Lord of the Rings Trilogy (Theatrical Versions) - April 6, 2010

[Trogdor2010]

Has anyone here ever seen The Seventh Seal on Blu Ray?

[Batman1980]

As far as I can tell, going by the reviews and the screenshots and my personal experience with the DVDs, this site's 3.5/5 PQ rating is probably accurate. I just think they'll do for now and remember, like most posting in here, I AM a huge LoTR fan and so will upgrade once a better blu set comes out.

[Beta Man]

Originally Posted by Trogdor2010

Has anyone here ever seen The Seventh Seal on Blu Ray?

I own it, and have seen it 3 or 4 times on Blu-ray, and many times on DVD...... why?

Originally Posted by Trogdor2010

Actually I intentionally put this on the LotR thread, you know why?

Nope.... no clue......

[saprano]

Originally Posted by Trogdor2010

Actually I intentionally put this on the LotR thread, you know why?

Only if they could've done this transfer.

[Brodo Faggins]

Originally Posted by Stinky-Dinkins

That's nice, but a screen cap is what is actually on the disc regardless of what you want to believe.

The reason it looks different is because of how you're seeing it on your display. Your display is probably not large enough to bring out flaws that are very noticeable on other displays, or you are sitting too far back from it and aren't able to notice such imperfections.

If you watched something like this release of Fellowship on a very high quality display or a PJ it would be glaringly apparent.

Everyone's display is different.

FYI, I am viewing on a 46" Sony Z Series Bravia from about 8 feet, not sure what the equivalent is where you are, but it is one of the higher end panels here. Ill try and get around to viewing on my HD projector on an 84" screen later tonight and see what difference it makes.

[Brodo Faggins]

Originally Posted by Mike2060

Have you looked at the disclaimer at the bottom? Also, a lot of people are getting their screen caps from another source.

The screencap is horrid. The Blu-ray is nothing like it.

[CYMBOL]

Most people have Netflix or BB mail in - just rent them and see what you think guys.

That's my plan - I like the theatrical cuts better - so I'm hoping these are good looking - unfortunately for me - FoTR is my favorite and it seems most reviews agree this one is not as good as the others.

Either way I'm renting these for some outstanding DTS HD fun. These movies already sound amazing - can't wait for lossless!!!!

[Trogdor2010]

Originally Posted by saprano

Only if they could've done this transfer.

The Seventh Seal on Blu Ray is one of the Best Blu Ray transfers I've seen, and it was from 1957 and was on a budget less than a million, while you think about one of the most anticipated movies coming to blu ray since it's inception that well... you know.

[Brodo Faggins]

Originally Posted by kpkelley

You have to remember that, the image there is in fact a blend of multiple images at least two if not three(don't know if the background is practical or a model). Whenever you blend images like that you are going to either notice differences between the layers or make the whole image softer in order to blend them together. Below is an image from the recently released Clash of the Titans. The layers here are very obvious particulalry in motion, but the resolution of each image is maintained. It's a trade-off either way.

https://www.blu-ray.com/movies/scree...47&position=14

Would viewing these screencaps on my LCD make it a fairer comparison?

[Atreyu]

I just read this sites review of LOTR trilogy. Still was iffy on purchasing 'cause i want the EE. Since Fellowship was given a not too good review PQ am gonna wait till users post their reviews before making my final decision. Not to say the reviewers are not reviewing correctly but they seem to be a bit more technical and many times I agree with some of their findings, but mostly am happy with the outcome on most blus.

[Chiyo_chichi]

Meh, I was planning on skipping the TE release but now with the lukewarm video transfers I really have no guilt in waiting to see how they handle the EEs.

Unless I find this set at a bargain price, the most it'll get is maybe a rent.

[Ken Brown]

Originally Posted by Brodo Faggins

Im actually refusing to believe that was a screenshot from FOTR Blu-ray. It does look like an upscaled DVD. The Blu-ray I have checked does not.

If the image on your television looks significantly better, I would suggest switching off your TV's various enhancements for a moment -- current TVs offer dozens of contrast-boosting, sharpening, and misleading bells and whistles that artificially enhance whatever is on the disc. Thanks as always for posting!

[Stinky-Dinkins]

Originally Posted by Brodo Faggins

Would viewing these screencaps on my LCD make it a fairer comparison?

Your LCD TV (or are you talking about your PC monitor)?

