Jump to content



Sign up for a free account to remove the pop-up ads

Signing up for an account is fast and free. As a member you can join in the conversation, enter contests and remove the pop-up ads that guests get. Click here to create your free account.


Photo
- - - - -

A few words about...™ Patton -- in Blu-Ray

A Few Words About

  • You cannot start a new topic
  • Please log in to reply
561 replies to this topic

#21 of 562 OFFLINE   MatthewA

MatthewA

    Lead Actor



  • 6,682 posts
  • Join Date: Apr 19 2000
  • Real Name:Matthew
  • LocationSalinas, CA

Posted May 29 2008 - 11:40 AM

Why is it that only Lowry/DTS can remove or minimize grain without removing high frequencies? Or do studios just go too far with their own DNR (which is probably it)?

Enough is enough, Disney. No more evasions or excuses. We DEMAND the release Song of the South on Blu-ray along with the uncut version of Bedknobs and Broomsticks on Blu-ray. I am going to boycott The Walt Disney Company until then. And while you're at it, PLEASE stop dropping DVD/laserdisc extras from Blu-ray releases of other films.


#22 of 562 OFFLINE   Robert Harris

Robert Harris

    Archivist



  • 8,124 posts
  • Join Date: Feb 08 1999
  • Real Name:Robert Harris

Posted May 29 2008 - 11:44 AM

Lowry has a proprietary system. Where their processing can take many seconds per frame, others can move frames through at much higher speeds. Both remove grain, as can numerous other software packages, but only Lowry can reduce the grain while losing nothing of the image. I've seen their system in action, and find it amazing.

"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


#23 of 562 ONLINE   Robert Crawford

Robert Crawford

    Moderator



  • 26,161 posts
  • Join Date: Dec 09 1998
  • Real Name:Robert
  • LocationMichigan

Posted May 29 2008 - 12:00 PM

Lowry has a proprietary system. Where their processing can take many seconds per frame, others can move frames through at much higher speeds.



Both remove grain, as can numerous other software packages, but only Lowry can reduce the grain while losing nothing of the image. I've seen their system in action, and find it amazing.
Except when it came to "Citizen Kane". Posted Image

Crawdaddy

 

Blu-ray Preorder Listing

 


#24 of 562 OFFLINE   Robert Harris

Robert Harris

    Archivist



  • 8,124 posts
  • Join Date: Feb 08 1999
  • Real Name:Robert Harris

Posted May 29 2008 - 12:06 PM

I met the individual responsible for Citizen Kane. They were totally unfamiliar with the film. The word "embarrassment" doesn't come near how they feel. Total operator failure by someone who was not given enough information. I also believe that this was a very early post-beta version of the program. Properly directed their work was superb.

"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


#25 of 562 ONLINE   TravisR

TravisR

    Studio Mogul



  • 23,585 posts
  • Join Date: Nov 15 2004
  • LocationThe basement of the FBI building

Posted May 29 2008 - 12:07 PM

Except when it came to "Citizen Kane". Posted Image
If I remember correctly, didn't someone from Lowry say that they made a mistake and removed too much grain from Citizen Kane?



EDIT: RAH answered my question.

#26 of 562 OFFLINE   Stephen_J_H

Stephen_J_H

    All Things Film Junkie



  • 4,261 posts
  • Join Date: Jul 30 2003
  • Real Name:Stephen J. Hill
  • LocationNorth of the 49th

Posted May 29 2008 - 12:09 PM

To be fair, the algorithm used in Citizen Kane was an early version. One would hope the technology has improved in 8 years.
"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

#27 of 562 ONLINE   Robert Crawford

Robert Crawford

    Moderator



  • 26,161 posts
  • Join Date: Dec 09 1998
  • Real Name:Robert
  • LocationMichigan

Posted May 29 2008 - 12:10 PM

To be fair, the algorithm used in Citizen Kane was an early version. One would hope the terchnology has improved in 8 years.
Of course it has which is why I attached a smilie to my sarcastic comment. Crawdaddy

Crawdaddy

 

Blu-ray Preorder Listing

 


#28 of 562 ONLINE   Robert Crawford

Robert Crawford

    Moderator



  • 26,161 posts
  • Join Date: Dec 09 1998
  • Real Name:Robert
  • LocationMichigan

Posted May 29 2008 - 12:11 PM

I met the individual responsible for Citizen Kane. They were totally unfamiliar with the film. The word "embarrassment" doesn't come near how they feel. Total operator failure by someone who was not given enough information. I also believe that this was a very early post-beta version of the program. Properly directed their work was superb.
RAH, I was just kidding with my Kane reference, but my smilie wasn't enough to convey that.

