Sign In

Jay

User Group
Administrators
Join date
22-Feb-2003
Last activity
31-Mar-2020
Posts
2,370

Post History

Post
#1326801
Topic
4K77 reel by reel color grading
Time

DrDre said:

A new release of 4K77 is in the works, that will feature these colors. Our esteemed williarob will provide updates in the future, but an exact release date is not yet available.

After sitting through the Disney+ versions and shaking my head at more dumb alterations, frozen grain in many of the backgrounds, and SE CGI that has aged terribly and sticks out like a sore thumb, I’m excited to have such high-quality 4K versions in the works. I’ll gladly wait a few years to have a complete film-like OT in 4K with excellent color.

Thanks to everyone involved in these preservations.

Post
#1313298
Topic
4K restoration on Star Wars
Time

ray_afraid said:

Broom Kid said:

I can think he’s wrong, but I don’t have to let it personally affect me to the point where I’m indulging in conspiracy theories and ugly insults.

There’s only a very small fraction of sad weirdos doing that.
I’m not attacking the man or anything, but I don’t like his stance on this.
Suppression of history is wrong. It’s something George himself used to preach about.

Post
#1313207
Topic
The Rise of Skywalker box office results: predictions and expectations - <strong>NO SPOILERS</strong>
Time

NeverarGreat said:

Maybe Spielberg from 20 years ago could do it. I don’t know. With so many attempts, surely someone will figure out the precise formula that works. Since nobody has it all, it will probably be a team effort from writers like Filoni working on the worldbuilding and more film-centric writers being allowed to hone a script/storyboard until it becomes decent in a sort of Pixar development process. After going through an art director with a strong sense of simple, powerful design most directors would be able to make a decent film, but for a great one you’d need a director who could balance swashbuckling action with high romance and a dash of monster movie camp, among other things. These are after all fantasy fairy tales.

The original movies were all great because they were collaborative efforts from people at the top of their game and on the forefront of the craft of moviemaking. Disney needs to replicate that in some form.

Yup. Everyone is obsessing over the particular director at the helm when the magic of the OT was in collaboration. In the ST, we got one director with no real vision at all—mostly nostalgia and mystery boxes—followed by a director whose vision of Star Wars was “not Star Wars”. Now, it sounds like J.J. is doubling down and doing what he does best: using fast edits and fee-fees to distract you from the lack of substance underneath. (Full disclosure: I haven’t seen ROS yet, but I’ve read the review thread and I’m horrified by what I’ve seen.)

Disney had a number of successful models to replicate in creating a modern movie trilogy and I’m surprised how badly they botched it. Such a wasted opportunity that we’ll never have again.

Post
#1306783
Topic
4K restoration on Star Wars
Time

DrDre said:

Jay said:

DrDre said:

4throck said:

“In this case I optimized the display for HDR content in general, which always appeared somewhat dark, flat, and desaturated on my TV screen, compared to SDR content even if the dynamic range was obviously increased.”

The problem is that most people have their TVs set with very high SDR brightness levels.
At least for me the recommended SDR brightness of 100 to 200 nits (according to sources, most mention 100) is just too dark…

So yes, HDR will look dark in comparison, but that’s how it was mastered…

I don’t have my SDR set to very high brightness levels. I don’t like high contrast, brightness and saturation on my TV. I set the colors to a natural profile for SDR content, which generally means I have ro adjust, since most TVs by default go for high contrast, and punchy colors.

What do you use to calibrate your display?

For my own viewing pleasure, I optimize my TV to my personal preferences, so I wouldn’t call it calibrating.

Fair enough, and totally valid. I like to clarify this sort of thing so when I see screenshots, I have some context.

Post
#1306775
Topic
Markdown
Time

There is no underlining in Markdown, probably because underlining as a means of formatting text has fallen out of fashion (especially on the web, where underlining typically is reserved for links). Also, Markdown is a semantic language that isn’t concerned with how content is displayed:

https://softwareengineering.stackexchange.com/questions/207727/why-there-is-no-markdown-for-underline#answer-207730

Post
#1306772
Topic
4K restoration on Star Wars
Time

DrDre said:

4throck said:

“In this case I optimized the display for HDR content in general, which always appeared somewhat dark, flat, and desaturated on my TV screen, compared to SDR content even if the dynamic range was obviously increased.”

