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

[42041]

Originally Posted by MacEachaidh

From my perspective, I figure people who say it looks "great", or even more those who claim that they can't even see the tint overlay, can't be very observant of what they're actually seeing.

Why? I'm certainly suspicious of why the white point on the disc seems to be way off from the white point of my display, and would like any technical mishap corrected, but speaking as an anal-retentive PQ obsessive, ultimately my eyes adjust, and the effect is minor. The blu-ray is still quite pleasant to watch, much more so than the theatrical BD to my eye.

[ckenisell]

My main concern is not the color tint but the crushed blacks. Then, to a lesser extent, the color tint.

[AreaUnderTheCurve]

Originally Posted by MacEachaidh

With respect, that's your take on it; I'm not alone in seeing it differently. From my perspective, I figure people who say it looks "great", or even more those who claim that they can't even see the tint overlay, can't be very observant of what they're actually seeing. And honestly, there's no way that Jackson wanted this film to look this way, since it's so markedly different in palette from the other two films. Even the paltry statement that came from WB about the issue acknowledges that there was a problem with the colour grading and this was an attempt to remedy it. It's not an artistic choice

I have compared many shots to the TE Blu-ray (I even made a video comparison) and I noticed some of the tint during the theatrical presentation of the EE. I know it's there. But I still like it because there's more fine detail, some problems are fixed, and DNR appears to be almost completely gone. I am observant enough to see it.

Once again, Jackson gave it his tacit approval last June when it was in theaters.

I'm posting these again. The top is the TE and the bottom is the EE. Follow the link for each image and click on the screen for the full resolution.

[MacEachaidh]

Originally Posted by 42041

Why? I'm certainly suspicious of why the white point on the disc seems to be way off from the white point of my display, and would like any technical mishap corrected, but speaking as an anal-retentive PQ obsessive, ultimately my eyes adjust, and the effect is minor.

I think minor is a relative term.

I have DVDs that were transferred from scratchy or dirty prints of their source film, and I can watch those and learn to ignore the distraction of the imperfections, but it doesn't stop me repeatedly noticing the print damage or wishing that a better print had been used for the transfer.

With LotR, it's gasp-inducing to go from the Balrog confrontation at Khazad-dum in Fellowship to the same scene at the start of Towers. This is how Fellowship should have looked on the BD, but it also demonstrates that this scene, at least, exists with the compositing and effects complete from before the original post-prod regrading process. If that scene could be constructed from its ungraded elements, then presumably — given time and the will of the studio to do it — the whole film can.

The blu-ray is still quite pleasant to watch, much more so than the theatrical BD to my eye.

On some counts yes, on others no. As an example, I remember the first time I saw the early scenes in Rivendell on the new BD — the palette in the cinema cut was too hot, so I understand why they would want to cool the colour palette down a little, but they went far too far. In this transfer of the Extended cut the trees look like they're dying. It destroys the sense of the place.

Originally Posted by ckenisell

My main concern is not the color tint but the crushed blacks. Then, to a lesser extent, the color tint.

Since the black crush isn't a problem in the other two films, I tend to the thought that in Fellowship it's an artefact of the colour manipulations. So they sort of come as a job lot.

[Brightstar]

Originally Posted by MacEachaidh

Yes, but they were on the DVD as well. joliefan is asking about a difference he/she has seen listed between the DVD running time and the BD running time, both for the EE cut.



Assuming you're talking about Region 1 DVD and not Region 2 or 4 (where PAL speed-up would come into play), they should be the same length. Where did you see the "208 min" figure listed, joliefan?

I got the info from IMDB (Internet movie data base)

[Brightstar]

Originally Posted by AreaUnderTheCurve

I have compared many shots to the TE Blu-ray (I even made a video comparison) and I noticed some of the tint during the theatrical presentation of the EE. I know it's there. But I still like it because there's more fine detail, some problems are fixed, and DNR appears to be almost completely gone. I am observant enough to see it.

Once again, Jackson gave it his tacit approval last June when it was in theaters.

I'm posting these again. The top is the TE and the bottom is the EE. Follow the link for each image and click on the screen for the full resolution.

That will all be fixed in the future when the big set comes along in a stunning 4k transfer along with the HOBBIT

[HD Goofnut]

Originally Posted by joliefan

That will all be fixed in the future when the big set comes along in a stunning 4k transfer along with the HOBBIT

I wouldn't count on it. This is Warner we're talking about so I am sure they'll pull out every release they can. They're will be a Hobbit part I in all of its various forms and the same goes for Hobbit part II. Then they'll release both parts in a massive box set and then they're could be multiple sets since they'll probably separate the extended and theatrical cuts again. I am betting that Warner will utilize the same discs we have for the EEs now for the aforementioned box sets.

If Warner releases an ultimate set that includes the EEs, TEs, and both parts of The Hobbit with its potentially various cuts then I will buy that set. Otherwise I'll just stick with buying The Hobbit by itself.

[ACMutd]

Originally Posted by AreaUnderTheCurve

I have compared many shots to the TE Blu-ray (I even made a video comparison) and I noticed some of the tint during the theatrical presentation of the EE. I know it's there. But I still like it because there's more fine detail, some problems are fixed, and DNR appears to be almost completely gone. I am observant enough to see it.

