A few words about...™ Howards End -- in Blu-ray

 Another fave including the Robbins score. Skipped the delayed DVD.

Mr. Harris, this is an appalling blu ray release. I know most online reviews have been through the roof over it but Amazon customers, the people who really know this film, have not been happy. The amount of digital noise (not film "grain" as so many reviewers who have never worked in film believe) is awful. I have seen the film theatrically countless times and was even at the premiere at the Royal in Santa Monica and what I saw was absolutely not this "grainy." The film was shot Super 35mm for blow up to 70 and it looked great. The clips used in the blu ray's menu and blown up to 16x9 look better than the feature itself. And there are horrible pale digital blocks that ripple across the darker scenes in a very structured manner as if there was interference in a signal during transfer. Also, I am absolutely certain this is not a new transfer done specifically for blu ray - I doubt Criterion pulled in Tony Pierce-Roberts to time it, at great expense, when they had just done so for the previous masters used for DVD four years before.

I've got a good playback system and all other BD's look great when viewed, even other Criterion BD's. So why would this one be so hideous? Mr. Mulvaney told all of us complainers that our televisions would have to be recalibrated to make it look good. Interesting, since I am a film editor who grew up on actual film and who has already calibrated his television to look as good and "film-like" (whatever that is in the video world) as possible. This is literally the worst looking blu ray I own.

Anyway, I just had to say my piece. Most people have been happy with this BD. I find it unwatchable. It looks like it was struck from an old master and indeed it probably was. Even the editor of Howards End, a friend that I've worked with, thought so.

I am a huge fan of each, so no chasm for me (but my wife does think I'm weird, if that means anything in this context ).

Thanks, Robert. I don't use the Vivid setting and have taken the time to make my monitor look as good as possible. I don't understand why there would be a screen-like grid in the darker areas and the big pale blocks that occasionally appear are really awful. Why would I have absolutely no problem with any other DVD or BD?

I have my set on low contrast and sharpeness to avoid such problems while viewing BD's. It's a really awful disc and a severe disappointment after the stunning beauty of Criterion's The Seventh Seal and Repulsion.

For the record I took Mr. Mulvaney's advice and drastically knocked everything even farther down and the noise, snow and grid were still there. No DVD or BD release should ever have to force the customer to readjust their televisions. And I've certainly never had to readjust anything for any other Criterion releases.

Again, most people have no problem with it. But I've seen the film countless times projected in both 35mm Scope and 70mm (I was a manager for Laemmle theatres for years before I got into feature editing!) and this is absolutely not what it looked like.

Sean--I've posted to you on Amazon re: our problems with this disc.  At Jon Mulvaney's direction I took my sharpness down, although I never had the set on vivid.  It still looks just horrible, and as I said on Amazon if you pause it, it looks like someone spilled whiteout on it and tried to rub it off.  No disc, including my Criterion of Benjamin Button has ever looked like this.  Howard's End is just a wreck.  I would think my Sony 52XBR5 and Sony S550 could, with low settings, make this movie look like others are seeing it, but there's a real problem there somewhere.  I am so glad I netflixed it first, because this is a picture quality decision I couldn't be happy with as an owner of the disc.

Edited by PattyFraser - 12/9/09 at 8:06pm

Possible batch errors on this release?

Josh, I thought so, too, but was asked to send my BD of Howards End back to Criterion for evaluation. Mr. Mulvaney responded to my email and said all of the above (did I have my tv set to "vivid," did I turn my sharness down, etc., etc?). He said they could find nothing wrong with the disc and very kindly sent me a new one, which was just as bad if not worse than the other one (the replacement disc now has sound drop outs in specific scenes, I checked the disc with my one eyes, holding it up to the light just to be certain there were no scratches or physical anomalies that would cause this and it's very clean). It isn't a matter of getting my money back, it's simply an unacceptable release. And what is worse, the majority of viewers don't think so.

So be it. There is apparently nothing anyone will do about it. The quality of movie watching at home has finally sunk to a new low, even with a film of the caliber of Howards End.

Quote:
So, every other Criterion release looks fine, but one doesn't, and the entirety of home video is in the crapper? That statement is illogical on several levels, to say nothing of hypocritical.

