Patton is Phenomenal!!!

[aramis109]

Originally Posted by Entertainment72

Long live DNR.. grain is garbage.. grain will never be welcomed if at all possible in my home. I have an old sony vcr if I ever wanted grain I could use.

You're so far removed from the point of contention that you're not even in the same zip code.

While I don't agree about the dislike of grain, I CAN understand the argument. Grain doesn't always come across as clear and "HD-like" to some people. It's not like how HD is on the Discovery channel.

However, the point stands that using DNR to remove grain is removing details from the picture. Fine detail in faces, clothing, textures, etc are permanently lost. Many times faces look glossy or "plastic-like" if too much DNR is used.

Many so-called "film purists" appreciate grain for the sake of grain. To an extent, I agree with this. It's how a movie feels "cinema-like" to me. It has a greater depth of the image. However, I also appreciate films shot on all-digital like Apocalypto and Crank. I think those look great too. The point of argument however is that when applying DNR to old titles you're changing how they are. You're removing details and going away from director's intent. In many cases, film stock is chosen to achieve a certain effect. I think Penton-Man wrote up a list of movies with links of what and why a director chose. Removing that is removing a part of that piece of art- it's like cleaning the Sistine Chapel and then painting over part of it to "improve" it.

You're probably not going to find too much traction to the "I hate grain" argument here. If directors choose to film digitally, I'm all for it. But I'm not for DNR on old classics or on new movies where that was what the director chose for a reason.