or Connect
AVS › AVS Forum › Blu-ray & HD DVD › Blu-ray Software › The New PQ Tier thread for Blu-Ray - Discussion
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

The New PQ Tier thread for Blu-Ray - Discussion - Page 703

post #21061 of 21407
When these movies get ranked in the main thread is it only the ones that are linked or if I bought different editions or the 3d based titles would they still be the reference PQ I'm looking for?

For instance Rise of the guardians as 3 different editions. Reg blu-Ray, holiday edition blu-ray and 3d edition blu-ray if I bought the 3d edition and watched it in 2d would i still be watching tier 0 quality or do I only purchased the specific edition linked in the post to get that quality?
post #21062 of 21407
Quote:
Originally Posted by Inseconds99 View Post

When these movies get ranked in the main thread is it only the ones that are linked or if I bought different editions or the 3d based titles would they still be the reference PQ I'm looking for?

For instance Rise of the guardians as 3 different editions. Reg blu-Ray, holiday edition blu-ray and 3d edition blu-ray if I bought the 3d edition and watched it in 2d would i still be watching tier 0 quality or do I only purchased the specific edition linked in the post to get that quality?
It's a good question we haven't covered in a long time. I try to include the correctly linked edition for every single disc listed in the Tiers. When you click on Rise of The Guardians in the Picture Quality Tiers, the reviews brought up on CinemaSquid's website will be for the actual edition listed in the Tiers. The good news is that the studios are lazy and rarely create multiple editions with different transfers/video encodes, so most of the time the regular Blu-ray will look identical to the 2-D version found on the 3-D set. We do have a number of alternate editions listed in the Tiers of the same movie. The default assumption for the Tiers is that each disc is the standard American edition. Anything else is specifically listed (foreign country, remasters, box sets, unique, etc).

Unless there are known issues, I wouldn't expect substantial differences between different iterations of a movie. The situation does change a bit for older catalog product, which occasionally receive newly remastered editions. The recent Robocop BD blows away the old one in terms of picture quality. I don't believe it has been ranked yet. Robocop, ranked in Tier 3.75 at the moment, is the original version. When someone ranks the new disc, I'll make sure it's properly notated as the 4K remaster.

When there are qualitative differences between different editions, I try to be specific as possible when naming them. The Fifth Element is a perfect example of this phenomenon. The original BD was from a bad transfer and ranked near the bottom of the list. The remastered edition has a separate entry, noted as the remastered version.
post #21063 of 21407
Saboteur

1.33:1 black and white transfer of the 1942 Hitchcock movie. Pretty pleasing throughout, with inky blacks, nice contrast generally, and a clean print. Detail is just okay, with only a few standout scenes, and grain isn't terribly impressive (looking a tad digital in spots). It's better than DVD consistently, though, and the lack of print damage sets this above "Shadow of a Doubt" in the same set.

Tier Recommendation: 3.0
post #21064 of 21407
Prisoners

Tier Recommendation: Tier 1


Wow. I wasn't expecting the PQ I got from this movie. It's definitely not the genre I would expect to have such wonderful scenes of beautiful textures and deep blacks. Basically, this only enhanced the great suspense and the amazing acting job done by the two main leads. I'd heartily recommend this movie to anyone who liked suspense (and if you liked Zodiac with Jake Gyllenhaal, you'd like Prisoners with Jake Gyllenhaal because that is what I kept comparing it to while watching it). Also of note: bark. Wow tree bark. I could swear I didn't put trees in the basement, but, low and behold, there they were (plus, without the sappy smell). I recommend this based upon the solid movie and acting, and also based upon the great PQ featured.

EDIT (for clarification): Some softness in middle-range shots made me not place this in Tier 0, though I could see how someone might want to put it there.
post #21065 of 21407
From Beyond

recommendation: Tier 2.25*


Scream Factory licensed this movie from MGM. Apparently the film elements are in flawless condition, the film is in immaculate condition for a catalog release. The best thing about the picture quality is the pitch-perfect color correction, which has not been tampered with to heighten contrast or exaggerate colors. Some moderate DNR has been applied, the high-frequency content is less than one would expect from a film of this vintage. The DNR does not leave any notable artifacts and might actually improve the overall picture quality in this one particular case.

