Get Back visual grain/noise removal*

Discussion in 'Visual Arts' started by ognirats, Oct 19, 2021.

  1. lukpac

    lukpac Senior Member

    Location:
    Milwaukee, WI
    Don't like the complaints about it? Don't read and respond to them.
     
  2. audiomixer

    audiomixer As Bald As The Beatles

    I watched it; I liked it; I wouldn't buy it.
     
    Lownote30 and BeatleJWOL like this.
  3. BeatleJWOL

    BeatleJWOL Senior Member

    Not in its current form, for sure. If it leaves Disney+ or if there's a big box with additional footage, then sure, but right now I've got D+ and it's there for me to watch again anytime.

    I may have said this in another thread but the fact of the matter is that the folks that can't tell what has happened or don't care what has happened have won. Peter Jackson scrubbed any evidence that this was ever shot on film out of the picture and that's the only way this footage is going to exist, possibly until many of us here are long gone, and possibly forever.

    The content does supersede the visuals but it's the what could have been that leaves a mark on it.
     
    Anthrax and ognirats like this.
  4. audiomixer

    audiomixer As Bald As The Beatles

    My thoughts exactly.
     
    BeatleJWOL likes this.
  5. Oatsdad

    Oatsdad Oat, Biscuits, Abbie & Mitzi: Best Dogs Ever

    Location:
    Alexandria VA
    This is one of the weirdest "arguments" I've ever seen on the SHF... and that's saying something.
     
  6. misteranderson

    misteranderson Forum Resident

    Location:
    englewood, nj
    I have just as much right to be here as you do.

    Generally, I value your contributions, especially to anything regarding The Who.

    You have to admit that there are certain people who just lose their minds with bizarre OCD when every major Beatles project is released. Every. Single. One.

    As someone else upthread said, there's no "grain" or "hair in the gate" in real life. Again, if Get Back hurts your eyes, don't watch it again, and for God's sake don't buy it.
     
    audiomixer likes this.
  7. Dillydipper

    Dillydipper Space-Age luddite

    Location:
    Central PA
    Not an argument, a metaphor. I said all I needed to in post #678, and this was just a response to the pushback from that.
     
  8. Ringmaster_D

    Ringmaster_D Surfer of Sound Waves

    Location:
    Chicago, IL
    I’m not as outraged as some about the DNR, especially given that PJ needed to zoom in on much of the footage to cover for audio with no corresponding film. That said, any rational person would conclude that the desired result would be somewhere between the two images above, without the DNR settings set to stun. I wonder if he started with the extreme processing needed for the zoom ins, and then processed the other footage to match. I’m very grateful this exists and loved the film, but I’m sure the chance of it being remastered again are about zero.
     
    audiomixer and BeatleJWOL like this.
  9. misteranderson

    misteranderson Forum Resident

    Location:
    englewood, nj
    True. It would also be a thankless job, especially on this forum.
     
    audiomixer likes this.
  10. lukpac

    lukpac Senior Member

    Location:
    Milwaukee, WI
    Calling it "bizarre OCD" is just your way of dismissing the opinions of others.

    The thing is: people care. They care about the music. They care what things look and sound like. They care when something is made available after 50+ years and...it looks kind of awful. Or when a rare mix is sourced from a bad needledrop of a counterfeit 45. Or when an unreleased mix is sourced from a bootleg instead of the master tape. "Don't watch/listen/buy" is pretty insulting when people deeply care about the music.

    As far as grain goes, no, there's none in real life, just as there's no tape hiss in real life. But there's grain on film, and hiss on tape, and it's impossible to remove those as if they were never there in the first place. Our brains actually do pretty well hearing/seeing past hiss and grain, but when those are "removed", things just don't seem right, as Get Back demonstrates.
     
  11. Oatsdad

    Oatsdad Oat, Biscuits, Abbie & Mitzi: Best Dogs Ever

    Location:
    Alexandria VA
    Okay, it's one of the weirdest metaphors I've seen here. :shrug:
     
    Aoide likes this.
  12. Aoide

    Aoide Forum Resident

    Location:
    United States
    Many mistakenly believe the grain is an artifact of the film. The grain is the film. As that is removed the clarity is removed.
     
  13. malcolm reynolds

    malcolm reynolds Handsome, Humble, Genius

    Location:
    Oklahoma
    This will be my last post on the Get Back release. I don't like it and I won't be buying it. If it doesn't bother you then congrats. The only thing I have learned from this thread is that there a lot of SHF members who need to see an optometrist.
     
