What's new

Robert Harris on The Bits - 8/3/04 column - OFFICIAL THREAD (1 Viewer)

Robert Harris

Archivist
Reviewer
Senior HTF Member
Joined
Feb 8, 1999
Messages
18,311
Real Name
Robert Harris
This is going to be an interesting one...

First, I want to welcome Mike Maloney to the group. It should be understood that his commnets, in most cases, are more than simple opinions, but come from first hand knowledge. Its good to have him on board as that knowledge can be useful.

That said it is also acknowledged that his comments are his own and not as a representative of the company for which he works, which is a company where I currently am completing a project. They do some superb work.

To his points...

my quote:

I saw Cold Mountain at the Directors Guild in LA on a huge screen. The quality was impeccable.

Mike's response:

That ANY dvd gets a review that says something like "looks as good as in the theater" always amazes me. Let's look at the math. A film is mastered to some form of HD tape (HDCam, D5, etc.). Those tape machines play back at a data rate of approx. 1.483 Gigabits per second. If you were to make a dvd consisting of only the feature and one Dolby Digital soundtrack at 448 KHz, the dvd data rate would be about 9.5 Megabits per second. That's a compression ratio of 156:1.

In the case of Cold Mountain the compression ratio is actually 290.7:1. This is due to the length of the film and the extras on the disc.

********

The point that I was attempting to make here was not that a video representation should (or could) look as good as film, but rather that in a film which had gone through the DI process, and which may not have had the luxury of film dailies, looked as digitally free as it did. The only digital artifacts or odd-looking areas which I can recall were explosions in the opening scenes. My point was that the film looked quite good as film.

*********

quote:

Cold Mountain should have been a veritable slam-dunk to DVD.

Mike's response:

"There are probably less than 20 people in the world who have seen the compression master. I would be very hesitant to make that statement."


I am told that this comparison was performed and that the DVD failed the test.

********

Mike wrote:

"Also, with all due respect, if you do a Google search for "Cold Mountain dvd review", the results are about 80% favorable. This is not to belittle your review, but rather to point out that a review is an opinion, and it is to be expected that not everyone will agree."

One of the points, both good and bad, which is an affect of the web, is that we now have reviewers who become reviewers by appointing themselves as such with no qualifications to do so. Futher, said "reviewers" may not have the visual horsepower to properly examine these releases, which I will acknowledge, may look superb to the untrained eye, especially on a 27 inch monitor.

**********

In response to my query regarding too much material going into a DVD, Mike wrote the following:

"Aye, now there's the rub. My job is take all the assets provided by the client and make the best looking dvd possible. I do not have the authority to dictate the kind or amount of extras. Ultimately, the market will make those decisions. If dvds that are jammed with extras sit on the shelf, and retailers can't keep enough SuperBit discs in stock, the other studios will take note and do things differently."

He is absolutely correct in this statement.

However...

If there is too much junk going into a DVD, and it is not his proper position to tell the client that they don't know what they're doing...

Someone else in the organization should take on that task.

At the point the client can always reject the information.

It is then up to the Mike's superiors to reject the work which may make their facility look bad.

There is nothing wrong with turning down being the implimentor of inferior work.

********

In regard to my query about compression and authoring, we were properly told that the authoring had nothing to do with the problem, and that


"None of the bitstreams we make have any noise or grain reduction applied, nor is there any edge enhancement. We do not have any such devices installed in at our compression facility."


If this is the case, then were do the grain reduction and EE come from. I'm aware that some can be added during the transfer, but if the transfers or files do not have the problem....?

************

In regard to "apples and zebras," an apt phrase which I like...

But in the suggestion to compare the above problematic titles to Warner's release of the extended Two Towers, I'm not seeing the same problems. Two Towers, while similarly based upon a 2k DI, has light EE, but neither the totally removed high end and heavy digititus of Cold Mountain, nor the heavily electronic look of English Patient.

************

No offense was taken, nor was any meant.

Your comments are appreciated.

In regard to Cassy W's comments about the HiDef My Fair Lady, I'll have to take a look and see precisely what's going on.

RAH
 

Cassy_w

Second Unit
Joined
Jan 2, 2003
Messages
467
Thank you, Mr. Harris. Those of us that love film thank you. HDNet Movies has been a real God send and they do try and give us the best possible presentation, but they are at the mercy of the distributors they license films from.
 

