COLLECT WATCH TRACK RATE REVIEW APP
Manage your own movie collection and always keep it with you with our Apps. Price track movies and get price drop notifications instantly. Become a member to take full advantage of all site features.
GET STARTED

Best Blu-ray Deals

Best Blu-ray Deals, See All the Deals »
Top deals | Price drops  
 All countries United States United Kingdom Canada Germany France Spain Italy Japan
Tie Me Up! Tie Me Down! (Blu-ray)
$19.99
Y Tu Mamá También (Blu-ray)
$19.99
The Hobbit: The Desolation of Smaug (Blu-ray)
$19.96
The Walking Dead: The Complete Fourth Season (Blu-ray)
$29.99
Jumanji (Blu-ray)
$7.99
Grimm: Season Three (Blu-ray)
$39.99
The Amazing Spider-Man 2 (Blu-ray)
$18.96
The Amazing Spider-Man 3D (Blu-ray)
$14.99
The Fault in Our Stars (Blu-ray)
$24.99
The East (Blu-ray)
$6.99
The Amazing Spider-Man 2 (Blu-ray)
$74.99
It's a Mad, Mad, Mad, Mad World (Blu-ray)
$24.99
Jarhead 2: Field of Fire (Blu-ray)
$17.78
Once Upon a Time: The Complete Third Season (Blu-ray)
$39.99
Friends: The Complete Series (Blu-ray)
$110.00
Chuck: The Complete Series (Blu-ray)
$66.99
Wrong Turn Trilogy (Blu-ray)
$17.31
Only Lovers Left Alive (Blu-ray)
$23.59
Steins;Gate: Anime Classics Complete Series (Blu-ray)
$31.69

Go Back   Blu-ray Forum > Movies > Blu-ray Movies - North America

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 08-18-2014, 02:01 PM   #8841
MacEachaidh MacEachaidh is offline
Blu-ray Samurai
 
MacEachaidh's Avatar
 
Aug 2011
Edge of the Accretion Disc
605
26
2
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kryptonic View Post
Look outside. The sky isn't true blue. Grass isn't only green. Skin tone's aren't only pale, especially in a warmer sun drenched climate.

Why do I have to explain this?
You're not explaining anything. You're making assertions to establish some sort of case, except that they are non sequiturs — even if the sky isn't "true blue", whatever you mean by that, it has nothing whatsoever to do with the question of the colour palette shift on this BD transfer.

Quote:
The Raiders transfer was approved by Spielberg anyway. The conversation is moot - it's what the artist wants. Deal with it.
Nah, that's a silly comment. Someone — whether a famous director or a studio colourist — approving a transfer for release doesn't mean it's how they want it to look, but what they approve within a given working time frame and budget. Why would Spielberg want this shifted colour palette for this movie when all previous versions of this one and the BD transfer of the others in the set look so very different and so notably naturalistic? Why didn't he shift them as well?

Last edited by MacEachaidh; 08-18-2014 at 02:11 PM.
  Reply With Quote
Old 08-18-2014, 02:06 PM   #8842
Kryptonic Kryptonic is offline
Blu-ray Knight
 
Kryptonic's Avatar
 
Jul 2009
26
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by HD Goofnut View Post
I noticed something that I feel I should point out since the thread was resurrected over color. I know that the color palette is accurate with the BD. How you may ask? Well, I have been researching WWII for about the past 20 years and I can tell you that the Afrika Corps uniform colors are not accurate in the two HDTV broadcasts where they cast a more gray/green color. They are exactly how they should look in the BD, which is primarily tan with just a hint of green.

Also, a bit of trivia, the Afrika Corps was not even in Africa during the time the film is set. What's more, most of the Germans are carrying around the MP-40 (9mm sub-machine gun), which wasn't even reality until 1940. The film is set in 1936.
Thank you.

Quote:
Originally Posted by MacEachaidh View Post
You're not explaining anything. You're making assertions to establish some sort of case, except that they are non sequiturs — even if the sky isn't "true blue", whatever you mean by that, it has nothing whatsoever to do with the question of the colour palette shift on this BD transfer.
Just because the previous transfers came first, on a low resolution format, doesn't mean it's accurate at all.

