Jump to content



Sign up for a free account!

Signing up for an account is fast and free. As a member you can join in the conversation, enter contests to win things like this Logitech Harmony Ultimate Remote and you won't get the popup ads that guests get. Click here to create your free account.

Photo
- - - - -

A few words about...™ Those Magnificent Men in Their Flying Machines... -- in Blu-ray

A Few Words About

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

#41 of 65 JamesNelson

JamesNelson

    Second Unit

  • 276 posts
  • Join Date: Mar 12 2008

Posted July 19 2012 - 09:53 PM

The image on this BD is absolutely jaw-droppingly beautiful. Anyone talking themselves out of a purchase based on Internet screencaps is doing themselves a huge disservice.

#42 of 65 Lidenbrock

Lidenbrock

    Agent

  • 29 posts
  • Join Date: Oct 20 2005
  • Real Name:Albert GC

Posted July 20 2012 - 05:00 AM

In my experience, not ONE screen cap at bluray.com has ever resembled what I see when I actually WATCH a motion picture - please note the word MOTION. Sorry, you just cannot have this kind of discussion when you haven't seen the transfer.

I agree, the problem is the movement, not the screen caps: if done properly, they look exactly as if we were pressing "Pause", I´ve done comparisons so many times. Its just that we can´t be sure about the content of the entire BD by checking 1/24 th fraction of a second. Anyway, I still think they are useful. I knew Patton, Amadeus, My fair lady, Back to the future or El Cid (just to name a few) were bad transfers and I knew The Sound of Music, The Ten Commandments or Breakfast at Tiffanys were good before reading anything. Sometimes they don´t help , for example I thought West Side Story was fine), but certaianly screen caps arent useless, and they are far better than reading what some reviewers write.

#43 of 65 OliverK

OliverK

    Screenwriter

  • 1,535 posts
  • Join Date: Feb 01 2000

Posted July 21 2012 - 09:44 PM

I knew Patton, Amadeus, My fair lady, Back to the future or El Cid (just to name a few) were bad transfers and I knew The Sound of Music, The Ten Commandments or Breakfast at Tiffanys were good before reading anything. Sometimes they don´t help , for example I thought West Side Story was fine), but certaianly screen caps arent useless, and they are far better than reading what some reviewers write.

Patton and El Cid are very good examples for movies that look so bad on screencaps that nobody can expect them to miraculously look good when seeing the title in motion, motion cannot completely change all characterstics of a picture. For me screencaps and reviews by people whose opinion I can put in perspective with what I like are a good combination that allows me to avoid buying some of the stinkers that are released these days. These day I try to not spend my money on titles that are produced with minimal effort like Spartacus or with misguided conceptions about how a film should look on Blu-Ray, like El Cid or Patton.

#44 of 65 Mark Oates

Mark Oates

    Supporting Actor

  • 872 posts
  • Join Date: Mar 12 2004

Posted July 22 2012 - 05:36 AM

I agree, the problem is the movement, not the screen caps: if done properly, they look exactly as if we were pressing "Pause", I´ve done comparisons so many times. Its just that we can´t be sure about the content of the entire BD by checking 1/24 th fraction of a second. Anyway, I still think they are useful. I knew Patton, Amadeus, My fair lady, Back to the future or El Cid (just to name a few) were bad transfers and I knew The Sound of Music, The Ten Commandments or Breakfast at Tiffanys were good before reading anything. Sometimes they don´t help , for example I thought West Side Story was fine), but certaianly screen caps arent useless, and they are far better than reading what some reviewers write.

But you can't base your opinion of a transfer on a screencap or frozen frame. You're not supposed to see a single frame in isolation, you're supposed to see twenty-four of them every second, and your eye/brain combination interprets them as a homogenous, moving image. Grain will always look worse - if not downright terrible - in a still image. It stands there frozen as a layer of noise in the picture. If the image was moving, your brain would tune out the grain automatically and you'd see the information on the picture the director wanted you to see. I don't think screencaps are worthless by any stretch of the imagination - they give you an impression of the movie, but you have to see the picture moving on a screen. Would it be correct to judge a film to be poorly transferred if the screen caps included negative damage like tramlines, tears or debris, although it turned out to be purely coincidental that the screencapper had chosen to cap the three frames out of 129,600 that were damaged?
J Mark Oates
Do Not Be Afraid. That sound is simply my mind boggling.

