Ask questions to The Digital Bits team (Bill Hunt, Jeff Kleist et.al.)

[Banjo]

Originally Posted by SpaceDog

No special features on the first Avatar.

Yes, I'm aware of that, but thank you for pointing that out. I'm referring to the special edition they are preparing to release this November. Plenty of time to get the word out to Fox before they release it this November.

Sorry for the confusion.

[Jeff Kleist]

Jeff, I forgot to ask you. What did you think of "Heroes" this season? While better than last year I doubt they'll get me for another season (if it's even renewed).

I think they need to do 13 episodes and end it. It was definately better than last year, but probably should have been 13 eps

Any word on if the special features for the upcoming Avatar is subtitled in English? Fox has a poor track record when it comes to subtitling the special features in English for the deaf and hard of hearing.

Good news and bad news

Good news- The first issue of Avatar is pretty sparse when it comes to extras

Bad news- Still full price

I'll throw that at them since they're still working on the uber version

[SpaceDog]

Heroes for me is the worst train wreck of a promising series that I've ever seen. Season 1 was nearly perfect. Season 2 was awful. I didn't get very far into Season 3. Given the promise of this show, it's really terrible how they pissed away such potential.

[Banjo]

Originally Posted by Jeff Kleist

I'll throw that at them since they're still working on the uber version

Thanks bud!

[DenonCI]

Originally Posted by SpaceDog

Heroes for me is the worst train wreck of a promising series that I've ever seen. Season 1 was nearly perfect. Season 2 was awful. I didn't get very far into Season 3. Given the promise of this show, it's really terrible how they pissed away such potential.

I agree. Although one could argue it fell apart about 3/4 of the way through Season One. The last episode sucked and was lazy.

[DaViD Boulet]

since no one in the Avatar thread seems to know or respond... maybe an insider here knows and can share?

Will the 2D BD release be 2.35 or 1.78?

I know that Cameron did the native image work at 1.78 and intended that for IMAX 3D to "maximize size" since IMAX is basically constant-width. But for regular theaters he released 2.35 presumably to maximize size there as well... but by cropping the image down.

I'd love to see the image native 1.78 "opened up" to reveal the full picture on my 16x9 display... since the black bars will basically be wasting space and hiding actual image that was intended to be seen.

Anybody know how the 2D BD will be mastered? And for that matter... does anybody know if the 3D BD will be full-native 1.78?

I'd be really pissed if the only way to see the full 1.78:1 filmed image was in an IMAX theater... especially given that most of us have constant-width 16x9 screens which obviously would provide the "biggest" image with 1.78 content... in theory the same principle behind why it was shown that aspect ratio for IMAX.

[phansson]

David, I was thinking the same thing. Of course I would prefer the release to be in 2.40 if possible. I am sure it will be plain ole vanilla 1.78. That is the AR that it is listed as on IMDB.

What would be really neat is to release a 2.40 anamorphic for us CIA users......

[PeterTHX]

Originally Posted by phansson

David, I was thinking the same thing. Of course I would prefer the release to be in 2.40 if possible. I am sure it will be plain ole vanilla 1.78. That is the AR that it is listed as on IMDB.

What would be really neat is to release a 2.40 anamorphic for us CIA users......

So a cropped release to satisfy a limited non-standard audience.

(and don't confuse support with standard, projectors may support CIH but the HDTV standard is still 1.78)

[Diesel]

Someone posted this link in the Avatar BD thread that states the AR as 1.78

http://www.zonadvd.com/modules.php?n...icle&sid=19422


No idea if that is credible or not though.

[SpaceDog]

Cameron tends to have a lot of pull on home video releases of his film, so I would presume it would be exactly what he intends.

[cjamescook]

Originally Posted by Penton-Man

...“DRS”, (or Dirt and Scratch removal for those not familiar with the acronym), when it is unmonitored, automated and ‘cranked up to 10’ will remove large picture elements (like for instance, flying arrows) where there is a lot of movement or a lot of randomness, as well as tiny random particles like GRAIN. It is critical to monitor and adjust the level of application of this tool.

Penton!

What a great segue: Concerning DRS, does Sony (or the film industry in general) employ infrared surface scanning for DRS?

I ask because Nikon Super Coolscan scanners for slide flim and negatives employed technology from Applied Science Fiction that did a really neat job of DRS. Yes, the scanner manufacturer had to sign on as they had to add infrared scanning to the usual RGB, but it was pretty cool.

