Wow, you appear to have done some very in-depth public opinion surveys on LoA and DVDs in general. Either that, or you're just pulling the "most people" thing out of your ass as usual to justify your own opinion. Gee, I wonder which one it is...

DJ

I don't see most members of this board posting in this thread do you? Draw your own conclusions. Do you think most people make fine distinctions or make side by side DVD comparisons at home? I notice that you don't actually address those points. It's easy to be sarcastic. Try actually debating the points at hand.

There's nothing to debate. You pull nonsensical attempted-factual statements like "most people couldn't see the difference in the Superbit LoA" out of your ass. Since I neither have any data on it nor do I fabricate such facts, I can't debate that claim. I don't invent things just to have a debate about it for its own sake, as you often do. You can't bait me to debate your worthless invented statistics no matter how hard you try.

If you were to just post your own thoughts instead of attempting to justify yourself with invented crap about "most people," maybe the thread could actually go somewhere. Instead, you belittle your own opinion by dressing it up with nonsense and attempting to shield yourself with fabricated statistics.

DJ

While the Superbit version may have "better" picture (Robert Harris supervised the transfer on the SB while he didn't participate in the LE transfer), the LE version has the better overall package.

No, DJ, you just ignore reality. I don't need to conduct a poll to know how most people rate things. Living for 46 years has taught me that. People like you who want polls to back up common sense statements never actually address points. You just sit around demanding statistical analysis for that which most people grasp from experience. I have fabricated no statistics. I have made statements based on life experience and common sense. You, on the other hand, have failed to answer any questions.

Do you believe that most people make side by side comparisons of DVD's at home?
Do you need a poll to know the answer to the above question?
Do you believe that most people make detailed differentiations of video quality on DVD's?
If so, have you conducted a scientific survey to back it up?

DJ, your cries for statistics are just an evasion of the real issues. You are not fooling anyone.

EPKJ, let's move this back on topic. Feel free to continue your discussion on e-mail but not in this thread please.

But you don't mind DJ continuing? Why was this addressed to me? I was on topic. If anyone moved off topic it was DJ. If you have a problem I suggest that you address him. By the way, your post is off topic. Feel free to continue such posts in e-mail but not in this discussion thread. Now, Josh, let's move this back to the topic.

Well I sold off the LE and plan on getting the Superbit for the better quality image....I was disappointed with it on the LE, enjoyed the supplements and that's that.

as for EPKJ's questions....we're not talking about "most people" here...we're talking about a board full of dvd enthusiasts....who, by and large, seek out the best quality releases. So yes, "most people" around here do make comparisons of different transfers (thanks to DVDBeaver and similar sites it's pretty easy to do)...you don't have to do it yourself - others do it for you. Your assertion, ultimately, is baseless and clueless....there is no "real issue" to address....you are making things up to assuage your own lack of concern. I care about the differences, so do most others around here - the only relevent group in these discussions....

I think most people on these boards can tell the difference between a sub-par transfer and a really great transfer of the same film when they have the option to view both.

I didn't need a side-by-side comparison to see the merits of the Superbit. Usually I can't tell the difference between a normal really good transfer and the Superbit version (which usually uses the same transfer - just at a higher bit rate).

But in the case of Lawrence of Arabia - it's an entirely different transfer, cleaned up, and more importantly, properly colour corrected.

That changes the ENTIRE LOOK of the film. It makes things that used to be just shadows visible for the first time. You can see detail that you couldn't before. It's clearer and less murky.

The LE transfer was okay, but not great. There were a lot of problems with it, that reviewers DID note back when it was released.

The Superbit is much much better. I took a quick tally of the posts in this thread, and MOST PEOPLE agree with me.

Then I would ask what kind of equipment you've watched both the LE and the SB on... Were both viewings done on a properly calibrated 16X9 via a prog scan player? As noted above, the differences in the transfers between the SB and the LE are noticable on any display.. However, the larger and more detailed the display, the more you're likely to notice the improvements...

Since you seem to believe that no one can tell the difference, despite the overwhelming evidence to the contrary in this thread, why don't you run a poll and ask?

These guys must not be "most people"...

"Though I’d seen Lawrence a number of times prior to 2001, I definitely didn’t have great enough familiarity to know that something was wrong with the colors. Now that I have the new one and can compare, however, I could easily see the differences. Actually, before I did direct comparisons, I thought that the Superbit image simply looked more “correct”. There’s a clarity and purity to the colors that I didn’t recall from any prior incarnations, and they came across with greater realism and vivacity. A few minor flaws to the contrary, the Superbit Lawrence mostly looked tremendous and the DVD often gave the film a visual impact that made it seem like they shot it yesterday." > http://dvdmg.com/lawrenceofarabiasuperbit.shtml

"For this Superbit release, Columbia/TriStar has enlisted the talents of film-restoration expert Robert Harris, and the differences between this release and the previous are remarkable. I performed many direct comparisons between the two releases, and each time, I witnessed obvious improvements in sharpness, detail, artifacting, and most of all, color. Finally, we have a Superbit release that represents a huge step forward in image quality." > http://www.dvdtalk.com/reviews/read.php?ID=7786

"This is a newly remastered version of the movie, one supervised by restoration expert Robert A. Harris. The result is excellent and while the previous treatment was more than solid, this new edition is head & shoulders above all prior releases." > http://www.dvdauthority.com/Reviews.asp?ReviewID=3472

I can go on and on and on and on... The proof is out there... We're not all suffering from some mass induced delusion about the transfer of the LOA Superbit...

