The Lord of the Rings: The Motion Picture Trilogy (Extended Edition) (2001-2003)

[JamesKurtovich]

My wife, who doesn't know the difference between BD and DVD, also preferred the theatrical PQ when shown the comparison. People like bright and colorful pictures.

[MerrickG]

I am really surprised this thread hasn't been locked. This whole thing is just out of hand. I went out to the lake and had some barbq. Why not lock this thread until release day? Give people some time to cool off.

[Cinemaddict]

This reviewer says there is a green tint, but he likes it and thinks it was intentional: (skip to 7:35)

YouTube - ‪The Lord Of The Rings Extended Blu-Ray Edition. Unboxing and Review‬‏

[Penton-Man]

Originally Posted by duggie walker

...Nor does it affirm anything that people who went to the screening saw no murky green tint; as those who have seen the discs are saying - guess what? That there's no murky green tint!So how does this advance your case?...

lol, my “case” doesn’t need advancing....I have no vested interest. Perhaps I’m confused but I had thought that eye-witness accounts of the theatrical presentation, two Tuesday’s past, in fact reported the snow to be pure white (or very close to it) and the same scene on Blu-ray to be more cyan or bluish tinted. Like this (thanks to a co-member for the link to AVS) –

http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showp...postcount=2181

There shouldn’t be such a discrepancy like that or, for that matter, anywhere near that between the Digital Cinema presentation and the Blu-ray edition.

[punisher]

Originally Posted by mikej327

Umm I guess you don't understand that the digital copy is just the DVD version, so of course it wouldn't look like the new master.

why shouldn't it..the digital copy should be as green as the bd..just not the video nor audio quality..but certainly the same version and that includes color otherwise it is not a true digital copy of the blu ray..or maybe the digital copy is flawless and the bd is flawed.........hmmmmmm

[Penton-Man]

Originally Posted by duggie walker

Why should they say they're looking into something when there's nothing to look into? When Jackson and his DP have actually said this is how they want the films to look?

Well, I didn’t know that the filmmakers have said that this (the *tinting* issue at hand) is the specific look they desired. All I’m aware of is that Peter has stated they’ve regraded the film…..which is quite vague as it relates to the current discussion on this and apparently most other home theater forums on the internet.

On another issue which received far less internet consternation (his filming of The Hobbit at 48fps), he was very forthcoming in offering more specifics to his intentions and processes –http://www.facebook.com/notes/peter-...50235459531558

Of which I, for one, was happy with his clarification and elaboration of that topic – https://forum.blu-ray.com/insider-di...ml#post4676851

I really think that folks (the most discerning viewers, that is, like Ken) are just looking for a clear-cut response from someone in authority as to whether this specific look was truly intended or a mistake.

[punisher]

Originally Posted by Underworld54

I would just like to defend Bill Hunt for a second. If I remember correctly, he went after Paramount hard trying to get answers about why Gladiator looked like a mess. He was on then hard and went to bat for us. I'm sure his constant e-mails to Paramount helped speed that replacement process along. I don't think people should be questioning him about this. There's no doubt he's on our side.

defending Bill Hunt for anything is forbidden.......

[Cowboy]

I dont' know but if it looks like this:

https://www.blu-ray.com/movies/scree...804&position=3

then that is how the sky looks on cloudy snowy days quite abit of the time.

[frogmort]

Originally Posted by merrick97

I am really surprised this thread hasn't been locked. This whole thing is just out of hand. I went out to the lake and had some barbq. Why not lock this thread until release day? Give people some time to cool off.

This is a blu-ray forum for discussing LOTR. It is one of the biggest releases of the year, and will be released in just a few days. Why would you want us to not have a place to discuss this? Many people in this thread have been respectful in their disagreements, and not gotten in any trouble. Why do you want this taken away? If you don't want to participate, you don't have to. I have no problem with you, or anyone who disagrees with me, but I don't understand your desire to close this down.