Crawdaddy

 

Blu-ray Preorder Listing

 


#29 of 562 OFFLINE   Dave H

Dave H

    Producer



  • 5,350 posts
  • Join Date: Aug 13 2000

Posted May 29 2008 - 12:13 PM

Not to jump the gun, but one has to serious wonder just how bad something like Godfather will be DNR'd when it comes to BD. Paramount has quite the track record for DNR too.

#30 of 562 OFFLINE   Robert Harris

Robert Harris

    Archivist



  • 8,124 posts
  • Join Date: Feb 08 1999
  • Real Name:Robert Harris

Posted May 29 2008 - 12:23 PM

Smiley observed and taken.

"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


#31 of 562 OFFLINE   Rachael B

Rachael B

    Producer



  • 4,639 posts
  • Join Date: Jun 05 2000

Posted May 29 2008 - 01:12 PM

Not to jump the gun, but one has to serious wonder just how bad something like Godfather will be DNR'd when it comes to BD. Paramount has quite the track record for DNR too.
After seeing the DVD, I decided I liked my LD better. Yeah, it's scary what they might do.
Rachael, the big disc cat is in real life Dot Mongur, Champion of the International Pacman Federation. You better be ready to rumble if you play Jr. Pacman with me. This is full contact Pacman and I don't just play the game, I operate it!


#32 of 562 OFFLINE   Stephen_J_H

Stephen_J_H

    All Things Film Junkie



  • 4,261 posts
  • Join Date: Jul 30 2003
  • Real Name:Stephen J. Hill
  • LocationNorth of the 49th

Posted May 29 2008 - 02:28 PM

Not to jump the gun, but one has to serious wonder just how bad something like Godfather will be DNR'd when it comes to BD. Paramount has quite the track record for DNR too.
Given that the Godfather films have recently been digitally restored under RAH's supervision, hopefully all Paramount will do is downconvert the restoration files to BD resolution. I'm sure RAH will advise us if the case turns out to be otherwise.
"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

#33 of 562 OFFLINE   Edwin-S

Edwin-S

    Producer



  • 5,852 posts
  • Join Date: Aug 20 2000

Posted May 29 2008 - 02:31 PM

Okay. The only complaint I have is that somehow you seem to be equating and blaming this practice on the BD format, when the blame properly lies with the studios. It is they who are creating grainless masters through the use of DNR. BD is only the means, not the cause, for studios to transmit their 'washed' product.
"You bring a horse for me?" "Looks like......looks like we're shy of one horse." "No.......You brought two too many."

#34 of 562 ONLINE   Robert Crawford

Robert Crawford

    Moderator



  • 26,161 posts
  • Join Date: Dec 09 1998
  • Real Name:Robert
  • LocationMichigan

Posted May 29 2008 - 02:34 PM

Okay. The only complaint I have is that somehow you seem to be equating and blaming this practice on the BD format, when the blame properly lies with the studios. It is they who are creating grainless masters through the use of DNR. BD is only the means, not the cause, for studios to transmit their 'washed' product.
Edwin, To which person are you referring to?

Crawdaddy

 

Blu-ray Preorder Listing

 


#35 of 562 OFFLINE   Edwin-S

Edwin-S

    Producer



  • 5,852 posts
  • Join Date: Aug 20 2000

Posted May 29 2008 - 02:38 PM

Edwin, To which person are you referring to?
I'm sorry. To the original poster, Mr. Harris. When I read the review I got the impression that somehow the BD format is responsible for the way these films are appearing.
"You bring a horse for me?" "Looks like......looks like we're shy of one horse." "No.......You brought two too many."

