AVS › AVS Forum › Blu-ray & HD DVD › Blu-ray Software › The Dark Knight Rises
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

The Dark Knight Rises - Page 10

post #271 of 412
12/5/12 at 11:17pm
Do people really expect a clean, sharp image with extreme fine detail when watching a film shot anamoprhically? The 35mm sections in the film look identical to raw anamorphic footage I've dealt with in the past. I've also shot with anamorphic lenses before and can attest that you do certainly lose minute details when choosing to do so.
Reply
Reply

AVS Top Picks

post #272 of 412
12/6/12 at 3:35am
Quote:
Originally Posted by celboy View Post

Can I ask where you are getting your info from?
I would think all the digital video masters come from the master digital files--in this case the elements used for the 4K DCP that was shown in theaters.
Tom
NYC

Wrong: two different 4K DCPs were created: one exclusive for IMAX digital (that used 65mm as the source for the IMAX sequences) and another 4K DCP for regular theatres from the 35mm IP (IMAX scenes reduced to 35mm)



People forget that this movie DOESN'T have a DI and so uses the IP and not the OCN as the source, so you can't expect the same quality of other recent movies... This movie was made the old-fashioned way...
Edited by MisterXDTV - 12/6/12 at 3:49am
Reply
Reply
post #273 of 412
12/6/12 at 4:45am
Quote:
Originally Posted by 42041 View Post

I don't think its low-pass filtered, I think you're just seeing the generation loss going from negative to IP. I don't think there are any transfers from IPs on blu-ray that are significantly more detailed.

As far as anamorphic is concerned, I agree. With the surfeit of Super 35 flicks over the last couple of decades we've gotten used to their more immediate sense of sharpness on video, even when going from an IP as some transfers undoubtedly have done, but anamorphic lensing + film finish + IP transfer = noticeably soft video. Anamorphic + DI finish + direct digital transfer = blisteringly sharp video. Heck, even a 33-year-old anamorphic show like Alien - shot in a similarly dark, dingy style - exhibits more detail on Blu than most of Nolan's anamorphic flicks because of the 4K neg scan and Lowry pass that it received.
Edited by Geoff D - 12/6/12 at 4:51am
Reply
Reply
post #274 of 412
12/6/12 at 6:10am
Quote:
Originally Posted by Phantom Stranger View Post

Comments for the Picture Quality Tiers that might hold interest here...
The Dark Knight Rises
recommendation: Tier 1.25/1.5*
A somewhat disappointing release by Warner Bros. for video quality considering expectations, but that is nothing new for Nolan's Batman trilogy on Blu-ray. The IMAX footage looks spectacular and amazing in its scope and depth. The city-wide vistas possess an incredible sense of pop for a 2-D presentation and clearly deserve Tier 0 consideration on their own. Absolutely perfect black levels allow Batman to jump in and out of the shadows.
Not all is well in Gotham, however. Practically the entire film has been low-pass filtered, removing a layer of high-frequency detail and content while leaving behind a relatively constant level of ringing to the picture. If it weren't for the incredible cinematography on display and the amount of money behind the film's production, the transfer might be labeled a disaster. Some scenes are affected more than others, but it's tough picking out a truly extraordinary close-up. Yes, the image is razor-sharp and clarity is never less than excellent.
The AVC video encode is adequate for a movie that runs nearly three hours, but the obvious filtering applied in post-production was totally unnecessary. The Dark Knight Rises simply lacks the absolute fine-detail necessary for a disc to be ranked in Tier 0 and it was definitely there in the film's principal photography before digital processing got to it. There is also an unhealthy orange glow to flesh-tones that becomes noticeable in a few of the warmer scenes.
If the IMAX footage and a few of the best moments are taken out of play, The Dark Knight Rises probably merits a Tier 1.5 ranking. In totality for the entire movie, giving a bit of extra credit for the IMAX footage, I will recommend Tier 1.25.

I knew something was going on with the 2.40:1 scenes, just didn't care to admit... Still love my Blu-ray, tho!

