Aliens Boxed Set- Bad Transfer?
timothy prebble
that the picture resolution was very poor in several scenes. At first
I thought that I had some defective disks, but I don't think this
is the case because of how the low resolution scenes manifest themselves.
Scene A will look great, then just after a cut, we are presented with scene B
which looks like crap, and then, after another cut, we get scene C which looks
great again. In other words, the picture goes from great quality to
poor quality only after a cut has occurred, so I think the problem is
with the quality of the overall transfer from film rather than with
my discs specifically.
In order to test my theory, I'd like to know if anyone else who has viewed
the boxed set has observed the same poor picture quality. Also, if it's
true that the culprit is a poor transfer, has anyone heard of any explanation
for why such a poor transfer has been done for the collector's edition? For
a retail price of $100, I expect the best possible picture quality- not
something that looks like a bad VHS recording.
Thanks,
Tim Prebble
--
Tim Prebble | "Life is not a problem to be solved, but
pre...@cs.colostate.edu | a reality to be experienced."- Oliver,
Colorado State University | Bloom County's Head Scientist and Philosopher
Sector 001 | Extraordinaire
Lazlo Nibble
> I just purchased the Aliens Boxed Set and I was shocked to notice that
> the picture resolution was very poor in several scenes.
Many of the scenes in the film were shot with available light, and Cameron
had to use a grainy film stock to get any image at all. If you're seeing
grain in the darker scenes, it's because the transfer is accurately
reproducing what's on the film.
--
::: Lazlo (la...@rt66.com)
::: http://rt66.com/lazlo/ features Discographies, Record
::: Collecting Resources, The Internet Music Wantlists, and more.
0080C7...@innet.be
>I just purchased the Aliens Boxed Set and I was shocked to notice
>that the picture resolution was very poor in several scenes. At first
>I thought that I had some defective disks, but I don't think this
>is the case because of how the low resolution scenes manifest themselves.
>Scene A will look great, then just after a cut, we are presented with scene B
>which looks like crap, and then, after another cut, we get scene C which looks
>great again. In other words, the picture goes from great quality to
>poor quality only after a cut has occurred, so I think the problem is
>with the quality of the overall transfer from film rather than with
>my discs specifically.
>In order to test my theory, I'd like to know if anyone else who has viewed
>the boxed set has observed the same poor picture quality. Also, if it's
>true that the culprit is a poor transfer, has anyone heard of any explanation
>for why such a poor transfer has been done for the collector's edition? For
>a retail price of $100, I expect the best possible picture quality- not
>something that looks like a bad VHS recording.
Wow, you are a hard man. A bad VHS copy indeed.
Much has been written about the transfer of this film.
Please consider that James Cameron shot it fairly grainy and this accounts for
many of the surprises and disappointments. You can read much about this
film, it's transfer, film stocks used, etc. in an old issue of The Perfect
Vision. JP it is not.
As for your query related to different scenes being of different quality. I
have not noticed this on my copy. It could be the specially inserted scenes
for this release that you are noticing.
I would still maintain that overall this is an outstanding disc. The "extras"
what I've ploughed through are comprehensive and the film itself is a WOW.
How we'd all love a THX AC3 print at $39.99. Dream on Rob.
Rob
William Birkmaier
: I just purchased the Aliens Boxed Set and I was shocked to notice
: that the picture resolution was very poor in several scenes. At first
: I thought that I had some defective disks, but I don't think this
: is the case because of how the low resolution scenes manifest themselves.
: Scene A will look great, then just after a cut, we are presented with scene B
: which looks like crap, and then, after another cut, we get scene C which looks
If it is between the original and the restored scenes then this is
because the original restored footage was stored poorley and was the
best available for the restoration.
: great again. In other words, the picture goes from great quality to
: poor quality only after a cut has occurred, so I think the problem is
: with the quality of the overall transfer from film rather than with
: my discs specifically.
: In order to test my theory, I'd like to know if anyone else who has viewed
: the boxed set has observed the same poor picture quality. Also, if it's
: true that the culprit is a poor transfer, has anyone heard of any explanation
Its not that bad, remember this movie came out nearly 10 years ago!
Hasn't been many movies like it since.
: for why such a poor transfer has been done for the collector's edition? For
: a retail price of $100, I expect the best possible picture quality- not
: something that looks like a bad VHS recording.
It is the best picture quality according to them. If you read the
supplemental material on the extra disk it talks about the film
transfer in detail.
Will
: Thanks,
: Tim Prebble
: --
: Tim Prebble | "Life is not a problem to be solved, but
: pre...@cs.colostate.edu | a reality to be experienced."- Oliver,
: Colorado State University | Bloom County's Head Scientist and Philosopher
: Sector 001 | Extraordinaire
--
__
_@-@_
/-------------\
| pa_wbb@@ |
| splinter. |
| coe.neu.edu |
\-------------/
Toonces T. Cat
pre...@beethoven.cs.colostate.edu writes:
>I just purchased the Aliens Boxed Set and I was shocked to notice
>that the picture resolution was very poor in several scenes. At first
>I thought that I had some defective disks, but I don't think this
>is the case because of how the low resolution scenes manifest themselves.
>Scene A will look great, then just after a cut, we are presented with
scene B
>which looks like crap, and then, after another cut, we get scene C which
looks
>great again. In other words, the picture goes from great quality to
>poor quality only after a cut has occurred, so I think the problem is
>with the quality of the overall transfer from film rather than with
>my discs specifically.
