Fright Night (1985) (30th Anniversary Edition) (Limited Edition) - SOLD OUT

[BrandonJF]

Originally Posted by thephantomcat

I don't understand why you find it so hard to admit that the idea that a "defective encoder" was used and is responsible is not a fact and only a rumor initiated by someone on this forum who we cannot verify is indeed an "insider". Pretty basic really.

That's true. That can't be verified. But, on the other hand, I don't understand why you find it so hard to admit that the release is "defective". The point is lost by focusing on this "defective encoder". It doesn't matter. Something obviously went wrong during the encoding stage.

I may have to check out "Breaking Away" sooner rather than later to see if it exhibits similar issues.

This thread really is unbelievable. So much defensiveness surrounding issues with this disc. We finally see a thread that is now FULL of support for Twilight Time! After years of people continually complaining about them (I was never one of them - this is the first issue I've had with TT and I own 7-8 of their releases), who knew all they had to do to swing support in their favor is release a product with intermittent video corruption?

[KrugStillo]

Originally Posted by ditcin

Yes this is very true and it's something I ran into when I was reviewing. I had a problem with the original HARRY POTTER release on DVD and noticed that the trailer had better color timing and overall PQ. When I looked closer via my oppo I saw that the film had a constant bitrate while the trailer didn't. I did screen caps of the same scene comparing both. WB was furious and told me to take down my review and threaten to take me off the screening list. I told them to correct the situation and I would. They took me off the list.

Since TT has stated that the same master was used for both releases isn't possible that the issues surfacing are always there but not noticeable due to the lower gamma setting on the first release? By raising the gamma level it exposed what people are seeing which they couldn't when the picture was darker?

If its the same master those "defects" should be there.

I know from my past dealings with various DVD releases when I acted as a consultant tweaking of masters during the digital authoring phase was done to improve on poor quality, or age of the master. When contrast or gamma levels were changed it did tend to reveal more inherent problems with grain, noise and even color. At the same time it sometimes covered those issues as well.
An over zealous tech can make or break a release.

CBR can do a good job if there is no need for any other material on the disc. It's when you start crushing the bit rate of the CBR encode that it starts to "break apart". I've noticed from my own personal experience encoding stuff for my films that more bits doesn't always equal better quality. It can, as you have also stated, bring out more flaws or just create new ones of it's own. Sometimes a VBR encode can actually improve upon the original source by either smoothing out some anomalies or just masking them. There is no such thing as a perfect encode. We're talking 1's and 0's. Anything can happen.

[thephantomcat]

Originally Posted by brasil

Yes you did mention Nigerian princes, garbage worthy, and other non-sense, to compare the factual comments I made with fraud, as if they were the same thing. You also edited by leaving out TT response.

I don't have problem with the their being another reason for the defective encoding. Only you said that. At best, you've caught me a point of grammar.

Again you are conflating the issues of the possibility of a bad encoder with the reality of a bad encode. Just the facts, please.

I'm not leaving out TT responses. I'm highlighting yours. My point was a "defective encoder" is not a fact and it's been brought up several times by others that simply isn't how encoding works.

Originally Posted by KrugStillo:

Defective decoder just sounds like a statement someone who doesn't know what they are talking about would say. It wouldn't need to be "defective" for an issue to arrive. I've read that some companies have CBR (constant bit rate) transfers as opposed to VBR (variable bit rate) transfers done to save money. It cost more for VBR because it takes a considerable amount more time. The thing is on the user end it's tough to verify whether a VBR or CBR was used because even when it's constant it still fluctuates a bit. Just by reading the posts and looking at the screen caps this does seem to have some of the issues present with CBR. The slight gamma shift and macroblocking does occasionally happen when encoding with CBR at certain bit rates. So who knows that could be it. Or some tech could have forgotten to click a box in the program.

[BrandonJF]

Originally Posted by thephantomcat

Yes, I've watched it several times and I see nothing in the three scenes listed by the original poster. I did notice a small anomaly in the basement scene at the end, but this was on my third viewing overall and my second viewing "looking for it". So one the clock shot and pan up Gerry's leg and the fog when Evil walks through? Nothing. At all. I don't know what anyone is seeing there. No one has managed to post any screenshots of these alleged macroblocking issues. And before you ask, no. There is nothing wrong with my eyes.

So when you ask me to name a disc with issues "as bad" as this disc, it looks as good as any of the best catalog titles I've eve seen.

