Excellent article in new 'Sight & Sound' on the art & science of Blu-Ray transfers (1 Viewer)

[Dortmunder]

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.

 

[JoeDoakes]

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

 

[Dortmunder]

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.

 

[Michel_Hafner]

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

 

[BJQ1972]

Thanks for posting.

 

[bgart13]

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

 

[Yorkshire]

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

HERESY!

Steve W

 

[Yorkshire]

It was about time such an article was written. Could have been from me 5 years ago.
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

 

[cafink]

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.

 

[Michel_Hafner]

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.

 

[Doctorossi]

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

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