"Dark City: Director's Cut" coming to Blu-ray on July 29

Re: "Dark City: Director's Cut" coming to Blu-ray on July 29

Nope I'm not taking the bait RobertR.....Let's stay on subject now, I know it's difficult for you.


What are your thoughts given that two experts who've actually viewed and weighed in on Dark City have pretty much negated your and others opinions (yeah I just read that AVS thread again) condemning this transfer based on screengrabs?


Are you still claiming there's "missing detail" from Dark City?


Again for your benefit.........were talking Dark City and the legitimacy of relying on screengrabs for evidence of loss of detail.

Re: "Dark City: Director's Cut" coming to Blu-ray on July 29

To be clear, I'm not stating that there may not be missing detail on Dark City.

There has definitely been image manipulation.

What I am stating is that if there is, the film has not been plasticized, and nothing horrific has occurred.

RAH

Re: "Dark City: Director's Cut" coming to Blu-ray on July 29

Fair enough.

For the record my issue is that there's a certain group of internet posters that rely solely on screengrabs, make assumptions without viewing the disc, then the mis-information just escalates and spirals out of control i.e. Dark City which quite a few people here (and more-so at AVS) were condemning as total garbage without anyone having seen the disc.

Re: "Dark City: Director's Cut" coming to Blu-ray on July 29

On the topic of "missing detail", missing from what? Blu-ray is capable of a maximum of 1080 X 1920 pixel resolution. Let's just call it 2K on a good day. So, a 2k digital copy of a film shot on 35mm is the topic of this post (at the risk of being off topic ).

A Blu-ray disc, any Blu-ray disc, is missing resolution from what? The original negative? Undoutedly.

A first gen IP or IN? Certainly.

On more modern technology, a digital intermediate (DI)? I'm sure.

A first run, premium film print on well maintained equipment with a good lens and perfect focus? Yep.

A D-Cinema digital projection? Ummm, that's 1080 X 2048, so I'd call that a toss-up for resolution (D-Cinema beats the crap out of Blu-ray in other aspects though).

The average high-speed polyester 35mm dupe at the average chain cineplex? Not to my eyes.

To those that claim Blu-ray is losing resolution of the original film, in almost all cases, this is indeed true, no matter how good the Blu-ray transfer is. Blu-ray is at best 2K and film is, excepting for the end of the film chain (which is all the vast majority of people actually get to see), always better than 2K.

Before anyone (RobertR) pipes up with, "yeah, but some of these transfers are losing resolution that even Blu-ray should be showing", yeah, that's true. It's a shame, but it's true.

Here's the facts of life (God, I hate this part). There is no Santa Claus, there is no Easter Bunny, and film studios are really just a business that are run like a business. In a successful business, one must weigh the return on any expenditure. Blu-ray isn't much return on a new film transfer of a marginal catalog title, or even a fairly major catalog title in the current market. Expecting studios to go back and re-transfer their entire catalog for every Blu-ray release is simply pie in the sky. It won't happen.

If it makes you feel better to piss and moan about every Blu-ray disc that comes out that does not meet some arbitrary standard that someone has decided it should, by all means, that is what the Internet is for. Knock yourself out. Personally, I am a "glass is half full" kind of guy. I prefer to leave the studios to their business (they aren't going to pay me any attention anyway) and hope that the people that do work for studios that do care about quality presentation of their films (yes, there are people like that) will get their way often enough to make me happy at least most of the time.

As I said already, Dark City on Blu-ray is one that is right enough to make me happy.

Re: "Dark City: Director's Cut" coming to Blu-ray on July 29

A good point indeed.

I also think - as part of the business model with ALL previous home video formats - the studios will eventually need to double dip or re-sell you the same title...especially as the market grows. Only then will we maybe see new masters being done for at least certain catalog titles. I mean how many times did we see this with DVD alone?

Re: "Dark City: Director's Cut" coming to Blu-ray on July 29

Do as I do which is pay them little attention. It works fine for me.






Crawdaddy

Re: "Dark City: Director's Cut" coming to Blu-ray on July 29

That's exactly my issue. I have the DARK CITY Blu-Ray and completely agree with Robert George. I'm thrilled to watch it in HD, and the talk about how "DNR-d" the transfer is to the point where some people have been canceling their orders...frankly it's doing a disservice to the truly bad transfers (the few that are out there) that are out there on BD. DARK CITY looks just fine.