There's something wrong somewhere. These issues are there. If you can't see anything happening on the clock-pan, then consider yourself lucky. It happens twice and then again about 30 second later. I can't wait until screenshots are posted.... I wonder what excuses we'll hear then.

Although, I will say that I had a hard time seeing anything during the fog scene. I did notice what was being referenced, but it was the least offensive example I've seen so far.

[thephantomcat]

Originally Posted by brasil

Yes, I should have inserted the word "perhaps" in the sentence. So what?

Meanwhile, he conflates the issue to avoid admitting what is actually known: An encoding error.

But that wasn't what you asked. Does any label plan on releasing all their future titles with encoding errors? Can any label 100% guarantee that no future release will ever have an error? It's a loaded question. They answer no they will not "use a defective encoder", any issue arises in the future they are called liars. They answer yes they will continue business as usual they are told they don't care about quality which is what you did.

[PrestigeWorldwide]

Compression issues aside, has anyone asked TT if they received a new tweaked master from Sony that accounts for this release being brighter?

[thephantomcat]

Originally Posted by brasil

Yes, you did leave out TT responses. Why? Leaving them out as you did alters the meaning.

I said some said it was the encoder, not that is a fact.

My point is the encode is bad, which you do not admit and conflate with the encoder.

Nothing TT said alters the meaning of your statements. You did not as "was it a defective encoder?" You said it was a defective encoder and will they use that same defective encoder on future releases. When you wrote those posts, you were under the belief that it was a defective encoder. Now that you've been educated that is not how encoding works, that doesn't retroactively change what you posted on TT's Facebook page. You presented a "defective encode" as being responsible as a fact and they said that was crazy. Which we already know it is because that's not how encoding works. You were in the wrong.

It wouldn't need to be "defective" for an issue to arrive. I've read that some companies have CBR (constant bit rate) transfers as opposed to VBR (variable bit rate) transfers done to save money. It cost more for VBR because it takes a considerable amount more time. The thing is on the user end it's tough to verify whether a VBR or CBR was used because even when it's constant it still fluctuates a bit. Just by reading the posts and looking at the screen caps this does seem to have some of the issues present with CBR. The slight gamma shift and macroblocking does occasionally happen when encoding with CBR at certain bit rates. So who knows that could be it. Or some tech could have forgotten to click a box in the program.

[Filmmaker]

Originally Posted by BrandonJF

Although, I will say that I had a hard time seeing anything during the fog scene. I did notice what was being referenced, but it was the least offensive example I've seen so far.

For me, it was the pan with Charlie down the handrail of the staircase. That was the only one where I had to throw my hands up and say, nope, I don't see anything wrong here.

[klauswhereareyou]

I guess this is another of those instances people feel they are paying premium prices so they expect a premium product. I've been preaty happy with most of the Twilight Time discs I own, but there are couple that could've looked better (The Fury, Sexy Beast). Luckily with Sexy Beast I already knew it wasn't great looking, plus I got it during their sale a year and a half ago.

[thephantomcat]

Originally Posted by brasil

Note sure what you point is. And you are again incorrect.

It is what I asked. You edited the comments and do not admit the point which is the encoding error exists and substitute personal attacks in place of facts.

They also said the error does not exist, and used personal insults like you do.

I haven't used personal insults. I really have no idea what you're talking about. You're the one who is getting personal.

[KrugStillo]

Originally Posted by PrestigeWorldwide

Compression issues aside, has anyone asked TT if they received a new tweaked master from Sony that accounts for this release being brighter?

The brightness could very well be a result of the encoding. It's seems to be more of a gamma shift. This happens sometimes when one file is converted to another. They could have copied the master file and sent the copy out. The gamma shift could be only present in the copy. This is all just speculation of course but I know from personal experience that some of the Quicktime formats that are used as master files can in fact cause a gamma shift. This is all techie stuff but it's true. For example if a specific facility required a certain file format (and they usually do). The conversion to that format may have caused the gamma shift. Encoding and duplication houses usually require (if you are sending in a hard drive with a file) Quicktime Uncompressed YUV 10 bit 4:2:2 or 4:4:4 (there is even a 1:1 option that I think can be used as well). I noticed when making the master for my film that the Quicktime format actually increased the gamma slightly and it looked worse (bringing out macroblocking and color shifts). This is most likely what happened if they are using the same master. The encoder would then have to compensate for that shift but if they weren't informed or just didn't care well there you have it.

[thephantomcat]

Originally Posted by brasil

What TT said does alter the meaning. Why did you edit the comments?

