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

[Penton-Man]

Originally Posted by Esox50

It'll all be fine. ...... Stay the course.

Well Yeah!
What's the alternative..........sell and lock-in my loses?

You're killin me.

[Esox50]

Originally Posted by Penton-Man

Well Yeah!
What's the alternative..........sell and lock-in my loses?

You can deduct those capital losses up to a certain amount, and accelerate a "deferred tax asset" you now have on your personal balance sheet into your current income. :P

The markets are up ~10% in the last two sessions. Stay the course. I see a lot of idiots moving funds around...timing doesn't work. Get the right allocation, and keep a ritual of constant investing in your future with a revisitation of your allocation either semi-annually or annually. It'll all work out...

[Ben]

The screenshot scientists at AVS are up to their nonsense again in reference to The Dark Knight. I was shocked today to read that some posters are predicting that TDK won't sell because of their perception of edge enhancement being present in the transfer. Some forum members are already boycotting the title based off of a single screenshot. This particular thread is just rife with insane commentary and rabid sensationalism.

This is getting ridiculous. The Dark Knight looks fabulous on BD and I'm just completely confused as to where all this propaganda and vitriol is coming from over there...

[PaulGo]

Originally Posted by Ben

The screenshot scientists at AVS are up to their nonsense again in reference to The Dark Knight. I was shocked today to read this:

"It literally looks like VHS on my screen and makes me want to throw up."

Really? This is getting ridiculous. The Dark Knight looks fabulous on BD and I'm just completely confused as to where all this propaganda and vitriol is coming from over there...

I didn't read any of the comments on AVS (I'm trying to keep my blood pressure down) I did several weeks ago see a Blu-ray preview of the movie at Best Buy and it looked fantastic. I will be purchasing the movie on Blu-ray!

[Blaumann]

Originally Posted by Ben

The screenshot scientists at AVS are up to their nonsense again in reference to The Dark Knight. I was shocked today to read this:

"It literally looks like VHS on my screen and makes me want to throw up."

Really? This is getting ridiculous. The Dark Knight looks fabulous on BD and I'm just completely confused as to where all this propaganda and vitriol is coming from over there...

That was A. Gouger, one of their admins and the actual thread starter, who posted that in the "Whining about TDK pq" thread, didn't he. Un-friggin-believeable what is going on there....

[iceman]

Tragic:
http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showt...7#post15137857

And lots of people believing it and cancel their orders... DVDBeaver.com should stop doing their crappy screenshots and AVS should stop the anti-BD propaganda.. any decade now...

I'm much less disturbed by Blu-ray.com's screens. (phew) The scenes they capped aren't nearly as dithered, waxy or ringy as the scenes DVD Beaver put up. And seeing some clear IMAX shots, it look better than pretty much anything else out.

[badboi]

The thread over there is now locked for a "time out." Pretty confident that's code word for Rbobster going through, deleting all the posts that call out the b/s on these "scientists" on their silliness, and issuing infractions to us scoundrels that dare question their authority and knowledge.

[Jeff Kleist]

Honestly, if they wanted to "heal", they would have simply instituted a policy. Permanent bans for whichever side loses

[badboi]

Originally Posted by Jeff Kleist

Honestly, if they wanted to "heal", they would have simply instituted a policy. Permanent bans for whichever side loses

No, that's much too lenient. Castration might be a better option.

[mikey p]

Originally Posted by Blaumann

That was A. Gouger, one of their admins and the actual thread starter, who posted that in the "Whining about TDK pq" thread, didn't he. Un-friggin-believeable what is going on there....

That POS, has done this many times over the years, he get's off winding clocks, these AH's killed D VHS, as fast as they could, now they are trying the same with BD, wonder who is paying for all this hate?

Thanks.

[Bobby Henderson]

Originally Posted by Penton-Man

I personally find nothing wrong or distracting with “artificial” grain as compared to “natural” grain………….the ultimate problem with it seems to be the fact that it creates more havoc with the encoding machines out there, or so the compressionists tell me, if I've heard them right.

At the very least the act of adding noise to a digital image will increase the file size. The digital noise merely looks like intricate detail to an image compression codec. It demands more bits to store.

