USHE Press Release: Back To The Future 25th Anniversary Trilogy (Blu-ray) (1 Viewer)

[WillG]

On the bright side, if there are issues. Universal should be old hat at doing BTTF 2 and 3 disc exchanges.

 

[robbbb1138]

Originally Posted by WillG

On the bright side, if there are issues. Universal should be old hat at doing BTTF 2 and 3 disc exchanges.

Has anyone ever crunched the numbers on how much these corrections and recalls actually set back the studio? Maybe it's cheaper to do something half-assed if it requires spending less money and risking the exchange program, because their numbers tell them that only x% of the discs will fall into the hands of people that will want to be exchanged and the correction can then be funded based on whether or not the actual sales warrant it. It gets you out of having to spend big money on every release that might require a higher-priced restoration.

 

[Brandon Conway]

Recalls are terribly expensive and non-profitable, so I highly doubt that strategy would last long.

 

[FoxyMulder]

Originally Posted by RobertR




There are some people who post screenshots using PNGs (ie a lossless format, showing direct captures from the disc). Those are the ones I prefer to pay attention to. Color variations aren't what I look for in a capture, but rather DNR, EE, etc. As you've correctly pointed out, no one seems to be able to come up with an example of a disc showing bad DNR in screenshots that was proven not to have it when actually viewed.

I have to say this is wrong, i take screencaps as an PNG and then convert to JPG using 100% maximum quality and i have a couple of images on my site from The Searchers to show that to the human eye you cannot see a difference between them but JPG means less bandwidth which means more open connections on a website per user, think of a servers 100mbp/s pipeline and how many simulateneous connections get through and then you start to realize the importance of cutting down the bandwidth and thus using JPG.


PNG can be data crunched into a smaller file size, there are programs out there that do it so just because you see PNG as the file format do not think it's better, i carefully check my screencaps and i can tell you there is no visible compression side effects when doing maximum quality JPG conversions from PNG, indeed i am so sick of repeating that, now also think just how many people view on calibrated computer displays, i often hear people saying that screencap is too dark or too bright, thats because their display is too dark or bright and uncalibrated.


Still repeat something long enough and people will buy into it, i guarantee to you that there is absolutely nothing wrong with 100% maximum quality JPG images, in fact if you want a challenge on this then take a look at the examples below.


http://www.darkrealmfox.com/film_reviews/wp-content/images/png_vs_jpg/searchers_05.png


http://www.darkrealmfox.com/film_reviews/wp-content/images/png_vs_jpg/searchers_0500.jpg

 

[FoxyMulder]

Originally Posted by Ronald Epstein





Carl,


There is a very notable recent case that offhand I forget the title.


DVDBEAVER posted screen grabs of a BD release that turned out

not to be representative of the actual transfer. I'm not sure if it was

DNR related or not.


Someone here will come up with the title.


An important lesson was learned that you can't always rely on
screen grabs.

Was this The Thin Red Line. ?

 

[RobertR]

Originally Posted by FoxyMulder /forum/thread/301817/ushe-press-rel...h-anniversary-trilogy-blu-ray/60#post_3739309

 

[Ronald Epstein]

No, it wasn't the Thin Red Line.


I am at a loss because I was just as shocked at

the screen caps posted on DVD BEAVER but when

we all got our copies of the BD there were no issues.


I am thinking it might have been Braveheart but I am
uncertain. Was hoping someone else would have a

better memory because it wasn't more than a year ago.

 

[AaronMK]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Man-Fai Wong

Actually, even the color issue w/ Contact seems real enough though maybe not as exaggerated/distracting or easily noticeable in normal viewing as in stills shown by the DVD Beaver screen caps. It's easier for our eyes (and brain) to be fooled by color biasing -- and so, we're generally more accepting of that in normal viewing.

I tend to agree with this. The screen shots comparing the two mimicked my own experience with the disc. My own experiments changing my levels to see if image elements visible on the DVD would become visible on the Blu-ray came up short. Still, even though it was distracting when comparing DVD and Blu-ray screen shots, it did not significantly impact my enjoyment when watching the Blu-ray on its own in motion.


