Robert A. Harris lists his "quality" Blu-ray discs

[AaronSCH]

Originally Posted by dakota81

...That AVS thread has distorted so many forum dweller's opinions in the wrong way. ...

Yes, that's really the point here. some of these people will never be satisfied. I totally agree that the studios should strive to deliver the very best that Blu-ray has to offer and I happen to be one of the few who believes they generally do (and for all of you "selective" readers out there, generally DOES NOT mean all of the time). Their catalogs are cash cows and there is a lot of future growth in Blu-ray—believe me, they don't want to botch it. However, sometimes cost and return on investment will dictate how much they are willing to invest in any given title. Like it or not, they are in business to make a profit.

While attending college, I remember being exposed to films like Hitchcock's "The 39 Steps" for the first time. It was scratchy, broken perfs would cause the scene to jump and there were any number of imperfections that could have marred the enjoyment of the film—but they didn't. I was transfixed. The point here isn't that I would accept a shoddy looking transfer on Blu-ray, but that many of these people are so removed from reality that it isn't about their appreciation of the motion picture as much as preoccupation with the elements and equipment designed to present them.

[GGX]

Originally Posted by AaronSCH

Yes, that's really the point here. some of these people will never be satisfied. I totally agree that the studios should strive to deliver the very best that Blu-ray has to offer and I happen to be one of the few who believes they generally do (and for all of you "selective" readers out there, generally DOES NOT mean all of the time). Their catalogs are cash cows and there is a lot of future growth in Blu-ray—believe me, they don't want to botch it. However, sometimes cost and return on investment will dictate how much they are willing to invest in any given title. Like it or not, they are in business to make a profit.

While attending college, I remember being exposed to films like Hitchcock's "The 39 Steps" for the first time. It was scratchy, broken perfs would cause the scene to jump and there were any number of imperfections that could have marred the enjoyment of the film—but they didn't. I was transfixed. The point here isn't that I would accept a shoddy looking transfer on Blu-ray, but that many of these people are so removed from reality that it isn't about their appreciation of the motion picture as much as preoccupation with the elements and equipment designed to present them.

I think the guys at AVS have a point to a degree. Why not always strive to have the best possible presentation of a movie as possible? If not getting the best aspect of a film in all regards is not of the utmost concern then why even be in this hobby seriously?

Sure the movie itself is always the most important aspect but if it ended there I would just stick to DVD.

Why give the studios a pass for any flaws that are evident as fixable? So we can buy it again with a re-release down the line?

[Joe Cain]

Originally Posted by GGX

Why give the studios a pass for any flaws that are evident as fixable?

Who's qualified to determine what constitutes a flaw, and what's fixable?

[GGX]

Originally Posted by Joe Cain

Who's qualified to determine what constitutes a flaw, and what's fixable?

So we blindly accept what they are giving us as 100% perfect?

[Penton-Man]

Originally Posted by AaronSCH

You know Penton, I wonder if this type of nit-picking will have the studios ignoring some genuine issues regarding their future releases.

It’s not just the nit-picking, it’s also the disingenuous unbalanced internet campaigns waged by some that love to whine, complain etc. and veil it under some elitist high-brow notion that they love film. DNR and EE is just the current flavor, the last was BD50 replication problems.

You know what people truly, truly love film?
Not the online amateur digital video janitors that can’t watch a Blu-ray movie for more than 15min. or so without posting something negative about it on the internet or posting a forensic screenshot.
It’s the guys and gals working in the industry that have met and spent time over the years with indie filmmakers to offer advice……and that’s indies that have shot in only 16mm. or Super8 before digital cameras became so high quality and affordable.
It’s guys and gals that voluntarily serve on highly technical committees associated with the movie industry or film preservation (on their own time).
Its guys and gals in the industry that serve as visiting Professors for film schools such as U.C.L.A., etc.
It’s hobbyists that rent or buy a DVD or Blu-ray and get so engrossed with the film that unless it is a total abysmal visual or audio abomination (which is few and far between) finish the movie (if it met their particular tastes regarding storyline, character development, etc.) with a happy smile on their face for having left the real world for 2 hours of escapism.

Not the online fanatics constantly hyping to the nth degree whatever is negative about an anomalous Blu-ray, DVD or whatever the next generation home media version of a motion picture brings us. You will never satisfy those people because they are inherently unhappy individuals to begin with.

