dvdmike

You are correct about the UK disc, by far the best of a bad bunch

You don't see the janky frame rate mess when anything moves? Eeeewwwww

Is this for people who want the new transfer? are the issues worth it? can we not re encode the HDTV of the old bluray to match the colour of the new one minus the DNR?

AntcuFaalb said:

You_Too said:

I also think that overall, T2 needs a slight saturation increase as well as balancing out the pink skin tones.

I agree. T2 definitely needs less pink skintones.

Funny you should say that, I just tried an encode to match a few 35mm stills and the results are interesting to say the least, will post shots in a bit if no one minds me hijacking the thread a little.

http://screenshotcomparison.com/comparison/20267

Far from 100% happy it is only my first run (and I was only messing wanting to encode something at 4k for a friend), but there is something to be said for a slight change.

stretch009 said:

AntcuFaalb said:

dvdmike said:

stretch009 said:

dvdmike said:

drngr said:

2 & 3 HDNet captures are now on Usenet and the bay by which buccaneers congregate (3 posted twice by mistake -- later torrent preferred but it's the same .ts).

Love the first comment.

I thought the HDnet versions were no good, low bit bate and some DNR I did get them off that place and posted here and I thought we all decided we wanted the wowow or canal +

The HDnet versions that were no good with low bit rate etc; were the highly compressed versions from rutracker.  drngr just uploaded the uncompressed source files he found to usenet and TPB.  I have both the compressed and uncompressed of Part II HDnet and the uncompressed looks WAY better than the compressed.

 

 

Interesting, they are falling off the internet as we speak 

What do you mean?

A different way of saying "I'm downloading them", I guess.

 

I do not download anything, but if they carelessly fall off the internet onto my HDD then that is hardly may fault.

And I have to say I am far from impressed, they are still the same interpolated rips just with slightly better compression.

As to the AVS thread I remember that argument well, the supposed US DCP had no DNR but the UK version I saw 100% looked like the blu-ray as I commented a few pages back when i saw it before the disc came out.

I have no idea where those shots are from as I understand it you can't screen shot a DCP file due to encryption, you can with trailers however. 

DCP/Canal + comparison :

http://screenshotcomparison.com/comparison/20265

Also for UK people I am going to try for this 

https://www.odeon.co.uk/fanatic/booking-interactive/s211/p52700000023WXAZMLB/

stretch009 said:

dvdmike said:

drngr said:

2 & 3 HDNet captures are now on Usenet and the bay by which buccaneers congregate (3 posted twice by mistake -- later torrent preferred but it's the same .ts).

Love the first comment.

I thought the HDnet versions were no good, low bit bate and some DNR I did get them off that place and posted here and I thought we all decided we wanted the wowow or canal +

The HDnet versions that were no good with low bit rate etc; were the highly compressed versions from rutracker.  drngr just uploaded the uncompressed source files he found to usenet and TPB.  I have both the compressed and uncompressed of Part II HDnet and the uncompressed looks WAY better than the compressed.

 

 

Interesting, they are falling off the internet as we speak 

Jetrell Fo said:

A perspective on the 3D from a member of the AVS forum .....

My review of JP3D:

The Good Things first: The 3D was wonderful! On a par with Titanic 3D!
Easily one of the best conversion jobs ever.
Didn't find any evidence of massive DNR, the picture looked clean with lots of detail.
The colours were rich and slightly warm, very film-like. But didn't look too much like a 90s movie to me, as it was so clean, and that's a good thing!
Sounded good too. An additional aspect of the soundtrack I will discuss below. There were quite a few pop out moments in addition to a very realistic depth perspective.
It was pure Nostalgia for me.

Now the things that bothered me:
1.The aspect ratio has been tampered with once again. The image has been zoom-boxed, cutting on all four sides, quite a lot. As a result Dinos heads get cut off slightly, eyes at the top edge of the screen get chopped off. The cropping was distracting(the ratio was still 1.85:1). The Imax 3D trailer was framed at 1.85:1, and there were even comparisons made with the Bluray(which was cropped), the 3D version was even more cropped than the Bluray. The framing of the IMAX3D trailer is exactly how it looked in the Laserdisc and VHS as well, but the cinema version has been cropped further than the 1.85:1 trailer cut. It makes me worry about the Bluray 3D.

2. The VFX models didn't lend themselves well to 3D. The lack of detail was clearly apparent and in contrast with the rest of the surroundings, which were 35mm footages.

Surprising things that I noticed: Lot more detail, individual objects, even the minutest ones are now clearly noticeable.
I also noticed the Pace of the film, it was like a roadrunner, one thing after another, barely ever slowing down.
I mean I've seen the movie countless times and know every single frame by heart, but never has its pace felt so relentless, my goodness( and no there was no speedup issues).
New additions:
There were definitely quite a few additions very clearly noticeable-
1. When the thunder strikes and the lawyer crouches, asking the doctors to head back to their cars, they have added a lightning flash visually, which was never there. And It makes the impact of the scene much better!
There are minor additional sounds added to the soundtrack(not the music track), extra velociraptor sounds when the deadly duo enter the kitchen, one of which clearly had a high-pitched cat sound.

