Quote:
Originally Posted by JulianPope /t/1466806/james-bond-and-film-grain#post_23180263
I appreciate the thought in your response. I had maxed the DNR during that film because I was trying to figure out if it would help reduce all the noise and it did a little, I usually keep it on low. I was an editor with a post production group by the way, the only reason it even need be mentioned is because I know what 'film' is and I don't appreciate being patronized. I just got this TV a few weeks ago and I'm trying to work out the kinks is all. I just want is the clearest cleanest possible picture as I'd imagine most people do.
Look, if you work in the industry then you should know and understand what grain is, how it works and also how DNR can degrade picture quality. I don't say this to antagonize you. I say it because you are claiming to be in the industry, but are asking why a title is grainy. I (and others) are a bit confused by that contradiction.
Each film is different. Some films are grainier than others and no doubt the older the film, the greater the chance their will be grain. Modern film stocks and digital cameras are spoiling people so when they see grain, they think something is wrong and want to erase it. All that does is erase detail.
Studios sometimes hear a few complaints about grain and than release a new version of the film, but grain scrubbed...
When it comes to this forum, most of the members are high end buyers and high information viewers. When we hear "I don't like grain" or "I hate black bars an want all Blu-Rays cropped to fill my screen" reactions range from mild annoyance to thermo-nuclear anger.
What I recommend for you is to play with your TV, get it set up right. Tweak tweak tweak until you have a calibrated image. Then you will see what releases are good (to you) and what releases are bad (to you).
By the way, most releases today that have grain also have some mosquito noise. It's very difficult for these encodes to resolve grain without noise. Few releases get it just right.