The Longest Day comparison *PIX* - Page 6 - AVS Forum | Home Theater Discussions And Reviews
Forum Jump: 
Reply
 
Thread Tools
post #151 of 352 Old 06-22-2008, 04:10 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Hughmc's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Oregon
Posts: 7,511
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 18 Post(s)
Liked: 55
Steeb, I disagree.
Hughmc is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #152 of 352 Old 06-22-2008, 04:12 PM
Advanced Member
 
kdssrugby's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: The Great White North
Posts: 675
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Here are some screen caps of Tartan Videos The Seventh Seal on Blu-ray. This is quite a grainy film but gives you the idea of what a B&W film would look like if DNR wasn t applied. It was filmed in '58 and in 35mm.











kdssrugby is offline  
post #153 of 352 Old 06-22-2008, 04:31 PM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
Art Sonneborn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Battle Creek,MI USA
Posts: 24,252
Mentioned: 18 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1278 Post(s)
Liked: 1703
Art Sonneborn is online now  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #154 of 352 Old 06-22-2008, 04:33 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Hughmc's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Oregon
Posts: 7,511
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 18 Post(s)
Liked: 55
This is a great example of the issue I have with grain/noise.


http://www.imagehosting.com/out.php/...venthSeal8.jpg



The details of the face are excellent due to grain, but the clouds behind him are out of focus and that is fine as that is the way it is filmed. What isn't fine with me is the clouds have that grain/noise and at the same time they are blurry. Grain/noise in that case does zero good and IMO detracts from parts just as improperly applied DNR does, not from the entire picture as I said it looks excellent with grain. My opinion is based on what I am seeing in the screen cap taking it for granted it is as accurate as one can see. I am looking at it through my HTPC on my 60in display:
Hughmc is offline  
post #155 of 352 Old 06-22-2008, 04:43 PM
Advanced Member
 
sperron's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 831
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 11
If you want a real laugh, take a look at the edge enhancement around John Wayne's hat. It looks like someone photoshopped it onto his head. Look at his neck where it meets the collar, same effect.




One of these has been excessively DNRed and then EEed. Guess which one.
sperron is offline  
post #156 of 352 Old 06-22-2008, 04:43 PM
 
louigi222's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Albuquerque NM
Posts: 436
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by Steeb View Post

Did you or did you not post: "[snip]but let your pics do your talking for you. Really, they speak volumes. Let US decide if the Patton screen pics are "despicable." It could have been fun if you just posted the comparison and commented, "well...what do you guys think?"

To suggest that he should let everyone else post their opinions while he sits silently is ridiculous. To suggest that we're not intelligent enough to form our own opinions (and that we're operating under a herd mentality) is insulting.

Steeb,
It may surprise you to know that most people ( outside this forum...anyway) would conclude that Xylon's screen shots are sheer propaganda and would be dismissed out of hand as anyone with an agenda could easily alter the screen shots to support their position. This is not to suggest Xylon is doing this...I'm sure he isn't.
louigi222 is offline  
post #157 of 352 Old 06-22-2008, 04:45 PM
 
FoxyMulder's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Scotland
Posts: 5,823
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 12
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hughmc View Post

This is a great example of the issue I have with grain/noise.


http://www.imagehosting.com/out.php/...venthSeal8.jpg



The details of the face are excellent due to grain, but the clouds behind him are out of focus and that is fine as that is the way it is filmed. What isn't fine with me is the clouds have that grain/noise and at the same time they are blurry. Grain/noise in that case does zero good and IMO detracts from parts just as improperly applied DNR does, not from the entire picture as I said it looks excellent with grain. My opinion is based on what I am seeing in the screen cap taking it for granted it is as accurate as one can see. I am looking at it through my HTPC on my 60in display:

The clouds aren't blurry though they are as you first stated simply out of focus as the cameraman is focussing on the actor's face.

It looks superb in my opinion.....You would be able to soften what you are seeing by turning down your sharpness control or turning on your televisions noise reduction control.....Leave the source untouched and use your television and projector controls to alter it.
FoxyMulder is offline  
post #158 of 352 Old 06-22-2008, 04:48 PM
 
FoxyMulder's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Scotland
Posts: 5,823
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 12
Quote:
Originally Posted by louigi222 View Post

Steeb,
It may surprise you to know that most people ( outside this forum...anyway) would conclude that Xylon's screen shots are sheer propaganda and would be dismissed out of hand as anyone with an agenda could easily alter the screen shots to support their position. This is not to suggest Xylon is doing this...I'm sure he isn't.