Quote:
Nah, that's a silly comment. Someone — whether a famous director or a studio colourist — approving a transfer for release doesn't mean it's how they want it to look,
Actually, that's exactly what it means, especially for such a high profile release like this where the clearly took the time and put in the money to make it look spectacular.
  Reply With Quote
Old 08-18-2014, 02:24 PM   #8843
MacEachaidh MacEachaidh is offline
Blu-ray Samurai
 
MacEachaidh's Avatar
 
Aug 2011
Edge of the Accretion Disc
605
26
2
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kryptonic View Post
Just because the previous transfers came first, on a low resolution format, doesn't mean it's accurate at all.
Still got nothing to do with the BD transfer. It's not a simple either/or — it's not as if claiming previous releases were wrong means this one must be right.

Quote:
Actually, that's exactly what it means, especially for such a high profile release like this where the clearly took the time and put in the money to make it look spectacular.
No. There've been plenty of "high-profile" releases that haven't got it "right" after a great deal of anticipation. There were comments from the studio at the time of this release that made an explanation of sorts that essentially said this one had originally been photochemically timed in a way that limited what they could do with the image (though they brushed the wording up with marketspeak, of course). Essentially the same explanation that was given for Fellowship of the Ring.

But regardless of what you or I assume about Spielberg's intention or the restoration's capabilities, it doesn't change the fact that there's a colour cast in the transfer we were given. Some people don't notice it, some people don't care, some people can get cranky with anyone on a discussion forum who mentions its existence, but it's still there.
  Reply With Quote
Old 08-18-2014, 03:08 PM   #8844
ZoetMB ZoetMB is offline
Blu-ray Guru
 
May 2009
New York
154
27
3
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Early Memphis View Post
The BDs look nice, but he's got a good point. That shot and the shot right above also with a Nazi banner are orange. The red "silhouette" sunset shot (6 above), which has turned to yellow-orange, is also a clear change for the worse.
And how were the screen caps captured? Because for the broadcast versions especially, if they were captured by photographing a TV screen, there are so many variables, it's not even worth discussing. And even it was captured by other means, unless you're using a calibrated computer display, it's not worth discussing. And that's aside from the fact that we each see the same color differently.

Even in a movie theatre using the original 35mm or 70mm film prints, presentation quality varied so much, it's a completely different experience seeing it in different theaters, relating both to the quality of the prints and where the theatre was located (NY and Los Angeles tended to get more carefully made prints in those days), whether the theatre was still using carbon arc or xenon lamps, the brightness of those lamps, how dirty the screen was, etc.

I used to consult for a movie-industry company and part of my job was to check presentation on opening day. If the film was in a multiplex, we had to move from screen to screen and I can tell you that even within the same multiplex, regardless of whether it was film or digital, each screen was a shockingly different experience.
loose="not tight", lose="can't find it, doesn't have anymore" or the opposite of "win".
their="belongs to", there="place", they're="they are", there's = "there is"
it's="it is", for everything else use "its"
then="after", than="compared with"
"a lot" not "alot"

A Guide to Spelling and Punctuation
  Reply With Quote
Old 08-18-2014, 03:22 PM   #8845
HeavyHitter HeavyHitter is offline
Blu-ray Samurai
 
HeavyHitter's Avatar
 
Jul 2007
15
Default

I watched all four of these movies projected and they look outstanding, overall. Color looks great.

Raiders in particular is just top notch.

Regarding some not liking the color, it's no different than every other release: some people are not happy unless it looks like they think it should (which is usually based on VHS, DVD or a cable broadcast) on their non-pro calibrated sets.