The transfer is entirely free of sharpening. The AVC video encode handles the clean print with ease, replicating the film source without a problem. Definitely one of the better looking BDs that Scream Factory has released in the past year, likely sourced from a high-quality telecine of the original negative.
post #21066 of 21407
Quote:
Originally Posted by Phantom Stranger View Post


It's a good question we haven't covered in a long time. I try to include the correctly linked edition for every single disc listed in the Tiers. When you click on Rise of The Guardians in the Picture Quality Tiers, the reviews brought up on CinemaSquid's website will be for the actual edition listed in the Tiers. The good news is that the studios are lazy and rarely create multiple editions with different transfers/video encodes, so most of the time the regular Blu-ray will look identical to the 2-D version found on the 3-D set. We do have a number of alternate editions listed in the Tiers of the same movie. The default assumption for the Tiers is that each disc is the standard American edition. Anything else is specifically listed (foreign country, remasters, box sets, unique, etc).

Unless there are known issues, I wouldn't expect substantial differences between different iterations of a movie. The situation does change a bit for older catalog product, which occasionally receive newly remastered editions. The recent Robocop BD blows away the old one in terms of picture quality. I don't believe it has been ranked yet. Robocop, ranked in Tier 3.75 at the moment, is the original version. When someone ranks the new disc, I'll make sure it's properly notated as the 4K remaster.

When there are qualitative differences between different editions, I try to be specific as possible when naming them. The Fifth Element is a perfect example of this phenomenon. The original BD was from a bad transfer and ranked near the bottom of the list. The remastered edition has a separate entry, noted as the remastered version.

To achieve these levels in picture excellence does one require a specific blu-ray player? I personally own a 65ZT60 and have a PS3/PS4/Xboxone that can all play blu-rays. Which of those players would give me the best PQ on my tv with those tier 0 blu-ray movies? If none of them are good, which blu-ray player would your recommend?

 

I would rather not go with OPPO (I know they're the best), because I have the ability to get any other blu-ray player near cost (Sony, Samsung, LG, Denon, Pioneer Elite, Marantz etc. etc.). I'd like to keep the cost down as I don't watch blu-rays all to often. Normally I am streaming content from Netflix, Apple TV, Vudu.

post #21067 of 21407
Quote:
Originally Posted by Inseconds99 View Post

To achieve these levels in picture excellence does one require a specific blu-ray player? I personally own a 65ZT60 and have a PS3/PS4/Xboxone to play blu-rays on. Which of those would represent those blu-rays on my tv the best? If none of them are good, which blu-ray player would your recommend? I would rather not go with OPPO (I know they're the best), because I have the ability to get any other blu-ray player near cost. (Sony, Samsung, LG, Denon, Pioneer Elite, Marantz). I'd like to keep the cost down as I don't watch blu-rays all to often. Normally I am streaming content from Netflix, Apple TV, Vudu.
No, there is little need to hunt down a specific Blu-ray player in 2014 if all you care about is watching 1080P content from BDs. For practical purposes, every Blu-ray player produces just about the same picture quality for 1080P video content. There are differences for video content at lower resolutions, due to some players having advantages in upscaling SD video.

All of the discs listed in Tier 0 look phenomenal on all brands of machines.smile.gif
post #21068 of 21407
Quote:
Originally Posted by Phantom Stranger View Post


No, there is little need to hunt down a specific Blu-ray player in 2014 if all you care about is watching 1080P content from BDs. For practical purposes, every Blu-ray player produces just about the same picture quality for 1080P video content. There are differences for video content at lower resolutions, due to some players having advantages in upscaling SD video.

