Babylon 5 Transfer Quality
I was thinking of buying the B5 sets as it's one of my favorite shows. However, after reading the reviews at Amazon about the poor quality of the transfer (on all the sets), I haven't taken the plunge.
Have any of you who have purchased this been disppointed with the sound and picture transfer? |
Haven't seen them myself, but I recall reading that the FX were only rendered at 480 res and they lost the codes to redo them for higher res formats. So it's as good as it's going to get until they pony up some CGI cash.
|
The biggest gripe I had was dust on the prints. That wasn't really a problem with seasons 3 & 4, but it cropped up again on season 5 for some reason.
The DVD picture quality, overall, is still better than the original broadcasts and the sets are definitely worth buying if you like the show (or think you might like the show). |
Originally posted by milo bloom Haven't seen them myself, but I recall reading that the FX were only rendered at 480 res and they lost the codes to redo them for higher res formats. So it's as good as it's going to get until they pony up some CGI cash. |
Originally posted by aynrandgirl Which really shows how clueless WB is, since the sane thing to do would have been to spend *less* money, release B5 in 4:3, and get better video quality. But no, WB execs think that widescreen is the magic word for better sales, when everybody I've talked to would have preferred better video quality and don't care if it's not in widescreen, since it was originally broadcast in 4:3. Their real genius is shown in destroying the original CGI data without telling anybody; I'd bet JMS would have kept it if they'd asked. as to the orginal question i found the B5 discs to be of reasonable quality, definately NOT reference Q but high enough that i can enjoy the series over and over when ever i desire. T |
Originally posted by THORN YOU ARE WRONG...... the orginal show was broad cast in letterbox format not 4:3. only the orginal pilot was shot and aired in 4:3. The FX/CGI shots were all rendered at 4:3 as well, and therein lies the problem. The plan was for future airings of Babylon 5 to be Hi-Def widescreen, but Warner Brothers, in all of their wisdom, ditched the computer files that would be used to re-render the effects in 16:9 at a higher resolution. So in order to get widescreen versions of the series, all scenes with FX had to be blown up and cropped at the top and/or bottom to fit a 16:9 frame, while live action shots w/o FX were in their proper uncropped widescreen presentation. These are the transfers that were shown and the Sci-Fi Channel and put on the DVDs. |
Thorn - be careful declaring something as strongly as you do, especially when you may not know what you're talking about.
I watched all the original episodes, and they were SHOWN in 4:3. Did you see them originally? Must not have, or you wouldn't be saying what you say. |
I have watched season 1 and 2 and found the quality variable and disappointing. Generally close shots of people look good but CGI usually looks bad ...sometimes terrible. I didn't understand why but I think Josh has provided the answer. Bottom line - every single episode will have both good looking shots and bad looking shots. Is it worth it? Not at Amazon prices. Join Columbia House (CH) throught the TV club, get the first couple of seasons dirt cheap and decide for yourself. For details on CH see the dvd club forum.
|
Thanks to everyone for the info. :)
|
Aside from the technical issues, ie. widescreen cropping, f/x conversion from 4:3 to 16:9, etc, the picture quality is not bad when viewed from afar.
I have a 32" Flatscreen w/16:9 squeeze and when I watch B5 from about 12-15 feet away, the PQ is fairly smooth. However, when viewed closer, say like 8-10 feet away, you can start to see the slight grain in the print. |
I finished Season 5 a few weeks ago, so it's already a bit fuzzy, but iirc the FX shots in Season 1 and 2 looked terribly distored. I want to say that 3 and 4 looked better, but that could have been wishful thinking. Season 5 seemed to be as good as the original, at least to my untrained eyes.
|
Bad news
In very sad Babylon 5-related news, it seems actor Richard Biggs (Dr. Franklin) has died. JMSNews.com posted a message from JMS himself breaking the bad news. It is also up on B5TV.com.
