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

[Vincent Pereira]

Originally Posted by pro-bassoonist

Vincent,

Oink chimed in long after there were all sorts of different confirmations coming in from all sorts of different places that the presentation was indeed solid. When eric.exe speculated that there were encoding errors of some sort his reply was That is really bizarre - which is what I am trying to point out: get the disc, watch it, and judge the quality; don't go around creating buzz without having seen the actual disc, because things can't really be that bizarre when you have not seen the transfer.

It is a very simple concept

Oh I agree, and believe me I am not one to defend Mr. Oink (who actually suggested that Gordon Willis claimed to have approved THE GODFATHER restorations for monetary reasons), I just wanted to be fair and point out that most of the folks on that other site in THE THIN RED LINE thread did come out in favor of that superb Blu-ray. Internet nutter that I may be, I absolutely concur that the hysterical over-reaction to early screen shots over there is often absurdly over the top. It also occurred in THE EXORCIST thread, and of course now that the disc is out and everyone can see how terrific it is. It's also starting in the APOCALYPSE NOW thread over there. I understand completely where you're coming from, I was just trying to be fair and balanced

Vincent

[pro-bassoonist]

Originally Posted by Vincent Pereira

Oh I agree, and believe me I am not one to defend Mr. Oink (who actually suggested that Gordon Willis claimed to have approved THE GODFATHER restorations for monetary reasons), I just wanted to be fair and point out that most of the folks on that other site in THE THIN RED LINE thread did come out in favor of that superb Blu-ray. Internet nutter that I may be, I absolutely concur that the hysterical over-reaction to early screen shots over there is often absurdly over the top. It also occurred in THE EXORCIST thread, and of course now that the disc is out and everyone can see how terrific it is. It's also starting in the APOCALYPSE NOW thread over there. I understand completely where you're coming from, I was just trying to be fair and balanced

Vincent

Absolutely, Vincent. I wholeheartedly agree with everything you have written.

I rarely read AVS, if ever, because it has been taken over by a small group of people with very telling histories (just like a few other forums have been) that have completely driven away anyone who does not share their negative opinions. I also see that there is this new perception floating around that unless there is a 4K scan the final product is a total disaster. Obviously, someone like you knows very well that this isn't the case, and that in reality things are rarely as black or white as some people claim they are (The Last of the Mohicans being the perfect example).

On a similar note, I am extremely sad to see that a whole new breed of "reviews" is now being promoted where film analysis is no longer the focus of attention; rather there is an urge to rush and "review" almost entirely via screencaptures, which rarely, if ever, tell the whole story (no pun intended).

In any event, good to see you around, and have a wonderful weekend

Pro-B

[MerrickG]

Originally Posted by pro-bassoonist

Absolutely, Vincent. I wholeheartedly agree with everything you have written.

I rarely read AVS, if ever, because it has been taken over by a small group of people with very telling histories (just like a few other forums have been) that have completely driven away anyone who does not share their negative opinions. I also see that there is this new perception floating around that unless there is a 4K scan the final product is a total disaster. Obviously, someone like you knows very well that this isn't the case, and that in reality things are rarely as black or white as some people claim they are (The Last of the Mohicans being the perfect example).

On a similar note, I am extremely sad to see that a whole new breed of "reviews" is now being promoted where film analysis is no longer the focus of attention; rather there is an urge to rush and "review" almost entirely via screencaptures, which rarely, if ever, tell the whole story (no pun intended).

In any event, good to see you around, and have a wonderful weekend

Pro-B

Excellent post.

I do feel that it is important to point out that once the actual discs do come out and people do get the chance to see them in motion and then people come to conclusion that they look like crap THEN I feel that expressing ourselves is fair game.

But until then:
Wait for the DAMN discs!!

[HeavyHitter]

Originally Posted by merrick97

For the screenshots Ive seen, the bluray was better than the HDTV version.

