Announcement
Collapse
No announcement yet.
Blu-ray's to miss thread
Collapse
X
-
I think Robocop looks just fine on BD. Lack of extras is totally unimportant IMHO.
To add to the avoid list I would nominate Transformers: The Movie. It's the same faux widescreen version from the last DVD release albeit very clear. some scenes do look a bit fuzzy though. Soundtrack sounds a lot clearer though.
Comment
-
Originally posted by CMcK View PostTo add to the avoid list I would nominate Transformers: The Movie. It's the same faux widescreen version from the last DVD release albeit very clear. some scenes do look a bit fuzzy though. Soundtrack sounds a lot clearer though.
Comment
-
Originally posted by dvdmike View PostWorst discs for me are:
Zulu DNR
The Italian Job DNR
The Dark Knight A starved AVC encode with bad EE on all the Imax shots and some colour timing changes.
If the Italian Job & Zulu had a true transfer like Blade Runner then that's far more preferable but as it stands, they look magnificent, heavy DNR or not.
Comment
-
I'm nowhere near knowledgeable on all factors of Blu Ray but I’m aware of DNR when it’s heavy and whether it appears the Publisher has gone back to the original negative to transfer.
Zulu for me had the most noticeable DNR and some parts of the Italian Job, but by no means are they bad transfers to Blu Ray. Likewise I could not see a single issue with the IMAX opening to the Dark knight so I would love to know why you believe it looks bad. Are their particular shots or scenes where it becomes noticeable?
As I said, I’m in no way an expert and don’t have the biggest set up but I genuinely can’t see a problem with those three films except for the DNR issue that was used on The Italian Job & Zulu.
Comment
-
What's good and what isn't is somewhat subjective. And when we remember that most people's TVs won't be calibrated and will be adding another veil to the image, it becomes almost impossible to talk with each other about how something does or doesn't look. Thank the manufacturers and their peddling of the idea that picture settings should be done "according to your personal taste" for this mess.
FWIW, I agree with DVDmike. Although none of those discs are unwatchably bad, there should be no concessions on this format. The Dark Knight is especially bizarre, given that there is (or was) a QuickTime HD trailer on the web that has more vertical detail.
With that said, I don't think there are any Blu-ray Discs that I would miss entirely, if I wanted to see a film. There's no better format.Last edited by Lyris; 07-07-2009, 15:33.
Comment
-
Now, I'm not a Blue ray owner but have thought about getting one but what's the point when they don't do the format justice? By the way, what does DNR mean? and why are some Blu-ray shipped with no extras? i mean, isn't that one of the main selling points? Better image and sound with more extras than you could shake a stick at?
Yakumo
Comment
-
DNR, basically the process of removing 'noise' from the picture, in many cases to the detriment of the end product.
As for the quality of Blu-Ray and the existence of extras, it really does depend from one release to the next. Some studios will put a lot more effort into their releases than others, and of course some will hold extras back so that they can release the film again down the line and force people to double dip.
This isn't a Blu-Ray exclusive problem. I've got some SHOCKING DVDs at home (Hard Boiler and Platoon spring to mind), both in terms of picture quality and extras (Not that I care about extras, but still).
Comment
Comment