Bill Hunt recently posted a very significant response to me that some here may have missed or just glanced over………..
http://forum.blu-ray.com/showpost.ph...postcount=2276

^
The key sentences being……..
“I agree that the situation was getting a bit out of hand and that it wasn't helping matters any.”
and -
”Especially after the format war, the studios really don't think much of the boards by and large.”
The above ^ is absolutely true and the reason is because it is believed that there is no real sincerity or proportionate input in regards to deficiencies regarding the format. The studio people not only don’t or very rarely read the forums anymore but, they don’t want to even know what is being posted on any of the forums anymore because it is so grossly inaccurate or over-exaggerated…………….and often times just plain technically incorrect.

[Penton-Man]

Originally Posted by GGX

I can't help but think you are trying to tell me that there is no such thing as a bad Blu-ray transfer. It's all in people's heads and Blu-ray can do no wrong...

Did I say that?
I am trying to educate you as to why digital processing is sometimes utilized during the DI process with specific, highly detailed examples and why it has been used prior to Blu-ray compression in a case that I have first-hand knowledge of.

I thought you would be appreciative of the information, apparently not.

Of course there have been “bad” Blu-ray transfers.
There was also an HD DVD called Spartacus which is somewhere on the latest AFI Top 100 list that looked *very bad* on HD home media. I don’t even think that Gangs of New York or Patton are on the latest Top 100 list, are they ?

More importantly, was there an appropriately proportionate outcry all over the internet regarding the POS known as Spartacus as there was with Patton or GoNY ?
And by the time that Spartacus streeted, the respective studio had previously also offered to the public some superb looking HD DVD’s, so there was really no *learning curve* involved.

[Penton-Man]

Originally Posted by AaronSCH

.......that I titled, "Rantings of the Lunatic Fringe." It was the first time since the height of the format war that I left a post at AVS Forum. Film Mixer said he had been in the hospital for 13 days and the strip brought a smile to his face.

I'm sorry to hear that (the hospital part, not the smile you put on his face ).
He's a good man.

[GGX]

Originally Posted by Penton-Man

Did I say that?
I am trying to educate you as to why digital processing is sometimes utilized during the DI process with specific, highly detailed examples and why it has been used prior to Blu-ray compression in a case that I have first-hand knowledge of.

I thought you would be appreciative of the information, apparently not.

I can appreciate the info. When I read your posts I couldn't help but get the feeling that you think the studios can do no wrong. Like there is a good reason for every bit of DNR and EE on every Blu-ray transfer. That's just how you have come off to me.

If I come off as one of the "inherently unhappy individuals" that's your prerogative. I can tell you that my goal comes down to wanting the most accurate transfer as possible (within the limits of the Blu-ray medium of course). I regard all aspects of a film as important because I love this hobby so damn much.

[Clark Kent]

While I like checking out Xylon's screen caps I would never judge a Blu-ray based on them. Picture quality is really something that has to be judged on a calibrated display or projection to be seen in person. I do think Penton is right that several of the more strident posters about DNR over at AVS are from the losing side of the format war. People went way overboard on the Patton thing.

[GGX]

Originally Posted by Clark Kent

People went way overboard on the Patton thing.

No way. Patton looks good in its current state but it would look so much better without all the excessive DNR. Why would you need to add DNR to a 65mm film anyway?

[Cinema Squid]

Originally Posted by Penton-Man

Not the online fanatics constantly hyping to the nth degree whatever is negative about an anomalous Blu-ray, DVD or whatever the next generation home media version of a motion picture brings us. You will never satisfy those people because they are inherently unhappy individuals to begin with.

Originally Posted by Penton-Man

The studio people not only don’t or very rarely read the forums anymore but, they don’t want to even know what is being posted on any of the forums anymore because it is so grossly inaccurate or over-exaggerated…………….and often times just plain technically incorrect.

I am only quoting this part of your post, but I did read it all (and many of your other posts) and I understand and respect your point of view as member of the industry. However, if the studios are taking a dismissive attitude towards complaints that are laced with hyperbole and/or inaccuracies then that is truly a shame - especially since these drawbacks to discourse are a long-standing tradition of the Internet experience and it should come as no surprise that much of the surface noise must be disregarded to get to the signal.

The home theater experience is not the sole domain of the film-lover, but also the domain of the technology enthusiast and gadget geek. You will find different mixtures of these two approaches in each individual, but a stronger technological orientation has to be expected online and the "amateur digital video janitor" can still love film while dissecting the innards of the delivery format to find potential shortcomings.

