or Connect
AVS › AVS Forum › Blu-ray & HD DVD › Blu-ray Software › Blue Underground vs Arrow
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Blue Underground vs Arrow

post #1 of 20
Thread Starter 
This once again confirms my belief that Arrow brightened transfers a lot and is continuing to do so:
http://www.dvdbeaver.com/film/dvdcompare3/zombie.htm

And if someone thinks this is beaver's doing, BU:
http://images3.static-bluray.com/reviews/5035_17_1080p.jpg
Arrow:
http://images3.static-bluray.com/reviews/7148_19_1080p.jpg
post #2 of 20
The Arrow release is a completely different scan/restoration (A first between BU/Arrow, I believe). Such differences are to be expected. From the shots I've seen, the Arrow looks to be an improvement.
post #3 of 20
Is your thread about the differences as a whole between the two companies' releases of that particular title?
post #4 of 20
Quote:
Originally Posted by wuther View Post

This once again confirms my belief that Arrow brightened transfers a lot and is continuing to do so...

A few days ago, I rewatched the Arrow Blu-ray of PHENOMENA. I remember thinking that it was a decent picture but it seemed unusually bright...almost too "cheerful" looking for a horror film.
post #5 of 20
Arrow is abysmal. They have released one laughably bad transfer after another. Many of the Argento films scanned at that Italian facility were scanned on a unit that was out of calibration. Noise was introduced into each transfer. Just look at TENEBRAE. The French release is so infinitely superior in every way, it's clear the Arrow release is so bad it should be recalled.
post #6 of 20
Quote:
Originally Posted by Matt_Stevens View Post

Arrow is abysmal. They have released one laughably bad transfer after another. Many of the Argento films scanned at that Italian facility were scanned on a unit that was out of calibration. Noise was introduced into each transfer. Just look at TENEBRAE. The French release is so infinitely superior in every way, it's clear the Arrow release is so bad it should be recalled.

The Funhouse? Maniac Cop? A Bay of Blood? Exterminator? Vamp? Demons? Forbidden Zone? Red Scorpion? Spirits of the Dead? Obsession? Rififi? The Tin Drum? Bicycle Thieves? Cinema Paradiso? Ashes and Diamonds? Miracle in Milan? Ohh, just abysmal! rolleyes.gif
post #7 of 20
Quote:
Originally Posted by Alkaline View Post

The Arrow release is a completely different scan/restoration (A first between BU/Arrow, I believe). Such differences are to be expected. From the shots I've seen, the Arrow looks to be an improvement.
The Arrow transfer appears to capture much more of the actual detail and resolution inherent to the film elements, with a superior application of compression to boot. The level of contrast on the BU's transfer is probably closer to the intended look, but Arrow's transfer would be almost perfect if they had slightly toned down the brightness. Arrow has released a number of garbage BDs in the past in terms of video quality, but this is not one of them. I'm not sure the marginal uptick in filmic quality is worth it for current owners of the BU Blu-ray.
post #8 of 20
Quote:
Originally Posted by Alkaline View Post

The Funhouse? Maniac Cop? A Bay of Blood? Exterminator? Vamp? Demons? Forbidden Zone? Red Scorpion? Spirits of the Dead? Obsession? Rififi? The Tin Drum? Bicycle Thieves? Cinema Paradiso? Ashes and Diamonds? Miracle in Milan? Ohh, just abysmal! rolleyes.gif
Did I or did I not refer to the Argento films? Those releases are a sham.
post #9 of 20
Quote:
Originally Posted by Matt_Stevens View Post

Did I or did I not refer to the Argento films? Those releases are a sham.

You said "Arrow is abysmal", which is a pretty blanket statement. Some of their early releases had pretty significant issues - I agree on those you mentioned - but they've largely changed their ways. I'd say the good to excellent easily outweighs the bad at this point. From what I've seen so far, their Zombi looks to be another winner.
post #10 of 20
Quote:
Originally Posted by Phantom Stranger View Post

The Arrow transfer appears to capture much more of the actual detail and resolution inherent to the film elements, with a superior application of compression to boot. The level of contrast on the BU's transfer is probably closer to the intended look, but Arrow's transfer would be almost perfect if they had slightly toned down the brightness. Arrow has released a number of garbage BDs in the past in terms of video quality, but this is not one of them. I'm not sure the marginal uptick in filmic quality is worth it for current owners of the BU Blu-ray.

