Lord of the Rings Trilogy (Theatrical Versions) - April 6, 2010

[jwoodwar]

mjbethancourt
"I can see every hair in Jennifer Connelly's mustache in Dark City"


Lol. True True

[Todd Smith]

Originally Posted by 42041

Er, the guy who posted the HDTV comparison at AVS even said that the majority of the movie is not DNRd
at any rate, those caps look mediocre at best for a 2001 film. soft and blurry.

Not to mention how many reviews, even some user reviews in this very forum have labeled FotR VERY inconsistent? Not at all hard to believe the variance in quality of these shots considering what we are seeing from some of the written reviews in this very forum and elsewhere.

Originally Posted by mjbethancourt

People exaggerate.

Detecting DNR doesn't necessarily equal zero grain or zero fine detail. DNR is an application of degree, there can be a lot, a little, too much, etc., and it serves a perfectly valid purpose.
'Dark City' and 'Pan's Labyrinth' are spectacular examples of people being full of crap. Yes, both titles have a noticeable degree of DNR, but if you say the PQ is "terrible", then you are full of baloney... I can see every hair in Jennifer Connelly's mustache in 'Dark City', just how much "fine detail" do I need? How much more should I expect from 1080p? Does a title have to be reference-grade to avoid being labeled as "terrible"? Based on what I'm reading in this thread and all the WB-hate threads, that seems to be the case, though it also looks like other studios are being cut a lot more slack.

What really concerns me, is that given enough pressure, what if home video producers actually cave to a loud minority, and start adding digital noise to BDs just because a bunch of blowhard ignorami think they are seeing film grain on HDTV, when they are really just seeing noise.

Are you guys really defending Dark City? That movie is terrible as far as DNR and one of the worst. It clearly wipes out much of the detail. What valid purpose does DNR serve in Dark City besides destroying awesome detail and turning the actors into fake wax dolls? This has been proven so many times at this point it is ridiculous and when you watch it in motion, it is as bad or worse than the screen caps.

There are so many things wrong with this post it is amazing.

This type of mentality does put things into perspective though how some could be as defensive as they are with the FotR issues which are not Dark City caliber. This thread is VERY entertaining that is for sure

[Monkey]

Originally Posted by mjbethancourt

People exaggerate.

Detecting DNR doesn't necessarily equal zero grain or zero fine detail. DNR is an application of degree, there can be a lot, a little, too much, etc., and it serves a perfectly valid purpose.
'Dark City' and 'Pan's Labyrinth' are spectacular examples of people being full of crap. Yes, both titles have a noticeable degree of DNR, but if you say the PQ is "terrible", then you are full of baloney... I can see every hair in Jennifer Connelly's mustache in 'Dark City', just how much "fine detail" do I need? How much more should I expect from 1080p? Does a title have to be reference-grade to avoid being labeled as "terrible"? Based on what I'm reading in this thread and all the WB-hate threads, that seems to be the case, though it also looks like other studios are being cut a lot more slack.

What really concerns me, is that given enough pressure, what if home video producers actually cave to a loud minority, and start adding digital noise to BDs just because a bunch of blowhard ignorami think they are seeing film grain on HDTV, when they are really just seeing noise.

Maybe they should make some blu-ray players that offer DNA (Digital Noise Addition!!!) There should be enough people here and avs to make the player profitable Then we can have every film look like 300!!!! Yay!!!!

And yes, I can see the moustache as well :0 She should have requested more DNR on her scenes.

[Parasite68]

Originally Posted by solarrdadd

anybody know if BB's steelbook special offer was for "pre-orders" only or can you walk in and buy it if it's available? I ask because at the site there is no listing of any "steelbook" versions.

you have to walk in and buy it at customer service. if they look at you like a deer in the headlights, ask for a manager. i had to go to my best buy twice before they figured out what was going on. i went saturday and they told me to preorder it online steelbook with movies for store pickup. that is incorrect! i went today, gave them 5 bucks, they let me have the steelbook and i pick up the trilogy tomorrow! make sure the store you go to has the steelbook in stock. the offer with instructions is attached to the steelbook. if they still dont understand tell them to pull the steelbook and read instructions on how to ring it up. if not when you preorder them online theyll charge you 15 for the steelbook! Good luck!

[Diesel]

Originally Posted by Suntory_Times

What is your screen size. I fin when talking about DNR and EE it is a good idea to state.

40"


I'm sitting 6.5 feet, or 1.95 screen lengths, (eye ball to screen) away.

[billzfan]

Originally Posted by Diesel

40"


I'm sitting 6.5 feet (eye ball to screen) away.

