AVS Forum banner
1 - 20 of 22 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
457 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
I just got Crank and Xmen 3- the last stand yesterday. Mainly got Crank for its visual attributes and got Xmen because I like the movie and it was a tier 1 on the tier list. Crank looked awesome, bad movie (imo) and in thinking a tier 1 would look pretty good, Xmen looked like crap. I couldnt believe it was a tier 1, There was some scenes that looked pretty good but most of the movie was extremely grainy! One scene that looked really grainy was when Wolverine and Storm are walking through the fog in the woods, talk about grain! I also own Ultraviolet and Talladega Nights, which are both in lower tiers looked a world of a difference better. Havent seen Xmen on dvd yet on this set, but at points I would guess that it can look just as good if not dare say better. Anyone else have these issues with this movie?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
977 Posts
The grains is due to the Super 35 process which Brett Ratner is a big fan of. So like xbdestroya said ... its inherent to the film.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,995 Posts
You shouldn't fault the transfer, but then again according to pure eye candy aspect of Fett's ranking system, it shouldn't be Tier 1. I would have placed it way way down on the list.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,324 Posts

Quote:
Originally Posted by xradman /forum/post/0


You shouldn't fault the transfer, but then again according to pure eye candy aspect of Fett's ranking system, it shouldn't be Tier 1. I would have placed it way way down on the list.

I think thats the whole point. Tier system has nothing to do with reference, directors intent or any of that other **** you guys keep bringing up. If you read the d*** thread for once, it says this is purely based on PQ/Eye Candy. Grain is not eye candy. It definitely falls into the reference category, but not candy.


With that being said, I still feel that overall, the movie would get a Tier 1 for me. There were minor spots that grain was visible but nothing to remove it out of a tier 1 status.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,177 Posts

Quote:
Originally Posted by benes /forum/post/0


Why do you think grain is a bad thing?

It's distracting and draws attention to itself and takes away from the veiwing experience. I'd much rather view a smooth picture than a grainy one. Having grain is like having a projector that has the screen door effect. It's distracting.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
457 Posts
Discussion Starter · #11 ·

Quote:
Originally Posted by Legairre /forum/post/0


It's distracting and draws attention to itself and takes away from the veiwing experience. I'd much rather view a smooth picture than a grainy one. Having grain is like having a projector that has the screen door effect. It's distracting.

I totally agree its very distracting, when think of a hi-def, I think eye candy. If i want grain ill dust off and put in a vhs. Different strokes for different folks i guess.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,654 Posts
My understanding is that the problem is a lot of the fine detail also gets sucked out of the transfer if you attempt to remove the grain.


We should be asking for the most accurate transfers of the movies as they were intended to be seen in a theater. I too remember Xmen3 being grainy in the theater, and in fact made the comment to the person who was with me that I'd be willing to bet people will be complaining about grain in the BD disc upon its release...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
242 Posts
How close are you people sitting to your TV screen? At recommended viewing distance (see your TV manual) the grain is almost not even noticeable (cept for a few dark scenes) and all your left with is a very bright, sharp, vibrant image. Most definately belongs in Tier 1.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,513 Posts
DING! DING! DING!


I watched the dvd a week ago and thought it looked amazing for a dvd playing it on my PS3. I then purchased the BD version this week and thought this isn't much better than the dvd. Before anyone goes off, yes it is better. Really though it isn't that much better and my son thought the same. The dvd was that good PQ. I also bought this thinking it was going to be outstanding as it is Tier 1. I now call BS on some on the tier system as well as how the studios are putting these on BD.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
351 Posts

Quote:
Originally Posted by metalsaber /forum/post/0


I think thats the whole point. Tier system has nothing to do with reference, directors intent or any of that other **** you guys keep bringing up. If you read the d*** thread for once, it says this is purely based on PQ/Eye Candy. Grain is not eye candy. It definitely falls into the reference category, but not candy.


With that being said, I still feel that overall, the movie would get a Tier 1 for me. There were minor spots that grain was visible but nothing to remove it out of a tier 1 status.

I agree, the tier thread should be about PQ not about good/bad transfer and directors intent. I also hate grain, in the theatres thats fine if thats how the director intended it but for dvd I find it unacceptable to add grain. I dont care how the director wants me to see the dvd. It only matters how I want to see the dvd. 99.9% of the world does NOT have movie theatres in their homes, they have regular tvs and want a crisp, clean picture especially when they are paying for a HD disc.


my 2 cents

- Tom
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,177 Posts

Quote:
Originally Posted by edvedder /forum/post/0


How close are you people sitting to your TV screen? At recommended viewing distance (see your TV manual) the grain is almost not even noticeable (cept for a few dark scenes) and all your left with is a very bright, sharp, vibrant image. Most definately belongs in Tier 1.

THX recommends a veiwing angle of 36 degrees and SMTP recommends 30 degrees. I sit 13ft 6in from a 104 inch screen for a 31 degree viewing angle. This is 5 degrees farther back than THX standards and I'm 1 degree closer than the SMTP standards. Either way this seating was planned with both THX and SMTP standards in mind when we built our theater. THX states HD content for a 104 inch screen can be viewed as close as 11ft 6in.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
16,428 Posts
Actually, it's Brian Singer who likes Super35. Brett Ratner (and Christopher Nolan) likes Panavision scope (so do I) and has used it on most of his films. Brett used Super35 because the other two X-Men films were shot in Super35 and he didn't want to change styles.


I've noticed that a lot of newer films have tons of grain. Either they're deliberately going with that documentary "look" started back with Saving Private Ryan (and one could say even Schindler's List) or they're starting to cheapen out and use poorer high speed film stock and natural lighting.


Another possibility is that HD is showing us that studios are not using premium quality film stock from the camera negatives to produce consumer grade IP's for telecine work. Another reason to use archival 2k and 4k supervised digital IP's for the best possible source material-- it's only one generation away from the camera negatives, or in the case of classic films, the best surviving negatives.


Dan
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
16,428 Posts
One way to know for sure is to watch the full screen DVD's and compare. If there is obvious cropping and panning/scanning in scenes with no special effects then that's a big tell that one or more were shot anamorphically. Also, look at light/lens flares (not from SFX as those are faked) from vehicle headlights or lamps, etc. If they are oval then that shows anamorphic lenses were used.


One reason I say to not look at sequences with SFX is because even with Super35 they are usually rendered at 2.35:1 to save time and money. The Lord of the Rings films were shot Super35, but the SFX were done at 2.35:1 so you get a false idea that perhaps they were shot with anamorphic lenses when you watch the full screen versions.


IMDB's information is supplied by users. They aren't always correct. Just like Wikipedia.


Dan
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
8,011 Posts
I have little respect for the tier system and question it's wisdom. However, if X3 ain't tier 1, the tier system might as well fall down and go boom.


X3 looks like it looks, take it or leave it. I'm quite satisfied with my copy!


Grain, grain, go away and don't come back any other day, NOT!
It's film, c'est la vie.
 
1 - 20 of 22 Posts
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top