The Lord of the Rings: The Motion Picture Trilogy (Extended Edition) (2001-2003)

[Mavrick]

Originally Posted by Falaskan

Do the calibration DVDs do this well? Does best buy? I'm curious if my tv is properly calibrated, although it seems pretty awesome to me right now. It's a 2011 Panasonic Plasma.

You'd want something like Spears and Munsel calibration disc on Blu-ray to start calibrating your TV. Out of the box settings on almost all TVs are way off. So it's always worth at least calibrating it with the help of a disc.

Pro calibration is definitely the way to go if you can afford it, but not everybody can.

[HeavyHitter]

Originally Posted by Falaskan

Do the calibration DVDs do this well? Does best buy? I'm curious if my tv is properly calibrated, although it seems pretty awesome to me right now. It's a 2011 Panasonic Plasma.

Good question.

The calibration DVDs allow you to set contrast, brightness (more appropriately should be called black level), sharpness, saturation, and tint. Setting saturation can be tricky unless you can turn off two of the three primary colors of your display. Without using a meter, people tend to have saturation bumped up a bit too much. The blue filters that are sometimes included will oversaturate slightly. I usually tell people just using this disc to look at some reference quality skintones sometimes contained on the disc to set saturation. On some newer displays within Movie mode, it is sometimes set pretty well (50ish).

However, after that: greyscale, color primaries and secondaries, and gamma all need professional calibration (or well skilled DIY) with a quality meter (no less than i1pro). Greyscale is crucial because it is in essence the "skeleton" or foundation of the image. If this is off, so is everything else. It's also the key to achieve color neutrality and white. Some displays can come somewhat close out of the box (but never as close as calibration) within Movie modes, but drift occurs on all displays and eventually requires re-calibration over time. LEDs drift slower than plasma - not sure where OLEDs stand. Lamp-based projectors drift relatively fast especially with greyscale as the lamp and panel ages...one reason while I look forward to a laser-based projector down the road.

A properly calibrated 6500K image has a very natural look that is quickly distinguished among non-calibrated displays once your eye gets used to it. Even my girlfriend who is not a videophile can see the difference on my displays and my former calibrated display (Panasonic 65" ST30) I gave her. When she sees her family's displays or those at Best Buy, etc. their faulty look stands out like a sore thumb to her.

[StingingVelvet]

Honestly the test patterns on any early Sony release are more than adequate to set brightness, contrast, color, sharpness and backlight. I never saw the point of a DisneyWOW type disc because it doesn't do any more than that without a meter anyway.

[Falaskan]

Sound like too much of a hassle right now. Like I said, I love how it came out of the box (well I got it on display) although some movies like Harry Potter DH Part 2 are hard to see unless it's pitch black outside. lol

[Doctor Jack]

My display is properly calibrated. It's calibrated to how I like it. Therefore it's properly calibrated.

[MacEachaidh]

Originally Posted by HeavyHitter

It's discussion. Get over it.

I thought it was, yes. For my part, I intended it as such. What is it exactly I'm supposed to "get over"?

You did make a flat statement as fact, and characterised people's responses as "obsessive". The whole site is "obsessive", if you start going down that path!

I'm not "undermining" the importance of calibration. (I'm not even sure what that means.) I've said absolutely nothing against it or to dismiss it, only to argue against the dismissal of this issue as merely one of calibration. If it were just a matter of calibration, then the other films in the set would look problematic to those people as well, but no-one's saying they are. Or the footage from the first film that crops up in the second, where it looks spectacularly different. Clearly there's something objective about the colour grading in the first film that has nothing to do with the display it's viewed on.

And I haven't dismissed the issue of screencaps generally -- though I am bemused by the fact that often the same people who rubbish them in one instance will lean on them as support for their argument in another. And I agreed with you in your comments on the importance of calibration, but it's not an invalidation of those comments to say they don't explain what's happened with this disc.