Perhaps the case against certain titles is too strongly stated, but there is no doubt that there are some releases that are clearly less than they could have been and amateur eyes and ears have been without a doubt the most reliable source for discovering this.

[Alan Gordon]

Originally Posted by GGX

I can't help but think you are trying to tell me that there is no such thing as a bad Blu-ray transfer. It's all in people's heads and Blu-ray can do no wrong...

When I first got into HDM, I got into HD DVD (not my first choice, but I decided to go that way after reading other posts on AVSForum). After I got my HD DVD player, I was disappointed by a lot of the titles I had as my expectations were too high. I also ran with misconceived notions ("grain equals bad", etc) and expected every film to look like demo material. For instance, one title I had, "The Break-Up" (Universal) looked just slightly better than the DVD to me (with outdoor scenes getting the most improvement), but I later learned that the film probably had a VERY good transfer... and just wasn't a film that could be considered "demo" material. Of course, I also hated the film, but I give the HD DVD credit now.

I do believe there are people out there still operating under misconceived notions as well (this goes for both sides of the topic), people who focus on the tech specs too much (bitrate, lossless audio codec, disc size, etc) as a way to "categorize" a title, some who look for ANY defect as a sign of weakness, and finally, something I'm sometimes guilty of myself, which is blind-eye judging a title's PQ. That's when someone, who has never seen the film theatrically, tries to judge the transfer.

The problem with doing that is that one can make themselves look like an idiot. A few months back, I ranted about WB to Bill Hunt regarding SEVERAL issues... one of which involved WB's release of "Birds Of Prey: The Complete Series" on DVD in NON-anamorphic widescreen. Of course, TVShowsOnDVD.com recently posted a review of the series set... explaining WHY it was non-anamorphic. Now, I'm just glad to have the series at all. A similar issue is with the rumor that S2 of "Everwood" will soon be released on DVD, but it's possible that it will be released with some music replaced. This is disappointing, but as someone who wants to own the entire series, and who thought the series might never progress beyond S1, I'm thrilled about the news...

... and yet I see people complaining about some of the silliest things. Sure, I understand the complaints about "Patton", "Gangs Of New York", and "Twister" (even though the last one is the only one I've seen), as well as a few other titles, but I've also heard people complaining about/boycotting because some of the most MINISCULE details which detract nothing, or very little to the overall quality. Add to that the fact that I have MULTIPLE movies on DVD that are non-anamorphic widescreen and the studios have YET to double-dip these titles with anamorphic versions, and we have to admit that we have it pretty good the majority of the time (something that RAH mentioned in his list).

Sony: Aside from some of their earlier titles has been putting out some of the highest quality releases out there.
Disney: Aside from GONY, has been one of the most consistent, if not the most consistent studio.
Lionsgate: Who over the last year has turned in some FANTASTIC transfers.
Universal: Who has really hit the ground running on Blu-ray, and who will hopefully continue the great work.
Fox/MGM: Who has had their share of misses, but CAN offer some FANTASTIC transfers when they have a hit.
Paramount: Who also has done well since returning to the fold.

The studios have had their share of misses on DVD, and they've had their share of hits over the years, and I see no reason why this won't continue with Blu-ray, but if you listen to those who nitpick over everything, you'd think there was very few Blu-ray titles out there worth buying/watching.

~Alan

[PCiAM]

Originally Posted by Alan Gordon

When I first got into HDM, I got into HD DVD (not my first choice, but I decided to go that way after reading other posts on AVSForum). After I got my HD DVD player, I was disappointed by a lot of the titles I had as my expectations were too high. I also ran with misconceived notions ("grain equals bad", etc) and expected every film to look like demo material. For instance, one title I had, "The Break-Up" (Universal) looked just slightly better than the DVD to me (with outdoor scenes getting the most improvement), but I later learned that the film probably had a VERY good transfer... and just wasn't a film that could be considered "demo" material. Of course, I also hated the film, but I give the HD DVD credit now.

I, too, had some very high expectations when I went Blu the first time. I've also learned that even when a film sometimes may not be demo material, it's not necessarily any fault of the transfer but stems from the actual source material itself. Of course, there are also instances where some films do get bad transfers, as you go onto mention below.

A similar issue is with the rumor that S2 of "Everwood" will soon be released on DVD, but it's possible that it will be released with some music replaced. This is disappointing, but as someone who wants to own the entire series, and who thought the series might never progress beyond S1, I'm thrilled about the news...