No. It is not. Blu Ray reviewers (in general) seem to like anything that appears before them. I come from the film editing world and am deeply critical. That is my prerogative. My statement is quite logical as a comment on the fact that no standards have been set for blu ray releases, as no standards were ever set for DVD releases, etc., etc. so the quality of each release is scattered across the board. Not all films are photographed alike, but a set rule of standards would assure the best and truest look when released on home video.

Having more detail and brighter colors does not constitute a great release on blu ray. Maintaining the film's original visual and audible integrity, as far as is possible even with blu ray's limitations, does constitute a great release (i.e. The Wizard of Oz and GWTW from Warners).

My comment is ultimately about the run around we complainers have been getting about this atrocious release of Howards End on blu ray. Again, I come from the professional film/digital world, and to be told my television may be on the wrong setting in order to enjoy the film is really not very helpful. Will the time come when each and every blu ray requires the readjusting of our monitors?

Does that mean you normally watch BDs on your Sony Bravia LCD w/ some sort of "vivid" setting?  If so, that's almost certainly not ideal even for other BDs in general.  In that case, I'd recommend toning down your settings at least for watching BDs.  Make sure you turn off whatever "auto" or "dynamic" (or "vivid") modes/settings and at least use reasonable contrast and brightness settings (and adjust gamma as needed, if the set allows that).  Also, turn off whatever edge enhancement setting and tone down the sharpness setting.

If grain (or digital noise) is still objectionable to you for certain titles after all that, you may want to apply a reasonable level of DNR in your TV settings.

I also have the Howards End BD, but haven't had a chance to view it yet -- and my player just started acting up yesterday, so I can't even give it a quick test spin right now to see for myself.

_Man_

Errrr . .  who set their TV at VIVID mode?!?
Edited by Xylon - 12/13/09 at 6:56am

My thoughts exactly.

 I scanned through the other night, and was blown away by the sound (of the score)!
Wonderful...and brought back memories of why I LOVE the score.

Opening credits was nice. Zoom out was a bit strange.

Skipped through various chapters and picture softened a bit, but not inconsistently.
I compared against A ROOM WITH A VIEW, which was similarly good (sound for that was a bit unusual).

HE is a dark movie at times; the opening walk through the garden at dusk was fine, and held up on my rig.

NO sign of video noise at 185".

My first Criterion BRD.

Picked up most of them during the Amazon sale.

Playtime at last (since missing out on DVD in 2000).

Quote:
I am in complete agreement with this.  When I read positive reviews of the travesty that is THE FRENCH CONNECTION BD, which fails on so many levels, I knew that quality standards in reviewing Blu-Ray titles was growing increasingly misguided. 

"Monitor dependent?"  Thanks, I'll make sure to buy a monitor for each and every Blu-Ray DVD I purchase.  

Wow. Thank you, Robert. This is clearly my first time running into a disc like this. And unfortunately it had to be Howards End. That's a shame that it has to be so sensitive. The clips from the film in the menu design look fantastic, and the film itself looks wretched. I let it play out completely the other night, just to reassure myself I wasn't utterly mad, and when the film paused in the black after the end titles finished rolling to switch back over to the menu, even the black fell apart - green, red, white spots everywhere.

Well, it'll be too costly for Criterion to fix it, so I'll use my DVD instead. Perhaps when they release it again early 2010 on DVD as spine #488 (same as the BD) I'll pick that up and see if the quality is better than the old DVD. Or maybe not. I think I've seen the film enough for now. :)

How does "monitor dependent" work? 

I always figured if standards were met at both the source and at the playback system there wouldn't be any problem. 

Does this mean a properly produced disc played back on a properly calibrated display can look bad? 

Unfortunately, Point-Blank, I fear that most reviewers of blu rays have either just finished or are anxious to jump back into the video games they've just been playing. This is probably very ungenerous of me, but there it is. I come from the film world and though I know that home video is a long way away from looking like projected film (in some cases it actually looks better!) I still think that standards should have been set for image and sound quality. Howards End was very well photographed, for blow up to 70mm, and this disc does not represent that.

