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

[svenge]

Depends. What's his cut on home video royalties?

Seriously though, for all we know, he might have viewed them for approval on an iPod Touch or maybe his LASIK surgery wasn't 100% successful. Regardless, do you think that PJ or WB would ever admit to the buying public why they failed with LotR's BD release, short of a Congressional subpeona?

[Jeff Kleist]

Now you're just grasping at straws

And you still haven't proven that they failed. What I'm seeing is a lot of people with expectations that weren't met, or quite possibly ever could have been met given the inherent characteristics of the films. As has been noted, FOTR was likely taken from an archive print, because a DI doesn't exist for it like the other 2. In addition, while all 3 films were shot at once, their post production was done a year and 2 years apart receptively. That's a marathon when it comes to technology.

It's these kinds of reactions that make it so hard to pull them out of their foxholes when there IS a real problem.

For people who mentioned earlier that there are many excellent Super35 productions btw, not only are many of those quite different (less "guerilla" style shooting), but Super35 photography is light years beyond what it was even 5 years ago today, especially with the new stocks formulated for DI.

[svenge]

Is this the face of success? Because this seems to be a "real" problem...

(well-known screenshot of waxy-faced, blurry-beareded Gandalf linked below)

http://www.crunchgear.com/wp-content...03/lotr7bd.png

[Xorp]

Originally Posted by Jeff Kleist

You know what I'm seeing? Noise and artifacting, not grain. To my knowlege, especially in 2003, the only way to take a DirecTV signal and put it in a computer format is analog capture. So you're looking at a digital to analog back to digital, plus a recompression. It wouldn't be the first time that people are mistaking noise for grain or texture.

Everything you just stated is incorrect.

[Jeff Kleist]

That's exactly the shot I was talking about when it came to the noise. I deleted the giant image. Repost something smaller with a link

Given ten minutes of googling, I failed to find a single method of doing a pure digital extraction from a DirecTV hard drive without capture, and I do know where to look, especially circa 2003. If you want to PM it to me, feel free and I'll look at it.

If you'll remember, we discussed things like noise back when T2 came out. Stacey Spears did quite a whole example blu about it.

[svenge]

The picture in question WAS from the Blu-ray (thus the BD ending in its file name). I'm not saying that the HDTV version is correct, but there's no way that the BD was done properly for that scene (or most others, actually).

[Jeff Kleist]

But the comparison picture being used on it, that supposedly shows more detail was not

I already stated that large amounts of noise reduction (far inferior to today's) were used during the post process on LOTR.

[captveg]

It's these kinds of reactions that make it so hard to pull them out of their foxholes when there IS a real problem.

Exactly.

I already stated that large amounts of noise reduction (far inferior to today's) were used during the post process on LOTR.

I don't think this can be emphasized enough.

[DenonCI]

Originally Posted by svenge

Is this the face of success? Because this seems to be a "real" problem...

(well-known screenshot of waxy-faced, blurry-beareded Gandalf linked below)

http://www.crunchgear.com/wp-content...03/lotr7bd.png

For starters, until anyone here sees the Blu-ray's in motion, why are people jumping to conclusions and lambasting Warner Brothers based upon screen shots. As Penton has mentioned before, who's to say the posters of the shots aren't looking for the most egregious shots in order to make Warner look bad? Furthermore, FOTR has never been razor-sharp in any form that I've seen (on DVD, HD cable, or in theater's), so it seems someone (or many someone's) have an ax to grind with either Blu-ray or Warner (or both).

Just my $.02.

[jd213]

Kenneth Brown already saw them in motion and gave FOTR a 2.5 for video several days ago on this very site. His review specifically states "fine detail is continually undermined by some rather obvious digital noise reduction (DNR)."

https://www.blu-ray.com/movies/The-L...y-Review/5174/

[Jeff Kleist]

But the source of the noise reduction is the question, and given the post process used and the fact that it cleared PJ means it's almost certainly there from the get-go, and not the result of some tech cranking it to 11

[jd213]

I seem to remember reading that directors are often screened the uncompressed master, etc. made for a BD, and not the actual encode. If this isn't true in this instance though, then nevermind.

[Jeff Kleist]

You are usually correct, but PJ specifically stated he saw the Blu-rays and that they look great. Don't forget these have been done for months, so he would have had time to look at them, unlike what usually happens

Peter Jackson: Well, it keeps changing. I am not the best person to ask about that believe it or not as I am not in charge of the Blu-ray, Warner Home Video is. I believe it is scheduled for sometime next year. They keep changing the date…I don’t know why. I’ve seen the Blu-ray as they sent it to me to approve and I looked at the film and it looks fantastic on Blu-ray but I don’t know the date.

http://www.collider.com/2009/12/04/e...is-still-2011/

[Diesel]

From all the reviews I've read, I'm quite surprised he used the word "fantastic"; I'd expect something like "quite good", well at least for the 2nd two for sure since most reviews seem to agree that those are good.


I can't wait to be able to judge for myself

[jd213]

Originally Posted by Jeff Kleist

You are usually correct, but PJ specifically stated he saw the Blu-rays and that they look great. Don't forget these have been done for months, so he would have had time to look at them, unlike what usually happens



http://www.collider.com/2009/12/04/e...is-still-2011/

Ah, OK. Still though, saying it looks fantastic and saying it's faithful to the master are two different things. He might not have noticed a loss in detail or didn't expect the Blu-ray to be fully capable of representing all that was there in the master.

[Jeff Kleist]

PJ is one of us, I think he knows what Blu can do Considering he knows every frame of all 3 intimately, I DO take his opinion on the matter as gospel

[MerrickG]

Jeff,
While we're on the subject of Lord of the Rings here is some possible better news in regards to the EEs. Although, everyone seems to think this potential BS.

What do you think?

https://www.blu-ray.com/news/?id=435...ating30&page=1

If its the EEs coming later this year, then Im in!!!

UPDATE: TOTAL B.S.

No need for Jeff to comment.

[captveg]

For the record, I'd put that in the BS category.

EDIT: Indeed - an April Fools joke.

[SpaceDog]

Originally Posted by captveg

For the record, I'd put that in the BS category.

EDIT: Indeed - an April Fools joke.

A bit early for that - and april fools jokes regarding media like this are just lame. Of course I was thinking that wishful thinking or joke was involved since PJ has been very clear about his plans for the EEs.

I like sites like TVShowsonDVD that have a no april fools policy.

[Penton-Man]

Originally Posted by Jeff Kleist

The biggest objection to screenshots, outside of the "scientific" realm is that the studios can get into trouble with the talent over them, as all stills from a film are by contract approved by the actors and their agents. So anyone recieving screener product from them could potentially get them in trouble

Of course, there are sites out there that DON'T receive screener product who don't have to abide by the rules, and the cause problems for everyone else when they start these kinds of issues because everyone working online gets dumped into the same bag.

Well, I’m probably the last person on earth to ever defend *screenshot science* but Ken Brown’s screenshots are not the problem in this particular case. The *problem* is the comparison HD broadcast vs. Blu-ray movie screenshot comparison of FOTR on AVS.

People like Ronnee Sass from WB should be made clear of that……crystal clear. And tell her as a wee little tike, I never, ever got over the personal mental trauma of the Colts leaving Baltimore in the middle of the night to go to Indianapolis.