The Lord of the Rings: The Motion Picture Trilogy (Extended Edition) (2001-2003) - Page 375 - Blu-ray Forum

Phoenix Theory · 06-30-2011, 06:07 AM

I want to pick this up since I never seen this but $69.99 is a lot for 3 movie and a bunch of extras I will never watch.Only reason I want this version is for the pq.

joenostalgia23 · 06-30-2011, 06:15 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bert213

OK, enough about the 'green tint' chatter! I've decided to pickup my copy tomorrow....

but, I'm wondering...should I keep my Theatrical Blu-ray set?

Who's keeping their Theatrical Blu-ray set...and why? I've only watched the EE once...

BTW, I don't really mind the 'green tint' chatter. I actually enjoy reading all of the enthusiastic opinions from all.

I'm been back and forth and have decided to keep them. Even though I'll probably never watch the Theatrical versions again, it's good to keep a copy of them. I like knowing that I have previous versions of films, that's why I'm not buying The Star Wars blus and also why Blade Runner is one of my favorite releases(even though I only watch the Final Cut.)

Having the original edits and for FOTR the original color timing(though the film looks better now with the revised color correction) is why I've decided to keep them.

Also, the special features. While nothing there is as in-depth as the Appendices and the awesome Costa Botes documentaries, I'm keeping those DVDs. They're basically an "Archives" disc because they include the original trailers, tv spots, music videos and even promotional features(documentaries from SyFy and NatGeo) and featurettes.

joenostalgia23 · 06-30-2011, 06:37 AM

I know some people still think FOTR looks incredibly green and has had all color taken away from actors faces... But...

Watching The Two Towers, that kind of exactly how everyone looks. All of the actors looks a bit pale, not sickly pale, but even more pale than the people look in the revised Fellowship of the Rings. The colors in this film often range from grays to blues to greens. Warm shades are suppressed and colors are usually toned down. Still has beautiful cinematography, and I still think it's strange that Fellowship was the one that won the Cinematography Oscar, even though I still consider it the least visually compelling.
The Theatrical FOTR has an extremely saturated and colorful palette. Reds, oranges and pinks are all intensified making many scenes look warm. Clouds and snow and skies can sometimes take on a pink/purple look while oranges leak into shadows. All of the actors faces have a bit of blush to them. Maybe it's intentional that the first film look different, but revisited locations still look different. Well, Jackson still wants to make changes regardless and even though the tint has affected shadow detail and made text an off-white(they aren't green words!), they do make the look more in-line with the following films.
Truthfully, the coloring is even more extreme in TTT. You can tell that Jackson spent much more time on this films grading and had a much better idea of what tones he wanted. if you considered FOTR to be puke green and that everyone looked sick and the whole color scheme was unnatural... Well I recommend you never watch TTT because it's even greener and completely and verifiably intentional. Sorry if I'm stirring the pot, this will be my last post on the green tint issue.

I don't think FOTR will ever look completely natural, and it's either it looks too pink and orange or it looks too blue and green. But I don't think it was ever meant that way. Peter Jackson made use of the digital color grading systems so that his films would look exactly as he wanted them to colorwise. Although, because of a lack of time, only 70% was worked on.

CrescentMoon · 06-30-2011, 06:39 AM

About the color grading process.
I can imagine that whoever does the grading, goes through the film shot by shot, fine tuning each and every scene to perfection, adjusting hue, saturation, contrast, etc. carefully.
What is hard to understand for me is how can anyone, after all this careful work, simply apply a green tint (and quite possibly a contrast boost) to the whole feature, which basically negates much of the fine tuning and completely changes the outlook of every scene?
It's like a chef preparing a 7 course dinner, carefully prepare everything, fine tuning the amount of spices, making it to just perfect... then suddenly decides to add a pinch of salt to all courses.

As for the studio lying or not: Without trying to imply anything, it's very easy to make a statement to buy time and correct it later with excuses that sounds legit, like 'issue misunderstood / lost in translation', 'they were looking at a different transfer' etc. I'm not saying that this is the case here. I'm just saying that it's relatively easy to make statements that worded in a way that can be easily corrected in the future.

