Ask questions to The Digital Bits team (Bill Hunt, Jeff Kleist et.al.)

[J.Cornelius]

Bill:

I thoroughly enjoyed your recent two-cents editorial about grain reduction and your subsequent follow-up. You indicate in your editorial,

“In general, my feeling is that the studios need to try to achieve a better balance between the need to improve HD image quality for Blu-ray, the need to retain fine detail (the whole point of HD video after all) and to still leave just enough grain in the image (at least for photochemically shot films) to ensure that it still looks like film.”

I hope this is not a naïve question but here it is: Why are various studios putting out sub-par catalog releases while Criterion consistently delivers brilliant releases? If one studio can consistently get it right it seems logical that the other studios could replicate this consistency. It is apparent that the technology is in place for the studios to consistently produce the highest quality product but that is not what is ultimately delivered.

As a consumer I am in, hook line and sinker, I simply love the format. Hopefully the balance in Blu-ray which you speak of will happen sooner than later.

[Jeff Kleist]

A company like Criterion lives and dies by its quality. They deliver a mostly eclectic selection to a discerning base. That's also why their titles are expensive. You're comparing a mass product to a specialty enthusiast product. Not every movie is the same as well, there are so many variables in place, that making a blanket statement is really hard to apply.

Every movie is different, mastering policies at different studios are different. Face it, people are still going to buy some craptastic teen comedy by the millions no matter what, but if Criterion delivers a shitty Seven Samurai, they may as well pack up the shop. It's really apples and oranges in terms of customer base, and it's also easier to turn on a dime when you've got 3-4 titles in production instead of 30.

I hope all that makes sense

[Doctorossi]

Speaking of Criterion... those guys have really redoubled their efforts at obliterating my wallet. At their current rate of winners, I'll have every Criterion release I want by Christmas and the other distributors will take another 4-5 years to catch up.

Criterion

[Mr. Cinema]

I wonder who is going to release more live action titles this year, Criterion or Disney?

[J.Cornelius]

I appreciate your response and yes it makes general sense. I realize the economies of scale but it just sucks that is sometimes the studio's basic rationale. We can put out an inferior product when we are capable and have the technology to do otherwise. Eventually that logic will end up biting you in the arse. Those sub-par releases add up and will end up alienating the consumer base and the overall growth of the format. Thanks again for your time.

[Jeff Kleist]

I appreciate your response and yes it makes general sense. I realize the economies of scale but it just sucks that is sometimes the studio's basic rationale. We can put out an inferior product when we are capable and have the technology to do otherwise. Eventually that logic will end up biting you in the arse. Those sub-par releases add up and will end up alienating the consumer base and the overall growth of the format. Thanks again for your time.

Well, not quite

A Criterion or an Anchor Bay (the old pre-Starz) would put a lot of money and time into a title that a studio wouldn't blink twice at, because that's their bread and butter. There is still the economies of scale to consider, and the desire not to lose money. For example, Paramount is not going to restore Wayne's World, but they would probably put some money into Ferris Bueller because that movie still plays far fresher.

Some catalog titles are bad specifically because the mastering choices of the issuing studio are bad. One recent catalog title had a brand new master done for it,specifically for the Blu-ray but still looked horrible because of the poor choices by the studio during post processing.

Sometimes better elements aren't available either. An extreme example would be Transformers: The Movie (the real one) was lost until quite recently? A movie less than 20 years old at the time only had a master tape sitting on a shelf at Hasbro. The negative is gone, and it was only when a print was found in North Carolina that widescreen and HD versions were able to be put together

[Jeff Kleist]

Just FYI, we have a working hypothesis on T2, and why it looks soft, and we're in the process of confirming that. All signs do not point to DNR explaining the difference between the Japanese and Lionsgate discs however.

[OARmaster]

Originally Posted by Jeff Kleist

Just FYI, we have a working hypothesis on T2, and why it looks soft, and we're in the process of confirming that. All signs do not point to DNR explaining the difference between the Japanese and Lionsgate discs however.

The "science" forum will explode. They have two T2 threads and one of them has already been shut down. The screenshot e...ex...exper...sorry, this is hard to say...experts are of course convinced that they know best.

[Xorp]

Originally Posted by Bill Hunt

The Alien Quad is getting a full Blu-ray updating. Hopefully, it will be out in time for the holidays. It will be WELL worth the wait, and the upgrade. If all goes well, this will be THE definitive release.

Do you know the history of the Aliens transfer? I know Alien got a new transfer in 2003 to do the director's cut and the Quadrilogy DVD release. I've seen the D-Theater of it and it looks quite excellent. Did Aliens also get a new transfer for the Quadrilogy or was an older one used?

[Bill Hunt]

Hey Guys,

Sorry I've been a little MIA the last few days. I've been in grain-land so to speak, as you may have been able to read based on my posts on The Bits the last few days. I think we've gotten to the bottom of the whole T2 situation, FYI. Anyway, I'm pretty wiped out tonight, but I'll try to check back in tomorrow to answer a few questions. Cheers!

Bill

[Bill Hunt]

Originally Posted by Xorp

Do you know the history of the Aliens transfer? I know Alien got a new transfer in 2003 to do the director's cut and the Quadrilogy DVD release. I've seen the D-Theater of it and it looks quite excellent. Did Aliens also get a new transfer for the Quadrilogy or was an older one used?

