quote:

---

the problem I am referring to is obvious when you watch end credits with vertical scroll, or during a not too short panning camera movement; the actions seems to stop & start almost continuosly every fraction of a second. Since my player also outputs playback info on the screen, and it always reads 1080p/60 instead of /50, I am inclined to believe that all films released on Bluray are transferred to video according to NTSC specs.

---

quote:

---

The capture is done at 24 for blue-ray and for DVD, any conversion is done in the player not on the disc.

---

How do you know the conversion is done in the player? If it were like you say, then I'd experience the same problem with standard DVDs which is not the case.

It is also possible to take into account one more consideration: my Flat HD TV is also linked to a multistandard VCR and I have one NTSC VHS tape: its cinematic qualities in terms of jerkyness/motion studder are exactly the same as BDs; it's a 24 fps film transferred to 30 TV frames with the 3:2 pull down; again panning camera movements and rolling credits are crucial.

Steven, do I have to sense some degree of sarcasm? Do I have to feel obliged to disclose my CV as well? Plus I've never mentioned "jittery credits"; I might be wrong with my convintions but I am pretty much positive my observations are correct. Some people who have tried to give an answer seem to have mistaken the problem for something else, so the problem is still unsolved as far as I'm concerned. In fact reactions range from those like yours (there's no problem whatsoever with BDs), to aknowledgment of some sort of evidence to it, albeit depending on various reasons, and with varying degree of acceptance. So there must be something which perhaps you have missed?
 

---

Posted by John Hermes (Member # 1367) on June 28, 2009, 10:57 PM:
 
Paul, get yourself the Blu-ray of How The West Was Won. It really has an IB Tech look to it and is super sharp. I have a nice Optoma HD80 1080p DLP projector and my film buff friends, who have seen hundreds of IB Tech film prints, were astounded by the Blu-ray.
 

---

Posted by Steven J Kirk (Member # 1135) on June 28, 2009, 11:45 PM:
 
Maurizio, I don't mean to be sarcastic. I was just outlining that like many on this forum I have a lot of experience at looking for quality in images and I think with the right equipment and settings there shouldn't be a problem. I don't think what you are seeing is inherent in BD is what I'm saying. It must be fixable.
 

---

Posted by Maurizio Di Cintio (Member # 144) on June 29, 2009, 03:16 AM:
 
Gottcha, Steven. Actually BDs astonish me too under many aspects, save for what I am trying to describe here which I am afraid, is not fixable. I'll have to live with it. Thanx all.
 

---

Posted by Rob Young. (Member # 131) on June 29, 2009, 07:08 AM:
 
Paul, your original post has stimulated a really fascinating discussion.

Before any comments on motion judder, I have to agree with you that the two Disney Blu-ray titles are stunning, but Sleeping Beauty must take the crown for the level of detail on show.

In the past, I have sometimes found that Disney restoration jobs actually result in such a clinical image, which isn't as involving as it's film equvalent; somewhere the "magic" of watching it on film (super 8) was missing.

So I watched Sleeping Beauty and Pinocchio with some trepidation. The truth is, though, that these transfers, with their pristine images and huge levels of detail, actually draw you right into the "film" and the experience is engrossing (not giving any of my super 8 away though!)

As for motion judder...great discussion and links here. Oddly, for me, motion judder seems to be more of an issue on some titles and less on others, although I confess there should be no technical reason for this. The Pixar titles on Blu-ray, for example, although marvelous, do (for me) display a lot of motion judder. On the other hand, the other evening I watched Predator and what with all the sweeping camera moves expected loads of judder. The truth was that is wasn't really noticeable; strange!?

It actual makes me smile that once again, with all of todays's technology, video systems still struggle with an issue that is of little consequence to good old film!

Out of interest, how do professional cinema digital projectors address motion judder?
 

---

Posted by John Whittle (Member # 22) on June 29, 2009, 08:38 AM:
 
Most cinema digital projectors currently are DLP and have a very sophisticated frame interpolation used to keep smooth motion. As the projectors go to 4K it becomes more and more of a problem because of the need for powerful computers to process the image for projection.

As for why an error appears on Blue-ray and not DVD, one cannot really make overall statements without mentioning a specific title. You would not believe the number of errors there are in discs out there (if you count everything that does not adhere to the specifications). Early DVD which came from 1 inch tape masters had to be converted from a composite color signal to component and reverse telecine applied. This works somewhat until you get to an edit which doesn't conform to the proper telecine timing. Same for regular video in NTSC which doesn't abide with color framing (you can only cut at 15 frames per second because the 3.58 subcarrier isn't back to zero degrees on every frame, only every other frame).

Any of these things will throw the decoder off in the player. BTW different circuits are used for DVD and Blue-ray. Also since the display shows 60, it isn't outputing 24p. If the display device can receive 24p, then the player has to be set-up to output 24p.

An interesting discussion, but without all the facts, it's hard to determine the problem. The judder is more noticeable with larger screens in with high brightness and has been on film as well as video, in fact that was one reason that Todd-AO went to 30 fps for Oklahoma! and Cinerama ran at 28 fps to reduce flicker and smooth motion on large light screen images.

John
 

---

Posted by Rob Young. (Member # 131) on June 29, 2009, 10:53 AM:
 
Indeed, John. In my case the motion judder I am refering to is that which is apparent from Blu-ray at 1080p/24 output, with the projector set to (and acknowledging) 24Hz.

I have owned a Full HD projector that, despite the ability to do it, totally refused to acknowledge 1080p/24 from my HD-DVD player and insisted upon projecting a 1080p/30Hz image. All despite firmware upgrades - this certainly lead to noticeable and avoidable judder (player works fine with my current projector).

In the case of DVD playback; my own experience is that HD-DVD and Blu-ray machines are not that great at playing back and upscaling standard DVDs, despite manufacturer's claims.

My £600 Pioneer Blu-ray is fanatstic with Blu-ray but full of bugs when upscaling DVD (again, latest firmware running).

My £250 Toshiba HD-DVD player is, again, great with HD-DVD but a mess when upscaling DVD.

I use a separate dedicated upscaling DVD player which is the only way I have found to provide good, stable results from that old 576i (or 480i!) for a 1080p display.
 

