Steve T Power wrote:Damn blu-ray snob.
Andrew Forbes wrote:Steve T Power wrote:Damn blu-ray snob.
Excessive digital manipulation has left your posts feeling flat, lacking in fine detail and depth. All in all, not a very film-like comment.
Dan Mancini wrote:Andrew Forbes wrote:Steve T Power wrote:Damn blu-ray snob.
Excessive digital manipulation has left your posts feeling flat, lacking in fine detail and depth. All in all, not a very film-like comment.
That's rich, coming from someone whose posts look like wax dummies.
Jon Mercer wrote:Dan Mancini wrote:Andrew Forbes wrote:Steve T Power wrote:Damn blu-ray snob.
Excessive digital manipulation has left your posts feeling flat, lacking in fine detail and depth. All in all, not a very film-like comment.
That's rich, coming from someone whose posts look like wax dummies.
Guys, I've been a fan for most of my life, so it pains me to say that you've all felt pretty stock since about 2007. Its like you're all afraid to take artistic risks.
Andrew Forbes wrote:Jon Mercer wrote:Dan Mancini wrote:Andrew Forbes wrote:Steve T Power wrote:Damn blu-ray snob.
Excessive digital manipulation has left your posts feeling flat, lacking in fine detail and depth. All in all, not a very film-like comment.
That's rich, coming from someone whose posts look like wax dummies.
Guys, I've been a fan for most of my life, so it pains me to say that you've all felt pretty stock since about 2007. Its like you're all afraid to take artistic risks.
That assertion is front heavy and not very dynamic, with a digital sheen that renders it weak in comparison to truly lossless comments.
Jon Mercer wrote:The colour correction on that rebuttal doesn't match the chroma key of the original theatrical print released in 1954.
Dan Mancini wrote:Jon Mercer wrote:The colour correction on that rebuttal doesn't match the chroma key of the original theatrical print released in 1954.
As a longtime fan, this comment is near and dear to my heart. I had high hopes of agreeing with it, but the interlaced transfer and excessive compression has resulted in distracting moire artifacts.
Steve T Power wrote:Dan Mancini wrote:Jon Mercer wrote:The colour correction on that rebuttal doesn't match the chroma key of the original theatrical print released in 1954.
As a longtime fan, this comment is near and dear to my heart. I had high hopes of agreeing with it, but the interlaced transfer and excessive compression has resulted in distracting moire artifacts.
This comment certainly preserves the original grain structure and really looks organic, but the woefully misframed 1.85:1 transfer just can't hold a candle to the original theatrical aspect ratio, even if this is the Cinematographer's preferred version.
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest