The New PQ Tier thread for Blu-Ray - Discussion - Page 20

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.

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.

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.

Got mine replaced and received it in the mail on Wednesday.

When ya movin New TFM ot tier 0? Crank should be considered too. Hellboy as a long shot. (most underrated pq of any BR)

Hellboy looks great.

+1. It was a lot better than what i had expected.

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.

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.

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.

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

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.

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 )

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!

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

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.

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...

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.

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.

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.

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

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.

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

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