What's new

King Kong (1933) Blu-Ray (1 Viewer)

Johnny Angell

Played With Dinosaurs Member
Senior HTF Member
Deceased Member
Joined
Dec 13, 1998
Messages
14,905
Location
Central Arkansas
Real Name
Johnny Angell
Originally Posted by Joseph DeMartino
 
 
You know. The infamous "lost beaver sequence"
 
You know Peter Jackson would pay big bucks for that lost sequence. Where have you been hiding it?
 
 

Edwin-S

Premium
Senior HTF Member
Joined
Aug 20, 2000
Messages
10,000
I'm having trouble seeing much of a difference in the DVD Beaver screenshots of the Warner BD and DVD. I'm not sure that I'm really going to need to upgrade to the BD of this film.
 

smithb

Screenwriter
Joined
Sep 27, 2008
Messages
1,536
Real Name
Brad Smith
 


Originally Posted by Edwin-S
I'm having trouble seeing much of a difference in the DVD Beaver screenshots of the Warner BD and DVD. I'm not sure that I'm really going to need to upgrade to the BD of this film.
I agree, but I'm not sure we are seeing a true comparison. I am assuming the SD capture is at 480 and the HD at 1080. So with the image sizes matching their respective resolutions, this is like comparing a 32" TV playing the SD version next to a 72" TV playing the HD version. That is not how I would compare the two at home. I would be comparing the SD version upscaled to 1080 on a 92" screen against an HD native 1080 on a 92" screen. Using this approach I would expect to see more of a difference in detail between the two then I see in the way they are currently presented. Do others think DVDBeaver should be upscaling the SD version to match the resolution of the HD version in order to make a more accurate measure of the differences? I realize not all scalers may be equivalent, but regardless I think it would be a more logical way to determine how much better a BR is over its SD counterpart. Unless I am missing something that someone else would like clarify.
 
 

cafink

Senior HTF Member
Joined
Apr 19, 1999
Messages
3,044
Real Name
Carl Fink
Also, the comparative Blu-ray screen captures on DVD beaver have been downsampled to about a quarter of the full 1920x1080 image size, so it's not really a fair comparison in that respect, either.
 

FoxyMulder

映画ファン
Senior HTF Member
Joined
Sep 14, 2009
Messages
5,385
Location
Scotland
Real Name
Malcolm
Its a worthwhile upgrade, the dvd had a lot of shots which were zoomed in and compression artifacts are everywhere, the blu ray is more detailed on a number of scenes and similiar detail levels on some others, more importantly the film grain looks far more natural with none of the compression issues seen on the dvd.
 
To check out some differences between the dvd and blu ray you can click the link below, i painstakingly did some mouseover comparisons which took an entire day to do.
 
http://www.darkrealmfox.com/film_reviews/2010/09/22/hd-comparisons-king-kong-1933/
 
The blu ray has also had additional cleanup work applied to it, personally i think if you like the movie or are a collector it's a must buy release.
 

smithb

Screenwriter
Joined
Sep 27, 2008
Messages
1,536
Real Name
Brad Smith
 


Originally Posted by cafink
Also, the comparative Blu-ray screen captures on DVD beaver have been downsampled to about a quarter of the full 1920x1080 image size, so it's not really a fair comparison in that respect, either.
I see...my concerns are actually minimal compared to the downsampling on the HD image.
 

smithb

Screenwriter
Joined
Sep 27, 2008
Messages
1,536
Real Name
Brad Smith
 


Originally Posted by FoxyMulder
Its a worthwhile upgrade, the dvd had a lot of shots which were zoomed in and compression artifacts are everywhere, the blu ray is more detailed on a number of scenes and similiar detail levels on some others, more importantly the film grain looks far more natural with none of the compression issues seen on the dvd.
 