You seem to be trying to position me as oblivious of the technical aspects, when that's far from the truth and not at all in keeping with what I'm saying. There *is* a problem with the transfer -- yes, it's clearly better than the BD of the cinema version in many ways, but the colour grading is just as big an issue off in a different direction as the loss of clarity and detail was in its predecessor -- and it's not resolved by telling people to "get over it".

Myself, I just hope that the (inevitable?) re-release after the third Hobbit flick's EE comes out brings us a re-re-mastered transfer. It may even require them to go back to original elements and re-composite, but hopefully they'll offset that cost with the knowledge that pretty much everyone who's already bought it -- even those who say there's nothing wrong with the version we have now -- will go back to the well and pay for another dip into cleaner water.

[StingingVelvet]

Unless you put your color temp on cool or messed with the color settings a lot you're seeing the same picture everyone else is, roughly. The issue is different people have different levels of pickiness about such things. Yes, I know Fellowship has a green tint now. I just think it's subtle and not that big a deal. Others obviously think it's so bad they choose to watch the DVD.

Everyone is different and is bothered to different levels by different things. That's one reason forums like this even exist, so people can discuss these differences of opinion.

[HeavyHitter]

Originally Posted by MacEachaidh

I thought it was, yes. For my part, I intended it as such. What is it exactly I'm supposed to "get over"?

You did make a flat statement as fact, and characterised people's responses as "obsessive". The whole site is "obsessive", if you start going down that path!

I'm not "undermining" the importance of calibration. (I'm not even sure what that means.) I've said absolutely nothing against it or to dismiss it, only to argue against the dismissal of this issue as merely one of calibration. If it were just a matter of calibration, then the other films in the set would look problematic to those people as well, but no-one's saying they are. Or the footage from the first film that crops up in the second, where it looks spectacularly different. Clearly there's something objective about the colour grading in the first film that has nothing to do with the display it's viewed on.

And I haven't dismissed the issue of screencaps generally -- though I am bemused by the fact that often the same people who rubbish them in one instance will lean on them as support for their argument in another. And I agreed with you in your comments on the importance of calibration, but it's not an invalidation of those comments to say they don't explain what's happened with this disc.

You seem to be trying to position me as oblivious of the technical aspects, when that's far from the truth and not at all in keeping with what I'm saying. There *is* a problem with the transfer -- yes, it's clearly better than the BD of the cinema version in many ways, but the colour grading is just as big an issue off in a different direction as the loss of clarity and detail was in its predecessor -- and it's not resolved by telling people to "get over it".

Myself, I just hope that the (inevitable?) re-release after the third Hobbit flick's EE comes out brings us a re-re-mastered transfer. It may even require them to go back to original elements and re-composite, but hopefully they'll offset that cost with the knowledge that pretty much everyone who's already bought it -- even those who say there's nothing wrong with the version we have now -- will go back to the well and pay for another dip into cleaner water.

It IS one largely of calibration as this issue is very minor and the vast majority would notice it on a properly calibrated display in motion not obsessing over screencaps.

The only thing I stated as fact was rec 709. The loudest complaints of these issues are often from people who are not watching on properly calibrated displays. Some discs are more sensitive than others especially if we are talking delicate shadow details which are easily crushed, or colors which border or blue vs teal, etc. It really just depends on the source. But still...I will repeat it again: if your display is not calibrated to rec 709, you are NOT seeing what's on the disc.

Screencaps are absolutely useless for color if the monitor they are being viewed on is not calibrated. That is probably 99.99% of all monitors. They are more useful looking for DNR, EE, and grain structure - but even then apparent grain structure issues on caps may not even be evident during real viewing. And even so, as has been brought up, how our eyes perceive issues going back and forth on A/B caps on a monitor is different than watching the movie in all aspects. Screencaps need to be kept in proper context - a context that is often lost.

