or Connect
AVS › AVS Forum › Blu-ray & HD DVD › HDTV Software Media Discussion › HD Disk (HD-DVD and Blu-Ray) EE and DNR list
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

HD Disk (HD-DVD and Blu-Ray) EE and DNR list - Page 4

post #91 of 746
I found no issue with the Untouchables as I don't have a 106" screen. I liked the way it looks too, but if you go over to the Blu-ray software forum and do some searches you will find many people unhappy with the transfer.
post #92 of 746
Mr. Bean's Holiday

Another one bites the dust.
When the reviewers mention it count on it being twice as bad as they are reporting.

Title:Mr. Bean's Holiday (2007)
Studio: Universal Studios
Disc: HD DVD
Problem:EE
Time Codes: Whole movie
Comments: Finally, sharpness is strong, but it comes at a price -- edge enhancement is apparent but not excessive, so expect some noticeable halos on high-contrast areas.
URL: http://hddvd.highdefdigest.com/1162/....html#Section3
post #93 of 746
Funny, I don't remember the UK HD DVD being that way... in fact I'm almost certain it didn't have any EE. Did Universal intentionally do that just for the USA release?
post #94 of 746
Alan, I heard High Def Digest mention it, but wasn't sure if it was actually there or not - have you seen it yourself?

Here's grabs from the UK disc. It's not a 10/10 transfer but it didn't look too bad to me. The glowing around the "BAGUETTE" text on the left looks to me like it's a lens effect rather than digital tampering. Maybe this is what High Def Digest are seeing? Whereas, the ringing around the computer-generated text (the credits) looks to be the result of filtering.

http://lyris-lite.net/files/bean.jpg (600kb)

Also http://lyris-lite.net/files/bean2.jpg (800kb)

I just saw that the High Def Digest comments for this title were added to the front page - are you sure we shouldn't have someone else verify it first?
post #95 of 746
I have this title on the way. Ill have it this week. Ill ask it be removed from the list if indeed it is EE free. I hope it is. As silly as this movie may be to some Im looking forward to it. I will say HDD has been spot on with reporting EE. In fact its rare they do mention it unless it is really bothersome.. Ill know soon enough. f its there I will grab a few caps. Fingers crossed.
post #96 of 746
Cool, hope it goes well. And yeah, I liked this movie a lot too - I got the HD DVD when it came out over here in August. It's really nice to have stuff other than action movies on HD.
post #97 of 746
Thread Starter 
Payback has (obvious and ugly) DNR in one scene. The rest looks good. It's a grainy movie.
Any word on "Mr. and Mrs. Smith"? The 35mm prints had smeary DNR all over.
post #98 of 746
Michel, you didn't see any DNR on the Elizabeth HD-DVD? The screen captures posted here have a pasty quality.
post #99 of 746
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kram Sacul View Post

Michel, you didn't see any DNR on the Elizabeth HD-DVD? The screen captures posted here have a pasty quality.

Nothing obvious. It looked more video than it should but not because of DNR as far as I could see.
post #100 of 746
Guys just got my copy of Bean's Holiday (2007)

It clearly is an edgy title. Some scenes worse then others. Its not as extreme as other titles from Universal but as soon as the disc starts you know your in trouble.

Im using the Lumagen video processor with no ring processing and I had to set the sharpness to minus 4 to compensate for the edginess. Thats to bad because the entire transfer then suffers from this setting. Im also using Sonys new VW200 Lcos which is not overly sharp. I expect this would be worse on DLP.

What is a shame, people use the excuse they are adding EE to older titles yet this is a newer movie, no need for any EE. This could have been a great transfer its such a shame they feel they have to mess with it.
Its another one that I bet would pass on a flat screen yet falls apart on non CRT based FP systems
post #101 of 746
Alan, any idea how it compares to the screen grabs from the UK disc I posted?
post #102 of 746
Quote:
Originally Posted by lyris View Post

Alan, any idea how it compares to the screen grabs from the UK disc I posted?

Do you have a link. I did a quick search but could not find anything, thanks
post #103 of 746
post #104 of 746
Don't know if this is off-topic or not, but is banding in 2001: Space Oddesy kind of inevitable because of the use of both 70MM film AND a CineScope lens? Would seem to me the source would probably be why, lest this is a trope of 70mm-->35mm downscaling, and the copy appears to have a 35MM source...
post #105 of 746
What do you mean by "banding"? Also, 2001 was shot using spherical lenses, no anamorphic (or "CinemaScope") lenses were used.

Vincent

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rev. Nathan View Post

Don't know if this is off-topic or not, but is banding in 2001: Space Oddesy kind of inevitable because of the use of both 70MM film AND a CineScope lens? Would seem to me the source would probably be why, lest this is a trope of 70mm-->35mm downscaling, and the copy appears to have a 35MM source...
post #106 of 746
lyris

I watched this movie again last night. I love the restaurant scene eating the clams.