 


#45 of 65 FoxyMulder

FoxyMulder

    映画ファン

  • 4,162 posts
  • Join Date: Sep 14 2009
  • Real Name:Malcolm
  • LocationScotland

Posted July 22 2012 - 05:51 AM

Originally Posted by Mark Oates 


But you can't base your opinion of a transfer on a screencap or frozen frame. You're not supposed to see a single frame in isolation, you're supposed to see twenty-four of them every second, and your eye/brain combination interprets them as a homogenous, moving image. Grain will always look worse - if not downright terrible - in a still image. It stands there frozen as a layer of noise in the picture. If the image was moving, your brain would tune out the grain automatically and you'd see the information on the picture the director wanted you to see. I don't think screencaps are worthless by any stretch of the imagination - they give you an impression of the movie, but you have to see the picture moving on a screen.
Would it be correct to judge a film to be poorly transferred if the screen caps included negative damage like tramlines, tears or debris, although it turned out to be purely coincidental that the screencapper had chosen to cap the three frames out of 129,600 that were damaged?


A screencap can certainly tell you if edge enhancement is present or if excessive DNR has been applied but only if the person taking them can clarify whether the whole transfer has issues, i certainly clarify such things when i take a screencap, as for negative damage and the other things you mention, well that's where screencaps WITH a review come in handy so you get a point of reference, of course you will still get some people saying the screencaps are great or the film in question looks fabulous on Blu ray, even if the opposite is the case as has happened recently to me on another thread.


     :Fun Movie Quotes:

"A good body with a dull brain is as cheap as life itself"   

"Maybe it's a sheep dog... let's keep going" 

"Please doctor, I've got to ask this. It sounds like, well, just as though you're describing some form of super carrot"

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 


#46 of 65 Mark Oates

Mark Oates

    Supporting Actor

  • 872 posts
  • Join Date: Mar 12 2004

Posted July 22 2012 - 11:47 AM

Like I said, I don't think screencaps are worthless by any stretch of the imagination - they'll give you an idea of how a movie looks and possibly tip you off about issues, and a review without illustrating screencaps is a painful thing to read (I should know). I just get on my soapbox when I hear people basing whether or not they'll buy a disc purely on the basis of seeing some screencaps. It's cutting your nose off to spite your face. I want to say to these people - you want to see the movie? Slap down your fifteen dollars and buy the disc, watch it and then complain bitterly. You've earned the right. For me, complaining about a disc based on somebody else's screencaps is on a level with the people who want to ban a movie because somebody's wife's cousin's hairdresser said it was offensive. It's a second-hand viewpoint.
J Mark Oates
Do Not Be Afraid. That sound is simply my mind boggling.

 


#47 of 65 MichaelEl

MichaelEl

    Stunt Coordinator

  • 191 posts
  • Join Date: May 10 2006

Posted July 24 2012 - 10:44 AM

Like I said, I don't think screencaps are worthless by any stretch of the imagination - they'll give you an idea of how a movie looks and possibly tip you off about issues, and a review without illustrating screencaps is a painful thing to read (I should know). I just get on my soapbox when I hear people basing whether or not they'll buy a disc purely on the basis of seeing some screencaps.

If screencaps taken from various points in a film reveal a PERSISTENT image quality problem, then I think it's safe to say that the same problem will manifest itself when you watch the actual Blu-Ray - at least that's been my experience. If screencaps show a generally soft image, then you can expect that the actual Blu-Ray will also exhibit a soft image. If screencaps show a general lack of detail in lighter or darker areas of the image, then you can expect that the actual Blu-Ray will also exhibit a lack of detail in those areas of the image. Now if someone wants to argue that what appears as problems are actually not problems at all - for example, some claim that the DVD of NORTH BY NORTHWEST was too bright, and that the darker look of the Blu-Ray is more true to a theatrical presentation - that's fine, but I think it's ridiculous to argue that screencaps can reveal NOTHING about the general image quality of a Blu-Ray.