HeKS · 06-30-2011, 06:41 AM

Ok, the first thing I wanted to figure out was the exact color of the tint. The only way to do that is to find a spot where it is affecting pure white (or at least the closest you'd ever get to it). The scene where Frodo wakes up in Rivendell is not a good source because previous releases had a bit of a warm filter on it and pushed slightly red.

There is a good spot to find it, though, if you go to the scene on Caradhras, right after Frodo drops the ring and Boromir picks it up, there's a shot on Aragorn. If you pause it, there's a spot on the very top of the mountain near the right side of the screen that is blown out from sunlight and is pure white. Using exactly that spot in the frame from the EE version, I selected the color. This was the infamous tint ... not in the original color that was used for the tint, but the effective tint - the color that actually results from the particular density of the original color that was applied.

The color I came up with for this was RGB 187,222,193, which is a pale green.

I then took the EE screen print of this scene and added a "Photo Filter" adjustment layer. Using the color swatch, I took the corresponding LAB numbers for the pale green, 86,-17,11, and reversed them to 86,17,-11, which gives a pinkish tint. I then dragged the density slider up to 75%, which is the point right before the pink starts to enter the image. This neutralized the tint.

Unfortunately, because there's actual green in the image to begin with, including some green of essentially the shade of the tint, canceling the tint leaves the image slightly desaturated, especially in skin tones. To counter this, I applied a Hue/Saturation adjustment layer and made minor adjustments to bring the image back to an essentially neutral but lively state (in other words, avoiding something that looked a little like zombie Legolas). For the Reds I set the Hue to +4 and Saturation to +8. For the master I just set the Saturation to +14. I didn't touch any of the other colors.

Next was the Contrast issue. I added a Brightness/Contrast adjustment layer and set the Contrast to -30. This is the point right before the image starts to wash out slightly. In other words, it brings it back to a more neutral state as seen on previous releases. The result is that some of the detail comes back into the image.

With those changes I had a nice, natural picture. It was vibrant, but not over-the-top vibrant like you would get with something like "auto-color".

Now, recognizing that FOTR is based off of a brand new master, that means that it did not come with the color grading seen on previous releases. It seems to me this entire movie was regraded from scratch. As such, the colors that would have been arrived at through the new digital grading should not be expected to exactly match the Theatrical version. Not thinking about this fact wasted me some time, but when I stopped for a second and thought about it, this made me realize that an effective and accurate removal of the tint should not be expected to put me back at the exact colors of the TE version, cause that had it's own grading process. What it seems could be expected from the process I've described above is that it might put us back at the point AFTER the scene-specific grading on FOTR was finished but BEFORE the green-tint and contrast boost were applied.

Of course, knowing whether or not I'd achieved that was somewhat difficult. After all, what do I compare it to? There isn't really anything. However, something else occurred to me.

As some people have already commented, if this tint is so hard to see when not using a non-tinted reference for comparison, how do we KNOW that Jackson saw it himself when the released statement didn't actually mention the tint specifically and he hasn't said anything himself? Now, I'm not trying to say the released statement is wrong or claim for a fact that Jackson just didn't see this tint, but bear with me for a minute, because I just want to use it as a premise to test a theory.

IF the color correction I've described above really does get us back to the pre-tint regrading, and IF the tint was a mistake, there should be a very simple step that could get me from my "corrected" result back to what appears on the EE disc.

The first step in testing this was to turn off my contrast adjustment, cause I don't see anyway around that being a separate issue. After turning it off, I thought to myself, "What is the quickest way to get back to the EE picture in essentially one step that could have been done by mistake?"

So here's what I did. I added another "Photo Filter" adjustment layer, which defaults to using a filter from a list rather than the swatch I described using above. In that list is "Green". When I selected Green, the application of the filter to the image at the default density resulted in exactly the EE image. The ONLY different between the two is the very slight reduction of green that was lost from the original image by the removal of the tint and which is evident only in the sky and even then only slightly. It should be noted that this is a logically expected difference, because when the green filter would have been applied the first time around, all of the natural green info would have still been present in the image.

