The New PQ Tier thread for Blu-Ray - Discussion - Page 672

Welcome to AVS and especially to the PQ Thread!

Thanks for the review and we'll be looking for more reviews from you.

PS I use the Ideal-Lume bias light as well, though not always.

The Terminator (Remastered)

Outstanding detail and fantastically sharp source from what is certainly a recent master. Damage has been removed and grain is resolved. Black levels come and go. What's new? Orange and teal! Hooray! While the film has always shifted blue, this is certainly a push towards lighter tones and warmer flesh tones.

Tier 2.75*

The Terminator (Remastered)

Apart from a few weaker, soft shots (most of them are FX ones, from the flashbacks/flashforwards), this is fantastically looking, sharp and highly detailed image, with consistent grain. There are shots when I felt like I was watching modern movie, not low budget production from 1984.

Maybe I'm the only one, but I don't care - I think the new color timing looks great and fits the film.

Tier 2.25*

Though I totally agree with the softness causing the PQ ranking to decrease, I heartfully disagree on the orange / teal discussion. Nobody is going to say that, for instance, Tron Legacy is not wonderful on BD because the characters skin levels looks unnatural. It also means that extremely good BDs of very stylised on colors movies might get lower grades just because of this. Let's imagine that a movie as Ashes of Time or Fallen Angels get one day an extremely sharp and beautiful master. Will you then lower the grade just due to this stylisation ? It also means that potentially lower quality BDs might get better grades than Skyfall, due to their more natural photography.

Don't get me wrong : I totally understand your point and am sure it has been discussed already in the past. I just find it to bias the ranking in the end, since finding orange / teal photography distracting is totally subjective, on the contrary of soft photography where the resulting softness is totally objective. I thus agree with Johnny Vertigo and jrnewquist about judging fleshtones this way, especially since I'm quite sure that the casino scene does not render Craig as a pumpkin.

Also, since I'm now reviewing the BDs I watch for French forums, I know how complicated it can get to have the same scale for so many different looks. However, except if, as you suggest, the photography is capping the level of detail, I strongly believe it should not be taken into account in the ranking.

However, since you also found occurences of softness and lack of detail, your tier placement makes more sense to me.


I should get Skyfall in about a week and will pay extra attention to the Casino scene, anyway.

I did.

^^^^^^

I believe I've said enough on this subject of color-timing. Good for you if it doesn't bother you and I can honestly say some orange/teal hues aren't too bad in that they don't wreak havoc on flesh tones or obscure details. But when they do, they should, as GRG stated emphatically, be docked.

Am I guessing right in thinking you liked the orange hues in CSI: Miami?

I've never watched CSI Miami. I understand your point but can't answer about any loss of details due to this.

However, this photography is a choice which can be seen as problematic. But again, it is part of a style which should only be ranked as part of the aesthetic grade, not the technical, except if this affect the details and sharpness of the BD. That's also why it is not stated in the Tier 0 rules, and that exemples which has a strong photography choice but are in Tier 0 have been given. Otherwise, lots of Tier 0 placements would fall on Tier 1, like Avatar, Man On Fire, Live Free or Die Hard, Hot Fuzz, Watchmen, A Woman, A Gun and A Noodle Shop, Transformers 2 and 3 or Crank 2.

Again, I agree that photography choices impact the HD rendering, because it can impact many visual effects. However, I don't agree with a color palette, if not hampering details or contrast etc, being taken in account into the technical grade.

However, it seems to hamper details and it has been explained that the Casino scene has a softness which is a reason enough to place the disc into a lower Tier, and this is something I more understand.

Your viewpoint definitely has some validity. One's preference for a specific color-timing is more subjective than most of the other criteria we use to determine the rankings. Personally, I believe accurate color rendition to be an essential trait of the best HD material. It's particularly relevant for subject matter that purports to be set in the real world, which is why I tend to soften my personal view for animated or fantasy/sci-fi material such as Avatar. As much as Hollywood has led us to believe otherwise, we simply have too many real-world references for human flesh-tones built into our genetic codes. The only orange-tinted people I have ever seen in my life are the people that receive those horrible spray-on tans. It's not solely confined to that one color, the current rage for modern horror tales and thrillers is a predominance of blue tint. The Silence Of The Lambs would look much different today if it went into production now.

This is driven by several different concerns, only some of which have to do with true cinematography. Some of it is wrapped in marketing and the ability for Hollywood to distinguish their movies from ordinary television fare for audiences. The situation is not that far removed from when Hollywood decided they needed to go to widescreen presentations in the 1950s, to differentiate their movies from television.

Again, I totally understand Djoberg's point when he explains that he thinks that this type of photography limits the HD-quality of a movie. I aslo understand your point in that it's can be pretty disturbing to see a movie set in a realistic tone having flesh tones so unreal. However, I think that, as long as the BD is true to the cinematography, given that this cinematography doesn't generate limiting counter-effects (which, in Skyfall's case, might be generated), it should not be an issue of "thinking" but an issue of "seeing".

