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

[Jeff Kleist]

Shark, I totally agree on the fake 3D, it doesn't look that great no matter how much time you spend on it. The tools will still be useful for things like shots where the camera gets destroyed.

My biggest issue is that I see 3D as something that a lot of other people aren't. 3D is keeping movies going for longer periods of time at higher profitability rates for the theaters. Movie theaters are hurting, and I think they're slitting their own throats jacking up rates on people right now. I'd rather still be filling my theater 4 weeks into release when the split crosses the 50/50 mark (ever wonder why popcorn is $7? It's because the theater sees a dollar of your $10 ticket first week). There's a lot of people (excluding the online anti-socials and those who have unnaccetably bad theaters near them) who have gotten out of the habit of going, and 3D is bringing them back

[BluDomain]

Originally Posted by Jeff Kleist

....ever wonder why popcorn is $7? ....

It's a Fat Tax. Typical Nanny State economics.
"The Center for Science in the Public Interest conducted a recent study and "found movie theater popcorn offerings range from 400 to 1,200 calories, with one to three days' worth of saturated fat and up to 1,500 milligrams of sodium. Make it a combo and add 300 to 1,110 empty calories worth of candy and another 150 to 500 calories from a sugary soft drink to wash it all down." Both Regal and AMC popped their popcorn in coconut oil, which contains 90% saturated fat, while Cinemark popped their popcorn in non-hydrogenated canola oil, which offers contained only a fraction of the saturated fat."

[Anthony P]

Originally Posted by mrpink134

??? who is Robert Zohn?

Some loser that owns a small AV shop that during the format war used to post BS, false rumours and FUD on AVS (and possibly other sites that I never visited) in order to scare people away from BD and/or twords HD DVD.

[Jeff Kleist]

It's a Fat Tax. Typical Nanny State economics.
"The Center for Science in the Public Interest conducted a recent study and "found movie theater popcorn offerings range from 400 to 1,200 calories, with one to three days' worth of saturated fat and up to 1,500 milligrams of sodium. Make it a combo and add 300 to 1,110 empty calories worth of candy and another 150 to 500 calories from a sugary soft drink to wash it all down." Both Regal and AMC popped their popcorn in coconut oil, which contains 90% saturated fat, while Cinemark popped their popcorn in non-hydrogenated canola oil, which offers contained only a fraction of the saturated fat."

Does that count the incredibly yummy, great on milk duds butter type product?

[Rob71]

Originally Posted by PeterTHX

blu-ray.com never was "sponsored" by Sony or Panasonic or Philips or Pioneer, etc. AVS let the reds run wild, lest they bite the hand that feeds them.

So you can see why there's a lot of mistrust.

Originally Posted by Anthony P

Some loser that owns a small AV shop that during the format war used to post BS, false rumours and FUD on AVS (and possibly other sites that I never visited) in order to scare people away from BD and/or twords HD DVD.

0.jpg

Good answers, good answers.

[Anthony P]

Originally Posted by mrpink134

Ok I waited until the Hd format war was over before I bought a player, but why is there so much hate towards HD-DVD?

I don't think it is hatred towards HD-DVD but some of the characters involved and the posts they made. In the end you answer your own question of why when you said "I waited until the HD format war was over before I bought a player".

Some people like Amir who has been mentioned a few posts higher wanted the war to go on because a format war with people staying on the side lines is the easiest way for formats to go nowhere (like with DVD-A and SACD). That is why even after the war was over he continued against BD and stating BS like lossless is not needed because people can't tell the difference between lossy and lossless audio. Studios wanted something new (right, everyone has LOTR DVD but look at how many just bought the BD set and that is true for any most catalogue titles) and if HD disks failed then studios might give the push to DL to have a new format plus people would not be used to the quality of HD disks and might be more accepting of DL quality. So propping up the weaker format (in specs and support) helped with a stalemate that could mean the death of both.

