A Few Words About A few words about...™ 2001: A Space Odyssey -- in BD & HD (1 Viewer)

[Michel_Hafner]

Quote:

Last Crusade was probably from the camera negative (but maybe not). LOA in 89 was from duplicate negative.

 

[Dave Moritz]

I enjoyed the review of the HD-DVD release of 2001 A Space Odyssey. I am seriously thinking about picking up this title this friday along with Pirates 3, Mr & Mrs Smith, Close Encounters and Cast Away. I am thinking I will have to go with the Blu-ray version as I hate WB's use of Dialog Normalization. So just like the HP box set I will have to go with the Blu-ray. I might how ever have to go with HD-DVD for The Omega Man however, as it looks like the Blu-ray only has a mono sound track.
How good does 2001 look and how good is the sound on the Blu-ray version?
Again great review on the HD-DVD.

 

[Ken_McAlinden]

How good does 2001 look and how good is the sound on the Blu-ray version?

The Blu-Ray and the HD DVD use the same VC-1 encoded transfer, and they are both very good. There is some low intensity ringing on some high contrast edges noticeable in a few sequences, but it is very mild compared to the SD DVD versions. The PCM audio on the Blu-Ray is fantastic - a giant step-up from the DD5.1 on the SD DVD. Special features are the same for all versions, and the Blu-ray has more choices for alternate language tracks.
Regards,

 

[Dave Moritz]

Thanks for the feedback Ken, very much appreciated. I will have to see what my budget looks like this friday and if $ allows I may just pick up this title this friday.
Again thanks for the input.

 

[RolandL]

Regarding your equipment preventing you to see the difference to a DVD: 720p projectors are good enough to show a difference if there is one provided an appropriate downconversion to 720p is done somewhere in the signal chain. Not too many transfers have that much detail beyond 1280 x 720, Battle of the Bulge definitely hasn't. Regarding the Z4: It always looked pretty nice when fed 1080i and that might actually be preferred to 720p from the PS3 if the PS3 still has that bug when putting out 720p (I think that was just upsampled 480p for some time).
Oliver

I have a new receiver, the Yamaha 661 (only $355 on Amazon) so, I can now do a comparison of SD DVD 480p vs Blu-ray 720p. Very little difference on Battle of the Bulge. Maybe a very tiny bit sharper. The CINERAMA logo at the beginning has EE on the SD DVD but none on Blu-ray - that's the only big difference. I changed the output on the PS3 to 1080i but it looks the same or maybe a very tiny bit better with the 720p output. When I watch HD signals through cable, they do look a lot better than SD DVD.

 

[OliverK]

I have a new receiver, the Yamaha 661 (only $355 on Amazon) so, I can now do a comparison of SD DVD 480p vs Blu-ray 720p. Very little difference on Battle of the Bulge. Maybe a very tiny bit sharper. The CINERAMA logo at the beginning has EE on the SD DVD but none on Blu-ray - that's the only big difference. I changed the output on the PS3 to 1080i but it looks the same or maybe a very tiny bit better with the 720p output. When I watch HD signals through cable, they do look a lot better than SD DVD.

Roland,
I am not too surprised about your results. From my limited viewing of this title I can say I was astonished about the reviews it got - not a very good transfer that also has some EE and DNR.
BTW: I have known your site for a few years now and it is nice to meet on a forum like this
Oliver

 

[RolandL]

Roland,
I am not too surprised about your results. From my limited viewing of this title I can say I was astonished about the reviews it got - not a very good transfer that also has some EE and DNR.
BTW: I have known your site for a few years now and it is nice to meet on a forum like this
Oliver

Hi Oliver,
I'm not saying the transfer is bad. The SD version looks fine for SD. I just thought the Blu-ray would looked at lot better than the SD.
I would like to have Blu-ray or HD-DVD copies of all the films promoted as being "In CINERAMA". But, if they are not much better the SD versions, I'll skip them.

 

[OliverK]

I would like to have Blu-ray or HD-DVD copies of all the films promoted as being "In CINERAMA". But, if they are not much better the SD versions, I'll skip them.

I will probably still get all of them even if they are just a little better as this will show with closer viewing distances. Even the very bad HD-DVD of Spartacus is better than its DVD counterpart - why would I not want to watch the movie in the best version available even if the increase is not so big ?
So I think I will pretty much buy all large format based stuff on HDM and I eagerly wait for the day when the first HD disc comes out that is making full use of the potential of the large negative area that 70mm has to offer.
Oliver

 

[DaViD Boulet]

I will probably still get all of them even if they are just a little better as this will show with closer viewing distances. Even the very bad HD-DVD of Spartacus is better than its DVD counterpart - why would I not want to watch the movie in the best version available even if the increase is not so big ?

On the one hand, I agree with you. On the other hand, purchaching inferior/poorly mastered material tells the studios that we don't demand optimal quality with HD media. A hand-written letter to Universal expressing disappointment with the PQ of their Spartacus disc would do the world of cinephiles much more good.

 

[OliverK]

On the one hand, I agree with you. On the other hand, purchaching inferior/poorly mastered material tells the studios that we don't demand optimal quality with HD media. A hand-written letter to Universal expressing disappointment with the PQ of their Spartacus disc would do the world of cinephiles much more good.

