Go Back   Forums @ The Digital Fix > Entertainment Discussion Forums > DVD and Blu-ray Discussion

Notices

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 12-06-2010, 16:24   #41
Guest 69911
Trusted User
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 1,030
Thanks: 4
Thanked 1 Time in 1 Post
Predator's MPEG2 encode has a bitrate of 18.91Mbps, which is definitely low for this codec with such grainy material.
Guest 69911 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-06-2010, 17:43   #42
LouBarlow
Retired Member
 
LouBarlow's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Posts: 55,655
Thanks: 923
Thanked 979 Times in 620 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by Robert S View Post
Predator's MPEG2 encode has a bitrate of 18.91Mbps, which is definitely low for this codec with such grainy material.
Still should be plenty. Comparing compressed screengrabs and claiming they prove that there must be the same issue in the actual playback, is ridiculous anyway.
LouBarlow is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-06-2010, 21:07   #43
Guest 69911
Trusted User
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 1,030
Thanks: 4
Thanked 1 Time in 1 Post
Well it's obviously not “plenty” because provenly accurate caps (or: frames of the film) show definite compression artefacts.

Not everyone notices or cares about compression artefacts in motion, but that's not the point.

Still, you might want to contact Fox, Warners, Sony et al to let them know that they've all made a huge mistake these last couple of years attempting to improve the quality of image compression on their discs.
Guest 69911 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-06-2010, 21:21   #44
LouBarlow
Retired Member
 
LouBarlow's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Posts: 55,655
Thanks: 923
Thanked 979 Times in 620 Posts
Yes because the studios certainly have proven to know what it takes when providing us with a good transfer (*cough* DNR)

Some of you never stop moaning about them!

I know plenty about compression, either through encoding myself, or reviewing discs in a past life, and just because a transfer is MPEG-2 encoded, does not mean it is automatically inferior. Mission Impossible III - great transfer, MPEG2 encode. They kept the extras to a seperate disc, and the feature itself looked great. Black Hawk Down is another - over 2 hours long, grainy as hell, and a decent transfer.

The thing AVC, and to a lesser extend VC1 previously, had going for them, was that they offered more efficiency not quality.

Last edited by LouBarlow; 12-06-2010 at 21:25.
LouBarlow is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-06-2010, 21:44   #45
Niceguygeoff
I Do Deny Them My Essence
 
Niceguygeoff's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Swanage, Dorset
Posts: 10,176
Thanks: 129
Thanked 49 Times in 30 Posts
I don't think anyone here's saying that MPEG2 is automatically inferior Lou, but with a low-ish amount of bits behind it you will get artefacts more readily than with VC1 or AVC at the same rate. Hell, most AVS'ers complain that 20mbp/s is too low for VC1, let alone MPEG2!

Throw enough bits at it and MPEG2 will look quite delicious, but Predator does not have the luxury of a roomy dual-layer presentation like MI3 or Black Hawk Down. Uber-grainy movie + inefficient MPEG2 codec + BD25 should = toss, so I'm amazed that Predator's original encode holds up as well as it does.

Last edited by Niceguygeoff; 12-06-2010 at 21:50.
Niceguygeoff is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-06-2010, 21:44   #46
Guest 69911
Trusted User
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 1,030
Thanks: 4
Thanked 1 Time in 1 Post
Black Hawk Down looks good, as does Kingdom Of Heaven, Paprika and other MPEG2 encodes. But these all have an average of bitrate of around 25.00Mbps. That makes a difference.

Last edited by Robert S; 12-06-2010 at 21:45.
Guest 69911 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-06-2010, 21:48   #47
LouBarlow
Retired Member
 
LouBarlow's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Posts: 55,655
Thanks: 923
Thanked 979 Times in 620 Posts
Fair dues.
LouBarlow is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 13-06-2010, 12:19   #48
Psycho
Trusted User
 
Psycho's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Croydon, London
Posts: 10,159
Thanks: 817
Thanked 159 Times in 95 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by Robert S View Post
It's a blocky compression artefact over actual detail. Definitely.

Have a look here for some more examples:

Predator caps comparison

Worth mentioning that the original caps are less compressed jpegs than those from the French review site, but you get the idea.
Looking at the caps there I think the new version looks good. I've only got the DVD of Predator but if I end up with the new Blu-Ray (I'll wait for the price drop) then I don't think I'll watch it thinking it looks bad.

I can easily see that the grain has been removed but I can't see that much detail (if any) being removed from the picture. The faces don't look waxy to me... I've seen caps from other Blu-Rays and agree that they do look waxy.

The only cap I've seen that does look bad (almost a Photoshop airbrushing) is the one of Arnie in the red polo shirt... I'd like to see someone else post this same cap from the new and old version just to show that the one we've seen hasn't been messed about with in Photoshop.

So, this new version gets the thumbs up from me... and I do consider myself to be a fussy person... maybe not as fussy as some!

Psycho
__________________
Graphic Design Website: www.ph-design.co.uk
Twitter: @pHdesign2011
eBay Auctions: Nothing at the moment
Trader Feedback: Trader Feedback Thread
Psycho is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 13-06-2010, 12:21   #49
Guest 69911
Trusted User
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 1,030
Thanks: 4
Thanked 1 Time in 1 Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by Psycho View Post

The only cap I've seen that does look bad (almost a Photoshop airbrushing) is the one of Arnie in the red polo shirt... I'd like to see someone else post this same cap from the new and old version just to show that the one we've seen hasn't been messed about with in Photoshop.
Yeah - I think that cap's a wind-up!

Last edited by Robert S; 13-06-2010 at 12:22.
Guest 69911 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 15-06-2010, 08:45   #50
Roberto
OMG! it's full of stars!
 