I good summary of the Digital ICE software is located here at Wikipedia.
A general Nikon scanner review is located here, while an old (2001) review that demonstrates DRS is located here (it is much-improved since).

While I don't propose that IR scanning is a panacea, it seems to be a valuable tool to add to the belt vs. processing exclusively in the digital (post-scan) domain.

Cheers!

[Uxi]

Originally Posted by DenonCI

I agree. Although one could argue it fell apart about 3/4 of the way through Season One. The last episode sucked and was lazy.

Season 1 does stand great on it's own. Just pretend that Peter, Nathan, and Sylar died.

Is it too soon to reboot?

[phansson]

Originally Posted by PeterTHX

So a cropped release to satisfy a limited non-standard audience.

(and don't confuse support with standard, projectors may support CIH but the HDTV standard is still 1.78)

I am not really confusing anything. I would bet anything that the version I watched (twice in two different theaters) WAS 2.40/2.35. I could be wrong, but it didn't look even close to 1.78.

[Vincent Pereira]

If AVATAR was a center-crop for the 2.4:1 version (i.e., equal amounts matted top and bottom), couldn't the Blu-ray include a 2.4:1 letterbox matte encoded as a subtitle stream? That way, you could watch it either way you want, no?*

Vincent

* Provided the subtitles for the Navi language scenes are within the 2.4:1 area.

[Jeff Kleist]

I couldn't say what Avatar will be as far as AR goes on Blu-ray, I would assume 2.35:1 unless something comes out otherwise. If IMAX was truely a more picture 1.78 version I don't preclude some Wal-Mart "IMAX edition" or something for Xmas, but I have no specific knowlege of the existance of such a thing

I don't ever expect to see CIH discs unless they are specifically commissioned by a hardware manufacturer.

Is it too soon to reboot?

Always. Reboots are unnecessary. Write forward, move the clock forward 10, 20, 100 years, works just as well to clean the plate and you don't destroy other people's work.

[Jeff Kleist]

Oh yeah, I just triedd Samsung's 3D demo tonight, it seems to work pretty well, though it was hard to really judge with a dozen TVs reflecting on the screen

[DaViD Boulet]

Originally Posted by phansson

I am not really confusing anything. I would bet anything that the version I watched (twice in two different theaters) WAS 2.40/2.35. I could be wrong, but it didn't look even close to 1.78.

Sigh. Did you bother to read what was explained?

The *native* filmed and edited image was 1.78:1. IMAX viewers saw it natively. 2.35:1 theatrical projections, however, CROPPED the image top/bottom. The reason it was shown 2.35:1 anywhere at all was bcs Cameron wanted viewers to see the biggest most immersive image... and since most commercial theaters are constant height, 2.35:1 projection was the way to maximize the size in the theater. Since IMAX is constant width, the native 1.78 image was the "biggest", as it will also be on 16x9 screens.

[DaViD Boulet]

Originally Posted by Vincent Pereira

If AVATAR was a center-crop for the 2.4:1 version (i.e., equal amounts matted top and bottom), couldn't the Blu-ray include a 2.4:1 letterbox matte encoded as a subtitle stream? That way, you could watch it either way you want, no?*

Vincent

* Provided the subtitles for the Navi language scenes are within the 2.4:1 area.

but why? the 2.35:1 projection was non-optimal and is not the native aspect ratio or Cameron's preferred vision... it was just means to an end to get the biggest picture possible for 3D audiences in 2.35:1 set ups.

The irony is that the Real3D theaters I saw it at (two of them) were constant width! They literally matted down the top and bottom from the 1.85:1 trailers at the opening to the 2.35 feature film. Had Cameron realized this was going to happen on those screens, he would have insisted on a 1.85 projection for these Real3D screens which, ironically, act more like IMAX than they do conventional screens in terms of aspect ratio adjustment.

At least on the BD we'll be getting it right: 1.78:1.

[Doctorossi]

Originally Posted by Jeff Kleist

Oh yeah, I just triedd Samsung's 3D demo tonight, it seems to work pretty well, though it was hard to really judge with a dozen TVs reflecting on the screen

Speaking of which, I was startled by the Bits update, today, with the presser about the XpanD glasses and their claim of compatibility with "almost all" of the current/upcoming 3D tvs. Somebody, point me at an LCD display that produces polarized images with which those things would be compatible!

WTF?!

[Jeff Kleist]

Since no polarized displays are actually planned for commercial release, I think "almost all" covers it