Predator (1987) (Ultimate Hunter Edition)

[mars396]

Originally Posted by Post Prod

If you are really having problems with grain that much on a 37inch display to the point that you think things look like they have a burlap sack on them, you should really think about having a professional calibrate it.

To be fair with the above shots, it could be the camera, but that display appears to be needing a serious calibration as well.


Of course after a proper calibration, a lot of you may think it looks to subdued, since it's not burning your retinas out. But having the contrast jacked and any of the displays "enhancement" features turned on, can make grain look like a flaming sand storm.

I would compare preferring this version to preferring the Blu-rays of the Star Trek original series.
Yes, there was electronic manipulation to enhance the picture. Does that somehow change the quality of the film/show ? To me, no – it increases my enjoyment of it. I cannot and will not ever say anyone is “wrong” for not prefering the new enhanced HD Star Trek episodes, any more than I will tell someone they are stupid for marrying a woman I am not particularly attracted to. To each his own.

I wear glasses to be able to see. Would it be more natural or more the “original intent” of the Creator(s) for me to go through life without them ? Should I not wear them when I watch TV ? Why shouldn’t I use technology to improve my enjoyment ?

[markbr]

Originally Posted by Post Prod

If you are really having problems with grain that much on a 37inch display to the point that you think things look like they have a burlap sack on them, you should really think about having a professional calibrate it.

To be fair with the above shots, it could be the camera, but that display appears to be needing a serious calibration as well.


Of course after a proper calibration, a lot of you may think it looks to subdued, since it's not burning your retinas out. But having the contrast jacked and any of the displays "enhancement" features turned on, can make grain look like a flaming sand storm.

Nothing wrong with my 52" display. I took the shots with a iPhone 4 which I think came out good for a mobile device. The picture quality on the blu ray is perfect. Go out and buy it yourself, new edition or original release. Then you can post some pictures in your gallery..... And make your own Mind up.

[HD Goofnut]

Originally Posted by mars396

I would compare preferring this version to preferring the Blu-rays of the Star Trek original series.
Yes, there was electronic manipulation to enhance the picture. Does that somehow change the quality of the film/show ? To me, no – it increases my enjoyment of it. I cannot and will not ever say anyone is “wrong” for not prefering the new enhanced HD Star Trek episodes, any more than I will tell someone they are stupid for marrying a woman I am not particularly attracted to. To each his own.

I wear glasses to be able to see. Would it be more natural or more the “original intent” of the Creator(s) for me to go through life without them ? Should I not wear them when I watch TV ? Why shouldn’t I use technology to improve my enjoyment ?

You're comparing corrected vision to the manipulation of a film? That's not even a stretch, that's beyond a stretch. Do you think people want to have blurry vision? No. They don't. If people were smart they'd know they don't want digitally manipulated films either.

[mars396]

Originally Posted by HD Goofnut

If people were smart they'd know they don't want digitally manipulated films either.

I will never, ever tell someone that if they were smart, they should prefer to watch a movie enhanced with DNR. To each his own.

[HD Goofnut]

Originally Posted by mars396

I will never, ever tell someone that if they were smart, they should prefer to watch a movie enhanced with DNR. To each his own.

Well, there you go. Some people want every film to resemble Avatar, home videos, or video games while some people want the film to be represented the way it was originally created. It just so happens that the second group is smarter and far more logical.

[markbr]

Originally Posted by HD Goofnut

Well, there you go. Some people want every film to resemble Avatar, home videos, or video games while some people want the film to be represented the way it was originally created. It just so happens that the second group is smarter and far more logical.

You just said it plain and clear. Like I've said if you want the original buy it, if not buy the new edition. Everyone has a choice my choice was both as I had the original in the first place, and I think the new one is better...

[Grubert]

For all I care you're free to spread peanut butter on your steak.

But if a lot of people demand that at a restaurant, the chef will think that's what the public wants and start serving all steaks covered in peanut butter.

And you can't remove the peanut butter from a steak.