#48 of 65 haineshisway

haineshisway

    Screenwriter

  • 2,043 posts
  • Join Date: Oct 26 2011
  • Real Name:Bruce
  • LocationLos Angeles

Posted July 24 2012 - 10:52 AM

I disagree, of course. You cannot show me one screen cap on DVD Beaver, for example, that bears any relation to any disc I own. His caps are soft, the DVD caps look better frequently, and I'm sorry, movies in motion do no look like one-frame screen captures. I find them completely useless.

#49 of 65 John Hermes

John Hermes

    Supporting Actor

  • 700 posts
  • Join Date: Jan 01 2007
  • Real Name:John Hermes
  • LocationLa Mesa (San Diego) CA

Posted July 24 2012 - 11:08 AM

I disagree, of course. You cannot show me one screen cap on DVD Beaver, for example, that bears any relation to any disc I own. His caps are soft, the DVD caps look better frequently, and I'm sorry, movies in motion do no look like one-frame screen captures. I find them completely useless.

One thing which might help DVD Beaver's caps is if he would get the BD and DVD comparison images the same size. I'm kind of in the middle on caps. I think they may help at times but are far from conclusive. Sometimes they appear pretty much the disc, other times not. I think they are a better indication of color and maybe contrast rather than sharpness.

#50 of 65 Mark Oates

Mark Oates

    Supporting Actor

  • 872 posts
  • Join Date: Mar 12 2004

Posted July 24 2012 - 11:47 AM

One thing which might help DVD Beaver's caps is if he would get the BD and DVD comparison images the same size. I'm kind of in the middle on caps. I think they may help at times but are far from conclusive. Sometimes they appear pretty much the disc, other times not. I think they are a better indication of color and maybe contrast rather than sharpness.

But if the Beaver resizes his Blu-ray caps to match his DVD caps, he's compromising the integrity of the image - the resizing involves a resampling of the image - and we don't know if he puts any image processing into his screencaps. As it is, the screencaps on his site are .jpg files - potentially as removed from the data on the disc as a theatrical print from an OCN if the screencaps have been edited and resaved more than a couple of times. I've just randomly picked a Blu-ray cap from DVDBeaver (the shot of Tom Ewell with the Pepsi bottle in The Seven Year Itch). Now, if the image is 1920x1080, that should be 2,073,600 bytes of data, right? The file size for the image (as a .jpg) is 452.43 KB (463,291 bytes). That's 1.6Mb of data given the boot. I know JPEG compression is good, but it isn't that good. It isn't a straight bitmap of the frame off the disc. Screencaps should be for illustrative purposes only.
J Mark Oates
Do Not Be Afraid. That sound is simply my mind boggling.

 


#51 of 65 John Hermes

John Hermes

    Supporting Actor

  • 700 posts
  • Join Date: Jan 01 2007
  • Real Name:John Hermes
  • LocationLa Mesa (San Diego) CA

Posted July 24 2012 - 12:00 PM

But if the Beaver resizes his Blu-ray caps to match his DVD caps, he's compromising the integrity of the image - the resizing involves a resampling of the image - and we don't know if he puts any image processing into his screencaps. As it is, the screencaps on his site are .jpg files - potentially as removed from the data on the disc as a theatrical print from an OCN if the screencaps have been edited and resaved more than a couple of times. I've just randomly picked a Blu-ray cap from DVDBeaver (the shot of Tom Ewell with the Pepsi bottle in The Seven Year Itch). Now, if the image is 1920x1080, that should be 2,073,600 bytes of data, right? The file size for the image (as a .jpg) is 452.43 KB (463,291 bytes). That's 1.6Mb of data given the boot. I know JPEG compression is good, but it isn't that good. It isn't a straight bitmap of the frame off the disc. Screencaps should be for illustrative purposes only.

Well, I show both my BD and DVDs on a 106" screen (120" for scope films), so it's easy to compare the two. There must be some way to do caps the same way. It just seems to me if the caps are not the same size, it's hard to make a direct comparison. I agree with your last sentence.