---

Posted by Graham Ritchie (Member # 559) on June 29, 2009, 05:23 PM:
 

Has anyone watched "Baraka"? claimed to be the best Blu-ray ever made.

Specs on the cover.

First of its kind 8K Scan from fully restored 70mm film.
High Rez High Definition Digital Intermediate.
Scanned at 8K Ultra High Resolution from 65/5P film elements.
16/1 Oversampled Digital Intermediate to 1080P High Definition 16:9.
On the audio side Digitally Restored and Remastered 96k/24bits Dolby Digital 5:i and DTS-HD Master Audio 5:1 96/24 bits.

A couple of quotes.

"Baraka by itself is sufficient reason to acquire a Blu-ray player"
Roger Elbert.

"Quite possibly the most stunning picture I've ever seen on a HDTV"
DVD Empire

Well I bought the disc a while ago but still no player as yet, however we did replace our old TV now 10 years old with a Panasonic 42inch HD plasma last month, so a player is next on the list and will also used for the video projector.

Reading all those specs on the box does make me wonder if people who buy this Blu-Ray.. and thats including myself really understand very much of what is stated.....however...it does sound good

Graham.
 

---

Posted by Damien Taylor (Member # 1337) on June 29, 2009, 06:34 PM:
 
It does indeed look incredible. And the included featurette should answer most of your technical questions.
 

---

Posted by Paul Adsett (Member # 25) on June 29, 2009, 07:45 PM:
 
Graham, the Blu -Ray disc of South Pacific was also mastered from an 8K digital scan of the restored 70mm film - and it shows!
 

---

Posted by Osi Osgood (Member # 424) on June 30, 2009, 11:14 PM:
 
OK, I know I am talking with absolutely no experience with BR. I'm still back in the days of DVD and of course Super 8.

My concern is that, obviously, film will be obselete. My question is will the video transfer have that wonderful look of film, or will it be a glorified video image.

While a "classic" TV video image is quite fascinating, (such as music video from the early seventies, restored to look like they were just shot yesterday. Its as if time has never past at all!), I wouldn't like seeing a 32 fps video image instead of a 24 fps film transfer in a movie theater.

Just where do we go from here? We are now up to the point where we can literally see no difference between the film print and the BR image.

Besides, in some ways, many actors would not be in favor of the crystal clear image of our future "digital film transfers". It would pick up EVERY imperfection in them, brilliantly displayed for all to see.
 

---

Posted by Martin Jones (Member # 1163) on July 01, 2009, 04:34 AM:
 
Here we go, boys..... all abooooooaaaaard!!

http://www.techradar.com/reviews/audio-visual/televis ions/plasma-and-lcd-tvs/philips-cinema-21-9-56pfl9954h-607652/review

Martin
 

---

Posted by Rob Young. (Member # 131) on July 01, 2009, 04:40 AM:
 
Osi, my experience is that Blu-ray (and HD-DVD before it) can look more like film than DVD (or any previous video system) ever did. Of course this is when the movie has been originated on film, but thankfully that still applies to the majority of productions. The extra detail and even grain on show are all part of the film original and with HD, much more of that is captured, so you end up with the look of a high quality print as opposed to a sterile video image (although I know lots of debate continues over various re-mastering techniques such as grain removal, which is where things become more subjective).

But when a transfer is done with skill and respect the image, I find anyway, is "filmic". Plus, there is not so much need for video "tweaking", such as edge enhancement which, I think, plagues DVD, especially on a big screen. So, again, you end up with an image closer to ther film original.

But you raise a good point, this is when the movie has been originated on film as opposed to HD.

When HD cameras do get to a point where they can genuinely compete with film (just my opinion, but despite a lot of hype I think they have some way to go yet) it surely still remains the job of the cinematographer to photograph the "look" they want. And if that means everything soft and moody then everything will look soft and moody, despite the possible resolution on offer? If an actor has acne then stick a stocking over the lens...

I think to many HD simply implies better definintion (I mean, this is how it is marketed) and whereas there are many benefits to HD technology, I don't see why originating on future (hopefully better) HD cameras should neccesarily change the look of a production, that is the the hands of the director of photography and HD will only be a different tool. I hope.
 

---

Posted by Steven J Kirk (Member # 1135) on July 01, 2009, 05:24 AM:
 
Osi, ATTACK OF THE CLONES and REVENGE OF THE SITH were entirely shot on digital video. The DVDs ( and any BDV ) will therefore have no film content at all, ( they have been taken from digital masters.) There are also processes, one is called 'filmiser' I believe, that make digital look 'filmy'. Others may have more info on this. If the director choses it. The BBC are doing a lot of this. The Doctor Who's are now shot on 720p but 'filmised'.
 

---

Posted by Rob Young. (Member # 131) on July 01, 2009, 09:18 AM:
 
Steven, I think this kind of backs up what I am saying. In the cinema (to me) Clones & Sith both looked decidedly soft.

Although a lot of both movies where CG and Lucas LOVES HD, the look of the live action footage was deemed too sharp (!!) by Lucas and DP David Tatersall. So they (and I quote), "dumbed it down" by shooting with pro-mists.

In other words, the analogy would be that they didn't like the look of their stock, so they put nylons over the lens

As for the likes of Dr. Who, yes the days of shooting 16mm on big budget drama have long since (well almost) gone. Isn't it ironic that with todays superior video technology it is now possible to make video finally look like film and not that awful video look of old!!!
 

---

Posted by Michael De Angelis (Member # 91) on July 01, 2009, 10:23 AM:
 
I saw "sith" and "clones" that were strictly presented in digital format, and did not notice any sharp edge to the image. Instead the colors appeared as IB Tech.

A friend attended both screenings, one on film and the other digital, and the digital won hands down.

There's isn't anything that compares as in paying and go to the movies, and watch a video!



Strange?
 

---

Posted by Steven J Kirk (Member # 1135) on July 01, 2009, 09:14 PM:
 
I agree on the Star Wars prequels. In the cinema I saw what I'm sure were 35mm prints but they were not the sharpest I've ever seen. It could be there is a loss when making the 35mm from digital masters. The DVDs look pretty good on VP but not the best again. Curious to see what any eventual BDV might be like. Super 16mm seems to be going out fast if left at all. A pity. But there it is. Makes me more keen than ever to keep my cine going, if only for reference purposes.
 

