Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE: Phantom Menace DVD

This is topic Phantom Menace DVD in forum The Afterlife at Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE.

To visit this topic, use this URL:
https://ft-forum.com/ft/cgi-bin/ubb/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=12;t=000080

Posted by Steve Scott (Member # 630) on 10-17-2001, 12:16 AM:

Okay, so the movie blew (in comparison to the original trilogy), and Jar Jar didn't get killed off, but technically what have you guys thought aboutthe Episode I DVD?
I picked it up today & my first impression was that there wasn't the normal fifty pamphlets that fly out of most Fox Releases. I watched the major scenes on my DD system at home & the sound was decent. DTS woulda been better, & it definitley sounded better in our newly calibrated THX/SRD theater when it was released, but for a Dolby soundtrack it was good. The picture detail was great, even better on my computer (Progressive scan, how do i love thee?...)

I thought the extras were good, those that i got thru. The trailers woulda been better if they had been encoded in 6 channel instead of the pro logic crap they were subjected to.

All in all, probably not the best DVD this year, but worth the wait for Star Wars on DVD? Maybe...

Posted by Joe Redifer (Member # 3) on 10-17-2001, 01:14 AM:

Although I certainly won't buy it, I am eager to borrow it from a friend whom I know will buy it just just so I can listen to the pod race scene on my home Dolby Digital system, which sounds pretty damn good (could sound better with a real EQ). There is nothing else redeeming about the movie, unfortunately. Except maybe the light saber battle towards the end. But even that gets ruined because they keep cutting back and forth to the animated cartoon (which reminds me of Jedi where they kept cutting back and forth to the teddy bears and totally ruined any suspense). Who edits these things?

As for the extras, I'll probably watch them. The "additional scenes" that they showed on TV looked horribly bad, especially the scene where What's His Butt and What's His Face (can't even remember character or actor names from the movie, they were that impressionable) are caught in a river or some kind of flowing water. Even on TV it looked incredibly fake!

Posted by Brad Miller (Member # 2) on 10-17-2001, 03:57 AM:

Lucasfilm will correct that gross error about not providing a discrete 6 channel mix on the trailers and re-release the DVDs all over again in 6 months so everyone can buy another copy and Lucas can make another 20 million.

Anyone else wondering if this sort of *mistake* is planned and is actually not an accident in a plot to make more money?

Posted by Phil Connolly (Member # 465) on 10-17-2001, 04:59 AM:

I guess he will also wait till everyones got the Dolby Digital version, before the DTS version see's light of day - if at all.

Posted by Darryl Spicer (Member # 711) on 10-17-2001, 09:00 AM:

No he will probalby wait till the other two Star Wars movies have been released then put all six in a box set so you have to buy it that way just to get the last three films on DVD!!!!

Posted by Ken Lackner (Member # 1002) on 10-17-2001, 09:25 AM:

I don't know much about home theaters. I don't have one. Is DTS better than Dolby?

Posted by Phil Connolly (Member # 465) on 10-17-2001, 10:28 AM:

Once Lucas has milked all the boxed set options, He'll discover a few missing scenes and can the re-release everything as a special edition. The sad thing is people will buy.

Ken,

I only have 3 DTS DVDs, 'Gladiator', 'Chicken Run' and 'The Thin Red Line' in each case the DTS track is lots better sounding then the Dolby digital track.

I can't speak for other titles since the studios don't seem to release DTS disc's in the UK very much.

Posted by Greg Anderson (Member # 235) on 10-17-2001, 12:18 PM:

It's too bad that when Steve tried to start a thread discussing our impressions of how this DVD succeeded technically, all he got was smart-alec remarks from people who had nothing new/intelligent to add to the anti-Lucas rhetoric.

Perry Sun of Widescreen Review claims that the bass on the Dolby Digital "Superbit" DVDs is better than it is on the DTS tracks. I don't know what that means, however. Does everyone just use bass as the measure in their DTS vs. Dolby Digital evaluations?

Posted by Brad Miller (Member # 2) on 10-17-2001, 12:49 PM:

Greg,

The second posting had comments based upon the first posting and then each subsequent posting carried some of the comments further. It is not like from the second post on that everyone started posting things that came from nowhere. Threads DO vary and just because the originator asked one question does not mean that other people should not post if they have a comment that is off of the original topic. That is absurd.

Also, I have a feeling that a lot of people here are not big video fans. I know myself I rarely watch videos because of their horribly low quality...and yes, I'm even talking about DVDs with their motion artifacts that are so prominent in dark scenes. Personally I will not be purchasing the DVD for Phantom Menace because I prefer not to see the bumbling adventures of Jar Jar ever again. Oh wait, that's even further off subject, isn't it? Oh well, such is the way forum discussions work.

Sorry for the mini-rant, but I find your comments insulting toward the members who did participate, but strayed away from the original topic. That never has and never will be a policy, for some of the most interesting and useful topics have come from strayed discussions.

Posted by Greg Anderson (Member # 235) on 10-17-2001, 01:03 PM:

Yes, Brad... but hasn't the anti-Lucas and anti-Star Wars stuff been done to death already on Internet forums? I guess I'm just -- yawn -- a little bored with it -- yawn. It's as if nobody can mention anything Lucas-related without someone immediately changing the topic to a rant.

