28 Days Later - Poor video quality?
06-23-17, 12:33 PM
#102
DVD Talk Legend
06-23-17, 01:29 PM
#103
DVD Talk Legend
Re: 28 Days Later - Poor video quality?
I used to own that PAL DVD. Then I got the NTSC DVD when it was released a few months later. I compared them both when I reviewed them for DVDFile back in the day. Other than the PAL speedup and the very minor difference in resolution, they looked identical in terms of color, contrast and edge enhancement. Given that Fox distributed the movie in both territories, the two DVDs were almost certainly mastered from the same film-to-video scan. The studio wasn't going to waste money to have the movie scanned twice. DVDBeaver is well known to have had many problems taking accurate screencaps.
Last edited by Josh Z; 06-23-17 at 02:02 PM.
06-23-17, 02:18 PM
#104
DVD Talk Legend
Re: 28 Days Later - Poor video quality?
If you can provide better screencaps, I'd like to see them. Otherwise, I'm going to take those images over your over-a-decade old recollection.
06-23-17, 02:35 PM
#105
DVD Talk Legend
Re: 28 Days Later - Poor video quality?
Interesting part of Josh Z's review of the PAL DVD:
http://web.archive.org/web/200310030...dayslater.html
http://web.archive.org/web/200310030...dayslater.html
Video: How Does The Disc Look?
Shot rather inexpensively on digital video, the movie has a deliberately grungy style that works to increase the sense of tension. The DVD very much has that distinctive video-to-film-back-to-video appearance, meaning that it does not have the artificially sharp and vivid appearance of something transferred directly from a video camera source, nor does it look anything like film. It is an intentionally processed image, with colors and other picture attributes manipulated digitally when necessary. It looks neither "realistic", nor does it look like a glossy film production. It is its own thing, and for what it is, the 1.85:1 anamorphically-enhanced picture on the DVD is transferred accurately.
My only possible complaint is the presence of some edge enhancement, visible as halos ringing around objects. However, I am honestly not sure whether this is the fault of the video transfer or if the artifact was introduced by the DV cameras used. I suppose if I got off my butt to see this in the theater while I still have the chance, I might be able to tell whether the problem is present in the theatrical prints. In the meantime, I will just note it. But, along with some jaggies and other video-source defects, the edge enhancement is not necessarily out of place in such a deliberately artificial-looking image.
Shot rather inexpensively on digital video, the movie has a deliberately grungy style that works to increase the sense of tension. The DVD very much has that distinctive video-to-film-back-to-video appearance, meaning that it does not have the artificially sharp and vivid appearance of something transferred directly from a video camera source, nor does it look anything like film. It is an intentionally processed image, with colors and other picture attributes manipulated digitally when necessary. It looks neither "realistic", nor does it look like a glossy film production. It is its own thing, and for what it is, the 1.85:1 anamorphically-enhanced picture on the DVD is transferred accurately.
My only possible complaint is the presence of some edge enhancement, visible as halos ringing around objects. However, I am honestly not sure whether this is the fault of the video transfer or if the artifact was introduced by the DV cameras used. I suppose if I got off my butt to see this in the theater while I still have the chance, I might be able to tell whether the problem is present in the theatrical prints. In the meantime, I will just note it. But, along with some jaggies and other video-source defects, the edge enhancement is not necessarily out of place in such a deliberately artificial-looking image.
06-23-17, 03:01 PM
#106
DVD Talk Legend
Re: 28 Days Later - Poor video quality?
Interesting part of Josh Z's review of the PAL DVD:
http://web.archive.org/web/200310030...dayslater.html
http://web.archive.org/web/200310030...dayslater.html
"It is an intentionally processed image, with colors and other picture attributes manipulated digitally when necessary."
After writing that review of the import, I did see the movie in a theater. The edge enhancement was clear there too. Not a video transfer issue.
06-23-17, 03:11 PM
#107
DVD Talk Legend
Re: 28 Days Later - Poor video quality?
Edit, from your NTSC R1 DVD review:
http://web.archive.org/web/200310020...dayslater.html
My only possible complaint is the presence of some edge enhancement, visible as halos ringing around objects. However, this is not the fault of the video transfer; the artifact was introduced by the DV cameras used and was present in the theatrical prints was well. However, along with some jaggies and other video-source defects, the edge enhancement is not necessarily out of place in such a deliberately artificial-looking image.
