For home video (Blu-ray), you will not see a significant difference in the imagery if the source arises from a 2K or 4K scan due to the compression that occurs down the line.
In fact, I would say that the vast majority of people couldn’t tell any difference-- if involved in a blinded experiment. The 4K scanning aspect of the Blade Runner restoration will reap its PQ benefits in future theatrical presentations, esp. in the form of DCP (Digital Cinema Packages) as digital cinema with 4K projectors becomes more common.
I respectfully disagree. The basic principle of "supersampling" is very well established.
A (nominal <> real) source resolution 4 times as high as the output resolution results in VERY obvious and significant benefits.
If you do a little photography you can easily make a test run - shoot a picture with a resolution close to the native res of your monitor - compress it with Jpeg if you like. After that set your camera to max. resolution (likely at least 4 times as high as the res of your monitor) - compress again - and simply let your picture viewer scale it down to the same output size as before (if you want to get sophisticated use a Lanczos scaling filter for example). Compare these two pictures on the fly. "no difference"?
Lots of “critical” discussion on many consumer forums is incorrect.
For instance, on AVS the comment about The Fifth Element (Remastered) being…………..
“Incorrect inverse telecine of 1080i source material causes combing” in the thread started by mhafner about EE and DNR is just plain wrong.
.
If you want to dispute something on that list please post there with specifics.
Care to comment on these new Sony Blu-ray Players?
This is my post earlier in another thread. Is there anything else you may know that could fill in any blank spaces?
Sony will be introducing two new Blu-ray Disc Players. One the first week of July 2008, Model# BDP-S350, which passes all high bit advanced audio codecs (like the Panasonic DMP-BD30) to an outboard decorder (Pre-Amp or Receiver) and will be Profile 1.1 . The other player, coming out the first week of August 2008, the BDP-S550, will incorperate all the high bit advanced audio codec decoders in the player and will also be Profile 1.1. Both are HDMI 1.3a, catagory 2 compliant (output). Load times are faster. Both will play CD's, but not SACD. Both will have 5.1 Analog out as well.
I respectfully disagree. The basic principle of "supersampling" is very well established.
A (nominal <> real) source resolution 4 times as high as the output resolution results in VERY obvious and significant benefits.
If you do a little photography you can easily make a test run - shoot a picture with a resolution close to the native res of your monitor - compress it with Jpeg if you like. After that set your camera to max. resolution (likely at least 4 times as high as the res of your monitor) - compress again - and simply let your picture viewer scale it down to the same output size as before (if you want to get sophisticated use a Lanczos scaling filter for example). Compare these two pictures on the fly. "no difference"?
Same basic principle.
Well Walter, I’m not going to engage in an argument with you over this because I just found out last night the grandparents on my mother’s side are from Austria.
People can choose what they care to believe no matter what you tell them. If you prefer somebody else’s opinion on this subject, since you also frequent AVS, I suggest you search the posts of a guy named Dr.D or Mr.D……..whatever.
Few people know (or at least did at that time) that he is a film compositor that worked for years at Cinesite London as I know one of his colleagues personally. He often watched 35mm rushes struck from the 4k and 2k neg filmouts on a commercial sized cinema screen in their viewing theater as part of his job description. On that thread, he express the exact same opinion as I did above.
If it makes you feel better I will qualify my comment. A few people may notice a slight difference in the detail of the imagery of Blu-ray material that started life from a 4K scan, if they are viewing on screens greater than 110-120” inches……. depending on the film.
And I am being very generous with the terms “few” and “slight”.
For home video (Blu-ray), you will not see a significant difference in the imagery if the source arises from a 2K or 4K scan due to the compression that occurs down the line.
In fact, I would say that the vast majority of people couldn’t tell any difference-- if involved in a blinded experiment. The 4K scanning aspect of the Blade Runner restoration will reap its PQ benefits in future theatrical presentations, esp. in the form of DCP (Digital Cinema Packages) as digital cinema with 4K projectors becomes more common.
As a side note, the 70mm elements of Blade Runner got an 8K scan for the restoration process. Apparently somebody thinks there is SOMETHING in all that extra resolution.
I won't say that it's necessarily relevant for a 1080p presentation on a TV of sane size though.
