Predator (1987) (Ultimate Hunter Edition)

[Daredevil666]

Additional thoughts : the color timing is now free of the red hue on the original mpeg2 BD -- there may be slight variations in contrast and lighting, but the original color scheme is respected (unlike the Godfather box set for example, where the first two had their color tweaked until they were unrecognisable from the original films).
Thought I wouldn't give the presentation 18/20, I say it's a solid 15 whereas the original disc I would put at 11. Both have their shortcomings, and after that, it's a matter of preference. The original disc do represent, forever now, how the film looked in the theaters prints. But remember theaters prints are 4 generation removed, lossy copies of the original negative. HD is about being truthful to the negative, not the lossy 35mm theaters prints.
Grain can clearly be seen right there from the opening Fox logo, only it's evidently softened a lot.
More impressions later.

[bleauboy]

Thanks a lot for the review and your thoughts.
Nick666 also thank you for the impressive screen capt comparisons.
Good work guys.

[STARSCREAM]

^ Thanks for the impressions. I still think based on the pics the new one looks better.

[bogo5]

yeah that close up of Predator's ugly face looks hell of alot better on the Left.


Can you get something like this screenshot for a comparison?
https://www.blu-ray.com/movies/scree...316&position=9

thanks

[I am blu]

and it gets 18/20 (Video)!

google translated link

[HeavyHitter]

Originally Posted by dvdvision

Additional thoughts : the color timing is now free of the red hue on the original mpeg2 BD -- there may be slight variations in contrast and lighting, but the original color scheme is respected (unlike the Godfather box set for example, where the first two had their color tweaked until they were unrecognisable from the original films).

Robert Harris who led the Godfather restoration is a member of this site. The Godfather BDs represent the most accurate depiction of the films with the original filmmaker's input. Godfather was completely restored. I would not use the DVD (which had flawed source material) as a reference as to how Godfather was supposed to look.

[Daredevil666]

Ah don't bring that one here. We can follow this in the appropriate thread (but colors did get changed - retimed, which is not the case on this new BD of Predator).

[KubrickFan]

Originally Posted by dvdvision

Ah don't bring that one here. We can follow this in the appropriate thread (but colors did get changed - retimed, which is not the case on this new BD of Predator).

Back to the way they were, originally .

[HD Goofnut]

Originally Posted by drtre81

Actually no. We are the early adopters which are a small part of their revenue.

Actually yes. Collectors still make up a large percentage of DVD sales and they make up a majority of present BD sales. If you don't believe me then look it up.

[rkolinski]

I decided to cancel my preorder for this at Amazon since I own the original BD. I still want to own it but I want to read some reviews regarding the PQ of this re-release before I double dip. As a side comment, I generally hate debates on PQ based on screen-caps but they seemed to be right on when the discussion came to Spartacus.

[Robert George]

Originally Posted by Dotpattern

Now maybe I'm not reading what you wrote right, or you didn't write what you meant, but it sounds like I disagree with what you posted.

Well, you seem to have read only part of my statement. you quoted...

"If the new issue of Predator looks a certain way, it is virtually a certainty that...the filmmaker or someone associated with the production of the film, has made the decisions that have led to this transfer looking the way it does."

That isn't what I posted. Read the whole thing.

[Spanbauer]

Originally Posted by Nick666

Here you go http://comparescreenshots.slicx.com/comparison/62488

Just let it load and move your mouse on or off the frame and it instantly switches.

Gotta say, still think I prefer the new transfer. The original is like watching the film with sunglasses on. I wish they hadn't gone overboard with the noise reduction, but I'm a fan of the improved contrast and removal of the red hue (not necessarily prominent in this image).

[Dotpattern]

Originally Posted by Robert George

Well, you seem to have read only part of my statement. you quoted...

"If the new issue of Predator looks a certain way, it is virtually a certainty that...the filmmaker or someone associated with the production of the film, has made the decisions that have led to this transfer looking the way it does."

That isn't what I posted. Read the whole thing.

I did read the whole thing, but didn't feel the need to re-post your entire quote as it doesn't change the context of what you said. Maybe you'd like to enlighten me.

[Spanbauer]

Originally Posted by HD Goofnut

Actually yes. Collectors still make up a large percentage of DVD sales and they make up a majority of present BD sales. If you don't believe me then look it up.

"Collectors" is not synonymous with "people who scrutinize every little detail in the image and sound", though. The collector market is a niche of the population, and the video/audiophiles are a niche within that niche.

[bogo5]

Originally Posted by Nick666

Here you go http://comparescreenshots.slicx.com/comparison/62488

Just let it load and move your mouse on or off the frame and it instantly switches.

And a side by side comparison of their faces.

Thanks. I will diff buy this. Still like the grainy older version too. Just something different.

[DetroitSportsFan]

Originally Posted by rkolinski

I generally hate debates on PQ based on screen-caps but they seemed to be right on when the discussion came to Spartacus.