P.S. Glad you enjoyed your BBQ.

[mrpink134]

Digital Copy from Wikipedia

"There are two types of digital copy. The first is a copy already made in advance and included on the disc. The second is created dynamically from the DVD content itself. In both scenarios the publisher decides which content, formats, digital rights management (DRM) systems and technical parameters are used for the digital copy file. Digital copy solutions based on existing files are less flexible than dynamic transcoding solutions.

Digital copy files based on existing files include only one audio track and no subtitles, although the DVD itself may have multiple audio tracks and multiple subtitles. Also, the quality is limited by the bitrate used to encode the file which is typically relatively low and not adjusted to the device to be transferred to.

Digital copy files based on transcoding solutions can use the correct audio track and subtitle based on the user's location or choice and individually create the digital copy based on the target device properties (video and audio bitrate, display resolution, aspect ratio) of the target device.

Most often, digital copy solutions offer Windows Media or Apple iTunes files with their respective DRM services, Windows Media DRM and FairPlay. Newer solutions also provide support for Sony PlayStation Portable and phones using 3GP video files and Open Mobile Alliance DRM. It is important to note that some publishers, Warner Brothers to name one, limit their digital copies to Microsoft operating systems and devices. Apple computers and devices are not supported by their digital solution.

To limit the number of free digital copies, the disc typically comes with a single-use code to authenticate a computer over the internet. Alternatively, content owners can offer the digital copy feature as a paid service. Often the authentication code has an expiration date rendering the copy invalid if unused before this time, making the whole feature useless."

Thats why there is no green tint.

[42041]

Originally Posted by frogmort

This is a blu-ray forum for discussing LOTR. It is one of the biggest releases of the year, and will be released in just a few days. Why would you want us to not have a place to discuss this? Many people in this thread have been respectful in their disagreements, and not gotten in any trouble. Why do you want this taken away? If you don't want to participate, you don't have to. I have no problem with you, or anyone who disagrees with me, but I don't understand your desire to close this down.

These threads are where I pick up on any news regarding these releases, like a possible response from Peter Jackson on the matter. I don't see any reason to close it. It takes two to bicker, so if anyone's tired of this topic, just stop making replies that invite retorts.

[beefytwinkie]

Originally Posted by mredman

Do you also think she will prefer the old version here:


http://screenshotcomparison.com/comparison/58252
http://screenshotcomparison.com/comparison/58223
http://screenshotcomparison.com/comparison/58250
http://screenshotcomparison.com/comparison/58228
http://screenshotcomparison.com/comparison/58590

Oh, wow. Thanks for those photos. The photo collage I mentioned was small pictures. This is much better. In those, I think I prefer the EE version. Big difference!

[kurtlingle]

Originally Posted by mredman

Do you also think she will prefer the old version here:


http://screenshotcomparison.com/comparison/58252
http://screenshotcomparison.com/comparison/58223
http://screenshotcomparison.com/comparison/58250
http://screenshotcomparison.com/comparison/58228
http://screenshotcomparison.com/comparison/58590

Thanks mredman!

Wow. That really puts this whole "green" thing in context. Some screen shots really "fix" the color problems in the TE. I always thought that Rivendel was to "weird"/gold/glowing?

I certainly think all those are better. Now others, I don't think are better (we've seen those too).

That said, WB's silence does make me think something is up.

[Stinky-Dinkins]

Originally Posted by Penton-Man

On another issue which received far less internet consternation (his filming of The Hobbit at 48fps), he was very forthcoming in offering more specifics to his intentions and processes –http://www.facebook.com/notes/peter-...50235459531558

How are they going handle this for BD release?

Are they just going to axe every other frame to get it down to 24?

[nathan_393]

Originally Posted by Stinky-Dinkins

How are they going handle this for BD release?

Are they just going to axe every other frame to get it down to 24?