There is a image standard for HDTV. It uses the REC709 color space, D65 illuminant and a gamma of 2.3. If you get your HD display ISF calibrated, it will be calibrated according to this standard. If your display is not calibrated according to this standard then chances are that your problem with the BD of Howard's End is purely display related.

No, you don't understand. "Standards" means not technical specs, but visual integrity. And here we have the crux of the problem.

Sean,

You mentioned you have your display set on "low contrast and sharpness", but the issues you mentioned (mainly in the darker regions of the image) aren't quite that relevant to a display's "contrast" (or rather, white level) setting AFAIK -- in fact, if anything, too low contrast may actually have the opposite desired result.  What kind of display do you have?  LCD (like another poster w/ the same issue)?  If yes, I can imagine less-than-ideal black level/depth (and dark-to-mid gray presentation) could be a problem for the kind of issues you mentioned.

That would be my first guess into the problem anyway (on top of whatever actual issues exist w/ the transfer and encode themselves).

Also, you mentioned turning down sharpness, but are you sure the display isn't still applying some amount of edge enhancement anyway?  In the old days, some/many displays (even the more expensive, big name ones) would literally force EE on the image even if you turn sharpness down to zero/minimum.  Since you do not give all that much detail on your setup (nor actually indicate it's been ISF calibrated and fine-tuned/tweaked by a solid ISF tech), it's hard to know whether some of the problem is not coming from your own setup making this BD look worse than it could.

I'm admittedly no expert on the immediate matter, but it does sound to me like this BD could look better than what you're getting from it.


RE: this particular issue, (somewhat) ironically, other than what Criterion already seeks to do by involving the original filmmakers in the transfer as much as possible, what exactly would you propose in order to ensure "visual integrity"?

I guess they can shoot for the use of answer print instead and maybe give the transfer work to a qualified independent 3rd party who may understand the actual transfer process better than the original filmmakers (and also avoid situations where filmmakers try to impose some sort of undesirable revisionism, especially if that revisionism is imposed at the expense of preserving the original rather than to provide a potentially desirable, simultaneously available alternative).

_Man_

I have a 50" Panasonic Viera Plasma and have run up and down the scales of my brightness, sharpness, color, contrast, every bloody thing I can alter and it still looks like garbage. Bottom line is: it's a lousy release on blu ray. No other blu ray I own looks like this, they all look great. Again, I am an editor in the film industry and am very particular about what my monitor looks like.

If all other blu rays look good, how can this one be normal if its image falls apart in a mass of digital noise? AGAIN, absolutely no blu ray should require a viewer to recalibrate their television if all other blu rays look great on that television. Since all other blu rays look normal and this one does not, it is not the monitor. Period.

Clearly this isn't sinking in. Yes, they pull in the original cinematographer and that is wonderful. But there are many steps taken to getting that timed image onto the discs and out into the public. Something was clearly unplugged. Again, I work as an editor at a major studio, brought the disc in for viewing on our top of the line equipment, and the mouths of everyone standing there (all three of us...) fell open at how hideous this image looks. A good friend of mine was the editor on Howards End and even he thought it was garbage.

Sorry, I don't mean to be peevish, but this is frustrating to repeatedly go over this subject. I'll try to stay coolheaded next time. I wonder if people would be so doubtful of the truth of my claims if it was a favorite film of theirs that had received this lousy release rather than a favorite of mine.

I wasn't doubtful of your claim, Sean, when I asked my question.  I'm still wondering what "monitor dependent" means...or how it would work in a well-calibrated world. 

Sean..

I am throwing up my hands.  How NO OTHER DISC could look this bad is beyond me.  From now on, I will always netflix my discs first.  I had actually pre-ordered HE first and had canceled the purchase (I was going through a phase where I was trying to discipline myself to save money--hah!) and then I netflixed it later, with the thought of going ahead and buying it.  Man, when I saw it, I was very glad to have been spared the purchase!  Too bad, because I am a big Merchant Ivory Fan.

But I refuse to keep changing the settings on my display between every disc, and up to this disc I've never had to.  Display sensitive?  How can that possibly be a wise decision when trying to sell many copies?