"Club Penton" - Ask questions to Hollywood insider "Penton-Man"

[DenonCI]

Originally Posted by Penton-Man

I haven’t keep up with the most current *scientists* except for reading a couple of links from a thread on an outside forum which were passed onto me a couple weeks or so ago via PM. It seems that the poster (a technician who actually works in the mastering or encoding/authoring business) took them to task because he had reached his limit of frustration with their nonsense.

I’ll post his comments when I’ve got time to search my inbox again.
Classic stuff.
Could qualify for post(s) of the year.

Would LOVE to see those quotes!

[Penton-Man]

Originally Posted by DenonCI

Would LOVE to see those quotes!

This is a copy and paste of the PM sent to me (minus the sender’s name) –

Hi Penton. Thanks for the enlightening post about the photography of Gremlins today on your insider’s thread. The only thing that I would disagree with you about is that people don’t have to “wait” for the screenshot scientists to bash the look of it like you said………since they already did so back at the end of September. The following snippets are from AVS, I cut out the best parts posted by Cliff who got fed up the with screenshot science on AVS. I think he does encoding work for or has done work for Lionsgate on other Blu-ray movies.
FYI, back in July, I heard John Hora the DP for Gremlins speak at the Egyptian Theater in a Q&A following a screening of the Black Narcissus – great guy!

Originally Posted by Kram Sacul

Maybe Xylon or someone can do a comparison with the broadcast HD version.

……….You can't compare two still images from two different mediums and come to any sort of rational conclusion about the hows and whys of the finished product. Were they sourced from the exact same transfer? Was the same element used for all versions? Was the same telecine equipment used for each version? Have you accounted for the fact that the broadcast version is probably a 1080i HDCAM or HDCAM SR while the Blu-ray is a completely different 1080p24 HDCAM SR and the DVD is a downconverted DigiBeta? Were all of the different versions handled by the same dub or post house? Is the broadcast version processed in anyway? What was the original camera used to shoot the film? What film stock did they utilize? Who approved the transfer (or transfers if there have been more than one- Braveheart has had at least three high def transfers that I know of in the past 14 years)? Were the any special demands by those who approved? There are so many variables to these different releases that to be able to make definitive declarations about the quality of one versus the other is impossible. No matter what screen shots Xylon or anyone else posts, anyone with free will and a knowledge of and desire to actually enjoy films should be able to see that this is a great release of Gremlins. Is it too dark? I don't know... compared to what- a 35mm presentation that might have been projected too brightly? I saw a new print of Ghostbusters recently and the Blu-ray is not as blown out as people would have you believe. While I used to find these screen shots interesting and amusing, I now find them virus-like and incredibly dangerous.
http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showp...4&postcount=45

Originally Posted by Kram Sacul

You're right, we can only guess why they look different. The point though is to see how they look different and Xylon and others who can post frame grabs are invaluable in that regard.

But the problem I have is that the screenshots create a mob mentality (and not an entirely educated one). There seems to be a prevailing notion that if an image is largely devoid of grain that it has been "scrubbed" or "DNR'd to hell" or "a wax museum" - all terms I loath and terms that do a lot to destroy someone's credibility in my opinion. While I won't deny that noise reduction is used to varying degrees on almost all releases, noise reduction isn't the primary offender for a lot of what it gets blamed for.

I also think that despite people thinking that screenshots are a perfect emulation of what a Blu-ray represents, movies are meant to be viewed on properly set up systems and, oh yeah... in motion. I know I've never had my computer monitor professionally ISF calibrated, but I have had my 73" Mitsubishi professionally done. There are shots presented in some of these threads that are truly appalling, but that look very good to great on my larger, properly calibrated screen. Which presentation should I give more merit? Which one do most people in these threads (you know, the people who never actually watch some of these discs based on the screenshots they view on their own uncalibrated LCD monitors)?.........

