Jeff Kohn
Supporting Actor
- Joined
- Dec 29, 2001
- Messages
- 680
That's because you're talking about the overall-objective "absolute" criteria...that's the "WOW" criteria.
I agreed that a 16mm print should NOT get a 5 out of 5 on that scale.
It should *only* get a 5 of 5 on the *relative* scale.
I understand what you're saying that given an overall rating of 4 out of 5 you can then read the fine-print in the review to see *why* that's the case...and a good reviewer will have qualified that with the theatrical presentation etc. HOWEVER...given that being true-to-the-source is the most important goal that a DVD should be mastered to deliver...why then is only the "absolute" quality rating listed? It reinforces the agenda that is becoming dangerous that a "good" DVD is a "WOW" DVD and a "Bad" DVD is one that has stuff like grain or other "film" artifacts that may very-well be director-approved.I guess my point is that you don't need a separate score for the "fidelity" of the transfer, because trying to accurately access it is going to be difficult or possible in many cases.