And... am I automatically insulting all of you when I make that point? I hope not. If so, then we should consider how we've insulted Steve. He clearly didn't want to discuss whether or not it was a "good movie."

Posted by Jesse Skeen (Member # 586) on 10-17-2001, 02:58 PM:

I'm not buying this because I've heard the movie has some additional footage put back in that wasn't in the theatrical version. Additionally the subtitles during the alien-language scenes are player-generated, not on the film print itself. I never bought the original Star Wars movies on laserdisc because those had the subtitles moved off the picture and placed in the bottom black bar. Yes, I am picky!

I just LOOOVE how George Lucas delayed the DVD so long after the VHS release because he wanted to "do something really special"; this doesn't look like it really is! I would've bought a DVD of the untampered version if it'd come out the same time as the VHS.

Posted by Joe Redifer (Member # 3) on 10-17-2001, 03:13 PM:

Greg, no one is forcing you to read our comments, but if need be we can run all of our posts through your "intelligence" filter before actually being posted to the forums for the public to see. I don't feel my comments were off topic at all. They flow smoothly.

Also, in the post above made by me, I was not being a smart alec. I was dead serious, as I believe everyone who followed my post was. And if so many people in so many internet forums have similar opinions that you feel have been done to death, doesn't that suggest that there might be actually something wrong with the movie? Just the sheer mention of the title brings out negative opinions in lots of people who probably feel trapped by Lucas's vision. He can make the movie anyway he wants, but we don't have to like it just because it is his "vision". When he hypes a movie so much like he did, we all get VERY HIGH expectations, especially considering the first three Star Wars movies. When we are let down in such a way, it is perfectly natural to harbor more than a little resentment about it.

Posted by Rachel Gilardi (Member # 4594) on 10-18-2001, 02:33 AM:

Greg,

Before assuming what people want to or don't want to hear maybe you should read into the original question a bit more... In Steve's question he stated that the movie blew (that would be an opinion) and when asking about a DVD its hard to just give an opinion on the DVD and not the movie itself, they go together.

As for me, Anthony is very anxious to buy the DVD, I personally didn't like the movie but I really want to check out the extras. I will let you all know what I think when we get the DVD.

Posted by Rachel Gilardi (Member # 4594) on 10-18-2001, 10:10 PM:

Ok, we got the DVD today. As we sat there watching the extras all of the sudden we remembered that Star Trek was on....hmmmmmm Keep watching the Star Wars DVD extras or turn on reruns of Star Trek: The Next Generation....hmmmmm

We turned on Star Trek. That should answer anyones question of my opinion on the DVD.

Posted by Ken Lackner (Member # 1002) on 10-18-2001, 10:49 PM:

Fellow Trekkie!! Sweet!

Posted by Rachel Gilardi (Member # 4594) on 10-18-2001, 10:58 PM:

Oh ya!

Posted by Brad Miller (Member # 2) on 10-18-2001, 11:21 PM:

Oh come on, Star Trek just isn't Star Trek without William Shatner's hilarious overacting and random pauses in mid-sentence.

"Bones, Spock, meet me in the transporter room with an expendable crew member so we can..............................survey the planet."

Posted by Mike Heenan (Member # 392) on 10-19-2001, 12:46 AM:

Even though I cant stand Star Trek (please dont flame me... heh) I highly enjoyed Galaxy Quest for some reason.

Posted by Tao Yue (Member # 836) on 10-19-2001, 01:27 AM:

Star Trek on Sci-Fi channel every day, two ST:TNG episodes on TNN every day, an episode of Enterprise every week, and the Special Edition DVD of Star Trek: The Motion Picture coming up in a month. It's a great time to be a Trekkie.

------------------
Tao Yue
MIT '04: Course VI-2, Electrical Engineering and Computer Science
Projectionist, MIT Lecture Series Committee

Posted by Greg Mueller (Member # 17) on 10-19-2001, 09:33 AM:

Yesterday, while doing my weekly check of DVDs at Costco, I saw that SW1 was out and having never seen it, I thought I'd buy it. So I did. We watched it last night and about half way through I commented to my wife that I didn't believe we had seen a scene that did not have a computer generated effect in it. She agreed and said that all the little CGI characters looked like cartoon characters from a WB cartoon. The further we went the more irritating it got. When we finally got to the end we were relieved and didn't even bother to watch the credits, which we faithfully do otherwise. We were wondering if Lucas ever saw this movie. Boy talk about magna-suck. I'll probably watch the extra stuff on it and then trade it to a friend.
On the technical side... we had a hard time understanding the dialog. We didn't watch it on a home theater system, just a stereo tv. Maybe it makes a difference.

Kirk rules

------------------
Greg Mueller
Amateur Astronomer, Machinist, Filmnut
http://www.muellersatomics.com/

Posted by Joe Redifer (Member # 3) on 10-19-2001, 04:42 PM:

Sorry to go off topic again, but I just gotta comment about Star Trek: The Motion Picture. I don't care how fancy the DVD is or how much boring footage they cut out (there was at least half an hour that was nothing but the ship floating through fancy colors) it still is a horrible movie. Nothing can be done to help it. Not only that, but they went into the future and stole the title theme from ST:TNG (which I thought has always been kinda lame, Jerry Goldsmith did better on ST: Voyager... it's not as "in your face" nor as cheesy sounding).

