Christine (1983)

[Cevolution]

It all has already been posted in threads across the site, but because this thread is only new in this subforum these things have barely been touched on, so it will be good to see the info posted here as well.

[gettodamoofies]

Originally Posted by Cevolution

It all has already been posted in threads across the site, but because this thread is only new in this subforum these things have barely been touched on, so it will be good to see the info posted here as well.

I know some specs have been posted but from everything in the various subforums I've read no one's mentioned the audio difference, the exact bitrate of the video and no screenshot comparisons have been posted. I know you've discussed the bitrate before but not the actual bitrate direct from the disc and no screenshots showing if that difference in bitrate has resulted in a change in the image quality have been posted. That's what I want to show.

[Cevolution]

Originally Posted by atexp80

I know some specs have been posted but from everything in the various subforums I've read no one's mentioned the audio difference, the exact bitrate of the video and no screenshot comparisons have been posted. I know you've discussed the bitrate before but not the actual bitrate direct from the disc and no screenshots showing if that difference in bitrate has resulted in a change in the image quality have been posted. That's what I want to show.

There was a link to a review which showed the differences between the specs (and some screen caps as well). Though I can't remember if all the specs were listed, and do recall someone mentioning the reviewer/site is known not to be the most reliable.

[gettodamoofies]

Originally Posted by Cevolution

There was a link to a review which showed the differences between the specs (and some screen caps as well). Though I can't remember if all the specs were listed, and do recall someone mentioning the reviewer/site is known not to be the most reliable.

I think that was the DVD Beaver one and yes, their screenshots have been known to have various issues from time to time.

[nitin]

caps-a-holic also has screenshot comparisons.

[Blu-ray Neo]

When is TT supposed to re release Christine?

Sometime soon hopefully. If not, I'll go ahead and purchase the Australian version.

[gettodamoofies]

^ No date as of yet. Well worth picking up the local one, especially with the current price.

Wasn't aware of the caps-a-holic comparsions, but anyway I've done mine. Screenshots of the local release:




Matching screenshots of the Twilight Time release:



From A/Bing them you can see that the higher video bitrate on the Twilight Time release allows for a more precise handling of the grain in trickier areas (see under Arnie's eyes in the second screenshot). It's very similar to the situation with the original Mi4K Ghostbusters and the re-issue from this year where the grain blended in the background and appears as a softer, slightly less detailed image. The difference is extremely negligible though.

All special features bar the isolated score are carried over.

In short, the Twilight Time release wins based on the video bitrate, the bit-depth of the audio track and the inclusion of the isolated score. All up though the local release is definitely a solid disc for a great cult film and definitely value for money.

As a John Carpenter fan I'm glad to see more films of his getting local releases. Bring on Vampires, Village of the Damned and Memoirs of an Invisible Man so I can complete my collection!

[shireguy]

Originally Posted by atexp80

^ No date as of yet. Well worth picking up the local one, especially with the current price.


In short, the Twilight Time release wins based on the video bitrate, the bit-depth of the audio track and the inclusion of the isolated score. All up though the local release is definitely a solid disc for a great cult film and definitely value for money.
!

ah... YES... do you want to go and try and find a TT copy .... or do you wish to spend $8 at JB ??

I bought the later yesterday.



EDIT: IS THERE SOMETHING 'WRONG' WITH YOUR SCREENSHOT LINKS (caps just to grab attention ??) When I click between the two, they are 'exactly' the same image - there is no difference

[gettodamoofies]

Originally Posted by shireguy

EDIT: IS THERE SOMETHING 'WRONG' WITH YOUR SCREENSHOT LINKS (caps just to grab attention ??) When I click between the two, they are 'exactly' the same image - there is no difference

Attention? What are you talking about?

I think you need to look a little closer at them. They are not exactly the same.

[Blu-ray Neo]

Given the fact that I live in the USA, does anyone have a link to where I can buy this Blu-ray? Someone that ships to the USA?

Thanks.

[shireguy]

Originally Posted by atexp80

I think you need to look a little closer at them. They are not exactly the same.

Here... on a 27inch screen - looking at the car scratch image... flickering between both - and there's no difference. (Given that the 2nd one - http://postimg.org/image/9oniy27ch/full/ =- can't be fully expanded) Can you please point out 'what' to look for ?

[shireguy]

Originally Posted by Blu-ray Neo

Given the fact that I live in the USA, does anyone have a link to where I can buy this Blu-ray? Someone that ships to the USA?

Thanks.

https://www.jbhifi.com.au/movies-tv-...istine/616886/

Best bet would be JB..... they do ship internationally.

[LordCrumb]

I don't think I would see a difference in motion.. I haven't seen the film since VHS days so that's all I could compare it to lol

[gettodamoofies]

Originally Posted by shireguy

Here... on a 27inch screen - looking at the car scratch image... flickering between both - and there's no difference. (Given that the 2nd one - http://postimg.org/image/9oniy27ch/full/ =- can't be fully expanded) Can you please point out 'what' to look for ?

This is the one you can't get to expand: http://s8.postimg.org/vb2jf35wz/0000...14_22_48_1.png

Here is an example. I've enlarged it to point out a couple of areas.

[Show spoiler]

The bottom left arrow shows two distinct dots in his nostrils. On ours it's just a blurry patch. The top left arrow shows a line (possibly a hair?) which on ours is blurry over his eye an non-existent under it. The top right arrow shows creases in his brow which aren't as prevalent. The same goes for the crease in his nose on the bottom right of the image which has lost definition.