Now I am not saying every HD-DVD supporter that was posting BS was for that reason but there where two possible outcomes from before anything launched, either BD wins (too much support to lose out to HD-DVD) or they both lose. And so propping up HD-DVD for any reason (even with best intention) could help bring an unwanted outcome (no HD movies) to anyone that wanted HD movies and cared about quality.

Then there is the fact that every day it was dealing with garbage posts, right "50GB BDs are sci-fi and 25 vs 30 is a big difference", when the first BD 50s came out "these where made in test labs they can't be produced in mass quantity and so they don't really exist so it is still 25 vs 30" , a bit later when too many BD 50s where selling "maybe 50 GB can be produced but they are not really 50GB and soon we will have 45GB HD DVDs and so they are really the same”, and a bit later " 51GB HD-DVD that is bigger then 50GB BD" often from the same people as time changed. And then there was every few weeks "I just heard from several insiders that a BD only studio is dropping BD for HD-DVD" at one time or an other there where "rumours" for Disney, LGF, Fox and even MGM

[Penton-Man]

Originally Posted by i JACK o

thanks for the info penton

im scared of all this change

Don’t be scared.
Despite what some people who hang out on internet forums think, the real world does not revolve around their preferences, nor is on the same purchasing time tract as they are for homes, vacation trips, new cars or televisions.

A case in point as to the later……….
http://www.crunchgear.com/2010/03/17...und-in-stores/

[Anthony P]

Originally Posted by MetalMike666

6) That there is also some animosity between some (most?) on this forum and AVS .. and that's where I'd like to ask a question.

If I read this correctly, some of this animosity seems linked to the HD-DVD vs. Blu-ray nastiness/dirty tricks/arrogance/whatever-you-call-it and also some of it is due to the 'screenshot scientists' incorrect judgment of Blu-ray movie video quality. This extends to some Blu-ray movie reviews & video quality threads on AVS.

But I've mostly used AVS for researching hardware (HDTVs, Blu-ray players, AVRs, & speakers). In the short time I've been following Blu-ray, I'd like to think that I've now learned to look at as many Blu-ray movie (software) reviews as possible, take many with a grain of salt, and rent before purchase if I'm unsure (having found this thread earlier would have helped).

Q) Do folks here have an issue with AVS overall (including the hardware forums), or is it mostly with regards to Blu-ray software (movies)?

I can't talk for anyone else, and I know there are many people that still see value in some of AVSs forums. But, I joined AVS back in 2001 (if I remember correctly, but could have been 2000) and left a few days before I registered here, so I was a long time meber there. The straw that broke this camels back was HD-DVD /BD related, and to give the details it went something like this:

there was a thread about two formats being a good thing (by that time I think even the most deluded HD DVD fanboys where starting to see the writing on the wall and it was no longer about HD DVD winning but surviving) and someone said that it brought down prices and so as consumers we benefited. I asked how did it benefit consumers if you needed an HD-DVD and BD player in order to watch all the movies, since studio support was split, and so how was 1000$+ to play both better for consumers then needing one DVD player for 500$ when DVD was at the same stage (OK, I am going by memory so the numbers might not be exactly what was in the post). The next day I did not have time but being addicted to discussing AV on forums I logged in to check, I went to see if there was a reply (as well as check the forum in the few minutes I had before needing to leave) and. there was a reply (not sure if it was the only thread I read that day) and it was a nasty response calling me a liar because 1000$ is more then 500$ when you add inflation. So I respond in fashion pointing out that electronics tends to be deflationary and that even if one used inflation (and linked to an inflation calculator on the US governments web site) 500$ back then does not even come close to 1000$ in 2007. I went away, after that post and I was away from my PC for a day or two (I think it was a long weekend or something) and then get to that thread to see what the guy responded and I find out that his post was there and mine was deleted. At first I could not believe it (even though many of my posts had been deleted in the past because as one mod put it when I asked about a different post "someone complained about it so our hands are tied") I thought of re-replying, then I thought of asking the owners how that was acceptable. But in the end I decided it was no longer fun to post there, the rest of the forums had been deteriorating for some time and many of the people that I respected had moved on (though there where still many that where still there and might still be there). So I wrote a good buy message (since I always hate it when people I know disappear without knowing what happened) and wished them luck but we where no longer interested in the same things.