To check out some differences between the dvd and blu ray you can click the link below, i painstakingly did some mouseover comparisons which took an entire day to do.
 
http://www.darkrealmfox.com/film_reviews/2010/09/22/hd-comparisons-king-kong-1933/
 
The blu ray has also had additional cleanup work applied to it, personally i think if you like the movie or are a collector it's a must buy release.
Thanks for the link to your site. Yes, those screen captures with mouse over's provide a much better reference to the differences. It clearly shows how much difference the resolution upgrade of blu-ray can make over SD in resolving grain properly in video.
 
 

FoxyMulder

映画ファン
Senior HTF Member
Joined
Sep 14, 2009
Messages
5,385
Location
Scotland
Real Name
Malcolm
Originally Posted by Doug Otte
Thanks for your work, Foxy. It also looks like the DVD was horizontally stretched.
 
Doug
Possible, there is certainly more information on a number of shots both at the sides of the frame and sometimes the frame is different at the top and bottom, one exception is screencap 14 with the bird which has different framing to the dvd although i'm sure there are many more examples. I'm really looking forward to watching this on my birthday next Tuesday on the bigscreen as i love classic cinema so this will be a real treat.
 

Trevor824

Grip
Joined
Sep 20, 2010
Messages
19
Real Name
Trevor
I hate to sound like an ignorant / Jeff Wells like viewer complaining about "grainstorms"
 
BUT
 
In watching the Blu-ray, it has to be one of the grainiest I have seen in some time. I didn't have the original to compare it to, but I never noticed something like this on TV airings.
 
I realize that some actually like grain, and you may be able to adjust your TV settings, but on factory settings (which lets face it is all most people keep it at) it does look extremely grainy.
 

Steve Christou

Long Member
Senior HTF Member
Joined
Apr 25, 2000
Messages
16,333
Location
Manchester, England
Real Name
Steve Christou
 


Originally Posted by Trevor824
I hate to sound like an ignorant / Jeff Wells like viewer complaining about "grainstorms"
 
BUT
 
In watching the Blu-ray, it has to be one of the grainiest I have seen in some time. I didn't have the original to compare it to, but I never noticed something like this on TV airings.
 
I realize that some actually like grain, and you may be able to adjust your TV settings, but on factory settings (which lets face it is all most people keep it at) it does look extremely grainy.
 
Well that is a shame and I've had a look at FoxyMulder's screenshots. It means no Blu-ray Kong for me. DVD only.
 

Bleddyn Williams

Supporting Actor
Joined
Jun 30, 1997
Messages
984
Real Name
Bleddyn Williams
Thanks for the hard work, Foxy! I'm going to pick this one up based on these and Robert's recommendation.
 

FoxyMulder

映画ファン
Senior HTF Member
Joined
Sep 14, 2009
Messages
5,385
Location
Scotland
Real Name
Malcolm
 


Originally Posted by Steve Christou
 
 
Well that is a shame and I've had a look at FoxyMulder's screenshots. It means no Blu-ray Kong for me. DVD only.
Screencaps show grain in a static form, in motion it looks like film, i know you dislike film grain but it's where the detail is at and i mean the finer detail, its a real shame you would stick by a dvd which incidentally has the grain but the dvd fails to resolve it and instead is full of compression artifacts, i mean what do you consider worse, real film grain or bad compression artifacts!
 
To the person talking about factory settings on televisions, yes they will enhance the grain and make it look ugly thats why i recommend buying the Spears and Munsil disc and calibrating your monitor, a well calibrated monitor will make your films look filmlike and the grain will look much more natural, its worth the effort believe me it is, once again i just don't understand the complaints, people will accept very high levels of compression artifacts but get annoyed at film grain, it makes no sense to me.
 

FoxyMulder

映画ファン
Senior HTF Member
Joined
Sep 14, 2009
Messages
5,385
Location
Scotland
Real Name
Malcolm
Originally Posted by warnerbro
This is the funniest post ever on Home Theatre Forum. I'm sure Fay is looking down and laughing.
Well don't keep the joke to yourself please let us all know what you find so funny.
 

