A few come to mind: The Dark Knight, Coraline, Wall.E.
8/13/09 at 7:57am
- Joined: July 2009
- Post Count: 4
Home Theater Forum
›
Forums
›
Hi-Definition
›
HT Software - High Definition
›
What Blu-ray discs do you consider as "Reference Video Quality"
Recent Reviews
-
Toshiba enters the Blu ray world with their first player. Toshiba with universal had gone with HDDVD a few years back and lost. now they are here with the first blu ray player. I had a Toshiba HD-a2...
-
FUNNY PEOPLE 2-Disc Unrated Collector’s Edition Studio: Universal Studios Home Entertainment Year: 2009 Rated:R Film Length: 2 hours, 26 minutes (theatrical), 2 hours, 33 minutes...
-
There are continual jolts of electricity spread throughout Matteo Garrone’s Gomorrah. It’s akin to the shock-to-the-system kick one got when he was first exposed to Martin...
What Blu-ray discs do you consider as "Reference Video Quality"
8/13/09 at 8:16am
- Michael Reuben
- Michael Reuben
-
- online
- Joined: February 1998
- Location: New York City, Office space for rent - cheap!
- Post Count: 19,342
Moved from High Def Disc Review Archives, which is the archive for HTF disc reviews.
Zoloft and Paxil and Buspar and Xanex, Depacon, Chronaphin, Ambien, Prozac,
Ativan calms me when I see the bills.
These are a few of my favorite pills.
(Next to Normal) HTF Rules & Regs My 2009 Film List
Win cool stuff: www.hometheaterforum.com/contest for details!
Ativan calms me when I see the bills.
These are a few of my favorite pills.
(Next to Normal) HTF Rules & Regs My 2009 Film List
Win cool stuff: www.hometheaterforum.com/contest for details!
8/13/09 at 8:34am
- Joined: June 2003
- Location: Honduras, Central America
- Post Count: 112
There are several, but I'll limit myself to movies I've recently viewed. Pinocchio comes to mind. My wife and I marveled at how good it looked. Spiderman 2 looked real good the other night when we watched it. Also, Dr. No and From Russia with Love have great transfers, imo.
"And in the end, the only thing you really own is... your story. Just trying to live a good one" - The Drover
8/13/09 at 9:39am
- Joined: February 2004
- Location: Santa Cruz, California
- Post Count: 1,559
I take it this should be a thread for titles which keep their original theatrical look? Perhaps The French Connection doesn't apply but I'm not sure if it does or doesn't.
I'll put up a nomination for ALL OO7 films I own on Blu-ray so far. Can't wait for the remaining 9 out of 20 to be released. Only problem is what do I do with the 4 Volume Ultimate Edition R1 NTSC releases which I bought? I want to keep the booklets...
I'll put up a nomination for ALL OO7 films I own on Blu-ray so far. Can't wait for the remaining 9 out of 20 to be released. Only problem is what do I do with the 4 Volume Ultimate Edition R1 NTSC releases which I bought? I want to keep the booklets...
http://www.invelos.com/DVDCollection.aspx/Ray_Rogers
Non-Supporter of Tai Seng, DNR/EE, DRM, Digital Copy and The Digital Bits.
Errol Flynn films wanted as boxsets and not released in the "Archives"!
Zero Interest in all things Harry Potter.
Non-Supporter of Tai Seng, DNR/EE, DRM, Digital Copy and The Digital Bits.
Errol Flynn films wanted as boxsets and not released in the "Archives"!
Zero Interest in all things Harry Potter.
8/14/09 at 4:09pm
- Joined: January 2001
- Post Count: 2,025
i'm guessing this thread will eventually get locked when debate gets too heated :P
anyways, Dark Knight is hardly reference. sharp and detailed, yes. edge enhanced, YES.
also add Benjamin Button to the list of references discs, as well as most movies shot with digital cameras. although Superman Returns was a bit soft.
anyways, Dark Knight is hardly reference. sharp and detailed, yes. edge enhanced, YES.
also add Benjamin Button to the list of references discs, as well as most movies shot with digital cameras. although Superman Returns was a bit soft.
"now, if that's a fact, tell me... am i lying?"