Exactly. Dawson's Creek was a big show during my adolescence. Upon looking back, the show wasn't always great, but it holds great nostalgic value for me. When they released the seasons on DVD, almost all the music in every episode had been replaced due to copyright reasons. Being the purist that I am, I was a little upset, but moreso glad that I was still able to own all the seasons on dvd. It may not be the most ideal release, but it's the best I'm ever going to get, and I'm still thankful.

... and yet I see people complaining about some of the silliest things. Sure, I understand the complaints about "Patton", "Gangs Of New York", and "Twister" (even though the last one is the only one I've seen), as well as a few other titles, but I've also heard people complaining about/boycotting because some of the most MINISCULE details which detract nothing, or very little to the overall quality. Add to that the fact that I have MULTIPLE movies on DVD that are non-anamorphic widescreen and the studios have YET to double-dip these titles with anamorphic versions, and we have to admit that we have it pretty good the majority of the time (something that RAH mentioned in his list).

I agree with you. While some transfers warrant such criticism--I hear that Twister's transfer was botched and/or something weird was done with the transfer, a lot of the time people are nitpicking over small details. There are some films I own on Blu whose transfers aren't perfect, but it's still the very best the film has ever looked so far so I'm still thankful. I've come to realize some transfers are better than others whether that's due to the original source material (and no fault of the transfer) or whether it is actually a botched transfer. For the most part, however, I'm very happy with the few Blu Rays I've bought so far--I'm still new to Blu Ray... I've only had it about a week, and own about 7 titles so far! I don't mind people criticizing transfers at all because that's the beauty of opinion and sometimes its very warranted; however, some people appear to be nitpicking far too much.

The studios have had their share of misses on DVD, and they've had their share of hits over the years, and I see no reason why this won't continue with Blu-ray, but if you listen to those who nitpick over everything, you'd think there was very few Blu-ray titles out there worth buying/watching.

~Alan

Very true.

[AaronSCH]

Originally Posted by GGX

I think the guys at AVS have a point to a degree. Why not always strive to have the best possible presentation of a movie as possible? If not getting the best aspect of a film in all regards is not of the utmost concern then why even be in this hobby seriously?

Sure the movie itself is always the most important aspect but if it ended there I would just stick to DVD.

Why give the studios a pass for any flaws that are evident as fixable? So we can buy it again with a re-release down the line?

These people aren't making constructive criticism, they are tearing apart these releases frame by frame. And I'm sorry, but even the bad ones are nowhere near as bad as they claim. The sad truth is the studios are already weary of this. In fact, I doubt they are even gonna listen to anything except the bottom line. There is nothing reasonable in how these discs are being evaluated. In fact, if you have a differing opinion, you are told to take it to another thread. For instance, in the Longest Day thread, AVS member Matt_Stevens said the following:

Not open to debate in this thread. There is a thread set asside for folks like you who just cannot understand the issue.

Pathetic. But these days, there is growing intolerance of differing points of view regardless of the subject matter.

[mhafner]

Originally Posted by AaronSCH

Me too. I roll on the floor laughing when I read the reviews from theses guys. They seldom agree. So who do you believe? Mr. Harris initially puts Twister in the top tier of Blu-ray releases while The Digital Bits contributor, Barrie Maxwell states, "image noticeably improved over standard DVD, but is no poster child for Blu-ray." Mr. Harris puts Dark City and The Mummy in Level 1 and yet people over at AVS Forum are screaming over excessive DNR and EE in those titles. In the last few days Mr. Harris has changed his mind on certain titles and removed some from his top tier list. He even removed his original assessment of Patton. For cryin' out loud, he doesn't even agree with himself! Obviously the image didn't make THAT much of a negative impact upon him. So who are we to believe?

You don't have to believe anyone. If you are not blind you can watch the titles yourself . And if you are sufficiently interested in and experienced with the related subjects you can have a well founded opinion about them which includes the specifics of how you watched the titles (very important) and your personal likes and dislikes. You don't need anyone else's opinions on principle. And you are aware where you lack specific information and need to get it first before you proceed.

I believe most of the online critics have lost the ability to simply sit back and enjoy watching a movie—instead they've turned entertainment into some sort of film "forensics." I even question whether they watch these discs all the way through.

It would be interesting to hear back from them on this. I know I would hardly enjoy to have to watch x films a week and deliver a technical evaluation of the discs with a deadline looming over me. No job for me. I watch films to enjoy them, or be startled, pushed to think about something, have a treat, see the world, tear up, bite my nails, throw up my arms, talk to the screen (not often, though)... Cinema is an important part of my life, same as music.

