Visiting Criterion Collection

For show notes, please visit our corresponding discussion thread.  Full Criterion visit documented in the podcast episode, available via the audio player below.

Sam Posten and Home Theater Forum Co-Owner Ron Epstein visit Criterion Collection in New York.  Sam interviews Technical Director Lee Kline, Producer Abbey Lustgarten and Audio Supervisor Ryan Hullings about how they work with assets provided by film rights-holders to put out the best series of serious films.

Although the tag on the YouTube video indicates there are more videos in the series, we were only authorized to publish this one.

 

Published by

Brian Dobbs

member,editor

102 Comments

  1. I am so incredibly excited to have you all hear this episode. Ron and I had an absolute blast and I could not thank Brian enough for all his editing prowess here. This was my first effort taking podcasting gear on the road and we did the best we could with the echos in the room, so I'm pretty happy with how it all worked out. But the key is just how honest and forthcoming the folks at Criterion were. We learned a TON there and know you guys will be super satisfied with the answers to (most!) of your questions, even if the answer was a smiling 'Maybe!'

    Let us know what you think! If you enjoyed it please share the link with any and all outlets you think will also enjoy it!

    Thanks once again to Lee, Abbie and Ryan, you guys were AWESOME!

  2. Since I just read the review of Europa Europa in Criterion Forum (another Director Approved transfer that the reviewer took offense over for having a yellow/cyan push), these comments by Lee are far more interesting in retrospect.

  3. Unfortunately, the vast majority of reviewers and critics have no idea what they're talking about. Even paid ones from supposedly legitimate sources. We're in an age when saying negative things always comes off as being more discerning than those who don't. There's a subconscious reaction to any negative comment that the person making it must know what they're talking about. I guess people get their enjoyment where they personally find it, but I tend to be amazed by how many supposed movie lovers seem to spend an awful lot of effort looking for things to dislike about movies, and how they're presented.

  4. My favorite take-away is when Lee Kline is asked about a possible upgrade to David Lean’s SUMMERTIME (Criterion has released it previously on Laserdisc and DVD), Kline responds ”It needs an upgrade, I think it will come out at some point, and…uh…God, SUMMERTIME would look fantastic from the original negative in 4K, so I would personally like to see that one, I imagine that will happen.”
    That made my day! One of my favorite films! Let’s hop that happens soon!

  5. Sam Posten

    Yeah one of the Reddit guys was complaining about Garfield being green. I had to pull that one up, AFAIK there is no Criterion release of Garfield, that would be weird…

    That's called "shitposting" Sam.

  6. JohnRice

    Unfortunately, the vast majority of reviewers and critics have no idea what they're talking about. Even paid ones from supposedly legitimate sources. We're in an age when saying negative things always comes off as being more discerning than those who don't. There's a subconscious reaction to any negative comment that the person making it must know what they're talking about. I guess people get their enjoyment where they personally find it, but I tend to be amazed by how many supposed movie lovers seem to spend an awful lot of effort looking for things to dislike about movies, and how they're presented.

    This is why the "Teal/Orange Brigade" has always struck me as being full of themselves. Just need another excuse to demand a new format or feed their confirmation bias.

  7. Sam Posten

    It's so frustrating that the Blog Post makes it look like the only content is the video =(

    Yes, but those of us who want to listen (yeah, I've listened to all of every podcast) need to plan the 100 minutes to listen to it, plus I'm guessing most also have it waiting in iTunes or wherever we subscribe, waiting for us when we have time.

  8. Yeah, for the locals it's obvious. But we have traffic coming in from both Reddit and likely other podcasts like Criterion Now so i want to make it easy for folks to get to the right place. @Brian Dobbs just updated the blog post to do so, so woohoo for that!

  9. I must say that the topic of "Teal" made me wonder if there would ever be a release of "Anna and the King of Cyan". 😀
    But seriously, though, I extend a most sincere congratulations to both Sam and Ron on pursuing, producing and fulfilling this solid 90 plus minute interview; and so many thanks to Criterion, as well, for their informative, insightful and generous tour.:thumbs-up-smiley:

  10. Thanks @PMF it's very much appreciated. If you or any listeners can toss those kudos on the iTunes ratings too it really helps. I know, I know, I hate the damn influences and their 'smash those like and subscribe buttons' but the game is rigged and all positive feedback helps.

  11. I’ve started but haven’t gotten too far yet. I’ve never viewed much less owned a Criterion release. When they were the DVD hotness in the late ’90s or early 2000’s I didn’t have money for their expensive discs. And when I later had the money, it seemed like the buzz had diminished. And today…do they do blu-Ray or 4K? I think of them as DVD makers.

    But I think I never really understood what they were, why I’d buy a criterion release of a movie I could buy normally that already had commentaries and so on.

    That’s a long way to ask: is this podcast accessible to someone who doesn’t know from Criterion? 🙂

  12. DaveF

    I’ve never viewed much less owned a Criterion release. When they were the DVD hotness in the late ’90s or early 2000’s I didn’t have money for their expensive discs. And when I later had the money, it seemed like the buzz had diminished. And today…do they do blu-Ray or 4K?

    They do Blu-ray but are not releasing in 4K yet.

    DaveF

    But I think I never really understood what they were, why I’d buy a criterion release of a movie I could buy normally that already had commentaries and so on.

    Criterion was basically the first third party distributor – they were pioneers and now companies like Kino and Twilight Time and Olive all have business models that are more or less inspired on the Criterion model, which is to license and release someone else's content.

    There are kinda two categories for Criterion releases: releases where they are the only company issuing a title on physical media at all, and releases where they're putting out a special edition of a title that the original studio had already released.

    They have fans for both of those releases. They brought a lot of things to disc that fell between the cracks of what major studios would release. And then they also did a lot of great special editions; they basically invented the audio commentary back in the 1980s. They were the ones that really popularized the idea that physical media could and should include bonus material – they started that trend with Laserdiscs. And I think, for instance, because they did such great special editions for titles, that fans of that more popular content then started being a little more interested in trying out the more obscure things that Criterion was bringing to disc in the first place. So besides being a licensee that put out physical media, their choices of what to put out was seen as a curation of sorts.

