"Club Penton" - Ask questions to Hollywood insider "Penton-Man"

[sharkshark]

what set did you pickup? I assume you get some sort of "employee discount"

I've only seen the Samsung, showing Monsters vs Aliens and was unimpressed (I even took a sec to do a quick calibration, amusingly). Lots of ghosting, etc. I was hoping the Sony sets are much better, but curious if you'd had a chance to compare directly.

Originally Posted by Penton-Man

Yeah, "on paper". If I hadn’t watched it in 3D, I think I might have fallen asleep esp. during the 1st half since Ivory Coast just sat back. Here’s hoping that someone actually challenges Brasil in future matches.

Speaking of 3D, someone previously asked me about the 3D capture at the World Cup with the Sony cameras. In that regard, the action is being captured at 1080i50 (side by side 3D) as a sub-master. Which begs the question, "how will yous guys make those Blu-rays for us folks in the good ole US of A given that off-speed acquisition signal"?

Answer - Well, you transcode the material with a frame rate converter such as a Teranex, or if you work in a Digital Intermediate suite, then you may use a more sophisticated file-based system such as the Arri Relativity (see Oliver K, I love all Germans )…
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PIrtm35jesc

[Kris Deering]

Hey Penton,

Long time no post! I watched The White Ribbon this weekend. Good film, though I didn't care for the ending at all, too vague. Sony has been putting out one great BD transfer after another and I was excited to see how this one would look given all the accolates for the photography. But this is one of the first discs from Sony that I notice some obvious compression issues. This film has some very obvious film grain throughout, which gives it a very alive look (love this). But some of the photography is a bit on the static side (typically during a narrative) and the grain just stays completely still making it look like the same frame on repeat. This makes the image look like a bad still photo compared to the rest of the film. There are a few instances where only a small portion of the image has movement and film grain is readily apparent there but the rest of the image has an unnatural stillness in comparison. I'm sure this happens a lot with modern compression techniques but this is one of the first films that it really stood out. Any comments?

[sharkshark]

I'll add a comment, I thought the ending was brilliant

I've yet to pickup the BD (I thought after all our talk about the film Penton was mailing me one, what happened with that?!). It was obviously a DI production, shot on colour and then converted to B&W, so I wonder if the re-addition of grain was done poorly enough that you notice it at home.

I assure you that when I saw it digitally projected it looked lovely, and I was too engrossed in the film to notice such things. But then again, I hardly have your eye for such things, Kris. I do hope, however, that on the first screening of any film you can still turn off that "evaluation of picture quality" part of your brain and just get into the tale.

Originally Posted by Kris Deering

Hey Penton,

Long time no post! I watched The White Ribbon this weekend. Good film, though I didn't care for the ending at all, too vague. Sony has been putting out one great BD transfer after another and I was excited to see how this one would look given all the accolates for the photography. But this is one of the first discs from Sony that I notice some obvious compression issues. This film has some very obvious film grain throughout, which gives it a very alive look (love this). But some of the photography is a bit on the static side (typically during a narrative) and the grain just stays completely still making it look like the same frame on repeat. This makes the image look like a bad still photo compared to the rest of the film. There are a few instances where only a small portion of the image has movement and film grain is readily apparent there but the rest of the image has an unnatural stillness in comparison. I'm sure this happens a lot with modern compression techniques but this is one of the first films that it really stood out. Any comments?

[Oliver K]

Originally Posted by Penton-Man

Answer - Well, you transcode the material with a frame rate converter such as a Teranex, or if you work in a Digital Intermediate suite, then you may use a more sophisticated file-based system such as the Arri Relativity (see Oliver K, I love all Germans )…
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PIrtm35jesc

Interesting! ARRI definitely has some great people and they were the first ones that I knew could do a filmout from 4k to 35mm which brings me to the question of when it will be possible to do an 8k filmout to 70mm

[Penton-Man]

Originally Posted by sharkshark

what set did you pickup? I assume you get some sort of "employee discount"

Nope.
I’m purposely watching on the comPetiton (like here, i.e. a Panny….http://hollywoodinhidef.com/2010/06/...s-via-directv/) and I must honestly admit, the match looked superb on their plasmas.

[Penton-Man]

Originally Posted by Kris Deering

Hey Penton,

Long time no post! I watched The White Ribbon this weekend. Good film, though I didn't care for the ending at all, too vague. Sony has been putting out one great BD transfer after another and I was excited to see how this one would look given all the accolates for the photography. But this is one of the first discs from Sony that I notice some obvious compression issues. This film has some very obvious film grain throughout, which gives it a very alive look (love this). But some of the photography is a bit on the static side (typically during a narrative) and the grain just stays completely still making it look like the same frame on repeat. This makes the image look like a bad still photo compared to the rest of the film. There are a few instances where only a small portion of the image has movement and film grain is readily apparent there but the rest of the image has an unnatural stillness in comparison. I'm sure this happens a lot with modern compression techniques but this is one of the first films that it really stood out. Any comments?