2. The animatronic shots were the most impressive in 3D. However the final shot, when the T-Rex rears up to its full height in the Visitors center lobby and roars, knocked the earlier poor vfx 3D shots' balls out of the park. That last shot when the Rex Roars and the Banners fall was ABSOLUTELY EPIC, as it was in 2D when it originally came out. It had GREAT depth with the Tail swinging out of the screen+ it was highly detailed. I don't know how they could get the last CG shot with the T-Rex to look so detailed, imagined it to be lackluster like the other CG shots, the colour scheme of the Rex also looked slightly different, more colourful that is.
I'm catching it again on Sunday!
These didn't at all damage the experience for me, though the cat sound was a bit annoying and unrealistic(Well Gary Rydstrom succumbed to a little temptation it seems).

 

Didn't find any evidence of massive DNR, the picture looked clean with lots of detail.

I can name 3 people that would spout that over there now that I am most of the guys left, its just mostly fanboy bull shit there now, there is a TON of DNR hyperbole on full 

drngr said:

2 & 3 HDNet captures are now on Usenet and the bay by which buccaneers congregate (3 posted twice by mistake -- later torrent preferred but it's the same .ts).

Love the first comment.

I thought the HDnet versions were no good, low bit bate and some DNR I did get them off that place and posted here and I thought we all decided we wanted the wowow or canal +

are you sure they are untouched? maybe someone edited them as youtube can flag stuff like that 

So why are people upscaling when the BD is the same master?

penguinofgreatness said:

dvdmike said:

vbangle said:

pittrek said:

Are the official Blurays the theatrical versions or the "special editions" ? Are the WoWoW broadcasts still necessary ?

I think there is a slight color grading difference between them, other than that, I think they are the same...maybe the BD was de-grained?

Yep the BD has DNR on the effects shots 

The Bluray removed the snake reflection but the other "tweaks" are gone.

How much DNR is on the effects shots? I saw the IMAX version and there was almost no DNR, I only noticed a bit of frozen grain in the first globe/map scene. I've been thinking of picking up Raiders soon and I hate DNR.

It is not jurassic Park level, but if you know the wowow version it is easy to spot, your IMAX showing grozen grain would be from the DMR the BD does not show this.

vbangle said:

pittrek said:

Are the official Blurays the theatrical versions or the "special editions" ? Are the WoWoW broadcasts still necessary ?

I think there is a slight color grading difference between them, other than that, I think they are the same...maybe the BD was de-grained?

What is disappointing is that even starting from the DVD's and now the BD, Raiders still has out of focus moments that are distracting for me. You could barely see it on the DVD because of the low DVD resolution but on the BD it really shows up. Its on the WoWoW brodcasts as well BTW.

Yep the BD has DNR on the effects shots 

What about the DTS JP Superbit DVD?

borisanddoris said:

Also, anyone else thinking the 2011 disc is any good, here's the original trailer:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QWBKEmWWL38

Shitty YouTube quality, but you get the idea.  Again, this has a similar feel to the 35mm print I saw last year.  In fact, having seen JP cinematically way back in the 90s, then growing up with the VHS/LaserDiscs (had the DVDs but always went back to the LaserDiscs), I wasn't sure really what it should look like.  Seeing it last year was a revelation.  I hope that print is somewhere safe.  

 

Neither are any good, but I would rather the pink EE and sharpening than that DNR nightmare 

Found the post with the 35mm Episode 2 scans

http://www.avsforum.com/t/1243512/star-wars-on-bd-confirmed-by-lucas-for-fall-2011-pre-release-discussion/1470#post_19165045

Anyone with a working AVS account able to PM and get the pix again? mine is kinda suspended right now 

Lol I get that with the Terminator and the BTTF thread, also you have mail 

lol

Can anyone grab a shot to match this?

I may have been lied to but they had a 70mm display thing outside the screen on the day, and it was not always there.

But in looking about the internets, looks like some fool put it up by mistake! 

My whole cinema going life is a lie!

Faithful? It is 100%not the same mix

I only ever saw it 70mm blow up and the 2011 dcp 

Sky have the first two on now, I keep missing it to check if two is better

Dude stay away, it's a retched hive of scum and dnr apologists.

I just go there to wind them up as unlike them I care not if I am banned

I had the chance to import it last week, but the price and the pure masterpiece in dnr made me think again

The MGM is the same master, and is dated as all hell we compared on AVS.

The Sony got a lot right but had the contrast blown out Ghostbusters style, it needs a new 4k master with no colour timing changes, as the Sony and the MGM/Criterion could not look more different

http://www.avsforum.com/t/1266651/robocop-1987-unreleased-sony-vs-fox-blu-ray-comparison-pix/60

Criterion upscaled overlaid with MGM/Fox disc

TServo2049 said:

I'd prefer a color scheme somewhere between the old and the new. While I'm sure that the 1993 theatrical timing was as cold as the 2011 BD, and the new colors are pleasing, I also can't imagine that the '93 color scheme was AS warm as the 3D. I always remember the grass in the Gallimimus scene being "pure" green.

I am with you, it not looks like Crystal Skull and the new Raiders