    They've certainly cultivated an aura that if it's a Criterion release, it's an "important" film and something you should own. So if nothing else, their branding has been remarkably successful.

    People still have a lot of brand loyalty towards them. I don't want to say it's misplaced per se, because they've put out stuff that's earned that loyalty. But I think they have cultivated a mystique that sometimes causes people to abandon logic when discussing them. For instance, when "Superman: The Movie" hit its 40th anniversary last year, there were some people very vocal that Criterion should release it. It didn't matter that Warner Bros had already put out a phenomenal Blu-ray edition loaded with special features, or had announced a UHD disc. Some people felt that it would somehow be better if it had the Criterion label.

    Ultimately, they're a boutique home video label that has managed to pioneer what physical media meant to collectors in the early days, and have continued to put out interesting releases ever since. But they're not a mystical, infallible company either. At this point in my collecting life, I'm rather agnostic on who actually puts out a new release. To close with another example, in recent years, Sony has been remastering their back catalog of Frank Capra and Cary Grant movies in 4K; some of those movies they've released themselves, others they've licensed out to Criterion. It's all Sony's masters. It doesn't make a difference to me if the physical disc comes from Sony or Criterion. But there are a lot of collectors who feel that it is intangibly better if it's Criterion that puts it out over Sony.

  13. DaveF

    But I think I never really understood what they were, why I’d buy a criterion release of a movie I could buy normally that already had commentaries and so on.:)

    I have several titles, and probably most of them aren't available anywhere else. I've been buying them since they were founded. My first title was For All Mankind about 30 years ago, which I've bought on LD, DVD and now BR. Some are movie series, like the Qatsi Trilogy, the Del Toro set, Dekalog, Three Colors and so on. Then there's always the Bergman box, 'cause I just couldn't let that one pass. There are some others that had a regular release, that just wasn't up to par for me, like Fincher's The Game or The Princess Bride, ones with substantially different, multiple versions like The Tree of Life and Brazil, which I bought on DVD, then again on BR. Some are just movies that needed restoration and no studio was probably ever going to release, like The Magnificent Ambersons.

    I also just try to buy some Criterions, because I've always appreciated what they do and I want them to stay in business.

  14. @Josh Steinberg Thanks. 🙂 I remember in my early days on HTF people raving about Criterion Collection releases. I looked on with a little mixture of jealousy and confusion 🙂

    Maybe I'll take a look at some CC when I get through my viewing backlog and start purchasing anew.

    I expect to listen to the podcast in the next week or so. But this one is a lower priority as it hits topic for which I have a total void in my HTF experience.

    Technically, I was immediately impressed, recognizing the effort and coordination of doing an offsite interview podcast. So kudos to Sam and Brian on that! 🙂

  15. JohnRice

    I have several titles, and probably most of them aren't available anywhere else. I've been buying them since they were founded. My first title was For All Mankind about 30 years ago, which I've bought on LD, DVD and now BR. Some are movie series, like the Qatsi Trilogy, the Del Toro set, Dekalog, Three Colors and so on. Then there's always the Bergman box, 'cause I just couldn't let that one pass. There are some others that had a regular release, that just wasn't up to par for me, like Fincher's The Game or The Princess Bride, ones with substantially different, multiple versions like The Tree of Life and Brazil, which I bought on DVD, then again on BR. Some are just movies that needed restoration and no studio was probably ever going to release, like The Magnificent Ambersons.

    I also just try to buy some Criterions, because I've always appreciated what they do and I want them to stay in business.

    I was totally into Koyaanisqatsi in high school when I was introduced to it. I had the cassette tape and listened to it too much. I eventually got the sequel on tape a few years later. I don't think I've ever heard the third in the trilogy. But I was into the music; I never watched the movies past my first viewing in a high school class. And then I forgot about them, never rebought on CD. The tapes are long gone.

    I don't know that Koyaanisqatsi would resonate with me as it did 30 years ago. That was many seasons of life ago. 🙂

  16. I’ll get around to listening to this podcast next week on my way to work. I listened to the first four HTF podcasts last week and really enjoyed them. My only criticism is you should drop the sound effects and stop playing all the movie clips. The clips don’t translate well and tend to pull me out of the podcast.

  17. Vincent_P

    Nobody asked about THE DEVILS? 🙂

    Vincent

    They may have. I'm not saying one way or the other, I simply do not know and you can go back to the preview thread to see if someone did. We were very up front that the list of Qs was vetted by Criterion and we kept pretty close to that other than my own that I asked at the beginning to establish the criterion business model and philosophy. They answered the vast majority of Qs that we sent them.

  18. DaveF

    @Josh Steinberg
    Maybe I'll take a look at some CC when I get through my viewing backlog and start purchasing anew.

    I'd jump on the subscription train if you don't already have a bunch of their disks (and yeah doubly so if you do!) Soooooo much value there.

    Clinton McClure

    I’ll get around to listening to this podcast next week on my way to work. I listened to the first four HTF podcasts last week and really enjoyed them. My only criticism is you should drop the sound effects and stop playing all the movie clips. The clips don’t translate well and tend to pull me out of the podcast.

    Thank you for the feedback Clinton. It's appreciated even if it doesn't track with our current plans. We've been pretty happy with the positive feedback of the sound clips overall and I think they will remain a signature part of our podcasts. Those are really where we get to put in little nuggets of surprise and delight. (Thank you Tim Apple!). We know that's not everyone's cup of tea but they are pretty important to us so far.

  19. DaveF

    I was totally into Koyaanisqatsi in high school when I was introduced to it. I had the cassette tape and listened to it too much. I eventually got the sequel on tape a few years later. I don't think I've ever heard the third in the trilogy. But I was into the music; I never watched the movies past my first viewing in a high school class. And then I forgot about them, never rebought on CD. The tapes are long gone.

