Shot using HD camera vs. copied from film

[skrill]

Originally Posted by Sonny

Allot of HDDVD's catalog titles look like crap especially from *Universal
& they were all my favorite's too , ie: "Fear & Loathing" "Casino" it was a BIG let down...but what the hell...it was crappy old HDDVD, soooo.........Anyway thats why it going to take Universal along time because they have to re-encode a lot of films ( bringing um up to standard )

I have not seen either of the two you mentioned.

But Chronicles of Riddick and the two prior Bourne movies (Identity and Supremacy) are reference quality video encodes (and audio as well). The Thing looks awesome. Those Universal titles come to mind. So they are not all bad.

Bourne Ultimatum was voted one of the best video encodes of 2007. It is awesome (if you don't get sick from the shaky camera). Children of Men is awesome as well.

Keep in mind that "grain" and "washed out look" are sometimes the directors intent (wouldn't surprise me if that was the director's intent in the pictures you mention).

[Sonny]

Originally Posted by skrill

Really? Are they shot on film? Or just shot in regular video and upconverted?

Yeah there shot on film , & I know the 2k 4k & what ever other 'k' you want to throw in film wise...but there not 'shot' with an HD camera. My computer is running really slow, thats why its taking so long to get these 'posts' out

[skrill]

Originally Posted by Bobby Henderson

Mission Impossible III was shot on film, not video.

I guess we are both right -- from Hi-Def Digests review:

Interestingly (and as you'll learn more about in the extras), 'M:I III' was shot using both anamorphic 35mm film and 24 frames-per-second HD video, yet the image looks, for the most part, surprisingly consistent. I imagine director J.J. Abrams chose this dual-format approach to filming to both allow for flexibility when it came to filming effects-heavy scenes in HD, though the two disparate technologies actually match up quite well. Blacks and contrast are terrific throughout.

[Sonny]

Originally Posted by skrill

I have not seen either of the two you mentioned.

But Chronicles of Riddick and the two prior Bourne movies (Identity and Supremacy) are reference quality video encodes (and audio as well). The Thing looks awesome. Those Universal titles come to mind. So they are not all bad.

Bourne Ultimatum was voted one of the best video encodes of 2007. It is awesome (if you don't get sick from the shaky camera). Children of Men is awesome as well.

Keep in mind that "grain" and "washed out look" are sometimes the directors intent (wouldn't surprise me if that was the director's intent in the pictures you mention).

There were plenty that were ok...but "Fear & loathing in Las Vegas" has a hole 'seen' with a line down the F'n middle of the screen, & it does not go away until an 'seen' change...that something you will never see on BD. Universal was literally just throwing out as many movies as possible & we the consumers paid for it with crap quality. You don't need to defend HDDVD to the death on Blu-ray.com, theres other places for that...I don't even need to talk about 'grain' lol

[PeteS]

Originally Posted by Bobby Henderson

The process of how a 35mm movie is transferred to HD will make a big difference on image quality. If it is simply run through a HD-quality telecine then details will be a little soft and color won't be as good. If the studio spends the extra money to put the 35mm negatives through a digital intermediate process the end result will look a lot better.

Good points throughout. Another thing to consider is that the 'state of the art for' HD cameras and videography is advancing rapidly. It is worth looking at some professional-videography testimonials from directors shooting on HD who know what they're doing. We can't say that HD is never going to look as cinema quality as film because there are now HD cameras that do pretty well.

[Eternalnow]

Originally Posted by Sonny

There were plenty that were ok...but "Fear & loathing in Las Vegas" has a hole 'seen' with a line down the F'n middle of the screen, & it does not go away until an 'seen' change...that something you will never see on BD. Universal was literally just throwing out as many movies as possible & we the consumers paid for it with crap quality. You don't need to defend HDDVD to the death on Blu-ray.com, theres other places for that...I don't even need to talk about 'grain' lol

There is nothing wrong with a little grain now and then, sometimes it makes a film better. You must be confusing 'grain' with "picture noise'.

[skrill]

Originally Posted by Sonny

There were plenty that were ok...but "Fear & loathing in Las Vegas" has a hole 'seen' with a line down the F'n middle of the screen, & it does not go away until an 'seen' change...that something you will never see on BD. Universal was literally just throwing out as many movies as possible & we the consumers paid for it with crap quality. You don't need to defend HDDVD to the death on Blu-ray.com, theres other places for that...I don't even need to talk about 'grain' lol

I am not defending anything -- but I do feel it was an objectively good product, the same way I feel about BR.

[FilmmakingFiasco]

Originally Posted by Sonny

There were plenty that were ok...but "Fear & loathing in Las Vegas" has a hole 'seen' with a line down the F'n middle of the screen, & it does not go away until an 'seen' change...that something you will never see on BD. Universal was literally just throwing out as many movies as possible & we the consumers paid for it with crap quality. You don't need to defend HDDVD to the death on Blu-ray.com, theres other places for that...I don't even need to talk about 'grain' lol

If there is a scene (not 'seen') in Fear and Loathing that does have a vertical line in it, there's nothing inherent in Blu-ray that magically makes it look better. It wasn't the technical limitations of HD-DVD that would create such a problem.


You can pretty much count on one had all the Hollywood produced feature length films that were shot fully on HD. So, if you want to throw everything else out, go ahead.

[Sonny]

Originally Posted by FilmmakingFiasco

If there is a scene (not 'seen') in Fear and Loathing that does have a vertical line in it, there's nothing inherent in Blu-ray that magically makes it look better. It wasn't the technical limitations of HD-DVD that would create such a problem.


You can pretty much count on one had all the Hollywood produced feature length films that were shot fully on HD. So, if you want to throw everything else out, go ahead.

Are you that 'simple' look DE DE DEEE don't put words in my mouth....jump in some other thread.

[Sonny]

Originally Posted by Eternalnow

There is nothing wrong with a little grain now and then, sometimes it makes a film better. You must be confusing 'grain' with "picture noise'.

Damn guy, you think I was born yesterday

[FilmmakingFiasco]

Originally Posted by Sonny

There were plenty that were ok...but "Fear & loathing in Las Vegas" has a hole 'seen' with a line down the F'n middle of the screen, & it does not go away until an 'seen' change...that something you will never see on BD

I corrected the word 'seen' to tell you that it was scene. I didn't correct your misspelling of hole that should be whole. I wasn't trying to be a jerk.

And I wasn't trying to put words in your mouth but you make it seem (as the quote above) that Blu-ray brushes all the problems of a film print away.

[TheRealBob]

Originally Posted by Eternalnow

There is nothing wrong with a little grain now and then, sometimes it makes a film better. You must be confusing 'grain' with "picture noise'.

Grain is picture noise.