I hear you and I leave the hand-written letters to you guys in the US but I agree there should be more complaining.
I think the biggest problems are the titles that are "good enough" for most and that get pretty nice reviews despite their shortcomings, Spartacus was so bad it even got some bd reviews but others just slip under the radar.
And I also think that most people in the studio would suspect that if a title like Spartacus does not sell it is due to the movie not being popular.
So to put something out there voicing disapproval of subpar transfers is very important - not buying and not saying anything will help even less.
Would be even better if some videophiles among us would be able to have a look at the final product before a transfer is approved and to compare it to the master it is taken from - now that would be something to strive for.
Oliver

 

[DaViD Boulet]

Would be even better if some videophiles among us would be able to have a look at the final product before a transfer is approved and to compare it to the master it is taken from - now that would be something to strive for.

Tell me about it. You know... that wouldn't be a bad idea. Not bad at all...

 

[Douglas Monce]

Would be even better if some videophiles among us would be able to have a look at the final product before a transfer is approved and to compare it to the master it is taken from - now that would be something to strive for.
Oliver

I think that is an incredibly bad idea. It's bad enough to have every yahoo at the studio chiming it, but to have some self professed "videophile" weighing in on how a particular title should look is just laughable. First of all there are so many different opinions on what these things should look like, who are you going to send. Just because you think a film should look a particular way doesn't mean that I do.
Frankly I'll take the professionals who understand the strengths and limitations of the hardware and software over an armature who THINKS he knows.
Doug

 

[DaViD Boulet]

Doug,

I'm assuming that anyone evaluating would be given the opportunity to a/b against the original projected print.

Frankly I'll take the professionals who understand the strengths and limitations of the hardware and software over an armature who THINKS he knows.

Looking at discs like Mary Poppins and Ben-Hur, even high-profile releases often manage to get mangled despite all the "experts" at the helm.

 

[Douglas Monce]

Doug,
I'm assuming that anyone evaluating would be given the opportunity to a/b against the original projected print.
Looking at discs like Mary Poppins and Ben-Hur, even high-profile releases often manage to get mangled despite all the "experts" at the helm.

In spite of some mediocre releases I still say no. A layman has no business in a telecine room. Whats next the CNN audience voting on a military battle plan?
Doug

 

[OliverK]

I think that is an incredibly bad idea. It's bad enough to have every yahoo at the studio chiming it, but to have some self professed "videophile" weighing in on how a particular title should look is just laughable. First of all there are so many different opinions on what these things should look like, who are you going to send. Just because you think a film should look a particular way doesn't mean that I do.
Frankly I'll take the professionals who understand the strengths and limitations of the hardware and software over an armature who THINKS he knows.
Doug

Doug,
this brings this thread way off topic and out of respect to RAH and as it is me who started this I will open another thread and adress your questions there.
Oliver

 

[Brian Whitish]

I am going tonight to see a 70mm print of 2001 at the Cinerama in Seattle. It will be the 12th time I have seen it in 70mm. I feel very fortunate right now! My favorite movie in my favorite theatre. I can hardly wait.

Brian

 

[Edwin-S]

I have to admit I was kind of disappointed in this one. I was expecting more. Don't get me wrong, I think the film looks really good in a lot of places, but it also looked soft in a lot of other areas. The meeting at the Clavius base looked pretty soft and detailess, at least on my set up. Unless it was supposed to look like that. I don't remember ever seeing a theatrical screening of this film.

 

[OliverK]

I have to admit I was kind of disappointed in this one. I was expecting more.

The difference between 70mm in the cinema and on HDM media is this:
In the cinema most movies shot in 70mm look superior to anything shot in 35mm. On HDM IMO no 70mm transfer comes close to the best 35mm transfers :frowning:
I hope this will change with the upcoming Fox releases of The Longest Day and Patton. Please note that none of the large format based releases so far look really bad with the notable exception of Spartacus (RAH was polite neough not to comment on it) but IMO they do not look that stunning either.

 

[Peter Raber]

I just watched this about 2 weekends ago in Blu-Ray and I thought it looked stunning. I saw details I never saw before, specifically with the rotating space station section (first Blue Danube part).

I had absolutely no issues at all with the way it looked and was in awe with it at most times. The Stargate scene was breathtaking.

The sound was also the best I have heard on any home format. Beautiful sound!

The special features were decent for the most part. I could do without Keir Dullea reading from papers on screen, but aside from that they were good additions.

A masterful disc IMO.

 

[Douglas Monce]

The difference between 70mm in the cinema and on HDM media is this:
In the cinema most movies shot in 70mm look superior to anything shot in 35mm. On HDM IMO no 70mm transfer comes close to the best 35mm transfers :frowning:
I hope this will change with the upcoming Fox releases of The Longest Day and Patton. Please note that none of the large format based releases so far look really bad with the notable exception of Spartacus (RAH was polite neough not to comment on it) but IMO they do not look that stunning either.

I guess that depends on what you call the best looking 35mm transfers. I think Grand Prix is probably the best looking film on HD right now. Of course it comes from a 35mm reduction print and not directly from 65mm.
If you are talking about actual 65mm transfered directly to HD then I agree with you. But then I've only seen one direct transfer of 65mm and thats the above mentioned Spartacus. I don't know of any others on HD that are direct from 65mm
To be honest, I'm not sure there is really enough resolution in HD to be able to see a dramatic difference between 35mm and 65mm anyway.
Doug