Tim,
I have looked everywhere and I could not find Van Ling's great posting on
this subject. Van does all of the transfers to LD for LightStorm
Entertainment. He posted a terrific explanation of why the ALIENS SE has
the look that it does.
The bottom-line is that they used a new (at the time) low-light film
stock to get the look they wanted...sort of a gritty docudrama
appearance. The compromise that resulted is that in very low-light
scenes, there is a lot of grain visible in the film. On a personal note,
I think it was a terrific choice as, for me, it really aids in the
suspension of disbelief. When they did the LD, they faced a choice: 1. Go
for a slight defocus and lose the grain, or 2. Keep the image sharp and
let the grain be rather apparent...They went for #2...
If Van sees your message, he'll probably post. If not, you can write him
at kira...@aol.com
-t
Ken Story
pre...@beethoven.cs.colostate.edu (timothy prebble) wrote:
> I just purchased the Aliens Boxed Set and I was shocked to notice
> that the picture resolution was very poor in several scenes. At first
> I thought that I had some defective disks, but I don't think this
> is the case because of how the low resolution scenes manifest themselves.
> Scene A will look great, then just after a cut, we are presented with scene B
> which looks like crap, and then, after another cut, we get scene C which looks
> great again. In other words, the picture goes from great quality to
> poor quality only after a cut has occurred, so I think the problem is
> with the quality of the overall transfer from film rather than with
> my discs specifically.
>
> In order to test my theory, I'd like to know if anyone else who has viewed
> the boxed set has observed the same poor picture quality. Also, if it's
> true that the culprit is a poor transfer, has anyone heard of any explanation
> for why such a poor transfer has been done for the collector's edition? For
> a retail price of $100, I expect the best possible picture quality- not
> something that looks like a bad VHS recording.
>
>
--
I have had the Aliens Boxed Set for a year or two. I have observed that
certain scenes are very grainy, while other scenes are fine. This varies
from camera angle to camera angle and the problem seems to be with the
program source rather than with the transfer. I recall reading somewhere
that the "graininess" problem was in the film used to photograph the
picture. I also recall reading that the director wanted to use this grain
to provide a certain effect in various scenes. The grain really shows up
in the outdoor night scenes.
The Alien Boxed Set produces a much better picture than does the subsequent
Aliens Boxed Set.
Ken Story
st...@rocky.tntn.gtegsc.com
Mark Doyle
admmitted in an interview that he didnt exactly know what he was
doing at the time, as the media was still in its infancy. FOX
claims that one day they may get him to remaster it, make it a littel
widerscreen, but, just a new excuse for us to spend our money.
Tom Burka
Cameron supervised and approved the transfer. Although everyone (and I
mean *everyone* complained about the awful quality of the transfer when
it came out, the President of Fox (or whatever company it was that
produced the discs) said that that was the way Cameron wanted them. He
did shoot in low light, and the process he chose in the transfer
emphasized the high degree of grain which was already present in the film.
--
::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
Tom Burka The opinions expressed here are not mine. Go figure.
::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
Rusty Williams
I don't think this is correct. I think the original poster isn't talking
about the general look of the release, so much that *some* scenes (obviously
separated by cuts) look much granier than the rest of the film. I can easily
see this on my copy, and it turns out it's always the extra footage that was
cut from the original film. So, it's not the transfer, that's just the best
quality print available for that extra footage.
-R
Philip Renda
>
> I don't think this is correct. I think the original poster isn't talking
> about the general look of the release, so much that *some* scenes (obviously
> separated by cuts) look much granier than the rest of the film. I can easily
> see this on my copy, and it turns out it's always the extra footage that was
> cut from the original film. So, it's not the transfer, that's just the best
> quality print available for that extra footage.
>
The grainy shots show up in the original footage as well as the extra footage.
If you compare the original laser release of Aliens to the box set you will
see that some scenes that looked fine on the older release now look grainy.
Also, some of the restored scenes look fine while others look grainy.
If you turn down the contrast on your television the grain won't be
as noticeable.
--Philip
--
Philip Renda (ai...@freenet.carleton.ca)
president of The Laser Alliance - Canada's #1 source for Laser Discs
(613) 841-8942
Ottawa, Ontario CANADA
Jim Millick
timothy prebble <pre...@beethoven.cs.colostate.edu> wrote:
>I just purchased the Aliens Boxed Set and I was shocked to notice
>that the picture resolution was very poor in several scenes.
I wish someone had saved Van's explanation. This is what Jim Cameron
told me in a 1992 Perfect Vision interview:
--------
JM: Let's talk about ALIENS. One of the things I keep hearing from
some other TPV writers and readers is...
JIM CAMERON: The graininess?
JM: Yes.
JIM CAMERON: It's a grainy film. It was shot on 5294, which was
Kodak's high speed stock in their transition from 5293, which was not a
T-grain emulsion , to 5296, which is their new high speed emulsion,
which is a T-grain emulsion. 5294 didn't have the bugs worked out of
it, it's a grainier movie than T2. It [ALIENS] was also transferred in
a not super state of the art transfer facility, like they have now.
They have some gadgets now that can play around with the black
pedestal, get the blacks sharp without the shots going grainy. I
supervised the transfer, I did the color corrections from shot
to shot. It was the best it could look.
--------
Copyright (c) 1992, The Perfect Vision
For information, 1 (800) 222-3201 or (516) 676-2830.
Somebody add this to the FAQ *please*!
Jim
--
Jim Millick
Staff Writer
The Perfect Vision