Posted by Greg Mueller (Member # 17) on 10-19-2001, 06:29 PM:

I agree Joe and secretly so did everyone else. They just didn't want to admit that after waiting and whining so long for a ST movie that it was such a stinker. We did get to see our first Klingons with lumps and bumps though. The bald chick and the uppity captain dude are better off where ever they went than in the movies (IMHO). Yep it pretty well sucked. I have it in my video collection only because I have to

------------------
Greg Mueller
Amateur Astronomer, Machinist, Filmnut
http://www.muellersatomics.com/

Posted by Mike Blakesley (Member # 26) on 10-19-2001, 06:30 PM:

Ever notice that now most of the reviews of DVDs only review the added "features"? They hardly mention the original movie anymore, preferring to focus on stuff that most people will view only once, if at all.

Posted by Evans A Criswell (Member # 381) on 10-19-2001, 07:20 PM:

Quote about SWI DVD:

quote:

On the technical side... we had a hard time understanding the dialog. We didn't watch it on a home theater system, just a stereo tv. Maybe it makes a difference.

I had two friends over the past Wednesday night (2001/10/17) and we watched this DVD. I typically adjust the volume so that the dialogue is loud enough to be clearly heard without having to strain. I noticed that the sound effects were quite loud in comparison to the dialogue. I kept wanting to lower the volume a bit but was afraid to do so because I feared the dialogue might be too soft during the quieter scenes. I've played many action movies on my system, both DD and DTS, and this movie is one of the few that seems to have too high a difference between dialogue levels and effects levels.

This may have what made the dialogue harder to understand on a stereo TV. Just a guess.

Don't get me wrong -- the picture and sound on the DVD were outstanding. I could see the dynamic range being a problem for people like my parents, who hate loud sound effects. Of course, at ages 65 and 73, and neither of them being in a movie theatre in around 35 years, I can see that they're not used to that kind of thing.

------------------
Evans A Criswell
Huntsville-Decatur Movie Theatre Information Site

Posted by Joe Redifer (Member # 3) on 10-19-2001, 09:04 PM:

Maybe the center channel sound is so low because studios realize that people don't even come close to calibrating their home theaters correctly and try to compensate for the overly bright, tinny (and usually tiny as well) center channel speaker that sits horizontally on top of the TV.

I wish all speakers in the world were horizontal home theater center channel speakers.

Posted by Jesse Skeen (Member # 586) on 10-20-2001, 11:38 AM:

So what do you think is a correct center-channel setup for home use? I have a horizontal center speaker and had it on top of my TV when I got it, but since my left and right speakers were located closer to the bottom of the TV it didn't seem to blend in too well. I finally moved it directly under the TV and have been much more satisfied with it that way.

Posted by Joe Redifer (Member # 3) on 10-20-2001, 12:39 PM:

In my opinion, all 3 stage speakers.... errr front speakers should be identical, of the large variety and sitting on the ground. But that's hard to do in a home theater setup. I wouldn't trust those home theater "kits" which come with 5 tiny speakers and a sub. While it's great that all 5 speakers are the same, you are losing a lot of sound by routing anything below 150Hz (or higher) to the subwoofer, in addition to the discrete sub channel.

Posted by Steve Guttag (Member # 268) on 10-20-2001, 12:46 PM:

Brad:

Isn't the proper method of releasing high-end home media to release a plain-jane version of a title (SW EP:1 in this case) then after sales die to do a "Directors Cut" boxed set containing all the films in the series (in this case EP:1, SW, ESB, RJ) just in time for the new film's theatrical release, guaranteeing that the new film will not be in the boxed set so the whole process can be repeated later? Also the only way to get the DC of EP:1 would be in the boxed set so that one has to buy titles they may already have just to get the wiz-bang version of the title they do not.

Steve

------------------
"Old projectionists never die, they just changeover!"

Posted by Brad Miller (Member # 2) on 10-20-2001, 01:27 PM:

I don't know Steve, I don't really run around purchasing video media, but it certainly does appear to be an intentinal scam to the public to me. I've have less than 10 DVDs and exactly 1 laserdisc in my collection and don't much care to have more. The quality is just too crappy for my tastes. In fact, I probably only average about 1 hour of some form of video/television in a week's time.

If these studio heads were really smart (and greedy), they would release the director's cut of these movies to select theaters. A few hundred prints would suffice and the director/producer could cherry pick the better theaters to run them in. Then after they have sucked every ounce of $$$ they possibly can from a theatrical run they can release it to video. Personally I skip many a director's cut of movies because it is only available for viewing in video form, which just isn't the same thing, isn't it Steve?

Posted by Michael Barry (Member # 237) on 10-21-2001, 10:38 AM:

A friend just brought over his copy of SW:E1 and we checked out a few key scenes. The dynamic range on this DVD is ENORMOUS - I had to set my decoder/preamp between -15db and -20db to get a good dialogue level. That is about 10-15db higher than just about every other movie I have. Of course, the sound effects are incredibly loud at that level, which is probably the intention. When I set the volume to a level that was comfortable for the effects, the dialogue was almost whisper quiet. This movie was designed to be played LOUD.

