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

[MerrickG]

Mr. Harris,

I appreciate your comments.


I will just say that I VERY MUCH look forward to continuing this debate when I have the actual discs in my hands and can make a judgement to my eyes.

I suspect that I will be very pleased with PJ-approved color timing.

Maybe I am blessed with not having seen the dvds in YEARS and cant remember the original quality.

[Strevlac]

Originally Posted by Stinky-Dinkins

So what's the debate now, that FotR does NOT have the color timing we've been seeing in the early caps?

So when it comes out, and it does have that color timing, what then?

You'll like it or else

BTW I always laugh when I see the name "Stinky-Dinkins". I dunno why but I can't help cracking up.

[MerrickG]

Originally Posted by Stinky-Dinkins

So what's the debate now, that FotR does NOT have the color timing we've been seeing in the early caps?

So when it comes out, and it does have that color timing, what then? Will certain people go back to saying it looks great? It reminds me of the DNR issues the first one had.... at first everyone claimed it was some kind of conspiracy by those leaking early caps, and then when it came out and it was clear that is what it actually looked like those same people were like "Oh, it looks great!"

Somebody will come in and TRY to say that is what someone like me was saying when it wouldnt be true.

The facts:
Nobody denies the color timing has been changed. The argument is whether its looks as bad in motion as these screencaps have made it look when Bill Hunt, and RObert Harris are of the opinion that it looks breathtaking. Im inclined to believe them, but I reserve the right to form my own opinion when I see the discs and/or get a much wider sample of people who have seen the actual discs. I encourage EVERYONE else to do the same.

We shall see.

But yes, I fully expect someone to make the argument and say "See I told you the screencaps have a greenish tint to them" They will try to claim that we said there was no color timing change.

Mark my words.

[Velmeran]

Originally Posted by Stinky-Dinkins

So when it comes out, and it does have that color timing, what then?

I would expect those saying there isn't a color issue to eat some crow.

Just like I would expect those saying there is a is a color issue to eat some if there isn't.

[Rik1138]

Originally Posted by Petri Teittinen

You hit the nail on the head. There are several variables here affecting what each of us sees on our displays.

For example, is everyone using a properly calibrated monitor? If person A is using a calibrated monitor and person B is not, they simply don't see the same image and any discussion on color between them is rendered pointless.

How about PowerDVD settings, are they identical? What about display card driver's video settings? When one considers the myriad of factors affecting what each of us sees... yeah, this is a prime example of an exercise in futility.

I haven't been reading this thread much lately (not that much free time in my day it seems! ), but when I posted comparisons a while back, I took screen shots of both the Theatrical edition blu-ray and the EE blu-ray, using the same player on the same computer, with all the same settings. So, even though it was set for 16-235 (instead of 0-255 color) (as someone complained about), the difference between the two is still accurate, at least that's my logic behind it... Of course, someone claimed the theatrical images were fake because it wasn't what _he_ sees when he looks at his blu-ray...

I wasn't trying to show exactly what everyone else would see, but a specific example of the difference between the TE blu-ray and the EE blu-ray discs (not torrent downloads)...

Personally, I don't really think anything is wrong with the EE. When you sit actually _watch_ it, you aren't really thinking about the tint of the snow (at least, I'm not). But it IS different than the TE version.

[Post Prod]

Originally Posted by Stinky-Dinkins

So what's the debate now, that FotR does NOT have the color timing we've been seeing in the early caps?

So when it comes out, and it does have that color timing, what then?

Well it seems to me the debate is as follows:

Is there timing change toward cyan?
How severe is it, are the early caps accurate?
(and the most important and overlooked question) - In context, when watching, is the change distracting?


We know there's been some changes, just a lot of conflicting reports on how intense they are and if they are a major distraction.

I think a few of the people here have gotten too invested in preaching their side, you've become pretty useless in moving the conversation forward. Because you have your own agenda tied into your thread cred.

But then again who am I to say. Maybe this is what this forum and the internet in general is all about.

Let the pissing match resume.

[AreaUnderTheCurve]

Originally Posted by Post Prod

(and the most important and overlooked question) - In context, when watching, is the change distracting?
.

Definitely not. But the problem is that some people, having seen the screens, will remember the comparisons and then complain. If the screens had not surfaced, there most likely wouldn't be as much now or after its release, unless comparisons were made then. The latter would have been interesting to read.

[Robert Harris]

I'll add one more fact to the discussion, which is a directive, and tacit agreement between those reviewing discs and WB that "Screen grabs, clips and sound-bytes from the DVD and Blu-ray are prohibited."

[mredman]

Originally Posted by Rik1138

I haven't been reading this thread much lately (not that much free time in my day it seems! ), but when I posted comparisons a while back, I took screen shots of both the Theatrical edition blu-ray and the EE blu-ray, using the same player on the same computer, with all the same settings. So, even though it was set for 16-235 (instead of 0-255 color) (as someone complained about), the difference between the two is still accurate, at least that's my logic behind it... Of course, someone claimed the theatrical images were fake because it wasn't what _he_ sees when he looks at his blu-ray...