Also, it's that I don't recall Skyfall being orange to the point described ahead, except for the climax, which might explain my perplexity around this discussion.

I don't want to sound writting "you don't know what you're talking about" or "this is not how you rank a BD, damnit !!" I'm just perplex about how this can be incorporated into the final placement in an objective way.

No worries, the clash of ideas is healthy for the thread and the tiers themselves. I certainly don't take any of the vigorous discussion personally and it can only help to illuminate the finer points of understanding picture quality. While I don't speak for Denny (djoberg), I imagine he feels the same way. Your score for Skyfall and the ensuing discussion will certainly be a part of the calculus when I make my initial decision on its placement.

I watched Skyfall again tonight (3rd time overall, 2nd time on my Projector)

Ohhhhh it is soooooo good. Just such a nice film to watch. The ariel night shots are easily, EASILY the best I have seen. I could see a person crossing the road in one of the latter London ones.....there is just so much detail to soak up.

I've read the comments about the Casino scene being a weak point and my thoughts are this: it is the least 'eye candy' part of the film for sure and I am glad it's relatively brief. We have a saying in the UK - 'you can't polish a turd' - sometimes a scene, by virtue of its setting, mood, theme, just won't appeal in the eye candy sense no matter who's at the helm. But for me, because the rest of the film is so stellar, it retains my Tier 0 placement as I'm left feeling like for 90% of the film I've had a mesmerising, delicious, HD experience.

I do indeed "feel the same way." I'd like to think I have a fairly thick layer of skin () and thus I'm not taking any of this personally.

I've seen Skyfall twice and we'll be watching it again tonight with one of our daughters and her husband who are visiting us. I just love this movie, and the exceptional PQ is just the "frosting on the cake."

There is one other scene (in addition to the casino scene) that had quite the orange hue. I'm referring to the scene where he's having a drinking contest in a bar on the beach. That too had a definite softness and affected the fleshtones. If not for those two scenes, I'd be joining you rusky_g with your Tier Blu recommendation.

It is a fantastic film Denny and I was conscious not to let that fact influence my rating. Although it is a treat to have the rare combo of Good Movie + Great PQ.

It's also got a repeat view factor and is selling very well over here. I'd agree on the drink scene - for me it had a Mexcian feel to it, if that makes sense.

Our company LOVED the movie, including the PQ and the amazing audio track. This most definitely has the "repeat view factor."

I agree with you wholeheartedly regarding the nighttime aerial shots of Shanghai and Macau; I don't think I've seen anything better than these, though there are shots in The Dark Knight that come close.

The Sessions

recommendation: Tier 0* (bottom 1/4)

Another product of the Red One camera, The Sessions looks clean as a whistle with laser-like focus. Helen Hunt lost her expected Oscar last night for this role, after winning the Golden Globe for it. It does appear they digitally smoothed out her face in a couple of scenes. It only sticks out because the rest of the movie has extraordinary levels of high-frequency content in close-ups.

Speaking of TDK, and to give an exemple of my set of mind on the photography, I think that TDKR and its orange + what I saw as crushed black 35mm scenes are problematic on BD.

I have now watched Skyfall twice as well and I am ready to weigh in. The casino scene really does not play a part in my evaluation. Instead, what makes me go lower than Denny and others is the fact that there were far too many scenes where the detail was just a bit off. Virtually all the interior scenes fall in this category. All the interior scenes at both MI6 locations, for example. The first scene between Bardem and Dench is a good example. The really outstanding close-ups were just too rare. The shots where Craig and Dench were in a car together in daylight (the first car, not the second one) were among the few really excellent ones. An example of a disappointing exterior shot was the scene near the end where Craig is on a rooftop overlooking London. So this is clearly not in or near tier zero for me.

Recommendation: Tier 1.5*

Thanks for the review Patrick!

I can't say that I agree with your assessments regarding the detail being off, but the next time I view it I'll be sure to take a closer look at the scene with Bardem and Dench and the scene at the end with Craig on the roof. I am surprised you weren't put off by the orange push in the casino scene, but as I said to others we obviously have different degrees of sensitivity when it comes to color-timing or lighting with orange hues.
Edited by djoberg - 2/26/13 at 9:41am

Wreck-it Ralph

Gorgeous, as expected. Even the interiors of a chocolate underground where light is limited turns out pretty incredible. Stunning sharpness and outstanding texture on shirts, environments, and candy is everywhere. Brilliant color and plenty of different palettes to choose from. Depth is perfect.

Tier 0.25*

So how does it compare to the two best animated CGI movies at the top, Madagascar 3 and Toy Story 3? Is Ralph a clear step below those discs? I only ask because the placements at the very top are very tricky for me to adjudicate with limited information and I think those are the most critical spots in the tiers for its fans.


