The Brotherhood of the Wolf R1Canadian vs R2FR

gojensen · Post by **gojensen** » 15 Oct 2006, 12:03

I think the biggest problem with the canadian 3 discer is all the grain really. The edge enhancments aren't that bad... but all the grain makes the MPEG coding process very difficult which results in a bad picture at times, at other times just a very grainy one. Most of the other releases of this flick seemed to use some aritifical digital blur on the film before encoding, meaning the encoded mpeg looks better, but as a result of the blur (to get rid of the grain) it looks a lot softer.

Anyhoo, I have it and could provide comparisons shots if nobody else volunteered

Some shots;

See, there's really not much EE going on here (look at water drops, grass) but you can already see the grain... Which just becomes more apparent in the next shot...

See how the grain makes the mpeg coder kind of blur action more than necessary and "reduce" the colour space? Finally...

Even more grain and weirdness going on in the sky...

All this is probably because of "cheap" film stock used when filming, but could really be cleanedup though that would be very costly I think... How fares the french disc with regards to grain?

tom2681 · Post by **tom2681** » 15 Oct 2006, 14:49

I'll try and find out. You've chosen some pretty weird shots, though.

tom2681 · Post by **tom2681** » 15 Oct 2006, 15:27

And yours are in the wrong aspect ratio.

Canadian:

French:

Weird...

Canadian:

French:

Weird again...

Canadian:

French:

Here's the explanation:
Canadian = "Edge-Enhancement Suprême".
More EE = More grain.

bradavon · Post by **bradavon** » 15 Oct 2006, 18:55

Sure the Frenchie wins but it's so minor and like I've already said big deal. It's not like the competition is any better.

The UK and Original American DVDs suck. I'm pretty sure the Aussie sucks too.

gojensen · Post by **gojensen** » 16 Oct 2006, 09:03

My screenies were "unaltered"

I like it that way... resizing images brings all kinds of questions with it... should I use bicubic? bilinear? trilinear? sharper? smoother? All stuff which changes the original image

Anyhoo. I'd like to still claim there's not much EE on the Canadian disc. There should be considerable haloing in the 3rd shot if EE was cranked up. The french transfer may have used different film stock, but it's also "cleaned up" a bit... as it seems a bit softer in shot 1. Then again... it may be your computer vs. my computer

As for the shots... I popped in the disc and grabbed 3 shots that I thought showed the weaknesses of the Canadian disc "well". All done in a matter of minutes. Since this has now been made into a comparison thread perhaps you would offer to find some interesting shots and I can match them up? (I could even resize them if you wanted - just tell me "how"

)

EvaUnit02 · Post by **EvaUnit02** » 17 Oct 2006, 07:07

If it's possible, could we please get some less daft cap selections? Thanks.

gojensen · Post by **gojensen** » 17 Oct 2006, 07:23

Now that I think of it... TomTom must have resized his caps since PAL should be 720x576... thus they are not accurately representing what's really ON the discs

It's been years since I saw this film so I'm not sure I could figure out what would be less daft caps - but I could give it a shot...

tom2681 · Post by **tom2681** » 17 Oct 2006, 13:39

Maybe I should choose the caps.

bradavon · Post by **bradavon** » 17 Oct 2006, 17:28

Yep but 720x576 would mean having to resize ntsc to match, it's better to take ntsc down than pal up.