James Cameron uses DVNR on Aliens Blu Ray transfer. — Page 2

Johnny Ringo said:

I only have star trek 6 [of the first 10] but I can tell you the amount DVNR is insane - everyone's faces appear rubbery.

Pretty lousy treatment of a great movie. I'm almost afraid to buy the others now.

Johnny Ringo, VI is by far the worst of the original Star Trek movie Blu-rays in terms of DVNR.  I and II are really good.  (I know I said that  II had a blue tint, but it is light really and you do not really notice while watching.  I am just fussy really.  I watched it yesterday and it looked really good.)  III has some DNR, but it looks good overall, and I think it is worth buying.  You might want to skip IV and V, although they do look better than the DVDs.

Thanks, Harmy.  I tried that, but the result was unsatisfactory.  It is not a big problem really.  It is mostly noticeable in the space scenes. 

There is an argument that the hazy brown look on earlier releases had crept into the film with age; and while I think this is probably true, in my opinion the color correction for the BD overcompensates a little at times leaving the film too blue in certain scenes.  It is ultimately a matter of preference: there is nothing really wrong with the BD.

you know im really an idiot when it comes to restoring but what if they had given aliens a 4k restoration wouldnt that help with the grain field in anyway?

Everything's okay, guys, we don't have to worry!

http://hcc.techradar.com/playback/coming-soon/blu-ray-screenshot-gallery-alien-anthology-aliens-07-09-10

Be sure to click on the links to the full-size, 1920x1080 images.

--edit--

And Alien:

http://hcc.techradar.com/playback/coming-soon/blu-ray-screenshot-gallery-alien-anthology-alien-06-09-10

Alien 3 and Resurrection will be up later this week on the same site.

I doubt that's the case.  If it were distributed by a different company in Europe vs America, I could see it, but I'm pretty sure this is going to be the same release everywhere.  Probably region free.

At least we know Cameron didn't go overboard on the DVNR in the restoration process - and if the US Blu-Ray does pull a Pan's Labyrinth, it won't be because of him, it'll be because of the distributor.

Honestly, for a huge set like the Alien Anthology, it'd be cheaper for them to have one master, and distribute it to all regions.  They don't have to worry about PAL/NTSC differences, either, and a LOT of Blu-Rays are region-free (I've seen infinitely more region-free BRs than DVDs).

I would be incredibly surprised if the US Blu-Rays look any different from the European Blu-Rays.

ChainsawAsh said:

Everything's okay, guys, we don't have to worry!

You've been around longer than that CA...there's always someone worried here. :P

msycamore said:

It sure looks fantastic on those images, the color timing on Alien seems to be the modern Director's Cut timing though.

Wasn't that the case with the previous 2-disc and Quadrilogy DVDs, as they were seamlessly-branched?

ChainsawAsh said:

msycamore said:

It sure looks fantastic on those images, the color timing on Alien seems to be the modern Director's Cut timing though.

Wasn't that the case with the previous 2-disc and Quadrilogy DVDs, as they were seamlessly-branched?

Yes, and I think that is what mysycamore meant.  I had the same thought as he did when I saw the screenshots.  The color timing looked as if it might be subly different from that of the Quadrilogy on the BD screenshots -- maybe a tiny bit closer to the original?  Perhaps it is my imagination, but it would make sense, if the film has been restored, for the colors to be slightly different.

What Director's Cut footage creeped into the theatrical Alien on the Quadrilogy disc?  I hadn't heard that!

I saw the caps of this today was astoundingly relieved. It's not as de-grained as nearly as I feared. It looks like a normal negative emulsion from 1985. Unfortunately, the purist in me would like to have the original. I know it was grainier than they wanted but why the hell are people so afraid of grain now that HD is in style? Like fuck. It's film. And I always felt is sort of suited Aliens, it gave it that sort of Vietnam-documentary type of look, with all the handheld camerawork. I wonder if in the future people will object to handheld camera work and want everything to be smooth steadicam work if people won't go back and image-stabilize all those handheld shots.

Anyway, as far as filtering the film for BR, this release is a model example, to Cameron's credit. It does indeed look beautiful. But it needn't be filtered in the first place. Luckily there is already HD captures of this. Cameron says it was the extended cut only, which I would be fine with, but my understanding was that the theatrical version would be branched. Well, at least there IS some debat about whether unwanted grain is to be equated with dirt and scratches, rather than any outright revisionism like adding new CG.

ChainsawAsh said:

What Director's Cut footage creeped into the theatrical Alien on the Quadrilogy disc?  I hadn't heard that!

 The biggest one is that the scene where Brett is finding Jones, the part where he is entering that cavernous room with some kind of vehicle where he finds the alien skin. It was always a bit gold-tinted, but in the DC it looks like the whole room is made out of solid gold, whereas in the original it was a brown-red-gold that looked a bit more like rust. I think Scott even acknowledges the new coloring of that scene. The whole film has had the contrast and such tweaked but that one section of the film stood out in particular as being tweaked to the point where it no longer resembled the original photography, at least as represented by all previous material. The levels throughout the rest of film probably are more accurate representations of the original answer print, for instance, the white levels of the awakening chamber were dialed down in some telecines because the primitive video couldn't handle whites like that (some early video telecines had the levels of the DC, which just blew out detail, which is why it was diaed back for the subsequent DVDs; the DC didn't have to adjust to such variables since video display was better).

I thought msycamore meant actual altered footage from the Director's Cut made it into the branched version of the theatrical cut (as in, a shot with altered effects, or a shot that simply wasn't present in the theatrical cut), not color timing differences.