Why Aren’t All HD-DVD Transfers Perfect?

[Pirate]

OK, I know that probably sounds like a silly noob question, but I think it has some validity.

Over the last week or so I’ve watched several HD-DVDs of newer films that just weren’t that impressive.

Film like "Meet the Parents" and "The Grinch" are new enough that they should look near perfect. Besides not putting the effort into each transfer, what are the reasons that these should look so mediocre? I understand that major restorations can be very costly, but we’re talking about films that are less than 10 years old. If "Casablanca" can look so beautiful on HD-DVD, I have a hard time believing that something couldn’t be done with "Meet the Parents."

In my opinion, now is the time to be putting out quality discs that really show the format’s potential. For a lot of consumers, films like "Grinch" and "Parents" are what will sell them on the format.

Thoughts?

[BoSoxMole]

I thought Meet the Parents looked pretty good. I mean not reference or anything, but a 7.8.

[Pirate]

Originally Posted by BoSoxMole

I thought Meet the Parents looked pretty good. I mean not reference or anything, but a 7.8.

But don’t you think "pretty good" is kind of unacceptable? If I’m going to double-dip on a catalogue title or, god forbid, that was my first exposure to HD-DVD, I’d be pretty underwhelmed by it.

"The Grinch" is a combo disc which means I'd be paying upwards of $30 for a HD-DVD that looks "OK." Not to sound like Mr. Smith, but that's just not right.

[BADBRAD]

actually, I thought Meet The Parents looked good also. But what do I know, I thought Miami Vice looked awful and I got pounced by people saying "It's supposed to look that way!". Haven't watched "Grinch" yet

[Vonner]

The same reason all DVDs don't look the same. Different care being taken in creating the disc by different people, companies, etc...

[limacharliewhiskey]

Maybe there is a learning curve with the authoring & transfer process for the HD-DVDs, just as there was for DVD. The first batch of DVDs were pretty crappy compared to what we get now.

[Pirate]

Originally Posted by limacharliewhiskey

Maybe there is a learning curve with the authoring & transfer process for the HD-DVDs, just as there was for DVD. The first batch of DVDs were pretty crappy compared to what we get now.

I'm not sure I totally buy that, though. The discs mentioned are from Universal and they've put out some stunning HD-DVDs. Why are these different? Could they not employ the same methods used for King Kong, Tokyo Drift, etc?

[BADBRAD]

They are all spread out in my collection. Lara Croft:Tomb Raider (Paramount), Full Metal Jacket (Warner) and Miami Vice (Universal) are my least favorite transfers. But like I said, I thought Meet The Parents looked pretty good, the best it ever has.

[Pirate]

Originally Posted by BADBRAD

They are all spread out in my collection. Lara Croft:Tomb Raider (Paramount), Full Metal Jacket (Warner) and Miami Vice (Universal) are my least favorite transfers. But like I said, I thought Meet The Parents looked pretty good, the best it ever has.

I'm not saying Universal is alone. Each studio has had so-so transfers. However, that doesn't change my point. Perhaps I'm being too harsh, but I'm paying for high definition and I expect just that. “Meet the Parents” did look better than its SD counterpart, but not by that much. At least not in my opinion.

Keep in mind that I’m watching at 720p. With so many of you that own 1080i TVs, it surprises me that I’ve not heard more members complaining about this.

Transfers like this just lend credence to the "upconversion is better" crowd.

[Ruined]

I think a big part of it has to do with the filming style/quality and also how well good of a hidef transfer was done. One trend I've noticed is that films shot on digital look crappy compared to real film.

[DavidCantu]

LOL, I had the same complaint last week and I was told in no uncertain terms that I was being too picky.

"The Look And Sound of Perfect" my butt!

"Army of Darkness" and "Full Metal Jacket," are just a couple of HD-DVDs that I think could have been remastered big-time!

Originally Posted by piratehunter

But don’t you think "pretty good" is kind of unacceptable? If I’m going to double-dip on a catalogue title or, god forbid, that was my first exposure to HD-DVD, I’d be pretty underwhelmed by it.

"The Grinch" is a combo disc which means I'd be paying upwards of $30 for a HD-DVD that looks "OK." Not to sound like Mr. Smith, but that's just not right.

