superman returns bluey greeny tint

[stow123]

Did anyone notice this ? i found it so annoying it just looks like theyve been messing around with the way the film looks why did they do this and the detail levels on the blu-ray were bad i thought too and it was shot in HD!

[Blu As Hell]

Originally Posted by stow123

Did anyone notice this ? i found it so annoying it just looks like theyve been messing around with the way the film looks why did they do this and the detail levels on the blu-ray were bad i thought too and it was shot in HD!

Superman Returns was shot with a HD camera, but in post productin Bryan Singer ran it through a digital grading process to "soften" the look of the picture so it could mimic Richard Donner's Superman: The Movie. If you think the Blu-Ray looks bad, you should look at the DVD. The Blu-Ray is a vast improvement over the DVD.

[flbeachlf]

I'm sure my viewpoint is that of a novice, but I always thought that "Returns" looked nothing like the first two movies. The first two Superman movies seemed to be "white" to me, like you were dreaming and seeing it through unfocused eyes.

[stow123]

if hes softened the picture thats why im thinking the detail levels are rubbish i hope he dosent do the same thing for the sequel

[BStecke]

The detail is crap also because it was made to fit on an HD DVD. It was made to look soft, but at the same time, there are scenes in the film where it looks like mush because it's starving for more bits. Usually you can see it in faces, particularly on the roof of the Daily Planet.

I remember watching the trailer for this and thinking everything was sharp as a tack. I know trailers aren't the best gauge for how the movie is going to look, but I saw this in IMAX and it was nowhere as smooth as it is on the Blu-ray.

As far as the coloring . . . it's kind of strange in some places, but that's the way it's supposed to be. If you notice everything has kind of a dulled look to it, except for Superman's suit.

[stow123]

youre joking stecke that sucks at least we dont have to worry about that anymore for future films.

[Blu As Hell]

Originally Posted by BStecke

The detail is crap also because it was made to fit on an HD DVD. It was made to look soft, but at the same time, there are scenes in the film where it looks like mush because it's starving for more bits. Usually you can see it in faces, particularly on the roof of the Daily Planet.

I remember watching the trailer for this and thinking everything was sharp as a tack. I know trailers aren't the best gauge for how the movie is going to look, but I saw this in IMAX and it was nowhere as smooth as it is on the Blu-ray.

That too.

[sonicbox]

Unless you have access to the master the compressionist used, any comments that the look or softness of the film was caused by the compression work (your so-called bit starving) is pure conjecture.

Bad compression work rears it's head more often as specific compression artifacts... not the look of whole scenes.

[BStecke]

Originally Posted by sonicbox

Unless you have access to the master the compressionist used, any comments that the look or softness of the film was caused by the compression work (your so-called bit starving) is pure conjecture.

Bad compression work rears it's head more often as specific compression artifacts... not the look of whole scenes.

Considering the issue with Superman Returns is the same issue as most HD DVD ports from Warner, I'll stand by my previous post. It didn't look like mush in the theater, it looks like mush on the Blu-ray . . . so, obviously something happened between the film and the compression for Blu-ray.

Warner is notorious for their "smoothie" transfers, and Superman Returns is no exception.