Gladiator (2000)

[Godbluffer]

Originally Posted by Monkey

Haha, that is awesome. Must drive Xylon, Kram Sacul and the rest of the HD DVD posse

Back in the day some (supposedly) bad looking HD-DVD's were thrashed there too, and not only by Blu-fans. I just sense an admittedly understandable AVS-trauma around here, but get over it already and don't blame those helpless screenshots for the sins of their creators.

And referring to post # 572, the person you're quoting doesn't say anything about doubting the faithfulness of the screenshots per se, just that he thinks the Blu-ray may actually not look as bad when he sees it with his own eyes. That's something quite different.

[supercutz]

Originally Posted by MCT

So Paramount gave the extended sequences more attention, and left the remainder of the theatrical version to dry (so to speak)? I just skimmed the last few pages, so forgive me if I'm missing something.

Actually, how I understand it is DNR and EE are "added" elements to movies so with that, Paramount is actually giving more attention to the theatrical version. They are just blowing it. With that said, I'm still getting both movies because they are still upgrades to my DVDs.

[Monkey]

Originally Posted by Godbluffer

Back in the day some (supposedly) bad looking HD-DVD's were thrashed there too, and not only by Blu-fans. I just sense an admittedly understandable AVS-trauma around here, but get over it already and don't blame those helpless screenshots for the sins of their creators.

Just calling a spade a spade. The long history speaks for itself.. The person below is just another that is fully aware of that long history nonsense.

And referring to post # 572, the person you're quoting doesn't say anything about doubting the faithfulness of the screenshots per se, just that he thinks the Blu-ray may actually not look as bad when he sees it with his own eyes. That's something quite different.

It's pretty clear from his experience with past threads and comments what he expects to see in motion versus the "utter garbage" "trash" "stick to DVD" type comments. Reason being for threads like Xylon's Baraka thread.. Which the real experts actually chimed in and corrected the false claims of DNR

[Godbluffer]

Originally Posted by Monkey

Just calling a spade a spade.

I'm afraid that's no argument at all. I'm talking about just the screenshots, not the excruciating hyperbole that too often accompanies them there.

Originally Posted by Monkey

It's pretty clear from his experience with past threads and comments what he expects to see in motion versus the "utter garbage" "trash" "stick to DVD" type comments. Reason being for threads like Xylon's Baraka thread.. Which the real experts actually chimed in and corrected the false claims of DNR

And it's his fullest right to have his doubts if he experienced it as such, especially referring to the Baraka thread you mentioned there. That was indeed one of the all-time lows over on AVS; highly embarrassing and it just about killed their credibility. You have to admit though that the "evidence", or whatever you prefer to call it , for Gladiator is a bit more obvious than it ever was for Baraka, regardless of what that quoted person or you might think about how it will look on your TV's. And, I have to repeat it, the simple act of borrowing screenshots from there is in and of itself no reason to dismiss them.

And additionally, people who actually watched the Blu-ray have already been reporting - also in this this thread - that the PQ is problematic, so it's already gone a step further.

[Jimbo976]

I don't think anyone here is saying that the PQ on Gladiator is surely amazing or anything like that.

The general feeling is that it people want to see the Blu-ray in motion and in person to see how good they think it is. Screenshots are not a good judge of how a movie looks.

[STARSCREAM]

Originally Posted by surfdude12

dude, you've gotta trademark that. then you could have a review site "wifetestreview.com" with reviews.

+1, that is golden.

[Godbluffer]

Originally Posted by Jimbo976

I don't think anyone here is saying that the PQ on Gladiator is surely amazing or anything like that.

The general feeling is that it people want to see the Blu-ray in motion and in person to see how good they think it is. Screenshots are not a good judge of how a movie looks.

You certainly won't hear me claiming that screenshots are ideal for that purpose - especially when it comes to very grainy movies - but if the difference is obvious enough, which I think it is here, it can at least give a pretty reasonable indication.

For example, I don't think I'll be far off in predicting the following PQ quality in descending order :

1. Gladiator (extended)
2. Braveheart
3. Gladiator (theatrical)

[Monkey]

Originally Posted by Godbluffer

I'm afraid that's no argument at all. I'm talking about just the screenshots, not the excruciating hyperbole that too often accompanies them there.

We can agree to disagree. You can use AVS all you want.. For me they have zero credibility.. not "just about killed their credibility" they killed it a long time ago with cherry picked screens on multiple movies during the format war. You yourself say you dont agree with the "garbage" comments.. Like I said, I'll wait until I watch it in motion, you can review it based on still shots.. that just isn't how I watch my movies.

And it's his fullest right to have his doubts if he experienced it as such, especially referring to the Baraka thread you mentioned there. That was indeed one of the all-time lows over on AVS; highly embarrassing and it just about killed their credibility. You have to admit though that the "evidence", or whatever you prefer to call it , for Gladiator is a bit more obvious than it ever was for Baraka, regardless of what that quoted person or you might think about how it will look on your TV's. And, I have to repeat it, the simple act of borrowing screenshots from there is in and of itself no reason to dismiss them.