I've noticed that several people have proudly proclaimed themselves to be 'Screenshot Scientists,' an obvious FU to Penton Man and some of the gang over at Blu-ray.com, but I have to say, a scientist actually collects all of the facts needed before coming to a conclusion. They don't gather as many as they can (or simply want) and then just fill in the rest with opinion and guesses. You say you're just interested in seeing 'how they look different,' but that isn't what happens now. People see a difference and then create entire scenarios about what went wrong (assuming something actually DID go wrong) and then those scenarios mange to suddenly find themselves regurgitated over and over as facts. That's not science... that's something more akin to religion or folklore……
http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showp...4&postcount=54

[DenonCI]

Thanks Penton...very enlightening. Go figure, a movie should be judged while it's in motion, what a novel thought

[Hep]

Good read Penton, and I'm sure all that rational thought was welcomed with open arms by the scientists .

[SquidPuppet]

The 800cc formula is dead

X 5 gazillion.

[sharkshark]

Respectfully, Penton, I think there's a better post from Cliff in that thread that speaks eloquently to the point at hand:

For roughly $23, you can now OWN a copy of Gremlins that I can only imagine is as good or better visually than what you would have seen on screen in 1984 (certainly better black levels, colors, cleaner) and with undoubtedly better sound. At what point does the quest for something finally become less important than the goal?

http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showt...1183827&page=3

This, daresay I, is the heart of the issue - forget screenshot bashing, 'red ant' and other namecalling/ childishness madness, even (dare I say here) format zealotry, the film is the thing. Red, Blu, Grain/DNR police, the whole this is a massive distraction from what, in the end, is the core, our enjoyment and appreciation of the art of filmmaking, and this magical age where in the comfort of our own theatres we can experience this in a way we never have before.

Kudos to Cliff for the eloquent and patient posts he has generated in that AVS thread, one that I frankly wouldn't have frequented if it were not for Penton's link.

[Clark Kent]

What would end the rampant speculation by the screenshot scientists is a full accounting of the chain of equipment and who made what decisions when transferring a film to Blu-ray. It could easily be included as a text page on the Blu-ray itself. The movie studios could take a page from certain audiophile music releases, which list in explicit detail the chain of equipment the music was recorded on and then transferred with to whatever consumer format it was released. The recent Beatles' remasters have had their entire mastering chain published step by step.

I have seen limited information of this variety already listed in the credits on BD. A recent Blu-ray I watched had the company responsible for the Digital Intermediate listed in the credits (Cine-byte Digital for anyone wondering). In the information age, content of this type will help to satisfy inquiring minds of a more technical persuasion.

The studios following best practices with regard to mastering Blu-rays should have no problem publishing this information. Now the studios dumping 10-year old telecined HD masters with numerous problems on the market might be more hesitant.

[PeterTHX]

Clark: they basically did that with Baraka, had the people responsible for the disc on the AVS Forum, and still those "scientists" cried foul. So I doubt it would help matters.

[DenonCI]

Clark, "The Curious Case of Benjamin Button" was the same. There is an insert in the box explaining the process.

[DenonCI]

Originally Posted by Clark Kent

The studios following best practices with regard to mastering Blu-rays should have no problem publishing this information. Now the studios dumping 10-year old telecined HD masters with numerous problems on the market might be more hesitant.

That would be a nice addition, but I'm not sure how some studios would feel about the process. Penton, what do you think? Granted, 99.9% of the public doesn't give a damn

[42041]

Originally Posted by DenonCI

Go figure, a movie should be judged while it's in motion, what a novel thought

What, don't you know DNR is old-hat? The hot new thing in complaining about blu-rays is "color changes" and "boosted contrast". Because of course, every DVD, laserdisc, and HDTV broadcast had colors that are absolutely faithful to the release prints but now the studios are out to ruin your favorite movies like Braveheart by giving them new HD transfers with DIFFERENT COLORS any difference is always for the worse and something you'd totally notice without a direct comparison

i'll certainly embrace the label of "screenshot scientist" and whine about baraka all day but even I can't stomach some of those threads anymore

[sharkshark]

I guess if there's really something to be upset about, just take a moment to recognize that only a decade or so out, there will be a significantly smaller population that will be viewing any films on celluloid. From art houses that are sure to go digital in order to save money on shipping of prints, to the latest, immaculate blockbuster projected in 4K or higher, 3d, etc., we'll see an entire generation that thinks the application of artificial grain on DI'd films to be little more than a pathetic anachronism.