Sorry for that long post but I thought it important, if you decide to have the facts, so that can decide if it makes me bitter or not and use it if it colours what I will say next.

So to get to the point. You asked if it is just that one forum or everywhere. To me it was everywhere. It has been more then a couple of years since I went there and read it with any interest (though I did check my PMs after the message and there have been people that linked to specific discussions that I have followed), but let me ask you this. You said you where looking for an HDTV and that is how you ended up there. Assuming nothing has changed since 2007 for the better, and that the HDTV forum is/was like the rest (I was interested in projectors not TVs so I did not venture in that forum often) are threads still basically brand XXX model YYY with most posts in it by some idiot who either says "I bought this and this is the best TV ever" or "I bought this and it is the worst TV ever" depending on the experience he had with it and what he imagines what it would be like with any other equivalent TV because he never tried any of the other comparable TVs. Discussing this reminded me of a thread started a long time ago by QQQ (if I remember correctly) "review of 10 projectors I have never seen", because if you did go to the projector forum back in the day it was always the same thing. Projector X was announced, a bunch of posts would follow "Oh my god this is the best projector ever" (either because of screen grabs with cameras or some useless spec or because someone else said so), then it hits the market and the first few people buy it, eventually someone finds a flaw (no matter how minuscule) and all of a sudden the whole flock of sheep say "it is not a good projector and you should not buy it" and they move on to the next “best projector ever”. With most of them never having even experienced the projector when it was the best or flawed. How can you gain any real knowledge when , in the end, it is just ignorant fanboys giving their opinion.

Isn't this in essence what the screen capture discussion is all about, a bunch of ignorant people that jump to conclusions based on no real experience (with the movie in this case) and treat it as fact. The reason I stopped going there was because that same idiocy was everywhere (actually the only place it had not started much was the HD forums because those screen captures had not started yet)

[Anthony P]

Originally Posted by Jeff Kleist

My biggest issue is that I see 3D as something that a lot of other people aren't. 3D is keeping movies going for longer periods of time at higher profitability rates for the theaters. Movie theaters are hurting, and I think they're slitting their own throats jacking up rates on people right now. I'd rather still be filling my theater 4 weeks into release when the split crosses the 50/50 mark (ever wonder why popcorn is $7? It's because the theater sees a dollar of your $10 ticket first week). There's a lot of people (excluding the online anti-socials and those who have unnaccetably bad theaters near them) who have gotten out of the habit of going, and 3D is bringing them back

agree, that is why I don't see 3D going anywhere, and I can't understand the "it's a fad" people

[Penton-Man]

Originally Posted by Jeff Kleist

Penton, no sporting event will get me to drive half an hour to see it in person, let alone 3D on a store shelf, sorry .

Well Jeff, there’s something coming in 3D for guys like you too….. “The Final Frontier in 3 Dimensions” ala Hubble 3-D…..
http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/hr/...04075078.story

Since the Imax 3-D camera was located in the cargo bay, not only did it capture the planet and stars, etc. in 3D, but also dem astronaut space walks where they’re fixing things and such with outer space as a backdrop.

[Penton-Man]

Originally Posted by Anthony P

agree, that is why I don't see 3D going anywhere, and I can't understand the "it's a fad" people

Robert Harris just announced (within the past 15 min. or so) at their press conference that more than 20 new 3D films are due out in theaters between now and the end of the year.







This Robert Harris, that is…………
http://svconline.com/news/panasonic_...s_vp_01112006/

Got you guys, didn't I.