#52 of 65 MichaelEl

MichaelEl

    Stunt Coordinator

  • 191 posts
  • Join Date: May 10 2006

Posted July 24 2012 - 07:19 PM

I've just randomly picked a Blu-ray cap from DVDBeaver (the shot of Tom Ewell with the Pepsi bottle in The Seven Year Itch). Now, if the image is 1920x1080, that should be 2,073,600 bytes of data, right? The file size for the image (as a .jpg) is 452.43 KB (463,291 bytes). That's 1.6Mb of data given the boot. I know JPEG compression is good, but it isn't that good. It isn't a straight bitmap of the frame off the disc.

A 1080p image should actually fill the entire screen of a 1080p monitor. Most screencaps of Blu-Rays are, as you point out, considerably smaller than that. The compression, however, doesn't prevent the screencaps from revealing a lack of detail in closeups or the overall brightness of a Blu-Ray. For example, I could easily tell from screencaps that the Blu-Ray of NORTH BY NORTHWEST was going to be considerably darker than the DVD.

#53 of 65 FoxyMulder

FoxyMulder

    映画ファン

  • 4,162 posts
  • Join Date: Sep 14 2009
  • Real Name:Malcolm
  • LocationScotland

Posted July 24 2012 - 08:29 PM

Originally Posted by John Hermes 


Well, I show both my BD and DVDs on a 106" screen (120" for scope films), so it's easy to compare the two. There must be some way to do caps the same way. It just seems to me if the caps are not the same size, it's hard to make a direct comparison. I agree with your last sentence.


You mean like the results below, this is scaling the DVD image and is indeed what many will see when the blu ray player/projector/television scales it to 1080p standards and by the way i do just one conversion for Blu ray images from PNG to JPG and save at 100% quality, when you do that there is no difference between a PNG and a JPG and i have tested this many times and even posted asking people to see if they can spot which is the PNG and which is the JPG, DVD Beaver does not convert to JPG and save at 100% quality, they also use Power DVD for some of their caps which is also an issue which results in a few problems such as softness.


I know some of you are very skeptical regarding screencaps, i have had the argument about it all too often but i maintain they serve a purpose and can be useful, hover your mouse on and off the images to check the differences out.


http://www.darkrealm...-wild-at-heart/


http://www.darkrealm...king-kong-1933/


http://www.darkrealm...cradle-of-life/


This cap is a great example of fine detail on a Blu ray that the DVD filters away, check the shirt sleeve.


http://www.darkrealm...f Life - 5.html


     :Fun Movie Quotes:

"A good body with a dull brain is as cheap as life itself"   

"Maybe it's a sheep dog... let's keep going" 

"Please doctor, I've got to ask this. It sounds like, well, just as though you're describing some form of super carrot"

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 


#54 of 65 Mark Oates

Mark Oates

    Supporting Actor

  • 872 posts
  • Join Date: Mar 12 2004

Posted July 25 2012 - 12:45 AM

I agree that the mouse on/off comparisons are great for comparing DVD to Blu-ray, and if you're looking at screen caps you have to look at the full definition image, not an image reformatted to fit your monitor. However, I still think that any kind of data compression compromises the validity of a screencap as a totally faithful representation of what is on the disc. The image information for your screencaps - no criticism intended - indicates a file size of 757.98 KB (776,174 bytes) for the "shirt sleeve" cap. Again a 1.3Mb reduction in data from a full frame bitmap. I'm not saying people shouldn't do screencaps. I'm all for them. Considering how fussy (it took me ages to come up with something that wouldn't sound critical) many of us on these forums are about the technical aspects of movies on DVD and Blu-ray, I'm surprised so many seem to have a knee-jerk negative reaction based purely on a screencap. I guess my objections will mostly fall on ears that are either deaf or don't want to listen to reason. I'd just rather a situation where people would reserve judgement until they'd actually seen the disc.
J Mark Oates
Do Not Be Afraid. That sound is simply my mind boggling.