Trevor824

Grip
Joined
Sep 20, 2010
Messages
19
Real Name
Trevor
Originally Posted by FoxyMulder
 
Screencaps show grain in a static form, in motion it looks like film, i know you dislike film grain but it's where the detail is at and i mean the finer detail, its a real shame you would stick by a dvd which incidentally has the grain but the dvd fails to resolve it and instead is full of compression artifacts, i mean what do you consider worse, real film grain or bad compression artifacts!
 
To the person talking about factory settings on televisions, yes they will enhance the grain and make it look ugly thats why i recommend buying the Spears and Munsil disc and calibrating your monitor, a well calibrated monitor will make your films look filmlike and the grain will look much more natural, its worth the effort believe me it is, once again i just don't understand the complaints, people will accept very high levels of compression artifacts but get annoyed at film grain, it makes no sense to me.
Hello,
 
I am sure that calibrating my monitor might fix things.
 
I have to admit, my eyesight is not the greatest. I was an early adopter to the DVD format, yet have never really noticed compression artifacts.
 
That said, film grain on Blu-rays has become very distracting. I do understand that it gives the film a filmlike look, but to me, it looks more like you are watching a movie on the old rabbit ears TV, and the station doesn't come in very well, and is very snowy.
 
Other than the grain, I still love the film. It is a very nice set otherwise.
 

Mike Frezon

Moderator
Premium
Senior HTF Member
Joined
Oct 9, 2001
Messages
60,695
Location
Rexford, NY
Originally Posted by FoxyMulder
Well don't keep the joke to yourself please let us all know what you find so funny.
I, too, am curious as to what Darrell (and Fay Wray) might find so amusing.
 

FoxyMulder

映画ファン
Senior HTF Member
Joined
Sep 14, 2009
Messages
5,385
Location
Scotland
Real Name
Malcolm
 
Trevor824 said:
60#post_3731668
I, too, am curious as to what Darrell (and Fay Wray) might find so amusing.
 
 
I'm looking to the heavens for guidance so i can understand it all, once a joke is explained though it probably ends up being not as funny.
 
Just reading a post above and regarding the "lost" spider pit sequence, my understanding is that they previewed the film in 1933 before the cinema release and the director thought it slowed the film down and they removed it and destroyed the footage, it wasn't a censor issue since The Hays Code didn't come in until 1934, i think it's highly likely the footage is lost forever but maybe a few prints were made before cinema release containing the footage and somewhere in the world it's waiting in a vault to be discovered, even if it is discovered the director didn't want it in the film.
 

Steve Christou

Long Member
Senior HTF Member
Joined
Apr 25, 2000
Messages
16,333
Location
Manchester, England
Real Name
Steve Christou
 
Trevor824 said:
/forum/thread/300127/king-kong-1933-blu-ray/60#post_3731672
 
Anyway this debate over to have film grain or dnr it away is ever present with every film review on blu ray, my feeling is they should build DNR controls into the blu ray player rather than the monitor and let people dial it down if it annoys them and for those who like the filmed look we get to keep it, that way both camps are happy.
A great idea Foxy. I'll be first in line.
 

smithb

Screenwriter
Joined
Sep 27, 2008
Messages
1,536
Real Name
Brad Smith
 


Originally Posted by FoxyMulder
Anyway this debate over to have film grain or dnr it away is ever present with every film review on blu ray, my feeling is they should build DNR controls into the blu ray player rather than the monitor and let people dial it down if it annoys them and for those who like the filmed look we get to keep it, that way both camps are happy.
 
That is a thought. The question would be whether the better algorithm's used in current processing steps for doing DNR would be able to do it in real-time for display right now. I'll bet there are some fairly sophisticated software tools in use by the top companies that can do some amazing things when used correctly. I'm under the impression that DNR and related tools are not really a bad thing when used well, but when done badly they really bring attention to themselves and stand out in a negative away. So I wouldn't want some cheap alternative thrown in as a solution.
 
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Latest Articles

Forum statistics

Threads
356,815
Messages
5,123,796
Members
144,184
Latest member
H-508
Recent bookmarks
0
Top