Author Topic:

Taking pictures of TV screens

 (Read 76883 times)

Offline David Mackenzie

  • Global Moderator
  • Calibrated
  • *****
  • Thank You
  • -Gave: 908
  • -Received: 2043
  • Posts: 3561
    • View Profile
    • Personal web site
Re: Taking pictures of TV screens
« Reply #30 on: 16 June 2012, 08:38:58 PM »

Baraka is another one of those films where I just don't understand how it keeps popping up on people's "Reference Disc" lists.
 
Well, I know the reason, but it makes me sad to realise that many people who are enthusiasts actually don't understand what makes for good image quality, and just go along with what everyone else is saying. (not accusing anyone of that here, just saying I see it happens a lot)

The imagery is beautiful, it's a very captivating film. I understand that it was shot on 65mm film, and they made a point about how the Blu-ray is sourced from an 8K scan.

If that's really an 8K scan, they've blown out a hell of a lot of detail with overdone sharpening. That won't be easy to compress, either, with all those fake high frequency edges gobbling up bits.

But I understand why it's used as demo material because, like you say, the imagery is great and the colour grading looks beautiful. I still want to see it for those reasons, but it's a shame it's been compromised by image processing.

Quote
The same thing applies to titles like The Dark Knight, Avatar, Crank, and a number of other discs often listed as "reference titles."
Agree again... although the CG parts in Avatar are nice enough. The compression is also very, very good given the amount of dirt and bullets and other mayhem going on the image. It's those live action video camera segments that look average.

The exact same thing happened with the Lord of the Rings trilogy on SD DVD. The resolution is terrible thanks to overdone lowpass filtering. But it still got used as a "reference" because the imagery was compelling.

The Dark Knight BD is another. Poor resolution, but still gets used a lot, because it's decent for testing contrast (which I can understand). It doesn't make it "reference" though.
« Last Edit: 16 June 2012, 08:44:04 PM by David Mackenzie »
HDTVTest.co.uk Reviewer & US Correspondent
--
Please don't send me the same question through multiple methods (email/forum/PM) since I can't respond 3 separate times. Please post on the forums or use private messages for messages that need privacy. Thanks!

Offline tele1962

  • Calibrated
  • *****
  • Thank You
  • -Gave: 3505
  • -Received: 1925
  • Posts: 5678
    • View Profile
Re: Taking pictures of TV screens
« Reply #31 on: 16 June 2012, 08:52:04 PM »
Baraka is another one of those films where I just don't understand how it keeps popping up on people's "Reference Disc" lists.
 
Well, I know the reason, but it makes me sad to realise that many people who are enthusiasts actually don't understand what makes for good image quality, and just go along with what everyone else is saying. (not accusing anyone of that here, just saying I see it happens a lot)

The imagery is beautiful, it's a very captivating film. I understand that it was shot on 65mm film, and they made a point about how the Blu-ray is sourced from an 8K scan.

However, the image quality on the Blu-ray disc is poor. It's full of ringing and compression artefacts. Here's a 100% quality JPEG (not lossless, but close enough) of a completely random frame from the Blu-ray disc:


You can pick just about any frame from the film at random and it's going to have similarly poor image quality.

And here's YouTube for comparison (couldn't get the exact frame to match)


When a highly compressed YouTube clip of a very detailed scene like that doesn't look significantly worse, you know something has gone horribly wrong.

The same thing applies to titles like The Dark Knight, Avatar, Crank, and a number of other discs often listed as "reference titles."

About the only film I can think of that is frequently used as a demo disc or "reference title" which is actually useful, is Casino Royale (2006). Not because it's a stunning transferówe've come a long way in six years of Blu-ray encodingóbut because it's a good looking disc, has a wide range of good scenes for testing, with night shots, great daytime vistas, and some scenes that are great tests for judging how good a display's colour reproduction is. What makes it a good disc is that it's been around from the very beginning (it was many people's first Blu-ray due to promotions Sony were running) and so calibrators are usually quite familiar with it, and how it's supposed to look.