#36 of 562 OFFLINE   PaulDA

PaulDA

    Screenwriter



  • 2,617 posts
  • Join Date: Feb 09 2004
  • Real Name:Paul
  • LocationSt. Hubert, Quebec, Canada

Posted May 29 2008 - 02:49 PM

That's not how I read it. I believe he intended to convey his dismay that the studio did NOT use the full potential of BD to properly provide a "film-like" experience--something that has been achieved, according to Mr. Harris, on a number of BD and HD DVD releases already.
Never try to teach a pig to sing. It wastes time, and it annoys the pig.

#37 of 562 OFFLINE   Vincent_P

Vincent_P

    Screenwriter



  • 1,803 posts
  • Join Date: Sep 13 2003

Posted May 29 2008 - 03:13 PM

I'm sorry. To the original poster, Mr. Harris. When I read the review I got the impression that somehow the BD format is responsible for the way these films are appearing.

If you read Robert Harris's "A few words about... THE LONGEST DAY" ( http://www.hometheat....y-blu-ray.html ), another title he had issues regarding DNR with, you'll see that he isn't faulting the Blu-ray format at all, but rather the studios. This quote from that review in particular confirms this:

"To my eye, the image appears to be highly processed, removing grain, and with it, much of the high frequency information that can be so easily replicated in the wonderful Blu-Ray system. This is what high definition Blu-Ray is all about."

So, he's not faulting the Blu-ray format at all, he's faulting the studio for messing with the master.

Vincent

#38 of 562 OFFLINE   Edwin-S

Edwin-S

    Producer



  • 5,852 posts
  • Join Date: Aug 20 2000

Posted May 29 2008 - 03:17 PM

Maybe I was reading too much into his comments. I do want to say one other thing though. I think if a person has strong feelings about the issue then they should take a definite stance. If the use of DNR is altering the look of the film to the point that it no longer looks like film, then I would say that the practice is no better than modifying aspect ratios or colourizing black and white films. Would Mr. Harris recommend films that have undergone those types of modification? I am going to hazard a guess and say no, so why recommend a film that has undergone high frequency filtering? I think a person who feels strongly about something should just take a stand. To me, the stance here should be this film is not recommended due to the issuing studio's use of DNR which has resulted in a modified presentation. Taking such a stance is also entirely in keeping with the stated objectives of this website's mission statement.
"You bring a horse for me?" "Looks like......looks like we're shy of one horse." "No.......You brought two too many."

#39 of 562 OFFLINE   Vincent_P

Vincent_P

    Screenwriter



  • 1,803 posts
  • Join Date: Sep 13 2003

Posted May 29 2008 - 03:20 PM

I think Harris puts enough detail into his reviews that people can figure out where he stands. There's a hell of a lot more to his commentaries here than the usual dumbed-down "thumbs up" or "thumbs down" variety, all he asks is that you take the effort to read his comments and then make up your own mind. I have to say, though, that I find it odd that you started out bashing Robert Harris on one issue, and when you were shown to be wrong in that regard, you've now moved on to attack him on another issue. What's up with that? Vincent

#40 of 562 OFFLINE   Edwin-S

Edwin-S

    Producer



  • 5,852 posts
  • Join Date: Aug 20 2000

Posted May 29 2008 - 03:40 PM

I have to say, though, that I find it odd that you started out bashing Robert Harris on one issue, and when you were shown to be wrong in that regard, you've now moved on to attack him on another issue. What's up with that? Vincent
I'm not hidebound or close minded. If I think I have made a mistake then I will admit it. Also, if you think I'm attacking him then that is your interpretation. My intention is not to attack him and I don't think I am. I think he has strong feelings on the use of DNR so I think he should just take a firmer stance and not recommend the film. If he feels that I'm out of line then he can respond and tell me so. I am sure he is quite capable of defending himself without any help. Furthermore, he asked for people's opinions on this issue. My opinion is that DNR'ing film is no better than MARs or colourizing B&W. When excessive DNR is used on film then it should be strongly opposed. The best way to send the message is by saying [bold]not recommended[/bold]. We, as consumers, can send the message by not purchasing films that have been modified by excessive DNR.
"You bring a horse for me?" "Looks like......looks like we're shy of one horse." "No.......You brought two too many."





Also tagged with one or more of these keywords: A Few Words About

0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users