I said it once and I will say it again: unless your display has been calibrated to rec 709 and your delta errors are under 3, you are NOT in a position to accurately begin judging color on a Blu-ray disc. Your display is NOT showing you accurate color. This should be a sticky on this forum. It's a crucial point.
JVC DLA-RS4810 front projector (ISF pro-cal'd)
Stewart StudioTek 100, CinemaScope 108" wide screen
Samsung 51" F5300 plasma
Oppo BDP-983 & BDP-103D Blu-ray player
Denon AVR-X3000 (Audyssey pro-cal'd)
Definitive Technology Pro Monitor 1000 (fronts)
Definitive Technology Pro Monitor 800 (surrounds x 4)
HSU VTF-15H sub

Last edited by HeavyHitter; 08-18-2014 at 03:27 PM.
  Reply With Quote
Old 08-18-2014, 04:12 PM   #8846
MacEachaidh MacEachaidh is offline
Blu-ray Samurai
 
MacEachaidh's Avatar
 
Aug 2011
Edge of the Accretion Disc
605
26
2
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ZoetMB View Post
And even it was captured by other means, unless you're using a calibrated computer display, it's not worth discussing. And that's aside from the fact that we each see the same color differently.
These kinds of arguments work in both directions, though. What about people who do have pro-calibrated systems, as I do, who see the colour shifts? There's an oft-stated myth on this site that's trotted out every time that someone raises an issue with a specific transfer, that asserts they wouldn't feel that way if they had a calibrated display. The assertion is that it's a lack of calibration that somehow makes a difference, that somehow makes a colour shift appear on just one movie in a set but somehow doesn't do the same for the other three movies in the box. A better explanation is that a lot of people don't have a keen sense of colour, of absolute colour, unless they have something else to directly compare the colour to. On a screen on its own, they don't see the issues — much the same as most people can't hear the pitch shift caused by PAL video speed-up unless they've got an accurately-pitched alternative sample to compare it to.

Quote:
I can tell you that even within the same multiplex, regardless of whether it was film or digital, each screen was a shockingly different experience.
Sure. But if you put two different pictures onto the same screen and one of them had a significant colour shift, you should be able to see the difference in relative terms even if the display of neither was ideal in absolute terms.

Quote:
Originally Posted by HeavyHitter View Post
Regarding some not liking the color, it's no different than every other release: some people are not happy unless it looks like they think it should (which is usually based on VHS, DVD or a cable broadcast) on their non-pro calibrated sets.
That's close to an ad hom argument. But the amusing thing is, the only people who trot out the alleged "it doesn't look like the DVD" business are the people who are trying to poo-pooh discussions of colour issues in transfers. It's a myth that people say that for real.
  Reply With Quote
Old 08-18-2014, 04:36 PM   #8847
Early Memphis Early Memphis is offline
Blu-ray Samurai
 
Early Memphis's Avatar
 
Feb 2012
Texas
541
139
3
3
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ZoetMB View Post
And how were the screen caps captured? Because for the broadcast versions especially, if they were captured by photographing a TV screen, there are so many variables, it's not even worth discussing. And even it was captured by other means, unless you're using a calibrated computer display, it's not worth discussing. And that's aside from the fact that we each see the same color differently ...
Well, first, I thought it was clear that we were discussing the caps. No cap can convey what motion does, and as you say, who knows what people are watching on or how it's calibrated. Even if the yellow sunset I mentioned is accurate, however, the Nazi banners were bright blood red in real life. No way they were orange.

If I were meaning to comment on the BD itself, I'd have to get mine out, punch up that scene and post about it (I might've been tempted, but my bike was calling me for 30 miles of hills ). Even if I went to all that trouble, however, the calibrationists on "the other side" (of whatever I said) would scream that I wasn't calibrated.
You can only have too much ammo if you're on fire or swimming.

Digital Copies Available ($1-$3 or Best Offer). PM Me For List.
  Reply With Quote
Old 08-18-2014, 04:49 PM   #8848
HeavyHitter HeavyHitter is offline
Blu-ray Samurai
 
HeavyHitter's Avatar
 
Jul 2007
15
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by MacEachaidh View Post
These kinds of arguments work in both directions, though. What about people who do have pro-calibrated systems, as I do, who see the colour shifts? There's an oft-stated myth on this site that's trotted out every time that someone raises an issue with a specific transfer, that asserts they wouldn't feel that way if they had a calibrated display. The assertion is that it's a lack of calibration that somehow makes a difference, that somehow makes a colour shift appear on just one movie in a set but somehow doesn't do the same for the other three movies in the box. A better explanation is that a lot of people don't have a keen sense of colour, of absolute colour, unless they have something else to directly compare the colour to. On a screen on its own, they don't see the issues — much the same as most people can't hear the pitch shift caused by PAL video speed-up unless they've got an accurately-pitched alternative sample to compare it to.


