-

Jump to content



Photo
- - - - -

A few words about...™ Predator (2010 re-issue) -- in Blu-ray

A Few Words About

This topic has been archived. This means that you cannot reply to this topic.
230 replies to this topic

#21 of 231 Worth

Worth

    Screenwriter

  • 1,127 posts
  • Join Date: Jul 17 2009

Posted June 29 2010 - 01:33 AM

DNR is the new pan and scan. And even worse is the fact that there are people on forums such as this one who see nothing wrong with it. A snippet of a user review of the new Predator edition from another forum:


I thought the whole point in blu ray was to make movies/films look their best, not like the original…am I wrong? I guess people just need something to complain about. 


I weep for the future of catalogue releases.


Sealed with a curse as sharp as a knife. Doomed is your soul and damned is your life.

#22 of 231 Jesse Blacklow

Jesse Blacklow

    Screenwriter

  • 2,049 posts
  • Join Date: Oct 14 2002

Posted June 29 2010 - 04:04 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Worth 

DNR is the new pan and scan. And even worse is the fact that there are people on forums such as this one who see nothing wrong with it. A snippet of a user review of the new Predator edition from another forum:


I thought the whole point in blu ray was to make movies/films look their best, not like the original…am I wrong? I guess people just need something to complain about. 


I weep for the future of catalogue releases.


Those postings are an extremely tiny minority in the HT community, so trying to portray them as an epidemic is highly misleading. It's the other consumers that need education.


Also, seeing as how pan-and-scan was more or less banished after a few years, comparing it to DNR making you "weep for the future" is kind of puzzling. If anything, using that analogy, it should make you glad that it's a problem that can be overcome somewhat easily.


"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

#23 of 231 Robert Harris

Robert Harris

    Lead Actor

  • 7,467 posts
  • Join Date: Feb 08 1999
  • Real Name:Robert Harris

Posted June 29 2010 - 04:19 AM

Possibly a third image harvest is the way to go.


"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


#24 of 231 Worth

Worth

    Screenwriter

  • 1,127 posts
  • Join Date: Jul 17 2009

Posted June 29 2010 - 04:34 AM



Originally Posted by Jesse Blacklow 

Quote:


Those postings are an extremely tiny minority in the HT community, so trying to portray them as an epidemic is highly misleading. It's the other consumers that need education.


I disagree. I don't think "average" consumers much care one way or another - they may not like grain, but they're mostly just interested in watching the film for the story. It's the growing number of HD "enthusaists" that are the problem - people who equate high-definition with live sporting events and CG animation. I've seen an increasing number of "I like the new look, therefore it's better" posts with regards to this title, and other overly processed transfers. I think it's because of this vocal crowd - who complained that the original Predator release was poor because it was grainy - that we have this new, "improved" release.


Sealed with a curse as sharp as a knife. Doomed is your soul and damned is your life.

#25 of 231 Todd H

Todd H

    Screenwriter

  • 2,049 posts
  • Join Date: May 27 1999
  • Real Name:Todd
  • LocationGeorgia

Posted June 29 2010 - 05:08 AM

Just picked up the original blu-ray release for less than $10. I'll take grain and occasional artifacting over the sterilized, blurry DNR'ed to death current release.



#26 of 231 Jesse Blacklow

Jesse Blacklow

    Screenwriter

  • 2,049 posts
  • Join Date: Oct 14 2002

Posted June 29 2010 - 05:27 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Worth 

I disagree. I don't think "average" consumers much care one way or another - they may not like grain, but they're mostly just interested in watching the film for the story. It's the growing number of HD "enthusaists" that are the problem - people who equate high-definition with live sporting events and CG animation. I've seen an increasing number of "I like the new look, therefore it's better" posts with regards to this title, and other overly processed transfers. I think it's because of this vocal crowd - who complained that the original Predator release was poor because it was grainy - that we have this new, "improved" release.