Of course you know this because you actually polled the entire population before making your post
FoxyMulder is offline  
post #159 of 352 Old 06-22-2008, 04:49 PM
 
Steeb's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Vegas
Posts: 2,558
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 54
Quote:
Originally Posted by louigi222 View Post

Steeb,
It may surprise you to know that most people ( outside this forum...anyway) would conclude that Xylon's screen shots are sheer propaganda and would be dismissed out of hand as anyone with an agenda could easily alter the screen shots to support their position.

It may surprise you to know that I couldn't care less about what "most people outside of this forum" think about the pics. Their opinions and conclusions are completely irrelevant and have no bearing on my position that your suggestion that Xylon keep his opinions out of these threads was rude and out of line.
Steeb is offline  
post #160 of 352 Old 06-22-2008, 04:55 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Hughmc's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Oregon
Posts: 7,511
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 18 Post(s)
Liked: 55
Quote:
Originally Posted by FoxyMulder View Post

The clouds aren't blurry though they are as you first stated simply out of focus as the cameraman is focussing on the actor's face.

It looks superb in my opinion.....You would be able to soften what you are seeing by turning down your sharpness control or turning on your televisions noise reduction control.....Leave the source untouched and use your television and projector controls to alter it.

Blurry/out of focus is what I meant and just on the clouds and applied properly is where DNR would have helped and not hurt IMO like grain does. Again, just the clouds and not the entire picture.
Hughmc is offline  
post #161 of 352 Old 06-22-2008, 04:58 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Sean_O's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Carlsbad, CA.
Posts: 1,542
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Worst use of DNR I have ever seen. Even the white subtitles bleed from excessive use.
Sean_O is offline  
post #162 of 352 Old 06-22-2008, 05:04 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Hughmc's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Oregon
Posts: 7,511
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 18 Post(s)
Liked: 55
This really angers me. For the record, when I stated Ken H. latest mantra I meant the latest term or as he calls it boilerplate which is in reference to the very topic of heated debate in this and other threads. It was not an attack on Ken H., but a reference point.

My point was and is that while I agree with what Ken H and many posters are saying with respect to this topic, yet I also understand, agree and support opposing points of view.

https://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showt...7#post14117227
Hughmc is offline  
post #163 of 352 Old 06-22-2008, 05:12 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
RobertR's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: California
Posts: 6,891
Mentioned: 16 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 686 Post(s)
Liked: 819
Quote:


Apparently, you're not "lucky" enough to EVER watch 35 mm film to use it as a guide for your visual reference, whether it's in your home or not.
Does going to the movies every week for the past 50 years count? 65/70mm, Cinerama, 3-D, 35mm, 16mm, 8mm,....you name, I've seen it. I actually prefer the theater over my own HT.

Then your "golly, how are we supposed to know what film looks like, because we don't have film projectors at home" comment makes no sense.
RobertR is online now  
post #164 of 352 Old 06-22-2008, 05:13 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
AmishFury's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: too close to kentucky
Posts: 1,204
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 19 Post(s)
Liked: 13
sorry to off topic for a bit

is the seventh seal bluray all region?
AmishFury is offline  
post #165 of 352 Old 06-22-2008, 05:13 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Vern Dias's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 1999
Location: Allen TX USA
Posts: 4,914
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 15
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hughmc View Post

Blurry/out of focus is what I meant and just on the clouds and applied properly is where DNR would have helped and not hurt IMO like grain does. Again, just the clouds and not the entire picture.

Can't be done, at least not for any reasonable price and without a tremendous amount of human intervention. We are not talking about a single frame, but 24 frames per second.

Grain is native to film, accept it or turn down the sharpness on your display.

By the way, the background including the clouds are blurry because the director and the director of photography wanted them that way to focus the viewers attention on the face. The grain are the film components that captured the background. Your personal preferences are not a valid reason to change that fact, IMHO.

