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

[karlosfunkster]

Originally Posted by HeKS

I'm sorry to be a broken record here, but something about this whole controversy and "hoopla" keeps being overlooked. This issue needs to be broken down into 4 stages, starting with the EE DVD release.

Stage 1: The color timing as it exists on the DVD EE release of FOTR.

Stage 2: Color timing changes made to specific scenes (eg. Council of Elrond, Lothlorien) for the Blu EE release of FOTR.

Stage 3: The addition of a green tint applied over the entire Blu EE release of FOTR, including OVER the changes already made in Stage 2.

Stage 4: The addition of a massive contrast boost applied over the entire Blu EE release of FOTR, including OVER the changes already made in Stage 2.

Most of us think that the changes made at Stage 2 are actually improvements. I haven't actually noticed anyone saying otherwise.

Our complaints start at Stage 3 and what I'm personally noticing is that several people are under the impression that the green tint applied in Stage 3 is what is responsible for the improvements that should actually be attributed to Stage 2. The change at Stage 3 simply gives the changes at Stage 2, along with everything else, a heavy green push, lessening the net improvement that was achieved at Stage 2.

Take care,
HeKS

Not really a valid argument as to our knowledge PJ has made these changes and they are intentional, whether you feel they do or do not improve the picture.

[MarkBirds]

Just ordered the replica One Ring from Best Buy for 4.99. I'm gonna give it to my 12-year-old nephew, who's a total maniac for Lord of the Rings, for his birthday. I get to be a hero for 5 bucks. Not too shabby.


I'm also gonna swing by Blockbuster to see if I can get the set for 60 bucks.

[NYorker]

Originally Posted by Ken Brown

Tricky question, tricky answer. From the official review:



Taken directly from the disc. 100% accurate. Captured in the same manner as every screenshot that appears on this site. Question its accuracy, and you need to question the accuracy of every screenshot that accompanies my TTT and ROTK reviews. (Even though no one will dispute the fact that they are 100% accurate ) And no, these shots don't rely on displays or calibrations; they only objectively exhibit what is encoded on the disc.

However, and this is a big however, the tint isn't as apparent when the film is in motion. The bright whites on your browser and computer screen make it much more noticeable than it is when watching the film.

I've noted this discrepancy, as have Bill Hunt, Robert Harris and others who verify the tint is more apparent in accurate screenshots than it is when the film is actually playing. Mr. Hunt and Harris have even mentioned how baffled they are by the discrepancy. Again, the tint is there, it's measurable and verifiable from all objective accounts. It just isn't as easily or readily perceived in motion in a proper viewing environment.

The reasons for this are numerous, and detailed in my previous posts. I'll spare you the cuts-n-pastes

Though I tire of saying it, let's stop debating whether the tint is there, gents. Please debate how noticeable it is, without attacking those who find it noticeable or unnoticable. I can't believe how much anger is consuming this thread. Warner's official statement should have quelled most of the hostility, but it's only made it more rampant

Maybe because their statement was as dry as ten-day old bread...? it looks as if it was written by someone who just graduated PR school.

I'd like to throw out a guess: it was an error, but WB felt it did not justify a replacement/substitution program, and the past ten days or so also included a debate about that.

[karlosfunkster]

Originally Posted by frogmort

I just finished watching FotR EE BD for the first time. It's much better than I expected. There is still not one pixel of pure white, but most scenes look okay. Some are obviously newly color graded, but some are just weird.

The clarity, detail and depth is pretty amazing, but there are scenes that seem a little too dark and colorless, compared to what I'm used to.

Over all, it's the best I've ever seen it look. The Elves in general don't glow as much as they should, and the second breakfast/Caradhras scene goes from almost white, to blue, to cyan within a matter of seconds, which seems wrong.

It's not perfect, but it's much better than I expected.


Edit: The audio was okay. From my personal experience, the TE BD is actually a little hotter. The most agressive audio, at least in the LFE department is on the EE DVD. Although not lossless, the EE DVD has an almost overloaded LFE.
Pass me some crow!