If you can show the "growing numbers" of posters saying this, and the "vocal crowd" that complained that the original release was too grainy, be my guest. Until then, I'm going to assume that there isn't actually convincing evidence of a noticeable increase in either numbers or loudness across the 4 forums I skim (HTF, AVS, HDD, and Blu-ray.com). In fact, the post you quoted is repeated across several boards, but appears to be (a) taken out on context of the thread, and (b) on the side of a very small minority even on that board.


"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

#27 of 231 Jeff Brooks

Jeff Brooks

    Second Unit

  • 252 posts
  • Join Date: Mar 09 2000
  • Real Name:Jeff Brooks
  • LocationSugar Hill GA USA

Posted June 29 2010 - 06:23 AM

I did too, Todd.  I sure wish I had not gotten rid of the SD-DVD version that had the extras.



#28 of 231 RobertR

RobertR

    Lead Actor

  • 9,501 posts
  • Join Date: Dec 19 1998

Posted June 29 2010 - 06:56 AM



Originally Posted by Nick Graham 
Unlike Universal, Fox did at least spring for a new transfer, something I whined for to a great extent when the first version came out.


Who told you this is a "new transfer"?  I've seen analysis that shows it's actually the same transfer, slathered with lots and lots of DNR and brightening, etc.



#29 of 231 Michael Reuben

Michael Reuben

    Studio Mogul

  • 21,769 posts
  • Join Date: Feb 12 1998

Posted June 29 2010 - 07:23 AM


Originally Posted by RobertR 

Who told you this is a "new transfer"?  I've seen analysis that shows it's actually the same transfer, slathered with lots and lots of DNR and brightening, etc.


One of the early reviewers reported getting feedback from Fox that it's a new transfer.


COMPLETE list of my disc reviews.       HTF Rules / 200920102011 Film Lists

#30 of 231 Matt Hough

Matt Hough

    Executive Producer

  • 11,114 posts
  • Join Date: Apr 24 2006
  • LocationCharlotte, NC

Posted June 29 2010 - 08:17 AM

In the press release letter that came with my review copy, Fox called it a brand new DIGITAL RESTORATION.



#31 of 231 Flemming.K

Flemming.K

    Stunt Coordinator

  • 76 posts
  • Join Date: Feb 18 2005

Posted June 29 2010 - 08:32 AM


Quote:
Originally Posted by MattH. 

In the press release letter that came with my review copy, Fox called it a brand new DIGITAL RESTORATION.


First braille blu-ray release on the market.


Waiting impatiently for Sir Ridley Scotts Prometheus!

Danish filmsite Cinefil

#32 of 231 RobertR

RobertR

    Lead Actor

  • 9,501 posts
  • Join Date: Dec 19 1998

Posted June 29 2010 - 08:44 AM



Originally Posted by Michael Reuben 



One of the early reviewers reported getting feedback from Fox that it's a new transfer.


He says,


"I received feedback from Fox Germany today that, believe it or not, a brand new HD master was used for this new BD."


But is a "master" a "transfer"?  From a web site that talks about film transfers:


"We archive the original High Definition digital transfer files of every single film we process. If ou lose or damage your transferred media for some reason, we are always able to retrieve any transfers that you do with us and we can always re-master them to DVD or Blu-ray."


Sounds to me like the master is made from the transfer.  I think Fox remastered the existing transfer with lots of digital processing.



#33 of 231 Geoff_D

Geoff_D

    Supporting Actor

  • 892 posts
  • Join Date: Jul 18 2002

Posted June 29 2010 - 08:48 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Michael Reuben 



One of the early reviewers reported getting feedback from Fox that it's a new transfer.



Read it again, Michael (though you're not the first I've seen get caught out by that segment). It says new HD master, not a new transfer. And that's exactly what it appears to be: a new video master derived from an existing transfer.


Edit: Dang! RobertR got there first.



#34 of 231 Michael Reuben

Michael Reuben

    Studio Mogul

  • 21,769 posts
  • Join Date: Feb 12 1998

Posted June 29 2010 - 08:59 AM



Originally Posted by Geoff_D 
Quote:


Read it again, Michael (though you're not the first I've seen get caught out by that segment). It says new HD master, not a new transfer. And that's exactly what it appears to be: a new video master derived from an existing transfer.


