AVS Forum banner
1 - 20 of 110 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,205 Posts
Discussion Starter · #3 ·
Holeee craaap!



Who is the f****** r***** that approved this? Anyone?


Come on there has got to be a rational, logical explanation to this umm, errr, hmmm I don't really know how to describe this transfer.


Ok so we have DNR or a mutant version of it. We have EE or halos or ringing or edging or "Wonder Twin powers activate! Form force fields!" We still have that oh so annoying dust and hair that pops out once in a while in the bottom of the frame. The Criterion DVD has it. This blu-ray still has it. Funny how they manage not to DNR that



Let's get serious here. There are a lot of classic cinema - Translation: movies only A/V people or filmlovers have heard about - out there that will eventually get remastered for high definition release. Its very important that these companies must take the priority of preserving the look and style of the film. Even Criterion is not immune to this (see other *PIX* threads. Not DNR but EE and questionable AR). DNR must be used only when its absolutely necessary and when you do for f*** sake don't dial it to 11!

FUBAR
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,205 Posts
Discussion Starter · #5 ·
DVD Criterion Collection

Blu-ray File size: 19.50 GB


Bitrate: 20.22 mbps


Code:
Code:
Total   Video                                             
Title                                                           Codec   Length  Movie Size      Disc Size       Bitrate Bitrate Main Audio Track                          Secondary Audio Track
-----                                                           ------  ------- --------------  --------------  ------- ------- ------------------                        ---------------------
00007.MPLS                                                      AVC     1:56:39 21,818,370,048  24,373,664,720  24.94   20.22   LPCM 1.0 768Kbps (48kHz/16-bit)           LPCM 1.0 768Kbps (48kHz/16-bit)

DISC INFO:

Disc Title:     SALO
Disc Size:      24,373,664,720 bytes
Protection:     AACS
BD-Java:        No
BDInfo:         0.5.1

PLAYLIST REPORT:

Name:                   00007.MPLS
Size:                   21,818,370,048 bytes
Length:                 1:56:39 (h:m:s)
Total Bitrate:          24.94 Mbps
Description:            

VIDEO:

Codec                   Bitrate             Description     
-----                   -------             -----------     
MPEG-4 AVC Video        20222 kbps          1080p / 23.976 fps / 16:9 / High Profile 4.1

AUDIO:

Codec                           Language        Bitrate         Description     
-----                           --------        -------         -----------     
LPCM Audio                      English         768 kbps        1.0 / 48 kHz / 768 kbps / 16-bit
LPCM Audio                      English         768 kbps        1.0 / 48 kHz / 768 kbps / 16-bit

SUBTITLES:

Codec                           Language        Bitrate         Description     
-----                           --------        -------         -----------     
Presentation Graphics           English         26.858 kbps                     
Presentation Graphics           English         44.752 kbps                     
Presentation Graphics           English         0.640 kbps                      

FILES:

Name            Time In         Length          Size            Total Bitrate   
----            -------         ------          ----            -------------   
00004.M2TS      0:00:00.000     0:03:15.278     804,956,160     32,977          
00006.M2TS      0:03:15.278     1:53:23.755     21,013,413,888  24,708          

CHAPTERS:

