Gladiator (2000)

[Gremal]

Originally Posted by Beta Man

Is she saying people in the U.S. are somehow different from people in the UK in the sense that "We" don't like grain, and "They" do? That's absurd....

Grain and honor.

[jw]

I watched this and I compare the quality of this to Robin Hood...Was enjoyable never the less

[Deadset]

Originally Posted by Gremal

Grain and honor.

is GOOD

[Petri Teittinen]

Originally Posted by Jack Burton

Love to know who has confirmed the same

I haven't read of a confirmation, but UK encode being the same makes perfect sense. Universal controls the assets, produced the US BD for Paramount and distributes the BD in Europe. They are not going to do two different encodes when there's no need for that. Same resolution, same framerate, i.e. none of those old PAL/NTSC differences forcing their hand. UK version might have U-Control, but that feature is simply slapped on top of the encode; i.e. it can be made to work just fine with the audio/video encode they used for the US release.

[tvine2000]

Originally Posted by gates70

Well I surely wasn't going to read 85 pages on my lunch break at work ! I read a few pages. Just seems odd to me that some people say it was sooo bad they shut their tv's off after a few minutes while other people like me think the picture looks great. Something's wrong there.

yeh somethings wrong like how they justify blowing 20 bucks or more.so to them the pq looks great.when i hear things like oh its a upgrade from dvd or its not as bad as people have been saying i know its bad.

when a bd is done well you hear ''wow'' or ''great pq''.what i'm hearing now is ''its not that bad'' on the outside .but on the inside disspointment!

[tvine2000]

Originally Posted by Beta Man

They didn't apply excessive EE and DNR to the DVD either......

beta-man then why do they feel they have to do this with blu-ray?it makes no sense.

[nycomet]

Originally Posted by jwbbud

I watched this and I compare the quality of this to Robin Hood...Was enjoyable never the less

Thank you JWB! A phenomenal movie is going to be amazing to experience no matter how much edge enhancement is applied.

However, a turd will still look like a turd -- with or without edge enhancement.

Insert turd here:

1. ___________________________________________
2. ___________________________________________
3. ___________________________________________
4. ___________________________________________
5. ___________________________________________

[Jack Burton]

Originally Posted by Petri Teittinen

I haven't read of a confirmation, but UK encode being the same makes perfect sense. Universal controls the assets, produced the US BD for Paramount and distributes the BD in Europe. They are not going to do two different encodes when there's no need for that. Same resolution, same framerate, i.e. none of those old PAL/NTSC differences forcing their hand. UK version might have U-Control, but that feature is simply slapped on top of the encode; i.e. it can be made to work just fine with the audio/video encode they used for the US release.

I think it will be the same ,but some times over here in the uk we get a different transfer with less dnr.Only sometimes but it does happen and until someone confirms they are the same, then i am crossing my fingers.I will doulble dip if i they are diffrent.

[Beta Man]

Originally Posted by tvine2000

beta-man then why do they feel they have to do this with blu-ray?it makes no sense.

I don't feel that they do....... yet they did


So, now that I see the actual review, I see they didn't mention Grain.... which leads me to believe that Jack Burton doesn't even realize the reason people are complaining about the PQ of this one......

GRAIN DOES NOT EQUAL BAD PQ!!!!

We're talking about EE and DNR here (and I wouldn't go so far as to use the word "Bad" either..... although it is certainly excessive, as a whole, I don't think the transfer is BAD)

[nycomet]

Originally Posted by Jack Burton

I think it will be the same ,but some times over here in the uk we get a different transfer with less dnr.Only sometimes but it does happen and until someone confirms they are the same, then i am crossing my fingers.I will doulble dip if i they are diffrent.

But will it be region free?

[jw]

Originally Posted by nycomet

But will it be region free?

German is confirmed, still waiting on UK

[HAVOKK]

I think I need to dig up my recording of the HDTV version and do some comparison shots..

[Kryptonic]

I picked it up and sampled some scenes. I definitely noticed the edge enhancement and haloing, but then I put in the DVD and yeah, it's a pretty substantial upgrade and those problems were already there on the DVD too. It isn't the shiny slice of perfection everyone wanted, but it's still a fine looking disc. The DTS-HD sound is incredible to say the least.

[Petri Teittinen]

Originally Posted by tvine2000

beta-man then why do they feel they have to do this with blu-ray?it makes no sense.

It makes perfect sense! The image is pre-filtered for DVD which is low and blurry enough not to show any major deficiencies of the original transfer. It's a completely different story with High Definition.