I would love to get these idiots in a room and quiz them on the history of motion pictures. Rarely in these threads do you see the directors, actors, cinematography, costume design, composers, soundtracks or technical accomplishments discussed. I bet the lot of them would fail miserably. The worst offending website has to be AVS Forum. Those guys are so out of touch that they are still bogged down in the HD DVD vs. Blu-ray debate. Somebody needs to tell them the war is over. Xylon's threads would be laughable if there weren't so many who take his blown out screen captures seriously.

Nah, nah. We seem to be mighty pissed here about people that have a close look at what's on the disks. Ignore their threads then. Don't let them spoil your fun. Talking about all the artistic aspects of films has its place for sure and so do the technical aspects of films and the (HD) transfers. They are interrelated anyway. AVS is the audio video science forum, so the main focus is on technical aspects. Nothing wrong with that. Plenty of other sites where you find a different focus.

These lame-brain critics are bogged down in minutiae that few who will be buying Blu-ray discs will give a rat's ass about. And that is exactly why it is just a lot of hot air being spewed by so many people filled with self-importance. They actually see themselves in some type of elite class while everyone else is basically a sniveling gamer watching movies on their PS3s. That's priceless and quite ridiculous.

If that was all that's going on it would be. But in reality it's just part of the total output. The main targets of heavy criticism concerning technical aspects of HD transfers lately were the disks for "Patton" and "Longest Day". And since a short time "Dark City". While it's your good right to call any criticism of "Patton" and "Longest Day" dealing with minutiae most people buying Blu Rays won't give a rat's ass about (and you might even be right with the second part) I would seriously not attempt to make this a case of film lovers versus technical autistic nit pickers (or film janitors, as some other individual here calls them) since a 'true' film lover hopefully knows what his object of love looks like (and sounds like), because that is what his object of love is made of. And if he gives a rat's ass about this look he's at best a selective film lover, certainly in no position though to accuse others of not being film lovers at all. There are many kinds of (film) love and we need no love police telling us which ones are appropriate and which ones are not.
Having said that I agree that there is also criticism of disks/transfers here and on other web sites which I find inappropriate and misguided. Usually criticism which is not based on the film itself (and how it was made and meant to look) but on people's subjective ideas of how a film should look according to their tastes and preferences. I find it misguided but it's a free net and people have the right to express such views. Live and let view.

[AaronSCH]

Originally Posted by mhafner

...I find it misguided but it's a free net and people have the right to express such views. Live and let view.

Yes, and others have a right to express our own—not often tolerated at the, ahem, "Science Forum."

[4K display]

Originally Posted by Penton-Man

(snip)
”Especially after the format war, the studios really don't think much of the boards by and large.”
The above ^ is absolutely true and the reason is because it is believed that there is no real sincerity or proportionate input in regards to deficiencies regarding the format. The studio people not only don’t or very rarely read the forums anymore but, they don’t want to even know what is being posted on any of the forums anymore because it is so grossly inaccurate or over-exaggerated…………….and often times just plain technically incorrect.

I have a lot of respect for Bill and you Penton, and that will probably never change. But perhaps you two should REMIND the studio peeps that we didn't ask for a goddamn format war...

[dakota81]

Originally Posted by GGX

I think the guys at AVS have a point to a degree. Why not always strive to have the best possible presentation of a movie as possible? If not getting the best aspect of a film in all regards is not of the utmost concern then why even be in this hobby seriously?

Sure the movie itself is always the most important aspect but if it ended there I would just stick to DVD.

Why give the studios a pass for any flaws that are evident as fixable? So we can buy it again with a re-release down the line?

Define "best".

One person says "I will not buy any movie with DNR" while the next person says "I will not buy any movie with grain".

One person says "I will only buy a movie if it's in the OAR" while the next person says "I will not buy any movie with black bars".


The biggest thing I see with the AVS tier thread, isn't so much that it exists - but that many people use it really without a clue how to properly interpret that information AVS users supply.

[GGX]

Originally Posted by dakota81

Define "best".

A transfer as true to the source (master) as possible.

What one person wants it to look like is irrelevant.

[dakota81]

Originally Posted by GGX

A transfer as true to the source (master) as possible.

Would that be as true as possible to what the movie looked like the first day it was aired in theaters? Or true to what the source looks like in it's current aged condition? Do you, or people at AVS, know what the source looks like to know if it's even a satisfactory viewing experience? How can one be so sure what is best, if they have never seen the source?