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

[PeterTHX]

Originally Posted by garyrc

Call me crazy, but the smile wrinkle on the left side of her mouth (our right side) looked sharper before the grain reduction and enhancement. Better than some I've seen, though.

A lot better. The processed image seems to retain just about all the detail and gets rid of the noise (remember there's grain texture and grain noise). Look at the panel on the wall next to the door in the background. The processed image also seems a lot more dimensional: the original looks flat in comparison.

I would like to see details in the pores, even on a beautiful woman like that. Since BDs aren't generally made from Super 16, but 35 mm, or digital, or even 65/70 mm, perhaps their process would allow more detail through than when they are starting with super 16.

Looks like the source is too noisy and would obscure fine detail, like pores.

As for most DNR'ed film ever: I'd say the Milla Jovovich opus Ultraviolet takes the cake.

[Jeff Kleist]

I'd like to take this opportunity to do something I"m going to repeat again on Monday

If you want more Sony TV on Blu-ray, if you want more straight dramas on Blu-ray, if you want one of the best damn shows on television on BLu-ray that I will tell you, looks freaking GREAT on Blu, then make sure you pick up Breaking Bad on Tuesday, preferably both seasons. While the first season is really uneven, season 2 looks unbelieveably good on Blu-ray. Sony's trying again with TV, and if you have other favorites that you want them to give another go to, or even give a first go, then you have to reward them for giving it a try. It's absolutly not the show I even thought I'd love. Sopranos bored me, Weeds bored me, but the characters and the writing are so good and refreshing in Breaking Bad that it's something you really don't want to miss. Pre-order it today!

Thus endeth Jeff shilling for BB season 3 on Blu-ray

[MerrickG]

Hey Jeff,

What would you bet this sequel is being announced for PS3?

http://goonlinegames.net/2010/03/12/...ed-next-month/

Im hoping its Resistance 3, but many people are predicting its Killzone 3 or Infamous 2.

All of those would thrill me, but I feel its a little too soon for an Infamous sequel. Then again, GTA: Vice City came just a year after GTA3 and it ended up being fantastic.

Whats your best guess?

[Jeff Kleist]

If it's not shenmue 3 or powerstone 3 I don't care

[MerrickG]

Originally Posted by Jeff Kleist

If it's not shenmue 3 or powerstone 3 I don't care

Take a stab at it!

[Jeff Kleist]

I really have no clue

[coolmilo]

Hi Jeff,

Why is Warner and Lionsgate using BD25 media and low bitrate encodes (average 20mbps) on several of their new releases. In particular the following new titles are released on BD25 media/low bitrate encode: Brothers, Ninja Assassin (according to Ralph Pott's review it uses BD25), Extract (Highdefdigest review), and Time Traveler's Wife to name a few.

The other interesting thing is the pricing for these titles remains high ($25 plus).

This looks like Warner is being greedy because they are selling dumbed down releases for a premium.

Are these studios sacrificing quality for profit or is there a shortage of BD50 media or something else?

It's really disappointing to me that ALL titles are not optimized for BD50 media with high bitrate encodes. I thought the days are over for building releases based on the HD DVD specification.

[Jeff Kleist]

The price difference between BD50 and BD25 is not even worth mentioning. You're paying for the content on the disc, not the physical medium. If all they needed to do was make a profit on the medium, Blu-rays would be about $5.

As technology improves, the lower the bitrate required for the same results. Ninja Assassin is barely over an hour and a half and only contains about 30 minutes of bonus material, most of which is easy to compress. Looks like it did in the theater to me.

Bitrate in and of itself is not a measure of quality. It's the end result that matters.

[coolmilo]

Thanks for the update Jeff. I guess I am freaking out for nothing. I am having format war flashbacks.

I do appreciate it when those high bitrate movies pop off the screen.

[Jeff Kleist]

Sure, but it's not necessarily the bitrate that's doing that for you There has to be stuff there it takes a high bitrate to capture Ninja Assassin is a VERY dark movie, a lot of it is ninjas scurrying around in the dark, and implied ninjas don't needa lot of bits to capture

[garyrc]

Do you guys think Blu-ray as a medium is capable of capturing the resolution and acutance of a 35 mm real-world release print (not the even better original negative), or do you think that awaits a better medium?