Re: "Dark City: Director's Cut" coming to Blu-ray on July 29

I saw a lot of "pissing and moaning" (as you like to characterize all such concerns) about the original Fifth Element release, and Sony fixed it (they even offered to exchange it). So did Disney when people "pissed and moaned" about the bad framing in Pirates of the Caribbean. So expressing concerns about studios not achieving the quality they're perfectly capable of achieving is hardly useless (as you imply). "Business is business" is NO excuse for "silently" (ie not "pissing and moaning") accepting mediocrity. If you don't understand that, take a look at what happened to American automakers in the past 35 years.

Re: "Dark City: Director's Cut" coming to Blu-ray on July 29

As sympathetic as I am to this argument, let me suggest that this is not a good occasion to be making it.

The problem is simple: In this instance, most of the people making the biggest fuss haven't yet seen the actual disc. Most of the people who have don't agree that what's being offered qualifies as "mediocrity" -- and one of those people is RAH, who has never been shy about speaking up when the studios provide less than they're capable of.

Let's save the ammo for a disc that, by general consensus, genuinely deserves it.

M.

Re: "Dark City: Director's Cut" coming to Blu-ray on July 29

I'm fine with that, Michael. I was making a general rebuttal to what Obi was saying.

Re: "Dark City: Director's Cut" coming to Blu-ray on July 29

What is the difference between affects and infects for you? Whether it takes you out of the film or not?

Re: "Dark City: Director's Cut" coming to Blu-ray on July 29

You didn't direct that at me, but I'll answer it from my point of view.

DNR is a tool, and like any tool it can be used to its optimum potential or it can be misused. Digital noise reduction in some form has been a part of video post production for a very long time (as I'm sure you are aware). Used properly, DNR helps give better consistency between shots with varying levels of film grain. It is most often used as an aid in digital compression to help alleviate compression artifacts.

Recognizing the use of DNR on an analytical level would be DNR "affecting" an image. The over-use of DNR changing the intended look of an image would be "infecting" the image.

While I can recognize the use of some form of noise reduction on an analytical level in the transfer of Dark City on Blu-ray, the look and tone of the film remains intact on an aesthetic level.

That's the difference to me, and I might be so presumptuous as to say this is what Mr. Harris meant.

Re: "Dark City: Director's Cut" coming to Blu-ray on July 29

That's fine. I like movies that take me out of reality.
(done artistly, not processed & not too excess as "I" found w/"Miami Vice") How is:
"very sharp, very detailed, with exceptional black level and shadow detail"
different from "reality"?
Thanks.

Re: "Dark City: Director's Cut" coming to Blu-ray on July 29

You've explained this precisely as I meant it.

I believe the point here is that Dark City is less than perfect, and less than what it might have been, but in my terms not "infected." It still looks cinematic, and has not taken on the appearance of those other films.

It has not be hewn in plastic.

Mr. Hafner, who is one of the most learned on the board, understands this perfectly.

In my case, it's simply a matter of desiring to choose my own battles toward winning the war. This is not, IMHO, one of those battles, as to my eye, it is a more than acceptable release.

I'll now wait for someone to ask, "what is acceptable."

Please do not.

RAH

Re: "Dark City: Director's Cut" coming to Blu-ray on July 29

In short, yes.

There are very few releases that I consider perfect, but many that I find far more than acceptable, and that's fine.

The studios are walking a tightrope, attempting to make everyone happy, and that can't be done.

If they can make the early adopters, and the cinephiles happy, that will do fine, as everyone else can turn down their sharpness, eliminate grain, and along with it, detail. And all will be well.

Generally, if one strives to hit the highest quality, everything else will follow.

Lose the battle for overall perfection, and accept something that is slightly less than perfect, but more than acceptable.

Win the war of education against garbage Blu-rays.

I'm visualizing Laurence Harvey drawing the line the sand in The Alamo.

In my mind, that line has been drawn, and getting side-tracked in minor skirmishes will not be helpful.

"A storm in a teacup, Dryden..."

RAH

Re: "Dark City: Director's Cut" coming to Blu-ray on July 29

Indeed.

"...A sideshow of a sideshow."

Re: "Dark City: Director's Cut" coming to Blu-ray on July 29

Perhaps I was misunderstood. I was describing basic attributes of the Blu-ray transfer on the one hand. The production design of the film (Dark City) differs from reality in virtually every sense. Color, lighting, physical design, the entire atmosphere of the "world". Not to mention it is always night.

