will transfers get better with time...

[deckard2080]

Just a question to any experts on the site...Will there be an improvement in blu ray transfers to older films. I mean there are still tons of titles that still havent been released. Real classic films. Im wondering how the transfer process goes. Are most blu ray transfers taking from the origional print or are they upgrades from the old dvd's. I know the best looking blu rays are the new releases which are first time on video. Thats pretty abvious that studios take the transfer from the orignal print. But what about old movies. Do you think over time...as blu ray takes over for dvd, will studios give more effort in getting older films better transfers? There have been some great transfer from older films like the godfather, blade runner, 2001...but thats because studios actually took the time to restore them for blu ray. What do you think?

[Batman1980]

There have been plenty of older movies that have gotten an excellent transfer to blu-ray, you just have to look harder.

[deckard2080]

yea i know that,,,i guess you didnt get what im saying..maybe someone else can respond with better

[cathexist]

A lot of the time it depends on the film. Warner is scanning many of their older titles in at 4k resolution (i.e. Blade Runner) and on others they are releasing from the same master as previous DVD releases.

I think it's a film to film basis, I wouldn't be surprised if a lot of double dips on older films pop up though as time passes.

[Lucy Diamond]

See Viva Las Vegas.

You will never be the same again.

[VinnAY]

There's a review just posted of "The Wedding Singer" which has apparently taken a step backward in the PQ department. I had been thinking that perhaps things were getting better, but maybe not...
https://www.blu-ray.com/movies/movie...52&show=review

[nerdboyrockstar]

I think it's going to continue to be hit or miss, depending on the studios and the work they put into each individual title. That's why forums like this and our reviews as well as the ones on the site will help us determine what's worth spending our money on.

[reece]

Originally Posted by deckard2080

Just a question to any experts on the site...Will there be an improvement in blu ray transfers to older films. I mean there are still tons of titles that still havent been released. Real classic films. Im wondering how the transfer process goes. Are most blu ray transfers taking from the origional print or are they upgrades from the old dvd's. I know the best looking blu rays are the new releases which are first time on video. Thats pretty abvious that studios take the transfer from the orignal print. But what about old movies. Do you think over time...as blu ray takes over for dvd, will studios give more effort in getting older films better transfers? There have been some great transfer from older films like the godfather, blade runner, 2001...but thats because studios actually took the time to restore them for blu ray. What do you think?

It's really all about what studios can afford, based on consumer demand, and how much work the particular film is in need of. Like you said Blade Runner and 2001 (as well as many others) were given in-depth expensive transfers from the original print because the studios knew it would pay off, and the people involved really cared about the films. With less popular title catalogs, its just not worth it for the studios to be spending that kind of time and money, so they often just port over the dvd master, which sometimes is sufficient and sometimes very aggravating. And the other thing you can't forget is that some of the films don't really have the potential to look all that great in the first place, depending on how it was originally shot, and how well the film stock has been preserved (among other factors).

As far as the future of transfers, it mostly rides on whether or not the mainstream buys into blu-ray. Until then, studios can really only afford in-depth restorations for classics.

[deckard2080]

yes that does answer a lot of my questions...thanks....interesting...i remember when dvd first came out with was sort of the same thing....sort...i mean blu ray is on a whole different level as far as PQ quality and i think has to be handled with more care than dvd...but i think when dvd was in its lets say 5th or 6th year you were getting re releases and really good quality transfers, hopefully studios will realize the importance of a good transfer..or at least a transfer that is able to get the most out of how it was originally shot.

[BluLobsta]

Well, as long as this company does the transfers...

http://www.lowrydigital.com/

[scweb13]

Originally Posted by VinnAY

There's a review just posted of "The Wedding Singer" which has apparently taken a step backward in the PQ department. I had been thinking that perhaps things were getting better, but maybe not...
https://www.blu-ray.com/movies/movie...52&show=review

Overprocessed, probably to satisfy the people that think HD means no grain. That review still states that the BD "outclasses its standard DVD counterpart in every conceivable way."

[nerdboyrockstar]

I think it's going to continue to be hit or miss, depending on the studios and the work they put into each individual title. That's why forums like this and our reviews as well as the ones on the site will help us determine what's worth spending our money on.

[zak88lx]

Maybe we need a mandatory standard for Blu-ray mastering.
These DVD to Blu-ray ports are not acceptable anymore.

Something like a THX certification for Blu-ray releases although that doesn't really mean much anymore.

[MCT]

any of you techies know if Blu Ray will wind up being the standard for the next 10-15 years or is there another format on the horizon already looking to take its place?

[Batman1980]

Flash drives actually but that's not feasible just yet so blu-ray should be THE format for at least another 5-6 years.

[HeavyHitter]

I think encoding is about as good as it will get, but yes, it will just depend on the time and money a studio puts into a release. In addition, some source material is just not eye candy and will never look "great." Some source material can look great with a lot of money spent. Again, it just all depends. I do think the poor economy may limit studio's ability to remaster some titles...particularly the non blockbuster type ones. For me, lay off the DNR and EE, and I'm generally happy!

However, other than a handful of poorly mastered titles, I've been happy with most titles I've viewed.

[HeavyHitter]

Originally Posted by Wolverine1980

Flash drives actually but that's not feasible just yet so blu-ray should be THE format for at least another 5-6 years.

I think much, much longer than 5-6 years...the studios and manufacturers have invested too much money into it all and consumers aren't going to upgrade yet again so soon...especially given the economy is not going to be good for a very long time (after this current recession is over, many economists predict another recession shortly after due to massive inflation heading our way).

[Rblu-Dblu]

There are some exceptions where movies get great transfers. But a lot of those older titles that get poor transfers, you would be better staying with the standard dvd and upconverting it. Of course you would lose out on the audio side of it.

[Beta Man]

DVD transfers got better over time.... so I'm sure it's possible to create better "cleaning/restoring" processes

[Jeff Kleist]

The Wedding Singer was from the old New Line library. They turned the DNR dial up to 11 and went to lunch as a matter of policy