Best 3D Blu-ray Deals

Best Blu-ray Movie Deals, See All the Deals »
Top deals | Price drops  
 All countries United States United Kingdom Canada Germany France Spain Italy Japan
Spider-Man: Homecoming 3D (Blu-ray)
$14.99
 
Gamer 3D (Blu-ray)
$5.00
 
Dream Big: Engineering Our World 4K (Blu-ray)
$22.96
 
Monster House 3D (Blu-ray)
$9.99
 
Katy Perry: Part of Me 3D (Blu-ray)
$7.85
 
The Amazing Spider-Man 2 3D (Blu-ray)
$10.95
 
The Great Gatsby 3D (Blu-ray)
$9.33
 
Journey to the Center of the Earth 3D (Blu-ray)
$14.99
 
Walking With Dinosaurs: The Movie 3D (Blu-ray)
$14.99
13 hrs ago
Hansel & Gretel: Witch Hunters 3D (Blu-ray)
$16.00
 
Dolphin Tale 3D (Blu-ray)
$11.99
 
Finding Nemo 3D (Blu-ray)
$24.50
 
What's your next favorite movie?
Join our movie community to find out


Image from: Life of Pi (2012)

Go Back   Blu-ray Forum > 3D > 3D Blu-ray and 3D Movies


Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 02-23-2013, 05:55 PM   #161
Paul H Paul H is online now
Blu-ray Samurai
 
Paul H's Avatar
 
Jul 2007
2
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Impossible View Post
Personally I don't care if Jesus Christ himself approved the colour timing, it looks like shit and that is all there is to it

I'm guessing Scott saw the final product around 10 days later..........
Your frustration is very understandable. The release similarities for this classic reminds me of the early days here when the 2007 Bram Stoker's Dracula BD was released.
Avatar: IMAX Header
BD 3D, BD, HD DVD, DVD collection

Last edited by Paul H; 02-23-2013 at 06:22 PM. Reason: Changed Dracula link to Post #35 specifically
  Reply With Quote
Old 02-23-2013, 06:26 PM   #162
NorthStarzz NorthStarzz is offline
New Member
 
Feb 2013
Ontario, Canada
1
Default

Wow, glad I am not alone.I just finished watching the first 30 minutes of this movie and have to say its their worst looking 3d movie I own.Never seen such a grainy picture in all my life,its like watching an old crt tv with rabbit ears and snowy picture.I had to then take it out and insert the regular blu-ray version to see if there was something wrong with my tv settings.I couldn't hardly notice any good 3d effects, its hard to believe they let this out the door,what a poor quality transfer! Don't waste your money on this, just get it on bluray,at least its clear to watch.
  Reply With Quote
Old 02-23-2013, 07:55 PM   #163
notops notops is offline
Expert Member
 
notops's Avatar
 
Sep 2010
Standing right behind you
674
1
4
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Impossible View Post
I'm sorry to keep harping on about this, but you are just wrong. This is NOT the artists intent. The film has NEVER looked like this before. It is fake grain. Fake grain has NOTHING to do with retaining detail. It is just that FAKE GRAIN.

It was DNR'd before it was converted. The detail is already GONE! No amount of added fake grain is going to get that detail back.

And even more importantly there is far less detail in the image because of background blurring of shots attributed to the 3D process and the colours and image are atrocious.

Yes the original has DNR and EE, but it is still a far more natural looking image than this digitally raped monstrosity.
Where are you getting this supposed information of yours from? Who told you it was DNR'd and then "Fake Grain" was put back in?

You are just wrong. Top Gun was filmed in the Super 35 format. In the days before DI, Super 35 movies had to do an optical blow-up in the post production process. That means what ever grain was already there in the image (plenty) gets accentuated in the blow-up. That results in more grain. I have recently seen many pre-DI Super 35 films projected in 35mm and they all look exceptionally grainy.

Tony Scott himself approved and assisted this transfer, all the way down to the "atrocious" (your words) color timing. Do you honestly think a director as seasoned as Tony Scott would just let these things slip by if they were wrong? Hardly...
  Reply With Quote
Old 02-23-2013, 08:17 PM   #164
Impossible Impossible is offline
Blu-ray Knight
 
Mar 2010
3
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by notops View Post
Where are you getting this supposed information of yours from? Who told you it was DNR'd and then "Fake Grain" was put back in?

You are just wrong. Top Gun was filmed in the Super 35 format. In the days before DI, Super 35 movies had to do an optical blow-up in the post production process. That means what ever grain was already there in the image (plenty) gets accentuated in the blow-up. That results in more grain. I have recently seen many pre-DI Super 35 films projected in 35mm and they all look exceptionally grainy.