The people claiming these "problems" with the bluray are full of crap.

http://comparescreenshots.slicx.com/...5377/picture:1

Look at the mole on Doc Browns face and the wrinkles on his forehead. I dare anyone to try and tell me the HDTV version is the superior one.

In addition, and I've made this point before on some releases, but some of the grain on the HDTV version seems like it's just not compressed well. There's more noise if you get your eyes right up to the monitor screen and flip back and forth between the BD and HDTV version. A lot of people mistaken compression issues as film grain....such was especially the case with the original Predator BD.

Now, on shot #8, the HDTV definitely looks more natural to me as less EE or sharpening was used. The color looks better too.

[gettodamoofies]

Originally Posted by Ray_Rogers

By the way to the insider who typed the Theatrical Cut of Payback isn't available on Blu-ray.
http://www.amazon.co.uk/Payback-Blu-...6664858&sr=8-1

I take it The Digital Bits doesn't support importing at all?

It's available here in Australia also and I highly recommend it.

[Jeff Kleist]

I take it The Digital Bits doesn't support importing at all?

Of course we do, but that also doesn't mean that we know about every single import that's out there,

[MerrickG]

Originally Posted by Ray_Rogers

Based on your guys vast egotism you guys most certainly should. Only insiders for Hollywood I take it? Sorry, if I were a film director, I wouldn't tell The Digital Bits shit.

Well you're not a film director or anybody important for that matter, just an anonymous little kid sitting behind his computer who probably has no life and wants to feel all powerful thanks to the anonymity the internet provides.

Bill has more friends and contacts in Hollywood and the film industry than you could ever hope to have in ANY industry.

Bill and the bits will continue to get a lot of feedback from insiders and directors.

He has that thing called a track record. I have gotten tons of good advice from Bill and have had many pleasant conversations with him off the record.

He knows his stuff.

What do you have?

_________________


Thats what I thought....

[Rob71]

Originally Posted by merrick97

Well you're not a film director or anybody important for that matter, just an anonymous little kid sitting behind his computer who probably has no life and wants to feel all powerful thanks to the anonymity the internet provides.

Bill has more friends and contacts in Hollywood and the film industry than you could ever hope to have in ANY industry.

Bill and the bits will continue to get a lot of feedback from insiders and directors.

He has that thing called a track record. I have gotten tons of good advice from Bill and have had many pleasant conversations with him off the record.

He knows his stuff.

What do you have?

_________________


Thats what I thought....

A hatred of John Wayne, apparently.

[Jeff Kleist]

Based on your guys vast egotism you guys most certainly should. Only insiders for Hollywood I take it? Sorry, if I were a film director, I wouldn't tell The Digital Bits shit.

If I recall, he's still mad that we publically sided with Blu instead of quietly taking the cash, and especially because we were right. He considered such an open declaration to be a violation of journalstic ethics (yet of course AICN gets no such hate )

There is no objectivity in journalism or in life. Your view is colored by your experiences, and too many people believe objectivity involves giving both sides of something, no matter how crazy one may be, equal ink. The Bits endorsing Blu-ray, for those not around at the time, was a response to the overwhelming bought support around the internet, and a function of the editorial section in an opinion column. Just as newspapers endorse candidates, we backed our horse, and like any actual newspaper, we did it without a check in our pocket. Wish a lot of other people could say the same.

[DNinja]

I'm glad The Digital Bits took a stand to support Blu-Ray. The internet was full of so much misinformation at the time that I didn't want to buy any high definition movies until the format war was over. I bought a PS3 strictly for gaming and only had a handful of movies for well over a year. After the Bits sided with Blu-Ray and gave a thorough explanation why, I finally felt more comfortable moving on from DVD.

[BillieCassin]

Originally Posted by merrick97

I feel that now more and more people instead of actually WATCHING THE DAMN FILM and being able to appreciate the significant improvement it offers over dvd the enthusiasts now get out their microscopes and go out of their way to find things wrong with the look of the film and then cherry pick the worst examples. The thing is that most of this stuff is stuff that most people (even enthusiasts) would never notice.