The problem is that most people have their TVs set with very high SDR brightness levels.
At least for me the recommended SDR brightness of 100 to 200 nits (according to sources, most mention 100) is just too dark…

So yes, HDR will look dark in comparison, but that’s how it was mastered…

I don’t have my SDR set to very high brightness levels. I don’t like high contrast, brightness and saturation on my TV. I set the colors to a natural profile for SDR content, which generally means I have ro adjust, since most TVs by default go for high contrast, and punchy colors.

What do you use to calibrate your display?

Post
#1306767
Topic
4K restoration on Star Wars
Time

4throck said:

“In this case I optimized the display for HDR content in general, which always appeared somewhat dark, flat, and desaturated on my TV screen, compared to SDR content even if the dynamic range was obviously increased.”

The problem is that most people have their TVs set with very high SDR brightness levels.
At least for me the recommended SDR brightness of 100 to 200 nits (according to sources, most mention 100) is just too dark…

So yes, HDR will look dark in comparison, but that’s how it was mastered…

Exactly. You can’t take something mastered for 4000 nits (or 10,000 nits in some cases), smash it into 700 nits, and expect it to look as punchy (on average) as SDR content when most consumers adjust their settings to something well above the recommended 100 nits. This is why some manufactures (Sony) clip some highlight detail in HDR in favor of maintaining a higher APL.

The HDR spec is well ahead of today’s display capabilities, so it’s going to take some time for the full benefits to present themselves.

Post
#1306740
Topic
4K restoration on Star Wars
Time

DrDre said:

Turns out the problem with washed out colors, and a flat image is at least partly caused by the HDR settings on the display device. HDR can look radically different from one device to the other (there are no real standards for HDR)

I hear this said frequently and it’s partially true, especially on the display side of things. There are standards for creating HDR content (like the EOTF curve), but there are few guidelines for translating that data for display. If video is mastered with a peak nit level of 4000 and the display can’t actually hit 4000 nits (none of them can at this point I think), the display has to tone map the image to fit within the display’s dynamic range, at which point it comes down to the manufacturer’s goals and philosophy. They can either maximize dynamic range (render all the highlight detail while reducing average brightness) or sacrifice some dynamic range to maintain average brightness levels (have a high average brightness and crush some highlight detail). But since we’re talking about Dolby Vision here, that means these decisions are being made in the material itself rather than the display (unless the display doesn’t support Dolby Vision and it falls back to the HDR10 layer).

Are you optimizing your display with settings specific to the OT or are you referring to general optimizations for all HDR content? This is a case where I think Sony’s approach in their consumer displays is the right one; you calibrate the display for SDR, then the display performs the necessary calculations and adjustments to render HDR content.

Your screenshots do look great, so I might sign up just to check out these transfers.

Fang Zei said:

Jay said:

HDTVTest evaluates the OT and ST in HDR on Disney+

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VGZmMjPJiAk

Vincent of HDTVTest is a respected reviewer and display calibrator. He doesn’t get into color grading or anything like that, but it’s an interesting look into whether the OT on Disney+ is true HDR or just some contrast tweaks (spoiler: it’s not real HDR).

I wonder how much of the issue is “fake HDR.” They may have simply intentionally graded it that way, giving it a restrained HDR pass. It may also be that there isn’t a whole lot of dynamic range to squeeze out of the camera negatives at this point, if there ever was to begin with.

But if I had to guess, I’d say that even if they could have gotten more HDR “pop” they still chose not to, if only so that the OT would still recognizably look like the OT. For all the time they’ve spent keeping the OOT buried, Lucasfilm sure seems to be striving for authenticity as far as the color and contrast goes.

It’s possible, but as soon as you watch film that was intended for a large screen in a dark room at 16fL transferred to a digital medium for viewing on a consumer display calibrated for 100 nits (~30fL, and that’s conservative), it no longer looks like projected film anyway. I can appreciate wanting to maintain the aesthetic (I watched the Criterion edition of Scanners back in October, and it looked about as close to film as you can possibly get on video, and I loved it), but we are talking about movies with glowing laser swords, laser pistols, gleaming golden robots, and big explosions in this case.

It’s also important to note that the goal of HDR (“High Dynamic Range”) isn’t necessarily eye-searing brightness levels, but high peak brightness (which would be seen sparingly in the objects noted above) with extra dynamic range for everything else. This is where Dolby Vision (and I suppose HDR10+) shines, allowing adjustments on a scene-by-scene basis.

I think Vincent’s key point isn’t that we get lower peak brightness, but that it’s indicative of reduced dynamic range.

