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

[jfanning]

Originally Posted by Maxpower1987

That should be interesting, quite a big genre change for PJ.

Is it? What about the likes of Heavenly Creatures?

[Bullseye]

Originally Posted by blitz6speed

New line sold the international rights, so they didnt make anywhere near the amount made overseas.

You would think with TW behind them they could control international rights. The film wasn't all that bad and the prop design was exceptional.

[Penton-Man]

How come so many from Ireland on this page?
Are you guys having some bad weather or did somebody offer free internet access ? ? ?

[pellucidity]

Originally Posted by Penton-Man

How come so many from Ireland on this page?
Are you guys having some bad weather or did somebody offer free internet access ? ? ?

The pubs are shut.

[WickyWoo]

How much is known about the unused footage? Is there a genuine possibility that after a lull, they'll shoot the sequels (maybe back to back) and refresh the franchise with a director's cut of the first movie?

45min approx was removed, yes the plan at least was to shoot them back to back. If GC sells well or the other 3 get made, then we'll probably see the DC (or one of the overseas companies will release it)

[horseflesh]

Originally Posted by Penton-Man

How come so many from Ireland on this page?
Are you guys having some bad weather or did somebody offer free internet access ? ? ?

The weather's been great actually!!
Well great for us, maybe hitting mid-70s of your crazy fahrenheit degrees (at a push). Probably quite chilly to you, LOL

I remember there sometimes seemed to be a disproportionately high number of Irish posters in the HD section (that I was eventually banned from for stating the, to me, obvious opinion that Blu-ray was going to win the "format war") of a UK forum too.

The pubs re-opened 15 minutes ago.

[pellucidity]

Originally Posted by WickyWoo

45min approx was removed, yes the plan at least was to shoot them back to back. If GC sells well or the other 3 get made, then we'll probably see the DC (or one of the overseas companies will release it)

Given that the suits decided to market I Am Legend's alternate ending as controversial you would think a DVD release of something that would stir up genuine controversy would be a nice little earner. I would blind buy a faithful adaptation, but as it is I'm not netflixing the current release at least until the GF can read the books.

Any plans to do anything with Lyra's Oxford?

[Penton-Man]

Originally Posted by Penton-Man

I received a few PM’s in regards to DNR, I guess as a result of Bill’s new mission to bring this to the attention of WB and esp. it’s absorbed New Line division.

The predominant question being, “should one use screenshots of people’s faces (i.e. soft) to assess whether there has been *inappropriate* DNR.

Answer –
I would not at all recommend using screenshoots of people’s faces to evaluate for DNR applied during the production of the high definition optical disc, or even “excessive” DNR applied during the DI process as one's only criteria.
Colorists are routinely asked by the filmmaker to “soften” actors’ faces to mask imperfections. Basically, a Gaussian blur is applied to soften the face and often times a luminance key is used in tandem to put a glow on the highlights. An example that you can see on a weekly basis is “Desperate Housewives.”

Really, the only fair way to assess for “excessive” DNR is to look for blurry motion and this takes some experience as one can be fooled with normal film motion blur,
which is a function not just of the frame rate but also the shutter angle in the camera. A wider shutter angle increases the exposure time of each frame thus increasing the motion blur.

^ ^
I’m still receiving some residual PM’s about soft faces and such. Again, be wary of only using screenshots of faces as your sole criteria for *inappropriate or excessive* digital grain reduction (exception being instances noted by Wicky where essentially you have a control….. https://forum.blu-ray.com/showpost.p...postcount=3076 ).

Like I said above, colorists are routinely asked by Directors’ or DP’s to “soften” actors’ faces. For example, many post houses (Universal Studios Digital Services, Level 3, etc.) utilize the Da Vinci 2K Plus system with which you can get a defocus PowerWindow option.
Defocus Plus™ is one of the, if not THE? most requested feature by colorists using the Da Vinci stuff. It, along with PowerTiers allows one to create user-defined areas (quadrilateral and circle window shapes for geographical area isolation)………………
in this particular case-- the person’s face, and selectively defocus it. A practice which is commonly performed.

Heck, as an aside, this application is so versatile that one can also defocus defined colors. For instance, if during the transfer session there is annoying (to the filmmaker) grain in a blue sky, the colorist can define the blue vector and add linear defocus to only that vector. In other words, you are able to defocus only the blue in the sky without defocusing the detail in the clouds.

People can argue till the cows come home as to whether the above technique of defocus is *good* or *bad* but, as long as it originates at the DI stage of the process, as far as I’m concerned it’s a moot point as it is just another tool being used by the film’s creator to tell a story.