Know what? It just dawned on me maybe that's why I really like Nolan's style: it all makes for more impressive IMAX shots!!! (Of course, once I make the jump to front projection, my giant screen will most definitely be 16:9, but that's just me.) cool.gif
Edited by Taranteacher - 12/6/12 at 6:43am
Reply
Reply
post #275 of 412
12/6/12 at 11:36am
Just watched the BD, and I find myself in agreement with those who say that the IMAX thing really is overdone with this movie. The great thing about other alternate aspect movies is that they use it sparingly for big set pieces, so even on a mere 55" display the effect still carries a sense of awe and scale because it's not overused. But when a movie flipflops back and forth so many times like TDKR does, even for regular dialogue scenes, I get so inured that it doesn't have the same impact any more. Does a shot of a grotty Samsung LCD TV on a wall really need 15/70 to show it off in its full glory?

The sound mix is killer, though. So...much....bass.....
Reply
Reply
post #276 of 412
12/6/12 at 2:46pm
I seriously doubt this is the theatrical mix
Reply
Reply
post #277 of 412
12/6/12 at 3:18pm
I seriously believe it is. It sounds just as awful and bass-lacking as it did in IMAX and regular cinema.

Very disappointing mix and Bane is low on the list of negatives.
Reply
Reply
post #278 of 412
12/6/12 at 3:27pm
At least the IMAX showing I attended the sound was loud with bloated bass, very fatiguing experience. Bane was usually intelligible.
Did not enjoy the film enough to pick it just yet. Some comments seem to indicate that the mix is bloated whereas others feel the opposite. Wonder which it is, clean and dynamic or just loud compressed dynamics and bloated bass.

Best Regards
KvE
Reply
Reply
post #279 of 412
12/6/12 at 3:30pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Scott Simonian View Post

I seriously believe it is. It sounds just as awful and bass-lacking as it did in IMAX and regular cinema.
Very disappointing mix and Bane is low on the list of negatives.

They are all bad mixes, but they are not the same one
Reply
Reply
post #280 of 412
12/6/12 at 3:30pm
It's loud and compressed. The first third of the movie is super loud during the action sequences. Painfully loud. All the gunshots sound clipped and flat but rock concert loud. The bass almost never extends below 30hz through out the whole movie. Most people WOULD be pleased. rolleyes.gif

By far the worst mix of the three Batman movies.
Quote:
Originally Posted by dvdmike007 View Post

They are all bad mixes, but they are not the same one

What makes you believe that this one is different?
Reply
Reply
post #281 of 412
12/6/12 at 3:34pm
The steering is different, I think its a near field mix
Reply
Reply
post #282 of 412
12/6/12 at 3:55pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by dvdmike007 View Post

The steering is different, I think its a near field mix

You got that right. There is almost no steering at all. Lol!

Such a lifeless mix. frown.gif

Yet it gets a 100 out of 100 for audio on the AVS review. Wow! Sad, sad, sad.


However, I don't think nearfield mixes affect the 'steering' of sound at all unless it's some kind of upmix to 6/7.1 or whatever. Usually the nearfield mixes have some EQ and dynamic range changes. Not positioning.

Don't you watch everything your computer anyway? tongue.gif
Reply
Reply
post #283 of 412
12/6/12 at 4:42pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Scott Simonian View Post

You got that right. There is almost no steering at all. Lol!
Such a lifeless mix. frown.gif
Yet it gets a 100 out of 100 for audio on the AVS review. Wow! Sad, sad, sad.
However, I don't think nearfield mixes affect the 'steering' of sound at all unless it's some kind of upmix to 6/7.1 or whatever. Usually the nearfield mixes have some EQ and dynamic range changes. Not positioning.
Don't you watch everything your computer anyway? tongue.gif
|

I said Different, not non existent. Has reading posts stopped of late on here?

Also reviews are subjective, many, many people here and others places have said the mix is really bad. Watch Dark Knight, then watch Bourne Legacy back to back as I did and then tell me Batman has a better mix

Also never watch an entire movie on my PC, twin LCD's and full chain THX 7.2 does not beat a 50" Plasma
Reply
Reply
post #284 of 412
12/6/12 at 4:52pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by dvdmike007 View Post

|
I said Different, not non existent. Has reading posts stopped of late on here?
Also reviews are subjective, many, many people here and others places have said the mix is really bad. Watch Dark Knight, then watch Bourne Legacy back to back as I did and then tell me Batman has a better mix
Also never watch an entire movie on my PC, twin LCD's and full chain THX 7.2 does not beat a 50" Plasma

Oh nice, I've never seen your setup before but I've seen your computer. tongue.gif

