"Club Penton" - Ask questions to Hollywood insider "Penton-Man"

[sharkshark]

Originally Posted by petmic10

I don't post here much but I must say I lost all respect for
him when he spit at the camera man after they were eliminated.

http://g.sports.yahoo.com/soccer/wor...urn=sow,252366

two things:

- In fairness, he didn't actually spit -at- the camera

- You had respect for Whine-aldo before? FOOL.

[petmic10]

Originally Posted by sharkshark

two things:

- In fairness, he didn't actually spit -at- the camera

Technically he didn't but he looked into the camera and
then spit on the ground in front of the camera man. Were
I'm from that is a huge insult. Try spitting at any European's
feet and see what happens. He knew exactly what he was
doing.

- You had respect for Whine-aldo before? FOOL.

I respected him for his ability and talent only. I guess I still do.

[Penton-Man]

I received numerous e-mails about some link circulating around in regards to Steve Jobs making comments about Blu-ray and such.
The lack of support there is nothing new however it does bring up the undeniable challenge that ‘download purchases and VOD’ presents to high definition packaged media. This was recently frustratingly hinted at by Michael here…
http://www.wwd.com/media-news/fashio...2136751?page=2

The fact of the matter is that Blu-ray is steadily growing, but it is not enough to compensate for the decline in DVD sell-through and rentals. With on-demand (be it broadband, cable or satellite) studio execs envision lower physical costs and higher potential profit margins compared to packaged home media which, accept it or not, portends a significant challenge to our beloved Blu-ray software.

The BIG picture is that…at least for Dreamworks Animation, the net revenue from a successful 3D theatrical release is greater than the decline in the DVD revenue which is why all the majors are embracing this new source of revenue.

If folks really want to do the single most substantial thing they can do to support the Blu-ray format, encourage your friends and family to experience 3D at home…or at least, don’t openly dismiss or bash it on internet forums because you’re just cutting your own throats as the 3D revenue trickle down will eventually benefit 2D Blu-ray production more than what one might imagine.

[JamesN]

^^^ Might I respectfully add that full resolution, 1080p per-eye 3D can be realized at home only via Blu-ray media and not via cable, satellite, etc.

[Oliver K]

Originally Posted by Doctorossi

Yes, it is. What's your point? If the budget ran out after getting the video and audio right and there won't be any extras on the set, just say so. I'll say, "That's too bad, but I'm glad the priorities are in order and the set should look and sound great!"

I think when video and audio are taken care of and with the extras from the DVD ported over we should have a very nice release that allows buyers not to have to keep two versions of the movie in their collection. Everything else (movie IQ, BD Live, additional extras) might be nice for some but I would not call it essential.

[Oliver K]

Originally Posted by Penton-Man

If folks really want to do the single most substantial thing they can do to support the Blu-ray format, encourage your friends and family to experience 3D at home…or at least, don’t openly dismiss or bash it on internet forums because you’re just cutting your own throats as the 3D revenue trickle down will eventually benefit 2D Blu-ray production more than what one might imagine.

If I want more classics on Blu-Ray I still think the best thing for me is to buy the classics that are properly done. And If I want to watch 3D only then I will buy 3D equipment and 3D Blu-Rays

[Doctorossi]

Originally Posted by Oliver K

I think when video and audio are taken care of and with the extras from the DVD ported over we should have a very nice release that allows buyers not to have to keep two versions of the movie in their collection.

I agree. I'm not sure why Penton seems to be arguing that consumers trying to tell the industry they want A/V quality prioritized is somehow implying that we are completely forfeiting all interest in extras or something.

[Braktastic]

Originally Posted by Penton-Man

If folks really want to do the single most substantial thing they can do to support the Blu-ray format, encourage your friends and family to experience 3D at home…or at least, don’t openly dismiss or bash it on internet forums because you’re just cutting your own throats as the 3D revenue trickle down will eventually benefit 2D Blu-ray production more than what one might imagine.