---

Posted by Ronnie Sortor (Member # 1652) on July 02, 2009, 01:07 PM:
 
Wow, Paul! Your Panny 700U is still running? You're one of the lucky ones as this projector's power-supply unit is prone to failure. Mine died two months out of warranty and I've boycotted that brand. Replaced it with the Sanyo Z4, (yeah, I know Sanyo has been bought out by Panasonic, but they still offer a much longer 3-year warranty and to my eyes, after calibration, the Z4 produced a better image than the 700U anyway) which itself was replaced with the Sanyo PLV Z3000 1080p projector when I took the Blu-ray plunge earlier this year because it nagged me that with only 720p resolution, the whole picture wasn't quite being presented. I gotta tell ya, 1080p is well-worth upgrading to! It's more than just that, technology has improved a lot in the last five years and the quality of LCD projectors is remarkably better! Better color reproduction, much higher contrast ratio and image detail. So, anyone on the fence for Blu-ray or HD projection, here's a little push from a voice of experience. Digital may never equal film, but it's getting closer and closer all the time!
 

---

Posted by Rob Young. (Member # 131) on July 02, 2009, 06:37 PM:
 
Steven, when Clones & Sith finally arrive on Blu-ray (in about 6 months) I'm sure Lucas will have a big song and dance about how technology wasn't quite up to it at the time (2005 ) and the "new" versions will be sooo much better...plus they will probably have ewoks in them

With further reference to HD; in the last 18 months or so I have had the, erm... "educational" experience of investing in various "state of the art" HD projection and media.

Suffice to say that I have now lost a lot of harned earned cash by investing in total and utter (excuse me) c**p; which is currently sold as, generally speaking, highly regarded kit.

I'm not bitter (well, I am really ) and I did do my homework (as a broadcast cameraman I have to be constantly aware of new developments in photography and displays - it's my living) but I have learned, or should I say, re-learned some rather fundamental lessons that I should never have forgotten; the most most basic being, I guess, believe your own eyes!!!

Forget HD for the moment and ask yourself these questions when investing in a new video projector...(or TV)...

Does you display offer true (or close to true) black level? If not then forget contrast ratio...honestly about 500:1 will really do if you can produce good black, then anything on top is a bonus. 30,000:1...50,000:1...nonsense. Sure, very, very bright whites and very dark, erm, greys...useless...great contrast range but no real shadow detail = rubbish, especially for watching movies.

Video processing...even some of the best, most highly regarded video prosessor manufacturer's in the business (which are commonly fitted to various makes of video projector) are, well, in my humble opinion...adequate at best. Forget 10 bit, 12 bit, blah, blah, blah...look at a blue sky in an average motion picture (or any background with gradations of the same colour) and see if there is a smooth rendition of colour gradient, or "join" where gradations meet. I'm not being picky...once you notice it in backgrounds you'll soon see it apparent in all aspects of the image. Rubbish video processing...don't accept it, better equally affordable options are out there.

Jaggies. The plague of video images. All sorts of reasons for these to show up and I'm sure many of you will be keen to offer very technical explanations. Fact is, when a fine diagonal line of detail passes through a video image there is no reason why it should (with modern kit) break up into a shimmering mess of lines. But all too often it does. Now I'm not talking CRT TVs with Laser Disc here, I'm talking "state of the art" 1080p displays with, at least, a DVD up-scaling player. Jaggies should be non- (well...almost) non-existence. If not, then either display or up-scaler is no good. Again, look elsewhere.

Colour calibration...how tedious is this bit . Your display should be calibrated to 6500K for natural presentation. Brilliant...and you can really spend a small fortune having someone come to your house and calibrate your whites so that they are spot on (and, no, not refering to your laundry!) Then you'll notice that (despite being able to see hardly any level of detail in dark scenes, and lots of weird colour artifacts all over the place, and that everytime an x-wing fighter attacks the death star it's wings break up into a weird shimmer) that actually, the colour looks a bit...well...odd. You'll think to yourself, "I don't remember Pierce Brosnan having jaundice when I saw Mamma Mia at the cinema???",

Then you'll reach for the remote and re-set the colour temperature of your display the way you want it anyway...the way that looks natural to you...the way a lab tech would set up a printer...with their EYES!

Then...and only then...(hopefully)...you'll finally notice how nice and sharp everything is...

Anyway guys...hope you will all take this with the jest with which it was meant...I know a lot of you will disagree (or just think I'm mental) - actually I now love my current video kit . It just took a lot of harsh experiences and wasted money to get there.

But you know, super 8 is so much easier...and less to worry about...maybe that's why it's me hobby! Quick, where's me Elmo and that 1970's print of "Project the right Image". In those days, all you had to worry about was whether or not your extension lead was long enough...

And let's not even get on to motion judder...

[ July 03, 2009, 04:42 AM: Message edited by: Rob Young. ]
 

---

Posted by Steven J Kirk (Member # 1135) on July 02, 2009, 08:38 PM:
 
That's a great posting! I agree you have to be subjective and use your own eyes. The figures can be manipulated to sound great anyway. You have to have a great demo with natural-looking material. I find that stores aren't helpful. Even if they have a demo room they always want to show you CGI animations ( because they appear sharp I imagine ) but where there is nothing natural to judge the true quality of the image.
 

---

Posted by Maurizio Di Cintio (Member # 144) on July 03, 2009, 04:17 PM:
 
I’d like to report one of my personal experiences in terms of believing one’s own eyes. It was 1994: DVD and Plasma TV’s were starting to appear on all markets. Once I went to one of the biggest international Hi-Tech chains where a huge Plasma TV (priced about € 15.000) and a DVD player were on display (demo). The film being played was “Jumanjii” with Robin Williams. Anything seemed even too perfect at first glance. But on a second look I could easily detect severe “jaggies” in the line of the chrome plated police car window frame which was supposed to be a curve (actually lots of tiny “steps”).

I asked one of the assistants there what resolution the whole set up was apt to deliver and he admitted he didn’t know “Suffice it to say it’s the latest technology – it’s digital that’s the best you can get!”

