TAJ
Darkness cannot drive out darkness; only light can do that. Hate cannot drive out hate; only love can do that.
Mostly sharpening. The halos are so bad that it looks like everything is glowing.
-
Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!
Worst Blu Ray Transfers
- Thread starter Livingskeletons
- Start date
Mostly sharpening. The halos are so bad that it looks like everything is glowing.
Well, that makes me happy that I passed on the Ultimate version. I was glad when I bought the 08 version at Costco for $12, but then sad when I saw the Ultimate version come out.
Any other screen caps from the ultimate version? Arnold looks kinda plastic there.
The Outsider
Member
TAJ
Darkness cannot drive out darkness; only light can do that. Hate cannot drive out hate; only love can do that.
This came up before but studios aren't using those to make better 2D discs for whatever reason.
Top Gun and Jurassic Park got new 4K scans for 3D and had 2D rereleases since then that were the old transfers. The Back to the Future movies were remastered for theaters and then the new Blu-rays were literally the same discs as the first release right down to the disc art.
I doubt that Predator got a new transfer. Most DTV 3D conversions aren't even done by hand.
Bobby Roberts
Banned
How does shit like that even make it out the door?
Extra Sauce
Member
This thread is going to give me nightmares.
Isn't that because the film was shot below 1080p? Something like that I think, then it had to be upscaled for BD.
Nerdkiller
Membeur
Actually, I think it's the same as the UHE.
And what a surprise. Disney messing with the grain and the colour timing because "we want to present it the way the animator's wished". Tch.
Phantom Menace was the sole Prequel shot on film. It was obviously DNR'd to be more in line with the digitally shot latter two.
Bobby Roberts
Banned
No. Phantom Menace was shot on film. You're thinking of Attack of the Clones, which used a 1080p camera matted for 2.35:1.
Wowfunhappy
Member
I consider myself a moderate when it comes to video qualityNetflix pisses me off, by I find something like iTunes to be perfectly acceptable vs a full BluRay.
I hate grain. I won't actually notice a bit of softness when watching a movie, but I will notice grain. When I rip grainy BluRays into my digital collection, I usually encode them with some noise reduction.
That isn't to say the example above didn't go overboard (I can't really tell from the pic because I'm on my phone, which is too small), but... yeah.
RoninChaos
Member
How can you tell DNR is bad? And what are halos?
Lys Skygge
Member
I agree. Grain is such a nice texture.
TAJ
Darkness cannot drive out darkness; only light can do that. Hate cannot drive out hate; only love can do that.
Things start to look like they're made of wax. White outlines around edges.
Halos are the thick lines that appear around sharpened images, distorting the detail around them. In the Tremors shot pay attention to the guy's shoulders. You notice the comic book-esque outline?
They are one of the reasons you want sharpness off for HD content.
You can tell DNR is bad when you lose fine detail. Can you spot the difference between the Predator screen caps that have been posted above? The DNR heavy shot features what looks like a wax figure in place of a real human being. Arnie looks like an action figure.
i have the ultimate hunter edition of predator (came with with the triple feature set) and while i had seen screens of it and read how bad it was i gotta say... it doesnt bother me that much. and i research which blurays to get and which to pass up
the film deserves a proper restoration, as does Terminator 2.
the film deserves a proper restoration, as does Terminator 2.
Extra Sauce
Member
Film grain gives movies a dreamy, etheral quality.
Grain and 24 fps are keys to the dream world.
Speaking of potentially bad BR transfers, can anyone confirm the longtime claim that The Dark Knight Blu-ray has been oversharpened and oversaturated to uncomfy levels?
Because I totally believe it when comparing it to the other BRs of the Trilogy.
Because I totally believe it when comparing it to the other BRs of the Trilogy.
It looks like shit outside of the imax scenes. It's actually quite jarring. There is noise everywhere.
I can't for the life of me find the interview, but the guy who directed all of the behind-the-scenes Appendicies for the LOTR and Hobbit trilogy EEs said last year that that the original blu-ray release of The Lord of the Rings was not a transfer from the original film (I forget the reasoning), and that the color-timing being a bit weird in the final product was a consequence of that.