Good to see you back. It’s difficult to speak about this motion picture without giving away parts of the story to readers who haven’t seen the movie yet either in the theater or on Blu-ray...which includes probably a lot of folks here.

I can tell you that the D.P. purposely pushed the limits of the camera during the interiors and night scenes because of the lighting which was utilized…all under the direction of the fine Director Michael Haneke. For example, for the interiors, no direct light ever hit the set with a minimum amount of aluminum reflectors being used with the light source Berger and Bartenback developed over a decade ago. In certain scenes, the meter read out in the highlights was F 0.5.

The nighttime scenes were constantly *pushing the toe* in regards to negative density with the color temp. clocking in significantly below 2800K. This type of acquisition is naturally going to accentuate the grain in the color negative stock, which the filmmakers didn’t really want audiences to key on consciously or subconsciously in the first place. The Director wanted to refrain from giving the picture any look of real warmth or nostalgia…he was more interested in a *clinical* look or something I think Christian Berger has referred to as a “modern B&W look”. So, what’s one to do in post?

The above philosophy concerning the film’s look is even carried over into the bright daytime exteriors which many would describe as overexposed and flat. Overall, I think the motion picture looks beautiful both in the Digital Cinema and via the Blu-ray format.

P.S.
Even a tad of sharpening was done in post…purposely…as the *screenshot scientists* with magnifying glasses wince, whilst they read this.

For the record, it was nominated for the 2010 Oscar for Best Achievement in Cinematography and won the American Society of Cinematographers award back in Feb.

[4K2K]

Originally Posted by Penton-Man

Speaking of 3D, someone previously asked me about the 3D capture at the World Cup with the Sony cameras. In that regard, the action is being captured at 1080i50 (side by side 3D) as a sub-master. Which begs the question, "how will yous guys make those Blu-rays for us folks in the good ole US of A given that off-speed acquisition signal"?

Answer - Well, you transcode the material with a frame rate converter such as a Teranex, or if you work in a Digital Intermediate suite, then you may use a more sophisticated file-based system such as the Arri Relativity (see Oliver K, I love all Germans )…
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PIrtm35jesc

Is there an option in the service menu of US Sony TVs to enable 50hz? Or could this frequency be re-enabled in another way on TVs that have been set to disallow it? If so, they wouldn't need transcoding if you had one of those TVs, and new Sony Tvs in the US could have that option enabled instead of disabled and so no need for transcoding.

If it's captured as side by side 1080i50, doesn't that mean that both views are stored in one 1920x1080i image? Couldn't they have recorded 2x 1920x1080/50i videos, 1 from each camera? Also, seeing as the cameras are capable of 1080p50/p60 couldn't they have been recorded like that?

Would the PS3 have had the processing power to decode stereoscopic 1080i50 or 1080i60?

Will Europe get a 50hz (720p50) version of this title?

Also, what refresh rate do shutter glasses of European 3D Tvs use - 50hz or 60hz (or multiples of one of them?) or something else and why can't they alter the frequency of the 3D LCD shutter glasses depending on the source video frequency?

[captveg]

Originally Posted by sharkshark

I've only seen the Samsung, showing Monsters vs Aliens and was unimpressed (I even took a sec to do a quick calibration, amusingly). Lots of ghosting, etc. I was hoping the Sony sets are much better, but curious if you'd had a chance to compare directly.

The Samsung TV definitely had a ghosting issue that has yet to be fixed, AFAIK. The Panasonic TV does not.

[captveg]

Penton, I know there's a large audience out there for Scorsese's Taxi Driver on Blu (and rightly so), but any chance for Scorsese's other Sony distributed title, The Age of Innocence?

[Penton-Man]

Originally Posted by 4K2K

If it's captured as side by side 1080i50, doesn't that mean that both views are stored in one 1920x1080i image? Couldn't they have recorded 2x 1920x1080/50i videos, 1 from each camera?

Yes, they are. Poor wording on my part.

The broadcaster is providing the live feed in the 1080/50i format delivering separate ‘full’ left and right eye signals using JPEG compression at a rate of 300 Mbps to ESPN, which then converts them into the 1080/60i side-by-side *frame-compatible* consumer broadcast 3D format supported by both new 3D TVs and existing set-top boxes in the U.S.

I’ll leave it up to you and your live personal viewing of the World Cup matches to tell me if you think the *frame-compatible* broadcast 3D format is squeezing the left eye and right eye images by interleaving them in a side-by-side configuration and decreasing 3D picture quality due to restrictions in bandwidth… after you’ve later watched the eventual Blu-ray rendition via your Blu-ray player or PS3…or, some smart folks here who haven’t yet purchased a 3D TV, may already provide an educated guess.