Tony Scott himself approved and assisted this transfer, all the way down to the "atrocious" (your words) color timing. Do you honestly think a director as seasoned as Tony Scott would just let these things slip by if they were wrong? Hardly...

Well he did jump off a roof a week later which is what I felt like doing after being swindled out of £25 for this pile of shit.

Watch the VHS, watch the DVD, download it from iTunes, watch the 2D version. The film has NEVER looked like this before end of story.

I will repeat, I don't care who did what it looks like crap. If you're willing to accept mediocrity when you hand over your cash that's fine, I don't
  Reply With Quote
Old 02-23-2013, 08:59 PM   #165
Geoff D Geoff D is online now
Blu-ray Grand Duke
 
Geoff D's Avatar
 
Feb 2009
Swanage, Engerland
1340
4
5
10
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by notops View Post
Have you actually watched the Aliens BD?

I ask because it is still grainy as shit. If you think Aliens proves your point, you may want to re-evaluate what you think grain is.
Absotruthly. Yes, Jimbo did say those things about removing all the grain and whatnot, but IMO he was just trying to add some marketing sizzle for the layman to get all excited about - which worried the shit out of the rest of us. Thankfully we got Aliens looking better than it ever would've done in 1986 (teal colour revision aside), grain and all. That said...

Quote:
Originally Posted by Impossible View Post
Cameron didn't use DNR though, he developed his own method of reducing grain without removing any image detail. Aliens looks great but it is still grainy. As long as image detail isn't lost I don't really care if he wipes his arse with it.
Aliens was processed by Lowry's proprietary system, which uses DNR to blitz away everything random in the image, leaving the detail intact, and then they lay fake grain over top of it so it looks like film again. (The same process was used for Terminator and Titanic, so Cameron is definitely a fan!) Sometimes this process works incredibly well, other times it leaves nasty frozen grain artefacts and other anomalies.

I wish my Top Gun would turn up so I can finally judge it for myself!
  Reply With Quote
Old 02-23-2013, 09:58 PM   #166
boulder_bum boulder_bum is offline
Active Member
 
Aug 2010
443
1
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Geoff D View Post
Absotruthly. Yes, Jimbo did say those things about removing all the grain and whatnot, but IMO he was just trying to add some marketing sizzle for the layman to get all excited about - which worried the shit out of the rest of us. Thankfully we got Aliens looking better than Aliens was processed by Lowry's proprietary system, which uses DNR to blitz away everything random in the image, leaving the detail intact, and then they lay fake grain over top of it so it looks like film again. (The same process was used for Terminator and Titanic, so Cameron is definitely a fan!) Sometimes this process works incredibly well, other times it leaves nasty frozen grain artefacts and other anomalies.
I think if you want to know what image Cameron prefers, look at Avatar; Very clean digital video and completely grain free (the way God intended).

Regarding the Aliens remaster, I rewatched it yesterday and loved it for the most part. It doesn't have the impact and pristineness of newer films shot in digital, but it's darn good for an 80's action movie and much better video quality, IMO than films like Top Gun, which left the noise intact to appease the grain cult.

Cameron wasn't just blowing smoke up laymen's butts in talking about how he cleaned up the image.
  Reply With Quote
Old 02-23-2013, 10:36 PM   #167
slasherdisc slasherdisc is online now
Blu-ray Guru
 
slasherdisc's Avatar
 
Apr 2011
675
57
Default

Just finished watching and WOW this was an incredible 3D experience! I'm pretty sure from now on this will be my preferred viewing of Top Gun!
  Reply With Quote
Old 02-23-2013, 11:56 PM   #168
Impossible Impossible is offline
Blu-ray Knight
 
Mar 2010
3
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Geoff D View Post
Absotruthly. Yes, Jimbo did say those things about removing all the grain and whatnot, but IMO he was just trying to add some marketing sizzle for the layman to get all excited about - which worried the shit out of the rest of us. Thankfully we got Aliens looking better than it ever would've done in 1986 (teal colour revision aside), grain and all. That said...


Aliens was processed by Lowry's proprietary system, which uses DNR to blitz away everything random in the image, leaving the detail intact, and then they lay fake grain over top of it so it looks like film again. (The same process was used for Terminator and Titanic, so Cameron is definitely a fan!) Sometimes this process works incredibly well, other times it leaves nasty frozen grain artefacts and other anomalies.