When some people use 8K, is it just to produce the best possible master for the future, of does it actually improve the BD we buy in 2010?

[chris0]

Originally Posted by Jeff Kleist

Sure, but it's not necessarily the bitrate that's doing that for you There has to be stuff there it takes a high bitrate to capture Ninja Assassin is a VERY dark movie, a lot of it is ninjas scurrying around in the dark, and implied ninjas don't needa lot of bits to capture

Some would argue that, since you can see said ninjas scurrying around, they're not actually ninjas. A video of true ninjas would have a very low bitrate indeed.

[Jeff Kleist]

There are many Blu-rays that are good enough to be shown on a movie theater size screen. I've had Shoot em up and a few others for example as large as 25 feet-ish. No I don't believe that they're equal to most release prints except that given the sizes of screen in the home environment, they certainly look comperable given the size discrepency.

8K mastering, the best rule of thumb is that the better source, the better the end result because there is more data to play with for the scaling and compression algorithmns (simple explanation). Transformers 2, if you can stand watching it, is a really good example of this.

Some would argue that, since you can see said ninjas scurrying around, they're not actually ninjas. A video of true ninjas would have a very low bitrate indeed.

Can't argue with that

[AnimeOnBlu]

Originally Posted by Jeff Kleist

If it's not shenmue 3 or powerstone 3 I don't care

Oh Jeff, why must you open old wounds......

[horseflesh]

Originally Posted by Jeff Kleist

I'd like to take this opportunity to do something I"m going to repeat again on Monday

If you want more Sony TV on Blu-ray, if you want more straight dramas on Blu-ray, if you want one of the best damn shows on television on BLu-ray that I will tell you, looks freaking GREAT on Blu, then make sure you pick up Breaking Bad on Tuesday, preferably both seasons. While the first season is really uneven, season 2 looks unbelieveably good on Blu-ray. Sony's trying again with TV, and if you have other favorites that you want them to give another go to, or even give a first go, then you have to reward them for giving it a try. It's absolutly not the show I even thought I'd love. Sopranos bored me, Weeds bored me, but the characters and the writing are so good and refreshing in Breaking Bad that it's something you really don't want to miss. Pre-order it today!

Thus endeth Jeff shilling for BB season 3 on Blu-ray

If I buy them will I get a solemn pledge from Penton that Seinfeld will be released in the next 12 months;
in 4:3 ratio, as originally broadcast
with an option to remove the canned laughter???

[Doctorossi]

Originally Posted by garyrc

Do you guys think Blu-ray as a medium is capable of capturing the resolution and acutance of a 35 mm real-world release print (not the even better original negative), or do you think that awaits a better medium?

Since you say "real-world release print", I presume your question is more about practical/typical performance-based measurement than about theoretical maximums. I make note of this because, from a practical performance perspective, one of the biggest factors limiting what a theatrical release print can give you is the performance of the theatre, itself.

In other words, in the "real world", there is usually a fair amount of spatial-resolution potential in a print which is "scrubbed off" by the gate of the projector.

Measured in this way (to the degree that we're actually measuring anything in this discussion), I would say that many, many BDs in 1080p set-ups beat the spatial-resolution performance of a majority of typical theatrical prints (in typical commercial performance circumstances).

[SquidPuppet]

Originally Posted by Jeff Kleist

I'd like to take this opportunity to do something I"m going to repeat again on Monday

If you want more Sony TV on Blu-ray, if you want more straight dramas on Blu-ray, if you want one of the best damn shows on television on BLu-ray that I will tell you, looks freaking GREAT on Blu, then make sure you pick up Breaking Bad on Tuesday, preferably both seasons. While the first season is really uneven, season 2 looks unbelieveably good on Blu-ray. Sony's trying again with TV, and if you have other favorites that you want them to give another go to, or even give a first go, then you have to reward them for giving it a try. It's absolutly not the show I even thought I'd love. Sopranos bored me, Weeds bored me, but the characters and the writing are so good and refreshing in Breaking Bad that it's something you really don't want to miss. Pre-order it today!

Thus endeth Jeff shilling for BB season 3 on Blu-ray

It's a fantastic show. I suspect it will sell better than Damages since it's SRP is $49 vs when Damages was $79(?) for its release.