Edit: Dang! RobertR got there first.


It's impossible to know for sure. Not every facility archives its transfers. So it would depend on whether the previous transfer was still available. Also, the information that's being relayed to us is at least double hearsay, and people are often imprecise with their terminology.


Maybe one of the Fox representatives will clarify for us (although, if I were a Fox rep, I wouldn't touch this subject with a ten-foot cattle prod /img/vbsmilies/htf/smile.gif ).


COMPLETE list of my disc reviews.       HTF Rules / 200920102011 Film Lists

#35 of 231 Nick Graham

Nick Graham

    Screenwriter

  • 1,409 posts
  • Join Date: Oct 16 2001

Posted June 29 2010 - 09:12 AM

According to Jeff Kleist of The Digital Bits, it is a new transfer (the original BD used a transfer from about four generations of tech ago).  Too bad some of the benefits have apparently been rendered moot by DNR.  I'm picking the title up in approximately and hour, hopefully not to find myself *too* disappointed..


*UPDATE*  Having seen it, I can't say I feel totally gypped out of the $5 net invested, but Fox really should offer a silent swap program - you can tell the new transfer is indeed a marked improvement over the old one, but the DNR really hampers it in many scenes, sometimes distractingly so.



#36 of 231 JohnRice

JohnRice

    Lead Actor

  • 8,568 posts
  • Join Date: Jun 20 2000
  • Real Name:John

Posted June 29 2010 - 06:05 PM

So, is it safe to say the 2 disc SE (SD-DVD) is probably the best release to date, image wise?


The Hybrid System

The Music Part: Emotiva XSP-1, Thiel CS 3.6, Emotiva XPA-2, Marantz SA8004, Emotiva ERC-3, SVS PB-12 Plus 2

The Surround Part: Sherbourn PT-7030, Thiel SCS3, Emotiva XPA-5, Polk & Emotiva Surrounds.


#37 of 231 AaronMK

AaronMK

    Supporting Actor

  • 768 posts
  • Join Date: Oct 30 1999
  • Real Name:Aaron Karp
  • LocationOrlando, FL

Posted June 29 2010 - 07:52 PM

Restoration?!  How can it be called a restoration if the result is something that looks a lot less like the film in its original form than what they started with?



#38 of 231 Dave H

Dave H

    Producer

  • 5,273 posts
  • Join Date: Aug 13 2000

Posted June 30 2010 - 01:30 AM

I too think this is not really a new transfer.  Why? Okay, I know they are only screenshots, but if you compare the same frames of the new and original discs, there are certain digital artifacts in both versions that exist in the same location of the image.  This is a dead giveway.  If this was really a new film scan (transfer), I don't see how this would happen.  So, I think it's the same transfer with just a new master derived from it adding DNR, dirt removal, color tweaking, contrast, higher bit AVC encode, etc.


#39 of 231 Dave H

Dave H

    Producer

  • 5,273 posts
  • Join Date: Aug 13 2000

Posted June 30 2010 - 01:38 AM



Originally Posted by AaronMK 

Restoration?!  How can it be called a restoration if the result is something that looks a lot less like the film in its original form than what they started with?


The term "remaster" has little value these days and now it appears the term "restoration" is following the same path.



#40 of 231 Michael Reuben

Michael Reuben

    Studio Mogul

  • 21,769 posts
  • Join Date: Feb 12 1998

Posted June 30 2010 - 01:46 AM


Originally Posted by AaronMK 

Restoration?!  How can it be called a restoration if the result is something that looks a lot less like the film in its original form than what they started with?


Originally Posted by Dave H 

The term "remaster" has little value these days and now it appears the term "restoration" is following the same path.


All such terms refer to a process. They do not guarantee any particular outcome.


COMPLETE list of my disc reviews.       HTF Rules / 200920102011 Film Lists