A Few Words About A few words about...™ The Fury -- in Blu-ray (1 Viewer)

[Sgt Pepper]

You know, there is something very oily about your posts - they are all tinged with, how shall we say, a little too much derision for me to respond to. The "how can you remember what a film looked like" is a tired trope and a bore. I remember because I have a really good memory for detail and because, over the years, subsequent to a film's release, I've either owned prints or seen them and that includes The Fury a mere two years ago. Hope that explains it for you.

"Heinshisway, there is one thing that keeps bothering me about your posts, how can you remember how a film looked in the cinema?"

It's Haines and it seems to me that it's not just "one thing" that bothers you about my posts - seems to me that it's everything about them.

Sir, I am not being oily or anything of the like, what I am doing is calling you out on what I see are flaws in your arguments and review.
One being remembering a colour grade from a movie you viewed a few years ago and some much longer, the other using just your eyes to see that your system is equal to the studio monitor you viewed some material on. Your eyes can be notoriously bad a comparing colour grades when not presented along side each other, although in this case you had both to view which is the way it should be, but maybe in your case still incorrect.
I have no doubt you are an expert in the field but you are using at times subjective opinion to prove your point, when I tend to rely on scientific fact. You dismiss screen grabs even though some are excellent examples of material that can be looked at side by side using a controlled and factual comparisons.
I have nothing against you and neither do I care if you think my posts are oily, but I will say when I think things aint done right.

PS
For the record I think TT are doing an excellent job and can not wait for the future release of Rollerball.

 

[schan1269]

Seriously y'all...

You are acting like JimmyJet

Pronouncements about inadequacy with no bearings on who gives a shit.

 

[schan1269]

All this spattering by Tele over "what are you viewing on"....good lord. But here is my take.

No matter what website or rag(paper or net) that has movie reviews of DVD and BD shouldn't have reviewers using LCD TV or LCD projectors.

But that is my opinion. Just like screen grabs on DVDbeaver...or whoever else you care to mention...if not viewed via a plasma, DLP or D-ILA/LCoS...I couldn't care less.

 

[rich_d]

Bruce,

I'll keep this short.

Your so-called "side-by-side" comparison ... which you went on and on about needing ... is anything but.

 

[Sgt Pepper]

All this spattering by Tele over "what are you viewing on"....good lord. But here is my take.

No matter what website or rag(paper or net) that has movie reviews of DVD and BD shouldn't have reviewers using LCD TV or LCD projectors.

But that is my opinion. Just like screen grabs on DVDbeaver...or whoever else you care to mention...if not viewed via a plasma, DLP or D-ILA/LCoS...I couldn't care less.

Excuse me but don't you think that is crucial when reviewing?

 

[schan1269]

Excuse me but don't you think that is crucial when reviewing?

The post you quote says my take.

Yes it is "crucial". But...

Does anybody else here have a JVC D-ILA firing on a Screen Research Clearpix2 .8 gray? (lesser screen/projectors have no bearing on my situation. If a reviewer is using a 8350 on a Mustang screen where their entire set-up cost 1/4 of my projector...not interested)

Does anybody else here have a 50" Hitachi Director series ALIS that is calibrated? (fully aware of the challenges ALIS creates with 1080P24 and what it does do for DVD that makes reviews using it unrealistic for anyone else...other than to say whether "as a whole story" if a title is worth having)

 

[Sgt Pepper]

I think at the very least the particular display for reviewing purposes should be professionally calibrated to a point where colour errors and gamma can be set to the correct parameters at least then we will be receiving reviews that have little or no variance from the original intent.
I also feel IMO that some sort of standard for reviewers should be put into to place, along the lines of a THX qualification. Not only would this aid the review but also add some credence to the person doing the review.

 

[schan1269]

That is all fine and dandy if you give two craps about THX standards. Sure video standards still mean something(and not discounting a THX calibration). Audio THX is a joke.

My ALIS plasma is calibrated. Will it produce the exact same picture as a Kuro 151FD? Hell no.

Will a $600 LG 720P 50" that is calibrated produce the same picture? No.

I do echo the one sentiment that any review be accompanied by what the video display is. I always find it funny when I read a review stating "Except for the crushed blacks, it is a fine picture". First thought..."Shoulda bought a plasma, you wouldn't be experiencing crushed blacks".

 

[Moe Dickstein]

We might also remember that for all his experience and knowledge, Mr. Kimmel is not an official reviewer here and is simply investing his own valuable time to give his opinions on releases for whatever benefit other members may derive from same.I find the overall tone of your words to him and Mr. Harris in another thread to be a tad condescending. You might do well to know who you are interrogating before you don the black cloth.

 

[Sgt Pepper]

We might also remember that for all his experience and knowledge, Mr. Kimmel is not an official reviewer here and is simply investing his own valuable time to give his opinions on releases for whatever benefit other members may derive from same.I find the overall tone of your words to him and Mr. Harris in another thread to be a tad condescending. You might do well to know who you are interrogating before you don the black cloth.

I am interrogating no one, I simply enquired about set ups and calibration which I think is a reasonable request and not at all condescending and something I would ask anyone...........put it this way because of who they are do they crap any differently to you or I.
Mr Harris has been the epitome of good manners although he found humour in my simple request.

