Donnie Brasco and Revenge (May 8)

[Ascended_Saiyan]

Originally Posted by BTBuck1

yes but this "Grain" has a grid line pattern to it, similar to graph paper. Look closer and you will see what I am talking about.

I just checked two times and even paused and did a frame by frame progression. I don't get a grid pattern. I'm just taking a guess here, but it might just coincide with your pixel spacing. If you view that close enough on just about any display technology, it can appear to have a grid pattern to it (wait...you know all this already...sorry). Otherwise, a grid pattern should be even more apparent to me at 70" if there is a grid pattern on the transfer itself. We should ask at least one other people that has a DLP (and a copy of the movie) and a couple of people with other types of displays to be sure.

[BTBuck1]

I'll post a pic when I get a chance, I didn't watch revenge on my DLP yet, this was on my LNS4696 Samsung 1080p LCD

[Deciazulado]

Originally Posted by BTBuck1

did you notice on a few dark scenes, like when Costner Boinks Madilyne Stowe in the Dressing room, that it gets this weird Screen door effect?
I had seen this on GridIron Gang before too. Is this some sort of compression artifact? The rest of the movie aside from this and a few other brief low light scenes looks great. Reminds me of the BS in Planet Earth, just not as bad or as frequent.

You mean the one at 28 minutes? or 43 minutes? (Sorry haven't watched the film so I'm searching blind ) On a quick scan I found those scenes with lots of varying degrees of exaggerated grain but I didn't see any regular pattern to it... (both spatially or temporal, and the grain kept changing from shot to shot going up and down in size and roughness (maybe to imply the roughness and impetuousness of the content? ) It was difficult to keep watch on the grain while Madeleine was there so maybe I missed it ). More err.. "study", might be advised.

[Ascended_Saiyan]

Originally Posted by Deciazulado

You mean the one at 28 minutes? or 43 minutes? (Sorry haven't watched the film so I'm searching blind ) On a quick scan I found those scenes with lots of varying degrees of exaggerated grain but I didn't see any regular pattern to it... (both spatially or temporal, and the grain kept changing from shot to shot going up and down in size and roughness (maybe to imply the roughness and impetuousness of the content? ) It was difficult to keep watch on the grain while Madeleine was there so maybe I missed it ). More err.. "study", might be advised.

LMAO...I hear ya!

Edit: It was 28 mins. in.

[BTBuck1]

ok guys, so I grabbed my DSCH9 (great camera btw) and headed downstairs with my copy of Revenge to check it on the DLP and post pics of what I was describing. I put it on the same scene inside the Dressing room, chapter 5 like 28 minutes in. The scene is totally grainy (which is understandable in the crappy lighting condition) But the grid like pattern was not evident here. I had seen this same type of Grid like pattern in "The worlds fastest Indian" on my LCD too. So it's not the source material...it is my LCD buggin out during these grainy type situations. Maybe my sharpness is too high, or dNie is "Actin a foo"

But I'm glad to know it's my $3,000 LCDTV and not my $20 disc

[Ascended_Saiyan]

Originally Posted by BTBuck1

But I'm glad to know it's my $3,000 LCDTV and not my $20 disc

ROFLMAO! What is up with all the comedy this time of night?!

[Deciazulado]

Your grid-like pattern might be some interference moiré-grain aliasing pattern between the - image / processing / display pixel "cells" grid - that is excited by certain images. Have you tested that display for 1:1 mapping?

[BTBuck1]

Originally Posted by Deciazulado

Your grid-like pattern might be some interference moiré-grain aliasing pattern between the - image / processing / display pixel "cells" grid - that is excited by certain images. Have you tested that display for 1:1 mapping?

^^^
What he said...lol

I don't know to test that, but with the known overscan issues with samsung sets, I'd seriously doubt its a 1:1 set. It gives a fabulous picture the other 99% of the time, so I'dd just have to "Deal" with it

[thebluemax]

Originally Posted by thebluemax

Yep, BDP-S1 thru HDMI at 1080/24p on a Samsung HL-S6187 DLP-excellent set-up just that the BLU-RAY Revenge-sucks. Yes, I did buy it, I love the movie, at least the original cut at 124 minutes. I think the intrusive grain was the most annoying factor i.e. when Costner first seduces Stowe the grain is so bad that it ruined the scene.

I viewed the disc for a second time, and I believe my initial opinion was a bit harsh.. I overall think now that the PQ is very good not demo. The few grainey scenes may I have been inherent of the source material. I jumped the gun here, however I still like the 124 minute cut better.

