Yup I guess so since I pre-order. Hopefully yours ok.

lucky you dont find some sticky on the disc

Watched this just now. For me however, the best looking ever for a 6 year old, catalog & B-movie title in high definition. The first thing I'm curious is the amount of grain that I'm expecting from this catalog title. Surprise2, its flawless.... yes, grain was there but almost un-noticed, images are sharp, colours are nice and the night/exterior scenes under low-light almost perfect for my level of viewing and I don't notice any DNR or EE applied to this one either.

Kudos to New Line! Other studios should follow this sample when making their catalog titles onto high definition... and stop making excuses to something like - grain is part of film stock, what BS!

This post has been edited by fadthil: Oct 10 2009, 03:06 PM

haha.. the ( . Y . ) is full of silicon wan

They still say that nowadays?

Even the Casablanca BD isn't as grainy as some of those BDs

Silicon is yum yum

It's not BS. I'm surprised you guys still can't understand this. Google up the type of film stocks used to shoot the movies. Even if the movie was shot digitally, the director might even intentionally add grain in post. So the movie looks the way the director intended, you just have to accept it, just like you accept his direction of the movie itself.

Some cases, problems come during transfer, which makes the film look not as intended. Old transfer might have DNR and EE applied which is fine for DVD because the low definition won't make it obvious, even might make it cleaner and sharper. But for HD it becomes a problem. In this case the director will have to get the studio do a new transfer which will take time and money. One example is Gladiator, the BD release used an old transfer, I'm sure Ridley Scott is pushing Universal/Paramount to do a new transfer for future release.

---

Added on October 10, 2009, 5:44 pmAgain it depends on the type of film stock used. Some 35mm stock produce less grain. If the movie was shot on 70mm, the grain will be very fine you might not notice it.

Plus, most studios take more efforts in restoring the classics, they might have done it frame by frame. It's time consuming and too expensive to be done on all movies.

This post has been edited by aiman04: Oct 10 2009, 05:44 PM

I love the above discussion.

Wanna share with u all :

Hi-Def vs Film Grain

An Explaination on film grain

Grain on 300 BD = nice
Grain on A Knight's Tale BD = BAD!!!

That's my point really. Intentional grain is fine... like 300, Black Hawk Down & The Kingdom... I don't have issue on those films and even rated them high on my PQ list in my collection.

The real issue here is how A TRANSFER make their way to high-definition format like blu-ray. Do the studios care about producing a good looking transfer without messing up the look or just use the master for LD or dvd to produce blu-ray? If it's a good transfer in the first place, do they need to apply DNR or EE? I bet most new adopters to blu-ray don't care about film stock characteristics, how directors want the studio to remaster their movie in the future...etc etc as they expect a flawless look on a high-def presentation.

How do we tell them if we play Predator, Lara Croft: Tomb Raider or Commando for instance? Are we gonna tell them it is the director's intention? or they decided to use cheap film stock... or the studio gonna remaster this soon? All they know: all hi-def = flawless picture & sound.

also depend on the type of TV and how it applies it's post image processing.. they may soften or accentuate the "grainy"ness ..

I'been seeing major grains on Bds played on some of sony's LCD TVs in the show rooms.. to me that's quite distracting..

I like both. on 300, the intentional grain give cinematic feel of conflict, blood, intense. on Knight's tale, it gives a feel of good old film, care-free yet full of twist. However sometimes the unintentional grain do come in the way of me enjoying the scene. Specifically in night dance scene.

Fine grain is fine. It's the bigger ones that is distracting and also sometimes some digital noise that screwed the film look. This is all transfer problem. Try watching Tomb Raider... you'll know what I mean. Having said that, I don't fancy overly-used DNR & EE either.

ok..come borrow me your tomb raider...

Sorry, sold it already the minute I've finished watching it...

any other information on the difference between Walmart's Exclusive Transformers 2 and the normal one? So far I know it will have switching aspect ratio and 1 minute longer for jungle fight scene.

I've cancelled my pre-order knowing there's another "slightly" better version out there but dunno how to get that one. pfffft... they really messed-up with this lar...

It's not transfer problem. Obviously you just don't understand. Let's just leave it at that, you have your opinions everyone should respect. But please, don't call something BS when it's not. Thanks.

Film grain isn't usually a transfer problem, but there are instances when it is (or rather, digital noise is more of a transfer problem)

Yeah, who can organize a bulk for the Transformers ROTF Walmart edition? That would have a lot of interest from here I'm sure.

stringfellow

I'm not sure if he can bulk, but he can definitely get it