All of the discs listed in Tier 0 look phenomenal on all brands of machines.smile.gif

Thanks, I appreciate the quick response. I was just reading that some players seem to mess with the picture before it even gets to the tv and therefore you never get the exact picture you were intended to see from the blu-ray disc. The colors are wrong, the picture gets compressed, black get crushed, all things I've read. I don't know how true these things are but they do come from reliable sources. (Cnet, Sound and Vision, HDGuru)

post #21069 of 21407
There are caveats, but most machines with the proper settings work about as well as any other Blu-ray player with sending 1080P video to your display. The wrong settings will affect the picture, often clipping black levels and not passing the PLUGE signal. The Sony PS3 still works wonderfully as a videophile BD player for example, if the proper video settings on it are enabled.
post #21070 of 21407
Quote:
Originally Posted by Phantom Stranger View Post

There are caveats, but most machines with the proper settings work about as well as any other Blu-ray player with sending 1080P video to your display. The wrong settings will affect the picture, often clipping black levels and not passing the PLUGE signal. The Sony PS3 still works wonderfully as a videophile BD player for example, if the proper video settings on it are enabled.

Excellent, anyway you can direct me to what settings those should be? Also, my 65ZT60 only has 3 HDMI inputs and the player will be running through a hdmi switcher. Any reason why I should hook up the blu-ray directly to the tv? Will the switcher affect PQ, Input Lag, 3D Crosstalk ect ect? This is the switch I have http://www.bestbuy.com/site/4-port-hdmi-selector/2947005.p?id=1218365975397&skuId=2947005&st=rocketfish%20hdmi&cp=1&lp=9

post #21071 of 21407
Quote:
Originally Posted by Inseconds99 View Post

Excellent, anyway you can direct me to what settings those should be? Also, my 65ZT60 only has 3 HDMI inputs and the player will be running through a hdmi switcher. Any reason why I should hook up the blu-ray directly to the tv? Will the switcher affect PQ, Input Lag, 3D Crosstalk ect ect? This is the switch I have http://www.bestbuy.com/site/4-port-hdmi-selector/2947005.p?id=1218365975397&skuId=2947005&st=rocketfish%20hdmi&cp=1&lp=9

Look for anything your player labels as an "enhancement" and turn it OFF. For instance, I have a Sony A/V receiver that also plays discs (I don't use it, I use my Panasonic DMP-BD60 instead, primarily because it lacks such "features"...). It has a bunch of settings enabled by default that "smooth grain" and "enhance contrast" and other such nonsense. Basically, all these sorts of routines do is introduce artifacts or crush blacks by manipulating an image that doesn't need to be manipulated.

What you want is an untouched signal from your BD player to your TV with no scaling, smoothing, manipulation, whatever. You want to see exactly the 2,073,600 pixels that are encoded on the disc displayed on the 2,073,600 pixels of your display.

I cannot speak to the switcher question.
post #21072 of 21407
Quote:
Originally Posted by Inseconds99 View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by Phantom Stranger View Post

There are caveats, but most machines with the proper settings work about as well as any other Blu-ray player with sending 1080P video to your display. The wrong settings will affect the picture, often clipping black levels and not passing the PLUGE signal. The Sony PS3 still works wonderfully as a videophile BD player for example, if the proper video settings on it are enabled.
Excellent, anyway you can direct me to what settings those should be? Also, my 65ZT60 only has 3 HDMI inputs and the player will be running through a hdmi switcher. Any reason why I should hook up the blu-ray directly to the tv? Will the switcher affect PQ, Input Lag, 3D Crosstalk ect ect? This is the switch I have http://www.bestbuy.com/site/4-port-hdmi-selector/2947005.p?id=1218365975397&skuId=2947005&st=rocketfish%20hdmi&cp=1&lp=9
Mweflen offers excellent advice, turning off the enhancements offered by most players is a great first step towards ensuring quality Blu-ray playback. You might want to look into calibrating your player and display, using a disc like this:

http://amzn.com/B00CKWI13O

That type of disc works very well in getting the most out of Blu-rays and other video content.