Mike Maloney

Auditioning
Joined
Jul 14, 2004
Messages
8
Thanks to all above for the welcome. Working in this industry as long as I have, I'm used to dealing with strong personalities. (I've got my flame-proof suit on.)

Let me start by being very clear. I am not making excuses.
An excuse implies an attempt to deflect blame. There is nothing "wrong" with the Cold Mountain DVD. You may not like the presentation, but that is a matter of personal bias.
(Thus, I disagree with the assertion that:
"I am told that this comparison was performed and that the DVD failed the test."
I was present at the comparison, I know the response of my client, the DVD did not "fail".)

If you looking for an apology, you may stop now, for one is not forthcoming. If you are interested in why Cold Mountain looks the way it does, read on.

The real crux of the problem is that we are seeing the conflict between art and business. The purist wants to see
the best possible presentation and the business side wants to put out a product that will sell well. Normally, there should be no conflict between those goals -- after all, the better the presentation, the more widely it will be accepted.

Unfortunately, we talking about a medium (DVD) that is, by design, a compromise. MPEG compression is a "lossy" compression scheme. There are several stages of compression in the MPEG scheme: pre-processing, motion-estimation, subtracting static picture information after motion-estimation, and the DCT of the residual after the subtraction step. Finally, the DCT coefficients are quantized and encoded. -> In order to effect variable bit rate encoding, the encoder transmits a quantizer scale code at the slice level. This allows the encoder to compress more or less severely in order to meet the required bit rate. As the encoder compresses more severely, there is a corresponding decrease in high frequency detail.
 

Dan Rudolph

Senior HTF Member
Joined
Dec 30, 2002
Messages
4,042
But many other studios can put movies just as long on DVD and they look a lot better. These aren't inherent problems with MPEG-2.
 

george kaplan

Senior HTF Member
Joined
Mar 14, 2001
Messages
13,063
With all due respect, it looks like you're not making an excuse or issuing an apology, but rather a denial that there's anything wrong. However, that's simply an opinion that many of us disagree with. I for one would have been happier with either an excuse (at least admitting it looks bad) or an apology (admiting it looks worse than it could, and showing regret).
 

Robert Harris

Archivist
Reviewer
Senior HTF Member
Joined
Feb 8, 1999
Messages
18,311
Real Name
Robert Harris
To Mike Maloney:

While I respectfully disagree with the Widescreen review, and am seeing flaws which they obviously do not, I'll throw out a simple question to you, which may not have a simple answer.

Part of the problem of this not being simple, is that you're not seeing (or identifying) the same problems that I am.

Also, my knowledge of the digital transfer process and the technical base needed to fully understand it, is reasonably basic. I much prefer to have those funny holes on the side of the images.

If you were the client, knowing what you do in regard to the visual elements, and you wanted to present the film as closely to the film experience as possible, what might you do to achieve the highest (or at least,a higher) level of quality?

If you disagree that the DVD has problems, I believe the question is moot.

You should have no need of a flame-retardant suit for this discussion. If you honestly don't believe there are problems, I'm fine with that, as all of this is in the eye of the beholder.

Lastly, this discussion is not meant as "argument." You obviously have much to offer HTF as someone in the trenches for future topics and queries.

That's a good thing.

RAH
 

Cassy_w

Second Unit
Joined
Jan 2, 2003
Messages
467
Mr. Maloney, all you have to do with COLD MOUNTAIN to make it look reasonably OK is remove the gobs and gobs of halos you people put into it. That's it. But instead, you ADD those halos to fool people into thinking the image is sharp. Well, we are not fooled. We are screaming about it in every forum there is online, but you just deny deny deny. Even when someone like Robert Harris speaks out, you deny. Amazing.

I may just be a 110 pound red headed b!tch who drives a Honda, but I sure as hell have eyes and know what I am seeing. And because I know what I am seeing, I am not buying any more DVD's from studios that think they can treat us like we all have 13 inch TV sets.
 

nolesrule

Senior HTF Member
Joined
Aug 6, 2001
Messages
3,084
Location
Clearwater, FL
Real Name
Joe Kauffman
Mr. Harris, I finally had the opportunity to see Lawrence of Arabia on the big screen today for the first time in my life as part of Tampa Theatre's Summer Classic Movie series.