[Pirate]

Originally Posted by Ruined

I think a big part of it has to do with the filming style/quality and also how well good of a hidef transfer was done. One trend I've noticed is that films shot on digital look crappy compared to real film.

Well, "Meet the Parents" is about as bland as you can get in terms of style, so I don't think that argument works there. Something like "Miami Vice" would make more sense. I haven't watched in on HD-DVD yet, but I could understand why it would get mixed reactions. I saw it theatrically in a DLP theatre and it was very harsh, gritty and grainy. I expect the HD-DVD to deliver the same.

Wasn't Smallville shot on HD video?

[Pirate]

Originally Posted by DavidCantu

"Army of Darkness" and "Full Metal Jacket," are just a couple of HD-DVDs that I think could have been remastered big-time!

Not to disagree with someone who agrees with me, but I think those two HD-DVDs were more to do with the source material. That goes back to shelling out the money for a restoration rather than just a solid transfer.

[BADBRAD]

Originally Posted by piratehunter

Not to disagree with someone who agrees with me, but I think those two HD-DVDs were more to do with the source material. That goes back to shelling out the money for a restoration rather than just a solid transfer.

I agree. Warner should have restored Full Metal Jacket and released along with 2001, A Clockwork Orange and The Shining. Which I have heard are getting restored transfers and special ed. treatments fo HD.

[plissken99]

About Meet the Parents I can understand a lax transfer, afterall comedies usually get low priority with restoration.

But an example i think it apt, what about The Mummy? That movie is not that old, it should rule on HD-DVD, and it is it's not that great. A few fleeting 3D like moments, but not much. By all accounts that should be a reference title.

[Pirate]

Originally Posted by plissken99

About Meet the Parents I can understand a lax transfer, afterall comedies usually get low priority with restoration.

See, I don't think that anything should be getting low priority at this point. We don't even have 200 HD-DVDs out and I think the only excuse for a poor transfer should be source material.

Originally Posted by plissken99

But an example i think it apt, what about The Mummy? That movie is not that old, it should rule on HD-DVD, and it is it's not that great. A few fleeting 3D like moments, but not much. By all accounts that should be a reference title.

Exactly! "The Mummy" is something that most consumers would go for and if it ended up being their first impression, I doubt they'd be very excited about the format.

Perhaps this is a casualty of the format war itself. Maybe these titles are being rushed to market to compete with BD’s ever-growing catalogue. Not that that's a good excuse.

[Ruined]

Originally Posted by piratehunter

See, I don't think that anything should be getting low priority at this point. We don't even have 200 HD-DVDs out and I think the only excuse for a poor transfer should be source material.


Exactly! "The Mummy" is something that most consumers would go for and if it ended up being their first impression, I doubt they'd be very excited about the format.

Perhaps this is a casualty of the format war itself. Maybe these titles are being rushed to market to compete with BD’s ever-growing catalogue. Not that that's a good excuse.

I really don't think this is the case. Its not artifacting we are seeing, it is flaws of the original filming in most cases.

Also, most of the films we see on HD DVD had their masters made 1-4 years ago (with the exception of The Thing, I believe the case art of other HD titles matches the DVD edition from which the HD master was made for), so I don't think the format war has anything to do with how solid the master is.

So, again I think its both style/technique and flaws in the original filming itself we are seeing that DVD just didn't have the resolution to deliver. Or, a mediocre mastering job from the past since in most cases I'd wager these HD masters were originally made for a standard DVD release that came out before the release of HD DVD.

[EM3]

Nope it's the human element. Anytime you put humans into the equations you are going to screw it up. Even if we build machines to do the work for us they are flawed because we programmed them. So there will never be perfect sound or visual experiences. It's all subjective.

My 2 cents.

[Pirate]

Originally Posted by Ruined

So, again I think its both style/technique and flaws in the original filming itself we are seeing that DVD just didn't have the resolution to deliver. Or, a mediocre mastering job from the past since in most cases I'd wager these HD masters were originally made for a standard DVD release that came out before the release of HD DVD.