 


#55 of 65 FoxyMulder

FoxyMulder

    映画ファン

  • 4,162 posts
  • Join Date: Sep 14 2009
  • Real Name:Malcolm
  • LocationScotland

Posted July 25 2012 - 12:54 AM

Originally Posted by Mark Oates 

I agree that the mouse on/off comparisons are great for comparing DVD to Blu-ray, and if you're looking at screen caps you have to look at the full definition image, not an image reformatted to fit your monitor. However, I still think that any kind of data compression compromises the validity of a screencap as a totally faithful representation of what is on the disc. The image information for your screencaps - no criticism intended - indicates a file size of 757.98 KB (776,174 bytes) for the "shirt sleeve" cap. Again a 1.3Mb reduction in data from a full frame bitmap.
I'm not saying people shouldn't do screencaps. I'm all for them. Considering how fussy (it took me ages to come up with something that wouldn't sound critical) many of us on these forums are about the technical aspects of movies on DVD and Blu-ray, I'm surprised so many seem to have a knee-jerk negative reaction based purely on a screencap. I guess my objections will mostly fall on ears that are either deaf or don't want to listen to reason. I'd just rather a situation where people would reserve judgement until they'd actually seen the disc.


Okay, take a look at the original PNG lossless file and then take a look at the JPG, like i say i have had this argument before, i wouldn't use JPG at 100% quality unless it worked.  I am one of the fussiest persons around for getting the little things right and i did extensive testing of PNG and JPG, i even used torture test frames with lots of red in them and there is no difference between a  lossless PNG image and a 100% quality JPG, indeed even at 90% the difference can not be seen but i take no chances and use 100% quality.  It is best if you use a monitor with at least 1920x1080 resolution to view them with all "enhancements" switched off.


Sorry it took so long, had to get Dreamweaver out and do another rollover comparison between the lossless PNG file and the 100% quality JPG, you tell me if you spot a difference.  Remember the Blu ray itself has compression applied but some of the better encodes are said to be faithful to the Master so don't be surprised that a lossless PNG and a JPG at 100% quality are identical.


http://www.darkrealm...e_rollover.html


Oh and just so you know they are different files.


http://www.darkrealm...om/blu_ray5.jpg


http://www.darkrealm...com/shirt_1.png


     :Fun Movie Quotes:

"A good body with a dull brain is as cheap as life itself"   

"Maybe it's a sheep dog... let's keep going" 

"Please doctor, I've got to ask this. It sounds like, well, just as though you're describing some form of super carrot"

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 


#56 of 65 Mark Oates

Mark Oates

    Supporting Actor

  • 872 posts
  • Join Date: Mar 12 2004

Posted July 25 2012 - 02:04 AM

Very impressive, Malcolm, I'm sorry you think I'm criticising your technical skill. I'm not. I agree 100% with your calls on making those screencaps and presenting them. I know they represent exactly what you would see viewing that specific frame on the original blu-ray. I appreciate that screencaps are an excellent illustrative tool for review purposes, both from an aesthetic and technical standpoint. My point is simply that people shouldn't use them as a one-stop criteria for the usual cry of "no sale!" You need to see the output from a disc a) running in full motion and b) on your home theatre kit. As I've said before - you slap down your fifteen dollars, watch it on your own kit and then you can complain. Would you buy a car based solely on a photo of the steering wheel? No, you'd want to see the whole vehicle. You'd want to sit in it, know the technical specs, take it for a run round the block. Screencaps are an excellent tool for judging certain things about a disc, but they don't give you (ahem) the whole picture.
J Mark Oates
Do Not Be Afraid. That sound is simply my mind boggling.

 


#57 of 65 FoxyMulder

FoxyMulder

    映画ファン

  • 4,162 posts
  • Join Date: Sep 14 2009
  • Real Name:Malcolm
  • LocationScotland

Posted July 25 2012 - 02:23 AM

Originally Posted by Mark Oates 

My point is simply that people shouldn't use them as a one-stop criteria for the usual cry of "no sale!"

Screencaps are an excellent tool for judging certain things about a disc, but they don't give you (ahem) the whole picture.


Screencaps without commentary is not always good or desirable, i think when you have someone reviewing the film they have watched and then giving some screencaps from various points in the film it can be a good thing, there are instances where screencaps cannot give you the whole picture, for example, you may have screencaps showing film grain, that film grain may have issues when not seen as a still frame, blocky, or static in motion or something else, that's when a posted comment comes in handy.