Post
#1303789
Topic
The Rise of Skywalker box office results: predictions and expectations - <strong>NO SPOILERS</strong>
Time

Creox said:

Jay said:

DominicCobb said:

ATMachine said:

I personally won’t see TROS in the theater. I didn’t go to TLJ either.

No doubt there are what could be called hardcore fans who have no interest in the St altogether. But here’s my question, for someone like you, would watching and enjoying the Mandalorian make you more likely to see TROS in theaters?

For me, skipping TRoS is an easy choice because I didn’t like TFA all that much and I liked TLJ even less; any movie by J.J. that has to clean up after Rian is unlikely to interest me either.

To your point, Mandalorian is its own thing and enjoying it wouldn’t affect my decision to stay home for TRoS (just like my dislike for TFA/TLJ won’t stop me from checking out Mandalorian). I’m sure there’s a small minority of fans who are just done with all Star Wars at this point and will skip all Disney SW, but…

Creox said:

I’ve been reading and listening to hardcore SW fans for 40 years. I know that most that talk about not seeing a SW movie or TV, book series are blowing smoke. When the product is released, they get it, watch it.

My point with regards to that quote is this. Any one who is a member of this site and posts on it fairly regularly as many of you do are obviously fans of this franchise. TROS is the last to showcase two of the last OT actors and even if a person is upset with the direction the ST has gone is likely still interested or curious about how the saga ends. We are talking about a grand total expense of a movie ticket. Not like people are giving their left nut to go see this flic.

Like I said, I was content to wait until TLJ hit streaming and I’m planning to do the same with TRoS.

If somebody who maintained a Star Wars forum for 15 years can get sick of/bored by/frustrated with the ST enough not to bother, I’m sure there are one or two others.

Post
#1303418
Topic
The Rise of Skywalker box office results: predictions and expectations - <strong>NO SPOILERS</strong>
Time

DominicCobb said:

ATMachine said:

I personally won’t see TROS in the theater. I didn’t go to TLJ either.

No doubt there are what could be called hardcore fans who have no interest in the St altogether. But here’s my question, for someone like you, would watching and enjoying the Mandalorian make you more likely to see TROS in theaters?

For me, skipping TRoS is an easy choice because I didn’t like TFA all that much and I liked TLJ even less; any movie by J.J. that has to clean up after Rian is unlikely to interest me either.

To your point, Mandalorian is its own thing and enjoying it wouldn’t affect my decision to stay home for TRoS (just like my dislike for TFA/TLJ won’t stop me from checking out Mandalorian). I’m sure there’s a small minority of fans who are just done with all Star Wars at this point and will skip all Disney SW, but…

Creox said:

I’ve been reading and listening to hardcore SW fans for 40 years. I know that most that talk about not seeing a SW movie or TV, book series are blowing smoke. When the product is released, they get it, watch it.

Post
#1302248
Topic
The Rise of Skywalker box office results: predictions and expectations - <strong>NO SPOILERS</strong>
Time

Rodney-2187 said:

I regrouped the predictions into an easier to read list.

Opening
144 - voltwaffle
220 - Broom Kid
230 - Rodney-2187
240 - act on instinct
260 - klawrence123

Domestic
400 - voltwaffle
540 - DrDre
620 - pleasehello (“less than the Last Jedi”)[more specific, please]
630 - notsuya
645 - act on instinct
650 - ChainsawAsh
685 - oojason
725 - Broom Kid
740 - mykyta-R4
750 - Outboundflight
750 - Rodney-2187
770 - Force-Abel
790 - V.I.N.Cent
859 - Omni
870 - klawremce123

Worldwide
860 - voltwaffle
1.2 - DrDre
1.3 - act on instinct
1.3 - pleasehello (“less than the Last Jedi”)[more specific, please]
1.4 - Broom Kid
1.4 - notsuya
1.5 - Rodney-2187
1.525 - ChainsawAsh
1.625 - Outboundflight
1.65 - oojason
1.7 - Force-Abel
1.7 - V.I.N.Cent
1.75 - mykyta-R4
1.8 - klawremce123
1.8 - Omni

Mavimao - 620-936/1.3-2.0 (“between TFA and TLJ”)[more specific, please]

Markdown supports tables if you prefer:

| User            | Opening | Domestic | Worldwide |
|-----------------|--------:|---------:|----------:|
| voltwaffle      | $144M   | $400M    | $860M     |
| Broom Kid       | $220M   | $725M    | $1.4B     |
| Rodney-2187     | $230M   | $750M    | $1.5B     |
| act on instinct | $240M   | $645M    | $1.3B     |
| klawrence123    | $260M   | $870M    | $1.8B     |
User Opening Domestic Worldwide
voltwaffle $144M $400M $860M
Broom Kid $220M $725M $1.4B
Rodney-2187 $230M $750M $1.5B
act on instinct $240M $645M $1.3B
klawrence123 $260M $870M $1.8B
Post
#1273443
Topic
The Criterion Collection Thread
Time

SilverWook said:

I thought Oppo’s deal was they wanted to concentrate on their phone business?