Once again, Jackson gave it his tacit approval last June when it was in theaters.

I'm posting these again. The top is the TE and the bottom is the EE. Follow the link for each image and click on the screen for the full resolution.

-img snip-

I personally prefer the EE to the TE. Except for a few of those comparisons.

[MacEachaidh]

Originally Posted by joliefan

I got the info from IMDB (Internet movie data base)

Hmm, curious then. The DVD EE is the same cut of the film as the BD EE, so I wonder if it's just a typo on IMDb?

Originally Posted by HD Goofnut

I wouldn't count on it. This is Warner we're talking about so I am sure they'll pull out every release they can.

You're probably right Goofnut, but even so sometimes WB comes up with a surprise. After grumping about the fact the new digibook release of Uninvited contains exactly the same disc as the old release (with its lossy audio), I was amazed to find that on the new digibook release of Deliverance they've upgraded the audio to lossless. Who woulda thought?

[Brightstar]

Originally Posted by HD Goofnut

I wouldn't count on it. This is Warner we're talking about so I am sure they'll pull out every release they can. They're will be a Hobbit part I in all of its various forms and the same goes for Hobbit part II. Then they'll release both parts in a massive box set and then they're could be multiple sets since they'll probably separate the extended and theatrical cuts again. I am betting that Warner will utilize the same discs we have for the EEs now for the aforementioned box sets.

If Warner releases an ultimate set that includes the EEs, TEs, and both parts of The Hobbit with its potentially various cuts then I will buy that set. Otherwise I'll just stick with buying The Hobbit by itself.

Ok silly question did they use the 2001-2003 masters to make this set ? They might remaster all three films for a 4k scan which will take years and it would be expensive

[HD Goofnut]

Originally Posted by joliefan

Ok silly question did they use the 2001-2003 masters to make this set ?

I believe so, but I am not 100% on that.

[Brightstar]

Originally Posted by MacEachaidh

Hmm, curious then. The DVD EE is the same cut of the film as the BD EE, so I wonder if it's just a typo on IMDb?



You're probably right Goofnut, but even so sometimes WB comes up with a surprise. After grumping about the fact the new digibook release of Uninvited contains exactly the same disc as the old release (with its lossy audio), I was amazed to find that on the new digibook release of Deliverance they've upgraded the audio to lossless. Who woulda thought?

My ROTK blu ray says 263mins instead of 251 on the back

[Brightstar]

Originally Posted by HD Goofnut

I believe so, but I am not 100% on that.

so they might need to remaster all three films from the ground up for 4k

[42041]

Originally Posted by joliefan

so they might need to remaster all three films from the ground up for 4k

I doubt that will ever happen. Unless you want to see the quality jump around every other shot they'll have to recomposite/re-render all the visual effects; given the perfectly serviceable quality of the existing 2K masters, the effort and cost involved would be more than any possible return on that investment.

[AreaUnderTheCurve]

Originally Posted by ACMutd

I personally prefer the EE to the TE. Except for a few of those comparisons.

Yep. I included the bad ones to show that there are some problems. If you look at the comparisons with Frodo on the ground, the EE looks better, but his teeth are blue. I still prefer it even with that discrepancy.

[Duffy12]

Originally Posted by ckenisell

My main concern is not the color tint but the crushed blacks. Then, to a lesser extent, the color tint.

Agreed.

That sticks out more like a sore thumb than the color re-grading issue.

As has been said, your eyes can adjust and except the re-grade. But the jacked up contrast resulting in crushed blacks is a real JOLT when trying to watch this.

But I have noticed a trend where crushed blacks are starting to show up in Blu-ray released movies now, and it sadly ain't over yet either.

.

[Moviefan2k4]

Originally Posted by ACMutd

I personally prefer the EE to the TE. Except for a few of those comparisons.

Me, too; the only real annoyance is the bluish snow in a few of the mountain scenes.

[Mavrick]

Warner Home Video has announced that The Lord of the Rings: Extended Editions will finally be available on 8/28 as Blu-ray singles (SRP $34.99 each). The Fellowship of the Ring, The Two Towers and The Return of the King will each be released as 5-disc sets that include the extended film split over 2 BD discs, along with 3 DVDs containing the Appendices discs and the Costa Botes documentaries. Note that these sets do not appear to include Digital Copy versions.

[besi]

thanks for the reminder on the digital copies.
I picked up a brand new set on craigslist couple of days ago(traded for 20$ worth of ps3 & 360 games) I'll pick up the "ultimate"collection too when its released.
f...love this movie ! this is the only movie I picked up the soundtracks too.

[Petra_Kalbrain]

Originally Posted by Mavrick

Warner Home Video has announced that The Lord of the Rings: Extended Editions will finally be available on 8/28 as Blu-ray singles (SRP $34.99 each). The Fellowship of the Ring, The Two Towers and The Return of the King will each be released as 5-disc sets that include the extended film split over 2 BD discs, along with 3 DVDs containing the Appendices discs and the Costa Botes documentaries. Note that these sets do not appear to include Digital Copy versions.

Do you have an official link to something official about that?