Like I said before, it only shows up as a slightly softer image where super fine details get wiped away a little. It's not DNR or any type of filtering, it's just the lower bitrate.

Originally Posted by LordCrumb

I don't think I would see a difference in motion.. I haven't seen the film since VHS days so that's all I could compare it to lol

I agree that it's very minute. Something like this only becomes a potential factor with close viewing distances and large screen sizes and it doesn't show up as DNR, it just looks like the image is ever so slightly softer. That's why I was saying it's extremely negligible though. It's near imperceptible but for those curious about these things it's handy to know.

I think stuff like this, although minor, is excellent when it comes to the argument of studios starting to put 2 hour films back on BD-25s when they're catalogue films. With the lower bitrate this sort of stuff can creep in. It's not a major issue but having that extra breathing room on a disc allows for a bitrate that really presents any film in the best possible light. This is a good example of what an extra 10Mbps can do and also a good example of why Blu-ray releases can sometimes be frustrating: the US release has a higher bitrate, higher audio bit depth AND an isolated score and still only uses 37,878,576,712 bytes of the disc space. Ours ditches the isolated score, has a lower audio bit depth and an average of about 9Mbps less - it only uses 30,464,882,618 bytes of a BD-50. In other words Sony could have used the same encode and same audio for our release. There really isn't a reason why it had to be different.

And just to make it clear, I am NOT saying ours is crap. I'm not even saying ours is inferior. I'm just saying that IF you had the choice and the means, the US one would be the better one to get. I am most certainly not saying it is better value for money though and definitely not saying ours is a poor substitute.

[shireguy]

Originally Posted by atexp80

Here is an example. I've enlarged it to point out a couple of areas.

[Show spoiler]

The bottom left arrow shows two distinct dots in his nostrils. On ours it's just a blurry patch. The top left arrow shows a line (possibly a hair?) which on ours is blurry over his eye an non-existent under it. The top right arrow shows creases in his brow which aren't as prevalent. The same goes for the crease in his nose on the bottom right of the image which has lost definition.

Like I said before, it only shows up as a slightly softer image where super fine details get wiped away a little. It's not DNR or any type of filtering, it's just the lower bitrate.

I agree that it's very minute. Something like this only becomes a potential factor with close viewing distances and large screen sizes and it doesn't show up as DNR, it just looks like the image is ever so slightly softer. That's why I was saying it's extremely negligible though. It's near imperceptible but for those curious about these things it's handy to know.
.

no disrespect - but THAT is one of the BEST SPOILER tags I've ever seen

Definitely now going to go and unwrapped my JB / Sony copy of CHRISTINE and sit back and enjoy it.

[Cevolution]

Originally Posted by shireguy

ah... YES... do you want to go and try and find a TT copy .... or do you wish to spend $8 at JB ??

I bought the later yesterday.



EDIT: IS THERE SOMETHING 'WRONG' WITH YOUR SCREENSHOT LINKS (caps just to grab attention ??) When I click between the two, they are 'exactly' the same image - there is no difference

Nobody was saying that the new Sony disc is not an excellent disc, or that people should seek out the more expensive TT release based on the slight discrepancies. The point is, some people want to know what the best versions are regardless of how small that maybe. Some people also already own the TT disc which they bought from Screen Archives Entertainment not a scalper (at the time of release nobody could say for certain that there would ever be a release of it again elsewhere), and are interested to know which version is superior to determine whether to keep their TT versions or to purchase the new Sony disc. With the TT disc having the slight edge for both video and audio, those who own it will likely want to stick with it.

I've seen you say a couple of times that you can't see any difference in grain structure between the two releases, if you honestly can't this makes me wonder when you give your opinion about other titles how well you pay attention to detail.

Lastly, nobody wants the versions that TT release to be the best ones, but unfortunately in most cases they are.

[Cevolution]

Originally Posted by atexp80

Wasn't aware of the caps-a-holic comparisons

I wasn't aware that they were up either, last time I checked they weren't.

[Boschy]

Originally Posted by carpenteresque579

There really is no difference, even in motion. Okay, so the Twilight Time edition has a higher bit rate therefore only a very slight amount of more detail suddenly makes the Twilight Time to be better than the Sony. I wouldn't nit pick about it and really either release isn't superior or better than the other. The Sony release is much cheaper and is the wiser purchase to go for!

Given that the way it was shot supposedly resulted in a soft image, inspite of the 4K scan, I'd say the extra bitrate on the TT release wouldn't yeild any noticable extra detail in motion shots unless you have a projector and/or you freeze frame the same motion shot and compare noise/blocking/detail etc. Even then, the moving scenery on the film print is going to be blurred too.

I recall this same point being raised for the ZODIAC Blu-ray. US release had higher bitrate than the Region B, and so the conclusion was that it was more detailed (I forget the wording used).

The low price of the local Sony release makes it a winner for me.

[LordCrumb]

Originally Posted by Boschy

Given that the way it was shot supposedly resulted in a soft image, inspite of the 4K scan, I'd say the extra bitrate on the TT release wouldn't yeild any noticable extra detail in motion shots unless you have a projector and/or you freeze frame the same motion shot and compare noise/blocking/detail etc. Even then, the moving scenery on the film print is going to be blurred too.

I recall this same point being raised for the ZODIAC Blu-ray. US release had higher bitrate than the Region B, and so the conclusion was that it was more detailed (I forget the wording used).

The low price of the local Sony release makes it a winner for me.

I think it was more the Lossless Audio that attracted the local buyers to the USA release of Zodiac.

[nitin]

with Zodiac there is also banding on the Warner disc that is not present on the US disc.