I remember being told that theaters would do exactly that if they did not purchase new equipment, so I would imagine they would do the same thing with the BD.

But BD is fully capable of handling 30 fps and 60 fps, so why not 48? Penton_Man might have some info on this actually.

I wouldn't be surprised if we got 48 fps on Blu or if we got 24 fps on Blu. Time will tell.

[DaViD Boulet]

Originally Posted by Stinky-Dinkins

How are they going handle this for BD release?

Are they just going to axe every other frame to get it down to 24?

If they did, that would be perfectly fine, as a native 24 fps capture would have been no different.

The only difference might result from film-style where the cinematographer chooses to pan the camera at speeds that look ok at 48 fps but have too much judder at 24 fps, but as long as he films "24 fps judder safe" truncating 48 fps down to 24 by frame-dropping would be exactly the same as having filmed in native 24 fps.

[greg_achen]

Originally Posted by mrpink134

Digital Copy from Wikipedia

"There are two types of digital copy. The first is a copy already made in advance and included on the disc. The second is created dynamically from the DVD content itself. In both scenarios the publisher decides which content, formats, digital rights management (DRM) systems and technical parameters are used for the digital copy file. Digital copy solutions based on existing files are less flexible than dynamic transcoding solutions.

Digital copy files based on existing files include only one audio track and no subtitles, although the DVD itself may have multiple audio tracks and multiple subtitles. Also, the quality is limited by the bitrate used to encode the file which is typically relatively low and not adjusted to the device to be transferred to.

Digital copy files based on transcoding solutions can use the correct audio track and subtitle based on the user's location or choice and individually create the digital copy based on the target device properties (video and audio bitrate, display resolution, aspect ratio) of the target device.

Most often, digital copy solutions offer Windows Media or Apple iTunes files with their respective DRM services, Windows Media DRM and FairPlay. Newer solutions also provide support for Sony PlayStation Portable and phones using 3GP video files and Open Mobile Alliance DRM. It is important to note that some publishers, Warner Brothers to name one, limit their digital copies to Microsoft operating systems and devices. Apple computers and devices are not supported by their digital solution.

To limit the number of free digital copies, the disc typically comes with a single-use code to authenticate a computer over the internet. Alternatively, content owners can offer the digital copy feature as a paid service. Often the authentication code has an expiration date rendering the copy invalid if unused before this time, making the whole feature useless."

Thats why there is no green tint.

I don't think anyone is denying anymore that the digital copies came from the DVD master. However, it does speak volumes about WHV and their handling of this release. They couldn't even bother creating new digital copies to reflect the new color timing. You'd swear they weren't charging a premium price for this release.

[Scooter1836]

Originally Posted by beefytwinkie

Reading this thread has been pretty entertaining. I hope everyone will be satisfied with the outcome whether it's a statement by Peter Jackson or someone of equal "credibility".

But I will say that I showed my mother the two comparison photo collages on page 277. My mom is the last person in the world to even care about the picture quality of any movie and she preferred the old version. Haha to me, that's pretty telling.

Well now that you mom says so it must be true...........

Have either of you looks at the BD itself. Color timimgs are percieved by the brain differently when pictures are in motion. The only people that can truly comment accuratly are those that have watched the BD in 1080p like it is designed to be viewed.

[nathan_393]

This thread becomes more and more like the Star Wars thread every day. Except this one comes with screencaps!

Kidding, of course. I look forward to Tuesday though.

Edit: But not really kidding.

[blu2]

Originally Posted by greg_achen

I don't think anyone is denying anymore that the digital copies came from the DVD master. However, it does speak volumes about WHV and their handling of this release. They couldn't even bother creating new digital copies to reflect the new color timing. You'd swear they weren't charging a premium price for this release.

Have to agree on this. If Warner is creating a new HD master for the EE, the digital copies should be the downrez-ed versions of those masters. They should be consistent except for the resolution. I think this is either laziness or extreme penny pinching at work.