TPM edge enhancement? (1 Viewer)

[MichaelG]

Gary, that is intersting. I guess that would answer my question as well.

 

[RobertR]

Well, over-compressing an image with a DCT technique like MPEG2 or JPEG will reduce the effects of edge enhancement, since one of the stages in M(J)PEG compression is a low-pass filter.

I'm skeptical of this explanation, unless you can show me that low bit-rate DVDs (more compression) have less EE than high bit rate DVDs (less compression).
As I said, the theatrical digital presentation I saw (and which obviously had much LESS compression than ANY DVD) had ZERO EE. Which tells me that the "source" argument doesn't hold.

 

[Robert George]

The other thing I'm having a problem with this issue in general is that everyone continues to use the term "EE", meaning "edge enhancement". The visible artifacts is actually "ringing", which can be caused by digital over-enhancement. There are many types of enhancement, even on specific and narrow frequency bands. it is not necessarily "edge enhancement", which really isn't a technical name for anything.

 

[Mark Zimmer]

Well, loads of folks have the LD and VHS. Is the ringing present there? If not, that should answer the argument that it's a fault of the source material. If it is, then we need to find some place that's still showing the film to look at it. Is there? Or is it on some Disneyesque moratorium?
But Bjoern's comments about something in the chain being responsible have the ring of truth to them. Someone at Fox (and I expect poor Peter Staddon is elected) needs to go and find out where in the process this ringing got added and complain to the manufacturer/fire the operator as need be to resolve it.
Was the compression handled at Lucasfilm? Or did it get done by Fox or contracted out to a third party?
------------------
"This movie has warped my fragile little mind."

 

[RobertR]

The other thing I'm having a problem with this issue in general is that everyone continues to use the term "EE", meaning "edge enhancement". The visible artifacts is actually "ringing", which can be caused by digital over-enhancement.

Robert, I think the semantic use is irrelevant. Whether you choose to call it "digitally oversharpened" or "edge enhanced", it amounts to the same thing, ie, a process that studios should not be using. Here's a quote from Bjoern's guide to EE:
"If you have ever increased the sharpness control on your TV to the max, you will also get the same ringing, so you are well advised to keep it as low as possible. The advantage of controlling the subjective sharpness as a control on the TV, instead of having the DVD transfer sharpened through the use of EE, is that you can adjust the sharpness control on your TV to your liking. But you can't get the video-like look out of a DVD transfer that has EE applied to it! You have to live with it, its an inreversible process.
Note: the ringing that is caused by setting the sharpness control too high on your TV is only a 1-dimensional horizontal effect. It show ringing only at left and right of vertical edges. EE on the other hand is applied in two dimesions, so both horizonal and vertical edges can show ringing. But EE is not necessary a symmetrical filter as we will see. The amount of horizontal and vertical EE used on DVDs can vary considerably.
Does 'Edge Enhancement' always look the same?
No, there are several parameters that affect the outcome of an EE processed image. First of all, the amount of EE applied can vary and will result in differnt amplitudes of the modulation. Little EE will result in only faintly visible halos, lots of EE will result in stronly visible, high contrast contours. Secondly, the frequency of the filter can vary. A high frequency filter will render only thin halos, while a low frequency one will render thick halos. Thirdly, the symmetry of the filter can vary. Stronger horizontally than vertically, for example."

 

[DaViD Boulet]