[Post Prod]

Originally Posted by mars396

I would compare preferring this version to preferring the Blu-rays of the Star Trek original series.
Yes, there was electronic manipulation to enhance the picture. Does that somehow change the quality of the film/show ? To me, no – it increases my enjoyment of it. I cannot and will not ever say anyone is “wrong” for not prefering the new enhanced HD Star Trek episodes, any more than I will tell someone they are stupid for marrying a woman I am not particularly attracted to. To each his own.

I wear glasses to be able to see. Would it be more natural or more the “original intent” of the Creator(s) for me to go through life without them ? Should I not wear them when I watch TV ? Why shouldn’t I use technology to improve my enjoyment ?

I'll agree with your first paragraph. When you started breaking things down to your eyeglasses analogy, things got a wee bit absurd. You wear glasses to see things for how they are as your vision become impaired. Unless we are talking about beer goggles, eyewear isn't about enhancing reality, but simply allowing you to see it as you should.

and we really don't need to make this a debate about religion and trying to draw parallels between someone using a wheelchair and applying excessive DNR to Predator.


There is technology to "improve" Predator in ways you are seeing on this release. Many major brand modern displays have built in noise reduction functions, as well do several blu-ray players. Not to mention out board video processors.

Considering how many releases out there WITHOUT excessive DNR, it would make more sense for you to start using this technology to do this to all non-DNR'd titles from here on out. Not only would this give you the enjoyment from technology you are seeking, but it would allow people who loathe that technology the option NOT to apply it to movies. and then everyone is happy. Unless of course you only care about your enjoyment, and in that case you are big selfish jerk and I say poopy to your face.

[mars396]

Originally Posted by HD Goofnut

Well, there you go. Some people want every film to resemble Avatar, home videos, or video games while some people want the film to be represented the way it was originally created. It just so happens that the second group is smarter and far more logical.

To be true to yourself, you really shouldn't be messing around with electronic media at all. You should have a projector, a screen, and watch everything on its original medium. You are contradicting yourself when you claim people are stupid for not watching something as it was originally created, yet you are watching Blu-rays. Are you watching these films with the "original" soundmix as "created" or some sort of digitally enhanced soundfield with 7.1 speakers ?

[toddly6666]

Right now, DVD watchers that don't own a blu-ray player are probably laughing in our faces right now as everyone is flipping out over this release - I bet they are happy with their DVD of Predator.

Out of curiousity, here's my little conspiracy theory for the day. When 3D blu-ray gets popular and they start re-releasing movies into 3D such as Predator, would it technically be easier to 3Dize a blu-ray that doesn't have grain? It doesn't seem like a grainy movie could be successfully transferred into 3D since it would ruin the 3D effect. It seems like a DNRed blu-ray would have an easier time getting transferred to 3D.

[HD Goofnut]

Originally Posted by mars396

To be true to yourself, you really shouldn't be messing around with electronic media at all. You should have a projector, a screen, and watch everything on its original medium. You are contradicting yourself when you claim people are stupid for not watching something as it was originally created, yet you are watching Blu-rays. Are you watching these films with the "original" soundmix as "created" or some sort of digitally enhanced soundfield with 7.1 speakers ?

I never claimed people were stupid for not watching something as as it was originally created. As a matter of fact I never used the word stupid. I simply said that the people that would rather have their films left alone instead of digitally manipulated are smarter.

[Post Prod]

Originally Posted by markbr

Nothing wrong with my 52" display. I took the shots with a iPhone 4 which I think came out good for a mobile device. The picture quality on the blu ray is perfect. Go out and buy it yourself, new edition or original release. Then you can post some pictures in your gallery..... And make your own Mind up.

I've already bought both copies. and I find no point in taking pictures of a display with a camera considering all of the variable in play that impact of the final image looks from camera settings, to room lighting ect.

It might be your camera, but looking at those pictures, I have to ask, do you see anything wrong with them?

Do you not see your whites and blacks being crushed? Sharpness too high, saturation too high? I think there is also a red/magenta push and your gamma looks a bit out of wack...