    I don't know that Koyaanisqatsi would resonate with me as it did 30 years ago. That was many seasons of life ago. 🙂

    I think it holds up even more in some ways, despite the laughable '70s polyester clothes and beehive hairdos. There's the ecological element, but the whole "Life Out of Balance" concept is probably even more true today than ever. That's a movie that really benefits form a good sound system, cranked up loud, so you can just get absorbed into it. Some of those shots late in the film with someone just standing there, looking into the camera while people swarm past them can really hit me at times.

  20. Sam Posten

    Thank you for the feedback Clinton. It's appreciated even if it doesn't track with our current plans. We've been pretty happy with the positive feedback of the sound clips overall and I think they will remain a signature part of our podcasts. Those are really where we get to put in little nuggets of surprise and delight. (Thank you Tim Apple!). We know that's not everyone's cup of tea but they are pretty important to us so far.

    I just feel the clips tend to be a little too long and too frequent at times.

  21. JohnRice

    I just feel the clips tend to be a little too long and too frequent at times.

    That's good feedback, thanks. We are still getting our feet under us, and finding the right balance. I can see doing shorter clips more than eliminating clips.

  22. Great interview, kudos to everyone involved!

    However, I am extremely disappointed about Lee Kline’s comment regarding compression.
    Criterion used to have and still has some major compression issues on certain titles, and these things are not difficult to see for a trained eye. Most recently, e.g. with Blue Velvet — some sequences are almost unwatchable on an OLED TV due to extreme macroblocking in dark parts of the image.

    I’m quite sure they know their compression could be much better, too, but for some reason are sticking to their third party compression studio.

  23. Sam Posten

    I'd jump on the subscription train if you don't already have a bunch of their disks (and yeah doubly so if you do!) Soooooo much value there.

    Thank you for the feedback Clinton. It's appreciated even if it doesn't track with our current plans. We've been pretty happy with the positive feedback of the sound clips overall and I think they will remain a signature part of our podcasts. Those are really where we get to put in little nuggets of surprise and delight. (Thank you Tim Apple!). We know that's not everyone's cup of tea but they are pretty important to us so far.

    I can appreciate that, Sam.

  24. Sam Posten

    That's good feedback, thanks. We are still getting our feet under us, and finding the right balance. I can see doing shorter clips more than eliminating clips.

    I think it was the previous podcast where I felt the clips were going a little too far. The Shelf Shame one.

  25. That one is talking about specific examples of bad movies that not everyone may be familiar with. A 10 second clip wasn't really enough to get a flavor of why we groaned over em. I don't know that future ones will have as many that are that long but we will definitely consider that longer clips drag the pace down. Seriously, thanks!

  26. Hi @Michael Hofmann and welcome to HTF. I don't have any beef with them overall and I'm sure they would agree that some things could be better than they are, but that the biggest issue is the quality of the elements they have to work with. I haven't seen BV so I can't comment, but I'd be very surprised if it was 'unwatchable' due to compression.

    A cursory look at reviews from DVDTalk and Bluray.com who tend to be the most critical gave it rave reviews
    https://www.blu-ray.com/movies/Blue-Velvet-Blu-ray/232096/

    https://www.dvdtalk.com/reviews/73849/blue-velvet-criterion-collection/

    The Amazon reviews are all very positive:
    https://www.amazon.com/Blue-Velvet-Criterion-Collection-Blu-ray/dp/B07NRF4K57

  27. Hi Sam,
    I’m afraid that the vast majority of Criterion’s compression issues are not related to the materials they have to work with. From a source restoration point of view, they often do an absolutely amazing, amazing job, only to have the final product marred by at times sub-standard compression.

    Criterion’s had slightly different compression issues over the years, affecting some titles much more than others. The particular issue on the Blue Velvet Blu-ray is e.g. also very present on their disc of Pan’s Labyrinth. It affects dark low-frequency backgrounds in certain scenes (not the whole film), i.e. the high-frequency detail, which the eye is primarily drawn to, is pretty unaffected.

    The issue may not be very easy to spot, and is most visible on viewing equipment with very deep black levels, e.g. an OLED TV. It is probably not visible much or at all when using a projector, although I did not test this. And it’s indeed almost impossible to spot on my LCD backlit monitor.
    But once one has seen the macroblocking/posterization on the right equipment, it is hard to miss and becomes extremely distracting. I shall try to take a photo of an affected scene later, to clarify what exactly I mean.

    Good compression is the art of removing a LOT of details, while making this loss not visible to a human observer. A problem only arises when the loss of detail becomes observable. In the case of Blue Velvet and Pan’s Labyrinth, this is exactly what happens.

    I am very familiar with the reviews for the Blue Velvet Blu-ray. I don’t blame most of the reviewers for not spotting this. Many Blu-ray reviews on the web are based on a fairly cursory examination. The average viewer is not trained to spot these kinds of issues. In the case of Blu-ray.com, there is a bit of a history of not addressing (sometimes very visible) Criterion issues. This is, however, sometimes discussed in their forum.
    I can provide obvious examples of sub-par discs, if desired. A particular egregious one is https://www.blu-ray.com/movies/My-Own-Private-Idaho-Blu-ray/132737; see the screenshots and the user review. Another one is the infamous https://www.blu-ray.com/movies/Mulholland-Drive-Blu-ray/68150/. There a a lot more.

    Criterion had a particularly bad period around ~2015/16 with general macroblocking. In the last year or two, their compression has gotten somewhat better, although issues remain – see above.

    Don’t get me wrong: I really like Criterion and what they are doing, have countless of their releases, and will continue buying them. But I would love them to finally admit (at least to themselves) that there are visible compression issues, and that they could do a lot better, and releasing vastly improved products in many cases.