Agreed. Detail aside, I do find the BU contrast/color more appealing in a few shots I've seen. Still, I never got around to the BU release and this will likely be the one that gets my money everything considered.
post #11 of 20
Thread Starter 
Of course this is not the first time Arrow has done this:
http://caps-a-holic.com/hd_vergleiche/index.php?vergleich=city_of_the_living_dead

Sometimes Arrow is out brightened by another distributor, as appears to be the case with Miramax's on Cinema Paradiso.
I think there was a Universal title Arrow managed to put out that was probably better, does not say much for Universal.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Alkaline View Post

The Arrow release is a completely different scan/restoration (A first between BU/Arrow, I believe). Such differences are to be expected. From the shots I've seen, the Arrow looks to be an improvement.

Got something tangible to base that claim on? Nothing in the images indicates one is a 'new' scan. I am pretty damn sure BU & Arrow are licensing from the same source on the many BD titles both released.
Edited by wuther - 11/27/12 at 6:16pm
post #12 of 20
Quote:
Originally Posted by wuther View Post

Got something tangible to base that claim on? Nothing in the images indicates one is a 'new' scan. I am pretty damn sure BU & Arrow are licensing from the same source on the many BD titles both released.
The BU version is loaded with DNR/remnants of scanner noise and the Arrow transfer isn't?
post #13 of 20
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by 42041 View Post

The BU version is loaded with DNR/remnants of scanner noise and the Arrow transfer isn't?

lol, 'scanner noise' meaning film grain. Yes, the Arrow transfer in most images have less film grain most of it probably washed away by the brightening. I grant you most of those adverse to film grain will probably like the 'cleaner' Arrow version better.
post #14 of 20
Quote:
Originally Posted by wuther View Post

Of course this is not the first time Arrow has done this:
http://caps-a-holic.com/hd_vergleiche/index.php?vergleich=city_of_the_living_dead
Sometimes Arrow is out brightened by another distributor, as appears to be the case with Miramax's on Cinema Paradiso.
I think there was a Universal title Arrow managed to put out that was probably better, does not say much for Universal.
Got something tangible to base that claim on? Nothing in the images indicates one is a 'new' scan. I am pretty damn sure BU & Arrow are licensing from the same source on the many BD titles both released.

Um. I'm basing that on the fact Arrow have explicitly stated this release comes from an all new scan conducted in London (harness the power of the internets!), along with, as 42041 said, that it appears (or should) to come from a completely different scan to anyone with eyeballs. Also, did you miss the part where I stated this to be a first TMK? I'm well-aware Arrow/BU have utilized the same masters in the past. This isn't those.
Quote:
Originally Posted by wuther View Post

lol, 'scanner noise' meaning film grain. Yes, the Arrow transfer in most images have less film grain most of it probably washed away by the brightening. I grant you most of those adverse to film grain will probably like the 'cleaner' Arrow version better.

Nah. Scanner noise, meaning, scanner noise. It's pretty common knowledge BU DNR'd their release, most likely to combat that noise in response to the blowback from their prior releases with the same issue. It would be uncharacteristic of BU to blast natural, wholesome grain with DNR, so one can reasonably assume that to be the reason. The Arrow exhibits more grain in virtually every comparison grab I've seen thus far. New scan, with proper grain in lieu of noise, makes sense.
Edited by Alkaline - 11/27/12 at 7:09pm
post #15 of 20
Quote:
Originally Posted by wuther View Post

lol, 'scanner noise' meaning film grain. Yes, the Arrow transfer in most images have less film grain most of it probably washed away by the brightening.
No, scanner noise meaning scanner noise. If you think that garbage on the BU discs of Italian films is grain... well, it's nice to get a reminder why someone's on your ignore list.
post #16 of 20
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Alkaline View Post

Um. I'm basing that on the fact Arrow have explicitly stated this release comes from an all new scan

That's it?? lol, Means no more to me then when Universal often claims a HD-DVD master is a new made for BD scan or when a distributor claims a director several years dead approved the BD. Yes I agree, if you dislike film grain you will like Arrow BDs.
post #17 of 20
Quote:
Originally Posted by wuther View Post

That's it?? lol, Means no more to me then when Universal often claims a HD-DVD master is a new made for BD scan or when a distributor claims a director several years dead approved the BD. Yes I agree, if you dislike film grain you will like Arrow BDs.