Got to say Andrew that we could pick fault with just about every film but to my eyes up to now i have not seen a real time film yet that can touch Baraka for shear Photographic beauty and image quality and watching it i can hardly see any fault with either the transfer or the compresion used.
The Youtube clip doesn't come close to the Blu Ray i have to compare it with. :)

Both the clips you have provided do indeed look like there is some artificial sharpening going on but that is not the case with my Blu Ray. ???
« Last Edit: 16 June 2012, 09:01:00 PM by tele1962 »

Offline FoxHounder

  • Global Moderator
  • Calibrated
  • *****
  • Thank You
  • -Gave: 704
  • -Received: 985
  • Posts: 1643
    • View Profile
Re: Taking pictures of TV screens
« Reply #32 on: 16 June 2012, 08:53:10 PM »
Andrew, David, since it's brought up in discussion, which Blu-Ray titles would you call a Reference apart from Casino Royale? And which of them would you personally recommend for testing purposes - like above-mentioned Dark Knight with contrasty scenes?
Video: Panasonic TX-PR55VT60 + Pioneer BDP-140
Audio: Onkyo TX-NR626 + Boston Acoustics CS260 II 5.1

Offline David Mackenzie

  • Global Moderator
  • Calibrated
  • *****
  • Thank You
  • -Gave: 908
  • -Received: 2043
  • Posts: 3561
    • View Profile
    • Personal web site
Re: Taking pictures of TV screens
« Reply #33 on: 16 June 2012, 08:59:40 PM »
That depends what you mean by Reference. Nearly any modern Hollywood film which is transferred from a digital intermediate (scan of the negative) stands a very good chance of looking excellent. Not all do, but there are tons that do.

For example, are the BDs of Pixar movies "Reference"? I would say so because they clearly represent the film. But, the films themselves (from Wall-e onwards, I think) have had lens softening effects added to them, so on a purely technical level, that could be seen as a compromise. I wouldn't agree, but I could understand why people wouldn't consider them "Reference".

Some CG movies get bungled during compression with lowpass filtering (Kung Fu Panda, the 2D versions of most Dreamworks CG movies) and lose any claim to "Reference", despite still looking decent. I see those pop up in "reference" lists a lot, but they're arguably not.

Some discs I like a lot for image quality: I-Robot, the Australian version of The Descent, the US version of Ponyo (although I think the UK/AUS version is equally good), the third Resident Evil film...
HDTVTest.co.uk Reviewer & US Correspondent
--
Please don't send me the same question through multiple methods (email/forum/PM) since I can't respond 3 separate times. Please post on the forums or use private messages for messages that need privacy. Thanks!

Offline David Mackenzie

  • Global Moderator
  • Calibrated
  • *****
  • Thank You
  • -Gave: 908
  • -Received: 2043
  • Posts: 3561
    • View Profile
    • Personal web site
Re: Taking pictures of TV screens
« Reply #34 on: 16 June 2012, 09:40:38 PM »
Quote
Both the clips you have provided do indeed look like there is some artificial sharpening going on but that is not the case with my Blu Ray.
Unless there's different masters made, we'll all be looking at the same thing.

With digital optical disc, there's no "good copies" and "bad copies". Well, you can get badly pressed discs, but they probably won't even start, and if they did, they'd freeze and glitch up.
HDTVTest.co.uk Reviewer & US Correspondent
--
Please don't send me the same question through multiple methods (email/forum/PM) since I can't respond 3 separate times. Please post on the forums or use private messages for messages that need privacy. Thanks!

Offline tele1962

  • Calibrated
  • *****
  • Thank You
  • -Gave: 3505
  • -Received: 1925
  • Posts: 5678
    • View Profile
Re: Taking pictures of TV screens
« Reply #35 on: 16 June 2012, 09:47:48 PM »
Quote
Both the clips you have provided do indeed look like there is some artificial sharpening going on but that is not the case with my Blu Ray.
Unless there's different masters made, we'll all be looking at the same thing.

With digital optical disc, there's no "good copies" and "bad copies". Well, you can get badly pressed discs, but they probably won't even start, and if they did, they'd freeze and glitch up.

My daft explanasion again LOL ::). I was meaning that if that has come of the Blu Ray that something else has added some ringing/sharpening to the picture..........i think. ???