I don't think the switcher will affect picture quality if it works properly. It might affect lag, but that would be an issue more important to videogamers than Blu-ray watchers. Someone with more experience in using switchers will have to help you there.
post #21073 of 21407
Captain Phillips

Another *decent* outing from Sony, but not the EYE CANDY that other recent releases from them have offered. Where this Blu really stands out is in the many facial close-ups, with finely-rendered texture across the board. The last shot of Hanks is perhaps the best example of this; in fact, that scene was the best all the way around. Colors were very "natural-looking," not punchy, but warm (in some scenes they came across as muted, though not due to color-grading). Flesh tones were excellent. Contrast was good, but at times it was too strong in daytime scenes (giving it a "washed-out" look) and definitely too weak in many dark interior scenes (most notably, the majority of shots in the engine room after it was powered down and those in the lifeboat). These shots were the most disappointing of all, with very murky blacks and a heavy grain structure that resulted in a lack of details and softness. Depth could be very good, with the exception of the dark interior shots just alluded to. Daytime shots of the ships and boats, along with the ocean and clear blue sky, were very pleasing to the eyes.

In trying to reach a placement recommendation, one has to "average things out," (which is always the case when you have such inconsistency in PQ). Most daytime shots, especially those filmed outside, were good enough to call "demo" (not "reference," mind you), but the MANY dark interior shots (and even nighttime shots outside in the last few scenes) ranged from Tier 2 through Tier 4. The *experts* that have weighed in on Cinema Squid's site are singing its praises and giving it scores of 80-100 for PQ, with no one referring to or commenting on the poor black levels in the dark interior shots. I'm most definitely going against that Conventional Wisdom, for my vote goes for....

Tier Recommendation: 2.5*

Viewed from 7.5' using the equipment listed below....
Edited by djoberg - 1/21/14 at 4:38pm
post #21074 of 21407
Excellent review Dj! I suspect my thoughts will be similar when I review this..
post #21075 of 21407
Riddick

Quote:
Originally Posted by rusky_g View Post

Riddick

Technically not much wrong. Strong detail and blacks sit amongst a highly stylised colour scheme, that being the dominant golden hues of Riddicks barren landscape. Other colours seldom got to shine outside of the internal shots which I much preferred.

Decent but not quite my cup of tea...

Tier 1.75

I can't argue with anything rusky_g said in his review (it's "spot-on"). Strong details and blacks won the day! But let me add that DEPTH was also outstanding. And in addition to the excellent black levels the shadow details were phenomenal (some of the best I've seen in a very long time). Yes, this did indeed have "a highly stylized color scheme," but my logic has always dictated that if it's taking place on ANOTHER PLANET who can argue the point that "it shouldn't look that way." Maybe on Riddick's planet the sun does bathe the landscape with pure gold!! smile.gif And I've also said that I'm not bothered by color-grading that much if it doesn't hinder details, and believe me when I say, "They did NOT hinder details!!"

All things considered, this one is most definitely worthy of my colleague's recommendation (that is, Tier 1), but I would bump it up a few notches.....

Tier Recommendation: 1.0*

Viewed from 7.5' using the equipment listed below....
post #21076 of 21407
Another sterling summary there. I agree that the golden hues didn't hinder details, I think that after a few chapters into the film I was getting impatient and wanted to see other colours in the mix! I was glad that the internal scenes gave a bit more variety to keep my eyes entertained smile.gif certainly not a bad film overall for PQ.
post #21077 of 21407
Prisoners

Quote:
Originally Posted by fredxr2d2 View Post

Prisoners

Tier Recommendation: Tier 1


Wow. I wasn't expecting the PQ I got from this movie. It's definitely not the genre I would expect to have such wonderful scenes of beautiful textures and deep blacks. Basically, this only enhanced the great suspense and the amazing acting job done by the two main leads. I'd heartily recommend this movie to anyone who liked suspense (and if you liked Zodiac with Jake Gyllenhaal, you'd like Prisoners with Jake Gyllenhaal because that is what I kept comparing it to while watching it). Also of note: bark. Wow tree bark. I could swear I didn't put trees in the basement, but, low and behold, there they were (plus, without the sappy smell). I recommend this based upon the solid movie and acting, and also based upon the great PQ featured.

