmakers wanted that.

Of course we don't need everything in teal and things like LotR were a bit nuts but....
post #88 of 244
Quote:
Originally Posted by khronikos View Post

And the teal people need to go away. Get over it. You guys seriously do see teal in your sleep lol.

I don't ever to the +1 thing, but I'm going to right now. +1. I am still amazed what people are saying about Titanic based on the screenshots posted here. There are very minor color changes compared to the DVD, I'll give you that, but it's not overly teal. I sometimes do wonder if people are grasping at straws just to stir the hornets nest. The 2D Bluray transfer looks fantastic.
post #89 of 244
Quote:
Originally Posted by khronikos View Post

And the teal people need to go away. Get over it. You guys seriously do see teal in your sleep lol.

Says that guy who rants and raves about bit rates in thread after thread after thread. rolleyes.gif
post #90 of 244
Quote:
Originally Posted by khronikos View Post

"The Blu-ray format has PLENTY of capacity and bandwidth for a +3hr movie, imho"
No, not really. That's a huge overstatement putting PLENTY in caps lol. I have never seen a 3 hour film on bluray that was close to perfect. Sure, many are okay but we all know 4k discs are going to be here in 2 years or so. What the hell is the point for high-end enthusiasts like us to buy every film again.
And the teal people need to go away. Get over it. You guys seriously do see teal in your sleep lol. Just because you watched film in an era where most filmmakers had to choose some awful pinkish 80s blare doesn't mean the filmmakers wanted that.
Of course we don't need everything in teal and things like LotR were a bit nuts but....

So where is the evidence that "no 3 hour movie has ever looked close to perfect" was because of capacity. And further more... where is ANY close to perfect Blu-ray? I can think of a handful if any. rolleyes.gif If it's not bitrate, its' DNR, teal, blah blah blah. Everyone complains about every g'damn release.

So yes, imho Blu-ray disc have the capacity to fit a 3hr movie on it. Obviously there are 'but's and if's' to that but ...c'mon now. That and my comment at the beginning of the thread was in relation to the dvd format that absolutely did not. So there. tongue.gif
Edited by Scott Simonian - 9/6/12 at 10:50am
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Blu-ray Software
AVS › AVS Forum › Blu-ray & HD DVD › Blu-ray Software › Titanic