I showed my surprise and I was like “Look at these jaggies”. The nicest part is that every other convinced the displayed image was the best ever seen… After all I am afraid not so much distance has been covered…
 

---

Posted by Christopher P Quinn (Member # 1294) on July 11, 2009, 07:57 PM:
 
I would just like to get back to the origins of this post first and say one, congratulations Paul on your entry into the world of BD. Two, How jealous I am that you’re AE700U is still running and now producing 720P for you. Three, I knew you would love the Disney’s in BD and like you I am looking forward to Snow White and fantasia. Don’t forget now that on the 2nd of November The Wizard of Oz is to be released in Blu-Ray.

Chris.
 

---

Posted by Rob Young. (Member # 131) on July 12, 2009, 08:09 AM:
 
Christopher, I feel that following my "rant", I should second that

Those Disney's are amazing and we have a lot to be thankful for with today's technology.
 

---

Posted by Paul Adsett (Member # 25) on July 12, 2009, 10:51 AM:
 
Thanks Chris. So far, I am very impressed with Blu-Ray, having now rented several BD discs and having had an opportunity to really scrutinize the picture quality in a home environment. Of the ones I have so far viewed, the three Disney BD releases are right at the very top, along with the new BD of 'South Pacific'. All are truly gorgeous PQ with stunning color and detail - you could not wish for anything better - as good as the professional cinema. However, I have seen several lesser BD titles which seem no different, or very little different, in quality than a good DVD, which raises the question whether or not some BD titles are in fact genuine HD.
Blu-Ray discs are still expensive here in the USA, with premium 2-disc titles, like 'How The West Was Won', going for about $35.00 in the local book store. So I shall be restricting my BD purchases to the great classic film titles like Snow White, Fantasia, Wizard of Oz etc. I certainly will not be buying any run of the mill modern titles, which appear to be 99% of the present BD catalog. I don't know who is buying these, since most of these modern films are only worth seeing once - at best!
From my perspective, BD presently poses no threat at all to DVD - DVD still has an overwhelming lead in the great film titles and most of the best collectors editions are on DVD, not Blu Ray. So blu-ray has a long way to go to catch up with DVD - if it ever does.
 

---

Posted by Graham Sinden (Member # 431) on July 12, 2009, 12:26 PM:
 

quote:

---

raises the question whether or not some BD titles are in fact genuine HD

---

Paul, I think this is a very important point. All the studios would be making budget cuts in every area including BD. Plus the fact that they know how the general public do not understand the technicalities of making a BD so they can put all the specs on the cover even if they know its not entirely true. Most people buying Blue Ray will think that this is the best version ever with the whole picture cleaned and re-scanned, new sound ect. unaware that their previous DVD at home on the shelf is not that much different. I would imagine that it would all depend on the movie title and how many copies they expect to sell of it.

To add another point, when they get around to releasing Laurel and Hardy and Chaplin on blue ray (they will eventually to make money), will they look any better than the best DVD's of them today when the master material is 70+ years old.

Graham S
 

---

Posted by Brad Miller (Member # 2) on July 12, 2009, 01:14 PM:
 
Graham, I know the guy who was in charge of the conversion to blu-ray and they went through ridiculous pains to quite literally, maximise the potential for the blu-ray format. Indeed there is no other blu-ray disc out there that can touch its quality, and I doubt you will see anything better in the future.
 

---

Posted by Bill Brandenstein (Member # 892) on July 12, 2009, 10:24 PM:
 
Speaking of Baraka, anyone who can be in Santa Monica, CA on August 1 can see a 70mm print screened at the Aero Theater.

http://www.americancinematheque.com/Aero/aeromastercalendar.htm
 

---

Posted by Michael De Angelis (Member # 91) on July 13, 2009, 03:48 PM:
 
Regarding the BD release of Pinocchio, was Disney
able to retain the depth that is their trademark
by using the multi-plane film technique?
 

---

Posted by Bill Brandenstein (Member # 892) on July 14, 2009, 12:18 AM:
 
I haven't seen the BD of Pinocchio, but if the multiplane camera was used, no transfer or print-down of it would change the camera's perspective and the multiplane effect. Since multiplane started at least by 1937 ("The Old Mill"), and Pinocchio was in 1940, it's safe to say that it was probably used and has never been seen so vividly on video as in this latest restoration.
 

---

Posted by Damien Taylor (Member # 1337) on July 14, 2009, 04:12 AM:
 
Funnily enough Bill, I actually will be in Santa Monica on the first of August, I will strongly consider this.
 

---

Posted by Paul Adsett (Member # 25) on July 14, 2009, 10:02 AM:
 
Walt used the multiplane camera extensively in Pinnochio, most famously the drop-down tracking shot into the village where Pinnochio lives, which was extremely expensive.
For those who have not seen it, the quality of the BD is jaw dropping.
 

---

Posted by Chip Gelmini (Member # 44) on July 14, 2009, 10:17 AM:
 
BARAKA!!!!!!!!!!!!

YAY!

FINALLY

SOMEBODY ELSE WANTS TO EXPERIENCE THIS GREAT FILM BESIDES ME

I do not have plans to jump into Blue-Ray. But I saw this picture originally in 70MM. I have it on laserdisc, and now have the 8K standard DVD and watched it recently with the Panasonic AX200U projector. The connection was mere S-Video, and it looked amazing. The behind the scenes documentaries ran almost one hour combined and yes there is much information about the production and the 8K mastering.

This is one of the best non-verbal films ever made and if you like this sort of thing it should not be missed.

Samsurra is currently filming and is the sequel to Baraka.

And I have heard that the next 8K scan restoration is Disney's Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs. I am not sure if it is in progress or they are starting it soon. After what they did with Baraka, anything else they do with this process should be amazing......

CG
 

---

Posted by Michael De Angelis (Member # 91) on July 14, 2009, 11:00 AM:
 
Please describe 8K scan restoration and
how does it apply with today's machines?

I have a 16mm Tech on Snow White
- and curious of the future release.

-suppose it can only be determined
with new machines to compare.

Where does it end?
Pinocchio was only restored just a few years ago.
 

---

Posted by Stuart Fyvie (Member # 38) on July 14, 2009, 12:06 PM:
 
Don't worry, this is the way it is scanned at. Think of it as scanning 35mm slides on your computer. The higher resolution, the more detail is retained. The image may eventually end up on blu-ray but the higher the source , the better the output.
Imagine a film was shot in 70mm, It would look a lot better than a film shot on 35mm. even by the time it ended up on 8mm.