8/14/09 at 6:23pm
- Joined: February 1999
- Post Count: 2,867
Several years ago, with some help from others in AMIA, I attempted to come to a consensus as to what precisely was "film restoration."
There was no agreement.
Before a list of titles comes into play, you must come to an agreement as to the words "reference quality."
RAH
There was no agreement.
Before a list of titles comes into play, you must come to an agreement as to the words "reference quality."
RAH
"All men dream: but not equally. Those who dream by night in the dusty recesses of their minds wake in the day to find that it was vanity: but the dreamers of the day are dangerous men, for they may act their dreams with open eyes, to make it possible. This I did." T.E. Lawrence
8/14/09 at 6:42pm
- Joined: July 2002
- Post Count: 6,078
Quote:
Originally Posted by Robert Harris 
Before a list of titles comes into play, you must come to an agreement as to the words "reference quality."
Before a list of titles comes into play, you must come to an agreement as to the words "reference quality."
I take reference to mean 'maintaining the highest fidelity to the source'.
But I recognize that is NOT what most people who use to the term mean consider it to be.
And even the way I use it is a bit obtuse. I could further qualify it as 'highest fidelity to the original theatrical presentation' which might be better but still leaves room for further contention over various exceptions to the rule.
It seems that most people who use that term invariably mean something that is bright, sharp, finely detailed, and punchy (dimensional). Which of course means a great many films will be disqualified no matter how faithfully they replicate their OTP.
That's why I look down my nose at "tier" threads.
I'm in the minority here I realize, but there are several Bond Bds that I don't feel are ideal because, while they look pretty, they exhibit too much in the way of 2000 era sensibilities as regard to their gamma curves and the color saturation. Moonraker and License To Kill in particular strike me as looking very manipulated- with crushed blacks in the case of the former and jacked contrast and color saturation in the latter. I'm not a big fan of this current fashion, and when it gets applied to catalog titles it really rubs me the wrong way.
8/14/09 at 8:52pm
- Joined: July 2003
- Location: Lacombe, AB
- Post Count: 2,562
How the West Was Won. Start there, and build your own list of reference discs. Your eyes will tell you the truth.
\"My opinion is that (a) anyone who actually works in a video store and does not understand letterboxing has given up on life, and (b) any customer who prefers to have the sides of a movie hacked off should not be licensed to operate a video player.\"-- Roger Ebert
8/14/09 at 8:59pm
- Joined: February 2004
- Location: Santa Cruz, California
- Post Count: 1,559
I'll agree with Pauls sentiment. To me the best transfers keep the original look of the film, whether it be soft focus, heavy grain, washed out colour pallette and even different looks for differing scenes.
If I ever were a director and made a movie, I'd have different locales look different compared to each other. Possibly heavier film grain for dark jungle scenes or slightly washed out colours for cities. Sort of in the style of Spy Game. But of course if I were a director, a dream project of mine would be THE FLASH. With highly stylised colours and differing film grain stock as the film goes on.
I'd never use DNR/EE or digital tape if I ever made movies.
Do titles from other Regions count? Such as the USA BD of Pan's Labyrinth has DNR while the AUS, I think or UK, has the film grain intact. Case in point, one of my most hated transfers on DVD was DIE HARD: With a Vengeance. The DNR/EE was so bad I just had the commentary go on but the display turned off on purpose.
I can't wait for FIGHT CLUB (November 17th according to Amazon) and Saving Private Ryan (Sapphire Series Wave 2?) to be on Blu-ray. I'd love it if both retain their stylised heavy grain structure and color pallettes. Alot of persons who are against original look for films and prefer DNR/EE for that pasty, waxy look would have a field day with the two.
I'm glad I have my noise reduction filter on my display disabled. And black bars? I pay attention to the movie.
Although I own these on HDDVD and quite sure the Blu-ray is nearly similar, I'd nominate:
12 Monkeys
The Adventures of Robin Hood
BLADE RUNNER
KING KONG (2005)
If I ever were a director and made a movie, I'd have different locales look different compared to each other. Possibly heavier film grain for dark jungle scenes or slightly washed out colours for cities. Sort of in the style of Spy Game. But of course if I were a director, a dream project of mine would be THE FLASH. With highly stylised colours and differing film grain stock as the film goes on.