  28. Michael Hofmann

    The particular issue on the Blue Velvet Blu-ray is e.g. also very present on their disc of Pan's Labyrinth. It affects dark low-frequency backgrounds in certain scenes (not the whole film), i.e. the high-frequency detail, which the eye is primarily drawn to, is pretty unaffected.

    I guess I'll take a closer look at Pan's Labyrinth. The DVD (which wasn't Criterion) had the worst macro blocking in the blacks I've ever seen, but I don't make a habit of looking for problems unless they hit me over the head. That one definitely hit me over the head. I've only watched the Criterion BR once, but nothing jumped out at me. I viewed it on a plasma, so it should reveal anything that's wrong. Again, I want to enjoy movies, and I don't look for problems. If I can't avoid noticing any, then that's a different issue.

  29. Or maybe we are being epicly trolled. Look, you are entitled to your opinions @Michael Hofmann but you aren't going to find a lot of support for them here. Pixel peeping obsession might find a foothold at other sites but we're not about that here.

    The examples you have listed are FINE for the vast majority of viewers.

  30. Michael Hofmann

    Many Blu-ray reviews on the web are based on a fairly cursory examination. The average viewer is not trained to spot these kinds of issues.

    I find this to be a deeply offensive comment to make regarding HTF reviews.

    I am a reviewer here and this sentence in no way describes my review process, nor the process of anyone else that I've worked with here. It's insulting to have what amounts to at least 10+ hours of work per title, provided on a volunteer basis, dismissed as a "fairly cursory examination".

  31. I have many Criterion discs on dvd & Blu-ray and rarely do I notice a issue with the image. Maybe looking back on some of the very early releases but I believe Criterion does it's best to provide the best picture possible.

  32. > Or maybe we are being epicly trolled. Look, you are entitled to your opinions
    > but you aren’t going to find a lot of support for them here.
    > Pixel peeping obsession might find a foothold at other sites but we’re not about that here.

    My intention is in no way to troll. And I’m not pixel peeping either, I’m just trying to point out what I perceive as pretty strong deficiencies of Criterion discs. And I am not the only person — just have a look around on other forums. The macroblocking of Mulholland Drive, for example, has been discussed at length elsewhere. It’s not that this is totally unknown and I’m just making this up.

    > I find this to be a deeply offensive comment to make regarding HTF reviews.
    > I am a reviewer here and this sentence in no way describes my review process

    I’m sorry if you find my remark strong. I wasn’t necessarily talking about this site here. You’ll have to admit that there are *many* review sites out there that don’t even look at the disc properly.

  33. Michael Hofmann

    […]I'm just trying to point out what I perceive as pretty strong deficiencies of Criterion discs. And I am not the only person — just have a look around on other forums. […]

    Just look around on the other forums and it is doubtful that Michael Hofmann will find a Criterion podcast on any of those other sites.
    Look, Mr. Hofmann, I am entirely open to critiques and criticisms; but there's a right time and a right place for it.
    This particular thread is the end result of something pretty darned special and neat, which took months to put together; as arranged by Ronald Epstein, Brian Dobbs and Sam Posten. The Criterion Collection opened their doors to us and permitted the membership to ask their questions. And the actual interview; for whatever you disagree with or not; was an entirely open and generous gift. As a new HTF member, you certainly seemed to have zeroed in this upbeat thread. Deficiencies can be addressed; IMHO; on a disc by disc basis where such films are reviewed. But why this thread? And why on your first 3 messages as a new member? There are certainly better ways to introduce yourself. Be Kind – Please Rewind.

  34. PMF

    I wholeheartedly agree with Message #46, as posted by atcolomb.:thumbs-up-smiley:

    You can't make everyone happy. And some people like to make themselves important by bitching about stuff that nobody else is. Not saying that's what's happening here, but there's plenty of examples on the internet.

  35. Please apologize my blunt European attitude, but I don’t understand why a reasonable discussion about issues with some Criterion discs can’t be had, even and maybe *especially* here.
    I initially only said that I’m disappointed by a particular answer from Lee Kline, who has provided the community of cinephiles a fantastic service over the years – let’s not underestimate that! I guess I’m particularly disappointed because the issue was seemingly addressed in the interview, which is generally great and an admission that some things might be amiss, only for it to be dismissed quickly along the lines of “if Criterion has determined that they’re happy, then everything is fine.” The main thing I’m trying to say is that it’s not. 🙂 And apologies again, but I take slight offense at calling my discussion ‘bitching about’, because that’s what I’m definitely not intending to do.

    I’m also by far not the only one mentioning these issues. For Pan’s Labyrinth, several others have expressed concern e.g. in this thread on the blu-ray.com forum: https://forum.blu-ray.com/showthread.php?t=306991. Or here: https://forum.blu-ray.com/showthread.php?t=278807&page=36.
    Seriously, on a properly calibrated OLED, this issue of swirling dark macroblocks is incredibly distracting and can ruin the movie experience. Just look at the top left quadrant here: https://caps-a-holic.com/c.php?go=1&a=0&d1=8960&d2=8962&s1=86196&s2=86229&i=8&l=0. There are no such issues on the much better encoded UK disc (2016 re-release by Studio Canal).
    A very similar thing is happening on some scenes on the Blue Velvet Blu-ray, and trust me, it’s no fun to spot. Again, discussed at length on the internet; this is just of the less complain-y example posts: https://forum.blu-ray.com/showpost.php?p=16468122&postcount=481.
    Major issues with other discs, such as Mulholland Drive or My Own Private Idaho are well documented. And the list goes on; these are just some of the examples where things are particularly problematic.

    Look, I have been buying somewhere northwards of 150 Criterion Blu-ray releases, so it’s not like I’m not invested in the company’s output or wouldn’t care. I would really just like them to be able to improve. For them to be aware that there *is* an issue is a necessary first step. And bad compression is in theory much, much easier to fix than a bad master, or a botched restoration. “Just” re-encode properly, and everyone will be happy. The fact that their compression is consistently a bit dodgy points to a sub-par authoring house. Criterion could fix this, if they wanted to.