At the end of the film when i saw the restoration credits, I saw your name and I just wanted to come here and say thank you for the work you did to restore that cinematic masterpiece.

The print itself was still in pretty good shape, except for 2-3 5-second sections where it was very scratched up.
 

Mike Maloney

Auditioning
Joined
Jul 14, 2004
Messages
8
Based on the responses to my last post, I see that I did not
state my position as clearly as I thought when I wrote:

"Thus, Cold Mountain (and for that matter, every DVD) looks the way it does because of the confluence of required data rate, the spatial frequencies of the source material, and the particular DCT coefficients and quantizer values (calculated by the algorithm) used in the compression."

Also my last paragraph was: "I said above that I respect Robert's views on this matter, and I do. I would like to see Cold Mountain presented with more of the high frequency detail preserved. To that end, I spend time at trade shows looking at new encoding products in an on-going effort to produce the best looking product possible. The search for perfection continues."

Let me try again.

It is my understanding that the problem which Robert (and others) is having with Cold Mountain is the lack of high frequency detail. (If this is not the point of contention, we need to start over again.)

Is there a lack of high frequency detail compared to the compression master? Yes.

Is there anything I could have done about it if I were to have done the compression? Not if you accept that I had a contractual obligation to perform the work according to my client's specifications.

If you were to remove the DTS track would the compression have more high frequency detail? Yes. (Or put the movie on two discs, or keep the DTS and throw away everything else.)

If I were use the same encoding parameters and run a different master through the encoder, would the resultant bitstream have the same problems? That would depend on the spacial frequency distribution of the material I tried to encode. As Robert pointed out The Two Towers had similar encoding parameters but did not suffer. If I were to run Last Tango in Paris using the same parameters, I am sure it would suffer similar degradation. Every compression job is unique.

I realize this is not a debate that someone has to win. I also know that my position is rather nuanced which, to belabor the point, is this: Even though the compression has visibly less high frequency detail than the master tape, it is not flawed because it looks as good as possible given all the factors that go into performing the compression.

The decision to produce and distribute a disc with that level of fidelity is different discussion.

Cheers.
Mike
 

Cassy_w

Second Unit
Joined
Jan 2, 2003
Messages
467
Mr. Maloney, once again, you have completely ignored our comments about EDGE ENHANCEMENT. Not once have you addressed this, despite it being mentioned multiple times (many times by me). It is the Edge Enhancement that turns the Disney DVD's from low quality to unwatchable.
 

Robert Harris

Archivist
Reviewer
Senior HTF Member
Joined
Feb 8, 1999
Messages
18,311
Real Name
Robert Harris
To Mr. Kauffman...

Your comments are appreciated. Hopefully, the print you viewed was 70mm. I should make the point that I don't do restorations alone. If you check the restoration credits on Lawrence, you'll find quite a lengthy list of those involved. Although the credits point print production to Metrocolor Labs, which in my humble opinion was the best direct positive lab in the business at the time of the reconstruction and restoration. Current prints are being produced by CFI, which is now part of Technicolor, and are up to the same high standards.

To Mr. Maloney...

Thank you again for your insights. With your recent message I believe I can now understand where we're mis-communicating. I was under the impression that you may not have seen the problems and I was incorrect.

If I'm reading you correctly, you concur that the problems are there, but the look of the final product is as it is because Disney or Miramax specifically requested certain elements be part of the programming, which necessitated the low quality. And since the company for which you work wishes to make the client happy, it was willing to lower the barre to keep the business.

Do you know if anyone actually attempted to explain to the studio reps what the film would look like, if the requests set forth in their purchase order were followed? By that I mean, did anyone attempt to dissuade them from doing it their way?

I happen to be a fan of DTS. On higher end systems, one can hear a difference in certain situations.

But in this case, I would have kept the real estate used by DTS intact and allowed more space to the image.

I don't believe that a vendor has to suffer silently. If things which are perceived to be not in the best interest of the filmmaker or the programming (should the filmmaker not know the differnce), what might be wrong with explaining one's discomfort in moving forward with their methodology?

The DVD of Cold Mountain is a failure in my book. If my son can view it, see the lack of quality, and explain what it is that he's seeing, then something very wrong is going on somewhere.

Among the myriad of decisions made in the production of a DVD, one should be that the public should be able to purchase -- only once -- and receive, state of the art quality. Have you seen the new English Patient?