Number          Time In         Length          Avg Video Rate  Max 1-Sec Rate  Max 1-Sec Time  Max 5-Sec Rate  Max 5-Sec Time  Max 10Sec Rate  Max 10Sec Time  Avg Frame Size  Max Frame Size  Max Frame Time  
------          -------         ------          --------------  --------------  --------------  --------------  --------------  --------------  --------------  --------------  --------------  --------------  
1               0:00:00.000     0:03:11.191     28,023 kbps     31,746 kbps     00:00:01.710    31,059 kbps     00:00:21.938    30,895 kbps     00:00:21.938    146,068 bytes   204,891 bytes   00:00:01.751    
2               0:03:11.191     0:10:08.274     22,783 kbps     35,837 kbps     00:07:03.881    35,240 kbps     00:07:01.337    35,050 kbps     00:06:56.290    118,782 bytes   351,208 bytes   00:11:21.806    
3               0:13:19.465     0:09:48.045     23,259 kbps     38,234 kbps     00:18:32.820    35,289 kbps     00:18:36.907    35,177 kbps     00:18:36.907    121,264 bytes   344,451 bytes   00:13:32.186    
4               0:23:07.511     0:12:56.192     24,284 kbps     35,654 kbps     00:25:06.213    34,955 kbps     00:25:05.212    33,956 kbps     00:25:00.498    126,608 bytes   255,402 bytes   00:33:23.876    
5               0:36:03.703     0:10:55.404     20,085 kbps     30,626 kbps     00:44:08.437    29,771 kbps     00:44:07.728    28,893 kbps     00:44:07.811    104,714 bytes   250,799 bytes   00:36:29.395    
6               0:46:59.107     0:09:49.088     19,514 kbps     31,846 kbps     00:56:24.172    29,571 kbps     00:55:57.562    27,723 kbps     00:55:56.728    101,739 bytes   241,486 bytes   00:55:57.604    
7               0:56:48.196     0:11:42.201     19,244 kbps     34,698 kbps     00:56:49.739    29,443 kbps     00:56:48.196    27,143 kbps     01:04:03.714    100,330 bytes   229,093 bytes   01:00:25.955    
8               1:08:30.397     0:07:03.047     20,275 kbps     26,086 kbps     01:13:07.299    25,244 kbps     01:13:04.171    24,731 kbps     01:14:39.349    105,703 bytes   220,761 bytes   01:13:44.962    
9               1:15:33.445     0:11:28.312     18,168 kbps     29,468 kbps     01:18:56.440    27,209 kbps     01:18:53.061    26,797 kbps     01:18:48.056    94,720 bytes    223,094 bytes   01:21:18.540    
10              1:27:01.758     0:09:39.996     17,527 kbps     35,231 kbps     01:27:01.883    28,622 kbps     01:29:35.411    24,552 kbps     01:29:35.411    91,380 bytes    223,315 bytes   01:29:12.680    
11              1:36:41.754     0:09:46.836     17,763 kbps     27,725 kbps     01:46:02.230    26,266 kbps     01:45:59.227    25,204 kbps     01:41:05.100    92,606 bytes    239,313 bytes   01:38:52.051    
12              1:46:28.590     0:10:10.443     16,289 kbps     36,440 kbps     01:56:35.947    35,314 kbps     01:56:31.943    33,497 kbps     01:56:27.480    84,927 bytes    257,328 bytes   01:49:13.797    

STREAM DIAGNOSTICS:

File            PID             Type            Codec           Language                Seconds                 Bitrate                 Bytes           Packets         
----            ---             ----            -----           --------                --------------          --------------          -------------   -----           
00004.M2TS      4113 (0x1011)   0x1B            AVC                                     195.112                 28,024                  683,469,805     3,717,234       
00004.M2TS      4352 (0x1100)   0x80            LPCM            eng (English)           195.112                 1,544                   37,649,984      234,336         
00004.M2TS      4353 (0x1101)   0x80            LPCM            eng (English)           195.112                 1,544                   37,649,984      234,336         
00004.M2TS      4608 (0x1200)   0x90            PGS             eng (English)           195.112                 0                       70              7               
00004.M2TS      4609 (0x1201)   0x90            PGS             eng (English)           195.112                 0                       70              7               
00004.M2TS      4610 (0x1202)   0x90            PGS             eng (English)           195.112                 0                       70              7               
00006.M2TS      4113 (0x1011)   0x1B            AVC                                     6803.588                19,999                  17,007,941,147  92,529,440      
00006.M2TS      4352 (0x1100)   0x80            LPCM            eng (English)           6803.588                1,542                   1,311,764,928   8,164,512       
00006.M2TS      4353 (0x1101)   0x80            LPCM            eng (English)           6803.588                1,542                   1,311,764,928   8,164,512       
00006.M2TS      4608 (0x1200)   0x90            PGS             eng (English)           6803.588                28                      23,497,494      133,922         
00006.M2TS      4609 (0x1201)   0x90            PGS             eng (English)           6803.588                46                      39,152,139      221,326         
00006.M2TS      4610 (0x1202)   0x90            PGS             eng (English)           6803.588                1                       559,841         3,224
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,525 Posts
This BD makes Gangs of New York look good.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
67 Posts
I know this is off topic, so mods delete if you wish...

but, I bought this film on DVD during dvdplanets 25 percent sale...

it was the only dvd I've ever sold.


I became a first time craigslist seller.


Thankfully I was able to get as much for it as I paid.


It was wrong.


Perhaps you need to be a scholar to find the joy of watching children sodomized and forced to eat crap...
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
34,841 Posts

Quote:
Originally Posted by mistermoravec /forum/post/15522735


Perhaps you need to be a scholar to find the joy of watching children sodomized

How can that be shown?


Last I checked, child pornography is illegal in this country.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
379 Posts

Quote:
Originally Posted by mistermoravec /forum/post/15522735


I know this is off topic, so mods delete if you wish...

but, I bought this film on DVD during dvdplanets 25 percent sale...

it was the only dvd I've ever sold.


