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 20

post #571 of 21406
TFE remastered does look excellent.Agree with it's placement as well.I didn't think Curse of the Golden Flower was that great,at least for where it's placed,I expected a little more pop.Colors and asian cleavage was nice.I gotta admit I really only skimmed through it looking for that cleavage Never mind.
post #572 of 21406
Quote:
Originally Posted by oleus View Post

so are you guys getting your FIFTH ELEMENT discs replaced by sony or are you just biting the bullet and buying new copies??? are they already sneding out replacements?

I bought a new one. I thought it would be interesting to have the old one for comparative purposes. But I haven't done that yet.
post #573 of 21406
Quote:
Originally Posted by patrick99 View Post

The poll suggests the great majority agree but to my eyes there is nothing in DMC that comes anywhere close to the facial close-ups in TFE. They are breathtaking.

Haven't seen DMC yet, but the facial close ups in TFE are, indeed, excellent. You could count every whisker on Bruce Willis' face!
post #574 of 21406
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rob Tomlin View Post

Haven't seen DMC yet, but the facial close ups in TFE are, indeed, excellent. You could count every whisker on Bruce Willis' face!

Many other faces as well.

I assume most would agree that the closeups of Milla Jovovich are probably the highlight, though.
post #575 of 21406
Quote:
Originally Posted by patrick99 View Post

Many other faces as well.

I assume most would agree that the closeups of Milla Jovovich are probably the highlight, though.

post #576 of 21406
Quote:
Originally Posted by oleus View Post

so are you guys getting your FIFTH ELEMENT discs replaced by sony or are you just biting the bullet and buying new copies??? are they already sneding out replacements?

Got mine replaced and received it in the mail on Wednesday.
post #577 of 21406
When ya movin New TFM ot tier 0? Crank should be considered too. Hellboy as a long shot. (most underrated pq of any BR)
post #578 of 21406
Hellboy looks great.
post #579 of 21406
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rob Tomlin View Post

Hellboy looks great.

+1. It was a lot better than what i had expected.
post #580 of 21406
banding or no banding, Ice Age should be at the bottom of the Gold Tier. Really, it shouldn't even be at the bottom of that tier, but there is no way on God's green earth it should be 3 tiers down.
post #581 of 21406
Just watched The Fifth Element remastered in my 46LX177, can someone please explain to me why this is not Tier 0? It was amazing, 3-d pop throughout! Granted, I have not seen DMC yet, but I can not imagine to be much better...

Changing gears... I do not see Incubus Alive at Red Rocks on the list. Please add it to mid Tier 3. It seems they used different cameras for this one, similar to Apocalypto. Most of the time the image is quite sharp, but a couple of cam angles make this one look like garbage. More specifically shots of the crowd and looking at stage from the side/back were ridiclulosuly grainy and it looked like the brightness was cranked up artificially. It really brought down the whole visual experience.
post #582 of 21406
Quote:
Originally Posted by Teepanen View Post

Just watched The Fifth Element remastered in my 46LX177, can someone please explain to me why this is not Tier 0? It was amazing, 3-d pop throughout! Granted, I have not seen DMC yet, but I can not imagine to be much better...

It is extremely good, but not perfect.

Don't get too hung up on the Tier. Realize this: it is currently ranked as the 10th best Blu-ray movie ever released in terms of PQ on this list.
post #583 of 21406
Why isn't edge enhancement taken into account on this tier thread? Crank has amazing detail but the EE is horrible. EE on a front projection screen can be very annoying and to me at least makes the image look like edgy video not film.

Tom
post #584 of 21406
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rob Tomlin View Post

It is extremely good, but not perfect.

Don't get too hung up on the Tier. Realize this: it is currently ranked as the 10th best Blu-ray movie ever released in terms of PQ on this list.

I feel you. I also own Corpse Bride and realize that it is really difficult to compare to an animated title but I would put TFE above it in terms of "Wow, this looks nice!".

I would also put this above Apocalypto , which I also own, simply due to shots that didnt look as good in the latter. For example, waterfall scene when the guys chasing main character appear from the jungle, it gets a lot grainier then most of the filck and just doesn't look as sharp. There are other examples of incosistencies in Apocalypto, none of which were apparent to me in TFE. I know that I probably wont convince anybody to bump this title up in the Tier thread, but to me it is the best visual experience I have had on BD as of yet.
post #585 of 21406
Quote:
Originally Posted by Anthony1 View Post

banding or no banding, Ice Age should be at the bottom of the Gold Tier. Really, it shouldn't even be at the bottom of that tier, but there is no way on God's green earth it should be 3 tiers down.

I agree 10000%! Ice Age is a real stunner. I use it as my animation demo disc. Never fails to greatly impress. And I simply don't see any banding (it must be very slight).

I still don't understand how League of Extraordinary Gentlemen can be rated soooo high??? Very inconsistent image (so disappointed I almost sold it on e-bay). And Ice Age rates just one spot above it ...? What am I missing here??? (besides my mind )
post #586 of 21406
Quote:
Originally Posted by John Ballentine View Post

I agree 10000%! Ice Age is a real stunner. I use it as my animation demo disc. Never fails to greatly impress. And I simply don't see any banding (it must be very slight).