Well that and the thing about them looking sufficiently different so as to render the a claim of a new scan completely credible. Those two factors working together in tandem. Re: grain...easy, Johnny Presumptive. I love the stuff. Ya know, grain. Not abhorrent digital noise introduced by aging/subpar equipment at the telecine stage.
post #18 of 20
Quote:
Originally Posted by Alkaline View Post

You said "Arrow is abysmal", which is a pretty blanket statement. Some of their early releases had pretty significant issues - I agree on those you mentioned - but they've largely changed their ways. I'd say the good to excellent easily outweighs the bad at this point. From what I've seen so far, their Zombi looks to be another winner.
I gave up on them. They were so awful, so pathetic, it wasn't worth my time to continue to spend (waste) money on them. And some of the releases you mention are not so hot to my eyes.

Should they be releasing great BD's now, awesome. good for them. But nearly ever release of theirs I have come across has been abysmal.

Anyway, Phenomena is a really mixed bag. No release is perfect. They are all messed up in numerous ways. Blu-Ray, DVD and Laserdisc.
post #19 of 20
For the record, here's what the Arrow release says about the transfer:
Quote:
Zombie Flesh Eaters has been exclusively by Arrow [sic] for this release, with all work personally overseen by Restoration Supervisor James White at Deluxe Soho, London.

The film was sourced from the original Techniscope 2-perf 35mm negative made available by Variety Communications, Italy. The picture was scanned at 2K resolution and fully graded on a Nicoda Film Master at Deluxe Soho, London. Restoration work was completed in 1080psf HD resolution using a combination of software tools and techniques. Thousands of instances of dirt, scratches and debris were carefully removed frame by frame. Damaged or missing frames were repaired, and density and stability issues were significantly improved. Throughout the process, care was taken to ensure that the film's original details and grain structure remained unaffected by digital processing. Although every effort has been made to present Zombie Flesh Eaters at the highest quality possible, some minor picture issues remain, in keeping with the condition of the original materials.

Both the original English and Italian mono soundtracks were restored, with audio issues such as bumps, clicks or dropouts removed or repaired. Audio sync to picture remains noticeably loose at times, in keeping with the nature of the film's production.

Lastly, working from the original 2-perf negative has allowed for access to the entire exposed image area of the film, so we have chosen to retain as much of the original frame are possible for this restoration.

Restoration supervisor: James White.
Audio mastering: Gary Sanders/Deluxe 142.
post #20 of 20
The shame is that so many films did not receive such treatment, or they do and then it is all for nothing because some dunderhead decides to slather DNR and EE onto the master and bake them in.
Quote:
Zombie Flesh Eaters has been exclusively by Arrow [sic] for this release, with all work personally overseen by Restoration Supervisor James White at Deluxe Soho, London.

The film was sourced from the original Techniscope 2-perf 35mm negative made available by Variety Communications, Italy. The picture was scanned at 2K resolution and fully graded on a Nicoda Film Master at Deluxe Soho, London. Restoration work was completed in 1080psf HD resolution using a combination of software tools and techniques. Thousands of instances of dirt, scratches and debris were carefully removed frame by frame. Damaged or missing frames were repaired, and density and stability issues were significantly improved. Throughout the process, care was taken to ensure that the film's original details and grain structure remained unaffected by digital processing. Although every effort has been made to present Zombie Flesh Eaters at the highest quality possible, some minor picture issues remain, in keeping with the condition of the original materials.

Both the original English and Italian mono soundtracks were restored, with audio issues such as bumps, clicks or dropouts removed or repaired. Audio sync to picture remains noticeably loose at times, in keeping with the nature of the film's production.

Lastly, working from the original 2-perf negative has allowed for access to the entire exposed image area of the film, so we have chosen to retain as much of the original frame are possible for this restoration.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Blu-ray Software
AVS › AVS Forum › Blu-ray & HD DVD › Blu-ray Software › Blue Underground vs Arrow