Recent content by Geoff_D

Well, speaking for these two movies I got a nice little increase in PQ on both UHDs, for despite Cloverfield having been shot HD it was lensed on such cameras as the Viper and the Sony F23, not just some rinky-dink Panasonic camcorder, and it looks surprisingly classy at times. The UHD brings...

Quite right, they created deliverables for 24fps, 60fps and 120fps and used RealD's 'True Motion' software to created "weighted averages" (interpolation) of the 120fps source frames that were truer to the inherent motion blur characteristics of the respective <120 masters. I've got the UHD on...

I have the disc and usually sit 6ft from my 55" 4K. The wonderful thing about 4K res sets is that they lack the visible pixel structure of 1080p direct-view displays when you get within a certain distance, so at that kind of range my viewing is unhindered and doesn't normally expose a disc so...

At the risk of sending everyone's eyes rolling into the back of their heads with my amateur sleuthing, it may very well have been a 6K scan for a 4K finish, owing to the necessities of oversampling (or so I've heard). You want 4K from an ARRISCAN, you've got to set it up to do a double-flash...

There are other uses for grain. How some 100-percent proof genuine Universal moonshine? They could call it Colt 35mm and get Billy Dee Williams in for the advert.

Ah, there's the trademark RAH sarcasm. For a moment there I was wondering if you were going to impart that AAWIL was shot on the same no-grain "Russian film stock" as GoldenEye was (chortle chortle tee hee, we are laughing!) but I tell you what, I'll never think of a grain silo in the same way...

Here you go Bruce: http://www.bleedingcool.com/2012/04/10/restoring-jaws-for-bluray-michael-daruty-on-grain-management-making-changes-for-spielberg-more/ And also this, a slide from a webinar by them Kodak peoples: Come on, be honest, you guys are just sore because us armchair experts...

Well, filmmakers were fully aware that what they were shooting on the negative was not going to end up on the screen in a 1:1 manner, that it would be duped down several times by the time it hit a regular 35mm release print, and the look of the grain changes from element to element. For that...

Man, if the look of AWIL is the result of the slightest dab on the pedal re: compression and not some heavy-handed grain management then I dread to think what it'd have looked like had they been any more aggressive with it. It's unquestionably better than the old edition as the sharpening is...

While the detail is sensational the sense of filmic texture looks incredibly weird to my eyes, like someone's gone crazy with the watercolour filter in paintshop, it looks like something shot on digital video and not early '80s 35mm. I genuinely hope this is a one-off from Universal and not a...

My copy's already on the way, along with GBII for good measure. Can. Not. Wait.

Gotta agree with Bruce on this, I thought the film was a diverting enough piece of fan service but in terms of "popcorn movie" status I've got a bunch of movies that do it so much better than this (the original JP, for one), and I didn't take kindly to all the smug meta references to blockbuster...

Dude, stay away from the 'Mastered in 4K tech', it's the usual marketing snow job from Sony.

RAH, the problem with the 'Mastered in 4K' setting on Sony's 4K equipment is that it's part of the 'Reality Creation' processing suite, and even with the sliders on the RC settings set to minimum with just Mi4K set to on it's still applying a layer of de-noising to the image which reduces grain...

It's hard to add to the chorus of approval without repeating what someone else has said, so effusive has been the praise, so I must resort to making up a word: this restored Blu-ray is utterly spanktabulous.