Vern
Vern Dias is offline  
post #166 of 352 Old 06-22-2008, 05:17 PM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
Dave Mack's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: NYC
Posts: 11,879
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 13 Post(s)
Liked: 13
Do people realize that grain are the particles in film that capture the image...? Like the brush strokes in a painting. The more you get rid of grain, the more you get rid of the image that was captured on the film.
Dave Mack is offline  
post #167 of 352 Old 06-22-2008, 05:23 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Hughmc's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Oregon
Posts: 7,511
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 18 Post(s)
Liked: 55
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vern Dias View Post

Can't be done, at least not for any reasonable price and without a tremendous amount of human intervention. We are not talking about a single frame, but 24 frames per second.

This is the problem I have with the grain haters. Grain is native to film, accept it or turn down the sharpness on your display.

By the way, the clouds are blurry because the director and the director of photography wanted it that way. Your personal preferences are not a valid reason to change that fact IMHO.

Vern

I don't hate grain and welcome it as you would see if you read my posts. As far as the clouds being blurry, that is what most films exhibit when they are shot that way and I understand why.

We recently had an excellent example on HDnet movies with The Outlaw Josey Wales showing how everything is in focus both foreground and background with lots of healthy grain.

IMO you cannot definitively say the director's wanted it that way anymore than I can say they leave it that way because they have other reasons for leaving it that way. I understand it is director's intent if they get that one in a million shot that has some flaws and yet they leave it that way as in they may not like it, but leave it as is.
Hughmc is offline  
post #168 of 352 Old 06-22-2008, 05:26 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Hughmc's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Oregon
Posts: 7,511
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 18 Post(s)
Liked: 55
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dave Mack View Post

Do people realize that grain are the particles in film that capture the image...? Like the brush strokes in a painting. The more you get rid of grain, the more you get rid of the image that was captured on the film.


I do understand Dave and you know where I stand on this issue. (in the middle) We also recently had a forum member who works in film reproduction say applied properly DNR can be used without loss of detail. That was either in this or the Patton thread.
Hughmc is offline  
post #169 of 352 Old 06-22-2008, 05:31 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Vern Dias's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 1999
Location: Allen TX USA
Posts: 4,914
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 15
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hughmc View Post

IMO you cannot definitively say the director's wanted it that way anymore than I can say they leave it that way because they have other reasons for leaving it that way. I understand it is director's intent if they get that one in a million shot that has some flaws and yet they leave it that way as in they may not like it, but leave it as is.

Yes I can, because the DP realized exactly what his depth of field was going to be when he chose that shutter speed and f stop for that shot. He knew in advance that he had a maybe +/- 6" or 12" or whatever in measured distance to the subject from the camera that would be in sharp focus.

Vern
Vern Dias is offline  
post #170 of 352 Old 06-22-2008, 05:38 PM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
Dave Mack's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: NYC
Posts: 11,879
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 13 Post(s)
Liked: 13
don't forget choice of lens, long vs. short.

Dave Mack is offline  
post #171 of 352 Old 06-22-2008, 05:41 PM
Advanced Member
 
kdssrugby's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: The Great White North
Posts: 675
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
@AmishFury: Yep its all region, best $50 I ve spent on blu-ray. I don t see it being released in N.A any time soon so thats why I picked it up, definitely my favourite Bergman film. It also comes with a dvd version which you can either compare the blu to, or to lend to a friend: here's a link:
http://www.amazon.co.uk/Seventh-Seal...4181603&sr=1-1
kdssrugby is offline  
post #172 of 352 Old 06-22-2008, 05:44 PM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
Dave Mack's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: NYC
Posts: 11,879
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 13 Post(s)
Liked: 13
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hughmc View Post

I do understand Dave and you know where I stand on this issue. (in the middle) We also recently had a forum member who works in film reproduction say applied properly DNR can be used without loss of detail. That was either in this or the Patton thread.

gotcha...
Dave Mack is offline  
post #173 of 352 Old 06-22-2008, 06:09 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Kram Sacul's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Posts: 5,232
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Liked: 10
The Seventh Seal looks even better than the very good broadcast HD version I saw. Excellent detail and the grain isn't screwed with. See, that's the thing: it's not that we like grain, we just don't want it tampered with because the DNR tools of today are just godawful.
Kram Sacul is offline  
post #174 of 352 Old 06-22-2008, 06:13 PM
 
louigi222's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Albuquerque NM
Posts: 436
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by sperron View Post

If you want a real laugh, take a look at the edge enhancement around John Wayne's hat. It looks like someone photoshopped it onto his head. Look at his neck where it meets the collar, same effect.