Death Note (Disc 1 of the Death Note Collection)

recommendation: Tier 1.5*

Viz Pictures brought over the live-action adaptation of the Japanese manga series. Giving the first film in the franchise its own BD-50, the digitally-shot movie has been given an extreme high-bitrate AVC video encode that highlights flawless detail and razor-sharp clarity. It possesses a clean image that never quite pops off the screen, as the flat depth and slightly dull black levels have that video sheen common to early digital cinematography. The pristine video quality wavers in sharpness when the only featured VFX element from the movie is on screen, a character completely rendered in CGI.

I was kinda hoping for others to step in before making a definitive call. It looks fantastic, but no Madagascar or Toy Story. Just a hair below them.

Hi guys, it's been a while, very busy with kids and work and not getting BDs from Netflix any more. But I did get three new titles from Amazon today, and I've watched two of them.


Samsara

I don't know if it is possible to get more "eye candy" than this. Fine detail is phenomenal. Color is lush but not cartoonish. Blacks are inky, whites are pure. Some scenes just blow the mind both technically and aesthetically - the mandala scene in which buddhist monks drop colored sand onto an intricate design is just mesmerizing, and really shows off both fine detail and brilliant color. Overall, the effect is like 3D, inasmuch as whatever lies at the focal point of the shot is in perfect clarity, while the backdrop shows depth of field focus effects while maintaining perfect color. There are no aberrations, DNR, or undue noise that I can detect. It is basically flawless.

So as far as rating goes, this is better than Baraka, we may as well get that out of the way first. I also think it's better than "The Tree of Life" and "The Thin Red Line," since both of those disc had a few slight aberrations caused by film stock or CGI. I haven't seen any of the discs above "Tree," so that's where I'll suggest this one goes, right above it.

Recommendation: Tier 0, above Tree of Life
Sony KDL 52EX700, 8 foot viewing distance

Lawrence of Arabia

Wow. This is the new gold standard for 65mm film transfers on Blu-Ray. "Lawrence" bests both Ben-Hur and Ten Commandments (and it easily crushes Bridge on the River Kwai and Doctor Zhivago, if you're interested in other David Lean movies) in terms of overall detail, color fidelity, and overall filmic look. Plus, I mean, yikes, what beautiful images. What is especially admirable is the tight, consistent grain, and the never-wavering black levels on display. Only some "night" shots (i.e. daytime shots with an ugly dark filter over the frame) diminish this disc as eye candy.

This looks better than many (90%+) modern BD transfers, if you ask me. Fine detail is that good. It really is a triumph of a restoration.

Recommendation: Tier 1.25
Edited by mweflen - 2/27/13 at 9:37pm

Lawrence of Arabia was the best 65mm transfer on Blu-ray until two days ago...more details will be coming soon.

The Master

recommendation: Tier 0* (upper half near Man On Fire)

From the same cinematographer that filmed Youth Without Youth, one of the more outstanding discs currently in Tier 0, comes a new 65mm production that absolutely sparkles in 1080P. The Master's stunning picture quality has possibly the best depth of field from a live-action film on Blu-ray, on par with Avatar at times. This is a must-watch disc for videophiles. Gorgeous shadow detail is matched with superb black levels and a rich color palette evocative of its period setting. The transfer is impeccable with a healthy AVC video encode and an avoidance of digital processing.

Hollywood needs to start shooting films in 65mm again. The detail and visual possibilities inherent to it are so much better than 35mm film, in theaters or on home video.

^^^^^^

Sounds good Phantom! I wanted to see this film anyway so the excellent PQ will be an added bonus.

Coincidentally enough, The Master was my third Amazon purchase and will be my very next review. Looking forward to it!

Lawrence has visible processing which stops it from being truly amazing. It still looks awesome however, especially when I remember how much talk there has been in the old days here when people were worried how it will look based on the HD broadcasts.

The Master I'd rate it somewhere very good, but not in the same league with, for example, Hugo. Fine detail is somewhat lacking, but the cinematography makes up for it. Using 65mm you get a smaller depth of field which makes the details in the focused parts pop out. Manipulation is suspected on this one.

Skyfall has great resolution, I'd say Arri Alexa is much better in that respect than the RED camera. It does have a slight digital look to it however, like some aliasing here and there. The compression on this one is a bit of a let down, especially since I was considering Sony to be the best there in that respect. First indoor scene has shimmering blocks in the background, visible banding during the intro and the mansion/explosion/night scene is not problemless. The first train/chase scene is almost perfect, which makes me wonder why the inconsistency in encoding quality. For the compression fault I couldn't rate it tier 0.

So I don't sound too negative I could rate a tier 0 for me: Braveheart. Great detail completed with no visible manipulation and perfect encoding. Great fine grain, it's just how many more movies could look, considering it's 'only' 35 mm.
Edited by someone else - 3/1/13 at 3:25am

Life of Pi screenshots looks amazing. Tier 0 maybe?