What's new

A Few Words About A few words about...™ The Fury (Arrow UK import) -- in Blu-ray (1 Viewer)

EddieLarkin

Supporting Actor
Joined
Oct 16, 2012
Messages
991
Location
Yorkshire
Real Name
Nick
That looks nothing like compression artifacts. It's just noise. I've never had compression issues with TT discs, they always have healthy bit rates. Indeed, TT's The Fury disc has the same bit rate and file size as the Arrow version, give or take a few bits.
 

Sgt Pepper

Supporting Actor
Joined
Jun 21, 2012
Messages
642
Real Name
Barry
haineshisway said:
Better encode? Whatever do you mean? Do you think the Twilight Time has a problem with its authoring because it most certainly does not. It is authored extremely well, as is the Arrow. I agree about the color and not about the sharpening. But that's just me :)
Just so I have this right.........you honestly see no sharpening on the TT disc?
 

Steen DK

Stunt Coordinator
Joined
Sep 15, 2012
Messages
155
Location
Copenhagen, Denmark
Real Name
Steen
EddieLarkin said:
That looks nothing like compression artifacts.
Ok. Just for fun...

Here's a bit of background from a different film on blu-ray (Quatermass and the Pit):

agnf.jpg


Then I compressed that image by some 40% and got this:

v5do.jpg


Voila! I think that looks quite a bit like the one from the TT Fury:

643d.jpg



(Bruce, feel free to roll your eyes. ;) )
 

Steen DK

Stunt Coordinator
Joined
Sep 15, 2012
Messages
155
Location
Copenhagen, Denmark
Real Name
Steen
Forgot to add...
EddieLarkin said:
healthy bit rates. Indeed, TT's The Fury disc has the same bit rate and file size as the Arrow version, give or take a few bits.
You can have high bit rates AND compression problems. The two are not necessarily connected.
 

ROclockCK

Screenwriter
Joined
Jan 13, 2013
Messages
1,438
Location
High Country, Alberta, Canada
Real Name
Steve
Steen DK said:
Ok. Just for fun...

Here's a bit of background from a different film on blu-ray (Quatermass and the Pit):

agnf.jpg


Then I compressed that image by some 40% and got this:

v5do.jpg


Voila! I think that looks quite a bit like the one from the TT Fury:

643d.jpg


(Bruce, feel free to roll your eyes. ;) )
But who actually watches a motion picture like this?

Of course, there is always that ugly tipping point where compression artifacts become distractingly apparent, as shown in Eddie Larkin's example. But this certainly wasn't that.

IMO, the reel comparison between these 2 Blu-ray releases of The Fury should be "theatrical authenticity" vs. "video revisionism". :P
 

John Hodson

Senior HTF Member
Joined
Apr 14, 2003
Messages
4,627
Location
Bolton, Lancashire
Real Name
John
ROclockCK said:
IMO, the reel comparison between these 2 Blu-ray releases of The Fury should be "theatrical authenticity" vs. "video revisionism". :P
If Warner reissue, for instance, 'Pat Garrett', I'd like at last three reels to have an ugly tramline down the right hand side, reels two and four to be almost completely magenta, and the whole to be pock-marked and dirty. To recreate my last authentic theatrical viewing of this film a couple of years back.
 

haineshisway

Senior HTF Member
Joined
Oct 26, 2011
Messages
5,554
Location
Los Angeles
Real Name
Bruce
Steen DK said:
Ok. Just for fun...

Here's a bit of background from a different film on blu-ray (Quatermass and the Pit):

agnf.jpg


Then I compressed that image by some 40% and got this:

v5do.jpg


Voila! I think that looks quite a bit like the one from the TT Fury:

643d.jpg



(Bruce, feel free to roll your eyes. ;) )
I have rolled. Twice. :)
 

haineshisway

Senior HTF Member
Joined
Oct 26, 2011
Messages
5,554
Location
Los Angeles
Real Name
Bruce
tele1962 said:
Just so I have this right.........you honestly see no sharpening on the TT disc?
Just so I have this right - you think the Arrow has a better encode than the Twilight Time?

From Eddie Larkin: "I've never had compression issues with TT discs, they always have healthy bit rates. Indeed, TT's The Fury disc has the same bit rate and file size as the Arrow version, give or take a few bits."
 

haineshisway

Senior HTF Member
Joined
Oct 26, 2011
Messages
5,554
Location
Los Angeles
Real Name
Bruce
ROclockCK said:
But who actually watches a motion picture like this?

Of course, there is always that ugly tipping point where compression artifacts become distractingly apparent, as shown in Eddie Larkin's example. But this certainly wasn't that.

IMO, the reel comparison between these 2 Blu-ray releases of The Fury should be "theatrical authenticity" vs. "video revisionism". :P
Well, there's that. Can you imagine if we actually went to a movie theater in days of old and sat in the first row looking up at the screen thinking "that grain looks like noise" or "I think I see some sharpening" or "look at that halo, what have they done?" Happily, we went to see the movie, admire it or not, be impressed with the cinematography or not, and not even have a spot of bother if some dirt specks showed up. Today at home - it's turned into something wholly other for some folks, and I don't think that's such a good thing.
 