I'd never use DNR/EE or digital tape if I ever made movies.
Do titles from other Regions count? Such as the USA BD of Pan's Labyrinth has DNR while the AUS, I think or UK, has the film grain intact. Case in point, one of my most hated transfers on DVD was DIE HARD: With a Vengeance. The DNR/EE was so bad I just had the commentary go on but the display turned off on purpose.
I can't wait for FIGHT CLUB (November 17th according to Amazon) and Saving Private Ryan (Sapphire Series Wave 2?) to be on Blu-ray. I'd love it if both retain their stylised heavy grain structure and color pallettes. Alot of persons who are against original look for films and prefer DNR/EE for that pasty, waxy look would have a field day with the two.
I'm glad I have my noise reduction filter on my display disabled. And black bars? I pay attention to the movie.
Although I own these on HDDVD and quite sure the Blu-ray is nearly similar, I'd nominate:
12 Monkeys
The Adventures of Robin Hood
BLADE RUNNER
KING KONG (2005)
http://www.invelos.com/DVDCollection.aspx/Ray_Rogers
Non-Supporter of Tai Seng, DNR/EE, DRM, Digital Copy and The Digital Bits.
Errol Flynn films wanted as boxsets and not released in the "Archives"!
Zero Interest in all things Harry Potter.
Non-Supporter of Tai Seng, DNR/EE, DRM, Digital Copy and The Digital Bits.
Errol Flynn films wanted as boxsets and not released in the "Archives"!
Zero Interest in all things Harry Potter.
8/15/09 at 7:03am
The best transfer I've seen this year so far has been SIN CITY. That was breathtaking.
8/15/09 at 9:14am
- Joined: February 1999
- Post Count: 2,867
There should also be a differentiation between ports, down-rezzed files from data and transfers.
"All men dream: but not equally. Those who dream by night in the dusty recesses of their minds wake in the day to find that it was vanity: but the dreamers of the day are dangerous men, for they may act their dreams with open eyes, to make it possible. This I did." T.E. Lawrence
8/16/09 at 10:53am
- Joined: January 1999
- Post Count: 1,928
This far into this thread and no one has mentioned BARAKA!?!?!?!
To quote Bill Hunt at TheDigitalBits, "...Quite simply, is the best looking live action Blu-ray release I have EVER seen."
And this isn't some old review before the format had quality discs out.
To quote Bill Hunt at TheDigitalBits, "...Quite simply, is the best looking live action Blu-ray release I have EVER seen."
And this isn't some old review before the format had quality discs out.
8/16/09 at 4:51pm
- Joined: February 2004
- Location: Santa Cruz, California
- Post Count: 1,559
Quote:
I don't go by anything what The Digital Bits says.Originally Posted by Mark Walker
This far into this thread and no one has mentioned BARAKA!?!?!?!
To quote Bill Hunt at TheDigitalBits, "...Quite simply, is the best looking live action Blu-ray release I have EVER seen."
And this isn't some old review before the format had quality discs out.
This far into this thread and no one has mentioned BARAKA!?!?!?!
To quote Bill Hunt at TheDigitalBits, "...Quite simply, is the best looking live action Blu-ray release I have EVER seen."
And this isn't some old review before the format had quality discs out.
And THE DARK KNIGHT being reference quality only pertains to the IMAX scenes. The 35MM ones were DNR'd. Thanks Warner Bros. I was even considering purchasing BATMAN (1989) but read it has DNR too. Might as well get the UK release along with BATMAN RETURNS.
So, no titles which have DNR/EE if they were derived from a film source. Completely digital I really don't care.
Another reference quality which retains the film look is Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull. What isn't reference quality is the Skynet Edition of T2.
http://www.invelos.com/DVDCollection.aspx/Ray_Rogers
Non-Supporter of Tai Seng, DNR/EE, DRM, Digital Copy and The Digital Bits.
Errol Flynn films wanted as boxsets and not released in the "Archives"!
Zero Interest in all things Harry Potter.
Non-Supporter of Tai Seng, DNR/EE, DRM, Digital Copy and The Digital Bits.
Errol Flynn films wanted as boxsets and not released in the "Archives"!
