Discussion in 'Visual Arts' started by ognirats, Oct 19, 2021.
I don’t hear that often!
I never said it looked fine to me. I only said I'm not bickering further with anybody about it because you don't like my take on the issue. Try not to mischaracterize my position in lieu of actual debate, whaddya say.
Maybe I’m mixing you up with someone else, but it seems to me that nobody has an issue with your take. What they have an issue with is your take on their take.
It's very apparent when you read this thread that the majority of participants are perfectly capable of being both appreciative of the opportunity to have this footage and its expertly crafted narrative, as well as being disappointed with its presentation.
Impossible. There are only binary positions on the internet. Good or bad, no middle ground.
Hey, maybe they'll do a limited-edition release, "The Grainified Get Back" with all the film grain left in. I bet people will be horrified by how bad the grain is. Not all film grain is pleasing and "authentic." Some of it is just overpowering and coarse.
The thing is, in this case, we've seen things that haven't been scrubbed, or at least scrubbed nearly as much. So it's not a matter of "I wonder what it could look like", it's "I've seen another version that looks much better".
Bingo. As much as I hate the way PJ distorted the source, I remain excited at the opportunity to see it.
I can remember in my yoot when we would've killed to see like 5 minutes of outtakes!
Exactly - it's not "100% grain" or "zero grain" as the only options.
Though I'd take 100% grain over 0 grain any day of the week.
I don't mind grain, even when it's heavy.
It's funny how different studios have different opinions: I've criticized Sony Pictures for releasing 4K titles that are loaded with grain, like their 4K HDR version of Close Encounters of the Third Kind. But then there's Fox, which noise-reduced the living crap out of James Cameron's films because of his aversion to film grain. To me, the right approach is Warner Bros., where their release of Godfather in 4K was fine: grain was there, but not too much, and it was never so overpowering that it got in the way of the images.I think the Bond films done by Lowry for MGM were generally pretty good, but there were cases where I didn't agree with some of the color decisions made.
It's the difference between NR at "11," NR at "5," and no NR at all. I don't think the latter works, because digitally scanning from negative inherently tends to make the grain more visible than it would be in a vintage 35mm print in a theater.
There has to something funny in a comment for it to be considered "humor." Just FYI. You must think Carrot Top is a riot.
Another FYI - you may be a self-appointed spokesperson for the Forum, but you definitely don't speak for me. Save the "nobody..." comments for your own (ill-informed) opinions.
Speaking of funny - and not funny - it's "funny" how so many "experts" in this thread and others consider themselves qualified to comment on award winning artists who've achieved more in a week than some of you will in a lifetime. Why aren't you in the industry wracking up awards and accolades? Oh wait, that's right - it's so much easier to sit on the couch and comment on the work of others than put in the hard work yourself. My bad. Carry on.
You got yourself worked up quite a bit over nothing but keep going. It's entertaining to see.
Hot take, I guess: Anyone is qualified to comment on anything.
Commenting on something doesn't make the person a self-described expert. Outside of the few who do this stuff, who is calling themselves an expert?
And dear lord do I hate this argument. You only see it on the internet in pop culture-related discussions. People are allowed to comment on art and entertainment they've seen. It's kinda encouraged, in fact. Especially on a music and pop-culture discussion forum.
By your logic, I can't talk about some bad BBQ I've had unless I've smoked a rack of ribs before.
By the way, are you a comedian? Who are you to judge a joke, otherwise?
You mean me? I think I have about 450-500 credits over on IMDB and 45 years working in Hollywood, if you want to look me up. (I'm counting each episode of a TV show as an entry, and I've worked on 44 network TV series and more movies than I can count.) It doesn't take any talent to understand excessive noise reduction. Not all of Get Back is bad, but a lot of it is.
I'm not a fan of Carrot Top at all; generally "prop comedians" are pretty low on the evolutionary chain, but I don't deny his commercial success.
The fact that he's a good director doesn't mean that he knows what a good motion picture looks like (in the terms of it's picture quality). It's like saying that I can't critique Elon Musk's investments because he's richer than me.
Never said I am an expert but I do know a thing or two about how 16mm should look like
Like, take a look at criterion 16mm restorations. Criterion workers are 100 times more professional than Peter Jackson when it comes to restoration.
Would love to see what Criterion or similar restoration could do with the theatrical version of Let It Be. At this point I'm wondering if we'll ever get that. If we get anything, it will probably be an edit of Jackson's work.
I believe some LIB footage did show up in some of the promotional material for Get Back (specifically here, if I recall correctly) and it had the exact same DNR treatment as Get Back.
Just spinning the newly released Blu Ray (LG 55” TV, Oppo BD103D both with their interesting processing modes switched off) and I think I am in the “excessive NR” camp. I’m enjoying watching it, because I never saw the original film or the Disney broadcast, but I’d never intentionally set up a TV to look like this. Plastic.
Paramount. WB had nothing to do with "Godfather".
WB's Archives line is probably the best out there these days in terms of putting out good BD product. They pretty much never drop the ball.
Is the Blu-ray the same as the Disney+ streaming or worse as far as the video quality goes?
WB usually does a great job for sure
Should be the same, probably a little better because it's not being streamed over the internet. But the content of the visuals is exactly the same.
The Blu Ray uses AVC at a bit rate of roughly 30Mbps. Not sure how that compares to the degree of compression and codec used for streaming.
Separate names with a comma.