RAH
 

Ken_McAlinden

Reviewer
Senior HTF Member
Joined
Feb 20, 2001
Messages
6,241
Location
Livonia, MI USA
Real Name
Kenneth McAlinden
Cassy,
That's kind of harsh, especially considering he mentioned in his first post that his facility does not only not add edge enhancement, but does not even have any tools in their processing chain to add it. If there is actual EE it is on the master that is provided to them.

Regards,
 

Shawn Perron

Supporting Actor
Joined
Oct 25, 2002
Messages
500
You can talk about average bit rate all you want. The consumer goes to play the movie, and it looks bad. All your technical reason why the dvd isn't up to snuff are meaningless at this point. Your company chose to release to Miramax a dvd obviously visually deficient and they chose to publish it.

Reguardless of the reasons you listed for the way the dvd looks, 2 things are obvious. Miramax doesn't care much about the video presentation of thier films, and the production studio doesn't care much about thier reputation. If either of those 2 weren't true, these dvds would not have reached us in this state.
 

Cassy_w

Second Unit
Joined
Jan 2, 2003
Messages
467
Ken, he would not get that kind of comment(s) from me if he would admit, yes, the edge enhancement is not only unsightly, but it is a massive eye soar that severly hurts picture quality.

In addition, I have to take this man at his word that they don't add EE, when in fact, we know most studios deny EE even exists. It's the company line to deny deny deny deny.
 

Robert Crawford

Crawdaddy
Moderator
Patron
Senior HTF Member
Joined
Dec 9, 1998
Messages
67,604
Location
Michigan
Real Name
Robert
HTF Members:
If you want to continue to have participation on this forum from industry people then you need to be more civil in your responses to their comments. Disagreement is fine and dandy, but the tone of how that disagreement is expressed here is rather harsh and unnecessary despite your frustration to the answers you're are receiving in this thread.







Crawdaddy
 

Nils Luehrmann

Senior HTF Member
Joined
Mar 21, 2001
Messages
3,513
Crawdaddy,

Always the one to say the right thing at the right time.

I also don't think it helps when we see posts that severely exaggerate the facts as it makes it very difficult for any of us to sort out fact from fiction.

For instance, I'm sure most know that I have been quite vocal myself over the quality (or lack there of) of quite a few Buena Vista releases, but to say that any of them, including Cold Mountain are "unwatchable" is a gross exaggeration. ”Unwatchable” is a screen full of static or images like premium cable channels from years past when they simply distorted the image to keep you from watching them.

It could be said that the 1997 Republic Pictures DVD release of Highlander is perhaps one of the worst quality images on DVD (and embarrassingly a THX certified disc at that) - at least for a high profile release, but even that DVD is certainly "watchable" - even on my 96" HT system at 1.5 DW which easily exposes any inherent artifacting on a disc.


Mike,

I for one truly appreciate your participation in this thread and welcome you to the HTF community and will look forward to reading more of your comments in this and other future threads.

Hopefully this thread will not become yet another example why many extremely knowledgeable industry insiders avoid ever speaking up and sharing with us some of their thoughts on the wonderful world of home theater.
 

richardWI

Second Unit
Joined
Jan 23, 2003
Messages
362
While Mr. Harris' mention of Straw Dogs as an ideal to strive for didn't take into account the lack of sonic real estate a mono movie takes up compared to current films, I humbly propose a hopefully more apt Criterion transfer that major companies should strive for: "Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas."

Here is a recent film which I have seen few complaints of picture quality; it boast a wide variety of colors and frantic camera movements, Dolby and DTS 5.1 tracks and three(!) commentary tracks. Disc one also has some short deleted scenes with optional director's commentary. Since I don't have a large monitor like Mr. Harris does, (and yes I do suffer from monitor envy!) I would like to hear his opinion on that transfer.

R.
 

Nils Luehrmann

Senior HTF Member
Joined
Mar 21, 2001
Messages
3,513

Or how about Paramount's Collector's Edition of Once Upon a Time in the West? 165 minutes of breathtakingly beautiful film with four audio tracks including a new 5.1 DD track. While the transfer isn't flawless, it is considerably better than most DVDs currently available.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Latest Articles

Forum statistics

Threads
356,814
Messages
5,123,734
Members
144,184
Latest member
H-508
Recent bookmarks
0
Top