  36. Michael Hofmann

    […]And apologies again, but I take slight offense at calling my discussion 'bitching about', because that's what I'm definitely not intending to do.[…]

    Maybe it would be more along the lines of "fair" to suggest that your discussion is akin to being the beating of a dead horse.

    It's not that we at HTF are afraid to address specific issues with a realistic and diagnostic eye; as we are not. But to my view, this particular thread is more along the lines of a celebration and thank you towards 6 individuals who made this fantastic 90+ minute interview possible. On the HTF side of this effort was co-owner Ronald Epstein, Podcast co-host Brian Dobbs and Moderator Sam Posten who guided the interview that you had heard. On the Criterion side of this effort was Technical director Lee Kline, Producer Abbey Lustgarten and Audio Supervisor Ryan Hullings.

    I imagine a great deal of time, planning and negotiations were put into this generous gift that was delivered to the HTF membership; which included the very open gesture of their answering so many of our questions. It's unfortunate that you hadn't joined HTF in the many weeks beforehand, as you, too, would have had the same and equal opportunity to post all of your questions concerning Blue Velvet, compression issues and macroblocking. But being that you did miss that train, perhaps you should write The Criterion Collection directly; or simply make your points on the specific threads that reviews these very films, discs and transfers. It is one thing for our eyes and ears to catch alleged defects in the comforts of our home theater systems; and for all I know you may be right on a few; but to throw out the baby with the bathwater through suggesting that The Criterion Collection doesn't care is more than reaching.

    With the greatest of certainties, I believe that Criterion is as passionate about film as we the home viewers are; and unless one is actually practicing in these fields of restoration, digital clean-ups and the likes, it becomes a bit galling to read the same complaint from someone who hasn't actively marinated themselves in the process of doing the same, for such a goodly many years. Being in the trenches and the giving of your best must be a disheartening experience when besieged with criticisms by those whom had never been beset by a daily set of conscientious minutia on one side, while also being subjected to an all but certain fate and barrage of slings and arrows from the other.

    Yes, we can diagnostically split those hairs; as it is so very important to do; but once in a while the long-term commitment and services from such a group as Criterion requires an overall round of applause, appreciation and gratitude – without qualification.

  37. My first Criterion I ever bought was back in the mid 1990's and it was Renoir's The Rules of the Game on laserdisc. Still have it along with my other 200 Criterion lasers and still play them.

  38. OK, I finally sat down and took a close look at the Criterion BR of Pan's Labyrinth. My HT is in the basement, with 100% light control. I'm playing the disc in my Oppo BDP-103, and since the Panasonic plasma is capable of 24P playback, that's what the Oppo is set for, and my Marantz AV7703 has all video processing disengaged. So, as far as I know, this is as close to zero processing going on as possible.

    I looked at several dark scenes, especially the final encounter between Ofelia and the faun at the end of the movie. I eventually cranked up the brightness from the (calibrated) 60 all the way to 90, in case it brought something out that's on the fringe.

    I see nothing. No speckles. No blocking. Nothing that shouldn't be there. Some people might complain that there's a lack of shadow detail, but I can only guess that's how the movie was shot. That final sequence is where the DVD (which was NOT Criterion) had particular problems. It was really awful, in fact.

    So, in my book, this is put to rest. I'll make an effort to look for problems for a while when I watch Criterion discs, but I see nothing at all wrong with Pan's Labyrinth.

  39. I have yet to observe anything problematic in those discs.

    There are so many places in the chain where artifacts can be introduced to the display that aren't present on the disc.

    For instance, if you're viewing these on a 4K/UHD monitor, something has to upscale that 1080p signal to 4K. Depending on what equipment you have and how its set up, that conversion could be done by your disc player, by your receiver, by your television or by some unholy combination of those entities. And it's certainly within the realm of possibility that any one of those upscaling devices could be introducing artifacts as it attempts to output a lower resolution signal onto a higher resolution display.

  40. Josh Steinberg

    I have yet to observe anything problematic in those discs.

    There are so many places in the chain where artifacts can be introduced to the display that aren't present on the disc.

    For instance, if you're viewing these on a 4K/UHD monitor, something has to upscale that 1080p signal to 4K. Depending on what equipment you have and how its set up, that conversion could be done by your disc player, by your receiver, by your television or by some unholy combination of those entities. And it's certainly within the realm of possibility that any one of those upscaling devices could be introducing artifacts as it attempts to output a lower resolution signal onto a higher resolution display.

    That’s exactly why I specified the details of my playback. Not even 3:2 pull down.

  41. JohnRice

    That’s exactly why I specified the details of my playback. Not even 3:2 pull down.

    Exactly – I don't think by and large that it's a global problem with the discs. I think it's a local problem with how playback equipment is interacting.

  42. In defense of Michael Hoffman, I agree that Criterion's compression has been problematic in some instances. There have been instances where fine compression artefacts are evident on Criterion discs yet absent on corresponding UK versions of the same transfer, eg. Time Bandits. I'm sure that David Mackenzie would back this up – he is one of the best in the business at the intricacies of encoding.

    This is not to say that these encoding problems are always detrimental to the viewing experience. I would say that the superior source material and all of the other work that Criterion puts into their releases makes them the preferred version to watch in most cases.

  43. PMF

    (…) the long-term commitment and services from such a group as Criterion requires an overall round of applause, appreciation and gratitude – without qualification.

    Sure they do. But they also deserve constructive criticism where it is due, in the hope that their encoding process will improve.

    Josh Steinberg

    There are so many places in the chain where artifacts can be introduced to the display that aren't present on the disc.

    I agree, but my equipment is set up to minimize this kind of processing, and, since I know a thing about image processing and video compression or two, I'm very confident that these kinds of artifacts are not introduced by anything in the chain. Output device is a calibrated LG OLED, where the banding/macroblocking artifacts on some of the above mentioned Criterion discs are revealed more so than on other equipment (e.g. they're far less visible on any output device that's backlit, or has a higher black level lower bound).