ANd hey! I read your posts, bro. I was saying there is no steering. It's a very bland boring mix.
Reply
Reply
post #285 of 412
12/6/12 at 4:57pm
Ah ok, with that we agree totally my bad, its loud and people are mistaking that for a good mix.
People who say its amazing really need to rent or buy Bourne asap!
Reply
Reply
post #286 of 412
12/6/12 at 5:30pm
Whoever mixed/master this went really heavy on the compressing/limiting tools. Everything is just loud and in your face. While not as bad as the mix on Super 8 (distortion at the source level), The Dark Knight and even Batman Begins had a better mix. Although for the record I didn't think the audio on Batman Begins was anything special. I'm also not saying it's unlistenable, I just expected more dynamics.
Reply
Reply
post #287 of 412
12/6/12 at 5:31pm
The IMAX preview was better, they bumped Bane in the final mix at the expense of everything else
Reply
Reply
post #288 of 412
12/6/12 at 5:47pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Phantom Stranger View Post

Comments for the Picture Quality Tiers that might hold interest here...
The Dark Knight Rises
recommendation: Tier 1.25/1.5*
A somewhat disappointing release by Warner Bros. for video quality considering expectations, but that is nothing new for Nolan's Batman trilogy on Blu-ray. The IMAX footage looks spectacular and amazing in its scope and depth. The city-wide vistas possess an incredible sense of pop for a 2-D presentation and clearly deserve Tier 0 consideration on their own. Absolutely perfect black levels allow Batman to jump in and out of the shadows.
Not all is well in Gotham, however. Practically the entire film has been low-pass filtered, removing a layer of high-frequency detail and content while leaving behind a relatively constant level of ringing to the picture. If it weren't for the incredible cinematography on display and the amount of money behind the film's production, the transfer might be labeled a disaster. Some scenes are affected more than others, but it's tough picking out a truly extraordinary close-up. Yes, the image is razor-sharp and clarity is never less than excellent.
The AVC video encode is adequate for a movie that runs nearly three hours, but the obvious filtering applied in post-production was totally unnecessary. The Dark Knight Rises simply lacks the absolute fine-detail necessary for a disc to be ranked in Tier 0 and it was definitely there in the film's principal photography before digital processing got to it. There is also an unhealthy orange glow to flesh-tones that becomes noticeable in a few of the warmer scenes.
If the IMAX footage and a few of the best moments are taken out of play, The Dark Knight Rises probably merits a Tier 1.5 ranking. In totality for the entire movie, giving a bit of extra credit for the IMAX footage, I will recommend Tier 1.25.

I thought the 35mm scenes were clearly better than TDK's. I didn't see anything that bothered me too much. Looked exactly as i saw it in IMAX. To me it had a nice film look to it. The IMAX scene were just out of this world. The best PQ on BD to date.

I thought the audo was reference too.
Reply
Reply
post #289 of 412
12/6/12 at 11:05pm
Just got done and overall enjoyed it. The variable aspect however was out of control! Very distracting on my CIH screen and I really wish I had enough masking to deal with this BS OR if they would give us the constant aspect option..... rolleyes.gif Otherwise no complaints. Great audio track I thought and overall my favorite of the three from that perspective. Not the deepest LFE, but tons of it and it hit hard.....my favorite of the three overall as far as LFE as well.

Even in light of the horrible variable aspect I am glad I bought it and will get multiple viewings out of it.
Reply
Reply
post #290 of 412
12/7/12 at 9:40am
Quote:
Originally Posted by dvdmike007 View Post

The IMAX preview was better, they bumped Bane in the final mix at the expense of everything else

I never heard/saw the preview but Bane's voice was the least of my worries wrt the audio mix. Sequences without him or without him talking were affected. The sound effects and music were constantly trying to fight each other to be on the top of the mix and it sounded awful.

This movies sound mix is the epitime of 'Loudness Wars' in cinema. No wonder everyone thinks it sounds great. rolleyes.gif
Reply
Reply
post #291 of 412
12/7/12 at 10:09am
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dZW5qyc2g6U

The bane changes, and I agree the entire mix is a mess
Edited by dvdmike007 - 12/8/12 at 5:08am
Reply
Reply
post #292 of 412
12/7/12 at 1:37pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Scott Simonian View Post

However, I don't think nearfield mixes affect the 'steering' of sound at all unless it's some kind of upmix to 6/7.1 or whatever. Usually the nearfield mixes have some EQ and dynamic range changes. Not positioning.

You are correct. A near-field mix should not affect steering.