Let's also not lose sight that, extracted from the hyperbole, there are at least some that look to the studios to do as good a job as they can to preserve the film in a digital form that as best as possible reflects the =projected= result. The fact that there are those blindly ignorant as to the multiplicity of factors that must be engaged in order to accomplish this, and similar retardation regarding the actual production of these images onto photochemical negative, means that the constant cries of 'wolf' drown out those instance where, alas, we've gotten less than we should have.

Baraka looks amazing, near perfect, but the hyperbole of the disc extras made it ripe for (obsessive) nit picking. Patton, famed whipping boy, pales to what it -should- have been, and even the most dogmatic studio supporter would concede that some mistakes were made.

We're left, I hope, with a generation expecting near perfection, not in terms of glossy, Speed Racer-like video image, but in the HD disc presenting film with as much of its wonderful flaws and characteristics as possible. The fact that there are many, many more discs that DO live up to expectations, versus those anomolies like Pattons, mean that hopefully some will take time away from the forums and actually enjoy these film in motion, on as big a screen as they can afford, and appreciate them aside from being mindless eye candy.

[Jeff Kleist]

What would end the rampant speculation by the screenshot scientists is a full accounting of the chain of equipment and who made what decisions when transferring a film to Blu-ray. It could easily be included as a text page on the Blu-ray itself. The movie studios could take a page from certain audiophile music releases, which list in explicit detail the chain of equipment the music was recorded on and then transferred with to whatever consumer format it was released. The recent Beatles' remasters have had their entire mastering chain published step by step.

It will never be good enough for them. They'll just find something new to complain about. It's like political punditry, once the public starts paying attention to you, you have to keep your audience engaged and riled up.

[Esox50]

Jeff, in light of the Rumor Mill update...I have chosen Jurassic Park as my new "friendly banter" title, as Braveheart was previously.

It's only November, so we'll start the back and forth in 2010, and I'm sure Penton-Man will get into the mix as well.

-Esox

[4K2K]

Have any studios given dates by which all of their new Blu-ray titles will work with Resume Play, like some Blu-ray titles do and all DVDs do? When can we expect the majority of Blu-ray titles to work with this feature?

[Jeff Kleist]

I'll get on seeing how long I can delay JP I still have my script I was planning for Braveheart, it can easily be adapted, though I'll have to find some new scenarios

Resume play is a proprietary java applet, so all the authoring houses will have to figure out how it's done and write their own, or purchase a license.

So 12 months at least, as I doubt Disney is sharing it, or the two houses I know have their own versions

[Penton-Man]

Originally Posted by 42041

i'll certainly embrace the label of "screenshot scientist" and whine about baraka all day but even I can't stomach some of those threads anymore

I think the slope of the graph just became slightly steeper……….
http://twitpic.com/jcn7k

[Penton-Man]

Originally Posted by 42041

What, don't you know DNR is old-hat? The hot new thing in complaining about blu-rays is "color changes" and "boosted contrast". Because of course, every DVD, laserdisc, and HDTV broadcast had colors that are absolutely faithful to the release prints but now the studios are out to ruin your favorite movies like Braveheart by giving them new HD transfers with DIFFERENT COLORS

lol, you betcha!

Little known industry secret is that the theme song for all mastering personnel in Hollywood is this (which they play all day at work)……..
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JR16WGh0JOI

Funny ironic aside though………anyone out there (esp. TV engineers) know what the slang acronym for NTSC is? (other than, Never Tested Since Christ), anyone?

[Deciazulado]

Notice the screen capture!

[DenonCI]

Originally Posted by Penton-Man

lol, you betcha!

Little known industry secret is that the theme song for all mastering personnel in Hollywood is this (which they play all day at work)……..
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JR16WGh0JOI

Funny ironic aside though………anyone out there (esp. TV engineers) know what the slang acronym for NTSC is? (other than, Never Tested Since Christ), anyone?

Never the same color (twice)?