    But that doesn't change the fact that they're there. They're the artifact of a compression algorithm (or setting) that assumed this loss of detail would never be visible to a viewer. Other people see them, too: https://www.blu-ray.com/movies/Pans-Labyrinth-Blu-ray/156565/#UserReviews.

    bugsy-pal

    There have been instances where fine compression artefacts are evident on Criterion discs yet absent on corresponding UK versions of the same transfer (…)

    Thanks for backing me up — indeed that is the case. Actually, it is the case on many, many Criterion discs. On some of those, the problems only become apparent when pixel peeping, so the overall viewing experience is not compromised. But on many others, these artifacts are clearly visible in motion, and at regular viewing distances.

    Another example: Don't Look Now. People have praised the grain structure, and yes, it's much better than the previously DNR'd-to-hell UK disc. But what people think is grain actually contains myriads of tiny compression artifacts on the Criterion disc; see e.g. https://www.blu-ray.com/movies/screenshot.php?movieid=42646&position=12. All these small square blocks with chroma noise are actually visible in motion! A proper grain structure would look much better.
    And if someone thinks this (https://www.blu-ray.com/movies/screenshot.php?movieid=132737&position=9) is a beautiful sky, then I cannot help them. 😀

    That said, these kinds of compression artifacts are a somewhat different problem than the banding/macroblocking in dark scenes (Pan's Labyrinth, Blue Velvet, …), which only shows intermittently on some discs, and only on equipment that brings these flaws to light.

    bugsy-pal

    I'm sure that David Mackenzie would back this up – he is one of the best in the business at the intricacies of encoding.

    Yes. I don't know David personally, but I'm 100% convinced he would back me up, including my opinion on the Pan's Labyrinth disc. (I'm just not sure if he'd want to, since that would mean publicly criticizing the competition.) Is he on this forum?

    Cheers,
    Michael

  44. If you're seeing something on your display then it's there from your perspective. If people are not seeing the same thing on their displays then the same is true for them too. It sounds to me like you guys should agree to disagree because you're not going to change each other's mind. Opinions vary and people can discuss the differences in opinion, but most of the time in these kind of disc discussions, opinions don't usually change from one perspective to the contrary one.

  45. Robert Crawford

    It sounds to me like you guys should agree to disagree because you're not going to change each other's mind

    Unfortunately it does not work like that when it comes to provable technical shortcomings; it's not an opinion, or, say, a discussion about religion. And I have tried to give ample evidence that it's not just my own opinion.

    I do understand that some people may not see these artifacts as clearly. This can be due to their equipment tending to hide these technical flaws (yes, I'm serious about this), or it can be due to them not really knowing what to look for.
    Example for the latter: A few years ago, lots of reviews raved about the "intact grain structure" of certain Italian film masters from LVR, to my strong dismay. Today, after several releases from fresh scans saw the light, it's a widely recognized fact it was all just ugly scanner noise.
    There might still be a lot of confusion today about what a well-mastered film should look like.

    I truly wish a community of what I thought were technically minded home theater enthusiasts would take these kinds of quality issues more seriously. I also remain disappointed with Criterion for not taking their compression issues more seriously. And since I don't want to debate against further semi-hostile comments, this shall be my last comment on this matter.

  46. Michael Hofmann

    Unfortunately it does not work like that when it comes to provable technical shortcomings; it's not an opinion, or, say, a discussion about religion. And I have tried to give ample evidence that it's not just my own opinion.

    I do understand that some people may not see these artifacts as clearly. This can be due to their equipment tending to hide these technical flaws (yes, I'm serious about this), or it can be due to them not really knowing what to look for.
    Example for the latter: A few years ago, lots of reviews raved about the "intact grain structure" of certain Italian film masters from LVR, to my strong dismay. Today, after several releases from fresh scans saw the light, it's a widely recognized fact it was all just ugly scanner noise.
    There might still be a lot of confusion today about what a well-mastered film should look like.

    I truly wish a community of what I thought were technically minded home theater enthusiasts would take these kinds of quality issues more seriously. I also remain disappointed with Criterion for not taking their compression issues more seriously. And since I don't want to debate against further semi-hostile comments, this shall be my last comment on this matter.

    Well, have it your way then and I'm sorry we didn't measure up to your home theater enthusiast expectations.

  47. Robert Crawford

    Well, have it your way then and I'm sorry we didn't measure up to your "home theater enthusiast" expectations.

    Thanks! Allow me a very last comment.

    Pan's Labyrinth, Blu-ray edition from the Trilogia de Guillermo Del Toro. Cat. no. CC2686BD-3. Photo of my LG E6 OLED TV. Pretty much the first scene at 02:24. I didn't have to look far.
    [​IMG]

    If this is not really bad macroblocking, then I don't know what is. Just one example of many, but a particularly egregious one. Effect is only slightly exaggerated due to choice of camera exposure. Black levels of this disc are milky, but this is not really what I'm complaining about.
    And before people tell me that there's something wrong with my equipment: 1) Look at the disc more closely. The artifacts are there. 2) The UK 2016 release (compressed by David Mackenzie, from what I've heard) has no such issues. 3) All properly mastered Blu-rays have no such issues.

    Thanks for reading. 🙂 More comments only when explicitly invited.

  48. OK, I took an even more in-depth look at Pan's Labyrinth. I played the exact same sequence at the beginning of the film as the recent post. I played it at regular speed. I played it frame-by-frame, repeatedly. I used calibrated brightness. I turned up the brightness. I tried both copies I have, because I had bought the single release before I got the three movie set, and I still have the single release.

    Then I tried all of this… again… on my cheap living room system that has an old, low end Panasonic BR player and a new $200ish TCL 43" 5 Series UHD. I wanted to see how its low-end upscaling would do. No upscaling with the player, and scaling is deactivated in the Marantz SR7012 receiver. (The video in that system is cheap, the audio is not.) I went through the entire process again. FWIW, I can definitely see the full shadow detail on both TVs.