I wasn't trying to show exactly what everyone else would see, but a specific example of the difference between the TE blu-ray and the EE blu-ray discs (not torrent downloads)...

Personally, I don't really think anything is wrong with the EE. When you sit actually _watch_ it, you aren't really thinking about the tint of the snow (at least, I'm not). But it IS different than the TE version.

Yep it is. But PJ himself changed the movie and approved it. He thought it should be changed. And IMO i think he is right because i like the new look of EE FOTR WAY more then the TE. I like the green in The shire it really shows what a lovely place the shire is. it is no longer looking dull with almost no green on the grass. While this new EE that PJ worked on himself has more green on the grass and the flowers are also more colorfull.

And the snow scene there is way more detail. Like the blue tinted sky and the detail of the ring laying in the snow.

[Petri Teittinen]

Originally Posted by Robert Harris

This is a beautiful set, with which I have no problems.

I agree.

Mr. Harris, I know you're probably busy worrying about curing diseases and the world peace (j/k), but I would appreciate it if you could answer one question.

In one of your posts you compared FOTR EE colors to a video you saw on YouTube. (I'm assuming you were referring to the split-screen comparison video.) You mentioned the greenish tint was nowhere as bad on the BD as it was on the YouTube video, or words to that effect. My question: did you view the YouTube video on the same JVC projector you viewed the BD on, or did you view the YT video on another display -- and if you did, was that second display calibrated to match the JVC projector?

Thanks.

[42041]

BTW, here's a Blu-ray to DVD comparsion that has a few new shots: http://caps-a-holic.com/hd_vergleich...he_rings_1_bd2

[MEB]

Originally Posted by Robert Harris

I'll add one more fact to the discussion, which is a directive, and tacit agreement between those reviewing discs and WB that "Screen grabs, clips and sound-bytes from the DVD and Blu-ray are prohibited."

That's hilarious, Robert! I guess Blu-ray.com and Gary over at DVDBeaver must be buying the discs out of their own pockets.

Mark

[Romansh]

Originally Posted by Petri Teittinen

[…]

The only difference between the left and middle photo is exposure.

Except there isn't a left or middle photo. Just the one:



Both the screenshot and the PowerDVD window are on the same monitor and part of the same photo.

[vargo]

Originally Posted by Romansh

Both the screenshot and the PowerDVD window are on the same monitor and part of the same photo.

The screenshot on the left was not taken using PowerDVD. And it is being viewed in a web browser. And it is a photo of a LCD display taken from an angle, even the white in the webbrowser changes colour from left to right.

Sorry, the whole thing is pointless.

[The Duke]

Originally Posted by Robert Harris

I'll add one more fact to the discussion, which is a directive, and tacit agreement between those reviewing discs and WB that "Screen grabs, clips and sound-bytes from the DVD and Blu-ray are prohibited."

So WB doesn't want us to know what it really looks like until we've shelled out the $$$ and watch it at home? That doesn't bode well.
And FYI I checked Blockbuster and they don't list the EE on blu-ray.

[Rik1138]

...
[Thread purge... ]

[Karl Murks]

Originally Posted by Romansh

Both the screenshot and the PowerDVD window are on the same monitor and part of the same photo.

Which doesn't change the fact that the only difference between those 2 images is the brightness setting.

[42041]

in the interest of testing my hypothesis that the green tint is constant and possibly the result of a blu-ray transfer goof, rather than a selectively applied artistic color grading, I put a few of those images into one big image, and white balanced the whole thing relative to that white transistion someone posted:

original caps: http://img837.imageshack.us/img837/5...iginallotr.jpg
balanced to that white transition: http://img198.imageshack.us/img198/3...lancedlotr.jpg

[Karl Murks]

I can't see anything of a 'selectively applied' grading there. And in this comparison even the Rivendell shot which I thought was fine, clearly loses compared to the regraded version.

Sigh...

[Romansh]

Originally Posted by vargo

The screenshot on the left was not taken using PowerDVD.

Right. The tint is there in both images anyway, you can hardly deny it. It's just that, whatever was used to take the screenshot on the left is making the tint more obvious and more annoying than it is when viewed in PowerDVD.

Originally Posted by vargo

And it is being viewed in a web browser. And it is a photo of a LCD display taken from an angle, even the white in the webbrowser changes colour from left to right.

Sorry, the whole thing is pointless.

On its own. But overall, it's somewhat consistent with the difference I see when viewing the scene in VLC (more like the left part) and QuickTime (more like the right part):

http://screenshotcomparison.com/comparison/59885

These are not photos. The VLC screenshot was created with VLC's built-in snapshot feature (so as to not include the player window and exceed 1920x1080); the QT screenshot was taken using Mac OS X's "Grab" application.

I also took a a screenshot of the VLC window using Grab.app, but I didn't bother uploading it because it looks identical to the VLC-created snapshot.