Almost all major studio new releases receive near-field mixes for DVD and Blu-ray. That's standard procedure today.

Dark Knight Rises sounded terrible in the theater I saw it in. It's just a badly-mixed movie.
Reply
Reply
post #293 of 412
12/7/12 at 1:38pm
Near field was the wrong term, but is not the same awful mix. Is an all new awful mix
Reply
Reply
post #294 of 412
12/7/12 at 2:33pm
The mix is very sedate in terms of steerage across the channels, and yeah, it does come across as being very loud for the sake of it. But I still loved it because I could feel the bass in my bones. If that makes me a Bad Person, so be it.
Reply
Reply
post #295 of 412
12/7/12 at 4:01pm
I didn't notice anything wrong with the track when I watched the Vudu version, other than either effects being too loud or dialog too low (an issue I don't usually have). I'll admit I was a bit alcohol enhanced, though.
Reply
Reply
post #296 of 412
12/7/12 at 11:01pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by 42041 View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by celboy View Post

Can I ask where you are getting your info from?
I would think all the digital video masters come from the master digital files--in this case the elements used for the 4K DCP that was shown in theaters.
Tom
NYC
There are several articles about it in industry journals such as American Cinematographer magazine.
Film-outs of scope extractions from an 8K scan of the 65mm material were integrated into the cut 35mm negative. The 35mm material was scanned at 6K from the color-timed IP made from that cut negative, which would be the basis for the 4K cinema master and the IMAX blowup. (The color-timed IP would be printed photochemically for the 35mm prints, and the 65mm material was printed photochemically on the IMAX prints) I'm not sure if the 65mm material in the constant-AR DCP comes from the 35mm IP or the 8K scans, but those screenshots certainly suggest the former.
Thank you for the information, I hadn't researched the chain of production on TDKR. The use of a 35mm IP does help to explain some of the minor loss in absolute detail I expected to see from the Blu-ray, though it wouldn't surprise me if a light application of filtering were still used. The tools have gotten much more sophisticated and the remnants they leave behind now are much harder to detect on first glance.
Reply
Reply
post #297 of 412
12/8/12 at 4:20am
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Phantom Stranger View Post

though it wouldn't surprise me if a light application of filtering were still used.

Maybe, but TDKR still looks much better than TDK for the non-IMAX segments imo. Regarding the audio, I don't find it as problematic as some members suggested. And Bane....no difference from the theatrical presentation as far as I can remember. I did understand him back then, and I still undersood him yesterday when I watched it. His voice is indeed too loud compared to the others, but knowing that the character's voice is special to begin with, I don't find it that distracting. I tend to agree with Scott about effects/music and dialogue fighting each other *at times*, yet, I wouldn't call this mix awful. Surrounds get really busy in this film, as well as an earth-shattering LFE in some scenes. Yes it's a loud mix, but it's also enveloping soundscape that I enjoyed listening to.
Reply
Reply
post #298 of 412
12/8/12 at 5:09am
Quote:
Originally Posted by Morpheo View Post

Maybe, but TDKR still looks much better than TDK for the non-IMAX segments imo. Regarding the audio, I don't find it as problematic as some members suggested. And Bane....no difference from the theatrical presentation as far as I can remember. I did understand him back then, and I still undersood him yesterday when I watched it. His voice is indeed too loud compared to the others, but knowing that the character's voice is special to begin with, I don't find it that distracting. I tend to agree with Scott about effects/music and dialogue fighting each other *at times*, yet, I wouldn't call this mix awful. Surrounds get really busy in this film, as well as an earth-shattering LFE in some scenes. Yes it's a loud mix, but it's also enveloping soundscape that I enjoyed listening to.
They did change him at least once https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dZW5qyc2g6U
Reply
Reply
post #299 of 412
12/8/12 at 5:24am
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by dvdmike007 View Post

They did change him at least once https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dZW5qyc2g6U

Yes I know that but by "theatrical presentation" I didn't mean "IMAX preview", I was talking about the actual movie release. I do remember the imax preview being almost undecipherable...
Reply
Reply
post #300 of 412
12/8/12 at 5:37am
But at the point Nolan said he would not be changing the voice under any circumstances, so if he flipped once....

I may have to download a cam version and compare
Reply
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Blu-ray Software

AVS Top Picks

AVS › AVS Forum › Blu-ray & HD DVD › Blu-ray Software › The Dark Knight Rises