quote: Actually, David, I think it is quite likely that the problems people see in this transfer are related to the source element. In fact, I can't believe the discussion of this disc has gone on for a couple of weeks now on several different forums and no one that I have seen has yet pointed out the obvious.[/quote]
Obi,
Didn't you see the comparisons of the trailer and deleted shots vs those from the film on the DVD? Clearly the "source" is not to blame (meaning the original film print), as the effects of this supposed EE change dramatically comparing the same scene/image on the trailer to the same image on the theatrical version.
I saw TPM on the big-screen and saw no halos in the theater like I'm seeing in these DVD images. Did you? Did anyone? Have you *ever* seen a film print projected in the theater that looks that way?
When people described the theatrical exhibition to look like "video" it had nothing to do with halos. I was one of those thought it looked like "video" too, but that phrase referred to what I considered rather obvious looking CGI effects (I had to laugh when Lucus went on and on about the "photo-realism" of his CGI effects) and the artifical look of many of the vistas and scenes...the lighting and the color of many of the scenes just look like something that was "painted" or processed in a video world and did not convincingly look like a filmed object in real life. For that matter, Toy Story and Shrek look like "video" too...in the sense that even when transfered to film and projected they look computer-generated and you don't find yourself thinking that your watching something that was literally filmed in real life.
In any case, if the studio can produce a trailer that lacks EE on a particular scene, or even just shows it to a lesser degree, that's an absolute indicator that the "source" is not to blame as far as when those digital images were first put to film.
c'mon people. Go to the movies and watch what you see. Right now I'm attending a film festival (runs for 2 weeks) and I'm seeing projected 35mm every night...with prints that vary in quality all over the map. No such thing as EE-looking halos on the screen no matter the budget of the film being projected.
-dave
[Edited last by DaViD Boulet on October 18, 2001 at 05:02 PM]

 

[DaViD Boulet]

quote: The latter is so ridiculously uneducated nonsense, that it must have been meant as a joke. The former is either an utter lie (unlikely) or a sign of inability and ignorance (very likely). Not on Peter's part, mind you.[/quote]
Chris,
I agree that this statement is pretty harsh and perhaps borders on being a tad un-gentleman-like. However, the equally harsh reality is that it's true! Yes, even worse than Bjoern's comments are the people who dared say something so incredibly lame as to blame the "film elements" for the halos we're seeing on the DVDs they master. In any case, perhaps Bjoern should take the high-road and remove such possibly inflammatory remarks from his review. But even more importantly, shouldn't Fox/Lucus/THX Whoever give us DVDs that don't mangle the image with halos and ringing...and not pass off bogus excuses like 'it's the source "elements"' when they're criticized for deficient transfers of movies they've made us wait years to buy on the promise of a reference-setting level of content and A/V quality?
quote: Well, over-compressing an image with a DCT technique like MPEG2 or JPEG will reduce the effects of edge enhancement, since one of the stages in M(J)PEG compression is a low-pass filter. It is possible that halos existed somewhere in the chain for the deleted scenes, but the extra-low-pass filter that was used got rid of them.[/quote]
But Gary, some of those deleted scenes with less ringing also contained *more detail* than the theatrical cut on the disc.
quote: Well, loads of folks have the LD and VHS. Is the ringing present there? If not, that should answer the argument that it's a fault of the source material.[/quote]
Actually, EE is usually added to a greater degree for these inherently lower-resolution mediums.
quote: The other thing I'm having a problem with this issue in general is that everyone continues to use the term "EE", meaning "edge enhancement". The visible artifacts is actually "ringing", which can be caused by digital over-enhancement. There are many types of enhancement, even on specific and narrow frequency bands. it is not necessarily "edge enhancement", which really isn't a technical name for anything.[/quote]
And people made fun of me for not wanting to call 16x9 encoded DVDs "anamorphic"

Since there's really no industry agreed upon term for this variable halo-effect let's just agree that "EE", given imperfect description, will do for general discussion. Personally, I'll be happy to use the term "ringing" as an alternative. In any case, let's not let this superficial issue be an obstical to the substance of a very interesting discussion.
-dave
[Edited last by DaViD Boulet on October 18, 2001 at 05:25 PM]

 

[GlennH]

Well maybe we're just a bunch of whiners here. Here's a review that gives Episode 1 a perfect 100 score for video:
http://www.dvdverdict.com/reviews/phantommenace.shtml
An excerpt:

Watching the film on both my 27" television and on a computer display (which can take advantage of the anamorphic enhancement), I noticed zero problems with the transfer. Despite the extreme amount of digital work on the film and that it was presented in digital theaters, the DVD transfer was transferred from film. It has an amazing filmlike quality; very rarely can you spot scenes that look digital, which is an important accomplishment for both the Industrial Light and Magic effects artists and the technicians who performed the transfer.

I was going to e-mail the reviewer about it, but on second thought why should I spoil it for him. He's happy.