I have to say I agree with you 100%. The EE while I do find the transfer somewhat edgy
was not intrusive. A few scenes like the ones where you see the hill tops in the back ground show some heavy EE but the rest is tolerable and far less then the others reported to be riddled with EE. I think for people viewing this on a CRT FP system the edginess I am seeing may not be an issue.
This guy cracks me up. As silly as this movie is I love it.
Take care
post #107 of 746
Title: The Matrix (1999)
Studio: Warner
Disc: HD-DVD (USA)
Problem: EE
Comments: Slight EE/Ringing visible in certain shots
Time Codes:
URLs: Link, Link
post #108 of 746
Quote:


This guy cracks me up. As silly as this movie is I love it.

Me too - I loved the ending as well. Kind of strange, but I wouldn't have done it any other way.

And yeah, The Matrix! It has a ton of ringing. Couldn't believe the 5/5 reviews - don't know how I forgot to mention it.
post #109 of 746
Quote:
Originally Posted by Alan Gouger View Post

Guys just got my copy of Bean's Holiday (2007)

It clearly is an edgy title. Some scenes worse then others. Its not as extreme as other titles from Universal but as soon as the disc starts you know your in trouble.

Im using the Lumagen video processor with no ring processing and I had to set the sharpness to minus 4 to compensate for the edginess. Thats to bad because the entire transfer then suffers from this setting. Im also using Sonys new VW200 Lcos which is not overly sharp. I expect this would be worse on DLP.

What is a shame, people use the excuse they are adding EE to older titles yet this is a newer movie, no need for any EE. This could have been a great transfer its such a shame they feel they have to mess with it.....

Deluxe Digital Studios - Ron Martin (V.P.)

I suspect you'll get answers from him ^ rather than excuses, as he has the experience with old (while at DVCC) and new titles. Whether that translates into results - you'll have to ask him.
post #110 of 746
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kram Sacul View Post

Title: The Matrix (1999)
Studio: Warner
Disc: HD-DVD (USA)
Problem: EE
Comments: Slight EE/Ringing visible in certain shots
Time Codes:
URLs: Link, Link

I don't know that you want to go after anything that has some shots that way. That would typically indicate an issue during original effects/film which is no fault of the mediums represented here. Lest we want to start complaining about exposure setting, the quality of the wood used in the set, etc. .
post #111 of 746
Amir, that's classic EE, not any sort of photography or visual effects artifact. The shot of Keanu on the roof has a pretty noticable halo outline, especially along his right arm.

The whole transfer has ringing on the black mattes as well, a telltale sign that EE/Ringing was introduced at some point. It may not have been applied intentionally but it's there in the final product.
post #112 of 746
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kram Sacul View Post

Amir, that's classic EE, not any sort of photography or visual effects artifact. The shot of Keanu on the roof has a pretty noticable halo outline, especially along his right arm.

Yes, it does look like EE. I did not mean that it is an effect by itself. But in the process of compositing, etc, someone may attempt to sharpen the final image (or one of the layers) and as a result, create this kind of halo. They may for example be compensating for slightly out of focus/soft source.

Quote:


The whole transfer has ringing on the black mattes as well, a telltale sign that EE/Ringing was introduced at some point. It may not have been applied intentionally but it's there in the final product.

That would be fair game if it is the whole transfer. I was just objecting to the words used that some fames have such a problem. If so, it is not the result of telecine or encoding as they are not going to apply such selective sharpening.
post #113 of 746
Amir

I know in the past you mentioned complaints are being passed on but it does not seam like anything is changing for the better. Do you get any feedback when passing on complaints. Will these studios stop using EE at some point. Things are not getting any better.

As always, thanks for your feedback.
post #114 of 746
Quote:
Originally Posted by Alan Gouger View Post

Amir

I know in the past you mentioned complaints are being passed on but it does not seam like anything is changing for the better. Do you get any feedback when passing on complaints. Will these studios stop using EE at some point. Things are not getting any better.

As always, thanks for your feedback.

Our feedback loop unfortunately is one way . And given the fact that some titles are encoded 3-4 months in advance of showing in the store, it is hard to know if the feedback was accepted or not.

What I can say is that we have gone through great lengths to demostrate what an excellent transfer looks like, and what doesn't qualify as such. We know the demonstrations have had an effect on level of awareness here. Hopefully actions have followed....
post #115 of 746
Thanks Amir

It makes you wonder if anyone actually looks at the end product. If they did, compared to a good transfer it makes you wonder how anyone with any sense doing their job could say send it out the door, looks fine Some of this stuff is looking pretty bad.

Anyway lets hope for the better.