Yaaay! Crow Pie in this case has a most satisfactory taste!

Glad you seemed to enjoy it!

[retablo]

Originally Posted by HeKS

Not to be pedantic or anything, but an accurate screenshot is representative of how it will look when viewed normally, at least in an objective sense. However, the conditions under which you view the screenshot may not be representative of the conditions under which you would watch the film, and that could cause you to perceive the two images differently.

Normally I wouldn't get so picky and granular, but the misinformation that keeps popping up in this thread seems to require it.

Take care,
HeKS

Which is EXACTLY my point. They are hardly EVER representative of the way the film actually plays out, yet people keep looking to them as definitive. How is that hard to understand?

It's not really misinformation if you see something in screenshot and not on the TV screen. That would justify it being different, hence my point of them not being accurate. You have no true white on TV to comare it to, as opposed to the webpage or "comparison" shots its posted next to, so all perception is altered. Not to be pedantic of anything.

Regardless, FOTR looks great, AS INTENDED.

[nefilim]

PJ just mailed me, wanted me to tell you all that snow IS greenish in NZ. was sorry about the bleaching used in theatrical version...wanted to correct the issue in extended edition.

just to let you know, all the best.

[MerrickG]

Originally Posted by Ken Brown

Sorry, I should have clarified that point a bit more. The point I was making (or trying to) is that certain settings (and setting combinations) will minimize or exacerbate what is primarily and already a difficult-to-spot tint. I was only using one setting as an example, not attempting to suggest every display set to Warm1 or Warm2 would suddenly showcase the tint

If you still can't see the tint, are desperate to see what difference Jackson's new intentional changes do make, and have two players connected to your display, toss in the FOTR theatrical BD (or extended edition DVD) and flip back and forth between corresponding scenes in it and the FOTR EE BD. The differences are fairly minor, and easy to miss while watching the EE BD from front to back, but the differences are also fairly unmistakable when flipping back and forth between it and a pre-tint version. (I'm doing it now, so I know I haven't lost my mind. Although that, in and of itself, may suggest I have )

As an added bonus, the increased detail and other improvements are unmistakable as well

Just to be clear: I'm not recommending doing a comparison to get you to change your opinion. But I do think it's valuable to see the changes Jackson made so you (and everyone else) can contribute to the discussion of those changes, and the discussion about why Jackson may have made these intentional adjustments. The tint alters the thematic tone of some scenes, so it's worth discussing how that thematic tone has been enhanced, lessened, or stabilized by Jackson's decision.

Again, since the tint is intentional, it must have a reason for being there, no matter how minor it is. It would be interesting to discuss what that reasoning is IMO since it's been established by most that it isn't too problematic or distracting

Originally Posted by Ken Brown

Yep. I'm looking at the actual scene on the FOTR disc on my calibrated display now, while simultaneously looking at the image as it appears on my computer monitor. It's amazing how different it looks in screenshots than it does in motion, even though both exhibit the same tonal colors and tint.

The only way I can see how different it is as the film plays is to switch between it and its theatrical edition Blu-ray counterpart. Flipping back and forth between the two makes the differences in the sky and snow colors more obvious, although it still isn't nearly as distracting as static shots suggest. And it still requires me to give it a point of reference before I can notice the tint more easily.

I'm also continuing to marvel at how different the shot looks posted on the blue-gray of the forum. I wasn't anticipating stumbling across that little practical demonstration

More optical illusion fun: form a tight circle with your hand, press it against one of your eyes, close the other eye, and look at the snow. See how it suddenly looks much brighter and whiter? That's because the darkness of your hand deprives you of any point of reference, allowing your eye to identify the snow as white and the skies as more blue. Your eye quickly and decisively self-calibrates the image. The same thing happens when watching the film, especially in a suitably dark environment. Strange as it may sound, it's an easy experiment you can use to verify the results for yourself

Well Ken upon sleeping on it for the night I have decided that I will NOT do any sort of comparison screenshots because its just not that important to me and I don't want it in my head when I am watching the film. I am perfectly happy in keeping my perception the way it is and I fully believe PJ was aware of how our eyes would adjust to it. But I am no longer going to watch these films with a mentality of "trying to find whats wrong" because I see that as a hindrance to enjoying the film.