I bet some producer at Universal saw the first BD tests made from the original transfer made in 2000 and crapped his pants. I'm sure HiDef brought out all that was wrong with the old transfer. It probably looked very grainy as well, and since consumers have been complaining about grain, they decided to smooth it over with DNR. That naturally killed much of the detail which they then attempted to bring back with edge enhancement and other sharpening filters. But it just doesn't work like that! Once you lose the detail, it's gone for good and never coming back. Same thing with upscaling DVD, really.

[tvine2000]

Originally Posted by Beta Man

I don't feel that they do....... yet they did


So, now that I see the actual review, I see they didn't mention Grain.... which leads me to believe that Jack Burton doesn't even realize the reason people are complaining about the PQ of this one......

GRAIN DOES NOT EQUAL BAD PQ!!!!

We're talking about EE and DNR here (and I wouldn't go so far as to use the word "Bad" either..... although it is certainly excessive, as a whole, I don't think the transfer is BAD)

i not sure i follow but i'm all for grain,always have been.the more it looks like film the better.which means less dnr&ee.all i'm saying is someone went over the top with dnr&ee and somone at paramount didn't check it and signed off.

[Jack Burton]

Originally Posted by Beta Man

I don't feel that they do....... yet they did


So, now that I see the actual review, I see they didn't mention Grain.... which leads me to believe that Jack Burton doesn't even realize the reason people are complaining about the PQ of this one......

GRAIN DOES NOT EQUAL BAD PQ!!!!

We're talking about EE and DNR here (and I wouldn't go so far as to use the word "Bad" either..... although it is certainly excessive, as a whole, I don't think the transfer is BAD)

What are you talking about.She clearly mentions the word grain which i am hoping it has .She does'nt mention EE or DNR.Once again what are you talking about.I hope she as different copy with grain which she clearly states and its Dnr free.

[Petri Teittinen]

Originally Posted by Jack Burton

I think it will be the same ,but some times over here in the uk we get a different transfer with less dnr.Only sometimes but it does happen and until someone confirms they are the same, then i am crossing my fingers.I will doulble dip if i they are diffrent.

You have to keep in mind who's producing the release. If it's a big studio distributing the same movie around the world, they will produce it centrally in-house for all territories using the same assets. For example, 20th Century Fox creates all Fox BDs for Finland in the USA.

It's a different story for movies that have been sold to a bunch of smaller distributors round the world. There's a studio with the assets in the US, but they won't lift a finger to actually encode and author the BD. They will sell the master to each distributor, and it's up to each distributor to decide what to do with it. Some might go with low bitrate VC-1, others with high bitrate AVC; some will add sharpening, others might apply DNR on purpose for easier low bitrate encoding to fit on a BD25 instead of the more expensive BD50. That's why you might find 4-5 separate European BD releases for the same movie, and every one looks a bit different.

[tvine2000]

Originally Posted by Petri Teittinen

It makes perfect sense! The image is pre-filtered for DVD which is low and blurry enough not to show any major deficiencies of the original transfer. It's a completely different story with High Definition.

I bet some producer at Universal saw the first BD tests made from the original transfer made in 2000 and crapped his pants. I'm sure HiDef brought out all that was wrong with the old transfer. It probably looked very grainy as well, and since consumers have been complaining about grain, they decided to smooth it over with DNR. That naturally killed much of the detail which they then attempted to bring back with edge enhancement and other sharpening filters. But it just doesn't work like that! Once you lose the detail, it's gone for good and never coming back. Same thing with upscaling DVD, really.

thanks for that.so what your telling me is the issue here is ''grain to be or not to be''i like grain,to me its film.i understand the complaining about grain.so the studios are trying to please the group that hates grain and the rest of us have to eat s&*t...nice! if i saw this coming i would have found another hobby!

[Petri Teittinen]

Originally Posted by tvine2000

thanks for that.so what your telling me is the issue here is ''grain to be or not to be''i like grain,to me its film.i understand the complaining about grain.so the studios are trying to please the group that hates grain and the rest of us have to eat s&*t...nice!

I think grain was only one of the reasons they decided to "enhance" the image and not necessarily the main one. A film transfer made in 2000 with DVD and HDTV broadcasts in mind will not look as good as a profer film transfer made in, say, 2008 with Blu-ray in mind.

[jsub]

Originally Posted by HAVOKK

I think I need to dig up my recording of the HDTV version and do some comparison shots..

Dont bother, just go to DVD Beaver and read their review. They have comparison's between 4 versions of Gladiator...2 DVDS, HDTV and Blu. Bluray owns by far.