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
- - - - -

Excellent article in new 'Sight & Sound' on the art & science of Blu-Ray transfers


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

#1 of 11 OFFLINE   Dortmunder

Dortmunder

    Auditioning



  • 8 posts
  • Join Date: Feb 14 2012

Posted November 13 2012 - 02:54 AM

Written by Nick Wrigley, formerly of Masters of Cinema in the UK. A thrillingly interesting despatch ~ Should be learned off by heart by every Blu-Ray producer in the business.

#2 of 11 OFFLINE   JoeDoakes

JoeDoakes

    Screenwriter



  • 1,997 posts
  • Join Date: Apr 01 2009
  • Real Name:Ray

Posted November 13 2012 - 04:24 AM

Is this online anywhere? The print is really hard to see. thanks

#3 of 11 OFFLINE   Dortmunder

Dortmunder

    Auditioning



  • 8 posts
  • Join Date: Feb 14 2012

Posted November 13 2012 - 06:30 AM

Haven't found it online yet, just PDF downloads, from which this screen grab was taken. Apologies for the quality, I sharpened it up as much as I could. I find if you right click and open in a new tab it's pretty legible, as opposed to just left clicking the image.

#4 of 11 OFFLINE   Michel_Hafner

Michel_Hafner

    Supporting Actor



  • 783 posts
  • Join Date: Feb 28 2002

Posted November 13 2012 - 06:40 AM

It was about time such an article was written. Could have been from me 5 years ago. :cool: I remember I got quite worried as early as "Lord of the Rings 2" when DNR started to creep into digital cinema masters.

#5 of 11 OFFLINE   BJQ1972

BJQ1972

    Stunt Coordinator



  • 55 posts
  • Join Date: Oct 16 2012

Posted November 13 2012 - 06:41 AM

Thanks for posting.

#6 of 11 OFFLINE   bgart13

bgart13

    Supporting Actor



  • 919 posts
  • Join Date: Oct 04 2008

Posted November 13 2012 - 06:58 AM

Excellent article. Done in a way lay people can understand. Cheers to Nick!

#7 of 11 ONLINE   Yorkshire

Yorkshire

    Screenwriter



  • 1,305 posts
  • Join Date: Oct 22 2009

Posted November 14 2012 - 01:40 AM

Apologies for the quality, I sharpened it up as much as I could.

HERESY! :D Steve W
Correct a fool and he will hate you, correct a wise man and he will thank you.

#8 of 11 ONLINE   Yorkshire

Yorkshire

    Screenwriter



  • 1,305 posts
  • Join Date: Oct 22 2009

Posted November 14 2012 - 01:42 AM

It was about time such an article was written. Could have been from me 5 years ago. :cool: I remember I got quite worried as early as "Lord of the Rings 2" when DNR started to creep into digital cinema masters.

Surely, that's quite different. If PJ wanted his film with grain removed, then that's his call. In this case it'd be revisionist to go back in the process to a pre-DNR version and release that with its grain intact, against PJ's wishes. Steve W
Correct a fool and he will hate you, correct a wise man and he will thank you.

#9 of 11 OFFLINE   cafink

cafink

    Producer



  • 3,041 posts
  • Join Date: Apr 19 1999

Posted November 14 2012 - 02:35 AM

Surely, that's quite different. If PJ wanted his film with grain removed, then that's his call. In this case it'd be revisionist to go back in the process to a pre-DNR version and release that with its grain intact, against PJ's wishes.

Revisionism isn't the only problem with excessive DNR. DNR removes details and produces an image that some find aesthetically unpleasant. A director certainly has creative license to use DNR as one of his filmmaking tools, but that doesn't automatically make it a good idea.
 

 


#10 of 11 OFFLINE   Michel_Hafner

Michel_Hafner

    Supporting Actor



  • 783 posts
  • Join Date: Feb 28 2002

Posted November 14 2012 - 07:14 AM

Surely, that's quite different. If PJ wanted his film with grain removed, then that's his call. In this case it'd be revisionist to go back in the process to a pre-DNR version and release that with its grain intact, against PJ's wishes. Steve W

While it was done with the blessing of the director it was poorly done and looks very bad compared to the current state of the art. And Jackson did not want the grain removed in general. It was a couple of specific grainy shots. Another matter was the print of "Seabiscuit" which I saw back then which was RUINED by DNR. That was fixed later on.

#11 of 11 OFFLINE   Doctorossi

Doctorossi

    Supporting Actor



  • 834 posts
  • Join Date: May 23 2012

Posted November 14 2012 - 07:42 AM

Apologies for the quality, I sharpened it up as much as I could.

Well, isn't that ironic? :D (D'oh! Steve beat me to it.)




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users