To me, this presents a very interesting possibility. Depending on the software used to create the final edit and master, adding a similar filter to the image could be just as easy as it was for me here. If a shortcut key had been set up to access the feature it could be even easier. The simplicity of what is required to get from a non-tinted image to precisely what we see in the EE version of FOTR using default settings strongly suggests that it is at least a possibility that the tint was added by mistake. How difficult is it to imagine accidentally hitting a wrong shortcut key and then not noticing that you've gotten this tint as a result if you don't happen to have another reference source up on screen? Because this is a type of filter that often gets used in video work, it could possibly be even easier to get this result by accident with fewer clicks or key strokes (depending on the software) than it would be in Photoshop. And in Photoshop it only takes two clicks.

Now, I don't claim to have just definitely described what DID happen. But I think it raises some interesting questions. More testing would be needed to see how uniformly this works. But I've tested it in a few different scenes and, without having to tinker with settings, achieved results that, though different from the TE blu-ray, could very reasonably be considered intended adjustments.

Here is the result of my tests:
(In case it's not clear, the "Re-broken" one is the result of taking my image with the tint removed and then applying the default green "photo filter" at the default density)

Thoughts?

ranitasus · 06-30-2011, 06:42 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bert213

OK, enough about the 'green tint' chatter! I've decided to pickup my copy tomorrow....

but, I'm wondering...should I keep my Theatrical Blu-ray set?

Who's keeping their Theatrical Blu-ray set...and why? I've only watched the EE once...

BTW, I don't really mind the 'green tint' chatter. I actually enjoy reading all of the enthusiastic opinions from all.

I'm keeping my set

want to have both versions.

lDlisturb3d · 06-30-2011, 06:46 AM

Lord of the Rings EE
The Fellowship of the Ring

Director Peter Jackson

Well I finally did it, for the first time ever i've seen the EE. Im a hardcore fan of this series and i wasn't disappointed at all. The movie was absolutely stunning both story wise and av wise. So much was left that that was helpful, im glad the Peter Jackson did this, kinda upset that this was release in a bundle with the TE but o well, its a business and someone has to get paid.

My all time favorite set of movies and Trilogy.

FOTR gets a solid
6/5

Ken Brown · 06-30-2011, 07:22 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by HeKS

Ok, the first thing I wanted to figure out was the exact color of the tint. The only way to do that is to find a spot where it is affection pure white (or at least the closest you'd ever get to it). The scene where Frodo wakes up in Rivendell is not a good source because previous released had...

...
...
...

Now, I don't claim to have just definitely described what DID happen. But I think it raises some interesting questions. More testing would be needed to see how uniformly this works. But I've tested it in a few different scenes and, without having to tinker with settings, achieved results that, though different from the TE blu-ray, could very reasonably considered intended adjustments.

I just read through your post twice, going point by point, and I follow what you're doing and how you arrived at each stage. I'm going to have to read over it again tomorrow, though, and process everything more carefully than I can at the moment. I'm a bit too bleary eyed right now to offer any worthwhile opinions on this one. 4am comes fast

nathan_393 · 06-30-2011, 08:00 AM

I think the debate needs to move on to address a few things, if you guys will allow me to list a couple questions I have here. For the sake of simplicity and since it appears likely to be true, let's just assume that the tint and colour correction is normal.

1. Will the TE of FOTR change as well? It's arguable that the EE has always been Jackson's way of tinkering with the films. They're tinkered with by definition on the EE's. If Jackson continues to change the EE, I can kind of understand, but if the TE changes, will that change how people view the new colour grading?
2. Will Peter Jackson change the colours of the other films? I actually feel that the colours in FOTR work better alongside the other films than they used to now, and PJ may agree for all I know, but I don't know much

3. Do the colour changes in FOTR fall into the realm of acceptable revisionism? Films like Alien and Gladiator both have new colour timing on BD to far fewer complaints and far less fanfare, so what makes FOTR any different? If the argument is that the colour changes don't work in FOTR, that's subjective. Anybody could say that Alien has crushed blacks now as a result of the changes - and I have heard people come to that conclusion, some on this very board.
4. Were the colour changes made so FOTR matches The Hobbit?
5. If the colour changes were made to match The Hobbit, will the rest of the series follow suit? Del Toro suggested that the Wargs will look different in The Hobbit than they do in LOTR; will Jackson follow Lucas's example and digitally replace people/objects in films so they all match each other? Who else could see Martin Freeman inserted over Ian Holm in FOTR's prologue?