Anyone with a copy of Photoshop can easily see the difference on what adding noise does. Open a photo image, copy it to the clipboard and paste a copy of the image into a new document so you have 2 copies of the same image. Add a noticeable amount of noise to one of the images (about 15%, Gaussian, monochromatic). Export the two copies of the image through the save for web feature. Using the same compression settings the image with the added noise will often be more than double the file size of the image without the noise.

[Penton-Man]

Originally Posted by PaulGo

I didn't read any of the comments on AVS (I'm trying to keep my blood pressure down) I did several weeks ago see a Blu-ray preview of the movie at Best Buy and it looked fantastic. I will be purchasing the movie on Blu-ray!

Well, I found this post to be disturbing as it is an indirect insult to “ender21” from FotoKem……………
http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showp...&postcount=710

one of the reasons being because I think this is the same “patrick” who is a fellow member of our forum, if I’m not mistaken ?, so I’ll respond to him here, because one of the mods on AVS will inevitably delete whatever I post over in *science* despite what I contribute. So…………….

Patrick, perhaps not too unrealistic………..at least when there was still a smidgen of intelligent discourse and reason in the *science* forum.
If you check my past posting history when I used to post regularly on AVS, I “admitted” that grain reduction (i.e. dnr) was employed during the encoding of the Blu-ray movie Casino Royale. Also mentioning the fact that Martin Campbell (the Director) screened the product and was happy with the result.

Then, about a week later, someone else more intimately involved in the Blu-ray production of that title (paidgeek) also came onto AVS (sometime before he departed from that forum for good) and likewise confirmed what I had stated, in addition, elaborating a little bit more concerning the grain reduction.

[Penton-Man]

Originally Posted by Blaumann

That was A. Gouger, one of their admins and the actual thread starter, who posted that in the "Whining about TDK pq" thread, didn't he. Un-friggin-believeable what is going on there....

I love Alan’s (the administrator) token of appreciation for The Dark Knight on page 25 ?……..I quote...............

“For myself it was still a very enjoyable movie and a worthy purchase” -- after he initiated, encouraged and participated in something like 25 pages of bashing the title with diametrically opposed statements.

Kinda like oh, I hate this, this, this, this, this about The Dark Knight and I hate this, this, this, this, this about WB’s encoding/authoring inhouse facility who I speculate is responsible for my dissatisfaction but…………………

“For myself it was still a very enjoyable movie and a worthy purchase”.

[Penton-Man]

Lastly, regarding the changing aspect ratio exhibited during The Dark Knight Blu-ray movie, it sure seems like the screenshot *scientists* are all for maintaining the intent of the filmmaker……………………………when that ‘intent’ jives with their personal tastes.

When it doesn’t……………well, look out.

[Penton-Man]

Originally Posted by Bobby Henderson

At the very least the act of adding noise to a digital image will increase the file size. The digital noise merely looks like intricate detail to an image compression codec. It demands more bits to store......

Correct, at the very least.

Additionally, there is the added problem that “artifical” grain tends to have sharper edges (than “natural” grain) since it is computer generated and not opticaly imaged. The sharper the grain, the more it will be at the detail threshold of the compressor grain/noise filters.

[patrick99]

Originally Posted by Penton-Man

Well, I found this post to be disturbing as it is an indirect insult to “ender21” from FotoKem……………
http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showp...&postcount=710

one of the reasons being because I think this is the same “patrick” who is a fellow member of our forum, if I’m not mistaken ?, so I’ll respond to him here, because one of the mods on AVS will inevitably delete whatever I post over in *science* despite what I contribute. So…………….

Patrick, perhaps not too unrealistic………..at least when there was still a smidgen of intelligent discourse and reason in the *science* forum.
If you check my past posting history when I used to post regularly on AVS, I “admitted” that grain reduction (i.e. dnr) was employed during the encoding of the Blu-ray movie Casino Royale. Also mentioning the fact that Martin Campbell (the Director) screened the product and was happy with the result.

Then, about a week later, someone else more intimately involved in the Blu-ray production of that title (paidgeek) also came onto AVS (sometime before he departed from that forum for good) and likewise confirmed what I had stated, in addition, elaborating a little bit more concerning the grain reduction.