EDIT (for clarification): Some softness in middle-range shots made me not place this in Tier 0, though I could see how someone might want to put it there.

I pretty much agree with fredxr2d2's assessment. The sharpness/clarity coupled with exquisite details throughout make this an easy contender for the "demo shelf." Facial close-ups were rewarding...even "partial facials" will serve to WOW you (I'm speaking of several shots of one of the "prisoners" where you only get a glimpse of the face which is surrounded by blackness....and the blacks were amazing too). And then there's the BARK (referred to by my colleague)...oh yeah, the director had a fetish for bark in this film and we're treated to several close-ups that may not reveal the age of the tree, but it does reveal the "face of the tree." This had a good deal of depth in certain shots as well, along with good contrast, so-so flesh tones, and a muted color palette (it was really on the cool side, which was fitting for the mood of the film). There were also fleeting soft shots that must figure into the final analysis.

I don't think I can go as high as my peer on this one, but I do see this meriting demo status. I'm inclined to drop it a notch or two....

Tier Recommendation: 1.5*

Viewed from 7.5' using the equipment listed below....
post #21078 of 21407
Quote:
Originally Posted by rusky_g View Post

Another sterling summary there. I agree that the golden hues didn't hinder details, I think that after a few chapters into the film I was getting impatient and wanted to see other colours in the mix! I was glad that the internal scenes gave a bit more variety to keep my eyes entertained smile.gif certainly not a bad film overall for PQ.

I hear you (see highlighted words)! I too was getting tired of the golden hues, even if was *normal* for Riddick's planet. smile.gif

I forgot to mention that I did NOT enjoy the movie. I'm with you...it was NOT "my cup of tea."
post #21079 of 21407
Quote:
Originally Posted by djoberg View Post

Thanks for the excellent review Toe! Your comments about the audio of both installments of "Ninja" makes me want to go out and rent Ninja 1, which I've never seen. It's hard to imagine the audio having even more LFE and digging deeper. I'm curious as to what you had your volume set at. I had mine on -15 for most of the movie (I did crank it up to -10 for the explosions smile.gif) and it was REALLY LOUD! Normally I would have to set it much closer to reference to get that much volume.

Ninja is in the discount Blu-Ray/DVD bins at Walmart for $8. Solid Blu-Ray buy!
post #21080 of 21407
Quote:
Originally Posted by Inseconds99 View Post

Thanks, I appreciate the quick response. I was just reading that some players seem to mess with the picture before it even gets to the tv and therefore you never get the exact picture you were intended to see from the blu-ray disc. The colors are wrong, the picture gets compressed, black get crushed, all things I've read. I don't know how true these things are but they do come from reliable sources. (Cnet, Sound and Vision, HDGuru)

Just go into the setup menus and disable any processing setting like noise reduction. Many players also have visual modes for different lighting setups like dark room, living room, etc. Also do the same with your TV.
post #21081 of 21407
Quote:
Originally Posted by LexInVA View Post

Ninja is in the discount Blu-Ray/DVD bins at Walmart for $8. Solid Blu-Ray buy!

Thanks! I may just pick that up today.
post #21082 of 21407
Spiderman 2 Mastered in 4K

Reeling from the Mi4K spectacle that was Elysium, I was keen to explore other titles which heralded this new found badge.

Perhaps I should have should have dug deeper than the initial 5 star review of Spiderman 2 Mi4K, which alluded to it being the pinnacle hi definition experience. After placing my order my heart sank at finding other reviews which were far less favourable.