I don't have the answers to any of these questions, as I'm guessing none of us do, but I'd love to hear some people's thoughts. I think these questions may be more pressing than whether or not WB is lying about FOTR's remaster.

I hope this all made sense. It's 4 am here and I'm more than a little tired!

HeKS · 06-30-2011, 08:19 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by nathan_393

I don't have the answers to any of these questions, as I'm guessing none of us do, but I'd love to hear some people's thoughts. I think these questions may be more pressing than whether or not WB is lying about FOTR's remaster.

I hope this all made sense. It's 4 am here and I'm more than a little tired!

I'll have to save my thoughts on your questions for a later time, but I just want to make sure that my comments weren't interpreted as claiming that WB is somehow lying about the remaster or the recent PR statement. I simply think there's a possibility of confusion between all parties here. The WB statement could be entirely true as far as they know, but if SO many people have had such a hard time noticing the tint without a non-tinted reference, we have to allow that it is at least possible that it got added by mistake and was not noticed before finalizing the disc; especially considering how easy it is to achieve exactly what we see in the FOTR EE, as I pointed out in my recent post. Even if Jackson reviewed the disc to make sure it was what he wanted, if he wasn't specifically directed to the issue of the tint and didn't have a non-tinted reference handy, well, who knows?

Take care,
HeKS

gridbug · 06-30-2011, 08:20 AM

Okay. Watched FOTR today with the wifey (it's a sentimental thing for us) and while I did certainly see some off-color stuff here and there, it wasn't as intrusive as I was expecting, and was more than compensated for by the crystal clear PQ of this new transfer. Very much looking forward to TT and ROTK over the next couple days, especially now that I've gotten past what's probably arguably the more grevious of the three presentations.

Thanks to all for your exhaustive attention to detail on this issue, your efforts are greatly appreciated to the more tech-minded enthusiasts in here.

Danielle Ni Dhighe · 06-30-2011, 08:25 AM

After watching TTT, I kind of missed the cyan tint of FOTR. I think the tint made for a more interesting image.

Cook · 06-30-2011, 08:26 AM

I am watching FOTR and all I can say is WOW!!! The amount of deatil is mind blowing! In the prologue the detail on the armor is just crazy. And the gold in the armor stands out like it never has before. No dark blobs or lost detail as some have said. Everything is visible, more so than it has ever been. I will update when i watch the whole thing, but i just had to post that. I am sure it wont all be perfect, but that prologue still is one of the best openings of a film in cinema history IMO. Seeing it like this was about as good as being back in the theater 10 years ago.

nathan_393 · 06-30-2011, 08:35 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by HeKS

I'll have to save my thoughts on your questions for a later time, but I just want to make sure that my comments weren't interpreted as claiming that WB is somehow lying about the remaster or the recent PR statement. I simply think there's a possibility of confusion between all parties here. The WB statement could be entirely true as far as they know, but if SO many people have had such a hard time noticing the tint without a non-tinted reference, we have to allow that it is at least possible that it got added by mistake and was not noticed before finalizing the disc; especially considering how easy it is to achieve exactly what we see in the FOTR EE, as I pointed out in my recent post. Even if Jackson reviewed the disc to make sure it was what he wanted, if he wasn't specifically directed to the issue of the tint and didn't have a non-tinted reference handy, well, who knows?

Take care,
HeKS

Hey HeKS,

That wasn't just directed at you; actually, it wasn't directed at all at you. It was just against the uninformed in the forum. Although a lot of people will debate the merit of your arguments/your copies of the films, at least you've made a solid effort. Some people just seem to talk with no willingness to listen to somebody else. That's generally who I'm referring to here

Cheers!

retablo · 06-30-2011, 09:11 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 42041

It's harder to whitewash a blatant encoding error as an intentional alteration.