Just one of many many lows for AVS.. the credibility was killed long before the Baraka thread. That just reinforces why many here only visit that area of AVS strictly for entertainment.

As for Gladiator, again I haven't watched it in motion to give a judgment

As for borrowing screenshots. That indeed can give a misguided view of what to expect even when comparing stills. Xylon has a long history of cherry picking crappy shots on blu-ray titles intentionally.

So feel free to repeat all you want.. History speaks for itself. In the end I have zero faith in that section of AVS, they simply aren't movie fans. If I followed their advice I'd have purchased probably 3 blu-ray's in the last 2 years as that is all that is acceptable to them.

Screenshots are not a good judge of how a movie looks.

Exactly!

[Godbluffer]

@ Monkey

And I'm convinced you're taking it to the other extreme by dismissing in advance everything coming from there. That's just another form of extremism by which no arguing is inherently possible. Sorry to see some people on both sides having buried themselves so far into their respective trenches.

Edit: I'm afraid I won't go into a discussion with you anymore when it's about this, as I feel my neutrality is being dismissed as an impossibility, intentionally or not. No hard feelings though.

[Monkey]

Originally Posted by Godbluffer

@ Monkey

And I'm convinced you're taking it to the other extreme by dismissing in advance everything coming from there. That's just another form of extremism by which no arguing is inherently possible. Sorry to see some people on both sides having buried themselves so far into their respective trenches.

Like I said, just calling a spade a spade.. Having spent the majority of the format war over there, that's exactly what it was like. (One of the big reasons blu-ray.com became so popular.. in fact this site may have been a failure if if AVS was actually a neutral site.. or at least not as successfull as quickly as it has become).

You can defend them all you want, that's fine with me.. They've given me zero reason to change my mind from the times I wander over there. The Gladiator/Braveheart threads just re-inforces my feelings of that place.

[Godbluffer]

@ Monkey

Sorry, I have a bad habit of editing messages late. Have another look above.

[Monkey]

Originally Posted by Godbluffer

@ Monkey

Sorry, I have a bad habit of editing messages late. Have another look above.

Edit: I'm afraid I won't go into a discussion with you anymore when it's about this, as I feel my neutrality is being dismissed as an impossibility, intentionally or not. No hard feelings though.

I was talking mainly about AVS, not you As for you, I simply indicated that I make my final judgement on movies in motion, not screen grabs. I've been mislead in the past by judging frame grabs (cherry picked for maximum punishment) at AVS. If you want to rate it based on grabs, that is your perogitive. I'm just not that naive any more and yes very skeptical as history repeated itself too many times to give any benefit of doubt to a crowd that I simply don't consider fans of movies.

I'm all good with you not discussing with me any more. We can simply agree to disagree. Peace.

[Godbluffer]

Originally Posted by Monkey

I'm all good with you not discussing with me any more. We can simply agree to disagree. Peace.

Well, at least not when it comes to AVS. And I was thinking the exact same thing in bold even before I read it. So a well-meant peace to you too!

And now off to bed, it's past 1 AM where I live.

[Kirsty_Mc]

I'm just hoping that the screenshots that are causing all the controversy are doctored in some way and that the release is actually OK. Gladiator is a movie I'm really looking forward to on Blu-ray. I have very little faith in the other forum, or anything that comes from it... I remember that paramount destroyed all their Blu-rays despite a constant drip of them coming on to the market during their HD-DVD dalliance.

Again... I'm going to make my own mind up... but this release deserves a 5* transfer... if it's not I'll be disappointed.

[Scarfather]

AVS prides itself in being niche and exclusive to seeking perfection in A/V quality. But they take it to the extreme. There is really no room there for people that are satisfied with better than DVD quality.

In my case, I'm more interested in the film.
That doesn't mean I'll purchase any POS they throw at me.
They don't realize that its all about economics.
Why would they cater to a small percentage of the market when they can get away with things like this.
AVS will never be satisfied.
Had this been a theatrical edition, bare bones release with reference PQ, they would be screaming bloody murder for the supplements not being included and holding of on a complete edition, etc.
This has what every collector is looking for except for average PQ.
Everyone has an option, either you buy or you don't.
I'd understand if they took your money up front and promised a BR but delivered a DVD in 480p.
But, you don't like you don't buy. Simple.

I've seen the BR and to me, I am satisfied with my purchase.

[Godbluffer]

Originally Posted by SonOfArathorn

Still, anyone who uses screenshots of a BD to determine a purchase.... well that person would certainly fit right in over there. Welcome anyway, too bad you couldn't have chosen a different screen name.

Indeed it isn't a good thing to over-estimate the predictive qualities of screenshots, but neither is it a good thing to under-estimate it, and it's even worse when a large part of the motivation for the latter seems to be plain and simple hatred of the AVS-forum and therefore any dismissal of tools that are over-used there. That makes it clear that for some over here there's just as little middle-ground as for some over on the AVS forum.