Film is the ideal format because the resolution is dictated by the way you can resolve the film grains. It is not dictated by a video resolution, for example 525 0r 625 lines.

Hope this makes sense.

Stuart
 

---

Posted by John Whittle (Member # 22) on July 14, 2009, 02:13 PM:
 
Think of 8K scanning much like shooting a VistaVision negative or 65mm negative and printing down to 35mm. Greater image capture and better color depth to start will generally give you a better image even when reduced/compressed.

The next release of Wizard of Oz will go back to the original Technicolor negatives (again) but this time at high resolution. This will provide a better image than you could get with the orginal Technicolor film process since you can register the three images with greater precision than was possible with the mechanical methods and printing on the famous "belt" which imparted a "personality" to each and every print.

Nothing looks worse than a Tech print that has moving or out-of-register elements.

The higher resolution original will look better on HD if it's properly handled in authoring and compression.

John
 

---

Posted by Rob Young. (Member # 131) on July 21, 2009, 06:15 PM:
 
Paul, I see that you are describing Blu-ray as being as good as professional cinema and "jaw-dropping".

Honestly, I mean no offence in this; I am interested in your opinion and appraisal of your own viewing experience; largely I agree with the "jaw-dropping" bit in terms of resolution.

But, whilst I am very happy with my current set-up, I am still bothered by "motion judder", whereby a video projector cannot produce the "perceived" smooth motion of a film projector (and I've been through a few video projectors).

I am raising this here because the Disney muti-plane pan is a great example of "motion judder" rearing it's ugly head in an otherwise perfect image (ironically more so at 1080p 24Hz).

Whereas good old super 8mm (16mm/35mm) sweeps it's way through pans with much more fluid motion to the eye (with it's 24 fps and introduced flicker).

I would really value your subjective opinion on this matter when comparing your video projector / Blu-ray set up compared to film projection.

As I say, I am not looking for any sort of argument here between formats; I am just interested in your own observations!
 

---

Posted by Paul Adsett (Member # 25) on July 21, 2009, 06:46 PM:
 
Hi Rob,
I can't honestly say that I have been unduly distracted by motion judder on Blu-ray, but I have only viewed a handful of films so far. I can't remember seeing any motion judder on South Pacific , but I did notice it on some scenes in Pinnochio and yes, I would agree that it was much more apparent than on super 8 film. I have read that some of the latest video projectors can do 'frame interpolation' where the on board computer looks at the last and next frame and fills in an extra interpolated frame to smooth out the panning motion.
The more objectionable Blu -ray problem for me right now, is the really terrible catalog of available Blu-Ray films, which seem to be mainly adolescent junk - certainly not worth buying. So few really great titles - where is ' Singin in the Rain' or ' Meet Me in St. Louis'.?
I have a feeling my Blu-Ray library is going to be pretty thin.
 

---

Posted by Christopher P Quinn (Member # 1294) on July 24, 2009, 06:21 PM:
 
I would like to see some Ealing classics released in Blu-ray, but it's never going to happen i fear. I hate motion judder more than peanut butter and that's saying a lot!
Chris.
 

---

Posted by Paul Adsett (Member # 25) on July 24, 2009, 06:40 PM:
 
Yes, the Ealing classics would be great Chris, but as you say, don't hold your breath. Right now, Blu-Ray is no threat at all to DVD in terms of classic film collecting. If anything, Blu-rays presence in stores around here seems to be decreasing, and you have to conclude that it will never get close to the market sales occupied by DVD. Except for a sprinkling of a few good titles, Blu-ray seems destined to just be a source for the latest movies showing at the theaters. I think this is a really bad marketing philosophy by the studios, because most serious film collectors will chose to just stay with DVD. Fortunately, there is some good news in terms of the Disney releases and some of the Fox musicals, but I doubt that we will ever see a whole lot of films from Hollywood's golden age getting to BD.
Don't get me wrong, I love the quality of blu-ray discs, but BD is a bit of a wasteland after the abundance of great film titles on DVD.
 

---

Posted by Mark Todd (Member # 96) on July 24, 2009, 06:49 PM:
 
I use std dvd and a 5 year old LCD XGA 4/3 projector and have to say I can`t recall seeing any motion judder ever.
Is it a HD type thing ???
Best Mark.
 

---

Posted by Mark Williams (Member # 794) on July 25, 2009, 04:17 AM:
 
Chris,

I believe the Ealing classics will be released eventually,THE DAMBUSTERS is even being released here shortly and that should look stunning if the dvd is anything to go by.

I have never experienced any motion judder either and I am using an HD setup now.

Cheers MW
 

---

Posted by Stuart Fyvie (Member # 38) on July 27, 2009, 06:14 AM:
 
24 fps is the same on film as it is on projectors running at 24 P.
Some video projectors dont actually run at this speed, they re-interlace the image which can introduce the judder on pans.
A true 24P set up will look better than film because the re-fresh rate is much faster. A 35mm projector has a 2 bladed shutter
which will be 48 hz. A DLP runs much quicker. Also any image processing like noise reduction in the projector must be switched off. A lot of these modes are gimmicks and should not be used.
Most 8mm projectors have a three bladed shutter. They dont flicker as much but don't let out as much light. They can be modified but will make 18fps. films be unwatchable.

Stuart
 

---

Posted by Rob Young. (Member # 131) on July 27, 2009, 10:27 AM:
 
Interesting article / discussion here on frame interpolation;

http://www.projectorcentral.com/frame_interpolation.htm

A recent article in UK publication Home Cinema Choice also discusses a new projector from Optoma which uses their new frame interpolation; the author's opinion is that it suffers the same fate, making films look more like video and less natural.

Interesting, as there clearly is an issue with motion judder at 24Hz, else why bother trying to "fix" it. However, seems that unless your wallet is bottomless the new technology used to address it in domestic video projectors isn't quite right yet, certainly for movies.

Paul, I agree with you on classic titles not appearing fast enough. Whilst it is good to have all new releases on BD, there is a real shortage of back catalogue films. I wonder if distributors are wary of realeasing older films on BD as so much work is required to get them right and when they aren't right the critiscism can be so scathing that it leaves a release dead in the water. Especially in the present economic climate, maybe they just think it better to stick with the DVD release and not invest in work / time to produce a good BD version.
 