I also agree with this. I do see the banding, but it is pretty minor and really does little to take away from the otherwise stunning images!
post #587 of 21406
Quote:
Originally Posted by Teepanen View Post

Just watched The Fifth Element remastered in my 46LX177, can someone please explain to me why this is not Tier 0? It was amazing, 3-d pop throughout! Granted, I have not seen DMC yet, but I can not imagine to be much better...

I do have DMC, and in my view TFE is better....in fact, its the best non-animation HD release I own. Simply spectacular on my rig.

Brian
post #588 of 21406
skimmed through "Shooter" and "Bridge to Terabithia" last night and following is my take on the PQ

Shooter: Some closeup are absolutely stunning while other wide shots are soft. 3d pop ranges from very good to none, in different scenes. I will put this one in high tier 2.

Bridge to Terabithia: Looks stunning. Plenty of 3D pop. Definitely belongs in middle tier 1.
post #589 of 21406
Anyone else feel that "The Sentinel" is a little too high? Maybe I was soured on it because it ended up being such a lousy movie...
post #590 of 21406
Agree on Ice Age 2

Crank should be tier 0, best live action pic my eyes have ever seen on hd dvd/blu-ray. amazes me every time i see it.
post #591 of 21406
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tom Monahan View Post

Why isn't edge enhancement taken into account on this tier thread? Crank has amazing detail but the EE is horrible. EE on a front projection screen can be very annoying and to me at least makes the image look like edgy video not film.

Tom

Exactly, I agree 100%. I was very distracted by the obvious EE on my 90" screen...

I also fully agree that Ice age should be at the very least mid tier 1.
post #592 of 21406
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Teepanen View Post

Just watched The Fifth Element remastered in my 46LX177, can someone please explain to me why this is not Tier 0? It was amazing, 3-d pop throughout! Granted, I have not seen DMC yet, but I can not imagine to be much better...

Changing gears... I do not see Incubus Alive at Red Rocks on the list. Please add it to mid Tier 3. It seems they used different cameras for this one, similar to Apocalypto. Most of the time the image is quite sharp, but a couple of cam angles make this one look like garbage. More specifically shots of the crowd and looking at stage from the side/back were ridiclulosuly grainy and it looked like the brightness was cranked up artificially. It really brought down the whole visual experience.

This has been added.

As for TFE I want to comment. I would agree the PQ is great on it, however it won't be moved to tier 0 without more of a consensus as moving things into that tier tends to stir up the pot. I think there was a poll at one point where the majority thought it was Tier 1. You should not hesitate to buy anything that is tier 0 or tier 1 as you can expect excellent PQ.
post #593 of 21406
Thread Starter 
Wow ok...to Sum up:

Ice Age 2 should be Mid Tier 1
Crank Belongs in Tier 0
Teribithia belongs in Mid Tier 1
Shooter High Tier 2
Sentinal is too high - where should it go?

I'll comment on EE - my screen is a 50: plasma; not everyone has these monster screens and I suspect EE isn't as apparent on smaller ones.

For those movies where changes in position are being requested I'll need confirmation from another person that they agree since I don't have any of them myself and as a result cannot refute/confirm these points.
post #594 of 21406
Quote:
Originally Posted by AustinSTI View Post

I'll comment on EE - my screen is a 50: plasma; not everyone has these monster screens and I suspect EE isn't as apparent on smaller ones.

Thank you for taking the time and effort to start and maintain this thread. I'm sure that there's a lot of members like me who follow it and rarely post, but still consider it a valuable resource/reference. I have posted a few times, mostly questioning the "ground rules" for deciding the tier (and position within the tier). My last few posts were regarding artistic choices that affect color palette and clarity.

This post is regarding the issue of screen size exposing shortcomings in PQ. It certainly makes sense that some assumption should be made about an upper limit on screen size, e.g. nobody is using a cinemaplex, but quite a few are using 1920 x 1080 displays these days, and quite a few of those are front projectors. (And it might even be safe to say that, regardless one's screen size, everyone would like a 100"+ screen!) So, without starting a firestorm, my question is this: Should greater weight be given to the observations and comments from members with large screens as they may be able to see flaws in PQ that others might miss? And if that's too controversial and/or elitist, how about everyone commenting on a film list their source and display?

As I read back over my post, I hope it is taken in the vein that I intend it and not as an insult to anyone who does not have a large, high end system. My point is that, since this is pretty much all subjective, the more everyone knows about the "reviewer's system" - pretty much a standard in reviews - the easier it would be to establish some sort of baseline and to draw conclusions about how a particular movie will look on one's own system.
post #595 of 21406
Purple Rain: Lower tier 3 or even 4
The Host: Tier 1 (at least)

I posted my impressions on both these titles eariler in the thread as well as another thread on the board. I can't believe that no one who has been following the tier list has commented on The Host yet.

If it can't be Tier 0 (like I suggested earlier) then at least put it on the list somewhere and let it fight it's way to the top instead of not listing it at all.