It's to be expected at an enthusiast site. Go to a Disney park fan board, and read all about the paint chip that is on one of the sign posts in the Haunted Mansion queue and is the ruin of Disneyland and destroying lives, or how Disney changing the paper they print receipts on is going to cause the destruction of the entire park and lead to the end of western civilization.

I glance at the video reviews (usually skip past the audio because if it sounds clear that's all I care about, and I have yet to find a really bad audio track) but I don't sit and obsess over them because I just don't care. I want a good, quality picture, better than what I've seen before. I understand a decent amount of video concepts and terms (i.e. I know a compression artifact from a black crush), but it seems they have invented all kinds of new terms for "defects" that people see with Blu-ray (I still have yet to see or understand "banding", even looking at comparisons that are supposedly examples).

It's just a symptom of fandom. For most people, DVD is good enough, and Blu looks even better. I kind of feel bad for people that can't just sit back and enjoy a film on Blu without getting those microscopes out and analyzing every pixel. I just watch movies, and if it looks good (and it almost always does on Blu) I'm happy. The only thing I can't stand are compression artifacts, which are thankfully absent from most Blu's.

Originally Posted by Mr. Cinema

Does this pic below look smeared to anyone else?

[Show spoiler]

If that picture is "smeared" or not is irrelevant.

That is a screenshot.

Screenshots are not accurate representations of the quality of a moving film, they must be taken artificially by software which puts something between you and the picture, and if you cherry pick a frame from even the most admired releases I am sure someone could find a complaint.

People should at least wait until they've actually seen the material in question before they go all "Predator". Or it will just backfire - cry wolf too many times (or in this case, "cry excessive DNR!") and eventually no one will care. At the very least people should wait until it's actually in their hands before they moan about it.

[DaViD Boulet]

Originally Posted by Ray_Rogers

Based on your guys vast egotism you guys most certainly should. Only insiders for Hollywood I take it? Sorry, if I were a film director, I wouldn't tell The Digital Bits shit.

a bit extreme for someone quite understandably not knowing about every single blu-ray release on the planet.

[Anthony P]

Originally Posted by merrick97

And thats the problem.

Neither you or I have ANY idea what the original print looked like. How can you say that these screenshots are representative of the actual master?

I am not specifically calling you out here, but I am just sick to death of all these comments on picture quality when most of these people know NOTHING about how these films were shot or how they were intended to look.

could not have said it better myself

[Anthony P]

Originally Posted by 42041

Don't care about the DVDs, I'm comparing blu-rays against blu-rays.

but you can't compare BDs to BDs every film, every stock, every camera ,every scene is different, that means comparing two different films could give you very different results even before you even start, then add editing and processing, age, restoration techniques and it becomes even less comparable by the time you have a digital master. compression and stuff only comes in at the tip of the iceberg.

In the end it is like the fat person that says "let me weight myself without my underwear" as if the underwear is the what makes the difference.

Don't get me wrong, you can have something great and then mess it up with filters and compression so that it is "awful", but how do you know that it does not look "awful" for other reasons?

[MerrickG]

Originally Posted by BillieCassin

It's to be expected at an enthusiast site. Go to a Disney park fan board, and read all about the paint chip that is on one of the sign posts in the Haunted Mansion queue and is the ruin of Disneyland and destroying lives, or how Disney changing the paper they print receipts on is going to cause the destruction of the entire park and lead to the end of western civilization.

I glance at the video reviews (usually skip past the audio because if it sounds clear that's all I care about, and I have yet to find a really bad audio track) but I don't sit and obsess over them because I just don't care. I want a good, quality picture, better than what I've seen before. I understand a decent amount of video concepts and terms (i.e. I know a compression artifact from a black crush), but it seems they have invented all kinds of new terms for "defects" that people see with Blu-ray (I still have yet to see or understand "banding", even looking at comparisons that are supposedly examples).

