No I mean it looks like CG, did they apply some smoothing filter to this "remaster" like those early Predator blu-ray transfers?
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Clip from the Terminator 2 remaster.
- Thread starter SCULLIBUNDO
- Start date
No I mean it looks like CG, did they apply some smoothing filter to this "remaster" like those early Predator blu-ray transfers?
Spiritual_Chaos
Banned
Yes, I get the reason for it from a filmmaking perspective. But I still don't get the in-universe reason for it, the mathematics doesn't add up. To me its a (small) flaw of the film. Something Cameron couldn't solve.
One known example is Lowrys scrubbing of Citizen Kane which caused details like rain to disappear.
I'm not really a fan of the DNR-ing and adding "digital" grain back again. Feels fake to me.
Spiritual_Chaos
Banned
That's relative. From the metric "details/resolution" sure.
But growing up, going to the cinema was special because it was a format you couldn't achieve at home. It was special. It wasn't just "better" then the TV/VHS -- it was something different. Something else.
When Tarantino called todays cinema "TV in public" it may sound pretentious. But it's also fitting.
Even the "Culture cinema" here in Sweden who only shows older films, and long had the principle of showing films on their original showing-format is moving over to DCP. Which is quite sad. But happy to have seen a lot of classics there through the years on 35mm Like The Terminator and Aliens for example. Not Terminator 2 though.
If I remember correctly, in the novelization, the t1000 is truly formless until he attacks the cop.
LoveCake
Member
Yessss, looks great. Those practical effects on the "liquid" metal pinned to his chest tho
Credit where credit is due, at least Cameron didn't change it to CGI.
I saw this twice at the cinema when it came out and I have it on VHS (an ex-rental copy) DVD, Blu-ray and I have the 3D Blu-ray and 4k on pre-order.
Frozen grain and smearing are usually a temporal noise reduction artefact. Temporal noise reduction basically works by averaging between frames.
Not a fan of the color grading. I don't see why Cameron insists on changing the look of his films so drastically lately. I skipped Aliens on Blu-ray because of that, looks like I'll be skipping this one, too. And suddenly I'm afraid for The Abyss... how much bluer do you think he'll make that one?
A Pretty Panda
fuckin' called it, man
Poor Budnick
SCULLIBUNDO
Banned
Shame, because Aliens looks unreal on blu.
MDSLKTR
Member
old transfer looked really bad.
Cameron dropping that enb treatment, always knew he was a pc gamer kind of guy
The Titanic remaster also looks amazing.
I assume top pic is the remaster? Looks much better to me than the bottom pic.
old transfer looked really bad.
Of course. Film done well is spectacular.
I go to the BFI semi regularly to see 35mm (and occasionally 70mm) prints. Last week, as mentioned above, I saw Alien in 35mm. It was great despite the fact the print had numerous issues. I saw Dunkirk at one of the few screens showing it in 70mm (5 perf, not IMAX) and it was something special.
But Dunkirk was a brand new showprint. Alien was a well cared for archival print. Most prints out there are far from pristine. Many have numerous splices, many are faded to the point of being unscreenable. Almost all have scratches and emulsion damage. Given the choice between a poor film print or a good DCP, I'll take the latter.
Tarantino, Christopher Nolan, Spielberg (although he has softened of late) and a few others are hardcore digital holdouts and all power to them. But like black and white photography, it has become a stylistic choice; one which can be almost completely recreated digitally.
It has been done as long as film has been digitised. Initially it was done when scanning for effects shot. It is easier to pull clean mattes without grain. After the final image was composited grain was added back to fit in with the surrounding footage. It also has a happy side effect of adding the illusion of extra detail to soft footage.
Now it can be done when restoring film or added to digital footage to give it a "film" quality. When done well no-one would ever be the wiser. It is only when it draws attention to itself people take note. And even then only a very few people who obsess over such things (mea culpa) will ever worry about it.
If that is the case I stand corrected. Thank you.
MindCollizion
Member
Following along the theme of the movie, the bottom picture is what you want.
Yes, please!!! Would be amazing.
Spiritual_Chaos
Banned
So did William Friedkin when he fucked the colours of French Connection. Or Steven Spielberg when he added walkietalkies.
AnotherDayAnotherDollar
Banned
MiloHoffman
Member
Apparently, the remaster for the Abyss was broadcast on cable somewhere a while back (I think it might've been in Japan). From what I've seen of the screencaps of that version, the BD/4K (whenever it comes out) will probably look how it is supposed to look: greenish like the others. The Abyss: Special Edition on LaserDisc looked more teal than steely blue as well. The same goes for some of the publicity photos. The greenish look of his other movies is likely to be accurate to the source. Dramatically changing the color of Aliens on the current Blu-ray to something different would be the actual revisionism.
Lynd7
Member
This thread also reminded me of this great analysis of T2 plus what makes a really great thoughtful blockbuster.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2YWeJ22mIlE
Check it out, its pretty great.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2YWeJ22mIlE
Check it out, its pretty great.
TAJ
Darkness cannot drive out darkness; only light can do that. Hate cannot drive out hate; only love can do that.
I don't know how it works now but in the '90s the grain pattern that they put in was the same one they pulled out.