Zero Interest in all things Harry Potter.
8/16/09 at 8:57pm
- Joined: April 2009
- Post Count: 26
Of all the Blu-Ray's that I own these are my favorite Video Transfers, keep in mind that I feel these transfers best replicate the appearance the film had during their theatrical presentations and are not limited to big-budget action spectacles.
Batman Begins
Any Pixar title currently availible
National Treasure 1 & 2
The Fast & the Furious 1, 3, & 4
Casino Royale
Hellboy I & II
Constantine
Leatherheads
Children of Men
Knocked Up
The Hulk (2003)
The Incredible Hulk (2008)
30 Days of Night
Primeval
Kung Fu Panda
Iron Man
Sunshine (2007)
V for Vendetta
The Prestige
Surf's Up
Zodiac
Coraline
Max Payne
Body Of Lies
The International
Quantum of Solace
There are still over a dozen titles I've purchased that I have yet to watch, but these titles listed above looked glorious on my 52 inch Sharp Aquos.
Batman Begins
Any Pixar title currently availible
National Treasure 1 & 2
The Fast & the Furious 1, 3, & 4
Casino Royale
Hellboy I & II
Constantine
Leatherheads
Children of Men
Knocked Up
The Hulk (2003)
The Incredible Hulk (2008)
30 Days of Night
Primeval
Kung Fu Panda
Iron Man
Sunshine (2007)
V for Vendetta
The Prestige
Surf's Up
Zodiac
Coraline
Max Payne
Body Of Lies
The International
Quantum of Solace
There are still over a dozen titles I've purchased that I have yet to watch, but these titles listed above looked glorious on my 52 inch Sharp Aquos.
"After Fight Club, watching football on television will feel like watching pornography when you could be having great sex." - Jack the Narrator
8/17/09 at 4:06pm
- Joined: September 2003
- Location: Monmouth County, NJ
- Post Count: 1,006
Many folks at another website consider BARAKA to be ridden with EE and DNRed/"filtered" to boot...
I think the Blu-ray is stunning myself.
I'd also vote for HOW THE WEST WAS WON and THE SEARCHERS, two large-format classics that look ravishing on Blu-ray.
The fully-digital SIN CITY also looks incredible, and as for recent 35mm/DI sourced films, you can scarcely get better than THE INCREDIBLE HULK (anamorphic 35mm) or TROPIC THUNDER (Super-35mm). They are both very film-like and detailed in appearance.
Vincent
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mark Walker
This far into this thread and no one has mentioned BARAKA!?!?!?!
To quote Bill Hunt at TheDigitalBits, "...Quite simply, is the best looking live action Blu-ray release I have EVER seen."
And this isn't some old review before the format had quality discs out.
This far into this thread and no one has mentioned BARAKA!?!?!?!
To quote Bill Hunt at TheDigitalBits, "...Quite simply, is the best looking live action Blu-ray release I have EVER seen."
And this isn't some old review before the format had quality discs out.
Edited by Vincent_P - 8/17/2009 at 11:19 pm GMT
Edited by Vincent_P - 8/18/2009 at 03:55 am GMT
Edited by Vincent_P - 8/18/2009 at 03:56 am GMT
8/18/09 at 5:23am
- Joined: February 2004
- Post Count: 3,141
I don't have a definition of reference quality, but I certainly think that films like Dr. No and From Russia With Love have never looked better to the human eye -- not unless you were present when they were filmed and had better than 20/20 vision. For films that are nearly 50 years old to look this good is a testament to the brilliant technology that is Blu-Ray.
Many recent films also look sharper on BD than they did when I saw them in the theater. When an eventual release of Revenge of the Sith pops up, I suspect it will blow people's minds, as the DVD is quite good.
Many recent films also look sharper on BD than they did when I saw them in the theater. When an eventual release of Revenge of the Sith pops up, I suspect it will blow people's minds, as the DVD is quite good.
8/25/09 at 1:47pm
- Joined: May 2008
- Location: The Netherlands
- Post Count: 717
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vincent_P
Many folks at another website consider BARAKA to be ridden with EE and DNRed/"filtered" to boot...
I think the Blu-ray is stunning myself.