On the flip side, there is a technique called deep focus, in contradisctinction to defocus, which completely defies all laws of optics; however, I doubt that home theater enthusiasts will complain about its appearance when they see the eye candy of Speed Racer (on which the Sony F23 camera debuted) which apparently is a current popcorn favorite of Bill’s

http://www.thedigitalbits.com/mytwoc...55.html#speedr

[Penton-Man]

Originally Posted by WickyWoo

Penton, in the case of Pan's Labyrinth, the same DI was used (confirmed) for the UK disc as the US disc, and the faces show remarkable increases in detail (I can link you to a side by side). When we have a DNR'd and non-DNR'd source such as this, that's when we've been using face detail for comparison

Otherwise, I see exactly what you're saying

Wicky,
There are also such things as “cloned” master tapes which are not that rare and cause a generational loss in PQ compared with the original HDCAM SR or D-5 tape, although, I doubt this is applicable to Pan’s.

[Penton-Man]

And this has to go down as one of the funniest PM’s I’ve reached in quite awhile.
It would fit under the heading……..”And Where Are They Now ?”

Remember our old friend “Lee” who used to post 24/7 everything imaginable to promote HD DVD and discredit Blu-ray on AVS? I’m not sure if he or rdjam is the most notorious hobbyist anti- Blu-ray online poster but, he certainly must wear the crown for being the most prolific (at least on AVS).
Anyway, it seems he’s resurfaced on HDD and completely lost it since the format war ended in a Blu-ray victory.

http://forums.highdefdigest.com/show...2&postcount=26

I had actually thought they closed that forum down after the format war ended.

[Penton-Man]

https://forum.blu-ray.com/showthread...ton#post828076

^ ^ ^
Seems you may be prophetic ………………
http://thedigitalbits.com/#mytwocents

[tvted]

Originally Posted by Penton-Man

^ ^
I’m still receiving some residual PM’s about soft faces and such. Again, be wary of only using screenshots of faces as your sole criteria for *inappropriate or excessive* digital grain reduction

I guess folks aren't familiar with the Doris Day catalogue and the behind the scenes intrigue.

Currently the hole-in-the-wall I work in, is transitioning our presentation to Hi Def. The make-up folk are all in a tizzy about how they are going to deal with the "pore" reality a ccd can bring. Our Video Control guys, after years of being told they need to turn up the details, are now having to deal with execs who think 24P in a 30 frame universe conveys a "film" look (must be the judder) touting the "crispness" of HD, while on the other side of the camera the "talent" are concerned that they will look old or "harsh". Can't have it both ways - my bet is on talent since its their pores that are visible (or not, depending on the "details" setting of course). Maybe we could only light for silhouette and call it a "Green" show.

ted

[hollywoodguy]

Originally Posted by Penton-Man

https://forum.blu-ray.com/showthread...ton#post828076

^ ^ ^
Seems you may be prophetic ………………
http://thedigitalbits.com/#mytwocents

Some prophecies are easier to make than others... During the format war (remember that one?), some called them "predictions."

[TheRealBob]

Originally Posted by merrick97

Hey Penton (or Max or Wicky),

Dont you think its time that the BDA updated their website to show that Paramount and Universal are now supporting the format? I didnt see either of their logos on the main page.

I think they need to be shown a little love, regardless of past sins.

More importantly, I think the BDA needs to update everyone's BD demo discs. I was just in our local Best Buy, and the outdated disc they had was talking about more studio support than HD DVD, more capacity than HD DVD, etc.

The irony is if you just walked into that Best Buy and looked around without watching the demo, you'd think from what you'd see that BD is simply the high-def successor to DVD, but if you took the time to watch some of the demo disc that's supposed to really hook you, you might end up thinking, wait, this thing's in the middle of an unresolved format war?

[TheRealBob]

Originally Posted by WickyWoo

I think that's at the bottom of everyone's list of priorities when it comes to Uni and Paramount

It may be low priority but would take their webmaster probably five minutes to do.

Since they do still push the official site, it would be nice if it showed the Universal and Paramount logos so anybody who had been sitting on the sidelines and happened to go to that site would get the clear message that the format war is over.

Believe it or not, outside of our little bubble here quite a few people still haven't heard the news. Just the other day my brother-in-law, who has three HD TVs, made a comment about what he believed was an ongoing format war.

In our BD bubble, this is old news, but to the outside world it was a few minutes of AP/TV/radio news stories that could easily have been missed. There should be a clear "BD is the undisputed high-def successor to DVD" message everyone one of these people might look.

