A Few Words About A few words about...™ Patton -- in Blu-Ray (1 Viewer)

[Dave H]

I'll be curious if Fox makes a statement about this DNR issue. Of course, if they do, I have to wonder if they would just deny it to avoid more heat and the presumption to correct the problem. It sort of reminds me of the Star Wars Phantom Menace DVD issue where it was denied any edge enahncement was used when it was very obvious otherwise.

 

[Robert Harris]

Not necessarily more "damning," but attempting to explain a bit better what I perceive of the problems.
I'll repeat myself.
Patton is a Blu-Ray disc that could well be an end of year winner as most beautifully rendered classic or catalog title.
All of this is very much in the eyes of the beholder.
RAH

 

[Travis Brashear]

Not necessarily more "damning," but attempting to explain a bit better what I perceive of the problems.

Yes, but there's a mile of difference between:
"This is a disc that will be wonderfully reviewed, as it deserves to be, and the public will revel in the image's clarity and brilliance"
and
"anyone with a knowledge of the film, and of 70mm will immediately know that something has gone horribly wrong"
You're a brilliant guy, and I feel honored to converse with you, but for me, you sure do have an unorthodox style of communication, he he...

 

[Paul Hillenbrand]

, and the public will revel in the image's clarity and brilliance"
and
"anyone with a knowledge of the film, and of 70mm will immediately know that something has gone horribly wrong"
You're a brilliant guy, and I feel honored to converse with you, but for me, you sure do have an unorthodox style of communication, he he...

Both statements seem right on the mark to me.
Just think of Joe-Six-Pack as the "public" and how they like the "video" look.
Paul

 

[Robert Crawford]

I watched this BRD yesterday and though I can understand why some would think this is a great looking disc, I did notice the picture devoid of any film grain and a very glossy look to it. I'm sure others with a more critical eye than mine can tell that the picture has lost some detail, but how much detail is a question that many of us can't answered. IMO, the picture quality of this disc will impress some people and for me personally I'm glad to have this disc in my collection because it does offer an improvement over the SD DVD video presentation, but I am still going to write a letter to Fox to complain about this issue. I have doubts that my letter would do much good because I think the studios are listening to a segment of their consumers that want film grain eliminated, but they probably don't realize the process being utilized is also reducing picture detail, at least the people in charge that can make a decision to stop this process.

Crawdaddy

 

[Robert Crawford]

, and the public will revel in the image's clarity and brilliance"
and
"anyone with a knowledge of the film, and of 70mm will immediately know that something has gone horribly wrong"
You're a brilliant guy, and I feel honored to converse with you, but for me, you sure do have an unorthodox style of communication, he he...

It seems clear to me. Those that are ignorant to how the picture should look will most likely love this video presentation and those that have the knowledge to distinguish what it should look like versus what this disc is actually showing will have a problem with it.

 

[Charles_Y]

I still think Mr. Harris and others are quibbling. The image looks fine to me. There is room for differing opinions here, isn't there? I'm not so sure.

He should be focusing his acumen towards other titles coming along. I have found his posts quite interesting in the past and most often I'm in agreement but I think we should all move on now.

 

[Robert Crawford]

RAH

In short, some eyes are better trained and less forgiving of flaws.

 

[Robert Crawford]

I still think Mr. Harris and others are quibbling. The image looks fine to me. There is room for differing opinions here, isn't there? I'm not so sure.
He should be focusing his acumen towards other titles coming along. I have found his posts quite interesting in the past and most often I'm in agreement but I think we should all move on now.

Nobody is being held hostage to this thread. If people want to move on then they can do so while some of us have a need to continue this discussion.
Crawdaddy

 

[Charles_Y]

and I suppose you have to factor in the vewiing environment and equipment in use as well.

 

[Robert Crawford]

and I suppose you have to factor in the vewiing environment and equipment in use as well.

Those are factors too.
Crawdaddy

 

[AlexCosmo]

So, not to be cynical, but is it possible that some blu-ray transfers are being prepared with a Full Metal Jacket-style double-dip already in mind?

 

[Dave H]

So, not to be cynical, but is it possible that some blu-ray transfers are being prepared with a Full Metal Jacket-style double-dip already in mind?

I think that's definitely the case with some Blu-ray titles (ex., Terminator 2), however, other than the DNR issue it seems Patton is the full package here.

 

[Kris Z.]

So, not to be cynical, but is it possible that some blu-ray transfers are being prepared with a Full Metal Jacket-style double-dip already in mind?

Nothing to be cynical about, I'm sure that's the reality for many catalogue titles. But I have a hard time believing Patton would be one of them. It seems it could have been more or less perfect if it wasn't for the DNR, while the ones that will most likely get better versions down the road have been abysmal dumps from whatever old masters the studios have had lying around (Scary Movie, Face/Off etc.)
We've seen multiple reports from studios saying that even if they have HD masters of the movies, technology back then simply wasn't what it is today, and many of them will need to be re-transfered to take full advantage of Blu-ray.

 

[Rachael B]

I have not seen the disc yet. Mine's stille in the mail. After all this yada, yada, yada.....How much total detail has been eradicated, 1%, 2%, more....? Mr. Harris, you might well be the only one qualified to answer this...???

 

[Dave H]

Robert Harris,

I don't mean to sidetrack, but I know you've been involved in the Godfather restoration. This goes without saying, but please do everything in your power to prevent this issue happening to the eventual Godfather BD. Paramount is probably the worst studio to date when it comes to abusing its BD titles with DNR.

 

[Robert Harris]

I would bet, and there is probably no means of actually measuring this, but the loss of high frequency information could be anywhere from 10 - 25%.
To my eye, a huge amount.
As I mentioned on another board, compare this to The Sand Pebbles, which begins with 40% of the resolution of Patton. With everything handled beautifully on that one, it appears to have higher resolution, grain and all.
RAH

 

[Travis Brashear]

It seems clear to me. Those that are ignorant to how the picture should look will most likely love this video presentation and those that have the knowledge to distinguish what it should look like versus what this disc is actually showing will have a problem with it.

Sure, but if that's what Mr. Harris meant to indicate, why use the phrase "as it deserves to be" in regards to the Blu-ray being "wonderfully reviewed"? It's no biggie--if you get what Mr. Harris is saying, fine. I just find that, personally, there's often a very schizophrenic nature to his opinions, where he often lambasts and exalts titles in the same review. I often find it hard to get to the core truth of what he wants the consumer/reader to walk away with...

 

[Paul Hillenbrand]

Quote:

Paul

 

[Paul Hillenbrand]

Thank you Mr. Harris for your expertise, giving your time - educating and opening eyes for the improvement of authoring film to Blu-ray disc.
People are discussing now what can be done.
Blu-ray.com post#3683:

You can use knowlege of the photographic process, the director's style, that sort of thing. I've never seen Patton in the theater (though I keep asking the Senator to book that 70mm print that I keep missing in LA), but the second I looked at those pictures I knew there was something very wrong with it because they had the characteristic DNR traits, and not the traits of a 1970 movie

Thank you,
Paul