I will not be able to listen at the intended level all the way through without getting into serious trouble with neighbors (down the street!). However, I did listen to the opening credit crawl and the end credits at -15db and the orchestral score sounded amazing - the brass section was perfect! It's quite obvious how compressed other soundtracks are (on DVD) in comparison to this one. They got it right. Now all I need to do is find a place to live in which I can actually play it back!

Posted by Joe Redifer (Member # 3) on 10-21-2001, 05:43 PM:

Has anyone clicked on the overhyped and much balleyhooed web link that is available when you stick Disc 2 into a DVD-ROM drive? Is it all you hoped it would be? I have a Mac and the DVD-ROM features are only designed to work in a PC, so I can't click on the web link! I suck.

Posted by System Notices (Member # 2357) on 03-07-2011, 03:00 AM:

It has been 3423 days since the last post.

Posted by Tom Petrov (Member # 1534) on 03-07-2011, 03:00 AM:

quote:
DTS woulda been better

For the record, I don't think any of the Star Wars films has even been released on DVD with a DTS track. Wonder if any overseas version might have it?

Posted by Joe Redifer (Member # 3) on 03-07-2011, 07:59 PM:

Holy necropost, Batman!

I'd just like to say that the video quality on this DVD has lots of over-sharpening, if I recall. Lots of halos and whatnot. I hate that. I hate DVD. DVD can go to hell.

Posted by Aaron Garman (Member # 1653) on 03-07-2011, 08:31 PM:

Agreed: this DVD image does look pretty crappy by today's standards.

Anyone up for a debate on why the LaserDisc of Episode I is still better? [evil]

AJG

Posted by Claude S. Ayakawa (Member # 1401) on 03-07-2011, 09:22 PM:

3-D anyone? THE PHANTOM MENACE will be rereleased next February in theatres in GLORIOUS 3-D [Smile]

How exciting!

In all seriousness, I love 3-D but only if it was done well such as AVATAR. Although I am curious how Lucas will pull it off converting the film to 3-D, I do not think I will waste my time and money seeing a movie I Did not enjoy in the first place.

-Claude

Posted by Mike Blakesley (Member # 26) on 03-07-2011, 11:48 PM:

I wonder how long before we start seeing interviews with Lucas where he says "I always envisioned these films in 3-D from the very beginning; so they are finally going to look the way I first envisioned them."

Mark my words, he will say this.

Posted by Manny Knowles (Member # 1171) on 03-08-2011, 12:11 AM:

I love it. [evil]

Posted by Bobby Henderson (Member # 840) on 03-08-2011, 09:42 AM:

quote: Tom Petrov
For the record, I don't think any of the Star Wars films has even been released on DVD with a DTS track.

The DVDs have all been Dolby Digital. However, chances are pretty strong the Blu-ray box sets scheduled for release on Sept. 27 will have DTS-HD Master Audio (which also includes a backward compatible lossy DTS "core").

Nearly all of the Blu-ray releases from Fox have used DTS-HD Master Audio for the primary audio track. Some have even used DTS for all the supplemental tracks. Lately all the major studios in Hollywood and even quite a few independents have been using DTS-HD considerably more than Dolby TrueHD or LPCM 5.1. Some studios are using DTS-HD Master Audio exclusively, at least for the primary audio track.

I'm not sure what the reasons are for this trend, which seems very opposite of what we saw on DVD (where Dolby overwhelmingly dominated). The lossless codecs from DTS and Dolby deliver seemingly equal quality levels. Other factors must be involved.

Maybe some studios like the embedded backward compatible lossy core feature with DTS-HD; no need to carry a hidden yet still separate Dolby Digital track like what has to be done with Dolby TrueHD. I'm a little foggy on how the licensing works for mass produced titles like major Hollywood movies.

It could be a software situation where price and convenience is being compared. The Dolby Media Producer Suite costs $3995 and is a product that runs only on Mac OSX 10.4.2 or later. The DTS-HD Master Audio suite costs $1495 and runs on WindowsXP, Windows 7 and Mac OSX 10.4 or later. The DTS site says "32-bit" which could be a problem for a lot of new Win7 machines. DTS has version 2.6 of their suite due for release soon. That one adds Blu-ray 3D support and dramatic performance increases (maybe that means it has been recompiled for 64-bit operation).

The dominance of DTS-HD on Blu-ray could be to blame on the fanboy thing. I know Sony ran some informal polls over a year ago when they were thinking about changing audio formats on Blu-ray releases (they were doing LPCM 5.1 and Dolby TrueHD). DTS won those polls, so now most Sony Blu-ray releases are DTS-HD.

In the end it will all come down to what George Lucas wants. If he insists Dolby TrueHD be used on the new Star Wars Blu-ray discs then they will be Dolby regardless of Fox' standard support of DTS. If the audio format doesn't matter that much to Lucas then the Blu-ray version of the Star Wars saga will default to DTS.

Posted by Greg Anderson (Member # 235) on 03-08-2011, 11:11 AM:

It seems like Lucasfilm and Dolby have had a very good relationship since, well, forever.