Ironically, I think it will be the studios cutting their own throats if they continue to covert 2D movies to 3D and expect people will continue to line up for it at the theaters like they did Avatar and buy equipment for their homes to replicate the experience. Converted 3D is a terrible experience.

I saw Alice in Wonderland and the 3D was middling at best. It was a complete waste with so few 'Wow' moments that I completely forgot I was watching 3D; and all I got in return was an overly dim imagine.

That experience was so bad that I opted for seeing Clash of the Titans in 2D, and I will continue to opt for 2D on any film that was originally compositioned for 2D.

3D has been a fad before in the 1950s and 1980s, and if the studios continue to cut corners converting 2D to 3D to make a quick buck it'll be a fad again and certainly not anything worth upgrading my display, receiver, and player over.

[Penton-Man]

Originally Posted by JamesN

^^^ Might I respectfully add that full resolution, 1080p per-eye 3D can be realized at home only via Blu-ray media and not via cable, satellite, etc.

You may.

[Penton-Man]

Originally Posted by Paul Arnette

3D has been a fad before in the 1950s and 1980s, and if the studios continue to cut corners converting 2D to 3D to make a quick buck it'll be a fad again and certainly not anything worth upgrading my display, receiver, and player over.

I think that after some initial mistakes due to inexperience, many are now seeing how critical 3D done well is.

Don't throw the baby out with the bath water.

[Blu Titan]

Penton I think that Sony has done a very good job managing the pricing of their BD movies and DVDs. However, most of the studios have only themselves to blame for the "decline" is package media sales. For years customers were "educated" into buying a movie on the week of release, because that would be the cheapest price for a long time. Now we see things that just irritate customers and devalue their (studio's product). We see Blu-ray catalog prices fall within a couple of weeks after release...I have seen 50% reduction in price just a week after release. New releases are sold cheaper (Best Buy) on the second week of release?! What's happening is that customers become frustrated and decide to postpone their purchases since they will be able to buy the movie at half the price in a month or so. The focus on the short term is what's hurting package media sales more than anything else.

[Braktastic]

Originally Posted by Penton-Man

I think that after some initial mistakes due to inexperience, many are now seeing how critical 3D done well is.

Don't throw the baby out with the bath water.

I hope you're right because done well without sacrificing character and plot it is pretty incredible.

[sharkshark]

Yes, the =highest= priority is that. I'm of the opinion that the BD should never be -less-, in any way, than the equivalent DVD. In this case, the PQ must surpass the Superbit, and ideally the extras would at least mirror the Region 2 DVD. Things like movie IQ, then, would be bonuses to this minimum standard.

I think you'd agree with this, no?

Thanks for the interview, reading it now. By the way, was at a MLS TFC match tonight, as they played Houston. Saw two players grab each other by the neck, resulting in twin red cards and another yellow, as there was what amounted to a bench clearing brawl (even the sideline players were involved, crazily).

Made up for the abysmal level of play compared to what I've been watching from the likes of Spain of late.

Originally Posted by Penton-Man

Hey, isn’t the highest priority supposed to be for the studios to put all the time, effort and expense into providing home theater enthusiasts with superb picture and audio quality of the motion picture itself?

I thought I recently read that freely offered advice somewhere on the internet.

And dude, consider the fact that things are tough all over …
http://news.cnet.com/8301-1023_3-102...?tag=mncol;txt

Anyway, here’s a bleeding edge out-sourcing extra brought to you (at no expense) from the L.A. times vis-à-vis an e-mail interview with Pete Townshend –
http://articles.latimes.com/2010/may...tommy-20100521

Gotta run, busy week this.

[sharkshark]

hey, from the Criterion site, can anybody talk about what specific tools/sofware are being used here:

[Vincent Pereira]

Originally Posted by al cos.

