Westworld - Page 3

So you guys are saying that it is your belief that the clipping in the bright outdoor scenes in the US version is how it should look ?

Marc

It's a distinct possibility. Do you have any evidence to the contrary?

How many times do I have to say it, Art? No, I do not think the caps are accurate to ANYTHING. They are still frames, they don't resemble the film in motion. I have BOTH disks and that is what I make judgments on. There is no excessive contrast in the US Blu-ray, no filtering - do you even know what those things mean? I'm projecting nothing and no I can't accept what you're saying because you are basing what you're saying on screen caps. But I get it - you enjoyed the US Blu-ray until you saw some screen caps. Really, there's nothing else that need be said. People can draw their own conclusions.

Frame captures are images of, wait for it, still images.

A "motion picture" is simply a series of still images projected in rapid succession which creates the illusion of motion.

When taken correctly, which established contributors are consistent in accomplishing, those caps are indicative of the picture quality in 'motion'. Specifically contrast and color.

The only real visual variance between observing it in motion versus a still image would be temporal information due to the compression. CAH for instances does an excellent job of uploading frames that retain the most detail which can be taken as being representative of final result viewed in motion.

An issue that does have merit is the observation of caps in a proper context. Ideally one should make evaluations of color attributes on a calibrated display with as little extraneous light as possible; by reducing outside white reference one can make better judgements on color-grading.

The real issue is that each party is taking staunch absolute stances in fear of any concession could be misconstrued as complete invalidation of their premise.
Also those that completely argue against the veracity and usefulness of frame captures typically appeal to dogmatic deference with partially reasonable but incomplete counterarguments.

The burden of proof on whether one transfer is more correct than the other lies with each supporter. Those who are more familiar with certain vintage of films can infer an assertion of what is likely correct but cannot be taken as a definitive affirmative.

In the absence of, god forbid, a scan or capture of a high quality print of the film in question for reference it really is anyone's guess.

Best Regards
KvE
Edited by KMFDMvsEnya - 3/28/13 at 4:39pm

Not accurate to anything? Not at all to the general nature of differences between the two transfers?

When I look at the screen caps the differences I can note are:

US VERSION: Warmer color hue, less purple-toned than the French version.
US VERSION: Brighter, punchier, richer contrast - the French looking more faded.
US VERSION: Less image noise.
US VERSION: Less sharpening/artifacts.
FRENCH VERSION: has vertically stretched image vs the US version.

These are differences I see between the two transfers ONLY drawn from looking at the screen caps.
Are you saying these are not, in fact, the type of difference one will actually see in the real transfers? Is that list just totally inaccurate?

If that list DOES to some reasonable degree mirror the differences between the two transfers, then I'm sorry you are wrong. The screen caps WOULD convey real information about the differences between these two transfers. Hence your railing about inferring anything from screen caps being ludicrous would be going overboard, and they would have some accuracy in portraying the differences between the two prints.

This really is quite strange,so would you also say comparing individual film frames taken from say different prints are also not anything. Oh yea, and I am indeed basing this on high quality caps of the BDs. Yes there are differences in motion I see this frequently in older films where random grain in a still looks much more obtrusive than it does in motion but color,contrast, edge enhancement, geometry, cropping and many other parameters can be evaluated nicely from individual frames. To totally dismiss caps is preposterous.

Art

It's preposterous for you - it's not preposterous for others, and the more times that caps are posted and outcries arise based on them, only to have the disc turn out to be great (Hammer's Dracula being yet the latest example), others begin to understand the pointlessness of them. The Warners Westworld is just what it should be. You can prefer whatever you like and you will, so the discussion is pretty much done. You're never going to change my opinion of screen caps and their uselessness and the damage they do (I'll just say The Ten Commandments and leave it at that), and I'm never going to change yours.

Or any of the other vociferous defenders of these inane screen caps. To whomever that is, you will continue to post your blather about them, make pronouncements based on them, and cause damage based on those pronouncements when they're shown to be false - after which you all conveniently disappear into the good night) and you will continue to think I'm full of crap, and I will continue to think that you're full of crap. And the world goes round and horse racing continues.

