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

Notices

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 25-06-2010, 12:49   #121
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 LouBarlow View Post
Looks a lot better to me. As mentioned, they seem to have retained the detail yet eliminated the grain. Interesting.
Fingers crossed they might re-release Ghostbusters using the same remastering as this release!

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 25-06-2010, 17:50   #122
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
Sorry, still not sold on this one. There was no need to DNR it to this degree because much of the 'missing' detail on the old release is lost to the low-bitrate encode. Take that same master and simply give it some more ones and zeroes, and I'd bet cash money that there'd be a comparable level of detail between that and the 'digitally restored' version.

And some shots other than the Tussauds Arnie debacle have less fine detail. In an odd way, certain details are standing out more because the DNR has eliminated even finer detail around it, and the contrast boost has also done its bit to flatten out the darker parts and give anything brighter a bit more (ugh) 'pop'.

I'd still like to see this new version in action to make a proper judgement, mind.
Niceguygeoff is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 25-06-2010, 19:04   #123
thescrounger
Trusted User
 
thescrounger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Kent
Posts: 19,802
Thanks: 93
Thanked 27 Times in 25 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by Niceguygeoff View Post
Sorry, still not sold on this one. There was no need to DNR it to this degree because much of the 'missing' detail on the old release is lost to the low-bitrate encode. Take that same master and simply give it some more ones and zeroes, and I'd bet cash money that there'd be a comparable level of detail between that and the 'digitally restored' version.
I wouldn't take that bet.
thescrounger is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 25-06-2010, 20:13   #124
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
Well, it's a shame we're not gonna get the chance to find out.
Niceguygeoff is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 25-06-2010, 20:17   #125
Dan
Passed away :(
 
Join Date: May 2002
Posts: 18,791
Thanks: 1
Thanked 3 Times in 2 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by Psycho View Post
Fingers crossed they might re-release Ghostbusters using the same remastering as this release!

Psycho
Is the Ghostbusters blu ray crap then?
Dan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 25-06-2010, 20:21   #126
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 Dan View Post
Is the Ghostbusters blu ray crap then?
I don't think it's out yet is it?
LouBarlow is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 25-06-2010, 20:22   #127
rustybin
Xbox/PSN Tag: Rustybin69
 
rustybin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Manchester
Posts: 24,073
Thanks: 1,211
Thanked 916 Times in 487 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by LouBarlow View Post
I don't think it's out yet is it?
Yep. I've got it. Not watched it though, unsurprisingly.
rustybin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 25-06-2010, 20:23   #128
anephric
Kidney Thief
 
anephric's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Derby, UK
Posts: 22,698
Thanks: 33
Thanked 120 Times in 76 Posts
It's not "crap" just very grainy, more grainy than even an 80s film with a lot of opticals should be.
__________________
www.khaaan.com
anephric is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 25-06-2010, 20:25   #129
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 rustybin View Post
Yep. I've got it. Not watched it though, unsurprisingly.
I'm getting bed (sofa) sores.
LouBarlow is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 25-06-2010, 20:39   #130
rustybin
Xbox/PSN Tag: Rustybin69
 
rustybin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Manchester
Posts: 24,073
Thanks: 1,211
Thanked 916 Times in 487 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by LouBarlow View Post
I'm getting bed (sofa) sores.
I find I've got far more time to buy Blurays than I've got to watch them.
rustybin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 25-06-2010, 21:18   #131
Guest 69911
Trusted User
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 1,030
Thanks: 4
Thanked 1 Time in 1 Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by Niceguygeoff View Post
And some shots other than the Tussauds Arnie debacle have less fine detail. In an odd way, certain details are standing out more because the DNR has eliminated even finer detail around it, and the contrast boost has also done its bit to flatten out the darker parts and give anything brighter a bit more (ugh) 'pop'.
This is right.

There's clearly less fine detail in every single cap I've seen of the new version. I genuinely don't know where this extra detail is that people are reporting.

Anyways, I finally bought the original disc the other day, and it looks pretty damn good and I bet authentic, so thankfully we've a choice on this one.