Sure. But if you put two different pictures onto the same screen and one of them had a significant colour shift, you should be able to see the difference in relative terms even if the display of neither was ideal in absolute terms.


That's close to an ad hom argument. But the amusing thing is, the only people who trot out the alleged "it doesn't look like the DVD" business are the people who are trying to poo-pooh discussions of colour issues in transfers. It's a myth that people say that for real.
There have been countless times on this forum people have been disappointed with a Blu-ray's color merely because it doesn't look like another previous format which they are used to seeing. We see people taking screenshots almost daily of DVDs to compared to Blu-rays and then scream, "See, the DVD didn't have that green or orange tint!" (yet they ignore the magenta tint and orange skewing that most DVDS have among other things).

The fact of the matter is: The processes involved in Blu-ray mastering and color timing are far superior than what has been applied to any other format and the Blu-ray is far more likely to look like the original film compared to the other formats. Any insider or person who works inside of the industry will tell you this, but you're going to believe what you want to believe evidently.
JVC DLA-RS4810 front projector (ISF pro-cal'd)
Stewart StudioTek 100, CinemaScope 108" wide screen
Samsung 51" F5300 plasma
Oppo BDP-983 & BDP-103D Blu-ray player
Denon AVR-X3000 (Audyssey pro-cal'd)
Definitive Technology Pro Monitor 1000 (fronts)
Definitive Technology Pro Monitor 800 (surrounds x 4)
HSU VTF-15H sub
  Reply With Quote
Thanks given by:
HD Goofnut (08-18-2014)
Old 08-18-2014, 08:57 PM   #8849
Geoff D Geoff D is offline
Blu-ray Ninja
 
Geoff D's Avatar
 
Feb 2009
Swanage, Engerland
945
1
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by HeavyHitter View Post
I said it once and I will say it again: unless your display has been calibrated to rec 709 and your delta errors are under 3, you are NOT in a position to accurately begin judging color on a Blu-ray disc. Your display is NOT showing you accurate color. This should be a sticky on this forum. It's a crucial point.
My screen's calibrated, my average dE for primaries and secondaries is 1.24, and my greyscale has an average dE of 0.37. Can I now say that the Nazi banners in Raiders shouldn't be orange?

Don't get me wrongo, I really like the overall look of the new Raiders transfer. The detail and texture that it's got is breathtaking at times. And for the most part, the golden yellow timing really works for the dry, dusty vibe of the film. Even the uniforms are now more accurate apparently, but those banners definitely aren't, having been affected by all the yellow that's been pumped into the image.
  Reply With Quote
Old 08-18-2014, 09:22 PM   #8850
HeavyHitter HeavyHitter is offline
Blu-ray Samurai
 
HeavyHitter's Avatar
 
Jul 2007
15
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Geoff D View Post
My screen's calibrated, my average dE for primaries and secondaries is 1.24, and my greyscale has an average dE of 0.37. Can I now say that the Nazi banners in Raiders shouldn't be orange?

Don't get me wrongo, I really like the overall look of the new Raiders transfer. The detail and texture that it's got is breathtaking at times. And for the most part, the golden yellow timing really works for the dry, dusty vibe of the film. Even the uniforms are now more accurate apparently, but those banners definitely aren't, having been affected by all the yellow that's been pumped into the image.
Perhaps so! (although the type of equipment used can make a difference Low cost meters (Spyder, etc.) are notoriously inaccurate as has been proven. You want to use an i1pro at minimum according to pro calibrators I have talked to. My display was calibrated with a Jeti 1211 profiled to a D3).

I will give those banners a second look on my set-up.

On any rate, I would argue the overall color of the disc is still closer to the original film and approved by Spielberg from what I have heard as I'm sure you would too.