Screencaps are good for showing edge enhancement or issues with DNR or the differences between various region releases of a Blu ray or a DVD-Blu ray comparison, of course as you are aware there can be conflicting opinions on all this, i guess there will always be differences, for me, if i have any screencaps at my site then i have viewed the film first and i like to give an opinion with the caps.  I'll never convince some people about the value of screencaps though and DVD Beaver is damaging the cause.

Anyways back to Those Magnificent Men In Their Flying Machines, damn i can't get the song outta my head.  ( I keep editing my posts - I'm a Libra, go figure :o)

 Posted Image


     :Fun Movie Quotes:

"A good body with a dull brain is as cheap as life itself"   

"Maybe it's a sheep dog... let's keep going" 

"Please doctor, I've got to ask this. It sounds like, well, just as though you're describing some form of super carrot"

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 


#58 of 65 JoshZ

JoshZ

    Second Unit

  • 378 posts
  • Join Date: May 26 2012
  • LocationBoston

Posted July 25 2012 - 03:49 AM

How many people look at screenshots on the same calibrated display that they watch movies? I would venture few to none. The whole argument in favor of screenshot analysis pretty much breaks down when you realize that.

Writer / Blogmaster

High-Def Digest


#59 of 65 Mark Oates

Mark Oates

    Supporting Actor

  • 872 posts
  • Join Date: Mar 12 2004

Posted July 25 2012 - 04:02 AM

Screencaps without commentary is not always good or desirable, i think when you have someone reviewing the film they have watched and then giving some screencaps from various points in the film it can be a good thing, there are instances where screencaps cannot give you the whole picture, for example, you may have screencaps showing film grain, that film grain may have issues when not seen as a still frame, blocky, or static in motion or something else, that's when a posted comment comes in handy. Screencaps are good for showing edge enhancement or issues with DNR or the differences between various region releases of a Blu ray or a DVD-Blu ray comparison, of course as you are aware there can be conflicting opinions on all this, i guess there will always be differences, for me, if i have any screencaps at my site then i have viewed the film first and i like to give an opinion with the caps.  I'll never convince some people about the value of screencaps though and DVD Beaver is damaging the cause.   Anyways back to Those Magnificent Men In Their Flying Machines, damn i can't get the song outta my head.  ( I keep editing my posts - I'm a Libra, go figure :o)  :rock:

We have an accord! :D I knew we were on the same page all along. ;)

How many people look at screenshots on the same calibrated display that they watch movies?

Quite. As a matter of fact I have two laptops from the same manufacturer which are as far as I can manage identically calibrated, and the two screens bear little resemblance. There are all kinds of issues like native resolution, graphics card and the like that can affect the output, and tv displays have their own foibles. I think you'd wind up spending more (time and money) calibrating all your various displays to match and only have this lousy straightjacket to show for it. :D
J Mark Oates
Do Not Be Afraid. That sound is simply my mind boggling.

 


#60 of 65 FoxyMulder

FoxyMulder

    映画ファン

  • 4,162 posts
  • Join Date: Sep 14 2009
  • Real Name:Malcolm
  • LocationScotland

Posted July 25 2012 - 05:31 AM

Originally Posted by Mark Oates 


We have an accord! Posted Image I knew we were on the same page all along. Posted Image
Quite. As a matter of fact I have two laptops from the same manufacturer which are as far as I can manage identically calibrated, and the two screens bear little resemblance. There are all kinds of issues like native resolution, graphics card and the like that can affect the output, and tv displays have their own foibles. I think you'd wind up spending more (time and money) calibrating all your various displays to match and only have this lousy straightjacket to show for it. Posted Image


Of course the counter argument to the one provided by Josh is that many large screen television displays now come with internet browsers and are 1080p and intended for home cinema viewing, thus one could potentially use those ( if ) calibrated displays for viewing screencaps.


     :Fun Movie Quotes:

"A good body with a dull brain is as cheap as life itself"   

"Maybe it's a sheep dog... let's keep going" 

"Please doctor, I've got to ask this. It sounds like, well, just as though you're describing some form of super carrot"

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 






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