Offline David Mackenzie

  • Global Moderator
  • Calibrated
  • *****
  • Thank You
  • -Gave: 908
  • -Received: 2043
  • Posts: 3561
    • View Profile
    • Personal web site
Re: Taking pictures of TV screens
« Reply #36 on: 16 June 2012, 10:09:10 PM »
It's probably just the sitting distance making it harder to see. It took about 6 years (I think!) for Andrew to find a TV he could live with, so there won't be edge enhancement in the chain.
HDTVTest.co.uk Reviewer & US Correspondent
--
Please don't send me the same question through multiple methods (email/forum/PM) since I can't respond 3 separate times. Please post on the forums or use private messages for messages that need privacy. Thanks!

These member(s) thanked your post:


Offline tele1962

  • Calibrated
  • *****
  • Thank You
  • -Gave: 3505
  • -Received: 1925
  • Posts: 5678
    • View Profile
Re: Taking pictures of TV screens
« Reply #37 on: 16 June 2012, 10:11:25 PM »
It's probably just the sitting distance making it harder to see. It took about 6 years (I think!) for Andrew to find a TV he could live with, so there won't be edge enhancement in the chain.

Could be my old eyes as well LOL. :P

These member(s) thanked your post:


Offline panman40

  • Calibrated
  • *****
  • Thank You
  • -Gave: 2049
  • -Received: 1597
  • Posts: 5876
  • 'The truth Is out there'
    • View Profile
Re: Taking pictures of TV screens
« Reply #38 on: 16 June 2012, 10:12:49 PM »
Andrew, David, since it's brought up in discussion, which Blu-Ray titles would you call a Reference apart from Casino Royale? And which of them would you personally recommend for testing purposes - like above-mentioned Dark Knight with contrasty scenes?

To be Honest Misha i think that Whatever looks Stunning to 'You' on your Panel would be considered 'Reference' Material  ;). I have several Blu Rays that i Consider 'Top Notch' for PQ and ironically one of them has always been 'I Robot' , A favorite of Davids i see.

I will come clean here and admit i am not a huge fan of Large amounts of Film Grain  :-[, I like a Clean Sharp Artifact free Natural but Vibrant Colour Image ...  :o :P Lol.
Sony KDL-55W905, Pana TX-L37LZD80, Panasonic DMP-BDT310, Pana DMP-BD60, Oppo BDP-103DMZ, Sky HD 1TB, Yamaha RXV 675, 7.1ch, 2x Kef Q300C, 4X Kef HTS3001SE Eggs,  Kef Q600C Centre, BK XXLS400 Sub, Harmony 900 & 650. Sennheiser RS160 Phones, iPad 4 64GB.

Offline panman40

  • Calibrated
  • *****
  • Thank You
  • -Gave: 2049
  • -Received: 1597
  • Posts: 5876
  • 'The truth Is out there'
    • View Profile
Re: Taking pictures of TV screens
« Reply #39 on: 16 June 2012, 10:14:24 PM »
It's probably just the sitting distance making it harder to see. It took about 6 years (I think!) for Andrew to find a TV he could live with, so there won't be edge enhancement in the chain.

So what did he end up with ?? A CRT from the Dumpster ...  ??? :P :P
Sony KDL-55W905, Pana TX-L37LZD80, Panasonic DMP-BDT310, Pana DMP-BD60, Oppo BDP-103DMZ, Sky HD 1TB, Yamaha RXV 675, 7.1ch, 2x Kef Q300C, 4X Kef HTS3001SE Eggs,  Kef Q600C Centre, BK XXLS400 Sub, Harmony 900 & 650. Sennheiser RS160 Phones, iPad 4 64GB.

Offline David Mackenzie

  • Global Moderator
  • Calibrated
  • *****
  • Thank You
  • -Gave: 908
  • -Received: 2043
  • Posts: 3561
    • View Profile
    • Personal web site
Re: Taking pictures of TV screens
« Reply #40 on: 16 June 2012, 10:17:41 PM »
Quote
I like a Clean Sharp Artifact free Natural but Vibrant Colour Image ...    Lol.
Those are exactly the reasons why I hate (badlyt done) film grain reduction! ;D

Film grain isn't automatically good, there are times where reducing it is okay. I always used the example of restoration projects where the original negative is lost or damaged and a lower-down (and grainier) source needs to be used; careful grain reduction in the studio is fine by me in those cases - IF it's done well.

