- Time
- (Edited)
- Post link
I'll never understand Hollywood's current fixation against grain in films.
Then again, seeing as Hollywood's an asylum being run by nuts, perhaps I should.
Where were you in '77?
Star Wars Blu-ray and DVD Combo Packs. (Please Read 1st post) — Page 2
- Time
- Post link
AntcuFaalb said:
SilverWook said:
If you mean grain, that's the fault of some studio's overuse of noise reduction, not the format itself.
Proposal: From now on, grain=grit.
True Grain was a pretty good movie.
- Time
- (Edited)
- Post link
Jaitea said:
SilverWook said:
If you mean grain, that's the fault of some studio's overuse of noise reduction, not the format itself.
Isn't film grain just a natural occurrence on film, it becomes more noticeable depending what film stock you use or what film format....16mm film when blown up on a projection screen would have more grain evident.
I think when TPM was released on BD the digital scan was processed and cleaned up so much (DNR) that it not only removed grain but also removed so much detail that it made the characters look like waxworks
J
Some filmmakers have used specific film stocks to achieve a certain look. The choice of camera lenses also play into this. It's an artistic choice as much as important as what paint is used in a portrait. Some digitally shot films have had fake grain added!
Some digital still cameras I've seen have modes to emulate film as well.
An old movie should never be manipulated to look like a modern one, especially by people who had no part in it's creation, and have no idea what they're doing.
- Time
- Post link
Grain removal is the new colourization.
- Time
- Post link
DuracellEnergizer said:
Grain removal is the new colourization.
Pretty much. And if you look at lots of Disney releases, you'll see DNR is their best friend. The only thing that scares me if they re-released Star Wars, but I wouldn't think they'd do that. Though, anyone who has a bluray of any of the Disney classic animated films, knows that many of the films are completely destroyed. Cinderalla on VHS has literally more detail than it's newer Bluray counterpart. There's something wrong if a VHS looks better than a bluray.
Not all Disney classics are affected by it, but certainly far too many are.
- Time
- (Edited)
- Post link
EDIT: Double Post
The website crashed on me, for some weird reason during the first post and then when I refreshed it, it posted a second time.
- Time
- Post link
DuracellEnergizer said:
Grain removal is the new colourization.
Exactly! And there are still people who don't like black and white. At least with all the colorized releases I'm aware of, there's a BW option.
Where were you in '77?
- Time
- Post link
If you don't like B&W you don't like film. Colorized films can be fun though as an alternate viewing experience. 'It's A Wonderful' is done very well on the Blu-Ray but still not a patch on the original.
VIZ TOP TIPS! - PARENTS. Impress your children by showing them a floppy disk and telling them it’s a 3D model of a save icon.
- Time
- Post link
Ryan McAvoy said:
'It's A Wonderful' is done very well on the Blu-Ray but still not a patch on the original.
The 2007 colorization still looks pretty bad. The only colorization that looked good to me was the I Love Lucy Scottland episode colorization. If you look at the real life color stills and then at the colorized episode, they look identical. They're even planning to release a colorized version of the whole series for the bluray version. But know matter how good it would look, I wouldn't bare to watch it a different way than how I watched it as a kid.
So even if it does look good, I still think it ruins a film.
- Time
- Post link
Usualy I'm against grain removal. But in certain case, when not overused, it could be okay. Like for the Aliens bluray. Cameron said that he used cheap film stock to make the budget smaller (or because it was all he had) (IIRC) so when the time for the bluray has come he tried to diminish the grain with great care. He still let some of it because it was how the movie looked but it was not the way he would have shot the movie back then. So, all in all, it all depends on who does the job and with what intention in mind and with what result... You could also say that if you don't want to do wrong: don't use grain removal. ;)
- Time
- Post link
Ryan McAvoy said:
If you don't like B&W you don't like film. Colorized films can be fun though as an alternate viewing experience.
My exact thoughts.
- Time
- (Edited)
- Post link
Ryan McAvoy said:
If you don't like B&W you don't like film.