That’s what they said. At least they’re still supporting their players with firmware updates.

Nice looking Panasonic player. Although for 800 bucks, I would think they could put a little door or cover on the USB port. 😉

That’s British pounds, actually 😉 I have an OPPO 205 and just sold it (at a profit) so I could grab the Panny.

Post
#1273440
Topic
The Criterion Collection Thread
Time

SilverWook said:

With Samsung getting out of the BD & UHD player market, some people are already worrying about the future of the format.

Samsung’s players never did great numbers; most people who own Samsung decks got them bundled with a Samsung TV at no cost.

OPPO’s departure is a much bigger deal, but even they sold in fairly limited numbers. Panasonic has picked up the torch with their latest players, though:

https://www.whathifi.com/reviews/panasonic-dp-ub9000-review

Edit: Anybody sign up for the Criterion Channel? It launches April 8th.

Post
#1268483
Topic
The future of OT.com - UPDATE: Please donate!
Time

Valheru_84 said:

I can understand you wanting to move on from something that has become a financial burden Jay, I didn’t realise it was costing you that much to keep this place running from month to month. Though it is a real shame you won’t be getting involved in discussions anymore, reading many of your posts while banned is part of what actually made me want to try and return to being an active member here and I was actually looking forward to being part of a number of topic discussions that you were actively involved in yourself. I had actually thought stepping out of the ownership role and just to tech support would take a lot of weight off of your shoulders in being able to post and remain active in the community. I don’t know the reasons as to why this is not the case but I am disappointed that we’ll no longer have your voice around here.

The money never bothered me. I was happy to do it.

My decision to hand over the day-to-day responsibilities to the mods was driven primarily by my diminished interest in the franchise. I didn’t bother with TLJ, RO, or Solo until they hit digital/Netflix, and this place deserves more enthusiastic management than that. Luckily for everyone, the mods stepped up and so did the membership, which is pretty cool.

As for participating as a member, I’ve said everything I have to say about the state of the franchise and the fandom; I don’t see the point in continuing those discussions. I’ll still lurk because I’m interested in the various film-based preservation projects, so maybe I’ll add an occasional thumbs up for the hard-working preservationists 👍

Post
#1265315
Topic
The future of OT.com - UPDATE: Please donate!
Time

moviefreakedmind said:

Anchorhead said:

moviefreakedmind said:

Will the recent bans on certain types of conversations be lifted and will certain previously banned users like TV’s Frink be allowed to return?

What about the people who can’t afford to contribute? Too bad for all of them, they just have to deal with the trolls who can help?

Does that seem fair to you?

I don’t know what your problem is, it seemed like a totally fair question.

Your question carried with it an implication that any potential donation would be contingent upon certain conditions being met. There’s no other reason to ask.

Anyone donating should assume things are going to continue as they are (minus my involvement) when considering whether to contribute. They should also assume their donations don’t entitle them to anything other than a genuine “thank you” from the mods and the community as a whole.

Of course, Anchorhead and SilverWook are free to do what they think is best for the forum starting February 1st. I’ll respect whatever decisions they make and so should everyone else; the lights would be going out at midnight on January 31st if it weren’t for their desire to keep this place running and the generous contributions they’ve received from members thus far.

Post
#1265292
Topic
The future of OT.com - UPDATE: Please donate!
Time

DZ-330 said:

Also, is there a way we can add some kind of indicator to how much is left before the deadline? It may help to incentivize people to donate.

Ideally, we’d like to display the monthly goal and current balance, but we wanted to get the button up there as quickly as possible given the tight deadline. We’re looking into it, though.

Edit: Anchorhead has ninja-like posting reflexes.

Post
#1265227
Topic
The future of OT.com - UPDATE: Please donate!
Time

The mods have set up a PayPal account to accept donations; the button is in the main navigation.

The monthly goal has been adjusted upward to $75 to cover fees (the funds will go through several transfers before making it to the hosting service).

Anchorhead and SilverWook have just under 2 weeks to raise these funds for the February hosting bill, so please consider donating as soon as possible.