Posts: 701
Threads: 109
Joined: 2015 Apr
Thanks: 257
Given 672 thank(s) in 280 post(s)
Country: 
I've mentioned this on OT in the past, but I'd love to see Jurassic Park given some love. As many will know, the 2011 2D transfer has (among other problems) an awful cold blue colour grading. The 2013 3D remaster made an attempt to restore the warmer theatrical colours but, as part of the 3D conversion, had all detail and grain scrubbed away and other bizarre artifacts added.
It would be great to have a regrade that retains the detail of the 2D BD with the more theatrically accurate colours of the 3D BD. Here is some evidence that shows that the 3D BD's colours are closer to the original theatrical look than the 2D BD.
2D BD
[Image: jurassic_park_10.png]
3D BD
[Image: jurassic_park_3d_21.png]
Original ILM file
[Image: 5a630cee_immaginetuv.jpeg]
2D BD
[Image: v5do.png]
3D BD
[Image: 0ran.jpg]
Film cell
[Image: l46n.jpg]
2D BD
[Image: gpvw.jpg]
3D BD
[Image: sftd.jpg]
Film cell
[Image: m0wJlfV.jpg]
Anybody interested??
Posts: 7,153
Threads: 601
Joined: 2015 Jan
Thanks: 1081
Given 1466 thank(s) in 963 post(s)
Country: 
IIRC, the 2D BD has EE and/or DNR applied... am I wrong?
A WOWOW version is floating around, that *could* be eventually better to use as a source.
Posts: 701
Threads: 109
Joined: 2015 Apr
Thanks: 257
Given 672 thank(s) in 280 post(s)
Country:
The 2D does have pretty bad EE as you will see if you look at the full-sized version of the brachiosaur image above. The 2D does not suffer from DNR as far as I can tell whereas the 3D is heavily DNR'd.
By regrading the 2DBD to the 3D colours we would have a version that retains all the lost detail and grain that is missing from the 3DBD and have the theatrical colours. Yes, there would still be some EE but, to me at least, that would be a small price to pay for the benefits of such a preservation.
I was not aware of an HDTV version. Do you happen to have any screenshots of it??
Posts: 7,153
Threads: 601
Joined: 2015 Jan
Thanks: 1081
Given 1466 thank(s) in 963 post(s)
Country:
(2015-05-18, 04:40 PM)Turisu Wrote: I was not aware of an HDTV version. Do you happen to have any screenshots of it??
Nope, sorry...  but you can find some info in an OT thread.
Posts: 893
Threads: 162
Joined: 2015 Apr
Thanks: 224
Given 488 thank(s) in 256 post(s)
Country: 
You can't use the 2D BD stream fromt he 3D BD because it's cropped and has work done to make the 3D release possible. Since there is no transfer of the actual untouched 2D version from that remaster, I highly recommend not using it.
To illustrate on what I'm talking about, check out this comparison.
Posts: 701
Threads: 109
Joined: 2015 Apr
Thanks: 257
Given 672 thank(s) in 280 post(s)
Country:
I'm aware of those weird anomalies due to the 3D conversion. I'm not suggesting combining the two sources. What I am suggesting is taking the 2DBD video and regrading to match the colours of the 3DBD. The 3D video would not be used as a source, only a reference.
Posts: 2,290
Threads: 39
Joined: 2015 Jan
Thanks: 177
Given 187 thank(s) in 133 post(s)
Not to de-rail the topic, but I am curious whether all 3D conversions are like this where they can't be used as a video source, but only as a color-reference. I am currently waiting on receiving the new 3D "Top Gun" BD and want to use it as a video source, instead of the crappy 2D version that is heavily DNR'd and has horrible EE, while the 3D version is a beautiful, new transfer but suffers from a horrible new color-timing.
Back on topic: I'm looking forward to the results of the regraded 2D BD, once you have some samples 
Posts: 7,153
Threads: 601
Joined: 2015 Jan
Thanks: 1081
Given 1466 thank(s) in 963 post(s)
Country:
AFAIK 3D versions are "touched" here and there... often you'll find objects moved - I noted that when discussing about Predator; of course I can't say this is true for every movie, but at least it *should* be true for 2D->3D conversions...
Found this comparison: http://screenshotcomparison.com/comparison/51849
don't know if the remastered BD is 3D, though...
Posts: 701
Threads: 109
Joined: 2015 Apr
Thanks: 257
Given 672 thank(s) in 280 post(s)
Country:
I suspect those images are from heavily compressed sources. Both the 2DBD and the 3DBD look way better than that. Though it does illustrate how certain foreground objects are often 'moved' in 3D conversions. So I would say that a 3D-converted video source would not be a good basis for any attempt at a theatrical preservation.
Posts: 2,290
Threads: 39
Joined: 2015 Jan
Thanks: 177
Given 187 thank(s) in 133 post(s)
Well, that's a HUGE disappointment as there are certain movies out there that have had a very decent, new transfer that is ONLY used for the 3D editions, where the 2D usually uses an old transfer (in many case inferior transfer)
I understand what you mean about 3D sources not being a good basis for a theatrical preservation, but how badly are things "moved" for the 3D conversions? In other words, how noticeable would it be while watching a film in 2D that was sourced from a 3D "master?" Would there be any "exceptions" to the rule, where the 2D source is so bad that you are "forced" to use the 3D source?
|