[mrpink134]

Do you think 3d tec is here to stay or is it a fad? I just bought a new TV and a AV Receiver within the last year

[Jeff Kleist]

Well Jeff, there’s something coming in 3D for guys like you too….. “The Final Frontier in 3 Dimensions” ala Hubble 3-D…..
http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/hr/...04075078.story

Oh I've known about it since the mission went up As uber space porn du jour, everything I hear says it can't be matched. Unfortunately it has yet to open here. I might have to see it at the Maryland Science Center next time I'm down in Baltimore where it just opened. I saw Tom Hanks's Walking on the Moon, but I think that was the last documentary type thing that played at the local commercial IMAX.

[sharkshark]

...that'd be Canadian film equipment and a Canadian arm...

And, well, American astronauts, shuttle, production, etc.

So, yeah, you win.

ps. Premiere of Treme (Tremé, actually) on HBO tonight...

[Penton-Man]

Originally Posted by Penton-Man

Robert Harris just announced (within the past 15 min. or so) at their press conference that more than 20 new 3D films are due out in theaters between now and the end of the year.

This Robert Harris, that is…………
http://svconline.com/news/panasonic_...s_vp_01112006/

Got you guys, didn't I.

Sony press conference at NAB just ended about 1hr. ago.
You guys here already know everything there is to know about what was said....except that Brian Lenz from SkySports mentioned how great it was to do the Arsenal - Manchester U match in 3D earlier this year.....he must be a ManU supporter.

[Penton-Man]

Originally Posted by sharkshark

Katz, on "fake 3D"
http://www.variety.com/article/VR111...=1&ref=bd_film

Wolski, ASC on “fake 3D”….. http://www.theasc.com/ac_magazine/Ap...land/page1.php

Bottom line, not all 2D -> 3D conversions are created equal.
If it’s done really well (and the studio Titans in Burbank aren't out to make a fast buck), unless viewers are ‘forewarned’ of the original 2D photography, they will think it was shot in 3D…http://www.nybreakingnews.com/news/A...ew-1267903847/

Just like you (as did some professional cinematographers) thought The White Ribbon was shot on B&W film.

Don’t rush to judgment, until you’ve seen more material with your own eyes.

[sharkshark]

Originally Posted by Penton-Man

Just like you (as did some professional cinematographers) thought The White Ribbon was shot on B&W film.

I first read this and thought, what the hell are you taking about...

Then I realized my conflation of terms:

http://filmfest.ca/2009tiff/03.html

"Shot in a stunning black and white palate, this is a poetic, elegiac film without the usual pretension or ponderousness that these terms connote."

I knew at the time that it had been processed from colour neg to B&W - I saw it digitally projected, if you recall, and made note at the time how gorgeous it looked from that source.

So, yes, I shouldn't have used the term "shot", which implied that the original film (the master of the master?) was in fact B&W stock. Instead, I meant to suggest that the chosen palate was, well, stunning.

As for 3D, again, I'm completely reserving judgment. I'm actually more confident that there will be mainstream, digital 3D presentations theatrically 10 years from now than there will be Blu Ray (care to take that bet? )!

In other words, I was simply including the links for your reading pleasure....

[sharkshark]

...however, I -think- Potemkin was shot in B&W stock, no?

http://www.dvdtalk.com/reviews/42063...ship-potemkin/

Hushed awe.

I'm not sure how else to best describe my reaction to Battleship Potemkin, a film that this year is ringing in its 85th anniversary and still looks nothing short of breathtaking in high definition. Having missed out on Kino's DVD release of the 2005 restoration, my experience with Battleship Potemkin up to this point had been limited to muddy, murky, public domain prints. To call this Blu-ray disc a revelation is putting it mildly.

sweet. It'll be fab if Kino's BD releases live up to this level of praise.

[Jeff Kleist]

I just watched Yojimbo tonight, another B&W film that looks spectacular on Blu

[42041]

What is a "pin-registered" film scanner (and as opposed to what)? Does pin registration eliminate the slight shaking of the image you see on some older transfers?