Re: "Dark City: Director's Cut" coming to Blu-ray on July 29

Sorry to disagree with both "Roberts" (R. George and RAH).

In my opinion, "Dark City" is extremely filtered / DNR-ed and absolutely not acceptable for me. A dreadful transfer - nothing in common with the Super 35 film elements.

The BD of "Dirty Harry", for example, is quite heavily filtered, too, but to a level, that can still be accepted, although it already hurts.

I recognize my obvious minority position. What kind of transfers can we expect in the future when a travesty of a transfer like "Dark City" is considered as to be "analytically filtered"? What an encouragement for the studios to continue this mess!

This is just my opinion. I confess to have the childish emotions of disappointment and frustration. I give up, will keep my old HD DVDs discs and sell the Blu-ray sh**. Besides, there are more important things in live, than whether a BD is filtered or not.

Re: "Dark City: Director's Cut" coming to Blu-ray on July 29

Johannes,

The point that I'm attempting to make is that what I'm seeing is not in the category of other extremely DNR'd releases, and this one cannot be compared to Patton, as DC was quite grainy while Patton far from it on the theatrical screen.

New Line, which no longer exists as an working entity, may have had this product in the works up to a year ago or more. It may not be grain friendly but neither is it a poster child for the problem.

It is extremely doubtful that studios are going to pull back product awaiting the marketplace that may no longer fit current visual parameters, especially one that doesn't exist to pull it back.

I can understand the trepidation during the BD production process in dealing with Dark City, as dark and grainy. Placing one's ear next to the disc, one can almost make out the words trying to escape...

"Gotta do something about all this grain. Consumers are gonna hate it."

And yes, grain was reduced.

But we're now hopefully in an interim period during which older transfers are going to continue to hit the streets for another six months or so that are in one way or another problematic.

While your frustration is noted, understand that this is part of a continuum in hopefully bringing change to the production process. I have already made a friendly query to the studio re: DC, and while they are willing to look into it, the fact is that they had nothing to do with its production.

BTW, may I ask if you are viewing the U.S. domestic release?

RAH

Re: "Dark City: Director's Cut" coming to Blu-ray on July 29

I have problems with this definition. DNR that is not a placebo (e.g. it actually visibly does 'something' to the picture) and does what it's supposed to do and nothing else (e.g. no loss of fine detail, no new artifacts of any kind) reduces the apparent level of grain/noise. This in itself affects the asthetic quality of the film. The question is only, negatively, neutrally or maybe positively. The answer can only be given by the film makers. But in "Dark City", if the stills are any indication, the DNR is far from just doing its core job, it also messes with fine detail, adds some waxiness and changes the random nature (stochastic behaviour) of the grain/noise displayed. This usually affects the asthetic quality in ways that are no longer minor or analytical, at least to the eye of someone who is used to compose pictures and pays for example attention to small changes in lighting or appearance of textures, static and in motion, people like the DOP or the color graders, often also the director (but not always) or other crew members. As long as DNR is not a very precise tool that reduces the visible grain/noise and does nothing else, its effects on images is always a mixture of wanted and unwanted modifications, it giveth and it taketh away. To bless or curse this mixture for home video versions or DIs is again foremost the film makers prerogative. Whether "Dark City" is just an old(er) transfer from a time where these modifications of the original were normal and accepted good practice or a new fully approved transfer I don't know. The former is not very alarming, the latter would be disturbing to me if the stills are typical for how it looks (including the damaging EE). I think it's the former, though. And there is hope a newer transfer will be released sometime in the future.

Re: "Dark City: Director's Cut" coming to Blu-ray on July 29

One of the problems of digital noise reduction is that one can never be quite certain what amount will create what changes. The process is not only hit and miss, but different toward not only the specific designs of each individual film, but potentially different on a scene by scene, shot by shot basis.

In the wrong hands...

Re: "Dark City: Director's Cut" coming to Blu-ray on July 29

Johannes S informed us about his decision to retire from the forum. That's why he won't answer to RAH's question to him here.

He was not banned or suspended as a member based on any decision by the staff, for any violation of our rules or as a rebuke for any unruly behaviour.

We told him we'll consider it our loss.


Cees

Re: "Dark City: Director's Cut" coming to Blu-ray on July 29

On the issue of "filmmaker's intent", it should be noted that DGA contracts require studios to advise a director when their film is being transferred to video (initially) and to allow the director or a designee to supervise that transfer. If one is assuming this transfer of Dark City is as old as some think, it could just as easily be assumed that Alex Proyas, or the DP, or someone that knows what this film is supposed to look like approved this transfer.