I became a first time craigslist seller.


Thankfully I was able to get as much for it as I paid.


It was wrong.


Perhaps you need to be a scholar to find the joy of watching children sodomized and forced to eat crap...

You might have gotten "screwed," depending on when you sold it. If ti was the criterion version, a few years ago, during the several years when this had been discontinued and extremely rare, you could have easily gotten some 100 bucks for it.


as for the film; it is not that one expects to find joy in the imagery. quite the opposite.


art seeks to extract emotional responses from the viewer. One would hope that there is not one single repeated response that all art attempts to achieve
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
719 Posts

Quote:
Originally Posted by zinfamous /forum/post/15522917


You might have gotten "screwed," depending on when you sold it. If ti was the criterion version, a few years ago, during the several years when this had been discontinued and extremely rare, you could have easily gotten some 100 bucks for it.


as for the film; it is not that one expects to find joy in the imagery. quite the opposite.


art seeks to extract emotional responses from the viewer. One would hope that there is not one single repeated response that all art attempts to achieve

Personally, I don't think that the film managed to convey the true reality of its subject. All of the victims seemed over willing, the acting was poor. I would like to see a remake, but with acceptable boundaries, however focusing on the actual torment, and breaking of the victims. Hopefully with some sort of objective, where perhaps a strong person cannot be broken, and gains revenge on the participants. Sort of Salo, combined with Hard Candy.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,940 Posts

Quote:
Originally Posted by Pincho /forum/post/15523275


Personally, I don't think that the film managed to convey the true reality of its subject. All of the victims seemed over willing, the acting was poor.

Have to strongly disagree.
Quote:
I would like to see a remake, but with acceptable boundaries, however focusing on the actual torment, and breaking of the victims. Hopefully with some sort of objective, where perhaps a strong person cannot be broken, and gains revenge on the participants. Sort of Salo, combined with Hard Candy.

Salo was not made for the torture porn and revenge flick crowd. It's a deep misunderstanding if you think the film needs improvement in that direction. And that's why the film is after 30 years still as disturbing and powerful as ever, although it was made before all the 'progress' in splatter sfx and dehumanisation of the audience happened.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
719 Posts

Quote:
Originally Posted by mhafner /forum/post/15523371


Have to strongly disagree.


Salo was not made for the torture porn and revenge flick crowd. It's a deep misunderstanding if you think the film needs improvement in that direction. And that's why the film is after 30 years still as disturbing and powerful as ever, although it was made before all the 'progress' in splatter sfx and dehumanisation of the audience happened.

Actually, it looks the opposite to me, it looks too porn, and not disturbing enough. People just do as they are told, and most of it is just silly. It makes it look like anyone could just do these things, and not have a struggle on their hands, which is scary if anyone did think it was this easy.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
470 Posts
The film was an allegory for fascism and the abuse of absolute power, so the victims being "unable" to defend themselves served a purpose. It's also strenuously accurate to the lengthy writings of de Sade, in which he often didn't write characters so much as he did these personifications of vice and the victims that satisfied them. (There's some neat psychology hiding in that pretensions wank material, though.)


Looking forward to these getting updated. I know the Blu-ray is crap already, but I'm curious if the Criterion DVD is much worse...

Edit: Nobody else is seeing screencaps yet, right...?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
455 Posts
For those wondering just what the hell what happened here, it's worth reading the Blu-ray.com thread on the subject, which has some good info amongst the disgusting apologetics for what might go down in history as the Worst HD Transfer Ever. Of particular note is Torsten Kaiser's post, which details the provenance of the master and specific mistakes made along the way -- apparently they didn't even have the telecine equipment configured correctly!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
226 Posts
Um, wow, can't believe I am going to say this, but going by those screenshots I think I actually like the look of the DVD better.


KT
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,205 Posts
Discussion Starter · #20 ·

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dan Average /forum/post/15531560


For those wondering just what the hell what happened here, it's worth reading the Blu-ray.com thread on the subject, which has some good info amongst the disgusting apologetics for what might go down in history as the Worst HD Transfer Ever. Of particular note is Torsten Kaiser's post, which details the provenance of the master and specific mistakes made along the way -- apparently they didn't even have the telecine equipment configured correctly!

Oh man they looove us over there. That is just a fanboy forum. Embarrassing really. Lots of "glowing" reviews
BTW what are they calling me now? screenshot scientologist?
 
1 - 20 of 110 Posts
Top