AVS Forum banner
Status
Not open for further replies.
1 - 20 of 27 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,304 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
What they have done to this show is a travesty of the HD medium! The pilot had excellent PQ (it was shot on film) but then they switched to HD video for the subsequent episodes and the PQ went right in the crapper! It's such a shame because the show itself is very good and had the potential to be demo material (PQ and content).


If you're showing off HD to someone, make sure it's not this show. They will wonder what the heck is all the fuss about HD.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
3,772 Posts
Please don't let this show give HD-video a bad

name! I am starting to wonder if they downconvert

to NTSC for editing then upconvert back to 1080i.


HD video can look way better than this show.

Try the tonight show on NBC for instance.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,733 Posts
Hi all,


I suspect something is being done intentionally for creative proposes, to make it look like it was shot on film and not hd and the result is what we are seeing.


Either that, or these people haven't figured out how to work with hd video.


Maybe a combination of both.


I it is too bad.. it is so awful......


hmm, I remember Bob Ross saying he was going to pass long comments about teh PQ, after he looked at the master. I wonder if he ever found out anything back.

-tony
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,836 Posts
I tried to watch it but failed. It might be a good show but it doesn't meet my minimum standard for image quality.



Frank
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,304 Posts
Discussion Starter · #7 ·
Video (HD or NTSC) simply doesn't lend itself well for dramatic storytelling, period. To use the "Tonight Show" for comparison is ludicrous. That is not a drama show and it doesn't have the requirements and restrictions that a drama show must work with (specially lighting). More appropriate would be to use "Diagnosis Murder" or even "Young and the Restless". None of the HD-video based shows can set a mood and draw you in like a good filmed show like "CSI", "Family Law", or "NYPD Blue".
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,019 Posts
I agree. I tuned in Last night and wondered what was up with the PQ. This has to be the worst example of HD.


Although the CBS sunday night movie 'Jennifer' looked pretty good. However my wife could'nt tell the difference because she had so many tears in her eyes it made the movie look like VHS:D


My 2cents


Mike Flanagan
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,733 Posts
Good Point.


Yes I agree the Tonight Show is not a good comparison.


But Y&R to me looks far better then Max B; I never got to see Diag Mur tho.


So hopefully cbs could do better on this show???


Also I think the complaints are about clairity of the picture, and not that we are not being darwn into the show or a mood is not being set.

-tony
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,304 Posts
Discussion Starter · #10 ·
Not just clarity, but also color (saturation and accuracy). This show fails miserably in both. I remember the pilot and it had a totally different feel to it.
 

·
Premium Member
Epson 5040, Oppo 203, Denon 8500H, Dish Hopper, Toshiba HD-DVD, Roku Premiere+
Joined
·
291 Posts
Agree that the show looks awful, which is a shame because I like the content. It seems like the intention is to shoot it soft or film-like. Maybe that works on a small set in NTSC. But in hi-def, on a large screen, the show simply looks out of focus. I hope the producers adjust the production style.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,733 Posts
vruiz,


I agree!

And forgot to meantion the color. Max B's color is much much worse then YandR's.

-tony
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,304 Posts
Discussion Starter · #13 ·
One thing that bothers me is that a lot of people seem to equate film-like with softness. I don't agree with that. A film image is more smooth, but certainly not soft. A show like "The District" (which in my opinion has the best picture quality of any show on television, including "CSI") is almost every bit as detailed as any HD video image you can find. Why can't all transfers be like this?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
9,204 Posts
I am going to forward these posts to our sales department. They in turn can discretly forward them to the producers. I agree the show looks too soft, but this is a creative call. The production facility is simply a contractor process and must conform to the wishes of the producers, otherwise they take the show somewhere else to get the look they want.


aka Glimmie

Laser Pacific Media Corporation


P.S.

For what ever it's worth, the CBS HDTV spot is equally as bad in the opposite direction IMO. It's way over enhanced. Real life does not jump out at you like that. But for the intended purpose of that spot, the HDTV wow factor, it's perfect. Again JMO on the creative aspects.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,304 Posts
Discussion Starter · #15 ·
Glimmie, can you speculate as to the reason for the change? The pilot episode was very good. Would you know (or find out) what didn't they like about it that prompted them to switch to video?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
816 Posts
Sorry I'm just an HDTV wannabe, but what's PQ?


In any case, I suspect that film costs more than video, so the switch was probably economic. Too bad for us viewers, though. You could even see the difference in SDTV.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
349 Posts
One of the worst. I actually caught myself watching the non-HD version after a commercial-surf. Could hardly tell the difference...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,144 Posts
Quote:
Originally posted by vruiz
Glimmie, can you speculate as to the reason for the change? The pilot episode was very good. Would you know (or find out) what didn't they like about it that prompted them to switch to video?
Without speaking for Glimmie, I would suspect that the intent is to eliminate any trace of "video-like" characteristics from the image. I only know of one show that is being shot on HD video with the support and enthusiasm of the director of photography, and that's "Pasadena." All the others are on HD video for financial reasons, and under those circumstances, the intent is to make as "film-like" an image as possible. To some, this simply means going to longer lenses and shooting at a lower stop to achieve shallower depth of field. To others it means keeping the highlights in check (sometimes difficult to do when trying to use any creative lighting in HD), and to others, it means taking the "ultra-enhanced" edge off the image, which unfortunately results in an overall softness that is not typical of film images. The bottom line is that you can't really make video into something it is not, which is film, and in some cases, you're better off not trying to. If you watch a bit of "Pasadena," you'll see that Roy Wagner (the director of photography on that show) not only doesn't try to limit the characteristics of the video camera, he embraces it, and winds up with an image that is clearly not film, but is eye catching and appropriate for the storytelling nonetheless. Perhaps a lesson to be learned by others.
 

·
Premium Member
Sony XBR-65A1E, Denon 3400, B&W
Joined
·
965 Posts
Agree about "Pasadena". Good example, even though only 480p. I've only seen one episode, but I thought this show's look worked very well with the content. The edginess matched the mood of the story.


"Max Bickford" is just dreadful. Due to football, I've only seen a few minutes of this shift to HD video. My first thought was that they were trying to prevent the actors from looking their ages. I've noticed Marg Helgenberger's close-ups have been softened on "CSI".


Whatever the reason, "Max" is a disaster. It's difficult to appreciate the content, when the look is so distractingly bad.
 
1 - 20 of 27 Posts
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top