I should tell that to my dumbass sister some day.
- Time
- Post link
This is what Star Wars would like with DNR. Scary, I know.
- Time
- Post link
They came out today, saw them at Barnes and Noble, for the same price as the non combo sets.
Is someone going to take one for the team, and find out if they just recycled the older DVD versions? ;)
Where were you in '77?
- Time
- (Edited)
- Post link
Ryan McAvoy said:
If you don't like B&W you don't like film.
I don't like B&W and yet that doesn't mean I don't like the films shot in B&W. B&W wasn't some kind of artistic feature at the time. It was a limitation which deprived the films of an important dimension. Every sane person should realise that. But you still get some guys shooting in B&W today, thinking it will make their work look more "artistic" (yes that is primarily aimed at Spielberg). Don't get me wrong, I think Schindler's List is exceptionally great film but being shot in B&W only makes it less great (it lost an important dimension because the stupid decision).
And I just get pissed at people who inherently oppose colourisation of B&W films when no one is trying to erase the original versions.
真実
- Time
- (Edited)
- Post link
Funny, I was watching Young Frankenstein the other night, and in the extras Mel Brooks mentions they never would have made the film had they been forced to use color. It was a deal breaker. Seeing color stills of Peter Boyle in makeup is very strange. It was designed to photograph best in black and white.
I have no issue with colorization today so long as the original is included in equal quality. (This wasn't always the case.) The colorized versions of the early Harryhausen films, (with creative input from the master himself) were watchable, but it doesn't look like any of the color processes used in the 50's either. Other old movies do not have the benefit of a living artist to supervise the process of course.
Black and white cinematography had it's own separate Academy Award category until the mid 1960's, IIRC.
In any case, feel free to start a thread on BW vs. color elsewhere, as this is getting off track. :)
Where were you in '77?
- Time
- Post link
Okay back to topic. I am a bit confused with this. It doesn't clearly state on the official website whether this is 2011 versions available on both Blu-ray and DVD, or is it 2004 and 2011 versions both available in 1080p format?
真実
- Time
- Post link
The packaging I saw said Blu Ray/DVD combo. What's on the DVD is the mystery here.
Where were you in '77?
- Time
- Post link
The case apparently has the same runtimes on both discs and the DVDs have minimal cover art. SOMEONE out there will buy it and tell us.
Star Wars Revisited Wordpress
Star Wars Visual Comparisons WordPress
- Time
- Post link
TMBTM said:
Usualy I'm against grain removal. But in certain case, when not overused, it could be okay. Like for the Aliens bluray.
Grain reduction isn't always a bad thing if handled correctly (Aliens BD you mentioned). But grain removal, as far as I can tell, always makes a film look waxy/smeary/shitty.
- Time
- Post link
The DVD's are the Bluray versions for all the films, in case anyone's still wondering. Just a simple repackage, but with new DVD's.
Nice thing though is that they have a Dolby 5.1 Spanish and a Dolby 5.1 English, which wasn't the case with the previous Bluray set. My bets are on these being the same exact mixes minus the language meaning the true vocal removal method may very well be possible.
- Time
- Post link
So they really went to that much trouble?
Ebay prices on the old versions aren't going to go down by much.
Where were you in '77?
- Time
- Post link
emanswfan said:
Nice thing though is that they have a Dolby 5.1 Spanish and a Dolby 5.1 English, which wasn't the case with the previous Bluray set. My bets are on these being the same exact mixes minus the language meaning the true vocal removal method may very well be possible.
Please to be elaborating.
- Time
- (Edited)
- Post link
emanswfan said:
The DVD's are the Bluray versions for all the films, in case anyone's still wondering. Just a simple repackage, but with new DVD's. ...
Well...then it's not a simple repackage, is it?
Star Wars Episode XXX: Erica Strikes Back
If you want Nice, go to France
- Time
- (Edited)
- Post link
What do the dvd menus look like? Could you post a screencap or two?