Posted by Bobby Henderson (Member # 840) on 03-08-2011, 11:41 AM:

Warner Brothers has had a long relationship with Dolby as well. WB is the only major Hollywood studio where Dolby Digital has been used on all of the studio's movie releases featuring digital surround sound. The first Dolby Digital release, Batman Returns was a Warner Bros. film. All the other majors had either brief or long term stints where CDS, DTS or SDDS was used exclusively on film prints. Yet look at what Warner Bros. has been doing lately. Many of their newest Blu-ray releases use DTS-HD Master Audio, including this year's Best Sound and Best Sound Editing Oscar winner, Inception.

Dolby TrueHD definitely has a good shot of being used on those new Star Wars Blu-ray discs. One thing also working in DTS' favor: George Lucas and Steven Spielberg have been friends for decades and Spielberg has a stake in DTS.

Posted by Greg Anderson (Member # 235) on 03-08-2011, 01:25 PM:

Spielberg also had a long-standing, good relationship with Universal after that studio stabbed Lucas in the back with their handling of American Graffiti and their refusal to do Star Wars. Spielberg's relationship with Hollywood and his general way of doing business has always been far different from Lucas' relationship with Hollywood and general way of doing business. So, we'll see.

Posted by John Wilson (Member # 269) on 03-08-2011, 01:35 PM:

quote: Mike Blakesley
Mark my words, he will say this.

Consider them so marked and agreed on.

Posted by Joe Redifer (Member # 3) on 03-08-2011, 04:09 PM:

quote: Bobby Henderson
The Dolby Media Producer Suite costs $3995 and is a product that runs only on Mac OSX 10.4.2 or later. The DTS-HD Master Audio suite costs $1495 and runs on WindowsXP, Windows 7 and Mac OSX 10.4 or later.

Too bad there is no application that I know of on either Windows or Mac OS X that allows you to import either a Dolby TrueHD or DTS-HDMA audio track into a Blu-ray project. You are stuck with Dolby Digital or, if I'm not mistaken, LPCM stereo.

But the DTS suite is CRAZY EASY to use and the Dolby suite is a huge pain in the ass.

Posted by Bobby Henderson (Member # 840) on 03-08-2011, 07:21 PM:

Another factor to consider is all the "enterprise level" Blu-ray authoring applications (Sony Blu-print, Sony Blu-code, Sonic Scenarist, etc) are Windows-only applications. They have no Mac OSX counterpart. Every Hollywood studio movie distributed on Blu-ray had to have its Blu-ray discs authored on a nasty PC!

Maybe Dolby needs to talk to its user base (or see what DTS is doing right with that suite) to make some product improvements and maybe consider getting a Windows version put together.

Or maybe Steve Jobs just needs to drop his anti-Blu-ray stance and start building Mac Pro towers and certain Mac Books with Blu-ray burners. With none of the heavy hitters in Blu-ray authoring supporting the Mac platform that would leave a wide open opportunity for Apple to build enterprise level Blu-ray authoring capability into a new version of Final Cut Studio.

Seems like a good idea to me, but what the hell do I know?
[Confused]

quote: Joe Redifer
Too bad there is no application that I know of on either Windows or Mac OS X that allows you to import either a Dolby TrueHD or DTS-HDMA audio track into a Blu-ray project.

The capability isn't there at all with Adobe's Production Studio applications. Linear PCM and Dolby Digital is all you get. Gotta go to third party applications if you want DTS, DTS-HD or Dolby TrueHD.

I don't understand why that capability isn't there other than it perhaps being a licensing issue for the particular encode/decode scheme. If the NLE application was able to drop the track into the time line, maybe merge it with other audio elements and then re-encode then there wouldn't be as much need for the third party application.

Posted by Tom Petrov (Member # 1534) on 03-08-2011, 08:06 PM:

quote: Greg Anderson
It seems like Lucasfilm and Dolby have had a very good relationship since, well, forever.

Yes you are right. Indiana Jones 4 was a True-HD title and that was Lucasfilm and a Speilberg movie. But it is more a Paramount thing too. I personally would like to see discs have both in some circumstances.

One thing we know for sure is that the new Star Wars Blu-rays will be THX Certified.

Posted by Bobby Henderson (Member # 840) on 03-08-2011, 09:19 PM:

That Indy Blu-ray was released in October of 2008, just as this whole DTS-HD trend was getting started. This was around the time Sony was looking to make its switch on Blu-ray audio formats.

Lately Paramount has been releasing most of its movies on Blu-ray with DTS-HD Master Audio.

Posted by Joe Redifer (Member # 3) on 03-08-2011, 09:24 PM:

Bobby, the encoding part is easy (at least with DTS), it's just that no program will accept .dtshd files to import for authoring Blu-rays. NLE programs have nothing to do with it.

Posted by Tom Petrov (Member # 1534) on 03-08-2011, 10:22 PM:

quote: Aaron Garman
Anyone up for a debate on why the LaserDisc of Episode I is still better?

I think I will take you up on this debate. The laserdisc I have is the best sounding I have heard in a long time. As for picture, it is pretty damn good.

But to beat it in picture, I think you would need the CLD-99

Here is a good debate
Phantom LD vs DVD

Posted by Bobby Henderson (Member # 840) on 03-09-2011, 01:25 PM:

quote: Joe Redifer
Bobby, the encoding part is easy (at least with DTS), it's just that no program will accept .dtshd files to import for authoring Blu-rays. NLE programs have nothing to do with it.