He also said that when WB/New Line release the inevitable six-film box set, they plan on remastering the films again - this time using the original film print as the source. They'd also love to transfer all of the Appendicies for LOTR to blu-ray instead of just leaving them on DVDs like they have, but he couldn't guarantee anything.
"Just fuck my shit up"
And that's exactly why I haven't upgraded those movies from DVD. I have the correct color time of all 3 films, all 3 in theatrical and extended versions and all special features.
Ben Morales
Member
That Robin Hood transfer... Damn. If I was to purchase that film on Vudu, would the transfer be the same? It has been on my wish list and I don't want it if it's gonna look like that.
This legit makes me sad. When a company like Disney can't even bother...And Robin Hood.
Left is the DVD, right is the Blu-Ray.
DNR completely ruined that transfer.
I'm saving this for future use.
Extra Sauce
Member
How have I never seen this gif before. Love it.
industrian
will gently cradle you as time slowly ticks away.
I'd let DNR on these ones slide, because it fits perfectly into the sterile and lifeless look of the the prequel trilogy.
Dandy Crocodile
Member
28 Days Later has a very low quality, budget look to it due to the XL1 used in it filming.
Unfortunately due to this, the Blu-ray transfer has almost no difference from the DVD release. It's still gritty and ugly (though it gives the film it's character).
Unfortunately due to this, the Blu-ray transfer has almost no difference from the DVD release. It's still gritty and ugly (though it gives the film it's character).
The IMAX scenes look decent, but the rest of the transfer has some terrible halos. It was one of the first discs that I watched on a Pioneer Kuro, and the display really illuminated just how poor the disc looked.
HideyoshiJP
Member
I agree. The war on grain has got to stop. If you shoot digital, it's whatever, but otherwise, please keep humans looking like they don't fit in at Madame Toussad's.
Well, I can make an exception - the montage at the end of Furious 7 would have been alright to clean up. Maybe then I wouldn't have realized how much I miss film. I would still end up missing the early 2000s.
Prototype Viktor
Member
The transfer of "Jesus Christ Vampire Hunter" from DVD to Blu-Ray was horrible. It didn't make the movie make sense at all
bobawesome
Member
It's literally just the SD videos stuffed on a blu-ray.
Death Metalist
Member
Beautiful, just beautiful.
My vote goes to the first Gladiator bluray release, it's so bad that some of the effects went missing!
First Blu
HDTV Broadcast
Thankfully all new releases of the film have been fixed. The first release of The Terminator also comes to mind.
Holly shit! All the objects ( I think arrows) in the shot are completely gone. Why the fuck is DNR even a thing?! It's only purpose is to fuck up detail.
If you're a person working on Bluray transfers in some studio somewhere, and you decided to use DNR on everything, I can only reason it's because you fucking HATE films. That's what I image people do.
"Hey, here we got ahhh Jane Ayre... Beautiful film... Every shot... Like a portrait... LETS FUCK IT UP. DNR UP TO 11."
Like they just get off on the idea of ruining movies.
HomerSimpson-Man
Member
DNR, for when you gots to f'd it up because reasons.
GamingOblivion
Banned
Yeah, for real. Why the hell did they mess with Fellowship when the other two movies were untouched color wise? Makes no fucking sense to me.
Jin
Member
I wonder if the people working on the transfer even have a choice and are just following company rules. Someone upstairs said "People don't like grain on HD TV's. Get rid of it" and the person working on Blu Ray is just following orders.
LOL. Looks like a video game.
I'm gonna go with the one that doesn't look like it was traced with a thick black sharpie being the DVD.
It's good to have even if only because of avoiding banding caused by bad color precision. (8bit)
Even if the grain is very slight it's helpful as it changes each frame and reveals additional sub gradient detail.
Not really a fan of overly strong grain, but it's usually artistic choice. (When it's not it can be quite distracting to see single shot that is a mess.)
Similar threads
- Poll