And I'm not saying this is. I just don't have any kind of implicit trust in the PR release. Subtle errors go unnoticed right onto retail discs with alarming regularity, even ones that are filmmaker-approved.

But you can ALWAYS make excuses... the FACT is that Matrix 3 was faulty and warner DID issue replacements. So you can't say Warner doesn't do this.

karlosfunkster · 06-30-2011, 09:28 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Yojimbo68

I actually have kept up with this thread and it sounds like after a lot of talk and debate everyone just "excepted" the green tint. I know this was a highly desired title and I think the idea of not buying it for some was too much. Like it or not IT IS REVISIONIST, just like THE FRENCH CONNECTION Blu-Ray.

The French Connection Blu Ray I have... and it looks... like shit, it's done badly. This does not and it is beautiful and crisp. I will be interested to hear from you. After you view it.

And yes we all know it's revisionist, and that is a problem, because? You don't want films to be revised perhaps? Or remastered even? A lot of films are eing revised in subtle and not so subtle ways. Often for the better. Not in the rather extreme case of the French Connection though! I think most would agree on that.

As far as just 'accepting' the green tint. What choice do you have? There is none, if you want the EE edition. However the real question was whether you noticed it, and if you did whether yo dissaproved. Mostly people are neutral or positive about the changes.

Danielle Ni Dhighe · 06-30-2011, 09:29 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by HeKS

Thoughts?

Interesting results, which suggest it could be easy for this to be done by mistake. However, I don't think there's good reason at this point to say it's a mistake.

YodasFootPowder · 06-30-2011, 09:35 AM

I skipped around FOTR today and I think it looks good. Now, when compared side by side with the regular edition, it definitely has the tint to it. But, watching it by itself, not making comparisons to anything, I think it looked great. I guess as long as I don't watch it along side of another TV showing the regular version, you can label me 'happy'.

karlosfunkster · 06-30-2011, 09:44 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by frogmort

I did some critical viewing last night on my friends copy of FOTR. I think I'm going to go watch my copy and try to forget all of this stuff, and just enjoy the movie.

Good call Frogmort, and I recommend this is what we all do!

Jumpman · 06-30-2011, 09:55 AM

As much as I really love the new look to the Fellowship of the Ring, I find it kind of funny that the digital copy of the film doesn't have the new color timing.

You can tell by the subtitles on the digital copy in comparison to the ones on the Blu Ray itself....