Horrible news. He was only 43. |
That is terrible about Richard Biggs. I have met him a couple of times at an annual Convention and he seemed to be a really kewl guy. Anyone know how he died?
|
The referenced article said it was probably a massive stroke or aneurysm. Very sad news... :(
|
Originally posted by Josh-da-man The FX/CGI shots were all rendered at 4:3 as well, and therein lies the problem. The plan was for future airings of Babylon 5 to be Hi-Def widescreen, but Warner Brothers, in all of their wisdom, ditched the computer files that would be used to re-render the effects in 16:9 at a higher resolution. The episodes were finished. In the can. Complete. Done. Once the show was canceled, the CGI files were just taking up valuable server space. |
Originally posted by Josh Z The episodes were finished. In the can. Complete. Done. Once the show was canceled, the CGI files were just taking up valuable server space. |
Originally posted by Josh Z The episodes were finished. In the can. Complete. Done. Once the show was canceled, the CGI files were just taking up valuable server space. |
Personally, I'd rather see a clear 4:3 than a shoddy rendering of 16:9. I think sales would be better if they had cleaned up what they had, rather than just fixing something up so they could say 'widescreen.'
|
Originally posted by aynrandgirl In that case, why take a show whose effects are rendered 4:3 NTSC and spend even more money jiggering the effects for anamorphic widescreen transfers? Why didn't they cancel the anamorphic project once they saw the digital artifacting? Why not spend that money on restoration and cleanup instead? Re-rendering all of the effects for higher resolution and wider framing would require an enormous amount of time and money. This was never going to happen, despite what JMS or the effects house may have wished. What Warner Bros. should have done was just released the episodes in 4:3 and been done with it. But because "widescreen" is a buzzword that they thought B5 fans would find desireable, they went the 16:9 route. That was their big mistake. |
Originally posted by Seeker Thorn - be careful declaring something as strongly as you do, especially when you may not know what you're talking about. I watched all the original episodes, and they were SHOWN in 4:3. Did you see them originally? Must not have, or you wouldn't be saying what you say. so dont tell me i dont know what im talking about |
I have been viewing the series DVDs on a 65” Mitsubishi HDTV (I am up to early Season 4), and I must say that the effects shots are pretty horrific. Any principle photography shots that do not contain effects are fine, though nothing to write home about. As previously mentioned, all effects shots are cropped, whether they are totally CGI rendered exterior shots or scenes with actors that contain special effects.
I find that the exterior space shots, while pretty bad, are still “tolerable.” The special effects scenes with actors, however, are really awful; especially for seasons 1 and 2. In many (most?) of these scenes, the cinematography is ruined by the cropped image, and of course, the image quality itself is comparable to what one would expect to find on a bootleg. It also appears that some principle photography shots that “fade-in” from or “fade-out” to a special effects scene are cropped from the 4:3 image. As for how the show was originally broadcast; I had thought that at least Seasons 1-4 were 4:3. I thought that possibly Season 5 had aired on TNT in 16:9, but I admittedly cannot remember. |
THORN
Babylon 5 was never broadcast during it's initial run in widescreen, regular syndication or TNT. The show was eventually re-formatted for widescreen for it's SCI-FI channel broadcasts. Yes, JMS always stated that the show was shot for widescreen television, but again, it was never shown in widescreen until it's SCI-FI broadcast. Perhaps you're confused since the opening credits were always an oddly formated version of widescreen. Fitprod |
A lot of the griping about the show being released in a less than perfect widescreen version forget that there was an online petition DEMANDING that the show be released in anamorphic widescreen. There were over 50,000 signatures. Along with the online petition there was also a strong mail in campaign attached to the same website.
Those people were heard by Warner Brothers and JMS. They just gave the fans what they wanted. The fact that re-rendering the FX was a much more expensive proposition than Warner Brothers would ever go for was never brought up. |
Originally posted by B5Erik A lot of the griping about the show being released in a less than perfect widescreen version forget that there was an online petition DEMANDING that the show be released in anamorphic widescreen. There were over 50,000 signatures. Along with the online petition there was also a strong mail in campaign attached to the same website. Personally, I not griping. It could be better for sure. But I'm still happy with what I have and wouldn't trade them for anything. |
Maybe off topic, but the guy who played the doctor on B5 was just found dead. Possible aneurysm or stroke:
http://www.cnn.com/2004/SHOWBIZ/TV/0...ggs/index.html |
All times are GMT -5. The time now is 04:29 PM. |
Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.