[Penton-Man]

Originally Posted by captveg

Penton, I know there's a large audience out there for Scorsese's Taxi Driver on Blu (and rightly so), but any chance for Scorsese's other Sony distributed title, The Age of Innocence?

Sorry capt., I can’t give out that information.

[sharkshark]

Originally Posted by Penton-Man

Nope.
I’m purposely watching on the comPetiton (like here, i.e. a Panny….http://hollywoodinhidef.com/2010/06/...s-via-directv/) and I must honestly admit, the match looked superb on their plasmas.

I admit to figuring that given their usual -actual-, in motion refresh rate superiority that Plasma would have far fewer artifacts than their LCD brethren. Frankly, if there was a nice way I could retrofit my Kuro I'd go ahead and do so for those very (=very=) few events/films where it'd be warranted.

Have you played with the Samsung? I'm not looking at you besmirching a competitor, but again I found it pretty underwhelming and certainly not ready for prime time.

[Jeff Kleist]

The biggest problem I've had is a lack of Apples to apples comparison. The Samsungs tend to be poorly placed, while the Panasonics tend to be placed the best when it comes to a good viewing environment. I haven't seen the Sony sets outside a Sony Style store.

Based solely on installations in stores and the demo discs they were running, without an apples to apples comparison, I'd have to say the Panny sets are noticeably better, the Sony's are no slouch, and the Samsungs are trailing behind.

Ironically Samsung's glasses were far and away the most comfortable and Panasonic are much worse than the competition

[Penton-Man]

Originally Posted by sharkshark

Have you played with the Samsung?...

WARNING – Do not look at the WC toolbar at the very bottom of the following link as it contains, or will contain (depending on the time of day) World Cup results. Keep your eyes glued to the pretty pics.

That said, to answer your question above… nope. Myself, I’m a Fly Emirates supporter …http://msn.foxsports.com/foxsoccer/w...cs#sport=World Cup&photo=11189450

Seriously, just not enough hours in the day. I do love some of their 3D commercials though …
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gHo-VjRkswk

[Penton-Man]

Originally Posted by Penton-Man

http://msn.foxsports.com/foxsoccer/w...cs#sport=World Cup&photo=11189450

^
Which, after reading the member comments below the pic (from bottom up), reminds me. Maybe FIFA should have allowed Charlize to *have her way* in the real draw, eh?
http://www.irishcentral.com/sport/FI...-78329492.html

[sharkshark]

Originally Posted by Penton-Man

WARNING – Do not look at the WC toolbar at the very bottom of the following link as it contains, or will contain (depending on the time of day) World Cup results. Keep your eyes glued to the pretty pics.

That said, to answer your question above… nope. Myself, I’m a Fly Emirates supporter …http://msn.foxsports.com/foxsoccer/w...cs#sport=World Cup&photo=11189450

Seriously, just not enough hours in the day. I do love some of their 3D commercials though …
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gHo-VjRkswk

yeah, that's a creepy hybrid of an Arsenal and Chelsea jersey... weird.

[captveg]

Originally Posted by Penton-Man

Sorry capt., I can’t give out that information.

Well, figured it was worth a shot. I know you've been able to make vague, general statements about a handful of titles on the long term schedule in the past (such as Lawrence).

Thanks for responding.

[micks_address]

well today i'm ordering a panasonic v20 2d plasma.. its basically the vt25 with the 3d stripped out, i know there's a 3d version coming in 42 inch later in the year, but i'm buying the 2d version now as i dont think i'm going to be ready for 3d for a few years anyway and with young kids in the house, it may not be suitable for them just yet.. also my wife is very anti 3d.. reckon it gives her headaches etc... so it would/will be a lonely a 3d life for me if i ever upgrade.. its a sad day really... i am replacing the last bit of sony gear i have.. i used to have sony erricson phones, sony mp3 players, sony tvs, sony speakers, sony amp, ps3 (sold as wasnt being used for games and needed the cash.. but i loved it).. now its all from different manufacturers.. people used to say i was sony mad.. where has it all gone wrong..

[aygie]

Originally Posted by Penton-Man

Seriously, just not enough hours in the day. I do love some of their 3D commercials though …
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gHo-VjRkswk

That was hilarious.

[Beta Man]

Since we're on the topic of Televisions, are there any conscious efforts by manufacturers to being phasing out 1080i/720p sets, or they considered a very viable market for T.V. sales still? I know personally I would still consider a 720p set for television viewing etc. since it would likely afford me years of enjoyment before 1080p sources were abundant enough to utilize the increased resolution..... I don't really care what the commercials say, I have yet to see an HD broadcast via cable/sat/OTA that warrants a 1080p set over a 720p one.