    Strat-Mangler and BeatleJWOL like this.
  14. marcb

    marcb Senior Member

    Location:
    DC area
    Sorry, but this is BS. Many, many opinions are rooted in factual inaccuracies and thus are simply wrong.
     
    mpayan and Oatsdad like this.
  15. misteranderson

    misteranderson Forum Resident

    Location:
    englewood, nj
    Oh! You're dismissing the opinion of others!!! As in, everyone I know who's seen the thing.

    I think it looks great, and extremely clear.
     
  16. misteranderson

    misteranderson Forum Resident

    Location:
    englewood, nj
    Careful. The "dismissing of others opinions" cuts both ways, as you've clearly illustrated.

    Only people whose opinions line up with yours actually care. Got it.

    Right now, there's one version of this film. One. Let me know when the Get Back - Restored Grain Edition is released.
     
  17. BeatleJWOL

    BeatleJWOL Senior Member

    Sometimes you just don't notice these things. And that's okay.

    I can't hear the apparently aggressive noise reduction on Let It Be Naked but the threads about that release on this forum mention it frequently.

    We can't all be audiophiles and we can't all be videophiles.
     
    Plan9 and Aoide like this.
  18. lukpac

    lukpac Senior Member

    Location:
    Milwaukee, WI
    Except, no. The entire purpose of this thread is to discuss the grain removal in Get Back. "I hate how it looks" and "I think it looks fine" are differing opinions. But complaining that people are saying "I hate how it looks" is just taking a dump on the thread.

    That there's only one version of the film available is kind of the point. There isn't some other option to turn to. Nobody can say "that's annoying, but not a big deal because I can watch this other version that looks much better".
     
    mpayan, Strat-Mangler, marcb and 2 others like this.
  19. audiomixer

    audiomixer As Bald As The Beatles

    Wrong in your opinion.
     
  20. lukpac

    lukpac Senior Member

    Location:
    Milwaukee, WI
    Lownote30 likes this.
  21. BeatleJWOL

    BeatleJWOL Senior Member

    Someone can have an opinion that the world is flat. That opinion is based on something that is wrong, therefore the opinion is wrong.

    That kind of thing. Should you beat the person over the head with tons and tons of scientific fact to change their mind? Probably not worth it. :D
     
    Plan9 and audiomixer like this.
  22. misteranderson

    misteranderson Forum Resident

    Location:
    englewood, nj
    In other words, disagreeing with *you* is threadcrapping. Nice.

    People have gone to great lengths to say much more than "I hate how it looks." It's one thing to go into the technical aspects of it, like @Vidiot does. He's in the industry, and if he doesn't like it, at least he has something to back it up. But to post a photo of the Tussaud's wax figures, and claim that they look better than Get Back...please, go away.

    Again, my wife, daughter, friends and acquaintances who have seen it - none have any complaints whatsoever, and think Jackson did a great job putting it together.
     
    adm62 likes this.
  23. lukpac

    lukpac Senior Member

    Location:
    Milwaukee, WI
    No. Disagreeing on whether Get Back looks good or not is a discussion.

    Suggesting that people should just get over it, not buy/watch Get Back, etc is threadcrapping.
     
  24. misteranderson

    misteranderson Forum Resident

    Location:
    englewood, nj
    No, it isn't. If you've seen it, and it absolutely offends you, then you need to get on with it, and focus on something else that you actually like. Furthermore, your assertion that the only people who "care" are those who agree with you is flat-out stupid. I watched the entire thing on Disney+ three times. I'll pick up the Blu-ray at some point. I care. My opinion just doesn't dovetail with yours. If Get Back as it is isn't better than nothing, say so.

    At least the Beatles remixes have dozens of other versions available in original mixes, though that doesn't stop people bitching endlessly about the remixes, calling them "cash grabs" and personally insulting Giles Martin, even though these same people probably have a half-dozen versions of all the original mixes on LP, CD, cassette, what have you.
     
  25. lukpac

    lukpac Senior Member

    Location:
    Milwaukee, WI
    Yes, it is threadcrapping.

    No, you don't. This thread is here for a reason, namely discussing the look of Get Back, specifically the grain reduction.

    It is stupid, because I never asserted that.

    The "Giles Martin/Neil Young/etc ruined my childhood" stuff is pretty over the top. But that doesn't mean the criticisms of the work aren't valid. And in terms of original mixes, there isn't always an ideal version available, especially digitally.
     

Share This Page

molar-endocrine