---

Posted by Stuart Fyvie (Member # 38) on July 27, 2009, 11:49 AM:
 
Yuck. That frame interpolation looks horrible. You can't just invent frames that are not there 'on the fly' succesfully. To timestretch frames profesionaly takes large processing power and long render times. Why would you then take a pristine image and then stick it through a chip which costs a few pennies? It is like taking any great painting and then looking at it through a bowl of jelly. All these things like 100hz/ noise reduction/ smooth motion flicker free blah blah... are all Gimicks and should be avoided.
It is just a way to sell the same box to the public.

Keep it the way the film was intended and let any noise and clean up to the film maker.

As for classic blu-rays, I think some more are on threr way this year. Wizard of Oz. Forbiden Planet, GWTW. It is like 8mm in its heyday all over again!

Stuart
 

---

Posted by Osi Osgood (Member # 424) on July 28, 2009, 09:18 AM:
 
Except I'm not messing with any motion judder ON MY SUPER 8 PROJECTOR!!!

HA HA HA!

Ehem ....

I just think it's so funny how modern technology is doing its best to "ape" film. I don't have to "ape" anything. I just put a reel on the projector and kick back!

The comment that "Its better than film" is a little presumptuous, especially since the source is film. You can't be better than the original source. Perfectly copy it, perhaps; but better? No.
 

---

Posted by Rob Young. (Member # 131) on July 30, 2009, 06:03 PM:
 


[ July 31, 2009, 06:29 AM: Message edited by: Rob Young. ]
 

---

Posted by Christopher P Quinn (Member # 1294) on August 01, 2009, 08:22 AM:
 
Just would like to say that i dropped the whole idea of trying to ape film when setting up. I found it a pointless and stressful exercise that just ended up with me feeling almost suicidal. It is just not possible to get the same look, especially when watching classic B&W films. You can of course make adjustments that give a more sympathetic look, but it's never the same. So a compromise has to be made and I take solace that i simply would not be able to or afford to see these films at home on the big screen otherwise. The look of video projection is still light years better than what you would get on a large screen LCD/Plasma, and does give you the same feeling of being at a cinema at home, even without the whirling sound of a projector, which lets face it, you never hear at the cinema.
Chris.
 

---

Posted by Rob Young. (Member # 131) on August 02, 2009, 08:18 AM:
 
Christopher, very good points indeed.

At the minute I am using a JVC D-ILA projector and have to say that it is the most "filmic" I have ever owned; no DLP rainbow and black levels that are so inky, with loads of deep shadow detail. I love it. I didn't think it possible until I saw it.

Motion judder does happen with 24Hz HD occasionally, but nothing's perfect (that goes for film too! And it happened with my DLP as well) which is why I was interested in other people's experience of it. Certainly it is more of an observation that an annoyance.

But you are right - it is so great that we can see films at home with the sort of quality now available which just wouldn't be affordable or practical otherwise. It's all about enjoying the movie in the end!
 

---

Posted by Christopher P Quinn (Member # 1294) on August 02, 2009, 07:54 PM:
 
I take it Rob that you have a dedicated projection room?
I can't get the black levels i want. I did ask the other half if she fancied having a black carpet and walls in the living room, but she won't go for it. So i steer clear of Star Wars type films, well for now.
Chris.
 

---

Posted by Rob Young. (Member # 131) on August 04, 2009, 04:32 AM:
 
Yes, Christopher, separate room (some pics of the set-ups from a couple of years ago on page 3 of the screening room thread).

But even with it blacked out some projectors I have owned just couldn't produce anything near black, just grey. And I'm talking up-to-date DLP projectors too! Even with the gamma settings adjusted to boost shadow detail (on both player and projector), I just couldn't get a convincing image with any real shadow detail.

The JVC D-ILA was a revelation. I dealt with a great hi-fi dealer who let me take one home for a week and try it before buying.
 

---

Posted by Steven J Kirk (Member # 1135) on August 04, 2009, 01:49 PM:
 
Slate grey carpet is still very homey and helps the image. I also have wine red wallpaper. It all gives the picture a bit more and no distracting reflections off walls. I use HD Panasonic VP and BD player. Exceptional. Okay the VP and player may cost the price of ten exceptional 16mm prints at £200 each but assuming you want more than 10 films in your collection it starts paying for itself. THE WIZARD OF OZ and NORTH BY NORTHWEST are out in the UK in Nov.
 

---

Posted by Paul Adsett (Member # 25) on August 10, 2009, 04:34 PM:
 
Steve, that's great news about The Wizard of Oz and North by Northwest'. I have not seen them yet in any stores here in Orlando, but those are exactly the kind of films which may give Blu-ray sales a much needed boost, and I shall certainly purchase both of them.
Unfortunately, the presence of Blu-ray discs in stores here in Orlando continues to decline while DVD is thriving. Blockbuster have now cut back their BD display to a meagre 8 rows of shelves with a total of about 40 titles only, and Target have relegated their remaining BD's to a lonely corner section. Borders book store no longer stocks BD's except for a handful of the very latest releases. You have to get the impression that BD is really not doing very well, and I hate to say it, but my feeling now is that BD will never become truly mainstream like DVD, and will be relegated to a niche market like laserdiscs were. This is probably not suprising, since it seems most people cannot see any difference between DVD and Blu-ray on their TV's, unless they are using video projectors on screens above 100 inches (many BD's I have viewed on my VP don't seem to be any improvement over DVD'S!) So the masses are perfectly happy with DVD and have zero motivation to spend a couple of hundred dollars on a BD player and $35.00 a pop for BD movies, when the same movie can be got at half the price or less on DVD. I think things could have been different if Blu-ray had been launched with inexpensive players and a mouth watering catalogue of restored Classic movies, worthy of 1080p, instead of the forgettable titles that they started out with.
 

---

Posted by Graham Ritchie (Member # 559) on August 10, 2009, 08:33 PM:
 
One thing I think is going to help is the new Panasonic Blu-ray recorder due to released here next month, which means if you own a HD camcorder its going to give a huge boost to those that take home movies. I still have not bought a player yet as they will no doubt come down in price as the recorders become the norm, very tempted to the go Blu-ray recorder way instead and replace our present camcorder with a Panasonic HD version. I now own a few Blu-ray discs "How The West Was One" is the latest so will make a move hopefully soon.

