Originally Posted by NagysAudio
You posted a picture which is a completely false representation of the Blu-ray. You purposely did this and you are 100% aware that the Blu-ray does not even in the slightest look like what you have posted. That is pretty messed up man. If you don't like the movie that is completely OK, but what you're doing is a new low for an AVS member.
This is gold, and I am actually slightly worried.
And have it all saved
12. The film grain
Grain is a characteristic of the recording medium not of vision. This raises problems since stereo-captured images would have completely independent grain profiles, but that neither helps the stereo effect nor reduces eye strain. The mono grain could not be ignored as anything the same in both eyes will have a depth. If grain was added equally to both left and right eyes, it would appear as a wall of grain at the screen plane, like a shower curtain, since only things at the screen plane resolve to the same position in x and y space. If a different approach is taken and a layer of grain is added but offset (but the same structure) would then either be in front or behind the screen – but in either case it would appear as a flat ‘shower curtain of grain. Cinesite never used this approach.
One could degrain the footage and try and remove all grain, but the director specifically wanted to shoot on film and grain is part of the film experience. Degraining can also cut into things such as distant rain, since small rain on screen has many of the same characteristics to a degrain algorithm as grain.
Cinesite’s solution was more traditional. The footage was degrained, which did remove some fine rain, but then this helped as it could be stereoscopically re-added with CG rain. But the grain was added independently to both eyes, simulating what would happen if the film had been shot with a stereo film rig – in this one minor respect. But also not all grain was removed, so some grain would be moved back in 3D-space with the dimensionality of the object that was moved to that position in 3D-space.
High quality conversion methods should also deal with many typical problems including:
Fuzzy semitransparent object borders – such as hair, fur, foreground out-of-focus objects, thin objects
Film grain (real or artificial) and similar noise effects
Scenes with fast erratic motion
Small particles – rain, snow, explosions and so on.
Thought so, it is part of the 2d plain so it would make things look cardboard cut out if done poorly, and since this is one of the best conversions out there they would have done it right.
The Lowry degrain on Aliens is one of the most natural looking out there, so depending on who did it, Stereo D did the conversion but I am guessing Lowry did the remaster/reframe under Camerons supervision and then sent to Stereo D.Edited by dvdmike007 - 9/9/12 at 5:19pm