40 inch is perfect at that distance

[Suntory_Times]

Originally Posted by billzfan

40 inch is perfect at that distance

I like it bigger from that distance. But i'm a front projection kinda guy.

[dcowboy7]

All this LOTR talk just makes me want SW on blu even more if thats actually possible.

[billzfan]

Originally Posted by Suntory_Times

I like it bigger from that distance. But i'm a front projection kinda guy.

You front projection guys won't be happy till the entire side of your house is one big screen, lol.

[Diesel]

Strange anomaly - vertical white line down the very right edge of the screen and another purple-ish one down the very left edge of the screen.


Time - 1:01:54


Edit: Occurs again at 1:03:56.

First time for only 2 seconds, second time for about 20.


Lines are very then, but seeing as it is a night scene, when the white one pops up it definitely catches your attention.

[petmic10]

Originally Posted by mredman

I agree. Does FOTR really look like this?

http://comparescreenshots.slicx.com/comparison/43821

I really think this shot has been manipulated because i think have seen this shot from the bluray on another site i can't remember and it certainly didn't look this bad

I lack proof but I don't think they are manipulated.

In some scenes DNR is very noticeable but the screen caps had me
expecting far worse. I guess not having a side by side comparison
when actually watching the movie made it more acceptable. The
thing with FOTR is the inconsistency, one scene looks blah and
another could be full of detail.

[Grand Bob]

Originally Posted by Diesel

Ok...

I just finished the part that most seem to think is the worst of the movie (the parts in Bilbo's house).
I didn't think it really looked nearly as bad as people are saying.
I'd say it is a decent 3.5/5 thus far into the movie.

How would you compare it to the HD broadcast?

[mjbethancourt]

Originally Posted by Todd Smith

Whatever mj Do you feel threatened as well?

Read it all again, maybe you will understand the second time. Your perception is WAY off as far as me and my comments You are seeing what you want to see and not what is actually there. Try again.........

Naw, just looked over it again, and I can summarize your side of the argument in a few short phrases:

"mine is bigger"
"I can see things that the rest of you can't"
"my opinions have the authority of fact... everyone is entitled to Todd Smith's opinion"

[42041]

Originally Posted by mjbethancourt

What really concerns me, is that given enough pressure, what if home video producers actually cave to a loud minority, and start adding digital noise to BDs just because a bunch of blowhard ignorami think they are seeing film grain on HDTV, when they are really just seeing noise.

Adding noise could only be convincing if the detail is there to begin with. Noise that has a higher spatial frequency than anything else in the image will not look like grain but something completely extraneous.

If a movie that is mostly or entirely analog doesn't look analog, then I think it's a bad transfer Dark City looks like nothing you could do in a lab or a darkroom.

[mjbethancourt]

Originally Posted by Diesel

Strange anomaly - vertical white line down the very right edge of the screen and another purple-ish one down the very left edge of the screen.


Time - 1:01:54


Edit: Occurs again at 1:03:56.

First time for 2 seconds, second time for about 20.

guess you'd better return the video, then

[Diesel]

Originally Posted by Grand Bob

How would you compare it to the HD broadcast?

Its definitely better to my eye than the HD broadcast (so far); not immensely, but still better.

I'm only 1/3 of the way through.

[jwoodwar]

Originally Posted by Diesel

Its definitely better to my eye than the HD broadcast (so far).

I'm only 1/3 of the way through.

Just finish the movie instead of posting every 15 minutes. Unless you have a laptop by you.

[mjbethancourt]

Originally Posted by 42041

Adding noise could only be convincing if the detail is there to begin with. Noise that has a higher spatial frequency than anything else in the image will not look like grain but something completely extraneous.

If a movie that is mostly or entirely analog doesn't look analog, then I think it's a bad transfer Dark City looks like nothing you could do in a lab or a darkroom.

That assumes that people know the difference between noise and film grain.
Based on my observations, that would be a foolish assumption.

[adamhopelies]

Originally Posted by Diesel

Strange anomaly - vertical white line down the very right edge of the screen and another purple-ish one down the very left edge of the screen.


Time - 1:01:54


Edit: Occurs again at 1:03:56.

First time for only 2 seconds, second time for about 20.


Lines are very then, but seeing as it is a night scene, when the white one pops up it definitely catches your attention.

I didn't notice anything, and believe me I was looking for trouble!

[Todd Smith]

Originally Posted by mjbethancourt

Naw, just looked over it again, and I can summarize your side of the argument in a few short phrases:

"mine is bigger"
"I can see things that the rest of you can't"
"my opinions have the authority of fact... everyone is entitled to Todd Smith's opinion"

Swing and a miss.........

Try again