I've got the LE (got it as an enrollment title from Columbia House), and I noticed some flaws in the picture when I watched it. That didn't, however, take away from my enjoyment of the movie, and the extras are pretty nice.

I just wish that they'd do a SB LE - add the extras to the Superbit version as a 2 disc set. That would satisfy everyone.

Having said that, it will probably never happen....

If I could get the SB version cheap enough I'd proably get it. Maybe as an enrollment title when I sign up again with CH.

You guys are ripping EPK apart, but you haven't even pointed out the most flagrantly false thing in his post: This is PATENTLY FALSE IN EVERY WAY.

Back in 2000, there were a lot of people, including Robert Harris in his online articles, who were saying the transfer was flawed. There were a lot of people who could hardly believe it because at that time Sony was recognized as having the most consistently excellent transfers in the DVD industry. There were pages of threads debating the issue. Then when Lawrence was rereleased as a one disc bare bones title, there were pages of speculation that this might be an improved transfer.

People didn't wait for the Superbit to start noticing problems, they noticed them right away.

I originally purchased the SE and was disappointed with the audio. So I picked up the SB when it came out. Having watched them both, I can say that in my honest assessment the SB has a noticeably better transfer.

Had the SB not come out, the LE would have been fine for viewing LoA repeatedly; but I'm happy to have the SB now, as this is one of the most visually stunning films of all time.

Incidentally, I kept the LE with its fine set of extras anyway. And I did so because when all is said and done, DVD collecting is really only a pissing contest, and I'm compelled by my philistine nature to enter my stream into any such proceedings. (In fact, come to think of it, I can't stand films. I'm just shallow and greedy. Thanks, Peach, for shining the light on me...!)

DJ

Actually, I pointed that out in my post above.

Considering the age of the film, the LE transfer is pretty good! Of course, the biggest problems I noticed were the colors were off. I haven't seen the SB version yet, but I think the LE is very watchable. Maybe it's good that I dont have the SB, because then I don't know what I'm missing. Also the DD 5.1 on the LE is very solid, again, considering the age of the film.

LoA isn't HORRIBLY flawed in the LE DVD, but it's enough to make you notice.

First, the opening logo, through the opening credits has desaturation and some very ugly softening.

In some scenes which used a combination of surviving original audio and newly recorded audio... there is poor equalization.

Two pieces of the score were improperly mixed, causing the sound to be wrongly placed.

All of the night scenes have a drastic loss of detail... on even small TV's, it's very noticable. The first night scene has too low of contrast, others are too high in contrast.

Throughout the film, sand has a pinkish hue and blue skies tend to be overly red.

Edge enhancement was added to the transfer and pixelation was very obvious.

The sound seems to be much more vibrant, too. The score seemed slightly muffled on the LE DVD, while the SB's sound is comparable to the CD album.

Even worse, Columbia had the FBI logo placed before the enter'act on the 2nd disc.

Basically, the Superbit is the best presentation of the film outside of seeing one of the newer 40th Anniversary 70mm prints circulating.

Here's what Robert Harris has to say on the topic. You can find the rest of the conversation here.

Out of respect for the people who DO compare, here are a couple of screen captures. The top is from the original LE, the bottom is from the newer Superbit:

Hard to argue with that.

Let's put things in perspective here.

First off the LOA:LE is NOT a horrible transfer by any stretch of the imagination. Those who say so have either not seem it or are vastly over dramatizing the situation. Does the LE have some flaws? Yes it does but it does not look bad.

Secondly, the LE (when it came out) got a high percentage of positive reviews until Mr. Harris spoke out about the color timing issue and then the waterfall of people on all these boards who think they are film experts came out and said "yeah this LE DVD is majorly flawed because of the color timing" etc... The vast majority of these people didn't even know what color timing was let alone know how to identify it on a DVD. These supposed experts who came out of the woodwork were ALL "full of it" because there is NO WAY any of them could have known the color timing was off unless they were involved with the restoration of the film as Mr Harris was.

Lastly I will say that the Superbit is noticably better looking then the LE but for those who have an equal appreciation for extras as they do the film itself and only want to buy one version then I would have to say buy the LE. If you want the best A/V experience of this film on DVD and extras are not a big deal then the Superbit is the way to go.

What we need to do is to get the studio to put out a superbit deluxe of this film to combine the extras of the LE and the A/V quality of the SB together!

Amen. I'd triple-dip for a Superbit Deluxe if it contained the extras of the original LE and the transfer of the SB.

I don't understand this. If you already own the LE and the SB, why triple-dip for a simple repackaging?

For collector's like us here the answer is obvious! "Because it there!"