But hey, it could be the camera and those are not test patterns. I do have all of my displays professionally calibrated oncer a year, so I'm drawing these comparisons based on how the new disc looks on my displays.

All bickering aside for a moment, if oyu haven't yet, I strongly suggest anyone here who is serious about their video presentation to get their displays professionally calibrated. It can make a world of difference. DVE and AVIA are fine to get in the ballpark, but you can't really fix most display issues with them. You need a competent professional with a good scope. I'm a colorist/online-editor so professionally I have no choice but to have my displays calibrated.

I'd be more than happy to recommend several calibrators in your area or ones who travel to it.

[Blu-ray Fanatic]

My vote is neither because the film doesn't have much replay value to me.

[AKORIS]

Originally Posted by mars396

To be true to yourself, you really shouldn't be messing around with electronic media at all. You should have a projector, a screen, and watch everything on its original medium. You are contradicting yourself when you claim people are stupid for not watching something as it was originally created, yet you are watching Blu-rays. Are you watching these films with the "original" soundmix as "created" or some sort of digitally enhanced soundfield with 7.1 speakers ?

that's exactly what I was thinking.... this entire conversation is starting to become ridiculous-- is it really necessary for 2400 posts basically having the same arguements over and over and over again-- nothing is going to convince either side

[Jutty]

Hummm,,as i dont own the 2008 blu release of this film,,i cant see going wrong with picking the new 2010 release up,,especially with the movie cash for one of the newer films

[Post Prod]

Originally Posted by toddly6666

Right now, DVD watchers that don't own a blu-ray player are probably laughing in our faces right now as everyone is flipping out over this release - I bet they are happy with their DVD of Predator.

Out of curiousity, here's my little conspiracy theory for the day. When 3D blu-ray gets popular and they start re-releasing movies into 3D such as Predator, would it technically be easier to 3Dize a blu-ray that doesn't have grain? It doesn't seem like a grainy movie could be successfully transferred into 3D since it would ruin the 3D effect. It seems like a DNRed blu-ray would have an easier time getting transferred to 3D.

I don't follow your logic how film grain would play any part in making a "retro" 3D master. Grain is simply a very fine detail in the picture. So if grain posed any issues, so would hair, skin pores and any other fine detail.

[persuazion]

Originally Posted by Grubert

For all I care you're free to spread peanut butter on your steak.

But if a lot of people demand that at a restaurant, the chef will think that's what the public wants and start serving all steaks covered in peanut butter.

And you can't remove the peanut butter from a steak.

WOW..........you just changed my whole outlook on life.

[Post Prod]

Originally Posted by AKORIS

that's exactly what I was thinking.... this entire conversation is starting to become ridiculous-- is it really necessary for 2400 posts basically having the same arguements over and over and over again-- nothing is going to convince either side

Yeah and a decent portion of the 2400 posts are people feeling a need to post about how stupid the debate is. If you think it's a really stupid debate, how smart is it to spend any time and energy posting in this thread?

This is the internet folks. and this is a hobbyist forum. This is exactly the place needless bickering, pointless chest thumping, circular arguments and nerdly hen pecking is meant to transpire. Now if you'll excuse me I'm going to go the local aquarium and complain about all the fish there.

"Why all the fish losers?"

[Spanbauer]

Originally Posted by Grubert

No offense but that looks nothing like Predator. It looks like it had been shot in a movie set flooded with soap-opera lighting, instead of on location in a Mexican jungle (which it was).

His pictures don't look anything like the blu-ray.

[persuazion]

Originally Posted by Post Prod

Yeah and a decent portion of the 2400 posts are people feeling a need to post about how stupid the debate is. If you think it's a really stupid debate, how smart is it to spend any time and energy posting in this thread?

This is the internet folks. and this is a hobbyist forum. This is exactly the place needless bickering, pointless chest thumping, circular arguments and nerdly hen pecking is meant to transpire. Now if you'll excuse me I'm going to go the local aquarium and complain about all the fish there.

"Why all the fish losers?"

Yep......where else can you go and have somebody compare DNR on a Bluray to peanut butter on a steak........only on the internet people.