More on topic, I saw the HDnet broadcast of Lawrence of Arabia, and it looked pretty awful IMO. If the Blu-ray looks like that it will be kind of a letdown, never mind what process was or wasn't used to get there. Other old 70mm films on Blu-ray have looked considerably better.
As a side note, the 70mm elements of Blade Runner got an 8K scan for the restoration process. Apparently somebody thinks there is SOMETHING in all that extra resolution.
Well then it is a good thing that Chris Cookson is now working for Sony Pictures, isn’t it?
You might want to check on what division he is President of.
B.T.W. sean,
FWIW, a 6K scan of LoA would capture all the detail present on the 70mm. film elements for archival purposes……given the lens most often used during the primary photography.
If you give me a week or so, I can search for a scientific paper by people from Panavision that proves the point.(Check my Insider’s thread as I don’t care to hijack paidgeek’s thread anymore with this discussion).
More on topic, I saw the HDnet broadcast of Lawrence of Arabia, and it looked pretty awful IMO. If the Blu-ray looks like that it will be kind of a letdown, never mind what process was or wasn't used to get there. Other old 70mm films on Blu-ray have looked considerably better.
I had the same reaction, I was wondering if it was due to compression of the signal over the copper wires or what, but something about it bothered me, is "mushy" and accurate descriptor, I felt like colors and details where mushly or slushy,
Congrats on the recent victory! I wanted to ask, are there certian groups that decide what BD will go to what country first. For exmple I see that Gemany is getting "Snatch" next month and there is nothing shceduled for any other country (at least that I have found)? It seems bizarre since this title did so well in the major countries like US, UK, and Japan. Is there a marketing strategy behind this move or do organizers in each country decide individually what title they want to work on?
I had the same reaction, I was wondering if it was due to compression of the signal over the copper wires or what, but something about it bothered me, is "mushy" and accurate descriptor, I felt like colors and details where mushly or slushy,
Disregard, It is airing again now and looks way better, I compared to the airing I had initially dvr'd and based my opinion off of, and this is indeed much better, it was very likely signal compression from the cable company (which they sometimes do at varying levels) it now looks much better.
I'll have to try and dvr again or wait for the blu release
I respectfully disagree. The basic principle of "supersampling" is very well established.
A (nominal <> real) source resolution 4 times as high as the output resolution results in VERY obvious and significant benefits.
If you do a little photography you can easily make a test run - shoot a picture with a resolution close to the native res of your monitor - compress it with Jpeg if you like. After that set your camera to max. resolution (likely at least 4 times as high as the res of your monitor) - compress again - and simply let your picture viewer scale it down to the same output size as before (if you want to get sophisticated use a Lanczos scaling filter for example). Compare these two pictures on the fly. "no difference"?
Same basic principle.
Should you not scale first, and compress only after that in the latter case to make this discussion relevant for 1080p compressed format? If the compression is on higher rez, it's rather obvious there will be difference, but the compressed file of the 4x rez image will be also a lot bigger.
Moderators: Please take note that while I mention some upcoming DVD releases with no announced Blu-ray releases, I am not asking for information regarding said titles, but simply using examples in my question. I'm posting this question to TWO Insiders (Paidgeek & Maxpower1987) but any insider is welcome to chime in additionally, though they should feel no pressure to comment on any unannounced releases. Also note that while I've read comments before by the insiders and moderators regarding similar questions, I am curious to their thoughts and replies.
When Blu-ray first started out, the pressure to release "demo material" was certainly high, and the pressure didn't die down when the PS3 was released as studios needed to release movies aimed at attracting the "gamer" crowd who were accessible via the PS3. During that time, we've managed to get some classics like "Rocky", "Close Encounters Of The Third Kind", "The Searchers", "Viva Las Vegas", "Bullitt", "The Shining", "2001: A Space Odyssey" to the upcoming "A Passage To India" as well as smaller less known new releases like "Paprika", "The Lookout", "Black Book", "The Lives Of Others" and more. We've even managed to get a few TV seasons out pretty early in the game, but some new releases still get the Blu-ray shaft.