I said people are noticing. That is correct.

How do you know what I believe?

You continue to conflate the issue and ignore that fact of an encoding error.

I edited the comments because every post doesn't need to be a transcript. I wasn't discussing TT's comments, I was discussing yours. Fairly simple really.

You also said it was a defective encoder. That is not correct.

I have already stated that I don't see the issues others have reported and I have only seen one brief hardly noticeable anomaly. I've already stated that the disc isn't reference quality. I didn't realize not being reference quality was a cardinal sin.

[thephantomcat]

Originally Posted by brasil

Yes you have used personal comments such as comparing the existence of the encoding error to Nigerian fraud.

You display the very characteristics you say others have.

So you are aware that just because someone says they're an insider and know that a defective encode was used doesn't make it a fact.

[klauswhereareyou]

Just because someone unintenionally uses the wrong terminology doesn't change the fact that some are seeing problems with this disc that were not present on the other release. They're sold out at this point, so I'd think the TT reps would just say something like, "There is no such think as a defective encoder, however we will look into what you and others have brought up." Someone may have used the wrong terminology, but does that mean the macroblocking is not there?

[klauswhereareyou]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but weren't there some that felt the TT The Blob blu-ray had some kind of compression/macroblocking issues too. I own the disc and didn't notice anything, but I seem to recall there were some kind of complaints on the image for that one also.

[thephantomcat]

Originally Posted by klauswhereareyou

Just because someone unintenionally uses the wrong terminology doesn't change the fact that some are seeing problems with this disc that were not present on the other release. They're sold out at this point, so I'd think the TT reps would just say something like, "There is no such think as a defective encoder, however we will look into what you and others have brought up." Someone may have used the wrong terminology, but does that mean the macroblocking is not there?

Conan Dillon :Many are noticing a few instances of large marcoblocking, compression errors, on this 30th Anniversary release not present on the original or Sony release, due to your new authoring facility Ambient Media using a defect encoder. Will be using this defective encoder an future blu ray releases?



Twilight Time DVD Label Conan, we would suggest you don't believe every crazy piece of misinformation you read on the Internet.


Do I really need to explain it?

[klauswhereareyou]

Originally Posted by HorrorBlu

Guys, Twilight Time doesn't even care about replacing defective discs and damaged cases shipped to customers. Do you honestly think they care about transfers and encoding?

TT wouldn't replace that stuff, that would be whoever you ordered it from. I was given a free replacement of a disc that I had that was defective for no charge from SAE. The case thing I can't vouch for, but I was given a replacement for a disc that looked like it had an manufacturing error.

[thephantomcat]

Originally Posted by brasil

Of course nor do I care what the reason is.

I care that TT avoids doing it in the future, and this logicallyd means that TT look into the possibility of the encoder.

Because I am going to buying more TT releases.

So...you admit my phone bill and Nigerian fraud have nothing to do with....well...anything really?

They're comparisons to illustrate points. Valid ones, too.

Conan, this is the last we have to say on the subject - we try enormously hard to do the best we can on every release, which takes into account a dizzying number of variables - some so complex it would make your head spin. It is bad enough dealing with actual problems, let alone made up ones like "defective encoders" - stuff like that exists only in Star Trek - most people who know us and our work know we strive for the highest quality whenever possible. If you or others think we fall short occasionally - which - newsflash - everyone does - then so be it - we will continue to try hard and you have the choice of supporting the label or not. Here endeth the sermon.

They told you they will try hard like they do on all of their releases and clearly the misinformation they are referring to is the "defective encoders" which we've already established isn't a thing.

[klauswhereareyou]

Originally Posted by HorrorBlu

SAE would have to get that from Twilight Time if I'm not mistaken. SAE do not have any copies for replacement. I've tried both.

Not sure, the one that I had was not a sell out like Fright Night.

[bruceames]

Originally Posted by thephantomcat

Conan Dillon :Many are noticing a few instances of large marcoblocking, compression errors, on this 30th Anniversary release not present on the original or Sony release, due to your new authoring facility Ambient Media using a defect encoder. Will be using this defective encoder an future blu ray releases?



Twilight Time DVD Label Conan, we would suggest you don't believe every crazy piece of misinformation you read on the Internet.


Do I really need to explain it?

The BD insider never said the encoder was defective, but rather "inferior". Defective somehow implies that it is broken.

The new facility is using an inferior encoder with known problems and I believe I even know which encoder