In the case of Adobe Encore (CS4 & CS5), it's limited to importing DTS .dts & .cpt files. It can't bring in DTS-HD files -at least not in a way that is compliant with Blu-ray authoring specs. There's an import/pass-through trick that can sort of do it, but it isn't going to be reliable. Encore also won't let you bring in Linear PCM WAV files with more than 2 channels. That sucks.

More affordable "pro-sumer" programs like DVD Studio Pro, Adobe Encore, etc. should allow the user to at least "place" the audio files into the project regardless of whether you can hear them play or not in the disc authoring program.

I don't know what all Adobe has planned for "CS6," but right now if you want to use DTS-HD Master Audio in a Blu-ray project you have to use ridiculously expensive authoring programs to do it.

Sonic Scenarist, Sony Blu-code and Sony Blu-print support DTS-HD Master Audio. I don't know exactly how much those programs cost, but I do know they're ridiculously expensive. One web search on Scenarist BD suggested a price of $35,000.
[Eek!]

Posted by Joe Redifer (Member # 3) on 03-09-2011, 02:09 PM:

That's just ridiculous.

DVD Studio Pro allows the placement of CPT files, but you can't hear them unless you have a sound system connected digitally (via SPDIF out). Of course, it will let you author HD-DVDs but it will have nothing to do with Blu-ray. We'll see what happens when Final Cut Studio 4 is announced soon, but I expect not to be impressed.

Posted by Aaron Garman (Member # 1653) on 03-09-2011, 03:26 PM:

quote: Tom Petrov
But to beat it in picture, I think you would need the CLD-99

That's a bit misleading. Sure, the CLD-99 was a great player, but many would argue a CLD-97 would be better. Also, both high end Japanese MUSE players (the X9 and X0) would probably be better than the 99 on most accounts.

YMMV depending on your setup too: flat panel, analog tube, CRT front projector? Scaler, line doubler?

Either way, I always found the image of the LD more pleasing than the DVD, regardless of the unit I used to play it back.

Of course the sound hands down wins.

AJG

Posted by Bobby Henderson (Member # 840) on 03-09-2011, 03:36 PM:

quote: Joe Redifer
We'll see what happens when Final Cut Studio 4 is announced soon, but I expect not to be impressed.

It's probably going to be at least another 6 months before the next cycle of Adobe Creative Suite upgrades takes place. I'm probably going to buy a new computer well before then and be stuck upgrading my personal license to CS5 (I'm still using 32-bit CS3 at home) and then have to spend even more upgrading to CS6!

Adobe has stuck close to an 18 month cycle lately. The CS5 generation of apps will be 1 year old in April. So I guess CS6 will arrive in October.

Honestly, I don't understand why Adobe hasn't done something to offer at least some support for DTS-HD as well as Dolby TrueHD and multichannel Linear PCM already. They seem to be going to considerable effort on supporting various video formats from professional level video cameras. They're doing more and more to support native Red One camera footage and added a "Red MysteriumX" plug in. They want to support the 4K capability of those cameras.

And that's all fine and good. But if they're going to go that far on the video capability Adobe needs to go equally far on the audio end of things. No one is going to edit a project consisting of 4K Red footage on an Adobe setup and merely be satisfied with lossy Dolby Digital or DTS audio as the finished soundtrack. They're going to insist on having multichannel LPCM for digital cinema use or having at least some DTS-HD or Dolby TrueHD support for authoring to Blu-ray.

quote: Aaron Garman
Of course the sound hands down wins.

Getting back on topic, "the sound hands down wins"? I don't understand. Are you saying the Laserdisc audio of The Phantom Menace is better than its DVD counterpart?

Posted by Joe Redifer (Member # 3) on 03-09-2011, 04:08 PM:

That's what he's saying. Evidently the LD uses the untouched theatrical mix whereas the DVD was remixed to take anything that was considered good out. But this kind of talk is very typical from the LD fanbase. I will do an A-B comparison on my system in a few days and report the results. Too bad you won't be in town this weekend otherwise I'd invite you to the comparison. I won't be viewing the entire movie, just certain scenes. I will be viewing them loudly. We'll see which one makes the neighbors put up a "FOR SALE" sign first.

quote: Bobby Henderson
Honestly, I don't understand why Adobe hasn't done something to offer at least some support for DTS-HD as well as Dolby TrueHD and multichannel Linear PCM already.

Agreed. I think that it's funny that if you want to use Dolby TrueHD, you need to encode it on a Mac and then go over to Windows to find an authoring program that will let you use it.

quote: Aaron
Sure, the CLD-99 was a great player, but many would argue a CLD-97 would be blah blah blah

The signal exists as composite on the disc itself. It will look shitty no matter what you use. You can only do so much to clean it up. Removing artifacts also means removing detail.

Posted by Tom Petrov (Member # 1534) on 03-09-2011, 04:28 PM:

quote: Aaron Garman
That's a bit misleading. Sure, the CLD-99 was a great player, but many would argue a CLD-97 would be better. Also, both high end Japanese MUSE players (the X9 and X0) would probably be better than the 99 on most accounts.

Yeah I have heard that argument many times. I guess I mention CLD99 because they were built later so I think you get a machine that is less aged.