Sgt Pepper

Supporting Actor
Joined
Jun 21, 2012
Messages
642
Real Name
Barry
haineshisway said:
Just so I have this right - you think the Arrow has a better encode than the Twilight Time?

From Eddie Larkin: "I've never had compression issues with TT discs, they always have healthy bit rates. Indeed, TT's The Fury disc has the same bit rate and file size as the Arrow version, give or take a few bits."
Just part of the chain in the restoration and transfer................now about the sharpening?

I can easily show the comparisons to back up my statement can you show this is not the case?

PS
This is only £12 from Amazon UK at the moment, so grab a bargain guy's.
 

John Hodson

Senior HTF Member
Joined
Apr 14, 2003
Messages
4,627
Location
Bolton, Lancashire
Real Name
John
haineshisway said:
Well, there's that. Can you imagine if we actually went to a movie theater in days of old and sat in the first row looking up at the screen thinking "that grain looks like noise" or "I think I see some sharpening" or "look at that halo, what have they done?" Happily, we went to see the movie, admire it or not, be impressed with the cinematography or not, and not even have a spot of bother if some dirt specks showed up. Today at home - it's turned into something wholly other for some folks, and I don't think that's such a good thing.
Quoted for truth.
 

Robert Harris

Archivist
Reviewer
Senior HTF Member
Joined
Feb 8, 1999
Messages
18,271
Real Name
Robert Harris
tele1962 said:
Just part of the chain in the restoration and transfer................now about the sharpening?

I can easily show the comparisons to back up my statement can you show this is not the case?

PS
This is only £12 from Amazon UK at the moment, so grab a bargain guy's.
There IS sharpening in the TT release. That sharpening was a part of the harvest, and the norm at that time. Every film with an image harvested on whatever particular piece of hardware used for The Fury would have had equal sharpening.

Take a transfer from the era on that hardware, ties rocks to the digital master tape, and drop it in a lake...

if it rises to the surface, it has no sharpening.

We need to be very clear about what is being discussed. There is nothing wrong with sharpening, as there is nothing wrong with digital noise reduction. It is the way that those tools are used that creates the problems.

RAH
 

Sgt Pepper

Supporting Actor
Joined
Jun 21, 2012
Messages
642
Real Name
Barry
Robert I could not agree more, but in the case of The Fury and to my eyes the TT release the sharpening is heavy handed, the Arrow release has none. I am not putting down the TT release, I am only looking at the comparisons between the two, one being very good the other being better.
Now before anyone say's I am an Arrow fan boy (I am now ;) ) their early releases were frankly bloody awful, The Bird With The Crystal Plumage being a prime example..........however I give credit where it is due and IMHO Arrow have done a better job than TT with the Fury.
 

Robert Harris

Archivist
Reviewer
Senior HTF Member
Joined
Feb 8, 1999
Messages
18,271
Real Name
Robert Harris
tele1962 said:
Robert I could not agree more, but in the case of The Fury and to my eyes the TT release the sharpening is heavy handed, the Arrow release has none. I am not putting down the TT release, I am only looking at the comparisons between the two, one being very good the other being better.
Now before anyone say's I am an Arrow fan boy (I am now ;) ) their early releases were frankly bloody awful, The Bird With The Crystal Plumage being a prime example..........however I give credit where it is due and IMHO Arrow have done a better job than TT with the Fury.
Part of what you're seeing is built-in sharpening, the rest are specular highlights on grain.

The two image harvests are very different, from different eras, and different means of extraction. They really cannot be compared.

RAH
 

Sgt Pepper

Supporting Actor
Joined
Jun 21, 2012
Messages
642
Real Name
Barry
Robert Harris said:
Part of what you're seeing is built-in sharpening, the rest are specular highlights on grain.

The two image harvests are very different, from different eras, and different means of extraction. They really cannot be compared.

RAH
Robert I respect your view on this....................so I will say that to my eyes and IMHO all being said and done the Arrow release is more pleasing to the eye.
 

haineshisway

Senior HTF Member
Joined
Oct 26, 2011
Messages
5,554
Location
Los Angeles
Real Name
Bruce
tele1962 said:
Robert I respect your view on this....................so I will say that to my eyes and IMHO all being said and done the Arrow release is more pleasing to the eye.
More pleasing to YOUR eye. Please don't speak for everyone :) And Mr. Harris, in all his recent posts, is right on the money so no need for me to respond. If there is sharpening on the Twilight Time release then it is so mild and minor that it didn't cross my radar at all.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Latest Articles

Forum statistics

Threads
356,710
Messages
5,121,078
Members
144,145
Latest member
treed99
Recent bookmarks
0
Top