But I will state once again that these films look SOOOOOOOOOO good in motion and that the screenshots really truly don't do it justice.

[#Darren]

I don't own the disks yet and have no strong opinions on the "green tint" matter, but I have to say WB's response sounds very PR'ish, and that leaves me with an untrusting feeling. If it is true that PJ posts regularly on his facebook, then why is he so silent on this controversy?

[Underworld54]

Originally Posted by Bad Boy Dazza

I don't own the disks yet and have no strong opinions on the "green tint" matter, but I have to say WB's response sounds very PR'ish, and that leaves me with an untrusting feeling. If it is true that PJ posts regularly on his facebook, then why is he so silent on this controversy?

Ummm maybe he feels that he doesn't need to defend his work, and I think he's a tad bit busy with a little movie called The Hobbit.

[BohemianGraham]

I watched FOTR last night with my Panasonic DMP-BD65, and I must say it was a huge improvement over watching my original EE DVDs on my parents' Toshiba upconverter DVD player. The image was way crisper on the BD, and I only noticed the green tint in a couple scenes, because I was actively looking for it. I blame this forum for that.

However, I'm not upset about it, I thought the green tint in the second breakfast scene worked, because who's to say what time it actually is in that scene? I simply assumed that they were up and eating first breakfast before daylight, and this was just around the time the sun was partially, up giving the land that odd early morning colouring I often see. We have greenish looking snow here in NS around 7:30/8:00 in the winter, depending on the sky. Of course, I could just have bad eyesight.

I will say that my TV never displayed anything as green as the screen shots HeKS has on Flickr. Just a slight tint, which, as I said, I probably wouldn't have noticed if I hadn't read this forum. I still think the set was worth a double dip for me. My cousin will be happy to get my EE DVD set, which was the same price as this BD set when I bought it.

[#Darren]

Like I said, "if it is true that he posts regularly on his facebook". If that is true then he is clearly not too time strapped to make a simple statement to quell concerns.

Originally Posted by Underworld54

Ummm maybe he feels that he doesn't need to defend his work, and I think he's a tad bit busy with a little movie called The Hobbit.

[borninusa]

Anyone think that this thread just ought to be locked down? Buy the set or not. Its all up to you.

[#Darren]

No, like Ken Brown said, intelligent discussion is a good thing.

Originally Posted by borninusa

Anyone think that this thread just ought to be locked down? Buy the set or not. Its all up to you.

[micks_address]

just finished the Two Towers last night, this is an amazing set.. i've never seen the films like this before...the detail in the picture is amazing..

[Troy73]

Originally Posted by Bad Boy Dazza

No, like Ken Brown said, intelligent discussion is a good thing.

Absolutely agree. Ken has been on point. If I was new and reading this thread I would isolate his posts at first to get my answers.

[borninusa]

Originally Posted by Bad Boy Dazza

No, like Ken Brown said, intelligent discussion is a good thing.

Yep...all 7221 post of intelligence

[Underworld54]

Originally Posted by Bad Boy Dazza

Like I said, "if it is true that he posts regularly on his facebook". If that is true then he is clearly not too time strapped to make a simple statement to quell concerns.

Everything he posts about on Facebook is about The Hobbit. That's his focus now, that's what he's promoting. Didn't you read Ken's post a couple of pages ago saying how they went to PJ to confirm that nothing is wrong with FOTR? That's all we need.

[Troy73]

Originally Posted by borninusa

Yep...all 7221 post of intelligence

More like 250 or so outta 7221.

[borninusa]

Originally Posted by Troy73

More like 250 or so outta 7221.

True dat

[WorkShed]

Originally Posted by Troy73

More like 250 or so outta 7221.

I didn't realize that I posted 250 times...