Gladiator Anniversary Blu-ray Delayed
07-29-10 | 06:26 AM
#26
Senior Member
Joined: Mar 2006
Posts: 540
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: Gladiator Anniversary Blu-ray Delayed
Sadly, I know that's not the case since I pointed it out to her. She even specifically pointed out to the first washed out shot as being her prefered picture. That's when I went straight to shot #6. She kept insisting that the blurry/washed out shot was more detailed and better looking than the newer shot. When I pointed out to the detail on the clothing to the subject on the right, she claimed there was no additional detail. 
And screen size isn't a factor as I showed it to her on a 52" screen and my seating is about 6.5' from the screen (which she constantly insists is too close and should be not less than 10' away.
).
And screen size isn't a factor as I showed it to her on a 52" screen and my seating is about 6.5' from the screen (which she constantly insists is too close and should be not less than 10' away.
).
07-29-10 | 08:19 AM
#28
DVD Talk Limited Edition
Joined: Aug 2005
Posts: 5,512
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: Gladiator Anniversary Blu-ray Delayed
I think it depends on where you're looking. I do notice that some things are sharper in the original image, especially things in the background. In the first picture, you can see the snow on the mountains in the background a lot better than in the new version, but the horses on the road in the lower-right corner are definitely clearer in the new version. In that example, the horses are more important than the snow on the mountains, so the new version is better. The same can be said for #6. The people in the background are a little more blurry in the new versions, but we're not suposed to be focused on them, anyway. But there is a huge difference in the detail on the clothes on the guy on the right. I was going to say that #5 was much better in the older version as there seemed to be a lot more detail, but then I realized there was more to the image and scrolled to the right to see the actors. It's in their faces that you can see that the newer version is much better. But if you are just looking at the clouds and the cracks in the rock wall, the newer version is a lot blurrier. So it all depends on where you look. However, the newer version is a lot clearer on the parts of the image that should be clearer. Plus the coloring looks a lot better. I saw images before (I think even on that same website) that was questionable, but in those images, I can really tell a huge difference.
07-29-10 | 11:04 AM
#29
DVD Talk Platinum Edition
Joined: Sep 2007
Posts: 3,518
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
From: Detroit
Re: Gladiator Anniversary Blu-ray Delayed
Things look sharper in the original version because they were artificially sharpened. It's the same effect that happens if you take a blurry picture into photoshop and try to artificially sharpen it. Yeah, the edges are harder and more pronounced, but it still looks like absolute shit.
07-29-10 | 12:02 PM
#30
DVD Talk Gold Edition
Joined: Feb 2000
Posts: 2,844
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
07-29-10 | 04:26 PM
#31
DVD Talk Legend
Re: Gladiator Anniversary Blu-ray Delayed
After showing those comparison pics to my mom, I can understand the J6P jokes people in forums actually make. She insists the old blurry transfer looks better than the new detailed transfer. Even picture #6 didn't sway her. After seeing that particular shot, she einsisted that the new transfer was the blurry one. 
07-29-10 | 08:52 PM
#32
DVD Talk Limited Edition
Joined: Oct 2002
Posts: 5,199
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
From: Muskegon, MI
Re: Gladiator Anniversary Blu-ray Delayed
Sadly, I know that's not the case since I pointed it out to her. She even specifically pointed out to the first washed out shot as being her prefered picture. That's when I went straight to shot #6. She kept insisting that the blurry/washed out shot was more detailed and better looking than the newer shot. When I pointed out to the detail on the clothing to the subject on the right, she claimed there was no additional detail.
And screen size isn't a factor as I showed it to her on a 52" screen and my seating is about 6.5' from the screen (which she constantly insists is too close and should be not less than 10' away.).
And screen size isn't a factor as I showed it to her on a 52" screen and my seating is about 6.5' from the screen (which she constantly insists is too close and should be not less than 10' away.
).It would be cool if a store had this on sale for $14.99 the week these started filtering into stores.