The caps are from the BD. Lossless 1920X1080 caps aren't inaccurate, they are what is on the disc. That being said if they are compressed they will differ ever so slightly depending on how much they're compressed, but there are numerous lossless FotR caps out there that look horrendous that have the same effect. There's nothing magical at work here, FotR actually looks like that, if it looks very different on your set the issue isn't with the screencaps it's with your set.

If you have the BD, and you want to see how a screen looks on your TV, put it the disc and pause it. Hooking your TV up to your comp to view a screen cap on your TV is a waste of time if you already have the disc, but if you want to go right ahead.

[Trogdor2010]

Originally Posted by jalabar

Nevermind The Seventh Seal. There are 2 movies on Blu-Ray from 1927 that comparatively look better than FotR.

You mean The General and Sunrise? Even B&W silent films look better than FotR, so cruel, yet hearing from you, it's becoming ture.

[jalabar]

Yeah those two films. I just mean if you take into account the age of the film, those 2 look better than FotR does considering its age/production/budget/etc.

Kind of sad that an 83 year old movie can outshine a 9 year old one.

[Brodo Faggins]

Originally Posted by Ken Brown

Sadly, they're all direct screengrabs. While the final images are .jpegs, and therefore compressed, you can easily see the difference between the FotR screenshots and the TTT and RotK screenshots, all of which were taken in the same sitting, using the same screencapture equipment, and compressed for the site using the same reasonable algorithims. Moreover, the original images taken by the gear we use are beefy .png files, and they look just as bad.

If the image on your television looks significantly better, I would suggest switching off your TV's various enhancements for a moment -- current TVs offer dozens of contrast-boosting, sharpening, and misleading bells and whistles that artificially enhance whatever is on the disc. Thanks as always for posting!

Okay, i just saved the screencap and had a look at it through my Blu-ray player. Its nothing like viewing it on a laptop/PC. I switched between the disc and the screencap and theyre alot closer in likeness now. But the Blu-ray edges it slightly, not by much though. Most people would say the difference is negligible.

For anyone judging the screencaps from your PC/laptop monitor, id recommend testing it out through your TV.

[Brodo Faggins]

Originally Posted by Stinky-Dinkins

Your LCD TV (or are you talking about your PC monitor)?

The caps are from the BD. Lossless 1920X1080 caps aren't inaccurate, they are what is on the disc. That being said if they are compressed they will differ ever so slightly depending on how much they're compressed, but there are numerous lossless FotR caps out there that look horrendous that have the same effect. There's nothing magical at work here, FotR actually looks like that, if it looks very different on your set the issue isn't with the screencaps it's with your set.

If you have the BD, and you want to see how a screen looks on your TV, put it the disc and pause it. Hooking your TV up to your comp to view a screen cap on your TV is a waste of time if you already have the disc, but if you want to go right ahead.

I realise why they looked horrendous, which probably says a lot about why others are saying the same thing.

[Trogdor2010]

Originally Posted by jalabar

Yeah those two films. I just mean if you take into account the age of the film, those 2 look better than FotR does considering its age/production/budget/etc.

Kind of sad that an 83 year old movie can outshine a 9 year old one.

At least we get to see them in high definition though . I should have mention, but The Seventh Seal is a fantasy film also (Well art fantasy), and that makes it an easier comparison to something of a fantasy spectacle such as LotR. I need to see what the fuss is though, making me turn cynical.

[Stinky-Dinkins]

Originally Posted by Brodo Faggins

I realise why they looked horrendous, which probably says a lot about why others are saying the same thing.

It's common sense why they don't look "horrendous" on your TV, it has nothing to do with the screencaps on any level.

A lossless screencap is how it is on the disc.

You have a 46 inch TV and you sit 8 feet from it, that's why it doesn't look horrendous. Not only is that very, very small as far as HDTV's are concerned, that's also a long ways to sit back from a 46 inch TV.

[Kryptonic]

Originally Posted by Stinky-Dinkins

It's common sense why they don't look "horrendous" on your TV, it has nothing to do with the screencaps on any level.

A lossless screencap is how it is on the disc.

You have a 46 inch TV and you sit 8 feet from it, that's why it doesn't look horrendous. Not only is that very, very small as far as HDTV's are concerned, that's also a long ways to sit back from a 46 inch TV.

No, it's a good sized set and 8 feet is about average for that size.