    I looked and looked, wanting to find something wrong. There was ZERO blocking. None. Anywhere. Not even a hint.

    Clearly there are people who are experiencing blocking, but I am positively confident it is NOT on the disc. My only guess is… maybe it's sharpening. Maybe. I despise any amount of artificial sharpening, so I try to find the "null" setting on my TVs. That's the only guess I can make, but clearly something is happening with some people's systems. It is NOT on the disc.

    I am truly putting this out of my mind so I can just enjoy some movies.'

    One other thought, both systems are wired entirely with new, certified high-speed Monoprice hdmi cables.

  49. If anyone is curious, this should be the answer.

    I missed the detail that Michael is in Europe, which uses PAL. North America uses NTSC. What's important with that is black levels. NTSC has a "blacker than black" region, which PAL doesn't. In other words, with 8 bit digital video, which has levels from 0-255, NTSC black is at 16. Everything below 16, logically, is also black. In PAL, black is at 0. After taking a direct, digital capture from Pan's Labyrinth and manipulating it in Photoshop, I found there was blocking, but it's entirely in the 0-15 "blacker than black" range. So, it's invisible on a properly calibrated for NTSC monitor. There was also ZERO film image in the 0-15 area. There were only blocks. No grain, no details at all.

  50. Spine 1000- Yayyyyyyyy!

    I hate to gripe but I wish if it could have been all Kaiju from Toho. Therefore no Mothra Nor Rodan standalones included.
    Nonetheless I am totally psyched!!

  51. JohnRice

    If anyone is curious, this should be the answer.

    I missed the detail that Michael is in Europe, which uses PAL. North America uses NTSC. What's important with that is black levels. NTSC has a "blacker than black" region, which PAL doesn't. In other words, with 8 bit digital video, which has levels from 0-255, NTSC black is at 16. Everything below 16, logically, is also black. In PAL, black is at 0. After taking a direct, digital capture from Pan's Labyrinth and manipulating it in Photoshop, I found there was blocking, but it's entirely in the 0-15 "blacker than black" range. So, it's invisible on a properly calibrated for NTSC monitor. There was also ZERO film image in the 0-15 area. There were only blocks. No grain, no details at all.

    That makes total sense to me.

  52. Sam Posten

    That makes total sense to me.

    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.

  53. Worth

    But the specs for HD video are the same in Europe and North America, aren't they? So any PAL versus NTSC differences wouldn't apply to 1080/24 video.

    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.

    One extensive article I read commented that higher end current TVs tend to have two options of where black is set. It says they tend to call them "Extended" and "Limited" and that people incorrectly set it to "Extended " because why would you set it to "Limited" if you didn't know better.

    What I do know is that my plasma doesn't display blacker than black, where the CRT before it could, if incorrectly calibrated. That's why the noise doesn't show up, regardless of how high I set the brightness.

    The bottom line is, I find it absolutely impossible to believe Criterion would make such an obvious mistake as to master the noise into the proper range of the image. I have determined it is there, but it is definitely outside the range of what is supposed to be visible. That's supported by the fact that it is not visible with the vast majority of TVs. Including TVs of those here on HTF, most of which have been calibrated at least with a calibration disc. I'm trying to find the explanation why some people can see it one their monitors. Improper calibration is the most likely culprit. I'm just trying to come up with a specific explanation of what the specific mis-calibration is.

  54. Could be maybe be a side effect of a TV in a PAL region needing to have settings that work with both HD and PAL? That some calibration that’s ideal for the PAL signal is still sticking around when it’s displaying HD?

  55. Josh Steinberg

    Could be maybe be a side effect of a TV in a PAL region needing to have settings that work with both HD and PAL? That some calibration that’s ideal for the PAL signal is still sticking around when it’s displaying HD?

    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.

    Again, the bottom line is that there are Criterion titles that have blocking (at least Pan's Labyrinth) in a very narrow area of about 8-10. Why, I don't know, and I doubt they're going to tell us. Of course, if a TV is properly calibrated for US discs, it isn't visible.

    I can post some images showing how narrow the range of the artifacts is, if anyone is interested. It's kind of interesting

  56. I feel compelled to respond here, since otherwise there's a lot of incorrect speculation going on.

    Worth

    But the specs for HD video are the same in Europe and North America, aren't they? So any PAL versus NTSC differences wouldn't apply to 1080/24 video.

    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.

    JohnRice

    One extensive article I read commented that higher end current TVs tend to have two options of where black is set. It says they tend to call them "Extended" and "Limited" and that people incorrectly set it to "Extended " because why would you set it to "Limited" if you didn't know better.

    Indeed, this is correct. Both player (or player software/graphics output on an HTPC) and output device (e.g. OLED TV) should be set to the "Limited setting" (range 16-235). If there is any mismatch, black and white level calibration will be off, and blacks will display as gray.

    All that said: Every part of my chain is set correctly in this regard (to 'limited'), brightness and contrast are set properly, and I still see lots of artifacts. However, and I agree with you there, I have looked at a few screenshots, and many of these artifacts do indeed seem to be inside the 0-16 range.

    This will require some more investigation.

    JohnRice

    The bottom line is, I find it absolutely impossible to believe Criterion would make such an obvious mistake as to master the noise into the proper range of the image. I have determined it is there, but it is definitely outside the range of what is supposed to be visible.

    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.
    Other people can see it, too, see e.g. https://forum.blu-ray.com/showpost.php?p=16666366&postcount=596 re. Blue Velvet, and I'm assuming most of them have their equipment set correctly.

    I have close to 1,000 Blu-rays, and watched hundreds of them on my OLED TV — and have not seen this kind of issue on other discs (that claim to be competently encoded), at least not as prominently.