And Gladiator...

[drtre81]

Originally Posted by Nick666

Here you go http://comparescreenshots.slicx.com/comparison/62488

Just let it load and move your mouse on or off the frame and it instantly switches.

And a side by side comparison of their faces.

Thanks for the comparison.

[Bishop_99]

Originally Posted by Nick666

ln32b530, this is from the old blu-ray.

http://www.imagebam.com/image/9d17a484388799

Head to head

[Show spoiler]

Thanks. This one looks the worst out of the bunch. This also shows how much DNR was applied to this movie. As bad as this is, I still see slightly more wrinkles under Arnold's eye. I don't see much lose of details in the new AVC encode, it just has a completely different look.

Originally Posted by Nick666

Yeah that particular one doesnt look so good.

Predator face to face

[Show spoiler]

I guess this one looks better in the new version .

This one looks perfectly fine in the new version.

Originally Posted by Nick666

A lot of motion going on.

[Show spoiler]

I guess mpeg2 couldnt handle it . Anyway, why the hell did they released it in mpeg2 back then ?

It's truly obvious which one is better in this screenshot. Similar issue was present with a screenshot of Anna earlier on. The AVC encode held up much better.

Originally Posted by Nick666

Here you go

[Show spoiler]http://comparescreenshots.slicx.com/comparison/62488

Just let it load and move your mouse on or off the frame and it instantly switches.

And a side by side comparison of their faces.

[Show spoiler]

The new version is brighter in this screenshot, in other screenshots I've seen that the new version was a bit darker.

Thanks for these screenshots. The higher encode and bitrate of the new release presented a much better version of the movie Predator but the DNR took away from its original look. The DNR didn't remove fine details when compared to the original release as we can see more details in the AVC version that should have been completely removed with the very obvious heavy amount of DNR that was applied. The AVC encode was better able to capture details and motions which the original mpeg-2 couldn't. There are probably extra details that aren't visible in either version that would have been present in the new AVC if DNR wouldn't have been used, I don't think it can be denied, but a direct comparison between the mpeg-2 and the AVC shows that the AVC didn't lose details unlike other movies that clearly show how lose of details because of the DNR.

The only real issue with this release is your personal preference. If you prefer the original film look and you are ok with slightly less detail and some macroblocking, then buy the original. If you prefer to see it as if it was shot digitally, slightly better defined detail and no issues like macro blocking, then buy the new one.

No denying though that this AVC version would have been able to capture even more details had no DNR been applied, but it really didn't lose any when you compare it to the original mpeg-2 version.

Originally Posted by dvdvision

OK got a test disc this morning (I'm reviewing it for my sampler magazine) -- first impressions, there is grain, only it will obviously be invisible if you watch a downloaded, recompressed bootleg, that's certain.

I don't think there's a race between the two versions, this one looks way better -- I compared and it looks like it's the same old HD master, re-encoded, DNRed a bit, with some scratch and dust removal on top. I can now make out, without the mosquito noise, that all close ups on Carl Weathers use slight diffusion on the opening briefing scene -- the DNR do look unsettling in that shot posted above, but it's only one shot, and I assume they applied the same amount of DNR on all the scene, that one just look bizarre because it was probably shot softer -- there's not a lot more detail on the original in that shot, (in fact I think there's less). The grain probably helped to hide the imperfections.

The rest of the film looks natural with just a slight amount of fine grain in it.
Overall it's at first disorienting to watch a so clean copy of the film after having seen it countless times over a wall of grain and mosquito noise, but you quickly get used to it. The film look shining brand new. The DTS HD tracks sounds good.

These are just quick impressions. I will watch it complete tonight.

Originally Posted by dvdvision

Additional thoughts : the color timing is now free of the red hue on the original mpeg2 BD -- there may be slight variations in contrast and lighting, but the original color scheme is respected (unlike the Godfather box set for example, where the first two had their color tweaked until they were unrecognisable from the original films).
Thought I wouldn't give the presentation 18/20, I say it's a solid 15 whereas the original disc I would put at 11. Both have their shortcomings, and after that, it's a matter of preference. The original disc do represent, forever now, how the film looked in the theaters prints. But remember theaters prints are 4 generation removed, lossy copies of the original negative. HD is about being truthful to the negative, not the lossy 35mm theaters prints.
Grain can clearly be seen right there from the opening Fox logo, only it's evidently softened a lot.
More impressions later.

Thanks.

[drtre81]

Originally Posted by HD Goofnut

Actually yes. Collectors still make up a large percentage of DVD sales and they make up a majority of present BD sales. If you don't believe me then look it up.

Uh no. Collector's are a small percentage of gross movie sales. Just stop.

[drtre81]

So based on all the evidence in this thread... I'm going with...

::drumroll::



The new version. Thanks guys.