Penton, I'm sorry you found my comment disturbing.

My comment at AVS was not meant as an insult to anyone, indirect or otherwise. I do think it is in fact unrealistic to expect that people involved with production or encoding will participate in on-line forums like this, at least insofar as commenting on titles that they have been directly involved with. I seem to recall some history at AVS of one such compressionist who participated there for a time, and then was required to stop, under fairly unpleasant circumstances.

I recall your comments on DNR in Casino Royale, and I most definitely appreciated those insights, as I have always appreciated your insights. But I do think it is rare for such insights to be available with respect to most BD releases, so I do think it is unrealistic to expect them in the ordinary course of things.

[PaulGo]

Originally Posted by Penton-Man

.... Then, about a week later, someone else more intimately involved in the Blu-ray production of that title (paidgeek) also came onto AVS (sometime before he departed from that forum for good) and likewise confirmed what I had stated, in addition, elaborating a little bit more concerning the grain reduction.

Why does the Blu-ray version need to be identical to the film version? Film and video have totally different characteristics. What looks good in the movie theater does not necessarily make a good quality Blu-ray movie for presentation on an LCD, plasma, or DLP. Maybe it's the way a lot of movie theaters show film products, but generally I am happier with the quality of a movie on Blu-ray on my 67" and 61" DLP rear projection sets.

[Penton-Man]

Originally Posted by patrick99

Penton, I'm sorry you found my comment disturbing.

My comment at AVS was not meant as an insult to anyone, indirect or otherwise........

Well, that’s good to know.

For some historical perspective, this campaign involving the excessive sensitivity to the degree and even existence of self-determined “unnecessary” digital processing has been going on(at least that I’m aware of, from the forum for professional colorists) since autumn of 2003. Yes, that’s not a typo…………..2003 – where one list happy AVS member first posted his ‘concerns’, regarding which he didn’t personally like the grain reduction (or what he thought was dnr) on the release prints of several 35mm feature films in 2002/2003. Since that time, he has extended that campaign to the consumer HD software forums……..all to no avail.

Believe me, this behavior is nothing new.
Since, you frequent the *science* forum, and it appears now that one of the administrators over there is the newest home movie watcher suffering from a hypersensitivity to digital processing (in this case, contrast enhancement), I would suggest you PM him one of my previous posts, and if it is too long of a read, just tell him to concentrate on the YouTube clip for his current ‘mission’………………………………………….

https://forum.blu-ray.com/showpost.p...postcount=6189

[Penton-Man]

Originally Posted by iceman

Tragic:
http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showt...7#post15137857

And lots of people believing it and cancel their orders... DVDBeaver.com should stop doing their crappy screenshots and AVS should stop the anti-BD propaganda.. any decade now...

It would be naïve to make solid PQ/AQ conclusions based upon “trailers”, not to mention, like you noted, the technical merit of how the screenshot itself was captured from these trailers and subsequently posted online.

A trailer should be thought of as a distinct entity in and of itself……..like a one minute mini-DI. It may or may not be even closely representative of the final post production product or Blu-ray product in terms of color timing, contrast enhancement, grain structure, sound, etc. which ultimately serves as the true creative intent of the filmmaker exhibited by the product at the end of the whole process.

For instance, editorial dept./houses cut from whatever sources they can get their hands on in order to produce a trailer. I remember for the Sony Picture’s feature film Hitch (staring the always hot Eva Medes and also Will Smith now currently starring in the just released Blu-ray Hancock ], the trailer for the SuperBowl ad for Hitch originated from picture elements from the original camera negative, two different interpositive versions and HD dailies.

People should not make erroneous conclusions that “trailers” are simply cut-downs from the final Cinematographic process in which the film’s creators have provided their input and finished their product to flow as a 2 hour feature film rather than an independent one minute mini-DI, which trailers, in many cases, essentially are.

Again, bad *science*...........but, what else is new?

[Penton-Man]

Originally Posted by Penton-Man

....the just released Blu-ray Hancock

Make sure you watch the extra with John Dykstra (Visual Effects Supervisor) on how light refracts and reflects off human skin (including transillumination) and the production's still camera capture of the facial textures of Will Smith and the lovely and equally talented Charlize Theron.