What I like about the disc too is it looks very film-like. A bit more so than the second and third movie although they are very good too.
JVC DLA-RS4810 front projector (ISF pro-cal'd)
Stewart StudioTek 100, CinemaScope 108" wide screen
Samsung 51" F5300 plasma
Oppo BDP-983 & BDP-103D Blu-ray player
Denon AVR-X3000 (Audyssey pro-cal'd)
Definitive Technology Pro Monitor 1000 (fronts)
Definitive Technology Pro Monitor 800 (surrounds x 4)
HSU VTF-15H sub

Last edited by HeavyHitter; 08-18-2014 at 09:27 PM.
  Reply With Quote
Old 08-18-2014, 09:27 PM   #8851
Geoff D Geoff D is offline
Blu-ray Ninja
 
Geoff D's Avatar
 
Feb 2009
Swanage, Engerland
945
1
Default

Please, check that shot of Belloq on your pro-calibrated setup and lemme know what you think.
  Reply With Quote
Old 08-18-2014, 09:29 PM   #8852
HeavyHitter HeavyHitter is offline
Blu-ray Samurai
 
HeavyHitter's Avatar
 
Jul 2007
15
Default

Will check tonight!
JVC DLA-RS4810 front projector (ISF pro-cal'd)
Stewart StudioTek 100, CinemaScope 108" wide screen
Samsung 51" F5300 plasma
Oppo BDP-983 & BDP-103D Blu-ray player
Denon AVR-X3000 (Audyssey pro-cal'd)
Definitive Technology Pro Monitor 1000 (fronts)
Definitive Technology Pro Monitor 800 (surrounds x 4)
HSU VTF-15H sub
  Reply With Quote
Old 08-18-2014, 09:34 PM   #8853
Geoff D Geoff D is offline
Blu-ray Ninja
 
Geoff D's Avatar
 
Feb 2009
Swanage, Engerland
945
1
Default

I've also seen the new transfer on a 2K digital projection at the BFI IMAX and the banners were orange there too, FWIW.
  Reply With Quote
Thanks given by:
Sky_Captain (08-18-2014)
Old 08-18-2014, 09:38 PM   #8854
MacEachaidh MacEachaidh is offline
Blu-ray Samurai
 
MacEachaidh's Avatar
 
Aug 2011
Edge of the Accretion Disc
605
26
2
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by HeavyHitter View Post
There have been countless times on this forum people have been disappointed with a Blu-ray's color merely because it doesn't look like another previous format which they are used to seeing. We see people taking screenshots almost daily of DVDs to compared to Blu-rays and then scream, "See, the DVD didn't have that green or orange tint!" (yet they ignore the magenta tint and orange skewing that most DVDS have among other things).
Again, something that crops up almost exclusively in people deriding that claim rather than people actually making it. It's an assertion that people always trot out, unprompted, and then go away thinking it was a necessary argument. But I haven't said that the colour isn't accurate because it's not the same as the DVD. I've said the Blu-ray transfer has a colour cast overlaying the palette, which it does.

Quote:
The fact of the matter is: The processes involved in Blu-ray mastering and color timing are far superior than what has been applied to any other format and the Blu-ray is far more likely to look like the original film compared to the other formats.
It has a greater possibility of looking like the original film, a greater capacity for image fidelity, but that is not the same as likely.

And it didn't come about because of the Blu-ray format, which I know has a wider colour gamut, but because of the arrival of the digital toolbox. That toolbox allows the image to be manipulated in a multitude of ways, not always to achieve fidelity. There are directors wanting to have an artistic flourish by shifting the palette to make some kind of statement or to freshen up their image by injecting some novelty or what they perceive as a modern aesthetic; colourists cooling the overall palette to contain bloom and bleed, which has always been the bane of digital video; the fact that people perceive greater detail in cooler colours; the fad du jour of an "urban" look conveyed in more neon colours, which people respond to without considering what they're seeing; and the fact that colours can be made to appear to "pop" more if your palette base is a cooler colour. That's all going on in Blu-ray releases as well, weighing against the likelihood of the colours being accurate.

Quote:
Any insider or person who works inside of the industry will tell you this, but you're going to believe what you want to believe evidently.
Hey, nice flounce, I guess, for rhetorical purposes — but what does it mean, exactly? What is it you claim I "want to believe"? And couldn't the charge also be levelled at you?
  Reply With Quote
Old 08-18-2014, 10:20 PM   #8855
Kryptonic Kryptonic is offline
Blu-ray Knight
 
Kryptonic's Avatar
 
Jul 2009
26
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Geoff D View Post
I've also seen the new transfer on a 2K digital projection at the BFI IMAX and the banners were orange there too, FWIW.
And the movie was totally ruined!
  Reply With Quote
Old 08-18-2014, 10:42 PM   #8856
Geoff D Geoff D is offline
Blu-ray Ninja
 
Geoff D's Avatar
 
Feb 2009
Swanage, Engerland
945
1
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kryptonic View Post
And the movie was totally ruined!
No, it wasn't, which I made sure to point out above. But, whatever.