Just in relation to Ghostbusters: the HD master has been contrast boosted, which has brought out the grain further than before.
Guest 69911 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 25-06-2010, 21:33   #132
thescrounger
Trusted User
 
thescrounger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Kent
Posts: 19,802
Thanks: 93
Thanked 27 Times in 25 Posts
There was far too much grain on Ghostbusters.
thescrounger is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 25-06-2010, 22:47   #133
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
Ghostbusters is extraordinarily grainy on Blu, no doubt. The ironic thing is that the optical shots look incredibly clean, when it really should be the other way around. (There was another movie of a similar vintage that also came out on Blu at the same time, and again the opticals in that one were remarkably clean.)
Niceguygeoff is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 25-06-2010, 23:09   #134
Psycho
Trusted User
 
Psycho's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Croydon, London
Posts: 10,159
Thanks: 817
Thanked 159 Times in 95 Posts
I'm interested to see how Aliens will look on Blu-Ray. Another grainy 80s movie. Once again, if they can remove the grain but keep the detail then it could be a good thing.

I'm not a grain hater but some films have a bit too much. Some is fine with me. I like film grain.

Psycho
__________________
Graphic Design Website: www.ph-design.co.uk
Twitter: @pHdesign2011
eBay Auctions: Nothing at the moment
Trader Feedback: Trader Feedback Thread

Last edited by Psycho; 25-06-2010 at 23:10.
Psycho is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 26-06-2010, 08:55   #135
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
Ja, I'm bricking it re: Aliens. The signs aren't good.

Last edited by Niceguygeoff; 26-06-2010 at 08:55.
Niceguygeoff is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 26-06-2010, 12:28   #136
LouBarlow
Retired Member
 
LouBarlow's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Posts: 55,655
Thanks: 923
Thanked 979 Times in 620 Posts
Can someone remind me what the problems are with the original BD of Predator as I've just watched it again and it looks great to me. Is it just a MPEG-2 paranoia or what?

I don't care what anyone says (including Robert who doesn't even have the disc) but there are no compression issues with the transfer at all. Using a different codec will not magically bring out more detail. If the first disc had artefacts resulting from a low bit-rate, then I can see why using a more efficient codec would have been an issue, but it doesn't.

Give me an MPEG2 transfer over a smeary AVC encode any day...

Last edited by LouBarlow; 26-06-2010 at 12:35.
LouBarlow is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 26-06-2010, 12:41   #137
Guest 69911
Trusted User
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 1,030
Thanks: 4
Thanked 1 Time in 1 Post
I do have the disc Columbo.
Guest 69911 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 26-06-2010, 13:07   #138
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
I do have the disc Columbo.


So you went out and bought it, despite claiming it had a poorly compressed transfer and despite saying you were going to wait until you had seen the new one? Fair play.

What problems do you have with the old disc then, now you have actually seen it in action, rather than judging via screengrabs alone?
LouBarlow is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 26-06-2010, 13:32   #139
Guest 69911
Trusted User
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 1,030
Thanks: 4
Thanked 1 Time in 1 Post
What are you talking about?

Just because I recognised a flaw *obviously* does not mean I wrote the transfer off.

In motion it looks just like the caps suggest: film-like, grainy with some definite compression artefacts.

I've seen the caps for the new edition and the transfer looks clearly digital and like ****. The only people who claim you need to see such an obviously manipulated image in motion are nervous studio people and shills looking to defend their product against damaging word of mouth.
Guest 69911 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 26-06-2010, 13:39   #140
LouBarlow
Retired Member
 
LouBarlow's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Posts: 55,655
Thanks: 923
Thanked 979 Times in 620 Posts
I'm talking about the first page where you said you were holding off from buying the original disc. Now you have bought it, I merely asked for your opinion on it, as I, as well as every reviewer who has analysed the disc, see no mpeg artefacting.

People suffer from MPEG2 paranoia, but if you take that master, and compress using AVC on the one hand, and MPEG2 on the other, and set a 25GB cap, they would look identical for a movie of this length.
LouBarlow 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 09:37.


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