Some releases last year went straight to DVD only like "Rise: Blood Hunter", "In The Land Of Women", "Waitress", and titles like "Martian Child", "Rendition", "Stargate SG-1: The Ark Of Truth", "The Seeker", "Southland Tales", "In The Name Of The King", "The Final Season", and TV series/season sets like "Torchwood: Season One", "Blade: The Complete Series", "Painkiller Jane: The Complete Series", "My Boys: Season One" and more. As someone who is now Blu-ray only (other than the occasional TV series made before HDTV... I've been enjoying "Buck Rogers In The 25th Century" recently), this is somewhat disappointing given that I would have purchased some of the above discs, but have/will pass on them due to the lack of a Blu-ray release. Now, I can understand the reluctance to release some of these titles given the cost associated with preparing a disc for sale... especially the TV series with multiple discs, and some the above titles given their less than Grade A status (though I'm kind of surprised by the lack of release for "Waitress" and SG-1), but my questions are these:
1. What is the thinking behind which Day & Date titles to release and which to hold back on? I mean, obviously titles like "Spider-Man 3" and "The Simpsons Movie" make sense to release over some of the above mentioned titles. I'm interested in what makes a studio release "I Know Who Killed Me", "Dragon Wars", "Daddy Day Camp", "Home Of The Brave", "Return To The House On Haunted Hill", "Appleseed Ex Machina", "Steep", etc., over some of the above titles? Does a studio sell more releasing a catalog title like "Hoosiers" or "Me, Myself & Irene" on Blu-ray than a new lesser known Day & Date title? Does a studio sell more titles like "The Lives Of Others" and "Black Book" than they would titles that gets more exposure and more theater releases? How does multiple region releases come into play when releasing these titles, other than the money savings?
2. While I can understand the wait to release certain titles like LOTR or the Star Wars series, and I'm amazed at the abundance of riches we've already received, are the studios really not wanting to invest the money to get these titles out now and have them on the shelves, and instead wanting to wait until there are more consumers? Will this force some movies to simply be put on the backburner for years... or in the cases of some, simply be put to pasture on DVD and cable TV?
3. I have always resented the PS3 owners only buy movies aimed at gamers dig at Blu-ray, as I purchased a PS3 for Blu-ray movies (though I have 6 games now as well) and am over 100 Blu-ray movies now of multiple genres, decades, styles and demographics. I have said this theory was shot down by New Line Home Video's release of "Hairspray" in the Top 10 HDM sales for two or three weeks as I don't see the gamer mentality having a thing for John Travolta in a dress. While I have no doubt that the end of the format war will solve this problem, my question is, are we truly past the "demo material" stage, or are we (at the moment) still stuck in that rut?
4. I read an article earlier this week about the war being over will bring more titles to Blu-ray. While I have no doubt this is true, is this referring to all HD-ready titles released concurrently, or is this referring to more catalog titles along with a few more D&D titles being released, but still leaving some HD-ready titles out?
5. With the war (effectively) over, what is your thinking when studios will start to release more TV titles? This year? Or will we have to wait until next year, or until a certain amount of consumers buy into Blu-ray?
~Alan
Last edited by Alan Gordon; 02-21-2008 at 06:45 AM.
I'm interested in what makes a studio release "I Know Who Killed Me", "Dragon Wars", "Daddy Day Camp", "Home Of The Brave", "Rescue Dawn", "Return To The House On Haunted Hill", "Appleseed Ex Machina", "Steep", etc., over some of the above titles?
You're seriously comparing Rescue Dawn to the rest of those titles? Ugh.
All countries
Argentina
Austria
Belgium
Brazil
Bulgaria
Chile
China
Colombia
Cyprus
Czech Republic
Estonia
Denmark
Finland
Greece
Hong Kong
Hungary
Iceland
Indonesia
Ireland
Israel
India
Latvia
Lithuania
Malaysia
New Zealand
Norway
Philippines
Poland
Portugal
Romania
Russia
Singapore
South Africa
South Korea
Sweden
Switzerland
Taiwan
Thailand
Turkey
Ukraine
United Arab Emirates
4K transfers
I'm not liking the 1.1-only players. I was hoping we'd see MANY more 2.0 players so the studios would be more likely to take advantage of BD-Live. 
Linear Mode
