Blu-Ray Best Of The Best - for discussing releases only

[Angry the Clown]

Had just been reading The Digital Bits and he does appear to have been in discussions with them.

Yeah, I wasn't really suggesting that a list of previously announced 4k titles was a way to find something which was close to a full catalogue release list but there are some catalogue titles which I'd really like to get hold of and I was hoping to find some clues if it had been announced for the 4k treatment.

Oh I wasn't pointing the figure at you, just that site. I don't know why they re-worded some of what Bill wrote in a manner that suited them when it would have been easier to quote him directly seeing as they were not capable of at least re-interpreting his news accurately.

They also made some really weird-looking ones, like the UK version of Zodiac which looked hideous. Bafflingly enough it looked like it had heavy grain reduction artefacts even on the lighter shots... despite being shot digitally.

Zodiac did go through some quite extensive noise reduction, but that was in post prior to its theatrical release (DTS Images/Lowry were responsible). That's actually a little Hollywood secret about some of these few major movies being shot in HD... Most have gone through some serious clean up in post prior to release to fix "issues." ILM had to do such work in house on Attack of the Clones and Revenge of the Sith.

It'll be interesting to see how Warner's forthcoming UK Blu-ray release of Zodiac's director's cut compares to the US HD DVD version.

I thought it was a Digital/35mm mix ? may be wrong tho.

Zodiac was shot entirely with Thomson's Viper - mostly on a version of its recording system actually re-designed to Fincher's specification. There may have been some use of film for effects work though… Not 100% sure.

Collateral and Miami Vice mixed use of the Viper and 35mm though on the latter I believe film as used only for over and undrcranked sequences, and on Collateral the club scene and some other interior sequences were 35mm.

[Lyris]

It'll be interesting to see how Warner's forthcoming UK Blu-ray release of Zodiac's director's cut compares to the US HD DVD version.

It certainly will, and I'm going to go out on a limb and bet that the Paramount version looks better...unless they've changed their ways that is.

The UK DVD of Zodiac is really bizarre looking though. It looks pretty naff from a compression point of view, there's mosquito noise everywhere... I can only assume WB have had access to a much noisier source and have had to make the best of reducing it. It has this really weird intense horizontal sharpness on the highest frequencies though, it's a really weird look. I just don't understand how someone could do such a poor job on a release with few special features to suck up room, and with so much of the disc full. Their encoding process must be optimised for speed and little else.

I seem to remember the latest Harry Potter SD DVD came under fire from some people for similar issues.

[Angry the Clown]

It certainly will, and I'm going to go out on a limb and bet that the Paramount version looks better...unless they've changed their ways that is.

Out of interest... Have you ever compared Paramount?s US MPEG4 Blu-ray encode for Flags of Our Fathers to Warner?s UK VC1 Blu-ray encode? I only ask as the UK disc boasts the attraction of a 24bit PCM track and there?s no presence of lossless/uncompressed audio Paramount?s US Blu or HD DVD versions (their US HD DVD is a different encode to their own Blu version in its own right. It?s VC1).

[Lyris]

I've not, but if money wasn't an issue it'd certainly be interesting

Since I already have the US version of Zodiac, I'll be checking out Warner's effort on BD.

[dvdmike]

Out of interest... Have you ever compared Paramount?s US MPEG4 Blu-ray encode for Flags of Our Fathers to Warner?s UK VC1 Blu-ray encode? I only ask as the UK disc boasts the attraction of a 24bit PCM track and there?s no presence of lossless/uncompressed audio Paramount?s US Blu or HD DVD versions (their US HD DVD is a different encode to their own Blu version in its own right. It?s VC1).

Xylon caps here http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showp...postcount=1431

[Lyris]

Interesting, they're the exact same source, both times with nothing else done to it. Very reassuring.

But, the Blu-ray AVC version is retaining the grain structure better. The Warner VC-1 HD DVD is "mashing it up" (as I always say) a little more.

[Angry the Clown]

That's just a comparison of the Paramount US releases though isn't it? There are technically three separate encodes of Flags of Our Fathers worthy of comparison.

1) US MPEG4 Blu-ray Encode from Paramount
2) US VC1 HD DVD Encode from Paramount
3) UK/European VC1 Blu-ray & HD DVD encode from Warner


Unless Warner got to share Paramount's American HD DVD encode for their UK version.

[dvdmike]

I thought the Uk disc was AVC

[Lyris]

I don't think Warner have ever used anything other than VC-1 (except for MPEG-2 on one or two early HD DVD and BD titles?) WB have been very snuggly with the VC-1 people from the early days...

[ne0star]

My Ratatouille / Pixar shorts boxset showed up yesterday from dvd.co.uk which is canny considering its not out until monday. Really impressed with their service. Didn't think much of the packing though. It was shrink wrapped carboard which has the tendancy to damage the packaging before its even in the post, but mine seems fine. Still Play would have probably just stuck it in an ordinary jiffy bag.

[Salsa Party Animal]

I have about 60 Blu rays and 20 HD DVD on wish list from Movietyme. (Roughly) when I can afford them I will stick with blu rays first then after buy HD DVD if there is no blu rays for those films. So it is not a problem as I don't think I can buy that many for a while.

[RLench]

I think it was Lyris who mentioned the weird effect in RE: Extinction (Jovovich's face looking blurry and wax-like). It didn't look like it in the pictures I'd seen but, when watching the film, it's blatantly obvious. What were Sony thinking? How could they expect people to miss this?

[Lyris]

It was part of the original film, not the transfer to BD - it's just that on BD it's blatantly obvious! Pretty hilarious, anyway!

[JP]

That's what I'd thought about it when watching it.

It's fairly obvious to most people on here but to me it really had the appearance of an airbrushed photo rather than just noise reduction. It may well be like that due to the director or one of the other creative team.

Has anybody watched it on DVD? Is it present on that too?

[dvdmike]

It was part of the original film, not the transfer to BD - it's just that on BD it's blatantly obvious! Pretty hilarious, anyway!

Seconded if you look for the RE thread I made I posted it was there about 10 mins after I saw it on the opening day