Nonetheless my copy arrived today and in a nutshell it was met with disappointment. Shocked at the quality of the firts two chapters - blown whites on every facial shot, unbalanced contrast and detail, this took some serious tweaking to get a half decent picture. Things got better by chapter 20/25 (50 in total) and there were some moments of glory to behold - mainly centered around the action scenes, but that early underwhelming sense was hard to shake. As a positive I would say that blacks were well rendered particularly in night scenes but as an Mi4K release I felt underchanged in the fidelity and fine detail department.

Perhaps the remarkable clarity of Elysium had set an unrealistic president, perhaps I had been naively lured into the Mastered in 4K web that Sony has spun...

Tier 2.25
post #21083 of 21407
Quote:
Originally Posted by LexInVA View Post

Ninja is in the discount Blu-Ray/DVD bins at Walmart for $8. Solid Blu-Ray buy!
Quote:
Originally Posted by LexInVA View Post

Ninja is in the discount Blu-Ray/DVD bins at Walmart for $8. Solid Blu-Ray buy!

I just returned home from our local Super Walmart where I spent at least 30 minutes going through the $7.88 Blu-ray bargain bin (I must have looked like a starving homeless man going through a food dumpster smile.gif) but my search for Ninja 1 was in vain. There must have been at least 100 different titles in there and I ended up getting a good deal on a "double-feature" and the complete collection of The Prophecy....not bad....5 discs for only $8! (I must confess that I've never seen any of that collection so it may not be the *steal* that I'm thinking it is.
post #21084 of 21407
Quote:
Originally Posted by djoberg View Post

I just returned home from our local Super Walmart where I spent at least 30 minutes going through the $7.88 Blu-ray bargain bin (I must have looked like a starving homeless man going through a food dumpster smile.gif) but my search for Ninja 1 was in vain. There must have been at least 100 different titles in there and I ended up getting a good deal on a "double-feature" and the complete collection of The Prophecy....not bad....5 discs for only $8! (I must confess that I've never seen any of that collection so it may not be the *steal* that I'm thinking it is.
You might want to reconsider on that Prophecy collection and return it. There are a lot of issues with that set, some of the transfers are not much better than upscaled DVD. I like the franchise a great deal but it's a very cheap set for a reason.

The Prophecy with screenshots.

The Prophecy: Forsaken review with screenshots.
post #21085 of 21407
Quote:
Originally Posted by Phantom Stranger View Post

You might want to reconsider on that Prophecy collection and return it. There are a lot of issues with that set, some of the transfers are not much better than upscaled DVD. I like the franchise a great deal but it's a very cheap set for a reason.

The Prophecy with screenshots.

The Prophecy: Forsaken review with screenshots.

Thanks Phantom....I will return the set.
post #21086 of 21407
Psycho

Quote:
Originally Posted by mweflen View Post

Psycho (1960)

Well. I was pretty shocked by the placement on the tiers here, but it seems that it is the result of just the one rating above. Here's what I saw:

Some close-ups show exceptional detail. The average medium shot shows good mid-level detail but nothing particularly fine. There are some nice cloth textures in the first and last thirds of the movie. The middle third, in which Janet Leigh is in the hotel (alive that is) is a bit softer, unfortunately. There is film grain present throughout but it is not particularly finely resolved. As such, it does appear as though some light DNR is in play. EE does not seem apparent, though. Contrast is excellent throughout, with good black levels and no apparent crushing or blooming. Exterior scenes look vibrant and punchy. Certain shots, such as the Bates mansion against the cloudy sky, look fuzzy, probably due to the optical process shots used to create the image. Overall, this is a pleasing watch that is superior to DVD in every way, but is not mind-blowing in terms of HD. Although there are scenes that look sublime, for the most part it's a mediocre Blu-Ray, in the most technical sense of the word.