Also, the 99 has an AC-3 out whereas the ClD97 you would need to modify it.

As for line doubles, if you can give me as much info if I should get one or what, that would be much appreciated.

quote:
I always found the image of the LD more pleasing than the DVD,

I agree with, however not all Laserdiscs look better. I have found than the THX discs are usually superior to the non THX LDs and dvds.

Posted by Joe Redifer (Member # 3) on 03-09-2011, 07:27 PM:

Dude you can't take advantage of THX LaserDiscs or DVDs without a THX certified TV. Such TVs have a THX button on the remote that you must engage. It sets the color, contrast, tint, sharpness, brightness and contrast to PERFECTLY match exactly what was seen by the camera lens (the two become indistinguishable). If you're not using a THX TV, then you are getting shitty video. If you are using a THX TV, you are getting better picture quality than the human eye can perceive. It is THX, after all.

Posted by Aaron Garman (Member # 1653) on 03-09-2011, 08:27 PM:

quote: Joe Redifer
The signal exists as composite on the disc itself. It will look shitty no matter what you use. You can only do so much to clean it up. Removing artifacts also means removing detail.

Shitty is relative. [Wink]

Sure, it's not completely clean, pristine, and digital but for what it is, it isn't the worst thing in the world. It beats the hell out of VHS.

The argument between the 97 and the 99 had to do with how the 99 did digital noise reduction. Apparently, on certain equipment, the 97 will give you a better image, whereas the 99 would on others. I have a CLD-79 so I couldn't tell you first hand.

Mcintosh made a 97 clone that had AC3 and apparently a nicer analog audio section.

Bobby, sorry for not clarifying. Joe, I can't wait to see your results. I've tried the test on my system, and even with matching volume levels, I still felt the LaserDisc mix was, I guess, more aggressive and fun?

Tom, for line doublers, scaling, etc. I recommend you start here.

Caution though, the pursuit of this hobby will make your head spin. Sure, it's fun, but it can get obsessive and expensive. [Eek!]

Joe, don't forget that one should always go to Home Depot first and buy the THX button for your listening room. Once installed and pressed, it will make your room sound like the rooms at Skywalker Sound.

AJG

Posted by Tom Petrov (Member # 1534) on 03-09-2011, 08:46 PM:

quote: Joe Redifer
using a THX TV

Joe-no need to tell me. The water coming out of my taps is THX approved.

Posted by Bobby Henderson (Member # 840) on 03-09-2011, 10:30 PM:

You guys are forgetting the most important thing: THX Certified Popcorn. No movie watching experience is complete without it.

Posted by Aaron Garman (Member # 1653) on 03-09-2011, 11:12 PM:

With THX certified "butter flavored" topping. [puke]

AJG

Posted by Tom Petrov (Member # 1534) on 03-10-2011, 12:28 AM:

quote:
Anyone up for a debate on why the LaserDisc of Episode I is still better? [evil]

Here is a pretty good read from Digital bits, the same guy review them both.

o how does the disc look? Well... fine for laserdisc, I suppose. But it definitely isn't first-rate video, even by LD standards. The letterboxed widescreen picture isn't in the same ballpark as Image's Star Wars Trilogy: Special Edition LD boxed set. There's plenty of detail here in the brighter picture areas and there's rich color, but there's also some edge-enhancement and NTSC artifacts visible. The contrast seems a bit off - the blacks are a little too black, and lacking in detail. In addition, the color seems just a hair over-saturated at times, and there's plenty of bleeding. Flesh tones also appear a touch red-shifted, even after a quick recalibration of my equipment with the LD version of Video Essentials. Just to be sure, I swapped this disc out and looked at the Star Wars: SE laserdisc, and sure enough, that looked fine. That's not to say this disc looks bad... but it's not as good looking as it should be. The English-only audio, on the other hand, is outstanding. This is the most active Dolby Digital 5.1 sound field I've heard on laserdisc (or even DVD for that matter)

As for DVD

The presentation quality of the film itself is very good. On the video side, we're given exactly the anamorphic widescreen transfer we would have hoped for. It isn't quite the home run I would have liked, though. There are two reasons for this. The first is an abundance of visible film grain present in the print. The second is a little bit too much edge-enhancement. The grain I'm fine with, but the edge-enhancement knocked the video grade down a little bit. Don't let these minor issues deter you from enjoying this transfer though, because it still looks absolutely wonderful. The contrast is excellent, with deep and yet detailed blacks. Color is rich and natural at all times, without bleed. Flesh tones, in particular, look wonderful. And picture detail is almost always excellent. Just watch the podrace and look at some of the rock formations in the background - this is great DVD video. It's not quite reference quality, but it's completely easy to enjoy. On the audio side of things, however, this disc is absolutely reference quality. Simply put, this is the best Dolby Digital 5.1 sound I've ever heard on DVD.

Laserdisc
DVD

Posted by Aaron Garman (Member # 1653) on 03-10-2011, 10:38 AM:

I'm assuming that was Bill Hunt's old review. The reason the blacks are so black on the LaserDisc is that it is Japanese NTSC, which has a different black level than American NTSC. When watching a Japanese LaserDisc on our flavor of NTSC, it is advisable to raise the brightness just a tad to compensate.

