I just think it's funny that such obvious and significant issues like this seem to be out of the realm of knowledge of even "experts", including those who critique things like this for a living. I don't remotely pretend to be educated about video, but I know just a little bit. This morning I was thinking about this, having closely analyzed images in Photoshop, and the phrase "blacker than black" popped into my mind. I had to research it, because it was only something I was vaguely aware of. What really jumped out to me is when I discovered that there is no "blacker than black" in PAL. So any TV calibrated for one will look really bad with a source that's in the other. Clearly this "problem" doesn't exist with PAL releases of the same titles. So, I learned something today. It's amusing that so many "experts" aren't aware of the same stuff. Not surprising though. I run into it daily with photography, which I genuinely do know, and the many clueless "experts" these days.
You encouraged me to look into this further. I'm trying to figure this out, because I have limited knowledge in this area. I think you are correct, and that with digital video, both NTSC and PAL have black set at 16. The point is that Pan's Labyrinth has some kind of noise around 9-10, so a properly calibrated monitor shouldn't show it. So, it still sounds like improper calibration to me. BTW, I looked at some other video from other studios, and none of them had artifacts in this area. The one thing I am quite certain about is that I was able to isolate the noise (blocking) in a still from Pan's Labyrinth, and that it's entirely within the "blacker than black" area, with a few levels between it and correct black.
It's all very confusing. Analog PAL had black at 0, but apparently digital PAL has it at 16, but I'm not certain if that is only HD. NTSC in Japan had it at 16 as well, but it was changed to 0 in, I think, 1985. I recall that most TVs in Europe are capable of displaying both PAL and NTSC, so I don't know how that plays into everything. I wish someone with reliable knowledge would chime up.
Indeed, there is absolutely no difference between Blu-ray video specs for European or North American display devices. Any mention of Europe vs. US, or PAL vs. NTSC does not make sense here, I'm afraid.
That would indeed be great, since, as I said above, compression is the art of removing details, while making this loss not visible to a human observer. I find it funny, though, that a few Criterion discs, such as Pan's Labyrinth and Blue Velvet, are among the only (or very few) discs where this particular extreme macroblocking effect in the dark color range can be observed, on certain types of output devices, apparently.
It seems like most of the comments you just quoted weren't incorrect speculation.
I already corrected myself regarding that detail. I am genuinely trying to figure this out, and I have already admitted that video is not something I know a lot about. So I'm trying to learn very quickly. Plus, what I originally stated wasn't outright incorrect, it used to be correct, but it no longer is. There's a difference. We live in an age when so many people state a conclusion, and then double and triple down on it when challenged, rather than have the willingness to accept new information and knowledge. When this detail was questioned, I immediately looked into it and immediately admitted that what I said did not appear to still be true, though it used to. I'd also like to point out that I have already put a lot more effort into exploring your complaints than you have done yourself. By your own admission, I have found a detail you were unaware of and need to explore more, despite your apparent infinite and unassailable wisdom. Pardon my sarcasm there. When I couldn't find what you claimed, I kept looking, then when I still couldn't find it, I kept looking some more.
I am never willing to make that type of assumption.
There's a lot of "US vs. Europe" and "NTSC vs. PAL" mentioned earlier that that is just not applicable to Blu-ray sources (but might have been applicable in the DVD era). I wasn't trying to imply anything else.
I wasn't necessarily unaware of this detail, but was and am quite confident that I have a correctly set up Blu-ray viewing chain w.r.t. all settings that could influence this, and I have very much double checked these.
It's good that we're not talking on the basis of "different people see different things, so you'll have to agree to disagree" anymore, as suggested by another participant earlier. That would be getting into voodoo territory, not a technical exchange. And I'm very happy that it's now also clear that severe artifacts are in fact on the disc, no matter the range, something that was heavily disputed earlier.
Sounds good. Trust me, I am too.
US vs Europe was mentioned again, even after I pointed out I corrected that and admitted it was a mistake, twice.So much for the last word on this matter.
I listen to podcasts while walking out dogs and at the gym. I will be checking this out.