I can see how that would be correct in some cases, but style and technique wouldn't make Meet the Parents look washed out and bland in some scenes and overly poppy in others. There were wide shots in that film that were very sharp and then others that were soft. I remember seeing the film in theatres and on DVD and I don't remember it being like that. And this is even more evident with The Mummy. That film should look amazing on HD-DVD. Sommer's is a very bright, poppy and slick filmmaker and that should be evident on the HD-DVD.

However, your mediocre mastering job theory would make sense. But then I would argue that it's foolish to bring those to HD until they've been cleaned up. These studios have lots of wanted catalogue titles, so there's no reason to send out less-than-spectacular masters.

[Pirate]

Originally Posted by EM3

Nope it's the human element. Anytime you put humans into the equations you are going to screw it up. Even if we build machines to do the work for us they are flawed because we programmed them. So there will never be perfect sound or visual experiences. It's all subjective.

My 2 cents.

Of course, but we can all agree that King Kong, Tokyo Drift, etc. look pretty close to perfect? It's when these transfer that should look and sound at that level fall, in my opinion, very short.

[DavidCantu]

I agree with you, but how is it that George Lucas can "remaster" the 'Star Wars' movies every couple of years while other classics such as "FMJ" remain looking like crap?

Sorry, but I hold Kubrick in higher regard than I do George Luca$.

Originally Posted by piratehunter

Not to disagree with someone who agrees with me, but I think those two HD-DVDs were more to do with the source material. That goes back to shelling out the money for a restoration rather than just a solid transfer.

[DavidCantu]

Machines have a nasty habit of wanting to take over ('2001', 'Terminator', 'Battlestar Galactica', 'Hardware', etc.)

Originally Posted by EM3

Nope it's the human element. Anytime you put humans into the equations you are going to screw it up. Even if we build machines to do the work for us they are flawed because we programmed them. So there will never be perfect sound or visual experiences. It's all subjective.

My 2 cents.

[Pirate]

Originally Posted by DavidCantu

I agree with you, but how is it that George Lucas can "remaster" the 'Star Wars' movies every couple of years while other classics such as "FMJ" remain looking like crap?

Sorry, but I hold Kubrick in higher regard than I do George Luca$.

Because Star Wars will always $ell.

[cherno]

More importantly, why the hell do they even put it on HD if they aren't going to make it look perfect? What is the purpose of HD DVD and Bluray? Additional space. That allows the disc to be filled with higher(est) quality of the film presentation and sound, yes? If you are just going to throw the same transfer over to the disc, and same extras, then you are just being deceiptful to the consumer.

[Pirate]

Originally Posted by cherno

More importantly, why the hell do they even put it on HD if they aren't going to make it look perfect? What is the purpose of HD DVD and Bluray? Additional space. That allows the disc to be filled with higher(est) quality of the film presentation and sound, yes? If you are just going to throw the same transfer over to the disc, and same extras, then you are just being deceiptful to the consumer.

I spoke about that in post #19 and I agree. They aren't throwing the same transfers on, but if the master is not up to the task, there's no point in putting it on HD-DVD or BD.

[Derb]

I agree with The Grinch not looking & sounding perfect. Far from it actually. This is a title where the colors should show off the format, instead they are flat, specs of film grain & Ooo an artifact here & there, but not everywhere.

Meet the parents doesn't scream reference either, I agree. Take away all compression artifacts & you have the HD DVD.

The Mummy, I thought would have more consistency throughout the transfer. It does have them wow 3D factors present during daylight scenes, but the darker ones are too unpredictable & noise + grain doesn't help either.

[Pirate]

Originally Posted by Derb

I agree with The Grinch not looking & sounding perfect. Far from it actually. This is a title where the colors should show off the format, instead they are flat, specs of film grain & Ooo an artifact here & there, but not everywhere.

Meet the parents doesn't scream reference either, I agree. Take away all compression artifacts & you have the HD DVD.

The Mummy, I thought would have more consistency throughout the transfer. It does have them wow 3D factors present during daylight scenes, but the darker ones are too unpredictable & noise + grain doesn't help either.

And now I'm afraid to get Field of Dreams, because I fear another so-so transfer.

It just bugs me that films like The Hulk looks so good while other, better (IMO) films suffer.