Edited to give my display details as suggested in the post above:
50" 1080p DLP, PS3 through HDMI
post #596 of 21406
Quote:
Originally Posted by AustinSTI View Post

Crank Belongs in Tier 0 .

IMHO Crank is already placed much too high at high tier 1, but to move it up to tier 0 would be to ignore the rules clearly specifying 'No artifacts whatsoever, no matter how small', when several people including myself have pointed out that is has obvious EE problems.

Quote:


I'll comment on EE - my screen is a 50: plasma; not everyone has these monster screens and I suspect EE isn't as apparent on smaller ones.

For those movies where changes in position are being requested I'll need confirmation from another person that they agree since I don't have any of them myself and as a result cannot refute/confirm these points.

Obviously everyone doesn't have 100" screens or 1080p displays for that matter, but that shouldn't mean that those who DO, would somehow be ineligible to point out PQ issues with a disc. After all, the whole point of this thread is PQ quality, regardless of your equipment. Contrarily, the bigger and better your display, the better your chances should be of spotting any artifacts in the video so I support pepar's suggestion that everyone notes their display equipment in their posts. Not to point fingers at those who do not have 100"/1080p, but simply to see their point of view to be able to make a better decision...

Oh, and I don't see how having front projectors would be considered "elitist", since most people with flat panel LCDs and Plasma TV's probably paid a lot more for their displays than I have for my projector.
post #597 of 21406
Quote:
Originally Posted by BjornK View Post

Obviously everyone doesn't have 100" screens or 1080p displays for that matter, but that shouldn't mean that those who DO, would somehow be ineligible to point out PQ issues with a disc. After all, the whole point of this thread is PQ quality, regardless of your equipment. Contrarily, the bigger and better your display, the better your chances should be of spotting any artifacts in the video so I support pepar's suggestion that everyone notes their display equipment in their posts. Not to point fingers at those who do not have 100"/1080p, but simply to see their point of view to be able to make a better decision...

Oh, and I don't see how having front projectors would be considered "elitist", since most people with flat panel LCDs and Plasma TV's probably paid a lot more for their displays than I have for my projector.

I agree that it isn't necessarily considered elitist to have a front projector these days, as there are some great, affordable rigs out there. The problem is the screen you use becomes a very important piece of the display system.

I suspect there are alot of enthusiasts out there who spend $2,000 - $4,000 on a PJ and cannot justify the extra expense for a quality screen, as that can add another $1,000 - $3,000 to the cost. For example, my 110" Stewart StudioTek 130 fixed frame screen lists for $2,400. When you add the cost of a good screen to the mix, then we might be back in the high-end category.

Mark
post #598 of 21406
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by wmitchell23 View Post

Purple Rain: Lower tier 3 or even 4
The Host: Tier 1 (at least)

I posted my impressions on both these titles eariler in the thread as well as another thread on the board. I can't believe that no one who has been following the tier list has commented on The Host yet.

If it can't be Tier 0 (like I suggested earlier) then at least put it on the list somewhere and let it fight it's way to the top instead of not listing it at all.

Edited to give my display details as suggested in the post above:
50" 1080p DLP, PS3 through HDMI

Updated with the HOST and Purple Rain.
post #599 of 21406
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by BjornK View Post

IMHO Crank is already placed much too high at high tier 1, but to move it up to tier 0 would be to ignore the rules clearly specifying 'No artifacts whatsoever, no matter how small', when several people including myself have pointed out that is has obvious EE problems.



Obviously everyone doesn't have 100" screens or 1080p displays for that matter, but that shouldn't mean that those who DO, would somehow be ineligible to point out PQ issues with a disc. After all, the whole point of this thread is PQ quality, regardless of your equipment. Contrarily, the bigger and better your display, the better your chances should be of spotting any artifacts in the video so I support pepar's suggestion that everyone notes their display equipment in their posts. Not to point fingers at those who do not have 100"/1080p, but simply to see their point of view to be able to make a better decision...

Oh, and I don't see how having front projectors would be considered "elitist", since most people with flat panel LCDs and Plasma TV's probably paid a lot more for their displays than I have for my projector.


First let me say that I don't take anything on this topic personally nor do I take offense to this; if I did I'd ignore it. Your points are valid and constructive which is all I asked when people highlight or discuss issues with the list and PQ ratings. I think the point about being able to more readily see issues on a larger projector is very valid. Things may not be apparent on smaller screens, however it is also valid to have an idea of what resolution PQ is being viewed at. Given this I think Crack should be bumped down and will be done so accordingly.

I'd also like anyone posting tier placements to post the following for all in the future:

Screen Resolution (EX: 1920X1080X24p or 1920X1080X60p)
Screen Size (EX: 100" Projection, 50" Plasma)

Everything I view is 1920X1080X24p.
post #600 of 21406
Quote:
Originally Posted by AustinSTI View Post

I'd also like anyone posting tier placements to post the following for all in the future:

Screen Resolution (EX: 1920X1080X24p or 1920X1080X60p)
Screen Size (EX: 100" Projection, 50" Plasma)

Thanks, and I see that you've added that to the first page!
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