Many folks at another website consider BARAKA to be ridden with EE and DNRed/"filtered" to boot...
I think the Blu-ray is stunning myself.
I read that too, but it doesn't seem likely. Why go through all the effort and money to do an 8K scan to scrub out all the detail in the picture?
Never go out with anyone who thinks Fellini is a type of cheese
My Blu-Ray/DVD Collection
8/25/09 at 2:32pm
- Joined: August 2001
- Location: New York City Area
- Post Count: 3,532
Baraka looks excellent on my 61" DLP from just about any viewing distance (though I didn't actively try to look for defects in PQ). It's actually one of a small handful of BDs that makes me want to get much closer to the screen to soak it all in. 
If it has any EE, it's probably just a mild tweak (to get a tad bit more of that Discovery Channel look). It's certainly not quite like The Dark Knight in that regard -- TDK definitely looks a bit overcooked in many places though I'm not sure that's not partially intentional (for a more gritty look to suit the film itself).
_Man_
Just another amateur learning to paint w/ "the light of the world".
8/25/09 at 4:57pm
- Joined: January 2001
- Post Count: 2,025
Quote:
I read that too, but it doesn't seem likely. Why go through all the effort and money to do an 8K scan to scrub out all the detail in the picture?
i don't know, but saying that 'it doesn't make sense' doesn't change what my eyes see. whether it was applied or not, there is obvious halo'ing in Baraka. questioning the logic of why it would be there doesn't change the fact that it's there.
"Reference" is a volatile word. do you mean "looks exactly like the way it was in the theater" or do you mean "something i can show off the system with"? because if it's the former, a movie could look blurry, dark, and muddled and still be considered 'reference'.
"now, if that's a fact, tell me... am i lying?"
8/25/09 at 7:11pm
- Joined: August 2006
- Post Count: 93
I agree wholeheartedly with Paul_Scott; I consider reference quality to be as close to the original source as the format will allow, whether demo material or not. I also find that at this stage of the format's life, most new DI-based films from the major studios come out looking that way. It's to the point where I hesitate to use the term out of concern that it might lose its meaning. I mean, if every week or so we get another Blu-ray disc that qualifies as "reference quality," then it ceases to be a real special honor. I suppose that's a good thing, though. Even though to this day there are still too many films- mainly catalogue titles- that get molested with DNR, EE, and other revisionist post-processing, I think that new releases tend to be excellent in terms of technical quality.
The main obstacle is getting studios to strike fresh masters for films that need it rather than trying to dress up the outdated ones. Garbage in, garbage out.
That being said, I can think of some titles offhand that struck me as being perfectly presented on video (in no particular order):
Quantum of Solace
Coraline
Sin City
Close Encounters of the Third Kind
Apocalypto
WALL-E
Ratatouille
Iron Man
'Pirates of the Caribbean' trilogy
The Curious Case of Benjamin Button
Zodiac (though I have the HD DVD, not the Blu-ray)
Seabiscuit (see above)
Rescue Dawn
Taken
Wanted
Die Hard
The main obstacle is getting studios to strike fresh masters for films that need it rather than trying to dress up the outdated ones. Garbage in, garbage out.
That being said, I can think of some titles offhand that struck me as being perfectly presented on video (in no particular order):
Quantum of Solace
Coraline
Sin City
Close Encounters of the Third Kind
Apocalypto
WALL-E
Ratatouille
Iron Man
'Pirates of the Caribbean' trilogy
The Curious Case of Benjamin Button
Zodiac (though I have the HD DVD, not the Blu-ray)
Seabiscuit (see above)
Rescue Dawn
Taken
Wanted
Die Hard
8/25/09 at 7:29pm
- Joined: December 1998
- Post Count: 7,877
Quote:
Originally Posted by Brian Borst
I read that too, but it doesn't seem likely. Why go through all the effort and money to do an 8K scan to scrub out all the detail in the picture?
I read that too, but it doesn't seem likely. Why go through all the effort and money to do an 8K scan to scrub out all the detail in the picture?