[WickyWoo]

I know that

The point I'm trying to make is that there's a lot of other things to do in regards to getting Uni and Paramount's disc production going

I also doubt there' s a full time webmaster, probably outsourced to whoever runs Sony or Disney's sites

[saprano]

Originally Posted by Penton-Man

^ ^
I’m still receiving some residual PM’s about soft faces and such. Again, be wary of only using screenshots of faces as your sole criteria for *inappropriate or excessive* digital grain reduction (exception being instances noted by Wicky where essentially you have a control….. https://forum.blu-ray.com/showpost.p...postcount=3076 ).

Like I said above, colorists are routinely asked by Directors’ or DP’s to “soften” actors’ faces. For example, many post houses (Universal Studios Digital Services, Level 3, etc.) utilize the Da Vinci 2K Plus system with which you can get a defocus PowerWindow option.
Defocus Plus™ is one of the, if not THE? most requested feature by colorists using the Da Vinci stuff. It, along with PowerTiers allows one to create user-defined areas (quadrilateral and circle window shapes for geographical area isolation)………………
in this particular case-- the person’s face, and selectively defocus it. A practice which is commonly performed.

Heck, as an aside, this application is so versatile that one can also defocus defined colors. For instance, if during the transfer session there is annoying (to the filmmaker) grain in a blue sky, the colorist can define the blue vector and add linear defocus to only that vector. In other words, you are able to defocus only the blue in the sky without defocusing the detail in the clouds.

People can argue till the cows come home as to whether the above technique of defocus is *good* or *bad* but, as long as it originates at the DI stage of the process, as far as I’m concerned it’s a moot point as it is just another tool being used by the film’s creator to tell a story.

On the flip side, there is a technique called deep focus, in contradisctinction to defocus, which completely defies all laws of optics; however, I doubt that home theater enthusiasts will complain about its appearance when they see the eye candy of Speed Racer (on which the Sony F23 camera debuted) which apparently is a current popcorn favorite of Bill’s

http://www.thedigitalbits.com/mytwoc...55.html#speedr

So what are you saying? that we should stop worrying about DNR cause we dont know for sure that its being used? I do look at the actors faces to tell if has been DNR'D to death, but your saying that sometimes it appears soft on purpose? but we dont want soft we want detail.

[Penton-Man]

Originally Posted by saprano

So what are you saying? that we should stop worrying about DNR cause we dont know for sure that its being used? I do look at the actors faces to tell if has been DNR'D to death, but your saying that sometimes it appears soft on purpose? but we dont want soft we want detail.

I’m saying that if Bill wants to make a case to x studio(s) about *inappropriate* DNR, he has to be certain that the digital noise reduction was not applied during the DI process – which is a creative choice by the filmmaker………whether you want detail or not; otherwise, it will just fall on deaf ears and prove to be a meaningless endeavor. So, he has to pick his examples carefully.

For instace, this is another case of intended DNR (not with faces) during the post production of the film, which was a creative choice…………..
https://forum.blu-ray.com/showpost.p...&postcount=104

On the other hand,
Wicky, Max and Bill have an obvious culprit for *inappropriate* DNR with Pan’s L.-- for which I don’t think the Blu-ray producers will have a valid excuse for.

As far as faces, perhaps you should reread my post #3161 (at the top of the page) carefully.

[WickyWoo]

Penton, check your PMs, I'm sending you additional info on how we're going about this.

Suffice to say, we're confident in our methodology to find real culprits of post-DI DNR

[mhafner]

Originally Posted by Penton-Man

Wicky,
There are also such things as “cloned” master tapes which are not that rare and cause a generational loss in PQ compared with the original HDCAM SR or D-5 tape, although, I doubt this is applicable to Pan’s.

Not applicable to Pan. Also, generational loss with master tapes is additional compression noise which does not look like DNR artifacts unless because of it DNR was then applied to the copy.
Concerning diagnosing DNR from stills it can be difficult to say what's going on. Seeing it in motion is always far better for telling what's going on.
And if the DNR is really good (as possible with newer systems) artifacts become hard to see. It's just the smooth look lacking any fine grain detail that is an indication that filtering was applied. I have seen a recent (unreleased) HD example from 4K DI where I know DNR was applied but artifacts were often minor. The look was smooth and insofar not film like, but overall quite nice. As more and more digital cameras are used and better DNR is applied to film sources (which themeselves become more grainless) it will become harder and harder in the future to know what has been done or not without insider information.