Would you prefer 300 with or without grain?

[Dace]

Originally Posted by Objectivity

Well, if it were freshly painted, it wouldn't be the Mona Lisa because Michaelangelo has been dead for hundreds of years. To answer your question, I would want it cracked and aged (or cleaned like the Sistine Chapel) rather than a reinvention.

There are a lot of reasons for film grain. Some directors use it to spark the viewers emotion. Others are striving for as much natural light as possible and an increase in grain is a direct consequence of that decision.


People are making it sound as if there's some switch in the projector that says "Grain - On/Off." That's far from the case.

Your ignorance is showing. It was Leonardo that painted the Mona Lisa not Michelangelo. And if you are going to argue the fact that he has died and can no longer paint a fresh copy...we can equally say that he also isn't around to be able to paint a toothy smile on the Mona Lisa.

And to see people get all excited and angered over the fact that some people are displeased with the grain makes me laugh. How old are most people in here?

This is not a thread conceived to rid the world of all grainy "300" Blu-ray movies and demand that a smooth version be released...it was merely an innocent question requiring a simple answer And by the way there is a button to remove grain from from the image....it's called Sharpen. it just does a horrible job.

Furthermore, people defending the grain solely because it is the directors intention and for the sake of art.....are simpletons. But I'll stop here; you guys are too easy to upset. To think that this the way most wars are started...for stupidities.