"Dark City: Director's Cut" coming to Blu-ray on July 29 - Page 11

Jari K · 08-01-2008, 06:09 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dave Mack

Started watching the DC 14 minutes ago.

So you actually watched the film with your laptop next to you, stopping the film every once in a while to comment about DNR and EE over the message boards?

I mean seriously, I would think that the "film", "story" and "actors" are still the main thing here, EVEN if the transfer has minor "issues". You probably ruined that from yourself over this silly thread..

Cees Alons · 08-01-2008, 06:28 AM

Even if, for a moment, we forget all about the enjoyment of watching a whole movie, we still shouldn't think we can prove anything about the moving picture by copying a screen capture someone made.

I'm not referring here to the fact that the screencap may have been chosen to show the absolutely worst (or best) example of a frame containing what the poster wanted to argue. Nor to a possible malafide use of photoshop techniques, or even "innocent" reproduction errors.

Screencaps PROVE close to nothing about what you see when watching the running movie. But on the other hand, they're almost the only way to explain on a non-moving medium what you saw.

Of course they need to be used very carefully, and preferably by people who, like Michel, know "how stills relate to the film in motion" indeed.

One of my biggest irritation in this respect on the internet is people who didn't see the movie at all and post opinions based on such screencaps of others (that were accompanying an article about the movie as seen by the author) and apparently think they have a 'proof' in hand. ("Here, see?")

The other irritation I have in this respect is separated screencaps: those that are published anywhere, or repeated somewhere (even if it's done by the original author) without the original text they were meant to clarify.

IMO, screencaps only carry any value when accompanied by the original article. Because the value lies in the description of the original observation, not in the stills themselves.

Cees

Jari K · 08-01-2008, 06:50 AM

Good post Cees.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cees Alons

I'm not referring here to the fact that the screencap may have been chosen to show the absolutely worst (or best) example of a frame containing what the poster wanted to argue.

Yes, one or two screencaps (I mean 1 frame of the 24 frames, where 24 frames is 1 second..) is hardly the "smoking gun" that should suddenly ruin the film. I personally want to see the film (and no, I don´t post in the forums during that..

) through. If I have to "freeze frame" the film to "see" some problem etc, it´s probably not a "problem" for me. Or it´s a "minor problem".

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cees Alons

Screencaps PROVE close to nothing about what you see when watching the running movie. But on the other hand, they're almost the only way to explain on a non-moving medium what you saw.

True, true. It has both sides for sure..

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cees Alons

IOne of my biggest irritation in this respect on the internet is people who didn't see the movie at all and post opinions based on such screencaps of others (that were accompanying an article about the movie as seen by the author) and apparently think they have a 'proof' in hand. ("Here, see?")

The other irritation I have in this respect is separated screencaps: those that are published anywhere, or repeated somewhere (even if it's done by the original author) without the original text they were meant to clarify.

Now we´re talking. We´ve now screencaps circulating from the various sources and many of them doesn´t have the original link/source included. They´re living their "own life" now. E.g. DVDbeaver didn´t post some of those screencaps to "show DNR or EE", I believe..

But like I said in some other thread, we´ll see these "I saw one screencap of this movie - it has DNR/EE/etc, no buy"-threads in the future, even when the person posting them haven´t see the disc him/herself.. IMO; It doesn´t work like that.

Give me the valid sources/links/knowledge/info (RAH, etc) WITH those screencaps and then we talk. If that´s not going to happen, forgettaboutit. One screencap means nothing alone. We need some proper "info" behind that (like it happened with "Patton", IMO)."This image is rather clean with no grain - it *must* have DNR"-type of threads is not the way to go, IMO. Too much speculation (since we all know, that the amount of grain varies quite a lot within the films - due the film stock, cinematography, style, post-production, restoration, etc).

JonZ · 08-01-2008, 09:41 AM

DVDFILE.com

"I DO like Connely's singing voice on the DC instead of the dubbed over version in the TC. The other girl might be more of a pro singer but it always seemed phony. The voice didn't match Connely. This is better IMHO."

I didnt even notice this difference. Thanks for mentioning that.

RobertR · 08-01-2008, 09:54 AM

deleted.

Jari K · 08-01-2008, 10:19 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by RobertR

Interesting statement, given what you said in the Starship Troopers thread regarding the statement "the TrueHD track seems to be a few frames out of sync with the picture. It's close enough to be unnoticeable for most of the movie, and isn't ever severe enough to be concerned about":

Yet somehow Dave doesn't pay enough attention to the "film", "story" and "actors".

I missed the point here...? Yes, I´ll be order both "Dark City" and "Starship Troopers" at some point. Both (I guess the jury is still out on ST) seems tohave minor "issues", but I can live with them. I´m against DNR, EE, etc, but based on this thread alone, I probably survive through "Dark City"..

Russell G · 08-01-2008, 10:24 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by RobertR

Interesting statement, given what you said in the Starship Troopers thread regarding the statement "the TrueHD track seems to be a few frames out of sync with the picture. It's close enough to be unnoticeable for most of the movie, and isn't ever severe enough to be concerned about"

Audio out of sync is easily 100 times more noticeable then a bit of DNR.

Really good post Cees. Screen caps for me are always better to show framing issues pertaining to aspect ratio then the actual transfer quality. Seems like every capture program out there does something to the still. And the motion really is big factor. the Charlie Chaplin MK3 (Might have the wrong name, sorry) sets that came out a few years had major issues where the NTSC discs were made from PAL transfers. Some thing that showed on a still like Charlies watch string vanishing in "THE GREAT DICTATOR" played fine when watching the movie as your eye is tricked and fills in the blanks. Film medium on the whole is a bit of bag of tricks, the technology itself is all about fooling the eye. Of course, other things were still terrible.

I think this DC disc sounds a bit like that, where stilled you see some horrible errors, yet played, it's mostly alright. Some of the scenes in the Chaplin DVDs where horrendous smears (the famous Globe dance in "The Great Dictator where the panneled wall would blur in the pans). Watching it though, I was simply totally charmed by the movie. So yeah, I'd love a more perfect version, but I'm not losing sleep over what I got.

RobertR · 08-01-2008, 10:25 AM

Oops, my mistake.

RobertR · 08-01-2008, 10:30 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Russell G

Audio out of sync is easily 100 times more noticeable then a bit of DNR.

Says who? I'll repeat the quote:

"the TrueHD track seems to be a few frames out of sync with the picture. It's close enough to be unnoticeable for most of the movie, and isn't ever severe enough to be concerned about".

So an audio issue in a "few frames" is a big deal, but if someone else is bother by DNR in some scenes, he's "too picky"?

Russell G · 08-01-2008, 10:35 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by RobertR

Says who? I'll repeat the quote

Says me. Joe average has no idea what anyones talking about when you say EDGE ENHANCEMENT or DNR, you have to show them that it's wrong. Children can realize if the audios out. If it's a little bit, then yeah, you can get by, but it's still more noticeable.

As far as you being picky, I never said that. Your peeve is obviously any kind of edge enhancement or digital thing happening to the film. That's okay. I'm more of an audio synch guy. That's okay too.