So, the screen shots were accurate, they looked bad, but the movie in motion was not as "bad" as the accurate screen shots led me to believe it would be. However, as _Man_ pointed out, what is distracting to someone in a screen shot versus what distracts someone in motion varies from person to person. It seems that "screen shot criticism that turns out to be alright" can either be inaccurate screen shots, or more likely something that falls between the "still frame" and "in motion" distraction thresholds of many people.


I'd be more interested in examples where the screen shots on which people based their criticisms did not turn out to be representative of the corresponding freeze frame on the actual Blu-ray. I'd also be interested in examples of accurate screen shots that were criticized, but turned out to be "alright" in motion. Actually, I would be surprised if we are not retreading territory that has been debated ad nauseum in another thread, but I don't have time to do the digging while at work.

In any case, assuming the screen shots are accurate, and based on previous experience with screen shots vs. final product in motion, I'm not risking a pre-order on BTTF.

 

[Ronald Epstein]

Ding! Ding! Yes, it was CONTACT.


DVDBEAVER posted screenshots that spread

fear across the BD community.


Turned out, as Mai Fong posted above, that the

transfer was far better than it was depicted to be.

 

[cafink]

Originally Posted by Ronald Epstein



Ding! Ding! Yes, it was CONTACT.


DVDBEAVER posted screenshots that spread fear across the BD community.


Turned out, as Mai Fong posted above, that the transfer was far better than it was depicted to be.

That's what I figured. As I mentioned before, that example has no bearing on the current situation, since Contact's supposed issues had nothing to do with DNR. Those of us claiming that BTTF's screen captures represent a real problem have already agreed that screen captures can be misleading in several ways, including color issues (as was the case with Contact). But I know of no such issues relating to DNR, especially in cases as extreme as this one. Again, has there ever been a Blu-ray whose screenshots exhibited such bad DNR, but which turned out to be fine in the end?

 

[Adam Gregorich]

 

[Xenia Stathakopoulou]

 

[Xenia Stathakopoulou]

Couldnt resist posting that pic, lol !!!

 

[Todd H]

Originally Posted by Xenia Zannikos

Couldnt resist posting that pic, lol !!!

Xenia, where is that screenshot from?

 

[Xenia Stathakopoulou]

I took it from blu ray.com message board. It was posted in their back to the future blu ray thread. Now where it originated from, im not sure.

 

[Erin C]

Pretty sure thats from FRINGE. One of their alternate universe gags.

 

[Todd H]

Originally Posted by Erin C

Pretty sure thats from FRINGE. One of their alternate universe gags.

Ah. That makes sense. Thanks.

 

[cafink]

Originally Posted by Xenia Zannikos

I have no idea why, but I have a bad feeling there wont be any blu ray reviews online, for at least another week.

In yesterday's update, The Digital Bits said they'd have their review of the trilogy up today. I'm curious to see what they have to say about it.

 

[Scott D S]

First impressions from The HD Room

http://www.thehdroom.com/news/First-Impressions-Back-to-the-Future-Trilogy-on-Blu-ray-Arrives/7575

Earlier this week Universal released a trio of short never-before-seen clips of Eric Stoltz as Marty. Unfortunately those clips represent all the Stoltz footage on this release so you won't get to hear him speak any dialogue. The 6-part all-new documentary the clips are a part of, however, is fascinating and should be the first stop when heading into the bonus features.

The films themselves underwent an extensive high definition remastering process for Blu-ray that was approved by Bob Gale. The result are transfers that have been scrubbed clean of any evidence of dirt, imperfections, or at times, film grain. Some scenes I sampled, such as when Marty and Doc gear up to first test the time machine, are so squeeky clean the actors look like mannequins and their environment like a digital creation. Other instances, including the openings of Back to the Future and Back to the Future III, are presented more naturally with film grain intact.

DNR (digital noise reduction) pundits will likely have a field day complaining about Back to the Future on Blu-ray for weeks or even months after its release. If you can get by a cleaner image that doesn't always reflect its age, the Back to the Future Trilogy on Blu-ray looks to be a ton of fun in high-def.

Hmm...

 

[Xenia Stathakopoulou]

That review makes it sound like the predator blu ray. Im stuck with it , because I want all those goodies in the uk blu ray tin. Im also looking forward, to what the bits says now about this.