I wish my Top Gun would turn up so I can finally judge it for myself!
Well I was just going by what he said at the time, that they'd worked out a way to remove all the grain, but retain the detail. I do however still think they removed a lot of grain as the bluray is nowhere near as grainy as the DVD was.

As I said early on I am using a projector with a 100' screen (as is the other person whinging the loudest lol) so the anomalies in Top Gun are magnified ten fold. Obviously it isn't as bad on smaller screens or there wouldn't be people saying it doesn't look that bad.

I had that problem with Grease which I thought looked great on my 42" plasma, but blown through my projector it looked atrocious and I took it back. My tv isn't 3D though so I can't check if it is any better on that. On another site I have seen people say the grain and colour grade looked horrible at the IMAX screenings as well.

Last edited by Impossible; 02-24-2013 at 12:02 AM.
  Reply With Quote
Old 02-24-2013, 12:55 AM   #169
notops notops is offline
Expert Member
 
notops's Avatar
 
Sep 2010
Standing right behind you
674
1
4
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Impossible View Post
Well he did jump off a roof a week later which is what I felt like doing after being swindled out of £25 for this pile of shit.

Watch the VHS, watch the DVD, download it from iTunes, watch the 2D version. The film has NEVER looked like this before end of story.

I will repeat, I don't care who did what it looks like crap. If you're willing to accept mediocrity when you hand over your cash that's fine, I don't
Comparing it to inferior formats that came before is asinine. Blu is the only format that can preserve what it actually looked like projected during it's theatrical run. If you don't like the way film looks, fine, but stop saying it has never looked this way. You obviously have not seen it on film.

All currently available versions in HD (the 2D Blu-ray, HDX on Vudu, HD on Amazon or Netflix) are based off of the DNR'd & EE'd transfer for the 2D Blu.

And the Tony Scott suicide joke... classy.

Last edited by notops; 02-24-2013 at 01:13 AM.
  Reply With Quote
Old 02-24-2013, 04:42 AM   #170
Jsmith82 Jsmith82 is offline
Expert Member
 
Jsmith82's Avatar
 
Feb 2012
Missouri, USA
59
Default

My Top Gun 3d party went awesome! Good times, good food, good drinks, and a room of stoked 80's kids.

Here's my review now that I watched the entire film: Awesome!

Most mentioned comment through said party: I can't believe Top Gun is in 3d!

And really, this was just..... Wild. It's Top Gun. In 3d! Legitimate 3d! Loved it!

About the ongoing butthurt over grain, I noticed intense grain over 2 scenes only, intro and goose's death, which his scene cut to a silky smooth grainless scene. So I do think it was an added effect, but done like the depth script (read about this conversion) - written in to the moment. Didn't bug me one bit, the movie was A ride front to back. Legend was given artistic freedom to control the 3d intensity, the grain in those 2 scenes IMO were most likely part of said freedom.

So! Awesome conversion, classic movie.. I'm pleased
Want to manually convert 2d to 3d yourself and accurately - not with an automated software? Check out my topic and tutorial here.
  Reply With Quote
Old 02-24-2013, 08:13 AM   #171
Taygan315 Taygan315 is offline
Blu-ray Samurai
 
Taygan315's Avatar
 
Aug 2012
14
10
2
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jsmith82 View Post
My Top Gun 3d party went awesome! Good times, good food, good drinks, and a room of stoked 80's kids.

Here's my review now that I watched the entire film: Awesome!

Most mentioned comment through said party: I can't believe Top Gun is in 3d!

And really, this was just..... Wild. It's Top Gun. In 3d! Legitimate 3d! Loved it!

About the ongoing butthurt over grain, I noticed intense grain over 2 scenes only, intro and goose's death, which his scene cut to a silky smooth grainless scene. So I do think it was an added effect, but done like the depth script (read about this conversion) - written in to the moment. Didn't bug me one bit, the movie was A ride front to back. Legend was given artistic freedom to control the 3d intensity, the grain in those 2 scenes IMO were most likely part of said freedom.

So! Awesome conversion, classic movie.. I'm pleased
Glad your party went well. I'm class of '86 myself,lol.

Just finished watching this as well on my projector (124"). I thought the 3D was better than average. Make no mistake....the arieal footage is what the 3D in this flick is all about....and it was awesome. Rest of the movie: some decent depth here and there and few and far between. Grain? Oh yeah....it's there. But not as much as I had read and there were many scenes where I didn't see any grain.