It's just a symptom of fandom. For most people, DVD is good enough, and Blu looks even better. I kind of feel bad for people that can't just sit back and enjoy a film on Blu without getting those microscopes out and analyzing every pixel. I just watch movies, and if it looks good (and it almost always does on Blu) I'm happy. The only thing I can't stand are compression artifacts, which are thankfully absent from most Blu's.



If that picture is "smeared" or not is irrelevant.

That is a screenshot.

Screenshots are not accurate representations of the quality of a moving film, they must be taken artificially by software which puts something between you and the picture, and if you cherry pick a frame from even the most admired releases I am sure someone could find a complaint.

People should at least wait until they've actually seen the material in question before they go all "Predator". Or it will just backfire - cry wolf too many times (or in this case, "cry excessive DNR!") and eventually no one will care. At the very least people should wait until it's actually in their hands before they moan about it.

Excellent post.

I will wait until reviews of the actual set come out and IF it turns out that people's worst fears are true THEN I will be right there with them complaining, but until I get a credible review I will remain excited.

[MerrickG]

Originally Posted by DaViD Boulet

a bit extreme for someone quite understandably not knowing about every single blu-ray release on the planet.

And COMPLETELY baseless and unnecessary. I also doubt he can give a SINGLE reason why directors and filmmakers shouldn't continue to talk to the bits.

This kind of bitterness is just plain SAD.

[Xorp]

Originally Posted by BillieCassin

I understand a decent amount of video concepts and terms (i.e. I know a compression artifact from a black crush), but it seems they have invented all kinds of new terms for "defects" that people see with Blu-ray (I still have yet to see or understand "banding", even looking at comparisons that are supposedly examples)

............

Screenshots are not accurate representations of the quality of a moving film, they must be taken artificially by software which puts something between you and the picture,

You claim to only have a decent understanding of video concepts, and back it up by stating you don't know what banding is, which is one the most basic and obvious video artifacts (it's HD 101), but then have enough video knowledge to state how a screenshot is taken? (which you did incorrectly) Funny stuff.

[AlexLight]

Hi, everyone!
Any news on Harry Potter 3&4 UCE? PQ/AQ, Final specs for audio, new extras?
Only one week left till the release, and no sign of any info on that. Did WB send screeners to reviewers?

[wallendo]

Originally Posted by Jeff Kleist

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-11506354

WB has canceled the 3D version of Potter 7.0, because they "couldn't finish the conversion in time".

Translation- They've finally figured out that quick and dirty fake 3D is going to kill the golden goose before it really has a chance to get going

Hopefully they've given up on the whole idea, but I'm sure that a suprise 3D version will pop up just short of part 2 for a few weeks anyway.

It is a shame they didn't film in 3-D. Was it too late in the process, or were they trying to save money?

I suspect 7.1 will be in 3-D.
They will release the entire series on BD in an "Full Series" Box. in Summer 2011.
They will release the "Ultimate Edition" full series in December 2011.
Then they will convert all 8 movies to 3-D and release the "3-D Full Series Edition (Theatrical Versions)" in December 2012.
The the "3-D Ultimate Edition" in 2013.
In 2014, WB will announce plans to reboot the series.

[MerrickG]

Originally Posted by wallendo

It is a shame they didn't film in 3-D. Was it too late in the process, or were they trying to save money?

I suspect 7.1 will be in 3-D.
They will release the entire series on BD in an "Full Series" Box. in Summer 2011.
They will release the "Ultimate Edition" full series in December 2011.
Then they will convert all 8 movies to 3-D and release the "3-D Full Series Edition (Theatrical Versions)" in December 2012.
The the "3-D Ultimate Edition" in 2013.
In 2014, WB will announce plans to reboot the series.

Justin Bieber will play Harry.