Thank you!
post #116 of 746
IMO, the issue of optimal image mastering is paramount (no pun intended) with HDM. With every medium that's come before, if the studio didn't get it right, at least the consumer had the consolation that "well, it's not anywhere near 35mm release-print quality anyway" since SD formats were so limited in resolution, not to mention "the studio will probably release it again in HD, and that's their chance to get it right".

While some titles will be recycled over and over in HD with bonus material etc. (just like they were recycled on DVD over and over), many titles might not get more than one shot for an HD transfer, and maybe only one release on HDM. There are still titles that only got one shot on laserdisc that never emerged on DVD. Still titles on VHS that never showed up on DVD. There are DVDs that were released once, went out of print.

So with HDM... since we *do* have formats that *can* finally delver a reasonable facsimilie of a projected print, it's time to get it right. The first time.

Call to the studios: recycle your HDM titles again and again by providing special feature content if absolutely necessary. But give us the transparent AV qualtiy (with lossless sound) we deserve the first time.
post #117 of 746
Quote:
Originally Posted by Alan Gouger View Post

Thanks Amir

It makes you wonder if anyone actually looks at the end product.

Thank you!

That actually seems to be the problem - transfer quality is judged by somebody looking at the image (on too small a screen) and making a subjective assessment. I do not understand why there aren't quantative procedures involved to remove human subjectivity. It must be possible to design an assessment algorithm which can compare the master vs the compression and derive a quality rating based on perceptually important factors (eg detail retention, colour accuracy etc); this would effectively halt the destruction of good prints by excessive EE and noise reduction. But perhaps that would remove the "art" from the compressionist?

Mark
post #118 of 746
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mark_H View Post

That actually seems to be the problem - transfer quality is judged by somebody looking at the image (on too small a screen) and making a subjective assessment. I do not understand why there aren't quantative procedures involved to remove human subjectivity. It must be possible to design an assessment algorithm which can compare the master vs the compression and derive a quality rating based on perceptually important factors (eg detail retention, colour accuracy etc); this would effectively halt the destruction of good prints by excessive EE and noise reduction. But perhaps that would remove the "art" from the compressionist?

Mark

I hear you but they are not using too small of a display. My laptop shows the issues being talked about so I know it is visible on displays they are using.

I am not trying to defend anyone but most subjective assessments of general public would show that users would prefer a sharper image with halo than one without. Just about every picture taken with a digital camera is sharpened for the same reason and too much so many times. No different than people driving distorted subs with their movies. Sometimes people prefer more of something even though it means some distortion comes with it. Think of how many people bother to set the sharpness control to where it should be.

Now, the above was a lot more necessary for SD where so much resolution was lost in the downsampling, that some sharpening was dialed in to increase the apparent resolution. Same is probably true to some extent on a 720p display where the filtering may over-soften the detail. I assure you that 99% of the people would prefer some amount of sharpening here even if it means that there are halos.

Noise reduction falls in exactly the same category. I am sure user surveys at large would show that average joe wants cleaner image with no grain. Even the people here ask for that from time to time. Remember Samsung BD player shipping with this filter always on?

The above is why this is hard. We have to convince the studios to cater to the needs of the few of us and get them to become one of us. We are making progress there but let's not assume that there is no reason whatsoever for doing what they do. Their business has driven them here for a reason. Best way to do this is to encourage them nicely and not assume that they are using cheap displays and don't know what they are doing .
post #119 of 746
To borrow your photography analogy, the studios could (should) deliver the highest quality RAW file and then users could apply whatever filters they deem necessary within the players? That way we would all get the quality we want?

I guess we're getting OT on this thread now...

Mark
post #120 of 746
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by amirm View Post

I am not trying to defend anyone but most subjective assessments of general public would show that users would prefer a sharper image with halo than one without. Just about every picture taken with a digital camera is sharpened for the same reason and too much so many times. No different than people driving distorted subs with their movies. Sometimes people prefer more of something even though it means some distortion comes with it. Think of how many people bother to set the sharpness control to where it should be.
Noise reduction falls in exactly the same category. I am sure user surveys at large would show that average joe wants cleaner image with no grain. Even the people here ask for that from time to time. Remember Samsung BD player shipping with this filter always on?.

3 rays of hope, nonetheless
- film maker approved masters without EE and DNR that the studios are legally bound to compress as is and not tinker with (e.g. film makers putting down their foots and insisting that art is not made for the lowest common denominator)
- the fact that you can have the cake and eat it too by delivering clean masters and leave the sharpening and filtering to the display chain where it belongs. People too clueless to know there are sharpness knobs and what they do are not smart enough either to see the lack of sharpening and boycott the product because of it.
- the trend to larger screens where EE and DNR become progressively more obvious and ugly to look at.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: HDTV Software Media Discussion
AVS › AVS Forum › Blu-ray & HD DVD › HDTV Software Media Discussion › HD Disk (HD-DVD and Blu-Ray) EE and DNR list