All in all: a good 3D conversion and not as ugly (pertaining to the grain) as you may have heard,imo. I enjoyed it and it was easily worth the $20.
PLEASE take a look at my NEW home theater gallery pics!!
  Reply With Quote
Old 02-24-2013, 09:27 AM   #172
Geoff D Geoff D is online now
Blu-ray Grand Duke
 
Geoff D's Avatar
 
Feb 2009
Swanage, Engerland
1340
4
5
10
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Impossible View Post
Well I was just going by what he said at the time, that they'd worked out a way to remove all the grain, but retain the detail. I do however still think they removed a lot of grain as the bluray is nowhere near as grainy as the DVD was.
Apples and oranges. The Aliens DVD was slathered in chunky noise from the DNR used to clean up the movie for the 1999 transfer. That's in no way comparable to the excellent high-frequency detail - inc. grain - visible on the Blu-ray, which was derived from a brand new 4K master.
Quote:
As I said early on I am using a projector with a 100' screen (as is the other person whinging the loudest lol) so the anomalies in Top Gun are magnified ten fold. Obviously it isn't as bad on smaller screens or there wouldn't be people saying it doesn't look that bad.
And then we get a comment from someone with a screen even bigger than yours who said that the grain didn't bother them. Weird, huh?

Quote:
Originally Posted by boulder_bum View Post
I think if you want to know what image Cameron prefers, look at Avatar; Very clean digital video and completely grain free (the way God intended).

Regarding the Aliens remaster, I rewatched it yesterday and loved it for the most part. It doesn't have the impact and pristineness of newer films shot in digital, but it's darn good for an 80's action movie and much better video quality, IMO than films like Top Gun, which left the noise intact to appease the grain cult.

Cameron wasn't just blowing smoke up laymen's butts in talking about how he cleaned up the image.
Avatar is what it is, digital video interspersed with entirely CG sequences shot some 12 years after Cameron lensed Titanic. On Film. Like all of his previous features. Things move on, and to use Avatar as an arbiter as to what Cameron "prefers" in reference to the look of his previous movies is utterly absurd.

I don't know if you watch everything with the noise reduction on your display whacked up to max, but the Aliens Blu-ray is grainy as ****. It's fine grain - probably not even the same as what was originally captured, owing to Lowry's degrain/regrain techniques - but the image is literally awash with the stuff. If you can stomach that, then maybe you're not so averse to grain as you first thought...

Last edited by Geoff D; 02-24-2013 at 11:36 AM.
  Reply With Quote
Old 02-24-2013, 04:12 PM   #173
Taygan315 Taygan315 is offline
Blu-ray Samurai
 
Taygan315's Avatar
 
Aug 2012
14
10
2
Default

My dad flew for the Navy so this flick always reminds me of him (RIP Dad...love you). He lost a good friend and fellow pilot attempting to land on a sea carrier...just like you see in the movie. He missed the line and went over the ship. My dad would tell me he used to drink with some of the Blue Angels as well.

Yeah...this movie is always a pleasure to see for me.
PLEASE take a look at my NEW home theater gallery pics!!
  Reply With Quote
Old 02-25-2013, 04:25 AM   #174
boulder_bum boulder_bum is offline
Active Member
 
Aug 2010
443
1
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Geoff D View Post
Avatar is what it is, digital video interspersed with entirely CG sequences shot some 12 years after Cameron lensed Titanic. On Film. Like all of his previous features. Things move on, and to use Avatar as an arbiter as to what Cameron "prefers" in reference to the look of his previous movies is utterly absurd.

I don't know if you watch everything with the noise reduction on your display whacked up to max, but the Aliens Blu-ray is grainy as ****. It's fine grain - probably not even the same as what was originally captured, owing to Lowry's degrain/regrain techniques - but the image is literally awash with the stuff. If you can stomach that, then maybe you're not so averse to grain as you first thought...
Look, Cameron took pride in "denoising" and removing grain in Aliens and shoots his new films in clean digital. If he had to shoot Aliens again today, I'd bet strongly that he'd be breaking out digital cameras.

I do have my set's DNR on the middle setting and haven't watched it on my projector yet, but it seems like a decent transfer to me (at least for an 80s movie). There were only a few times when I noticed some heavy grain (which immediately distracted me from the fantasy world to focus on noise artifacts).

When grain and noise are as bad as in Top Gun, I'd rather someone take a digital scrubber to it, even though I think it's still worth buying. If an Aliens style transfer is a compromise for the grain lovers, that's fine by me.