Welp, I'm lost. I think I understand Hunt's side of the argument, but at the other end I've heard some say, essentially, "Predator HAS to look like this" because of the way it was made, but what exactly does that mean? I've only heard vague things about grain and old film stock, low light levels etc. But why would a movie like, say, Dirty Harry, be any less problematic?

Well, DIRTY HARRY was filmed in California, very close to the labs and studios, etc. They could view dailies as they were shooting so if any problems with exposure or whatever came up, they could fix them easily and had a reference. PREDATOR was largely filmed on location in harsh environments. The exposed negative was likely being flown hundreds (thousands?) of miles to the lab for processing and I doubt 'dailies' were being flown back for viewing while they were shooting in those remote locations. More likely they had to wing it on location and hope for the best when they got back to Los Angeles to view what they had shot (I believe Michael Cimino dealt with similar issues when shooting the Vietnam sequences on THE DEER HUNTER in Thailand). In fact, I was told that in the case of PREDATOR they actually optically created 'coverage' in post-production by zooming in and cropping some shots, in order to help with the editing because they didn't get everything they needed on location to use as cutaways and such. So yeah, there's a big difference between a film being shot on-location in harsh environments far away from the labs and a movie being shot in San Francisco.

Vincent

[Penton-Man]

Originally Posted by sharkshark

hey, from the Criterion site, can anybody talk about what specific tools/sofware are being used here:

I assume you mean the display on the left. It’s Blackmagic Design’s ultrascope which is a low cost software which I think retails for around $700 -without the monitor.

The six panels (rectangular boxes on the screen) which are pictured are showing waveform monitor, vectorscope, histogram, display parade plus picture and audio. Among the software’s weakness are that it can’t zoom, mag or calibrate the scope readouts. It’s forte is basic color correction and QC monitoring.

[KubrickFan]

Originally Posted by Penton-Man

I think that after some initial mistakes due to inexperience, many are now seeing how critical 3D done well is.

Don't throw the baby out with the bath water.

I absolutely agree. Before Toy Story 3, there were some advertisements in converted 3D, and everything looked like a pop-up book. I don't know if that was the 'lazy way', and that movies like Alice in Wonderland or The Nightmare Before Christmas look better because more effort was used, but I think movies need to be shot in 3D to work properly, or be CG animated. Otherwise it'll never catch on.

[Buddy Christ]

Originally Posted by DenonCI

Nice Blackberry!

Yea I made her my screensaver and found out today she is quite famous in some parts. LARISSA RIQUELME

[micks_address]

well i am a week with my new panasonic 2d plasma... am i dissapointed it doesnt have 3d? well a little tinged perhaps that in a couple of years i will want to watch 3d... but for my house, 3d gives my wife headaches.. my children are quite young and 3d wouldnt be recommended for my daughter at all, so if i did get a 3d telly.. i'd be the only one watching it.. and when i'd ever get the tv to myself would be a big stumbling block... coupled with that id need a new blu-ray player.. it just wasnt the time to go 3d.. maybe in a few years, when most new releases are 2d/3d on blu-ray day and date then i'll jump again... i know my wife has already said.. oh you'll want a 3d tv next year... but with the panasonic coming with a free 5 year warranty i'm hoping i can hold out a little longer than the 2 years i had my lcd..

for me 3d will have to be at the cinema.. where maybe i think it will find its biggest audience..

re the dnr debate thats going on at the moment... for people with 42" inch screens and lower... are they going to notice the problem? i have the original release of predator ... so unlikely to rebuy anyway..

[Oliver K]

Originally Posted by Doctorossi

I agree. I'm not sure why Penton seems to be arguing that consumers trying to tell the industry they want A/V quality prioritized is somehow implying that we are completely forfeiting all interest in extras or something.

Well I think he wanted to poke fun at us a bit

I am not that much into extras myself but one has to understand that most people HATE it when they have to keep an earlier DVD version of a movie that is now out on Blu-Ray just because the extras have not been ported over.