I also wonder what system he was watching the DVD on because I always felt it looked like crap: too much edge enhancement and a very un-film like image.

AJG

Posted by Joe Redifer (Member # 3) on 03-15-2011, 04:39 PM:

I just did some A/B comparisons between the LaserDisc and DVD on the pod race scene (the only scene in the movie worth watching). The receiver was set at the same volume level for both. The digital was bitstreamed to the receiver where it was decoded internally so there were no outside DA influences. The result? The LaserDisc is noticeably louder than the DVD. Does that mean it is better? No. Louder is the reason why a lot of people thought DTS sounded better than Dolby Digital on DVD, even though the DTS tracks on Disney movies were often harsh and poor sounding in comparison to the DD mix on the same disc. The subwoofer track is slightly better on the LD version. Slightly. Both shook my pants a great deal and pushed on my chest/lungs. However the dialog intelligibility was ever-so-slightly better in the DVD version. The picture quality sucks on both, but the DVD picture certainly blows away the LD picture by leaps and bounds, even after making the adjustments to compensate for the Japanese 0.0 IRE level (in the US we use 7.5 IRE). The DVD picture has much more resolution and no upscaler in the world can add detail that isn't there. More resolution beats out less edge enhancement in this case, but both have edge enhancement.

Bottom line: There is no way that either version wins "hands down". I think a lot of the differences people perceive are psychological. They read about it sounding better and they are big LD fans themselves, so in their mind the LD MUST sound better. But a true back and forth A/B comparison (which I did several times) reveals otherwise.

Posted by Mark J. Marshall (Member # 1409) on 03-15-2011, 06:16 PM:

What's "IRE"?

Posted by Greg Anderson (Member # 235) on 03-15-2011, 09:26 PM:

This is not intended to be the definitive explaination but just the simplest one (because my understanding is limited too) but the NTSC video signal is basically within an "IRE" range of 100 being pure white and 7.5 being the darkest black in North America. So, if you were in a TV station and you had all the right scopes you could measure that and/or calibrate your gear and your broadcast levels.. The "blacker-than-black" area below 7.5 IRE is important but I lack the words to explain why. There isn't supposed to be any useful, visible material below 7.5 IRE. When you do a whiz-bang perfect calibration of your monitor using test patterns and color bars and what-not, you will want to adjust the brightness and contrast so that "black" and "blacker-than-black" look like the same thing to your eyes.

But the Japanese version of NTSC is different in that the "blackest" visible material goes all the way down to 0 IRE. So, to summarize, if your monitor is perfectly adjusted for the North American version of NTSC and you start watching material made for the Japanese version of NTSC then the picture will be slightly wrong.

(Of course, I welcome clarification if I didn't explain it correctly.)

Posted by Aaron Garman (Member # 1653) on 03-15-2011, 10:04 PM:

Good test Joe. I'm glad you agree about the bass because that was the most noticeable difference to me.

quote: Joe Redifer
Bottom line: There is no way that either version wins "hands down". I think a lot of the differences people perceive are psychological. They read about it sounding better and they are big LD fans themselves, so in their mind the LD MUST sound better. But a true back and forth A/B comparison (which I did several times) reveals otherwise.

Well the LaserDisc does do one thing better: it's the theatrical cut. The crap they added were so so [bs]

AJG

Posted by Joe Redifer (Member # 3) on 03-15-2011, 10:56 PM:

Oh, I almost forgot. The LD version is missing a scene from the race. What else is different?

Posted by Paul Mayer (Member # 355) on 03-16-2011, 03:02 AM:

IRE = Institute of Radio Engineers

No, really.

Posted by Aaron Garman (Member # 1653) on 03-16-2011, 12:50 PM:

quote: Joe Redifer
Oh, I almost forgot. The LD version is missing a scene from the race. What else is different?

If memory serves, the opening to the pod race is extended with more stupid digital abominations, the race scene you mention, and a scene on Coruscant. All instances hurt the pacing of the original theatrical cut.

AJG

Posted by Bobby Henderson (Member # 840) on 03-16-2011, 02:21 PM:

This talk of "IRE 0.0 or 7.5" gave me a flash-back of editing Beta and 3/4" U-Matic tape in a post production bay. Cue up the color bars. Then fart with the knobs on a Tektronics time/base corrector. The vector-scope gave a pretty good read out on the color signal, unless the tape had been recorded over again and again way too many times. Hey newsroom guys! You might want to shit can this tape already!

Posted by Mark J. Marshall (Member # 1409) on 03-16-2011, 03:27 PM:

quote: Joe Redifer
The LD version is missing a scene from the race.

It is? Or did they add a scene for the DVD? What scene is it?

Posted by Joe Redifer (Member # 3) on 03-16-2011, 04:37 PM:

In the pod race, a cable comes unhooked from one of the engines and starts to flap around wildly. The little turd from Jingle All the Way uses a kind of magnetic rod to put it back in place and restore power. That part in not in the LD. I don't remember if it is in the theatrical cut or not.

Posted by John Wilson (Member # 269) on 03-16-2011, 09:08 PM:

quote: Joe Redifer
I don't remember if it is in the theatrical cut or not.

If it was, it won't be in the next one. If it wasn't it will be in the next one. That's just how George rolls.