@HeavyHitter: I use a ColorMunki Display which has the same hardware as the i1pro. Yeah, there's all that other stuff but seeing as my Sony TV doesn't have a CMS, only 2-point white balance, I don't think the nth degree of measuring accuracy is needed. Still, as all the pro reviews with their pro gear will tell you, Sony sets will give you very accurate results with just a few clicks of the white balance.

Last edited by Geoff D; 08-18-2014 at 10:49 PM.
  Reply With Quote
Old 08-18-2014, 11:02 PM   #8857
James Luckard James Luckard is offline
Power Member
 
James Luckard's Avatar
 
Jan 2011
Los Angeles, CA
443
18
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by HD Goofnut View Post
Also, a bit of trivia, the Afrika Corps was not even in Africa during the time the film is set. What's more, most of the Germans are carrying around the MP-40 (9mm sub-machine gun), which wasn't even reality until 1940. The film is set in 1936.
That has always been one of the weirdest choices in the film, to me. Egypt was a British protectorate for many years and, while it was independent in 1936, it was only nominally so. I love the film and this doesn't stop me from enjoying it, but, the idea of hundreds, perhaps thousands of German soldiers stationed just outside Cairo is a bit of a head-scratcher.

Last edited by James Luckard; 08-18-2014 at 11:20 PM.
  Reply With Quote
Old 08-19-2014, 01:08 AM   #8858
HeavyHitter HeavyHitter is offline
Blu-ray Samurai
 
HeavyHitter's Avatar
 
Jul 2007
15
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Geoff D View Post
No, it wasn't, which I made sure to point out above. But, whatever.

@HeavyHitter: I use a ColorMunki Display which has the same hardware as the i1pro. Yeah, there's all that other stuff but seeing as my Sony TV doesn't have a CMS, only 2-point white balance, I don't think the nth degree of measuring accuracy is needed. Still, as all the pro reviews with their pro gear will tell you, Sony sets will give you very accurate results with just a few clicks of the white balance.
Good to hear. That's right, you have a Sony 4K display if I recall? And, yes, even without a CMS Sony's are very good in that regard with primary and secondary color points. I agree it can be debated "nth" degree calibrations, but I have seen so-called "subtle" differences that might surprise you (at least they did me). The Sony's were discussed positively in this regard at this past weekend's shootout as it carries over on the 2014 models, as well.
JVC DLA-RS4810 front projector (ISF pro-cal'd)
Stewart StudioTek 100, CinemaScope 108" wide screen
Samsung 51" F5300 plasma
Oppo BDP-983 & BDP-103D Blu-ray player
Denon AVR-X3000 (Audyssey pro-cal'd)
Definitive Technology Pro Monitor 1000 (fronts)
Definitive Technology Pro Monitor 800 (surrounds x 4)
HSU VTF-15H sub

Last edited by HeavyHitter; 08-19-2014 at 01:40 AM.
  Reply With Quote
Old 08-19-2014, 01:26 AM   #8859
HeavyHitter HeavyHitter is offline
Blu-ray Samurai
 
HeavyHitter's Avatar
 
Jul 2007
15
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by MacEachaidh View Post
Again, something that crops up almost exclusively in people deriding that claim rather than people actually making it. It's an assertion that people always trot out, unprompted, and then go away thinking it was a necessary argument. But I haven't said that the colour isn't accurate because it's not the same as the DVD. I've said the Blu-ray transfer has a colour cast overlaying the palette, which it does.
But even if it does, so what? Maybe I missed a previous point you made about it.