The most common explanation, and the one that makes the most sense, is that there's an all-too common mindset that says "film grain is BAD. Blu Ray video is supposed to look exactly like that--eye-popping, '3D', High Definition VIDEO, ala Discovery Channel HD, etc.". The people with this mindset don't give a rat's ass about preserving the original film look. It's this mindset that studios frequently cater to. They use DNR to scrub away the "offensive, despised" grain (Check out various online reviews that mention the presence of film grain as a "defect" in a transfer, causing the reviewer to lower his evaluation). They then use EE to sharpen the picture in an attempt to restore the detail they just scrubbed away. The result is a godawful mess, but their "logic" says it makes sense to them. Now you know why it's NOT unlikely. That said, Baraka is not one of the really bad offenders in this regard.
Edited by RobertR - 8/25/09 at 7:43pm
8/25/09 at 7:48pm
- Joined: October 2001
- Post Count: 1,485
To me "reference quality" is what you would refer or show others as meeting the highest standard for Blu-Ray media.
8/26/09 at 2:05am
- Joined: February 2004
- Location: Santa Cruz, California
- Post Count: 1,559
Quote:
Good one Alex!Originally Posted by Xylon
Tremors HD DVD
Tremors HD DVD
http://www.invelos.com/DVDCollection.aspx/Ray_Rogers
Non-Supporter of Tai Seng, DNR/EE, DRM, Digital Copy and The Digital Bits.
Errol Flynn films wanted as boxsets and not released in the "Archives"!
Zero Interest in all things Harry Potter.
Non-Supporter of Tai Seng, DNR/EE, DRM, Digital Copy and The Digital Bits.
Errol Flynn films wanted as boxsets and not released in the "Archives"!
Zero Interest in all things Harry Potter.
8/26/09 at 7:06am
- Joined: October 2002
- Post Count: 1,927
Quote:
Originally Posted by Paul_Scott
I take reference to mean 'maintaining the highest fidelity to the source'.
But I recognize that is NOT what most people who use to the term mean consider it to be.
And even the way I use it is a bit obtuse. I could further qualify it as 'highest fidelity to the original theatrical presentation' which might be better but still leaves room for further contention over various exceptions to the rule.
It seems that most people who use that term invariably mean something that is bright, sharp, finely detailed, and punchy (dimensional). Which of course means a great many films will be disqualified no matter how faithfully they replicate their OTP.
That's why I look down my nose at "tier" threads.
I'm in the minority here I realize, but there are several Bond Bds that I don't feel are ideal because, while they look pretty, they exhibit too much in the way of 2000 era sensibilities as regard to their gamma curves and the color saturation. Moonraker and License To Kill in particular strike me as looking very manipulated- with crushed blacks in the case of the former and jacked contrast and color saturation in the latter. I'm not a big fan of this current fashion, and when it gets applied to catalog titles it really rubs me the wrong way.
I take reference to mean 'maintaining the highest fidelity to the source'.
But I recognize that is NOT what most people who use to the term mean consider it to be.
And even the way I use it is a bit obtuse. I could further qualify it as 'highest fidelity to the original theatrical presentation' which might be better but still leaves room for further contention over various exceptions to the rule.
It seems that most people who use that term invariably mean something that is bright, sharp, finely detailed, and punchy (dimensional). Which of course means a great many films will be disqualified no matter how faithfully they replicate their OTP.
That's why I look down my nose at "tier" threads.
I'm in the minority here I realize, but there are several Bond Bds that I don't feel are ideal because, while they look pretty, they exhibit too much in the way of 2000 era sensibilities as regard to their gamma curves and the color saturation. Moonraker and License To Kill in particular strike me as looking very manipulated- with crushed blacks in the case of the former and jacked contrast and color saturation in the latter. I'm not a big fan of this current fashion, and when it gets applied to catalog titles it really rubs me the wrong way.
