The DNR Debate - What Side Are You On?

[JJ]

Although I am sure it has been going on for QUITE some time, after reading the recent review of the Golden Compass on the website, I began to think a little more onto it.

Digital Noise Reduction - or, as we all know, the removing of fine grain from movies (i.e., think Warner titles - Troy, Harry Potter - and some New Line, Pan's Labyrinth, Golden Compass - as well as others) have this postproduction feature applied to them during the Blu-ray processing. It removes grain from the movie, but also removes fine details.

I put Pan's Labyrinth as an example. Some say it has excellent, amazing picture quality - others say the DNR has made it look horrible.

What are your opinions on the matter?

Personally, I have no problem with film grain or not, and I happen to think the PQ of titles with DNR is fantastic - but - the common populace for the most part identifies film grain as not part of the high-definition experience - so perhaps DNR is what helps everyday folk see the biggest difference between DVD and Blu-ray. Then again, to the purist...

[Deadset]

I think it really depends on the movie and what the director wanted to show. My 2 cents, it works with some movies, not with others...and I don't mind it.

[Roland1919]

Originally Posted by Deads3t

I think it really depends on the movie and what the director wanted to show. My 2 cents, it works with some movies, not with others...and I don't mind it.

I agree, I was one off the few that hated the grain on 300. I think I would enjoyed it more if it were sharper....

[dspin]

I hate film grain with a passion

[Trekkie313]

Originally Posted by dspin

I hate film grain with a passion

[Tech-UK]

Originally Posted by dspin

I hate film grain with a passion

Is this mean't to be a joke . Was just looking through your collection, and the majority of your titles are grainy with the exception of some being extremely grainy.

[garyrc]

As a lifelong photographer, amateur cinematographer, and indie filmmaker, with over the counter photo sales and darkroom work/teaching in my background, the use of digital processing to hide facial blemishes or soften an image is against every instinct, every preference, and every bit of training I have had.

• If the original filmmakers had wanted to obscure detail or present a soft image -- for artistic purposes -- they would have taken care of that in the original filming and printing.
• The image quality available to the filmmaker should be of the highest quality to begin with. Details of craggy faces can show character by indicating where the character has been in life. Actors are sometimes selected because they have faces that tell a story. The director can alter the look of that face just about anyway that's wanted, but I don't want some person not connected with the film and probably ignorant of the filmmaker's intentions trying to clean up what should not be cleaned up, producing waxy faces, and sometimes blurry scenery.

[Knight-Errant]

Originally Posted by Roland1919

I agree, I was one off the few that hated the grain on 300. I think I would enjoyed it more if it were sharper....

You mean softer? The reduction of grain makes images softer, not sharper.

[Grubert]

Originally Posted by Knight-Errant

You mean softer? The reduction of grain makes images softer, not sharper.

Well then, the obvious solution is first applying grain reduction - then SHARPENING!! mwahahaha!!



Success!

[Blaumann]

Originally Posted by Grubert

Well then, the obvious solution is first applying grain reduction - then SHARPENING!! mwahahaha!!



Success!

Wow, what a great idea! I think this way one can produce a 3GB version of a 1080p movie, easy to download and great to watch. On an iPhone.....

[syncguy]

Originally Posted by Grubert

Well then, the obvious solution is first applying grain reduction - then SHARPENING!! mwahahaha!!



Success!

2001:A Space Odyssey is a very good restoration.

[Banned User]

Originally Posted by Deads3t

I think it really depends on the movie and what the director wanted to show. My 2 cents, it works with some movies, not with others...and I don't mind it.

My thoughts exactly. Should of been a poll option. Depends on the movie and the quality of the source.

[AintNoSin]

Originally Posted by Banned User

Depends on the movie and the quality of the source.

I disagree. If the quality of the source is so bad that DNR actually helps... then the answer is film restoration, not electronic manipulation that destroys detail.

[HD Goofnut]

Originally Posted by AintNoSin

I disagree. If the quality of the source is so bad that DNR actually helps... then the answer is film restoration, not electronic manipulation that destroys detail.

+1 I was just thinking the exact same thing.

[garyrc]

Originally Posted by Banned User

My thoughts exactly. Should of been a poll option. Depends on the movie and the quality of the source.

Originally Posted by AintNoSin

I disagree. If the quality of the source is so bad that DNR actually helps... then the answer is film restoration, not electronic manipulation that destroys detail.

Originally Posted by HD Goofnut

+1 I was just thinking the exact same thing.

The rub is that some films -- including Spartacus -- were of very high picture quality, then mucked up. The 70 mm print I saw was superb, as good as most (or all) modern films in apparent resolution and acutance, as were the majority of 70 mm films made from either 35 mm running on it's side for maximum area (Technirama films printed onto Technirama 70, including Spartacus) or 65 mm originals (LoA, Ben-Hur, etc., including the screwed up Patton). I believe RAH when he says the 65mm master of Spartacus he made earlier was excelent. So in this case the restoration was already done. They should have used it. If I understand correctly, they used an existing HD version that had problems, then applied processing either to try to fix it, or monkey with it to conform it to some imagined preference of the buying public, instead of making it look like the original.

For films for which there is no good source available (unlike Spartacus), the self fufilling prophecy some disk producers are using is: "The public won't buy classic catalog titles in great quantities, therefore we won't spend much on the Blu-ray versions."

[Banned User]

Originally Posted by AintNoSin

I disagree. If the quality of the source is so bad that DNR actually helps... then the answer is film restoration, not electronic manipulation that destroys detail.

That would be great if studios were willing to foot the bill to restore every movie that had issues. That's not going to happen. So DNR is a tool that when used correctly can help eliminate issues. Of course the degree of use and final image quality are going to vary depending on many many factors.
I'm by no means an expert and IMO Film grain is a plus, but from the titles I've seen that have used some minor DNR I do not see a real issue with it. Its the studios that set the dial to 11 that upset me.

[wallendo]

I don't like any unnecessary manipulation of recent films, but, on older films which have not physically aged well, a mild amount of DNR would be helpful. (I doubt the director or cinematographer actually wanted dust and scratches to develop over time)

[eChopper]

agreed.

You need an option "ok if applied judiciously"

for what its worth, film-school ******s might decry the Lowry effort on, say, Citizen Kane but theres no way it would have sold to the modern market without the face lift

and it looks gorgeous

[JJ]

Originally Posted by eChopper

agreed.

You need an option "ok if applied judiciously"

for what its worth, film-school ******s might decry the Lowry effort on, say, Citizen Kane but theres no way it would have sold to the modern market without the face lift

and it looks gorgeous

Good point. I really think it is applied more so for the general public than the true specialist or A/V-phile.

[UTVOL06]

Originally Posted by JJxiv1215

Good point. I really think it is applied more so for the general public than the true specialist or A/V-phile.

I hate the excessive amount DNR has been applied lately with New Line and previous Warner titles. I prefer much more to have more grain/noise as long as I get lots of detail back.