[Deciazulado]

BTBuck1 I think some Samsungs have a service mode way to do the 1:1, ask GoldenRedux for a possible link. For testing 1:1 oneness you could use certain test patterns and I think they are available in 1080 online on another various sites

[WriteSimply]

Originally Posted by Deciazulado

BTBuck1 I think some Samsungs have a service mode way to do the 1:1, ask GoldenRedux for a possible link. For testing 1:1 oneness you could use certain test patterns and I think they are available in 1080 online on another various sites

I'd like to get my hands on those service mode myself. Just to play around the Samsung sets on demo in stores.


fuad

[Ascended_Saiyan]

Originally Posted by Ascended_Saiyan

Sorry, I didn't see your post earlier. I didn't think the grain was that intrusive at all. I think We Were Soldiers was intrusive grain.

I would like to recant my earlier statement about We Were Soldiers. I just watched it all the way through. The first time I popped this title in I scanned through it. I thought it was excessive grain I was seeing at the time. This was before my TV was ISF calibrated. Now that I've had the chance to watch this title from start to finish...post-calibration, I think the grain was consistent and unobtrusive. Sorry.

[BTBuck1]

Ok guys, here are two pics I took of the pattern I am talking about. It's less evident when pausing...but you can kinda see what I am talking about:




Either way, this scene is a real mess...and not just cus Costner throws all those clothes on the ground... lol, why'd he do that?

[Deciazulado]

Originally Posted by BTBuck1

Either way, this scene is a real mess...and not just cus Costner throws all those clothes on the ground... lol, why'd he do that?

Cus he needed to balance the harness with the softness

Originally Posted by Savion Glover

Balance. Heel, tip, shuffle. Balance.

Yeah those pics show kind of an 40/60 interlaced scanning line pattern (remember Video Review test reports?) to the noise. I don't see that pattern in the grain here and you said your DLP didn't have it neither?



Anyway I need further study of the scene . Balance.

[miked924]

Just picked up Revenge and was looking at the run time I noticed it was 100 minutes but I remembered the original was 124 min so then I was thinking it was a shortened director's cut. I was confused since the review on highdefdigest.com said 20 minutes were added and the review there also said it had a 100 min run time. After popping the disc the run time showed 140 min so that was cleared up...bottom line isthe run time on the case says 100 min but it's really 140 min for anyone who has plans on getting this movie

[Deciazulado]

my PS3 display says 1:40:21

That's a 100 minutes.

[Ascended_Saiyan]

Is the time that it takes for the credits to roll up counted as part of the running time? I ask that because 1:40 (110 mins) is almost right in-between the 100 mins mentioned and the 124 mins for the full version.

[miked924]

Originally Posted by miked924

Just picked up Revenge and was looking at the run time I noticed it was 100 minutes but I remembered the original was 124 min so then I was thinking it was a shortened director's cut. I was confused since the review on highdefdigest.com said 20 minutes were added and the review there also said it had a 100 min run time. After popping the disc the run time showed 140 min so that was cleared up...bottom line isthe run time on the case says 100 min but it's really 140 min for anyone who has plans on getting this movie

Yeah I'm actually a moron for posting that, I realized now it's 1:40 min for 140 min. Guess I was hoping it would be longer....still highdefdigest claims there's 20 minutes added in the review. I love this movie so I'm pretty annoyed now all they gave us is this shitty chop down and not even the original version

[Deciazulado]

Originally Posted by Ascended_Saiyan

Is the time that it takes for the credits to roll up counted as part of the running time? I ask that because 1:40 (110 mins) is almost right in-between the 100 mins mentioned and the 124 mins for the full version.

Ascended_Saiyan, 1:40 is 1 hour (60m) 40m so 60 + 40 = 100
And the answer to your question is yes.

Originally Posted by miked924

I realized now it's 1:40 min for 140 min. Guess I was hoping it would be longer....still highdefdigest claims there's 20 minutes added in the review. I love this movie so I'm pretty annoyed now all they gave us is this shitty chop down and not even the original version

miked, watch the Obsession: The Sex and Violence of Revenge featurette, where Scott and the actors talk about why they made it more compact, calling the theatrical the "Studio/Producers" version.

[miked924]

Cool I'll have to check it out, I didn't even get to view the whole movie yet...who knows maybe I'll like this new cut.