 

[Sgt Pepper]

That is all fine and dandy if you give two craps about THX standards. Sure video standards still mean something(and not discounting a THX calibration). Audio THX is a joke.

My ALIS plasma is calibrated. Will it produce the exact same picture as a Kuro 151FD? Hell no.

Will a $600 LG 720P 50" that is calibrated produce the same picture? No.

I do echo the one sentiment that any review be accompanied by what the video display is. I always find it funny when I read a review stating "Except for the crushed blacks, it is a fine picture". First thought..."Shoulda bought a plasma, you wouldn't be experiencing crushed blacks".

Quite correct but once calibrated the error in any particular display will be minimised and not be introducing a colour error etc it shouldn't.

 

[schan1269]

Except color is a direct construct of contrast.

Shitty black. Shitty burgundy.
Shitty white. Shitty cream.

By the way. Two movies that I guarantee that are better on my JVC/SC CP than on whatever it is you got(and no. I don't care...cause no matter what it is...unless it is a JVC or Sony on another Screen Research...mine is better. Period.)

A Seasoning House
Underworld Awakening

 

[Sgt Pepper]

Except color is a direct construct of contrast.

Shitty black. Shitty burgundy.
Shitty white. Shitty cream.

By the way. Two movies that I guarantee that are better on my JVC/SC CP than on whatever it is you got(and no. I don't care...cause no matter what it is...unless it is a JVC or Sony on another Screen Research...mine is better. Period.)

A Seasoning House
Underworld Awakening

Contrast will indeed effect gamma, more concerning regarding colour is the greyscale although although all will interact.

This is not a willy waving competition and I have no doubt your system is very nice compared to my lowly Samsung Plasma but good results can be had using the set standards:



Not great I know and it will only be accurate when viewed on a calibrated display, but you get the idea.

 

[schan1269]

By the way...The only part of my theater(which in its entirety cost less than what RAH's main speakers themselves cost) better than RAH's?

My screen. But...I don't think his is AT. So not a fair comparison. But if he did have an AT, and it wasn't Screen Research...then we could debate...not very long though.

 

[JoshZ]

Boys, please zip your pants back up. You're not impressing anyone.

Haineshisway has viewed both discs on his own screen, and he is presumably very familiar with how movies look on that screen. He has provided his honest impressions on the differences he saw between the two discs. When you've viewed the discs yourselves, you may choose to disagree with his conclusions, but attempts to discredit his opinion because you think his equipment wasn't expensive enough, or wasn't a brand you like, or whatever other demeaning criteria you whip out, just make you look like bullies.

 

[Jari K]

"Gorgeous Samsung tv". Wow, with that you must really know how The Fury should look like.

 

[Robert Harris]

By the way...The only part of my theater(which in its entirety cost less than what RAH's main speakers themselves cost) better than RAH's?

My screen. But...I don't think his is AT. So not a fair comparison. But if he did have an AT, and it wasn't Screen Research...then we could debate...not very long though.

I do not have an AT screen, as I'm equally about visual quality as audio. I run on a Stewart StudioTek 130, with variable aspect ratios. Works fine for me. If your point is that a woven AT screen will yield a higher quality image than perforated, I'd be inclined to agree with you, but would want to see a test.

RAH

 

[Sgt Pepper]

Boys, please zip your pants back up. You're not impressing anyone.

Haineshisway has viewed both discs on his own screen, and he is presumably very familiar with how movies look on that screen. He has provided his honest impressions on the differences he saw between the two discs. When you've viewed the discs yourselves, you may choose to disagree with his conclusions, but attempts to discredit his opinion because you think his equipment wasn't expensive enough, or wasn't a brand you like, or whatever other demeaning criteria you whip out, just make you look like bullies.

Again no attempt to discredit only to assemble some facts.

 

[schan1269]

I do not have an AT screen, as I'm equally about visual quality as audio. I run on a Stewart StudioTek 130, with variable aspect ratios. Works fine for me. If your point is that a woven AT screen will yield a higher quality image than perforated, I'd be inclined to agree with you, but would want to see a test.

RAH

I do my damndest to make sure a perf screen is never included in my design plan(I do design plans. It is up to the customer/seller to devise what works).

When I sold wholesale I was on a first name basis(as much as you can be when one office covers 7 states and email is 90% of communication) with the Screen Research guys.

For "why I don't get involved" with the products used....4 year non-compete with the prior employer. Besides...not exactly fair for a former wholesaler to get involved with retail/final consumer.

One of the installation companies I work with on behalf of a home builder/renovator has a cute nickname for me...

The Profit Killer.

 

[schan1269]

By the way. Don't yak at me for trumpeting my theatre. I was merely pointing out to Tele that many reviews have zero reference to me.

I take all reviews with a grain of salt. That "other review site" frequently hands out reviews to people that hate the content of the disc to begin with.

It is contentious to give a movie a bad review simply from you not getting it.

As a side note. How can you judge color on a display incapable of black? There is no LCD out there that competes against my P50X901. And it isn't even a "great black level producing" plasma.