[Penton-Man]

Originally Posted by Godbluffer

Indeed it isn't a good thing to over-estimate the predictive qualities of screenshots, but neither is it a good thing to under-estimate it, and it's even worse when a large part of the motivation for the latter seems to be plain and simple hatred of the AVS-forum and therefore any dismissal of tools that are over-used there. That makes it clear that for some over here there's just as little middle-ground as for some over on the AVS forum.

The use of screenshots has been proven time and again to be fraught with pitfalls for the critical evaluation of Blu-ray picture quality, despite your choosing to ignore that fact. These pitfalls have been extensively described by myself, Deci (a multi-year attendee of this Symposium -http://www.amianet.org/events/thereelthing/program09.html - as a profession working in the field) -,as well as AVS membership, such as Josh Zyber-- in regards to dnr (see quotation)…..

“"A movie image is comprised of grain. That grain pattern changes in every single frame, 24 times a second. Persistence of vision contributes greatly to our perception of detail in the image. When you extract a screen cap, you're only capturing the detail and grain present on that particular frame at that particular moment in time. A single screen cap does not capture all of the detail and grain visible to the eye during regular playback.

Screen caps are useful for certain things, like aspect ratio framing and color. But they're simply not a reliable indicator of how much detail a moving image will exhibit, or whether DNR was used. There are far too many photographic attributes that are easily mistaken for DNR in a screen cap, like soft focus, soft lighting, and certain lens choices used in the filming.” END

Additionally, I recently made this post on my thread to provide an example for its misleading detection of what people on AVS considered at the time to be the egregious presence of sharpening artifacts (EE)with Baraka.
https://forum.blu-ray.com/showthread...ng#post2238485

One of the most prolific *screenshot scientists* now actively posting on AVS was banned from this forum a long time ago for having had manipulated his screenshot comparison, unbeknownst to the casual reader/observer.
Many members here are completely in the right to dismiss the use of screenshots for all of the reasons above (and more, such as comparing I and B frames, rather than comparing I to I and B to B).

Please don’t try to use Gladiator as proof to the validity of the use of screenshots for discerning critical picture quality. You will receive no sympathy from me, nor many other astute members of this forum. It is not a standard in use at any major studio or post house to evaluate the picture quality of a Blu-ray movie, and for good reason.

I’ve already received several P.M.’s complaining that you’re carrying this anti-Braveheart campaign to other forums besides Blu-ray.com which strikes me as an agenda, rather than stating your observation and moving on. Also, if you think you can strong-arm Paramount into recalling Braveheart or reissuing a more visually pleasing disc at least to your eyes, or have them implement a change in their technological or business practices, I’ll tell you right now that it won’t work and you’re becoming a nuisance by trying so here. If you think you can shame people here that are fans of the movie into not purchasing it because it doesn’t meet your standards……..that is nothing to be proud of either.

[Grubert]

In my experience, grain and noise look better in the actual movie than on screenshots, because they follow a random moving pattern, which tricks the eye a lot.

On the other hand, halos and heavy DNR look as bad during viewing as in the screenshots, if not worse.

Personally, I had Gladiator on preorder. Not anymore.

[Blurayfan88]

Originally Posted by Aragorn84

Well, that's certainly courteous.

No need to welcome me. Though I've been mostly quiet, I've been on this board for a few months.

As for using screencaps to determine purchases - I find this to work well enough. The Dark Knight screencaps showed Edge Enhancement - and, sure enough, there they were - bugging the hell out of me. I bought it anyway, because I wanted to own the film. In the case of Gladiator, I already do.

Personally, EE is about the only thing that drives me absolutely nuts. DNR, for the most part goes unnoticed by me. I think some people could tear apart just about every single release nitpicking at some kind of use of DNR. I don't tend to care too much unless it's used to an obscene amount (which I haven't found to be the case in any title I currently own).

Edge Enhancement takes me completely out of the film, though. I hated it on DVD, I hate it now on BD.

...and now it's present on my 4th Favorite film of all time. So no - I'm not paying Paramount for that.

Don't take it personally, alot of people here get kinda carried away with their comments. I understand where you're coming from as its the same things that drive me nuts as well. However, im not as picky as most of our counterparts on AVS. As Penton-Man said, screen shots are useful for certain things sucha s aspect ratio, color, and comparison quality over dvd, however you should not use it as an accurate measure of the way a bluray would be displayed on a tv. Don't be too quick to judge based on the still shots, im particularly waiting to read to official bluray.com review of gladiator as they do a pretty accurate job as far as PQ And AQ goes and im sure they'll go in depth in regards to DNR and EE due to all the controversy in the forums.

Aside from that, welcome to the forum, don't let these guys scare you off and feel free to speak your mind thats the point of these things.

[Godbluffer]

@ Penton-Man

Thanks for bringing up the article you mentioned there. I'm going to have a detailed look into it! But as for having an agenda, I'm sorry if I made that impression. If anything, it was completely unintentional, so I'll try and be a bit more careful when it comes to this.

And additionally, I wasn't aware that some folks were tinkering with screenshots as much as you mentioned. That is of course inexcusable and completely deceiving. I also never bought into the travesty that Baraka was made to be on AVS. That was actually reason for me not to return there for weeks...