06-30-2011, 06:41 AM	#7485
HeKS Active Member Member since:Jun 2011	Ok, the first thing I wanted to figure out was the exact color of the tint. The only way to do that is to find a spot where it is affecting pure white (or at least the closest you'd ever get to it). The scene where Frodo wakes up in Rivendell is not a good source because previous releases had a bit of a warm filter on it and pushed slightly red. There is a good spot to find it, though, if you go to the scene on Caradhras, right after Frodo drops the ring and Boromir picks it up, there's a shot on Aragorn. If you pause it, there's a spot on the very top of the mountain near the right side of the screen that is blown out from sunlight and is pure white. Using exactly that spot in the frame from the EE version, I selected the color. This was the infamous tint ... not in the original color that was used for the tint, but the effective tint - the color that actually results from the particular density of the original color that was applied. The color I came up with for this was RGB 187,222,193, which is a pale green. I then took the EE screen print of this scene and added a "Photo Filter" adjustment layer. Using the color swatch, I took the corresponding LAB numbers for the pale green, 86,-17,11, and reversed them to 86,17,-11, which gives a pinkish tint. I then dragged the density slider up to 75%, which is the point right before the pink starts to enter the image. This neutralized the tint. Unfortunately, because there's actual green in the image to begin with, including some green of essentially the shade of the tint, canceling the tint leaves the image slightly desaturated, especially in skin tones. To counter this, I applied a Hue/Saturation adjustment layer and made minor adjustments to bring the image back to an essentially neutral but lively state (in other words, avoiding something that looked a little like zombie Legolas). For the Reds I set the Hue to +4 and Saturation to +8. For the master I just set the Saturation to +14. I didn't touch any of the other colors. Next was the Contrast issue. I added a Brightness/Contrast adjustment layer and set the Contrast to -30. This is the point right before the image starts to wash out slightly. In other words, it brings it back to a more neutral state as seen on previous releases. The result is that some of the detail comes back into the image. With those changes I had a nice, natural picture. It was vibrant, but not over-the-top vibrant like you would get with something like "auto-color". Now, recognizing that FOTR is based off of a brand new master, that means that it did not come with the color grading seen on previous releases. It seems to me this entire movie was regraded from scratch. As such, the colors that would have been arrived at through the new digital grading should not be expected to exactly match the Theatrical version. Not thinking about this fact wasted me some time, but when I stopped for a second and thought about it, this made me realize that an effective and accurate removal of the tint should not be expected to put me back at the exact colors of the TE version, cause that had it's own grading process. What it seems could be expected from the process I've described above is that it might put us back at the point AFTER the scene-specific grading on FOTR was finished but BEFORE the green-tint and contrast boost were applied. Of course, knowing whether or not I'd achieved that was somewhat difficult. After all, what do I compare it to? There isn't really anything. However, something else occurred to me. As some people have already commented, if this tint is so hard to see when not using a non-tinted reference for comparison, how do we KNOW that Jackson saw it himself when the released statement didn't actually mention the tint specifically and he hasn't said anything himself? Now, I'm not trying to say the released statement is wrong or claim for a fact that Jackson just didn't see this tint, but bear with me for a minute, because I just want to use it as a premise to test a theory. IF the color correction I've described above really does get us back to the pre-tint regrading, and IF the tint was a mistake, there should be a very simple step that could get me from my "corrected" result back to what appears on the EE disc. The first step in testing this was to turn off my contrast adjustment, cause I don't see anyway around that being a separate issue. After turning it off, I thought to myself, "What is the quickest way to get back to the EE picture in essentially one step that could have been done by mistake?" So here's what I did. I added another "Photo Filter" adjustment layer, which defaults to using a filter from a list rather than the swatch I described using above. In that list is "Green". When I selected Green, the application of the filter to the image at the default density resulted in exactly the EE image. The ONLY different between the two is the very slight reduction of green that was lost from the original image by the removal of the tint and which is evident only in the sky and even then only slightly. It should be noted that this is a logically expected difference, because when the green filter would have been applied the first time around, all of the natural green info would have still been present in the image. To me, this presents a very interesting possibility. Depending on the software used to create the final edit and master, adding a similar filter to the image could be just as easy as it was for me here. If a shortcut key had been set up to access the feature it could be even easier. The simplicity of what is required to get from a non-tinted image to precisely what we see in the EE version of FOTR using default settings strongly suggests that it is at least a possibility that the tint was added by mistake. How difficult is it to imagine accidentally hitting a wrong shortcut key and then not noticing that you've gotten this tint as a result if you don't happen to have another reference source up on screen? Because this is a type of filter that often gets used in video work, it could possibly be even easier to get this result by accident with fewer clicks or key strokes (depending on the software) than it would be in Photoshop. And in Photoshop it only takes two clicks. Now, I don't claim to have just definitely described what DID happen. But I think it raises some interesting questions. More testing would be needed to see how uniformly this works. But I've tested it in a few different scenes and, without having to tinker with settings, achieved results that, though different from the TE blu-ray, could very reasonably be considered intended adjustments. Here is the result of my tests: (In case it's not clear, the "Re-broken" one is the result of taking my image with the tint removed and then applying the default green "photo filter" at the default density) Thoughts? Last edited by HeKS; 06-30-2011 at 07:59 AM.

06-30-2011, 06:07 AM	#7481
Phoenix Theory Banned Member since:Mar 2009 Location:30 Years From Now Home Theater Gallery:228 Blu-ray collection:457 DVD collection:5 Blu-ray reviews:18 Trading Score:163	I want to pick this up since I never seen this but $69.99 is a lot for 3 movie and a bunch of extras I will never watch.Only reason I want this version is for the pq.