Graham.
 

---

Posted by Steven J Kirk (Member # 1135) on August 11, 2009, 07:04 AM:
 
www.amazon.co.uk list THE WIZARD OF OZ as a 2 disc edition for 2nd Nov. GONE WITH THE WIND is Nov 9th. NORTH BY NORTHWEST for Nov 16. This latter seems to be the first Hitchcock available as a BDV disc. Haven't checked amazon.com the USA site yet.
 

---

Posted by Paul Adsett (Member # 25) on August 24, 2009, 12:40 PM:
 
Just purchased Saturday Night Fever on Blu-Ray, and there is a note inside the case which says ' It is possible this Blu-Ray Disc was manufactured after your Blu-ray Disc player. To ensure the best possible viewing experience, your Blu-ray Disc player may need a firmware or software update.
Whats this all about/ Are BD users really expected to know how to do this, or is the BD market just aimed at computer nerds?
I see this as one more reason why BD will never become mainstream.
 

---

Posted by Rob Young. (Member # 131) on August 25, 2009, 06:01 AM:
 
Paul, I think there are two ways of looking at this.

Do you remember in the early days of DVD when certain titles were released with elaborate special features (the Matrix springs to mind which included a feature that would take you off into behind the scenes sections as the film was playing). Certain DVD players just refused to play these discs correctly and created quite a wave of bad feeling amongst early adopters of the format.

I remember My £400 Panasonic at the time would totally lock-up when ever I tried to play Pink Floyd's The Wall!!

Personally, I'm not fussed about the features really, but they prevented proper playback of the movie itself.

Point is, there was nothing you could do except buy a new player . At least now, if and when we experience play back issues with Blu-ray, hopefully a firmware upgrade will fix it.

Out of my 20 or so Blu-ray discs I've experienced one so far (Wall-E) where the DTS soundtrack would just disapper half way through. Pioneer's advice was a firmware upgrade. If you visit the manufacturer's web site, you should find a list of recent upgrades available and what they do.

You can burn a CD of the upgrades yourself if you have the right software or, certainly in my case, Pioneer were very helpful and sent out a free CD with upgrades the next day. All you do is pop it in and let it do it's stuff for half an hour or so; so no need to be a computer geek!

But, a word of warning! You have to make VERY sure that the upgrade process isn't interupted (heaven forbid a power cut half way through it) or you can "brick" the player...in other words literally turn it into a useless brick!

If you have a profile 2.0 player, you should be able to connect it directly to the internet and do the upgrade that way. HD-DVD was the same, however, I had a Toshiba that needed upgrading (wouldn't run at 24fps) and plugged it into the internet as instructed by Toshiba. The upgrade all seemed to go well, but when I plugged it back into the projector it had yellow lines all over the image. I rang Toshiba and they were very helpful, calmly told me I had done nothing wrong but that the player was "bricked"...broken and that they would send me a new one!!!

I asked whether or not there was some way to restore it to it's factory settings and they told me no way...it was now useless

Two days later a courier arrived and swapped it for a brand new one together with a CD to upgrade it!

So on the one hand, I think the ability to upgrade the firmware is really future proofing your machine, but on the other hand just be careful when you do it

On a different note, I have just seen my first real "duffer" Blu-ray. I bought my better half Dirty Dancing and the picture is a mess of jaggy edges...one of the very things HD is supposed to be devoid of...it's rubbish and obviously a problem in the master source .
 

---

Posted by Paul Adsett (Member # 25) on August 25, 2009, 08:14 AM:
 
Thanks a lot for that advice Rob - if my player ever has a problem then I will certainly attempt a firmware upgrade. But the fact that if the upgrade goes wrong it literally wipes out the player is very scary indeed! You have to conclude that this kind of thing is going to turn off a lot of people from BD.
All of which makes me really value the simplicity and longevity of film systems.
 

---

Posted by Rob Young. (Member # 131) on August 25, 2009, 09:26 AM:
 
Absolutely Paul, you only need to worry about upgrades if you encounter a problem.

Actually, in my experience, most issues with firmware tend to arise when using HDMI; it's like one computer talking to another so invariably you can end up with problems!!!

On the subject of Dirty Dancing, a quick look around the internet confirms my fears...a transfer plagued with poor quality issues. Blu-ray could really do without this kind of sloppiness or, as you say Paul, it will never be attractive to a mass market.
 

---

Posted by Paul Adsett (Member # 25) on September 01, 2009, 06:50 PM:
 
I'm really looking forward to the release of The Wizard of Oz on the 29th of this month. I have a feeling the quality will blow everyone away.
Nevertheless, I still have very mixed feelings about getting into Blu-ray. After 3 months I have only purchased 4 Blu-ray films, whereas my DVD purchases are about 3 times that amount. And my renting ratio is about 10 dvd's for every Blu-ray.
 

---

Posted by Christopher P Quinn (Member # 1294) on September 19, 2009, 06:21 PM:
 
Paul,
Can we please have a review of Wizard as soon as you have viewed; here in the UK we have to wait until November 2nd. I am so excited about this release I may have to change my underwear.
 

---

Posted by Paul Adsett (Member # 25) on September 20, 2009, 10:21 AM:
 
Hi Chris,
I am hoping to get my copy of Oz next week, so I will be glad to post a report. As usual with this kind of legendary film they are offering different versions available with all kinds of elaborate options such as books, lobby cards, red slippers, figurines, etc - you name it, but none come with fresh underwear .
They have really gone to town on this one and I am anticipating that the BD transfer has been done with meticulous love and care and the BD of the film itself will be stunning, particularly as it originated on 3-strip Technicolor.
And lets not forget that the BD of Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs will be on sale here on October 2 - another eagerly anticipated release also loaded up with extras. 'Best Buy' here in the USA are already giving out free Snow White embossed metal BD boxes if you place an advance order.
 

---

Posted by Christopher P Quinn (Member # 1294) on September 26, 2009, 06:51 PM:
 
Great! Thanks Paul, I look forward to reading your report. Snow White is already on my list of must haves.