I do believe ALL of the films got new transfers for the Quad. And I believe that new transfers have been done again for BD as well. But don't quote me on that. I'll say more on this title when I'm able.

[Bill Hunt]

Originally Posted by Jeff Kleist

Just FYI, we have a working hypothesis on T2, and why it looks soft, and we're in the process of confirming that. All signs do not point to DNR explaining the difference between the Japanese and Lionsgate discs however.

Jeff's correct, we don't believe DNR is the culprit. What it's looking like now is that it's the difference between the bitrates of the two titles, as a result of the encoding process, and to a lesser degree the two different encoding formats involved. See tonight's late post on The Bits.

[Beast]

Originally Posted by Bill Hunt

Jeff's correct, we don't believe DNR is the culprit. What it's looking like now is that it's the difference between the bitrates of the two titles, as a result of the encoding process, and to a lesser degree the two different encoding formats involved. See tonight's late post on The Bits.

Plus it looks like there was some artificial sharpening done on the other releases.

Just like if you crank up the sharpness on your TV, you're gonna get more video noise.

Hell, as pictures on the T2 thread show... it looks like Sarah needs a shave on the older releases.

https://forum.blu-ray.com/showpost.p...&postcount=642

[Jeff Kleist]

No sharpening was done on the Geneon disc.

[Xorp]

Originally Posted by Bill Hunt

Jeff's correct, we don't believe DNR is the culprit. What it's looking like now is that it's the difference between the bitrates of the two titles, as a result of the encoding process, and to a lesser degree the two different encoding formats involved. See tonight's late post on The Bits.

The Euro HD DVD (re-released on Blu-ray using the same encode by Optimum in the UK and StudioCanal in France) also uses VC1 at a lower bitrate than the Skynet, it looks 99% identical to the Geneon disc. The loss of detail on the Skynet is too great not be DNR related.

Thanks for the info on Aliens btw.

[Esox50]

Originally Posted by Bill Hunt

Jeff's correct, we don't believe DNR is the culprit. What it's looking like now is that it's the difference between the bitrates of the two titles, as a result of the encoding process, and to a lesser degree the two different encoding formats involved. See tonight's late post on The Bits.

But Amir said bitrates don't matter after a certain point... *runs for the hills*

Bill, here's the message to take to studios IMHO: VIDEO AND AUDIO presentation come first. Bitrate needs to go there to squeeze out everything in the master FIRST. All this BD-LIVE and interactive stuff is "nice", but you know how much BD-LIVE I've done (and I have TWO capable BD-LIVE Players)....ZERO.

I know, I know. The discs are mapped out and space allocated ahead of time given the overall "package" so content & A/V can be produced concurrently, etc. But I think that's the wrong approach. I would rather wait an extra 6 months for titles for the A/V to be done right first, and then put the added value stuff on given what space is leftover.

-Esox

[Vincent Pereira]

One thing folks seem to have forgotten is that the 2003 1080P transfer of TERMINATOR 2 that has been the basis for all of these various HD releases was an anamorphic HD transfer. As per the liner notes on the "Extreme Edition" DVD (which was sourced from this same original master tape), the actual High-Definition transfer was not letterboxed, but rather the 2.35:1 image was "stretched" anamorphically to fill the entire 1080 X 1920 pixel real-estate. All of the consumer HD versions have been letterboxed High-Def, which means that the "anamorphic" master tape had to be "unsqueezed" and downconverted to a letterbox image. This downconversion may itself account for some of the variances in image quality between the various HD releases that we've seen.

Vincent

[Bill Hunt]

Originally Posted by Xorp

The Euro HD DVD (re-released on Blu-ray using the same encode by Optimum in the UK and StudioCanal in France) also uses VC1 at a lower bitrate than the Skynet, it looks 99% identical to the Geneon disc. The loss of detail on the Skynet is too great not be DNR related.

Thanks for the info on Aliens btw.

I disagree that DNR on the Skynet must necessarily be the sole culprit, but it's clear that many enthusiasts simply will not be dissuaded. Lionsgate insiders tell me they requested no DNR. I have no reason to doubt this - online conspiracy theories aside - unless it was applied without their knowledge prior to compression, or it's happening as part of the encoding process. I'm told the softening is more pronounced as a result of bitrate reduction, which could explain it. On the other hand, we don't know what additional processing was done for the Euro HD-DVD release. Was sharpening done, were subtle contrast adjustments made? All of these things can have an impact. As I've been saying for days now on The Bits, these things are substantially more complicated than many enthusiasts seem willing to admit, and it's very easy to make incorrect snap judgements based on little information. In the effort to investigate this all more thoroughly, and to consult experienced mastering sources in the industry, I myself have come to appreciate how much more complicated these things are than I suspected previously.

[HeavyHitter]

Does anyone know if the UK Skynet transfer is the same as the U.S. or Geneon?

I would like the slightly crisper Geneon transfer, but don't want to shell out that much if I can get it from another region.

[Xorp]

Originally Posted by HeavyHitter

Does anyone know if the UK Skynet transfer is the same as the U.S. or Geneon?

I would like the slightly crisper Geneon transfer, but don't want to shell out that much if I can get it from another region.

I'd expect all Skynet releases to look the same. I was referring to the out of print Optimum release that looks identical to the Geneon: http://www.optimumreleasing.com/dvd.php?id=823