To put a cap on it (pun intended), here's how I evaluate a Blu-ray. I purchase it and watch it. The End.

haineshisway,

It's not that some of us don't think you make some good points about screen caps. Most of us know to take them with a big grain o salt. It's just that your disdain for screen caps apparently causes you to go a little hyperbolic in your condemnation...just a wee bit overboard in your statements...

We all go a little mad sometimes

I do get passionate about this subject and obviously my passion knows no bounds.

ONLY if the screen caps are viewed on the exact same calibrated display that will be used to watch the movie. Which, I would venture to say, virtually no one does.

I was just wondering about this discussion of viewing screen caps and wondered about the actual taking of the pictures. I've been a professional photojournalist for 36 years and when shooting in gyms etc., the lights will pulse due to recycling and some of your frames with be green or orange or catch half the pulse, you will see a third of the frame as actually lighter than the rest. Does this work the same way with playing a blu-ray? Does freeze framing the film produce a frame that is always 100% accurate or can you catch it "in-between" so to speak. And if you are shooting the screen caps under fluorescent or tungsten lighting couldn't that add a color shift to the caps? Even using flash can add blue to the frames. Just wondering how people handle the actual shooting of the caps since there can be a variance due to the many different lighting situations.

Infrequent exceptions do not prove the rule or a trend. The vast majority of the frame captures are taken correctly and corroborated by different venues taking their own.

You mention The Ten Commandments which one person did inadvertently upload flawed caps due to driver errors, however the error was noted and resolved.

Besides, "whitesheik" if screen caps were so completely and utterly useless then why does your Blu safe haven even bother to post them. By your premise their 'editorial' quality will improve without them; it certainly would buoy their inconsistent reviewing parameters. In fact they should just take pictures of just the cases and slipcovers because it seems that is the only aspect of BR releases the majority that community is remotely concerned about and even critical of, the quality of the actual releases are but an afterthought.

Anyhow R. Harris's micro-review of Westworld mentions that the Titles seem to be overexposed, it makes one wonder what else might be amiss he might not have noticed as easily. As knowledgeable as R. Harris is, he is not infallible and is not omniscient of every film and their respective characteristics. Informed inference yes, but infallible no.

Best Regards
KvE

You don't get screencaps by photographing the display. You pull the frames directly from the decoded video stream.

Did not know that. Thanks for the info.

Naturally KMFD has left the room. Make an allegation and leave - Senator Joseph McCarthy is alive and well right here.

I went on vacation in New Orleans with my family for a week and spent zero time on the internet. I want to point out that after spending some more time with Westworld on my system last night I find that the capsahiolic screen caps look essentially identical to what I'm seeing on my system in the US version ( save for some minor color differences). So I guess you would then say that maybe they are identical on my system but not on others. What reason would I now have to believe that the US is accurate but the French is not on that site. I'm one who uses mutiple sources to help me before buying but if I really like the film I may buy it anyway despite negative reviews but in this case I have no reason to doubt the accuracy of these images at this point not withstanding your last man posting in a thread must be right mentality.

Art

The screen caps speak for themselves and quite frankly I chose to pick up the Warner release. Enough said.

I guess it wasn't quite obvious enough.


Notice how "haineshisway" manages to write this with a straight face and a complete lack of self-awareness. Cause, Lord knows, he would never present his own opinion as factual.


There is actually a person here who, for a very long time, couldn't tell the difference between DVD Beaver's old method of capturing images from blu-rays - that is taking photos of a TV - and their current method of capturing a frame from the disc (and unfortunately subjecting said frame to some kind of filtering).

Just watched this and have to say it looked mighty fine in my dedicated HT on ISF calibrated 65" Panasonic plasma. Glad I bought it since I had never purchased this on DVD (don't think they ever made an anamorphic transfer did they?) and had forgotten how entertaining it was.