I have though annoyingly, had to order Miss Potter in blu-ray from Australia as the UK has not even got a release date for this, if they ever do. I love the film and adore Renee Zellweger. The film is a must for Blu-ray, but yet again.

Chris.
 

---

Posted by Bill Brandenstein (Member # 892) on September 28, 2009, 12:16 PM:
 
Miss Potter - lovely, underrated, genteel little film. Enjoy.
 

---

Posted by Graham Ritchie (Member # 559) on September 22, 2012, 05:16 AM:
 
What happend to the last three years even though I have watched "Baraka" on our HD tv, tonight was the first time this Blu-ray title has been played through our Panasonic PT-AX200E video projector. Although I cant get the benefit of full 1080 from this projector, the image is still indeed very impressive. I also like that 2.21.1 ratio, it really fills the screen.

If anyone has a full HD projector then "Baraka" is a must have blu-ray, its simply stunning.

Graham
 

---

Posted by Jonathan Trevithick (Member # 3066) on September 22, 2012, 06:23 AM:
 
Graham - "Baraka" on blu-ray is a great looking film. I've also just picked up "Lawrence of Arabia" on blu-ray from Amazon.co.uk and that is simply stunning.It's the best i've ever seen it. Highly recommended.
 

---

Posted by Paul Adsett (Member # 25) on September 22, 2012, 11:49 AM:
 
I am not a huge fan of the film but I did purchase a blu ray of Cameron's epic Titanic when it was released last week. I am glad I did, as the picture quality is just incredible, revealing every little detail of the costumes down to the individual threads, the interior of the ship showing the grain in the wood of the grand staircase, and the expansive exterior deck areas of the ship. The whole thing is a sumptuous visual feast, every shot showing what blu ray can really do when care is taken. Ignore the silly romantic plot, just sit back and marvel at the picture you are seeing and the sound you are hearing.
Incidentally I read that the 3D version of the blu ray is awesome, so I plunked down an extra $7.00 for the 3D edition, just in case I get a 3D projector downstream.
 

---

Posted by Jonathan Trevithick (Member # 3066) on September 22, 2012, 03:36 PM:
 
Hi Paul. I picked up Titanic.I really don't care for 3D, so I bought the 2D version. Criterion's release of "A Night To Forget" is wonderful too.
 

---

Posted by Graham Ritchie (Member # 559) on September 22, 2012, 03:55 PM:
 
Thanks Jonathan

I will look out for Lawrence of Arabia.

Graham
 

---

Posted by Hugh Thompson Scott (Member # 2922) on September 22, 2012, 05:15 PM:
 
With all this talk of super duper picture quality etc from blu ray.
makes me wonder why so many deserted film for video back in
the day, and still take the snap shottery on mobile phones.
 

---

Posted by Jonathan Trevithick (Member # 3066) on September 22, 2012, 09:26 PM:
 
VHS/Betamax were more user friendly for mainstream users to access. I don't think many thought the quality was superior to film. Also, you could buy a whole, unabridged feature film on VHS for 30 pounds.
 

---

Posted by Hugh Thompson Scott (Member # 2922) on September 23, 2012, 03:18 AM:
 
I beg to differ Jonathan,I paid £48.00 for a tape of "Dance of the
Vampires" on VHS, and blank cassettes were not much cheaper
when they were available.It just strikes me as odd, that in a
separate thread we're discussing the loss of TWO major film
providers going to the wall and the shedding of crocodile tears,
while extolling the virtues of a plastic disc that has helped no end
in putting the final nails in films coffin,in both the professional
and amateur world, I just find it very strange.
 

---

Posted by Jonathan Trevithick (Member # 3066) on September 23, 2012, 06:41 AM:
 
All I recall Hugh is that I bought "Monty Python and the Holy Grail" for 29 pounds on VHS in 1981. The two Walton extracts would have cost more than that and only totalled a third of the movie.
 

---

Posted by Hugh Thompson Scott (Member # 2922) on September 23, 2012, 07:54 AM:
 
That's as maybe, but the extracts you mention are still being
sought after by collectors while the videos are a well and truly
dead and buried,as will blu ray in years to come when superceded
by the next "craze".Remember the cartload of equipment that
was video making, the huge cameras and power packs that cost
a fortune and the quality that was dire, but the marketing men
still managed to convert a helluva lot of people from the 8mm
scene, it was like a new religion, and now it's blu ray's turn.I
just find it strange that dvds are compared to something that
has more than stood up to the test of time,like comparing a
genuine piece of antique furniture to something from a flatpack.
 

---

Posted by Graham Ritchie (Member # 559) on September 23, 2012, 02:10 PM:
 
When VHS pre-recorded tapes came out they were expensive and the quality was poor, but for the masses owning a video player and watching them on a tv in those days with a max size of around 26inch was something. Super8 400ft was around $80, Universal 2-400footer $135, Marketing 3-400 $245 NZ dollars so even that was expensive. However you could own a film and project it just like at the movies in your home on a much larger screen than TV.

At the moment home entertainment has never been so good. Its cheaper than ever, with large TV screens, dolby digtal sound and with blu-ray picture quality thats either on a HDTV or projected on a video projector its really good. The thing is also cost, blu-ray titles are cheaper and much better than VHS ever was.

So where does that leave film, well for me I still enjoy projecting film and the natural image quality that it gives.
The sad part about loosing Kodak or Fuji, is film is still the only way to preserve a natural looking image for the long term, thats why I still take 35mm slides. The Digital camera has its use also, eg this forum or internet use, but digital as we know is not suitable for long term storage...thats down to film.

The thing is, enjoy what is on offer "today" with both digital and film and not worry to much about tomorrow, we cant change it. The one thing we are all short of is "time" believe me, it passes us by, way to quick.

Graham.
 

---

Posted by Michael O'Regan (Member # 938) on September 23, 2012, 02:19 PM:
 

quote:

---

It just strikes me as odd, that in a
separate thread we're discussing the loss of TWO major film
providers going to the wall and the shedding of crocodile tears,
while extolling the virtues of a plastic disc that has helped no end
in putting the final nails in films coffin,in both the professional
and amateur world, I just find it very strange.

---

Visit www.film-tech.com for free equipment manual downloads. Copyright 2003-2019 Film-Tech Cinema Systems LLC


UBB.classic^TM 6.3.1.2