Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Blu-ray and UHD' started by Robert Harris, Jun 9, 2012.
Almost everything will look good at 30".
How is it that these types of disasters get out?
Apparently to the studios, they're not "disasters." They are happy to have the work of artists represented in such a negative way.
I can imagine someone looking at number, and saying something like:
What's he done lately?
Anything for us?
I liked Carrie, but beyond that..."
The quality control staff view them on their IPhones.
I think the masters are being optimized for streaming delivery. Why in the world would you want multiple masters, especially one with lotsa pesky grain that would require a high bitrate to reproduce correctly and a certain physical medium (ahem) to deliver it?
Are you still optimistic about Jaws...?
EDIT: whoops, wrong thread, sorry. These probs are crossing over too frequently lately...
Waited a long time to replace by LD with a Blu-ray of this title.
Now it looks like I will be sticking with the LD. Just like Spartacus.
DVDBeaver hasn't been worth taking seriously since they declaired the SD of There Will Be Blood as "flawless" (it was a noisy edge-enhanced mess).
Curiously, "Blu-ray.com" actually compares this BD transfer to LD in their review!!
Here's an excerpt:
" ... the frame crackles and vibrates to an extent I have rarely seen since the days of laserdisc. Depending on screen size and individual disposition, the noise may or may not be tolerable, but either way it obscures picture detail. Grain this ain't."
Still --- they gave the video transfer a 1 out of 5. So, there's your review on a more conventional monitor as opposed to projection!!
I actually considered giving CoM a 1 rating, but then dropped it a full point based upon pure level of realizing what it could, and should have been. The Color of Money is an easy film to bring to Blu-ray. Everything is in place.
You are on the Home Theater Forum. Have you read the mission statement?
I only have a 32" to watch this on, but I'm sending it back to Amazon anyways. I pre-ordered based on price and thinking it HAD to be better then the DVD. I don;t like supporting garbage, so it gets returned.
I have a 45 inch and i'm always able to tell if it's garbage...so I really don't buy the smaller screen thing...cause i'm able to see it, maybe I am looking too hard . Like I said if it was not for the fact that the DVD is not a 16x9 transfer I would be sending this back and dealing with my DVD..but the DVD is not a 16x9 transfer. This needs to be recalled.
I agree completely. I also have a 28" in my bedroom that's the most unforgiving TV as far as transfers go. A bad transfer is a bad transfer.
Hopefully this isn't indicative of streamlining the physical product to be like the streaming. I watched my first streaming HD film a couple weeks ago, "Cowboys Versus Aliens". I'm sure the provider of the content is a huge factor and in my case, the cable companies version looks like shit. I've seen better presented SD DVDs and regular HD telecasts.
Which DVD are you talking about? The one I have is 16x9.
My DVD says 16x9 on the back of the cover, "widescreen (1.85)-Enhanced for 16x9 Televisions". But the DVD is a 4:3 transfer, letterboxed but 4:3. I was shocked when I got it and it said that. I bought it in 2003.
Yep, it's a misprint (or outright fraud). The only DVD that has ever been issued in region 1 is letterboxed 4X3.
I'm not surprised at the zero score. I looked at the DVD/Blu-ray comparison over at caps-a-holic. The DVD is so soft & the Blu looks just as soft, but with the contrast jacked up a bit. The shocking thing is that this is not an obscure film from an unknown label, it's a Disney release of a Scorsese film staring Paul Newman & Tom Cruise! It does make you appreciate the good looking stuff.
There's a few Touchstone films that are like that. Spike Lee's He Got Game and Summer Of Same are 4:3 and letterboxed, but they do not say 16x9 on the back either.