[Penton-Man]

Originally Posted by garyrc

1) 3K is nice, but why don't transferrers and restorers master at 8K (Baraka, the new Lawrence restoration), so they will have a very HD master for when Blu-ray is obsolete?

I don’t quite understand what you’re talking about because I think you may be somewhat confused with the terminology.
Do you mean rather “3K is nice, but why don't transferrers and restorers master 35mm films at 8K (Baraka, the new Lawrence restoration), so they will have a very future-proof digital master for when Blu-ray is obsolete?

Well, first of all, even if 8k ‘mastering’ digital tools (i.e. for color grading, etc.) were readily available to all commercially, the cost of such a venture would have to be reconciled against its value for a 35mm. film. At best, I think many would consider such a project to be *an experiment* in the value of oversampling, at worst, complete over-kill and a waste of money. In fact, there is debate among mastering folk and archivists as to the value of even 6k when the film source is 35mm CinemaScope. I’ll see if I can find a pertinent link for you later on my computer at work.

As to high resolution scanning for large format films (65mm, IMAX) such as Baraka, etc., something that I think you should keep in mind is that in the past, some online *experts* have invariably considered *deficiencies* in the picture quality of the Blu-rays to be due to or caused by the amount of ‘DNR’ that was applied in post. This is yet another online fallacy, as the true reason has actually been what downconversion algorithm was employed by the post production facility, the appearance of the principal photography and thusly how the downsampling filter was accordingly adjusted, meaning there has to be a bias one way or another as it’s always a trade-off between managing the presence of aliasing artifacts vs. producing softness…….with the presence or absence of ‘grain’ not even being a remote consideration to the mastering guru (Patton, aside) because large format is essentially grainless.

P.S.
Baraka was not ‘mastered’ in 8k. There is no 8k digital master sitting in some vault for archival purposes. It was scanned in 8k then downconverted to HD and subsequently ‘mastered’ in HD.

I am not at liberty to comment upon LoA, as the project is a state secret.

[Penton-Man]

Originally Posted by garyrc

I would like to see details in the pores, even on a beautiful woman like that.

lol, maybe you would but, I guarantee you that some of talent you’ve seen in feature films (and for that matter, TV series like Desperate Housewives), DO NOT …….and thankfully acknowledge the defocus filter in post as one of the greatest things since sliced bread and the pickup truck were invented.

It’s known to even be applied by the dallies colorist so that those keen-eyed studio executives who review the dallies don’t become ‘jaded’ and thusly possibly not consider such actors and actresses for future roles due to seeing dem pores….because along with dem pores on the big screen, one can easily see dem wrinkles and crows feet.

[garyrc]

Originally Posted by Penton-Man

As to high resolution scanning for large format films (65mm, IMAX) such as Baraka, etc., something that I think you should keep in mind is that in the past, some online *experts* have invariably considered *deficiencies* in the picture quality of the Blu-rays to be due to or caused by the amount of ‘DNR’ that was applied in post. This is yet another online fallacy, as the true reason has actually been what downconversion algorithm was employed by the post production facility, the appearance of the principal photography and thusly how the downsampling filter was accordingly adjusted, meaning there has to be a bias one way or another as it’s always a trade-off between managing the presence of aliasing artifacts vs. producing softness…….with the presence or absence of ‘grain’ not even being a remote consideration to the mastering guru (Patton, aside) because large format is essentially grainless.

You're right, I don't know much about the process of transferring a movie from film to Blu-ray. Is there a nice, annotated, flow chart you could refer me to?

Since you said "Patton aside" when pointing out that grain is not an issue in transferring large format films. can you tell us something about what happened with Patton? When I saw it in 70 mm in its first run, it looked just as "essentially grainless" as any other 70 mm print (and I saw nearly all of them from 1955 up through about 1980). Although you could see grain in these 70 mm films if you looked for it, it was not very noticeable except in West Side Story, in a very few shots in Ben-Hur, and in blow-ups from 35 mm. At the sneak of Spartacus, a studio guy went out and bought a pair of binoculars to make sure they could focus on the grain from the booth (I encounered him at the camera shop).