For the most part I agree here, although I do have have trouble with your original definition. I personally feel that "original theatrical presentation" is at best a misnomer, and at worst a poor benchmark for success. Gekkou put it better when he referred to it as "as close to the original source as the format will allow". Why? Because "theatrical presentation" has so many factors as to make it worse than useless when comparing it to the home video product. Here's how I've put it before:
Besides all the differences regarding controlling the flow of the movie (pause, FF, REW, etc), it's something that can only be achieved by perfectly calibrated projectors showing only pristine first-run prints, displayed on screens perfectly proportioned and colored to show any image, in theaters designed to maximize the visual and auditory scope with perfect lighting setups. Not the least of which is because of the tens of thousands of cinemas in the world, the number of cinemas that can actually create such an experience is likely in the double digits, limited to the cream of the crop single-screen theaters in premiere-only locations such as NY, LA, London, Tokyo, etc. And even then you'd have to have viewership limited to the best seats in the house. And I doubt everyone wants the real-world "cinematic experience" recreating multiplexes with postage-stamp screens, out-of-focus projectors with dim bulbs, overcooked sound systems, the sound of the next movie over leaking in, and loudmouths with cell phones.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ray_R
I don't go by anything what The Digital Bits says.
I don't go by anything what The Digital Bits says.
Mind you, he wasn't the only one saying this. Among all the other reviewers (expert and not), Roger Ebert--who despite any other shortcomings, is a consummate enthusiast of proper presentation of film--said the Blu-ray was perfection. That still doesn't explain this "Bill Hunt killed my family" level of animus you have here and which should be left out of future posts.
Edited by Jesse Blacklow - 8/26/09 at 7:42am
"Would I rather be feared or loved? Um...easy, both. I want people to be afraid of how much they love me."
--Michael Scott, The Office
"When I get sad I just stop being sad and be awesome instead. True story."
--Barney Stinson, How I Met Your Mother
--Michael Scott, The Office
"When I get sad I just stop being sad and be awesome instead. True story."
--Barney Stinson, How I Met Your Mother
8/26/09 at 11:32am
- Joined: July 2001
- Location: The Great Indoors
- Post Count: 2,183
For me, currently, it's gotta be "A Bug's Life"...the thing is flat out gorgeous on Blu-ray.
"Music is a magic carpet loaded with oils and other soothing potions, it's just what you need when you don't know what you need, when you've got more questions than answers." - Bob Lefsetz
8/26/09 at 4:21pm
- Joined: February 2004
- Location: Santa Cruz, California
- Post Count: 1,559
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ron Reda
For me, currently, it's gotta be "A Bug's Life"...the thing is flat out gorgeous on Blu-ray.
For me, currently, it's gotta be "A Bug's Life"...the thing is flat out gorgeous on Blu-ray.
I don't consider a film which is all CGI to be "reference" quality. Digital to digital isn't reference to me. Just the ALL CGI aspect.
I'm still not changing my signature.
If I were in charge, Jason and the Argonauts would most certainly be reference quality. Same goes for Clash of the Titans, The 7th Voyage of Sinbad and numerous other Harryhausen titles.
http://www.invelos.com/DVDCollection.aspx/Ray_Rogers
Non-Supporter of Tai Seng, DNR/EE, DRM, Digital Copy and The Digital Bits.
Errol Flynn films wanted as boxsets and not released in the "Archives"!
Zero Interest in all things Harry Potter.
Non-Supporter of Tai Seng, DNR/EE, DRM, Digital Copy and The Digital Bits.
Errol Flynn films wanted as boxsets and not released in the "Archives"!
Zero Interest in all things Harry Potter.
8/26/09 at 6:14pm
- Joined: July 2001
- Location: The Great Indoors
- Post Count: 2,183
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ray_R
I don't consider a film which is all CGI to be "reference" quality. Digital to digital isn't reference to me. Just the ALL CGI aspect.
I'm still not changing my signature.
If I were in charge, Jason and the Argonauts would most certainly be reference quality. Same goes for Clash of the Titans, The 7th Voyage of Sinbad and numerous other Harryhausen titles.
I don't consider a film which is all CGI to be "reference" quality. Digital to digital isn't reference to me. Just the ALL CGI aspect.
I'm still not changing my signature.
If I were in charge, Jason and the Argonauts would most certainly be reference quality. Same goes for Clash of the Titans, The 7th Voyage of Sinbad and numerous other Harryhausen titles.
Uh, OK?