Tier recommendation: 2.75

He nailed it!! Every point made is right on the mark. I would only add a few remarks to elaborate. I'm not one to easily spot "halos," but I did see a couple instances of these in shots of Janet Leigh. There were also a few fleeting instances of *specks* in earlier scenes, which isn't surprising considering the source. To add a word of praise, I was pleasantly surprised to see the level of detail that I did in some of the facial close-ups...the texture was amazing for a title dating back to 1960. Mweflen was right in drawing attention to the "fuzziness" of the Bates mansion against the cloudy sky, but man was it a joy to see considerable sharpness and clarity in close and midrange shots. I also thought the gray scale was very good. Kudos to all who had a part in the restoration of these classics!!

Tier Recommendation: 2.75*

Viewed from 7.5' using the equipment listed below....
post #21087 of 21407
^^^^^
Glad we're in agreement smile.gif

To add something else to the "settings" discussion, AVS has its own free HD calibration disc that can be downloaded and burned onto a regular DVD-R. I've done it myself, and found it useful.

http://www.avsforum.com/t/948496/avs-hd-709-blu-ray-mp4-calibration
post #21088 of 21407
Carrie (2013)

recommendation: Tier 2.5*

Carrie looks like a rushed production with obvious digital seams from composites and CGI. The bleached, deadened color palette has some odd color grading issues going on with it, resulting in unusual flesh-tones and a distinct lack of pop. Shot on the Arri Alexa digital camera system, its moderate sharpness appears flat and dull. I think they tried to make Chloe Moretz's hair a more reddish hue in post, which ends up looking completely unnatural.

There are no problems in terms of over processing from DNR, though close-ups are less impressive in fine detail and impact than I've seen from other movies using the Arri Alexa. For a new release in 2013, it's a fairly underwhelming video presentation.

The MGM movie is distributed by Fox, whom does their usual superb effort in minimizing compression problems.
post #21089 of 21407
Notorious

A 1.37:1 B&W film from 1946, directed by Alfred Hitchcock. Some close-ups shows exquisite detail, particularly one near the end of Ingrid Bergman and Cary Grant embracing. Film grain is present and stable throughout. The black levels mostly stay stable and overall contrast of the image is pleasing with no crushing. All that said, the nature of the way Hitchcock filmed this leads to many image degrading features - lots of optical process shots and rear projection work. So overall there is an inconsistency that plagues the image.The best of this looks tier 2, the worst like DVD. It's quite pleasant about 2/3 of the time. Overall, I think it's in the 3s.

Tier Recommendation: 3.5


Overall, the Fox (MGM) Hitchcock Blu-Rays are quite nice, now that I've seen all of them. The lack of overt digital monkeying is quite encouraging, especially when compared to some of Universal's transfers of their Hitchcock catalog. I think they look quite good - full restorations might correct some of the print damage and light blacks, but these probably look about 90% as good as they can, which given the price of the discs is good enough for me.

Also, Ingrid Bergman is beautiful. Just saying.
Edited by mweflen - 1/24/14 at 11:25am
post #21090 of 21407
Topaz

A lovely transfer of a 1.85:1 35mm print from 1969. On the bad side, things tend towards slightly edge-enhanced, and some of the whites are given to blooming (especially on crisp white shirts). There are about 2 minutes of substandard-looking scenes, and some documentary footage doesn't look as nice as the stuff shot for the movie. All that said, the strengths of this disc are numerous. Detail is exceptionally good for a movie of this vintage, with wonderful cloth textures, facial detail, bright colors, deep blacks, and just overall a very HD appearance. Film grain is a bit on the chunky side but is stable and not terribly obtrusive (As some felt with Marnie). Overall, this is a truly excellent looking disc and comes in behind only Trouble With Harry, North By NW, and Vertigo in this Hitchcock Masterpiece set.

Tier Recommendation: 2.0

Edited by mweflen - 1/24/14 at 10:26pm
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Blu-ray Software
AVS › AVS Forum › Blu-ray & HD DVD › Blu-ray Software › The New PQ Tier thread for Blu-Ray - Discussion