HappyPuppy
Member
PhantomZone
Member
That's fantastic.
there is legit loss of detail in the blacks
Spiritual_Chaos
Banned
One was taken at Tjernobyl in April of 1986.
One was taken at a mall in Receda today.
Spiritual_Chaos
Banned
It's a pic from youtube...
what about if i compare 2 pics from youtube
one look at the color grading and you just know blacks would get crushed tbh
Metal flowers glued to the suit.
This shot makes him look like he has a big ass beer belly. Dude was lean as shit in this movie but laying down he just expands.
Mortimer Brewster
Member
Fairly common, Fox was especially bad during Blu Ray's early years some of the most egregious examples were Patton, The Longest Day, My Fair Lady and Predator. The earlier T2 releases also had some iffy she work done but not nearly as bad as this looks. This is Predator bad, where the actors look so easy you would think they are from Madame Tussand's. Whoever Lionsgate has doing their recent scans sucks. It's a shame because Artisan/Live Entertainment use to be one of the best in terms of quality releases.
I'm also one of those film enthusiasts that strongly believe that Blu Ray releases should take advantage of sir specs to provide the best experiences that approximates the experience of the original release with proper grain structure, very conservative digital noise reduction and proper theatrical colour timing.
DiipuSurotu
Banned
He's not laying flat I think
killatopak
Member
wait there's a remaster? Where do I buy?
Mortimer Brewster
Member
It's not out yet and if judging by this footage, you don't want to.
I didn't have an issue with the Aliens scan. It had slight change in colour timing but nothing egregious, it still has the most distinctive look and colour timing of any Cameron film. The Abyss and True Loes scans were done by Van Ling who is a big proponent in maintaining a films original look so I don't see i being an issue. He wouldn't be able to step foot in the Home Theatre Forum again if he did mess them up. Best transfer for a Cameron film was the last restoration of the Terminator. It looked amazing, retained its grain structure and dark low budget look but had unbelievable detail and clarity.
Honestly Terminator 2, has been the one outlier in terms of good high def scans which firmly puts the blame on Lionsgate.
I've obviously noticed some modern films getting "film grain'd", like Avatar, but I didn't know they did this stuff with remasters of old movies. Now I look at pictures of the Aliens blu-ray and the grain indeed looks odd compared to the other movies in the Anthology... Oh well!
Yeah that's just DNR, I meant the apparent process of adding back "fake" film grain after scrubbing the picture with DNR.
Speaking of DNR, Disney is the worst at it with their old catalog. Stuff like Robin Hood and Sword in the Stone are just absolutely disgusting. Predator is number one for live action pictures.
Bobby Roberts
Banned
Yeah, early Disney efforts on blu-ray were... not kind.
They've gotten much better since, of course.
They've gotten much better since, of course.
was thinking the same thing.
Ol Ridley at least had the good graces of offering the older cuts with the original color timing, remastered just as well as the final cut too.
The current BD releases of T2 escaped Cameron's revisionist clutches. It doesn't look anything like this trailer. T2 only really looks blue at night. This is teal. In mid-day.
Aliens looks nice and all, but these sweeping changes just bother me. And almost nobody cares, I think that annoys me even more.
isnt that one DNR'ed to hell and back? Id rather have teal than DNRed to hell and back.
also your right most people dont care because we watch movies for entertainment, 99% of people would never even notice the difference unless you put literal side by side screen caps up.
do you really think digital download movies weight as much as the disc version ?
nowadays, movies are around 35gb and more
Bobby Roberts
Banned
To clarify:
We've been talking about T2 and the Abyss and most of the previous home video releases of Cameron's looking different than what these new remasters (overseen by Cameron) now look like.
But I'm pretty sure those old masters were also overseen by Cameron. In fact, Cameron has always been one of the most hands-on directors when it comes to tailoring his movies for home consumption, right?
Didn't Terminator 2 on laserdisc, and then DVD, and then its first HD iterations, look pretty much exactly like he wanted it to? He oversaw those transfers, he chose the color timing, right?
So what's changed between the versions he's been presenting to us the past 20+ years and now that the "original vision" suddenly has a black-crushed green cast to it?
We've been talking about T2 and the Abyss and most of the previous home video releases of Cameron's looking different than what these new remasters (overseen by Cameron) now look like.
But I'm pretty sure those old masters were also overseen by Cameron. In fact, Cameron has always been one of the most hands-on directors when it comes to tailoring his movies for home consumption, right?
Didn't Terminator 2 on laserdisc, and then DVD, and then its first HD iterations, look pretty much exactly like he wanted it to? He oversaw those transfers, he chose the color timing, right?
So what's changed between the versions he's been presenting to us the past 20+ years and now that the "original vision" suddenly has a black-crushed green cast to it?
what are you talking about, Jaws is widely held as one of the best transfers of an old film.
yea top looks better in this specific scene with regards to the color timing, however i could see it being a problem in other scenes.
old transfer looked really bad.
cause they're not historical documents?
no they're not.
not quite. They vary by codec and compression used. Jaws is 29gb. Both Avengers are 28 and 29 ish.
Never underestimate the filmic collector. I once came across a ultra squashed copy of the Cinerama feature How the West Was Won on 16mm.
Not sure what you are implying? That Cameron didn't have a say?