 

[Cris K]

Hi Bjoern,
I am pretty new here, and have found your website to be very informative. A couple of things you have pointed out made me think a little bit and just wanted to throw this out there... please be kind to the newbie

Columbia / Tristar is very consistent. They always use it on 2.35:1 transfers (recently 6th Day) and don't on 1.85:1 transfer (Starship Troopers is still one of the best non-EE transfers out there).

Heres my thinking: If only the 2.35 transfers have the problem, then I do not think the Sony encoder is to blame- assuming CT uses the same encoder for all of thier titles (which I think is pretty safe to assume) Could it possibly be related to the electroniv Anamorphic process of unsqueezing the 2.35 film element and them resqeezing it for the 16x9 anamorphic video format? Maybe that would explain the fact that it is assymetrical? It might also explain why Titanic (in super35) has none while Star Wars Ep I (in arriscope) does?
Am I way off target?
-cris

 

[DaViD Boulet]

Glenn
We're not a bunch of whiners.
We're simply don't consider a 27" 4x3 (probably not calibrated) NTSC TV nor sitting 3 feet back from an even smaller (though superior image) computer monitor to be the holy-grail of replicating the "film" experience in our homes.
We know that DVDs have the potential to look good, if not great, when projected on a 6-8 foot wide screen. And we get upset when they don't, especially when it's a DVD that was promised to set new standards of excellence.
-dave
p.s. we'd probably sound a lot less whiny if the guys at Fox/Lucusfilm/THX/whatever would just fess up and promise to fix their "ringing" problem rather than pretend that it's in the "source elements".

 

[RobertR]

If only the 2.35 transfers have the problem, then I do not think the Sony encoder is to blame- assuming CT uses the same encoder for all of thier titles (which I think is pretty safe to assume) Could it possibly be related to the electroniv Anamorphic process of unsqueezing the 2.35 film element and them resqeezing it for the 16x9 anamorphic video format?
Am I way off target?

You are off target Cris, because you're assuming that CT doesn't use the 16:9 anamorphic process on their 1.85 transfers.
In fact, they DO use it.
To me, this just proves how UNNECESSARY EE is.

 

[Bjoern Roy]

Chris, David,
after re-reading my conclusion, i agree that some comments were not appropriate and didn't help the cause. I changed the general tone down quite a bit to match my common writing style. Must have been the frustration that was getting the better part of me. Thanks for the heads up!
Cris, i will comment later.
------------------
"Never underestimate the predictability of stupidity" (Bullet Tooth Tony in 'Snatch')
Bjoern's Place (my HT in action, DVD reviews, SPL measurements...) | 'Edge Enhancement' Guide

 

[Cris K]

whoops-
I know that the 1.85 DVDs (and VIDEO transfers)are anamorphic, however what I am assuming really is that the 1.85 FILMS were shot flat, or spherical- and then matted to create widescreen and not shot anamorphicly on film. What I was thinking is that maybe it could have been the anamorphic film to anamorphic video conversion that is somehow inducing the consistant edge artifacting...
sorry I was not more clear

Maybe I am all wrong on the whole 1.85 thing...I will have to look into it a little further...
cris
[Edited last by Cris K on October 18, 2001 at 07:09 PM]

 

[Richard_Huntington]

OK, I realize I am new here and no one knows me, but if I may interject...
#1. I have both PHANTOM MENACE trailers on 35mm and watched them about a month ago and there is absolutely no edge enhancement of halos to be seen. None. So this gets rid of the source material problem (and we know most of the film was shot on 35mm anyway).
#2. Can we all agree that some time of EE, haloing, sharpening or artificial edging was added to this transfer? I think that's very clear.
There are countless DVD's in my collection that show no signs of this problem (Insider & Titanic stand out and there are countless others) so there is some step in the film to DVD transfer process that is introducing this EE, which is not liked by most people who can see it.
Therefore, I think we need to all agree that it is possible to put out DVD's without any of this EE or haloing or whatever you want to call it. So how do we find out where the EE is being applied, how it is being applied and how we can put a stop to it?
------------------
"My wife actually prefers widescreen"
[Edited last by Richard_Huntington on October 18, 2001 at 07:44 PM]