I'm not asking you to change anything and I respect your opinion, but I'm also entitled to mine. The thread is titled "Reference Video Quality" - to me that means the highest quality video on Blu-ray and again, to me, that is "A Bug's Life.""Music is a magic carpet loaded with oils and other soothing potions, it's just what you need when you don't know what you need, when you've got more questions than answers." - Bob Lefsetz
8/28/09 at 12:17pm
- Joined: May 2008
- Location: The Netherlands
- Post Count: 717
Quote:
Originally Posted by RobertR
The most common explanation, and the one that makes the most sense, is that there's an all-too common mindset that says "film grain is BAD. Blu Ray video is supposed to look exactly like that--eye-popping, '3D', High Definition VIDEO, ala Discovery Channel HD, etc.". The people with this mindset don't give a rat's ass about preserving the original film look. It's this mindset that studios frequently cater to. They use DNR to scrub away the "offensive, despised" grain (Check out various online reviews that mention the presence of film grain as a "defect" in a transfer, causing the reviewer to lower his evaluation). They then use EE to sharpen the picture in an attempt to restore the detail they just scrubbed away. The result is a godawful mess, but their "logic" says it makes sense to them. Now you know why it's NOT unlikely. That said, Baraka is not one of the really bad offenders in this regard.
The most common explanation, and the one that makes the most sense, is that there's an all-too common mindset that says "film grain is BAD. Blu Ray video is supposed to look exactly like that--eye-popping, '3D', High Definition VIDEO, ala Discovery Channel HD, etc.". The people with this mindset don't give a rat's ass about preserving the original film look. It's this mindset that studios frequently cater to. They use DNR to scrub away the "offensive, despised" grain (Check out various online reviews that mention the presence of film grain as a "defect" in a transfer, causing the reviewer to lower his evaluation). They then use EE to sharpen the picture in an attempt to restore the detail they just scrubbed away. The result is a godawful mess, but their "logic" says it makes sense to them. Now you know why it's NOT unlikely. That said, Baraka is not one of the really bad offenders in this regard.
Oh, I'm very aware of this phenomenon and I absolutely hate it. I think a movie on Blu-ray should look like the film is supposed to look. If that means there's grain or soft focus scenes or whatever in it, so be it. So in my regard both Bullitt and A Bug's Life are 'reference BD's', although they look completely different from each other.
But, in the case of Baraka, the filmmakers were involved in the Blu-ray transfer. That's why I don't understand why they would add edge enhancement to it, especially since 70mm already has very fine grain. There doesn't seem to be any DNR though, the grain is still visible.
I also heard that while scanning the film the computer doing it automatically adds EE to it. Don't know if it's true or not.
Never go out with anyone who thinks Fellini is a type of cheese
My Blu-Ray/DVD Collection
8/28/09 at 7:13pm
- Joined: December 1998
- Post Count: 7,877
Quote:
Originally Posted by Brian Borst
Oh, I'm very aware of this phenomenon and I absolutely hate it. I think a movie on Blu-ray should look like the film is supposed to look. If that means there's grain or soft focus scenes or whatever in it, so be it. So in my regard both Bullitt and A Bug's Life are 'reference BD's', although they look completely different from each other.
But, in the case of Baraka, the filmmakers were involved in the Blu-ray transfer. That's why I don't understand why they would add edge enhancement to it, especially since 70mm already has very fine grain. There doesn't seem to be any DNR though, the grain is still visible.
I also heard that while scanning the film the computer doing it automatically adds EE to it. Don't know if it's true or not.
Oh, I'm very aware of this phenomenon and I absolutely hate it. I think a movie on Blu-ray should look like the film is supposed to look. If that means there's grain or soft focus scenes or whatever in it, so be it. So in my regard both Bullitt and A Bug's Life are 'reference BD's', although they look completely different from each other.
But, in the case of Baraka, the filmmakers were involved in the Blu-ray transfer. That's why I don't understand why they would add edge enhancement to it, especially since 70mm already has very fine grain. There doesn't seem to be any DNR though, the grain is still visible.
I also heard that while scanning the film the computer doing it automatically adds EE to it. Don't know if it's true or not.
Apparently, it is true that EE is sometimes added automatically when transferring a film. Why? There seems to be this view that it has to look "better" (ie sharper) on a small screen, which EE can create the illusion of. Why would a filmmaker approve of it? Well, that just shows you can't even trust them to preserve the original look. Check out what William Friedkin did to The French Connection BR. That's just....amazing.