I'll ask again since you evaded my question: have you watched this disc on a professionally calibrated display? If so, what kind of display, meter, and software was used? Thanks.

[Petra_Kalbrain]

Excuse me. I'm looking for a deadhorse for the purpose of beating it. I was told that I could probably find one in this thread. Can anyone point me in the right direction?

[HeavyHitter]

Originally Posted by Petra_Kalbrain

Excuse me. I'm looking for a deadhorse for the purpose of beating it. I was told that I could probably find one in this thread. Can anyone point me in the right direction?

Unfortunately, the deadhorse was so badly beaten that it cannot be distinguished any longer.

[MacEachaidh]

I haven't "evaded" your question, HeavyHitter. You just make it very clear there's no point in stepping into your attempt to reframe the issue. Again, calibration may affect how some people see the film, but it's not the source of the problem. Neither are screencaps (which I didn't bring into the conversation; you did).

I love how you immediately tried to side with Petra's post, when in fact you're the one who started this with a sweeping misstatement. (By the way, Petra, you're free to talk about anything you want any time.)

So I'll finish my participation by repeating what I said in my last post: the thing that would make me double-dip on LotR in the anticipated new re-releases would be a remastering of Fellowship to address the colour grading and luminosity issues. I'd be interested in seeing how many of the people who currently trot their "bah humbug!" out over and over would do the same.

[HeavyHitter]

Originally Posted by MacEachaidh

I haven't "evaded" your question, HeavyHitter. You just make it very clear there's no point in stepping into your attempt to reframe the issue. Again, calibration may affect how some people see the film, but it's not the source of the problem. Neither are screencaps (which I didn't bring into the conversation; you did).

I love how you immediately tried to side with Petra's post, when in fact you're the one who started this with a sweeping misstatement. (By the way, Petra, you're free to talk about anything you want any time.)

So I'll finish my participation by repeating what I said in my last post: the thing that would make me double-dip on LotR in the anticipated new re-releases would be a remastering of Fellowship to address the colour grading and luminosity issues. I'd be interested in seeing how many of the people who currently trot their "bah humbug!" out over and over would do the same.

You're the one who decided to call me out. I didn't call you out first. You did. So you started it and if I am challenged on my thoughts I will defend them and give reasons why - as well as the other things we discussed.

Thank you for essentially answering my question. You obviously have not seen this disc on a properly calibrated set-up and that's fine; but you're being very closed-minded in not considering how this disc could look on a display calibrated to rec 709 IN MOTION - to be able to see this disc how it was INTENDED to be seen. You have NOT experienced this, yet claiming the disc is flawed. Hmmmm. Interesting perspective. At least consider this before dismissing the disc as a failure.

If you lived close by, I would sincerely invite you over to watch this disc at 124" on my JVC front projector as I can almost guarantee you would be impressed, overall, with the disc and that the color "issues" are hardly anything you are judging it to be.

[MacEachaidh]

Just when I think I'm out, they pull me back in ...

Originally Posted by HeavyHitter

You're the one who decided to call me out. I didn't call you out first. You did. So you started it and if I am challenged on my thoughts I will defend them and give reasons why - as well as the other things we discussed.

Called you out on a statement you made, flat and categorical.

Thank you for essentially answering my question. You obviously have not seen this disc on a properly calibrated set-up and that's fine; but you're being very closed-minded in not considering how this disc could look on a display calibrated to rec 709 IN MOTION - to be able to see this disc how it was INTENDED to be seen. You have NOT experienced this, yet claiming the disc is flawed. Hmmmm. Interesting perspective. At least consider this before dismissing the disc as a failure.

See? I knew that whatever I said, you'd turn it into what you wanted to hear, as you've done throughout this conversation. Where did I answer your question? And in particular, where did I say I hadn't seen this on a calibrated display?

I've agreed with you specifically all along about the value of calibration. I specifically disagree with you that alleged lack of calibration is what caused this to be an issue. There's no evidence that is true, and significant evidence to the contrary. Professionals as well as home-watchers all over the world have commented on it. As I said at the start, if you can't see it, then fair enough.