 

[RobertR]

quote: So how do find out where the EE is being applied, how it is being applied and how we can put a stop to it?[/quote]
That's EXACTLY what I want to know.
I'd like to think that there would be a major effort by the major DVD web sites to find these things out, and apply the necessary pressure to the studios to get them to stop using EE.
[Edited last by RobertR on October 18, 2001 at 06:25 PM]

 

[Shawn Pil]

If I may peek into this for a moment I would like to offer my idea of why this occurs.
If digital processing for DVD is anything like that used for still image processing, you achieve the same effect by using a sharpening of some sort. I have done quite a bit of digital photo processing and find this effect when a softer image is sharpened or enhanced in some way. I think due to space limitations on the Phantom Menace DVD they had already sacrificed the video quality by using a lower bitrate and as a result were left with a softer image.
To compensate for what would have turned out to be a very soft picture, they sharpened it to give the illusion of detail that could only be achieved by using more bandwidth. To get the image quality that "appears" to be on the disk without using EE, I think considerably more space would have been used and somehting else would have to be compromised.
Without the edge enhancement this DVD could look a lot softer or even border line blurry in comparison to other DVD's.
And I do think that based on all the varying opinions on the EX surround that this too has been compromised. By laying down the Dolby Digital track at a lower db you spare space but don't technicaly loose anything. Of course, by using the THX OptiMode included on the disc you change the balance of your speakers to compensate for the lack of db space. Does that make any sense? If THX OptiMode is disc specific then studios do tinker with the space on the disc by changing the amount of data per channel.
If the audio was more robust and as loud as the LD then maybe a commentary wouldn't fit.
I have yet experience this DVD but I think what I have said can apply to any DVD with these problems. And without knowing all the trick of the trade on sqeezing out every last ounce of space on a DVD, they are only my theories.
who the hell knows...

 

[Hubert]

Well, I'm certainly glad I'm not disappointed in the transfer the way many of you seem to be. On my rig, it looks incredible. I'm not educated enough about EE enough to get into a debate with a knowledgeable person on the subject, but it seems it's becoming stylish or popular to complain about edge enhancement. I don't know if it's on TPM, but it sure has seemed that a lot of people complain about it, even on discs that supposedly had none.
Again, I don't know if it exists on TPM. All I know is I'm extremely happy with the picture and sound. I guess if I want to blow a picture up, I can see every little flaw. But on my Pioneer Elite 710HD, it looks fantastic. All I could see was a bit of shimmering in a few of the desert scenes.
So if EE is a problem on TPM, I'm glad I can't see it.

 

[RobertR]

I don't know if it's on TPM
Again, I don't know if it exists on TPM

I suggest you visit Bjoern Roy's web page and look at his TPM screen shots. Once you do so, it will be impossible for you to say "I don't know if it exists".

 

[GlennH]

on my Pioneer Elite 710HD, it looks fantastic

Hubert, how close are you sitting to your 710HD? I sit about 10 feet from my somewhat smaller 610HD and I can see the ringing quite plainly.
As to it being stylish or popular to complain about EE or ringing or whatever... I can't speak for others but I get no joy or delight out of it. I bear no ill will towards Lucas or anybody. I just see something I don't like, something that isn't right, and I'd like to see it fixed. That's all. I'd be happy as a clam if this disc was absolutely perfect. But it isn't. There's no denying or excusing it.

 

[Walter Kittel]

Robert beat me to the punch, so to speak. There is absolutely no question that Ringing / Edge Enhancement / insert term of choice is present on Star Wars: The Phantom Menace. I screened this disc last night, and it was plainly obvious on my setup.
While I feel that the disc still represents a good value for even marginal fans of the film ( like yours truly ), the transfer clearly doesn't live up to the reference standard expectations that accompany the release of a contemporary film of this magnitude ( in terms of popularity. ) Personally, I was somewhat disappointed with the video performance of this title.
Bjoern Roy's presentation on TPM is located at http://home.t-online.de/home/bjoern....TPM/TPM_01.htm
- Walter.