    I still think this is pretty careless encoding/QC on Criterion's side, and it just adds to the more general compression issues that many Criterion titles have, though more in the high-frequency detail/grain structure. Funnily enough, the compression of salient high-frequency detail in Pan's Labyrinth is quite alright, though not perfect… other Criterion releases are a lot worse there.

  57. Michael Hofmann

    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.

    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 not "right fighting" here, which should be abundantly clear. I am genuinely trying to find what I can about what's going on and I have been abundantly willing to accept new information when I'm made aware of it. Please forgive me if I've had moments when there were details I was unaware of.

    As far as the range of the artifacts, which I need to state again, I put quite a bit of effort into finding, even though I doubted their existence, appear to be quite narrowly limited to the 8-11 range, and maybe less than that.

  58. Robert Crawford

    It seems like most of the comments you just quoted weren't incorrect speculation.

    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.

    JohnRice

    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.

    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.

    My wisdom is not infinite or unassailable, but fact of the matter is that quite a few people are complaining about bad compression with precisely these titles (and not with, say, 30% of all other Blu-rays, which would be much more likely with an improper setup). See e.g. my last post.

    All of these, where an output device is given, say that they're viewing on an OLED TV. You don't seem to have this type of output device, nor has anyone else so far come forward who will confirm or deny the presence of these artifacts on their OLED setup, with the color range settings in mind. That's where I'm saying that indeed more investigation is needed. Agree?

    JohnRice

    As far as the range of the artifacts, which I need to state again, I put quite a bit of effort into finding, even though I doubted their existence, appear to be quite narrowly limited to the 8-11 range, and maybe less than that.

    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.

    JohnRice

    I am not "right fighting" here, which should be abundantly clear. I am genuinely trying to find what I can about what's going on and I have been abundantly willing to accept new information when I'm made aware of it. Please forgive me if I've had moments when there were details I was unaware of.

    Sounds good. Trust me, I am too.

  59. OK, I'm going to summarize a few critical facts.

    I first looked for these artifacts on my plasma display. There are some important items to point out with that.
    1) It is calibrated
    2) The process of calibration demonstrated that is does not display anything that is blacker than black.
    3) Calibration also confirmed it displays a distinction between black and even one level above black.
    So, nothing is visible that shouldn't be, and everything that should be visible, is.
    The artifacts under discussion are not visible, ever. This made me doubt their presence.

    I hadn't been thinking about blacker than black, so I decided to explore if something was present in that area, and I found it is.

    I also looked at some other random discs, and those did NOT have similar artifacts in the blacker than black area.
    Which brings me to this statement…

    "the matter is that quite a few people are complaining about bad compression with precisely these titles (and not with, say, 30% of all other Blu-rays, which would be much more likely with an improper setup)"​

    If the artifacts don't exist on other discs, it's pretty simple to understand that they won't be visible. If they exist, aren't supposed to be visible, but are, that clearly points to incorrect calibration, which is supported by the other facts about the plasma display I first tried to find the artifacts with.

    The best I can tell regarding the artifacts with this particular title. A little speckling appears at 12, and the blocking appears at 10 and goes down to 8. None of this should be visible. BTW, it appears that current TVs, even cheap ones, tend to be pretty accurately calibrated to go to black precisely at 16, out of the box. You can adjust how fast they change from there and white levels, but were they cut off the image seems to be pretty reliable.

    Why are the artifacts even there, and does it matter? I don't know.

    Also, when I have made a statement, and with further experimentation corrected it after finding that the original statement wasn't correct, had changed at some point in time, or was incomplete, I will no longer waste my time explaining that I already modified or corrected the original statement. I will consider any further attempts to use those original statements proof of ignorance.

  60. If an 18 wheeler truck pulls up to a supermarket with a shipment filled only with eggs, what are the odds that a few of those shells might have a crack in them? For those who really need the answer to this question, the odds are good; indeed, some of those eggs are absolutely guaranteed to have a crack in them, no matter how skilled the driver may be. This is the nature of both the egg and a high volume output. Now, within this analogy, Criterion's 18-wheeler shipment has been 1,000 spines; with a complaint of only two slipped discs – or have you, two broken eggs – known as Blue Velvet and Pan's Labyrinth. Purportedly, there are a few more alleged eggs (or slipped discs) yet to be identified. But nonetheless; and in the larger scope of things, I'd say that both the hatching chickens and the spines are far more healthy than one could hope. In other words, when did this thread go from the discussions of Criterion's Podcast, overall success and goals to the minutia of a couple of titles? Glad to know that Michael Hoffman has other friends from other sites who have validated what he's seen; but why is it so imperative; if not crucial; that each and every one of us must also validate him, as well? IMHO, the theme of this thread is not about about a couple of disappointing discs; so, as I had posted last week, Mr. Hoffman may want to simply start his own thread on this topic, or post his findings on other HTF threads that are title specific or simply write Criterion directly.

  61. Criterion is releasing NOW VOYAGER! I’m so happy. But why are they releasing ALL ABOUT EVE? Is this really going to be better than the Fox version at more than double the price?

  62. Mark Cappelletty

    This is awesome — but any chance of a transcript for those of us who don't have two hours to listen to this? Thanks!

    I listen to podcasts while walking out dogs and at the gym. I will be checking this out.

  63. warnerbro

    Criterion is releasing NOW VOYAGER! I'm so happy. But why are they releasing ALL ABOUT EVE? Is this really going to be better than the Fox version at more than double the price?

    Perhaps, that last Blu-ray of "All About Eve" was at least from a 2010 transfer, so it's very possible that it could be a noticeable improvement. Also, when the Digibook was first released on 02-01-11, the MSRP was $34.99 which is five dollars cheaper than Criterion's MSRP of $39.99. This title is coming out in November which is when Barnes & Noble usually have their 50% off sale. Amazon price matches those sale prices, but it won't be $19.99 like it will be at B & N, but more like 22.99 at Amazon.

Leave a Reply