If you lived close by, I would invite you to watch Raiders projected on my 9 foot wide 2:35 screen. Trust me, I am a very strong, hardcore video enthusiast who can be overly-picky about Blu-ray transfers --- but Raiders just looks gorgeous. It looks like a new 35 mm film print on my JVC Lcos front projector. Does it look identical to the 1981 release? Probably not and it's technically impossible (as there are limitations to rec 709 and Blu-ray in that point to prevent as there is still an analog to digital conversion among other things), but I have strong reason to believe it looks much closer to the original look than it ever has before.

Quote:
It has a greater possibility of looking like the original film, a greater capacity for image fidelity, but that is not the same as likely.
And how do you know this is often the case you seem to imply? Assuming we are talking analog filmed movies, do you have actual film prints of these movies that have not deteriorated with a projector to compare to the Blu-ray on a high quality rec 709 calibrated display?

Quote:
And it didn't come about because of the Blu-ray format, which I know has a wider colour gamut, but because of the arrival of the digital toolbox. That toolbox allows the image to be manipulated in a multitude of ways, not always to achieve fidelity. There are directors wanting to have an artistic flourish by shifting the palette to make some kind of statement or to freshen up their image by injecting some novelty or what they perceive as a modern aesthetic; colourists cooling the overall palette to contain bloom and bleed, which has always been the bane of digital video; the fact that people perceive greater detail in cooler colours; the fad du jour of an "urban" look conveyed in more neon colours, which people respond to without considering what they're seeing; and the fact that colours can be made to appear to "pop" more if your palette base is a cooler colour. That's all going on in Blu-ray releases as well, weighing against the likelihood of the colours being accurate.
I would strongly suggest reading up on the history of home video mastering with NTSC compared to what is being done today for Blu-ray. Previous formats had SO very many issues with workflow and other parts of the process. It's not just a wider color gamut either. Robert Harris has written a lot about this on the forums some time back and it's been written about quite a bit in various home theater publications over time. There is absolutely NO basis for using previous home video formats as the De facto standard in judging color timing. Yes, it's true today's tools allow directors to make it much easier to achieve their vision, but that is one of my points and should be viewed positively: the previous formats made this very difficult so what you were seeing was often not accurate in that sense.

Quote:
Hey, nice flounce, I guess, for rhetorical purposes — but what does it mean, exactly? What is it you claim I "want to believe"? And couldn't the charge also be levelled at you?
No, because what I am stating is based on common knowledge and logic ---and not subjectively disliking something because I think it is supposed to look a certain way based on a subpar previous format which is all too common on this forum and others.
JVC DLA-RS4810 front projector (ISF pro-cal'd)
Stewart StudioTek 100, CinemaScope 108" wide screen
Samsung 51" F5300 plasma
Oppo BDP-983 & BDP-103D Blu-ray player
Denon AVR-X3000 (Audyssey pro-cal'd)
Definitive Technology Pro Monitor 1000 (fronts)
Definitive Technology Pro Monitor 800 (surrounds x 4)
HSU VTF-15H sub

Last edited by HeavyHitter; 08-19-2014 at 01:40 AM.
  Reply With Quote
Old 08-19-2014, 01:26 AM   #8860
Liquid_Swords Liquid_Swords is offline
Power Member
 
Liquid_Swords's Avatar
 
Dec 2009
Pacific NW
55
95
4
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by imagazzell View Post
Sorry to dig up an old argument, but can someone explain to me why it is that many of these shots from the DVD do appear superior, in terms of depth and clarity (if not color grading as well)?

Compare the images of Indy looking out the plane window (note the lines in his forehead and the contrast around his nose), or Belloq in the canyon just before saying "This is history" (the depth and clarify of the lines around his face and eyes), or the detail on the hands and stamped letters of the lock on the ending crate shot, or the overall contrast and sharpness of the shot of Belloq and the (seated) Nazi commander in the desert.

Why are my eyes seeing the DVD versions of those (and other) shots as cleaner and crisper?... I feel like what I'm looking at here ought to be the exact reverse or something.

I was going to upgrade from my old trilogy DVDs, but after seeing these shots, I'm not so sure anymore...

Thanks for any input.
I think the blu looks too gold, but not in the mood for an argument
  Reply With Quote
Reply
Go Back   Blu-ray Forum > Movies > Blu-ray Movies - North America


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 12:06 PM.