06-30-2011, 06:37 AM	#7483
joenostalgia23 Blu-ray Samurai Member since:Mar 2009 4K collection:578 Blu-ray collection:4534 DVD collection:236 Digital collection:43 iTunes collection:61 Prime collection:1 Trading Score:4	I know some people still think FOTR looks incredibly green and has had all color taken away from actors faces... But... Watching The Two Towers, that kind of exactly how everyone looks. All of the actors looks a bit pale, not sickly pale, but even more pale than the people look in the revised Fellowship of the Rings. The colors in this film often range from grays to blues to greens. Warm shades are suppressed and colors are usually toned down. Still has beautiful cinematography, and I still think it's strange that Fellowship was the one that won the Cinematography Oscar, even though I still consider it the least visually compelling. The Theatrical FOTR has an extremely saturated and colorful palette. Reds, oranges and pinks are all intensified making many scenes look warm. Clouds and snow and skies can sometimes take on a pink/purple look while oranges leak into shadows. All of the actors faces have a bit of blush to them. Maybe it's intentional that the first film look different, but revisited locations still look different. Well, Jackson still wants to make changes regardless and even though the tint has affected shadow detail and made text an off-white(they aren't green words!), they do make the look more in-line with the following films. Truthfully, the coloring is even more extreme in TTT. You can tell that Jackson spent much more time on this films grading and had a much better idea of what tones he wanted. if you considered FOTR to be puke green and that everyone looked sick and the whole color scheme was unnatural... Well I recommend you never watch TTT because it's even greener and completely and verifiably intentional. Sorry if I'm stirring the pot, this will be my last post on the green tint issue. I don't think FOTR will ever look completely natural, and it's either it looks too pink and orange or it looks too blue and green. But I don't think it was ever meant that way. Peter Jackson made use of the digital color grading systems so that his films would look exactly as he wanted them to colorwise. Although, because of a lack of time, only 70% was worked on.

06-30-2011, 06:39 AM	#7484
CrescentMoon Junior Member Member since:Jun 2011	About the color grading process. I can imagine that whoever does the grading, goes through the film shot by shot, fine tuning each and every scene to perfection, adjusting hue, saturation, contrast, etc. carefully. What is hard to understand for me is how can anyone, after all this careful work, simply apply a green tint (and quite possibly a contrast boost) to the whole feature, which basically negates much of the fine tuning and completely changes the outlook of every scene? It's like a chef preparing a 7 course dinner, carefully prepare everything, fine tuning the amount of spices, making it to just perfect... then suddenly decides to add a pinch of salt to all courses. As for the studio lying or not: Without trying to imply anything, it's very easy to make a statement to buy time and correct it later with excuses that sounds legit, like 'issue misunderstood / lost in translation', 'they were looking at a different transfer' etc. I'm not saying that this is the case here. I'm just saying that it's relatively easy to make statements that worded in a way that can be easily corrected in the future.

06-30-2011, 06:46 AM	#7487
lDlisturb3d Blu-ray Samurai Top ranked HT gallery Top contributor Member since:Oct 2009 Location:Norfolk, VA Criterion Collection: 33 Steelbooks: 28 Home Theater Gallery:53 4K collection:11 Blu-ray collection:464 DVD collection:12 Blu-ray reviews: 127 Trading Score:4	Lord of the Rings EE The Fellowship of the Ring Director Peter Jackson Well I finally did it, for the first time ever i've seen the EE. Im a hardcore fan of this series and i wasn't disappointed at all. The movie was absolutely stunning both story wise and av wise. So much was left that that was helpful, im glad the Peter Jackson did this, kinda upset that this was release in a bundle with the TE but o well, its a business and someone has to get paid. My all time favorite set of movies and Trilogy. FOTR gets a solid 6/5