[StingingVelvet]

I'll disagree on pro-calibration. It's largely a waste of money for a modern LCD if you use the tools available like a calibration disc and AVS tools. LCD have improved a loooooot over the years. They have a strong color mode that matches d65 out of the gate most of the time, and the rest of the time are close enough now.

Bring it!

[Tech-UK]

[GaragePoet]

Originally Posted by StingingVelvet

I'll disagree on pro-calibration. It's largely a waste of money for a modern LCD if you use the tools available like a calibration disc and AVS tools. LCD have improved a loooooot over the years. They have a strong color mode that matches d65 out of the gate most of the time, and the rest of the time are close enough now.

Bring it!

always agreed on the over-emphasis of the need for pro-calibration. unless you have a dedicated home theater worth thousands of dollars w/ a light-controlled environment, it's just a waste. any light changes that occur throughout the day are going to affect your pro-calibration.

granted, if you're using programmed settings on your TV, you could take a few mins. to make things a whole lot better. i've used a calibration disc to try to get the settings to where i like them. but people here often act like unless you spend hundreds of dollars having your screen professionally calibrated, you can't tell the color blue from the color orange, etc. it's snobbery at its absolute worst...

[Doctor Jack]

Originally Posted by GaragePoet

granted, if you're using programmed settings on your TV, you could take a few mins. to make things a whole lot better. i've used a calibration disc to try to get the settings to where i like them. but people here often act like unless you spend hundreds of dollars having your screen professionally calibrated, you can't tell the color blue from the color orange, etc. it's snobbery at its absolute worst...

It's people basically pushing their chest out and saying my male reproductive organ is bigger than yours. It's all ridiculous.

[Geoff D]

Originally Posted by StingingVelvet

I'll disagree on pro-calibration. It's largely a waste of money for a modern LCD if you use the tools available like a calibration disc and AVS tools. LCD have improved a loooooot over the years. They have a strong color mode that matches d65 out of the gate most of the time, and the rest of the time are close enough now.

Bring it!

I did have an extremely long-winded post lined up but I'll be here all night spewing it out, but the simple answer is: no.

[StingingVelvet]

Originally Posted by Geoff D

I did have an extremely long-winded post lined up but I'll be here all night spewing it out, but the simple answer is: no.

It's all about degrees, my man. Does it offer some perceivable difference to some people? Sure. Is it really needed? Nope. Does it mean people can't have opinions on visuals without a pro-calibration? Far from it. You're someone who says he can see minor compression differences in motion, so sure, it probably matters to you. You're not most people though.

Edit: Anyway, I more meant over-emphasis rather than useless, as GaragePoet wisely rephrased. The idea that you can't evaluate how bad the green tint is without a calibrated display is nonsense.

[Geoff D]

For ultimate accuracy to the source - which does exist as a set of industry-mandated standards to which these discs are mastered to, believe it or not - then pro-calibration is essential because things like gamma, greyscale and colour temperature cannot be set by eye, and even small variations in these across the 0-100% luminance range can create drastically different results from display to display, even between the exact same model of TV.

Does everyone need such accuracy? No, because their lives function perfectly well without it (say it ain't so! ) and it's simply not that big of a deal to them. Put in disc, press play. It's their TV, they'll set it how they want it and that's cool, it's their dime. But the precision of all these 1's and 0's - unlike the wobbly analogue days - has allowed home cinema tech to get that much closer to perfection and as someone who despised how crappy VHS was I'm like a kid in a candy store with all this Blu-ray malarkey.

Still, as I recently said in another post, my personal values and that of the wider user base of this forum seem to be skewing further apart by the day. Maybe I should just retreat to the HTF and be done with it, or create my own nitpicker's forum along the lines of databass, complete with fancy graphs and shit!