Granted, this transfer would have been supervised on a relatively small monitor and we are now watching the result on screens many times the size of a broadcast grade monitor, but still having a high enough level of quality that even subtle aspects of the transfers are quite visible. And that itself may be part of the problem. I suspect the goal of a video transfer is often to make the material look its best on TV sizes most commonly used, meaning, under 50". Placed under the magnifying glass of a quality 1080p front projector on a screen somewhere over 8' diagonal, even only mildly processed transfers are going to show some level of electronic manipulation to the trained eye. This is an electronic medium, after all.

As I said, DNR and other electronic tools (enhancement, aka, edge enhancement) have been used for a long time. I think the current issue is that the Blu-ray format is now making it easier to see the effects of these electronic processes, just as the DVD format made so many older laserdisc transfers appear more processed than they did on laserdisc.

Re: "Dark City: Director's Cut" coming to Blu-ray on July 29

There's no reason for people doing these transfers not to monitor them on large screen projection systems (I don't think there's much cost difference between a good projector and a high grade small monitor). It seems quite obvious to me that if the transfer is done so that it looks superb on the large screen, the look on a small monitor will be "taken care of". Aside from the grainophobic philistines, I can't believe anyone would MISS the excess filtering, DNR and EE.

Re: "Dark City: Director's Cut" coming to Blu-ray on July 29

It sure can't. And on certain topics, film grain, OAR, et cetera, the studios shouldn't even try to make everyone happy. Film grain (natural film grain, that is) is one of those isses where one "side" is clearly right, while the other side is wrong. It's certainly a nice sentiment to think every issue has a grey area, but not here.

Desirable film grain is now the new "black bars," only this time it's even harder to convince the average consumer that it's supposed to be there. Of course I uderstand that studios et al are out to make money, first and foremost, and of course I understand that if the average person doesn't want grain on their BD copy of "Talladega Nights," then it won't be there. However, my personal belief is that if the studios simply leave the desirable grain alone, the average consumer will quickly fall in line. Do people honestly think that scores of BD movies will be returned because "they are too grainy?" I don't. I do, however, know that scores of movies won't be purchased at all for being ravaged by DNR.

Maybe it's time to resurrect the "Joe Six-Pack" term and adopt a zero-tolerance policy towards excessive DNR.

Re: "Dark City: Director's Cut" coming to Blu-ray on July 29

Time machine back to 2006.. These type of comments won´t bring *anything* creative to anything. And they won´t help of getting the message through the studios ("do not use DNR", etc etc).

Re: "Dark City: Director's Cut" coming to Blu-ray on July 29

Exactly. It also goes to show some of the agendas some people still have.

Re: "Dark City: Director's Cut" coming to Blu-ray on July 29

Please stop these unsubstantive and personal comments about what other posters do or say, including such "agenda" remarks.

It's unpleasant, non-constructive, unproven and off-topic.


Cees

Re: "Dark City: Director's Cut" coming to Blu-ray on July 29

If I can offer my thoughts very quickly...

I have not received my copy of Dark City yet so I have
no authority to comment on the transfer nor will I make comments
based on those who have seen it.

If there was any manipulation done to this transfer, it is my
strongest guess that this was one of the final titles to go through
the New Line pipeline before they dissolved into Warner Bros.

I can tell you confidently that based on my personal conversations
with Warner Bros. the studio is very well aware of the DNR
arguments and should be very respectful towards their upcoming
releases.

Re: "Dark City: Director's Cut" coming to Blu-ray on July 29

The manipulations are visible on studio HD monitors. It's just that they are perceived differently since the magnification factor is less and the whole environment is different. The monitor in itself signals, if only subconsciously, we are in TV and video land, we are not a in a cinema or screening room here. There is no need to expect or demand more than what TV and video usually offers.
Project the same transfer the way you would supervise DI work or check test prints and suddenly expectations change, the differences become obvious, and the necessity to 'degrade' the pictures with (over)processing becomes questionable.
It's as much an attitude and conditioning issue as an equipment issue.
Finally technical progress is rapid and even technically experienced directors can not lean back and expect that 5 years later they can still rely 100% on what they know now and be happy then with what they approve and demand now. Expectations and preferences change over time, the film maker's and their audiences',