HD Advisor October 9th, 2009

[Attebery]

http://www.highdefdigest.com/news/sh...isor_31st/3537

[Bouncy X]

regarding the bootleg question...

if they just mean the physical disc, i'm sure some might go that extra mile but i'm pretty sure most bootlegs wont have any of the small print copyright info on the disc art.

and if they meant watching the actual movie well again, unless someone is really bored and goes that extra mile, i doubt bootlegs would have all the menus/trailers/FBI warnings and things.

but of course the easiest way is to avoid buying movies from unreliable sources.

[ronnie_barzel]

Regarding the 'Wizard of Oz'/HD question...

The writer says the presentation said, "It will look as good as it did on opening night." I think this statement is also made true due to the advances in lining up the three strips of film needed for dye-transfer Technicolor. With modern technology, the frames can be adjusted pixel by pixel.

[Lee Stewart]

Originally Posted by ronnie_barzel

Regarding the 'Wizard of Oz'/HD question...

The writer says the presentation said, "It will look as good as it did on opening night." I think this statement is also made true due to the advances in lining up the three strips of film needed for dye-transfer Technicolor. With modern technology, the frames can be adjusted pixel by pixel.

IMO - there will be no comparison between the original theater presentation of TWoO from 3 strip technicolor versus a 2K digial cinema presentation. Not even close.

[vancouver]

I think it may be worth adding that if you were to scan 35 mm film your could get 6000 lines of resolution as apposed to 1080 found on BD.

so obviously 35 mm film is much better then "HD" as defined by 1080.

What would be interesting to show people is a BD at 1080p on a full cinima sized screen vs 35 mm flim.

[Lee Stewart]

Originally Posted by vancouver

I think it may be worth adding that if you were to scan 35 mm film your could get 6000 lines of resolution as apposed to 1080 found on BD.

so obviously 35 mm film is much better then "HD" as defined by 1080.

What would be interesting to show people is a BD at 1080p on a full cinima sized screen vs 35 mm flim.

Arri says 4153 pixels H for 35mm: (page 11)

http://efilm.com/publish/2008/05/19/4K%20plus.pdf

[Devil N]

I have a Sega Mega Drive (Genesis in the US) that says High Definition Graphics on the casing. 240p resolution FTW!

[cheez avenger]

Originally Posted by Devil N

I have a Sega Mega Drive (Genesis in the US) that says High Definition Graphics on the casing. 240p resolution FTW!

BWAHAHAHAHA!

[RBBrittain]

Originally Posted by Lee Stewart

Arri says 4153 pixels H for 35mm: (page 11)

http://efilm.com/publish/2008/05/19/4K%20plus.pdf

Any pixel count for film is an estimate; film doesn't have pixels.

The point is that film isn't "HD" because it's not electronic video. Also, given this film was shot in three-strip Technicolor and modern HD restoration techniques can digitally align the three frames better than any optical system (in 1939 or today), a digital-cinema package (or even a 35mm print) struck from the HD restoration of TWoO will almost certainly look better than any 35mm print struck directly from the negatives, even in 1939. (The same will be true of GWTW if it's rereleased to theaters, since it was shot in three-strip Technicolor and restored in similar fashion.)

[Lee Stewart]

Originally Posted by RBBrittain

Any pixel count for film is an estimate; film doesn't have pixels.

They don't have lines of resoltion either buit both can be a measurement and Arri should know as they build movie camera systems. That measurement I showed is for moving film - not a static frame of 35mm.

The point is that film isn't "HD" because it's not electronic video. Also, given this film was shot in three-strip Technicolor and modern HD restoration techniques can digitally align the three frames better than any optical system (in 1939 or today), a digital-cinema package (or even a 35mm print) struck from the HD restoration of TWoO will almost certainly look better than any 35mm print struck directly from the negatives, even in 1939. (The same will be true of GWTW if it's rereleased to theaters, since it was shot in three-strip Technicolor and restored in similar fashion.)

The Wizard of Oz was shown at Digital Cinemas in DC 2K which is sorta like HD but it isn't. Not the HD you and I see at home.

The prints in the old days were created one frame at a time (unlike todays high speed printing process). A print from a 3 Strip Technicolor process is superior to any other print from any other 35mm process in 2 values; color depth and contrast (black level) - both which exceed what was recently shown in DC theaters.

[bmxhero]

regarding the bootleg Q,i recently purchased one accidently off ebay(no one bid and it was very cheap,Be sure to look where they come from before you buy).It was a malaysan import of The Fast And Furious on blu ray.The case,disc,even the slip cover looked legit.But when i put the disc in my sony bd player it read dvd video,not bd-rom like any blu ray disc reads.And at the main menu i could only play the movie(no scene selection,or special features,even though they were on the main menu you just couldnt click on them).Good copy of the film(i compared it to the us blu ray)and couldnt really tell a difference.It all worked out,confronted the seller and he didnt admit it but gave me my money back.Beware of malaysan imports!!

[MrBig]

If the prices are just too good to be true, they're probably bootlegs. If they come out of Malaysia or pretty much anywhere in Asia, they're more than likely bootlegs. If it has a printed label or it's a white-top BD-R with an obvious ink-jet printed label it's a home burned bootleg.

Don't order from questionable websites or sellers and you shouldn't have bootleg issues.

[OneManShow]

Originally Posted by bmxhero

regarding the bootleg Q,i recently purchased one accidently off ebay(no one bid and it was very cheap,Be sure to look where they come from before you buy).It was a malaysan import of The Fast And Furious on blu ray.The case,disc,even the slip cover looked legit.But when i put the disc in my sony bd player it read dvd video,not bd-rom like any blu ray disc reads.And at the main menu i could only play the movie(no scene selection,or special features,even though they were on the main menu you just couldnt click on them).Good copy of the film(i compared it to the us blu ray)and couldnt really tell a difference.It all worked out,confronted the seller and he didnt admit it but gave me my money back.Beware of malaysan imports!!

Had a similiar experience on ebay about 6 years ago when I was looking for the out-of-print Criterion DVD version of The Killer. The DVD case looked authentic, however the bootleg disc had something scratched out on the plastic interior ring, which I think was the name of the DVD-R brand. The cool part was that my bootleg was a perfect copy. The menu system, including the scene selection and special features worked just like the original DVD. After submitting a complaint, I received full refund & even got to keep the bootleg. The main thing that gave it away was the actual disc itself. Easiest way to spot bootlegs is to compare the inside plastic ring of the disc with authentic discs and I'm sure you'll see a difference.

[Alaneye]

I bought a copy of the region 1 season 6 of 24 from an Amazon 3rd party seller. As soon as I opened it my suspicion was aroused. The box (which looked authentic) was wrapped in flimsy cellophane that I hadn't seen before on disks I have purchase. On unwrapping I noticed the plastic box looked cheap, the clear cover that holds the insert was wrinkled. The slip sleeve had what looked like a sticker on it, but it was printed.

The disks themselves appeared to have been pressed and not burned as there was no tell-tale ring where the burning ended. The DVD disks where not printed clearly and looked slightly blurred when compared to a legit disk.

The real proof though was that the set is region 1 and not playable on a non-multiplay player like the PS3. The disks played fine, had all the menus and DD 5.1.

I contacted the seller, told him/her I didn't buy pirated copies, and returned the set, but no refund was forthcoming. So I complained to Amazon and after their investigation, they refunded the purchase price and also the cost of the return postage. They said they couldn't discuss other user's accounts, but if I cared to search for the seller, I would not find any more items from them.

When I bought a legit copy, the printed sticker on the the pirate was indeed a proper sticker on the original.

Alan