06-30-2011, 08:00 AM	#7489
nathan_393 Blu-ray Guru Member since:Sep 2010 Home Theater Gallery:8 4K collection:1 Blu-ray collection:274 DVD collection:11 Trading Score:2	I think the debate needs to move on to address a few things, if you guys will allow me to list a couple questions I have here. For the sake of simplicity and since it appears likely to be true, let's just assume that the tint and colour correction is normal. 1. Will the TE of FOTR change as well? It's arguable that the EE has always been Jackson's way of tinkering with the films. They're tinkered with by definition on the EE's. If Jackson continues to change the EE, I can kind of understand, but if the TE changes, will that change how people view the new colour grading? 2. Will Peter Jackson change the colours of the other films? I actually feel that the colours in FOTR work better alongside the other films than they used to now, and PJ may agree for all I know, but I don't know much 3. Do the colour changes in FOTR fall into the realm of acceptable revisionism? Films like Alien and Gladiator both have new colour timing on BD to far fewer complaints and far less fanfare, so what makes FOTR any different? If the argument is that the colour changes don't work in FOTR, that's subjective. Anybody could say that Alien has crushed blacks now as a result of the changes - and I have heard people come to that conclusion, some on this very board. 4. Were the colour changes made so FOTR matches The Hobbit? 5. If the colour changes were made to match The Hobbit, will the rest of the series follow suit? Del Toro suggested that the Wargs will look different in The Hobbit than they do in LOTR; will Jackson follow Lucas's example and digitally replace people/objects in films so they all match each other? Who else could see Martin Freeman inserted over Ian Holm in FOTR's prologue? I don't have the answers to any of these questions, as I'm guessing none of us do, but I'd love to hear some people's thoughts. I think these questions may be more pressing than whether or not WB is lying about FOTR's remaster. I hope this all made sense. It's 4 am here and I'm more than a little tired!

06-30-2011, 08:20 AM	#7491
gridbug Junior Member Member since:Jun 2011	Okay. Watched FOTR today with the wifey (it's a sentimental thing for us) and while I did certainly see some off-color stuff here and there, it wasn't as intrusive as I was expecting, and was more than compensated for by the crystal clear PQ of this new transfer. Very much looking forward to TT and ROTK over the next couple days, especially now that I've gotten past what's probably arguably the more grevious of the three presentations. Thanks to all for your exhaustive attention to detail on this issue, your efforts are greatly appreciated to the more tech-minded enthusiasts in here.

06-30-2011, 08:25 AM	#7492
Danielle Ni Dhighe Senior Member Member since:Aug 2009 Blu-ray collection:120	After watching TTT, I kind of missed the cyan tint of FOTR. I think the tint made for a more interesting image.

06-30-2011, 08:26 AM	#7493
Cook Blu-ray Samurai Member since:Nov 2009 4K collection:305 Blu-ray collection:1261 Digital collection:2 Trading Score:2	I am watching FOTR and all I can say is WOW!!! The amount of deatil is mind blowing! In the prologue the detail on the armor is just crazy. And the gold in the armor stands out like it never has before. No dark blobs or lost detail as some have said. Everything is visible, more so than it has ever been. I will update when i watch the whole thing, but i just had to post that. I am sure it wont all be perfect, but that prologue still is one of the best openings of a film in cinema history IMO. Seeing it like this was about as good as being back in the theater 10 years ago.

06-30-2011, 09:35 AM	#7498
YodasFootPowder Blu-ray Guru Top ranked HT gallery Top contributor Member since:Jan 2009 Location:Twin Cities, MN Home Theater Gallery:40 4K collection:154 Blu-ray collection:565 Blu-ray reviews: 4 Trading Score:3	I skipped around FOTR today and I think it looks good. Now, when compared side by side with the regular edition, it definitely has the tint to it. But, watching it by itself, not making comparisons to anything, I think it looked great. I guess as long as I don't watch it along side of another TV showing the regular version, you can label me 'happy'.

06-30-2011, 09:55 AM	#7500
Jumpman Blu-ray Champion Top contributor Member since:Nov 2008 Location:Durham, NC 4K collection:55 Blu-ray collection:110 DVD collection:7 Digital collection:230 iTunes collection:1783 Blu-ray reviews:8 Trading Score:39	As much as I really love the new look to the Fellowship of the Ring, I find it kind of funny that the digital copy of the film doesn't have the new color timing. You can tell by the subtitles on the digital copy in comparison to the ones on the Blu Ray itself....

Best Blu-ray Movie Deals