But the idea that film grain is automatically bad is misguided. It might not be to everyone's taste, but that means the film you're watching isn't to your taste. I've watched films with depressing, cold, blue, desaturated colours. I wouldn't have made the film that way. But it's not my film, and someone made it look like that on purpose, so it's not for me to decide.

Quote
So what did he end up with ?? A CRT from the Dumpster ...   
A Sony local dimming LED LCD ;D
HDTVTest.co.uk Reviewer & US Correspondent
--
Please don't send me the same question through multiple methods (email/forum/PM) since I can't respond 3 separate times. Please post on the forums or use private messages for messages that need privacy. Thanks!

Offline FoxHounder

  • Global Moderator
  • Calibrated
  • *****
  • Thank You
  • -Gave: 704
  • -Received: 985
  • Posts: 1643
    • View Profile
Re: Taking pictures of TV screens
« Reply #41 on: 16 June 2012, 10:17:57 PM »
That depends what you mean by Reference. Nearly any modern Hollywood film which is transferred from a digital intermediate (scan of the negative) stands a very good chance of looking excellent. Not all do, but there are tons that do.
By Reference I mean just a few titles, which often come to your mind as an example of near-perfect transfer and encoding work. Probably a 2-3 of your personal favourites in terms of PQ, which are a good showcase for Blu-Ray. Like, you pop that disc into player and withness the most stunning picture HD can offer (provided you do it on nice player and appropriate TV). :)

Some discs I like a lot for image quality: I-Robot, the Australian version of The Descent, the US version of Ponyo (although I think the UK/AUS version is equally good), the third Resident Evil film...
Thanks, that's what I wanted to hear! Personally, I don't like CG, but animation like Ponyo is always welcome.
Are some of your ST50 shots made with images from Ponyo disc?
Video: Panasonic TX-PR55VT60 + Pioneer BDP-140
Audio: Onkyo TX-NR626 + Boston Acoustics CS260 II 5.1

Offline tele1962

  • Calibrated
  • *****
  • Thank You
  • -Gave: 3505
  • -Received: 1925
  • Posts: 5678
    • View Profile
Re: Taking pictures of TV screens
« Reply #42 on: 16 June 2012, 10:19:55 PM »
Any thoughts on Blade Runner lads as i was thinking of some pics of that one? :)

By the way this taking pics of the tv is proving to be a great way to learn about different camera settings. :)

Offline David Mackenzie

  • Global Moderator
  • Calibrated
  • *****
  • Thank You
  • -Gave: 908
  • -Received: 2043
  • Posts: 3561
    • View Profile
    • Personal web site
Re: Taking pictures of TV screens
« Reply #43 on: 16 June 2012, 10:20:05 PM »
Quote
Are some of your ST50 shots made with images from Ponyo disc?
No, that's Arrietty, another Studio Ghibli film.

There's a disc I'm working on at the moment which is going to look outstanding. It's of a film from 30 years ago and it looks exceptional. If you don't like what films look like, you won't like this since it has grain. It's not going to be reference because there are occasional compromises in the scan. But I'm still really proud of how it's shaping up. I can't wait until I can actually show it.
HDTVTest.co.uk Reviewer & US Correspondent
--
Please don't send me the same question through multiple methods (email/forum/PM) since I can't respond 3 separate times. Please post on the forums or use private messages for messages that need privacy. Thanks!

These member(s) thanked your post:


Offline David Mackenzie

  • Global Moderator
  • Calibrated
  • *****
  • Thank You
  • -Gave: 908
  • -Received: 2043
  • Posts: 3561
    • View Profile
    • Personal web site
Re: Taking pictures of TV screens
« Reply #44 on: 16 June 2012, 10:20:55 PM »
Quote
Any thoughts on Blade Runner lads as i was thinking of some pics of that one?
I asked my brother about this one. He's seen this more lately than I have. The scan is absolutely excellent (especially the director's cut version). There's some rough compression in parts, but that's second fiddle compared to the great scan.

Warner are re-releasing it this year, hopefully with a new encode.
HDTVTest.co.uk Reviewer & US Correspondent
--
Please don't send me the same question through multiple methods (email/forum/PM) since I can't respond 3 separate times. Please post on the forums or use private messages for messages that need privacy. Thanks!