I'd still rather see new movies that are shot on digital, though.
  Reply With Quote
Old 02-26-2013, 06:29 PM   #175
sookymonster sookymonster is offline
Special Member
 
sookymonster's Avatar
 
Apr 2012
89
Australia Top Gun info link

Whilst waiting for it to be released in oz here on the 6th of march, I came across these articles giving great info on the conversion process done by Legend 3D -

http://www.thedigitalbits.com/column...y-danger-zones &

http://www.fxguide.com/featured/back...ne-top-gun-3d/


Last edited by sookymonster; 02-26-2013 at 06:43 PM. Reason: extra link
  Reply With Quote
Old 02-26-2013, 06:44 PM   #176
Impossible Impossible is offline
Blu-ray Knight
 
Mar 2010
3
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by boulder_bum View Post
Look, Cameron took pride in "denoising" and removing grain in Aliens and shoots his new films in clean digital. If he had to shoot Aliens again today, I'd bet strongly that he'd be breaking out digital cameras.

I do have my set's DNR on the middle setting and haven't watched it on my projector yet, but it seems like a decent transfer to me (at least for an 80s movie). There were only a few times when I noticed some heavy grain (which immediately distracted me from the fantasy world to focus on noise artifacts).

When grain and noise are as bad as in Top Gun, I'd rather someone take a digital scrubber to it, even though I think it's still worth buying. If an Aliens style transfer is a compromise for the grain lovers, that's fine by me.

I'd still rather see new movies that are shot on digital, though.
A scrubber wouldn't have fixed the terrible colour timing which is the bigger problem
  Reply With Quote
Old 02-26-2013, 07:56 PM   #177
donald.brown donald.brown is offline
Active Member
 
donald.brown's Avatar
 
Jun 2008
1
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by impossible View Post
a scrubber wouldn't have fixed the terrible colour timing which is the bigger problem
+1
  Reply With Quote
Old 02-27-2013, 06:02 AM   #178
mseeley mseeley is offline
Special Member
 
mseeley's Avatar
 
Jun 2010
CA
262
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jsmith82 View Post
My Top Gun 3d party went awesome! Good times, good food, good drinks, and a room of stoked 80's kids.

Here's my review now that I watched the entire film: Awesome!

Most mentioned comment through said party: I can't believe Top Gun is in 3d!

And really, this was just..... Wild. It's Top Gun. In 3d! Legitimate 3d! Loved it!

About the ongoing butthurt over grain, I noticed intense grain over 2 scenes only, intro and goose's death, which his scene cut to a silky smooth grainless scene. So I do think it was an added effect, but done like the depth script (read about this conversion) - written in to the moment. Didn't bug me one bit, the movie was A ride front to back. Legend was given artistic freedom to control the 3d intensity, the grain in those 2 scenes IMO were most likely part of said freedom.

So! Awesome conversion, classic movie.. I'm pleased
That's terrific I really wish I had bought it when I saw it at target last week or so ago for 20 bucks. Not the price is 25 or more at most
Places
  Reply With Quote
Old 02-27-2013, 01:22 PM   #179
Jsmith82 Jsmith82 is offline
Expert Member
 
Jsmith82's Avatar
 
Feb 2012
Missouri, USA
59
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by mseeley View Post
That's terrific I really wish I had bought it when I saw it at target last week or so ago for 20 bucks. Not the price is 25 or more at most
Places
Check Best Buy - That's where I picked mine up at, 19.99.
Want to manually convert 2d to 3d yourself and accurately - not with an automated software? Check out my topic and tutorial here.
  Reply With Quote
Old 02-27-2013, 08:39 PM   #180
brian9229 brian9229 is offline
Blu-ray Samurai
 
brian9229's Avatar
 
Jun 2012
New York / Steelbook™ - 376
1041
70
56
14
59
Default

Picked this up and watched it recently and thought it looked very nice. The depth was beautiful, although it appeared this wasnt given a new transfer for the 3d version, it still looked great imo.
Samsung - QN65Q9 - 4K
Samsung - un40d6420uf - 3D
Panasonic - DMPBDT320/3D (Region A)
Oppo - UDP-203 & 205(Both Region Free)
Onkyo - TX-RZ820/Atmos/dts X/HDR/4K
Denon - DP-300F w/Ortofon 2m Bronze
Polk RTA8T Monitors(6),LSiM706c,/Polk 80 F/X-LS-Atmos(2)
Definitive SuperCube 2000/ 7.5Pyle Pro PT8000CH 8-Channel Stereo/Mono Amplifier
  Reply With Quote
Reply
Go Back   Blu-ray Forum > 3D > 3D Blu-ray and 3D Movies


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 Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 09:37 PM.