One of these has been excessively DNRed and then EEed. Guess which one.

Excellent example of the DNR look Vs the grainy look. Now I can actually understand why Fox may have decided to go with the non-grain look for The Longest Day. Myself, I prefer the non-grain look as that grainy screen shot looks unnatural with way to much grain for my taste. I guess I belong in the (3-D PoP), Discovery channel side of the fence. But, having said that, my next BD purchase will be How The West Was Won whether it's grainy or not.
louigi222 is offline  
post #175 of 352 Old 06-22-2008, 06:42 PM
Newbie
 
scottomatic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 13
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by paku View Post

Agreed.

The opinion that film is a mysterious, almost magical medium where you can never tell how something should, or more often how something shouldn't look, is, I think, incorrect. But either way many of these cases are so clear-cut that no sweeping statements are necessary. If you really believe that the Longest Day very well could have looked like the last shot of John Wayne, then I'm sorry, but I'm afraid you have no business arguing the issue. Even without having seen an original 35mm theatre showing it is quite clear that something is not right, and anyone who's played around in Photoshop would have noticed the striking similarities to the paint brush filters.

Best quote of the whole thread, I think. I agree 100%. Anybody who doesn't see that there is a ton of DNR on this is in denial.
scottomatic is offline  
post #176 of 352 Old 06-22-2008, 06:58 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
paku's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Sweden
Posts: 1,687
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 57 Post(s)
Liked: 40
And just for fun I thought I'd try to modify the above Seventh Seal screenshot with a process I think similar to that of the Longest Day. This was done in Photoshop using the accented edges filter, and then with some sharpening applied:


It looks so clear and life-like and full of detail! It's like I'm actually looking through a window!
paku is offline  
post #177 of 352 Old 06-22-2008, 07:02 PM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
Dave Mack's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: NYC
Posts: 11,879
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 13 Post(s)
Liked: 13
try the watercolor filter now...


Dave Mack is offline  
post #178 of 352 Old 06-22-2008, 07:18 PM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
Art Sonneborn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Battle Creek,MI USA
Posts: 24,252
Mentioned: 18 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1278 Post(s)
Liked: 1703
Additionally ,anyone who has paused a black and white film like Seventh Seal the grain never ever looks that obtrusive as it moves . In other words, the detail remains while the grain visibility is reduced several fold in moving images as opposed to single paused frames. With DNRed images it looks like crap no matter what.

Art
Art Sonneborn is online now  
post #179 of 352 Old 06-22-2008, 07:24 PM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
Ken H's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: Metro Detroit
Posts: 45,469
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 8 Post(s)
Liked: 26
Quote:
Originally Posted by Robert George View Post

Some here seem to have lost sight of the fact that we are not looking at film. We are looking at an electronic representation of film. It isn't the same thing and never will be the same thing.......

Quote:
Originally Posted by Hughmc View Post

As someone stated earlier in this or another thread, Jeff, the bland did DVD reviews here on AVS a few years back. Many were reviewed as "reference". Reference in that case would seem to mean reference for DVD quality. I think the same scenario would apply here. BD reference disks IMO would mean reference for BD and not reference in comparing to the actual film. IMO and based on the stringent requirements many have for film reproduction, while some BD's maybe close to reproducing film, none ever really will be.

We already know different.

Many existing BD releases are faithful to the film. Those not faithful are the problem. We know that an accurate BD transfer can replicate the specific look of a film.

'Better Living Through Modern, Expensive, Electronic Devices'

Ken H is offline  
post #180 of 352 Old 06-22-2008, 07:30 PM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
Art Sonneborn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Battle Creek,MI USA
Posts: 24,252
Mentioned: 18 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1278 Post(s)
Liked: 1703


This frame is still awe inspiring to me and demonstrates so well what we know can exist if the people doing the transfers care.

Art
Art Sonneborn is online now  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Reply Blu-ray Software

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page


Forum Jump: 

Posting Rules  
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off