Roberto's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Londoner
Posts: 16,916
Thanks: 867
Thanked 600 Times in 252 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by Psycho View Post
Looking at the caps there I think the new version looks good. I've only got the DVD of Predator but if I end up with the new Blu-Ray (I'll wait for the price drop) then I don't think I'll watch it thinking it looks bad.

I can easily see that the grain has been removed but I can't see that much detail (if any) being removed from the picture. The faces don't look waxy to me... I've seen caps from other Blu-Rays and agree that they do look waxy.

The only cap I've seen that does look bad (almost a Photoshop airbrushing) is the one of Arnie in the red polo shirt... I'd like to see someone else post this same cap from the new and old version just to show that the one we've seen hasn't been messed about with in Photoshop.

So, this new version gets the thumbs up from me... and I do consider myself to be a fussy person... maybe not as fussy as some!

Psycho
If you look at the caps from the last page with arine's eye you'll see it actually has far more detail in the new one then the old one
__________________
Saddam✓Osama✓Gaddafi✓Kim Jong-un☐Justin Bieber☐

Last edited by Roberto; 15-06-2010 at 08:46.
Roberto is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 19-06-2010, 13:31   #51
anephric
Kidney Thief
 
anephric's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Derby, UK
Posts: 22,698
Thanks: 33
Thanked 120 Times in 76 Posts
From the caps popping up everywhere now, I wouldn't touch the new blu with a bargepole. It looks diabolical.

I'm off to hug my inferior, old, low-bitrate crappy MPEG2 encode.
__________________
www.khaaan.com
anephric is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 19-06-2010, 15:48   #52
RomerojpgX
Dead
 
RomerojpgX's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: In Hell
Posts: 10,543
Thanks: 38
Thanked 53 Times in 38 Posts
I will keep my old standard dvd myself.
RomerojpgX is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 19-06-2010, 16:08   #53
thescrounger
Trusted User
 
thescrounger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Kent
Posts: 19,802
Thanks: 93
Thanked 27 Times in 25 Posts
The french caps look fine. If you have to look a still picture blown up in order to see the DNR then it's not a big issue. Under normal conditions you'll just be watching the film. Not advancing through it frame by frame.
thescrounger is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 19-06-2010, 16:35   #54
Shingster
Trusted User
 
Shingster's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 8,464
Thanks: 492
Thanked 335 Times in 212 Posts
You're assuming everyone is going to be watching Predator on a 40-50" LCD/Plasma. If you have a large screen display then the blown up images will be more indicative of what you're seeing than a non-magnified grab on a 24" monitor.

Last edited by Shingster; 19-06-2010 at 16:36.
Shingster is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 19-06-2010, 16:41   #55
RomerojpgX
Dead
 
RomerojpgX's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: In Hell
Posts: 10,543
Thanks: 38
Thanked 53 Times in 38 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by thescrounger View Post
The french caps look fine. If you have to look a still picture blown up in order to see the DNR then it's not a big issue. Under normal conditions you'll just be watching the film. Not advancing through it frame by frame.
Could not disagree more with you, even on a 32 inch screen I can see this crap clearly with my eyes, never mind 40+ inches.

I can see it all just as much when in motion on all the dodgy quality Noise Reduced crap discs I own. So it is more down to the fact you just dont see it, when many others do. Just like some people do not see stunt doubles in films, doesnt mean they are not 100% obvious to most people.

Last edited by RomerojpgX; 19-06-2010 at 16:42. Reason: Spweliang
RomerojpgX is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 19-06-2010, 17:22   #56
thescrounger
Trusted User
 
thescrounger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Kent
Posts: 19,802
Thanks: 93
Thanked 27 Times in 25 Posts
So you think these look bad do you?

Sorry but there's a huge overreaction to this. I've seen a lot worse.
thescrounger is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 19-06-2010, 17:33   #57
Shingster
Trusted User
 
Shingster's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 8,464
Thanks: 492
Thanked 335 Times in 212 Posts
The new transfer is clearly not a terrible one, but it also clearly offers no overall improvement over the existing transfer, so really what is the point? A total waste of time and effort on the part of the distributor and a waste of money on the part of the consumer, which ultimately makes it a terrible release.

Last edited by Shingster; 19-06-2010 at 17:33.
Shingster is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 19-06-2010, 19:05   #58
thescrounger
Trusted User
 
thescrounger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Kent
Posts: 19,802
Thanks: 93
Thanked 27 Times in 25 Posts
It's not a pointless release, because to the average consumer it will look preferable to the bare bones release. You know, with all that nasty inconsistent grain gone.
thescrounger is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 19-06-2010, 19:51   #59
Shingster
Trusted User
 
Shingster's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 8,464
Thanks: 492
Thanked 335 Times in 212 Posts
I think you're completely out of touch with the average consumer, the average consumer will be on of two types: 1. Those who own the current edition and won't bother forking out for the new release unless they're hardcore fans of the film, and 2: Those who don't own the old release and given the choice will opt for the new release because it's a snazzy new "ultimate edition". All this talk about grain and compression will only be a factor to the more techno-savvy consumers.
Shingster is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 19-06-2010, 22:35   #60
thescrounger
Trusted User
 
thescrounger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Kent
Posts: 19,802
Thanks: 93
Thanked 27 Times in 25 Posts
No, the reason DNR is used on old film releases is because the 'average consumer' doesn't like grain. They think grain means the picture is bad somehow.
thescrounger is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On

Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
[PS2/XBOX] Mashed:Fully Loaded hezzer Bargain Forum 5 21-03-2005 18:03

All times are GMT. The time now is 06:58.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.9
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Copyright ©2000 - 2018 Poisonous Monkey Ltd. Part of The Digital Fix Network