DVDBeaver Comparisons

[justeleblanc]

Anyone else disappointed with the image on the MoC Antonioni? I assume this is the same issue that Kim Hendrickson was talking about when she said they are waiting for better elements.

[denti alligator]

Anyone else disappointed with the image on the MoC Antonioni?

Yes. But I'll wait till I see it in motion.

First thing to note: the MoC is either stretched horizontally or the Fox Lorber was narrowed. Don't know why Gary overlooked that. I assume the MoC is correct... Monica Vitti certainly looks a bit too gaunt in the Fox Lorber.

That aside, the MoC is less sharp. Peerpee, did you guys make a non-anamorphic source anamorphic? That may explain that lackof sharpness, something that is probably also the reason for Second Run's too-soft Cremator.

Then there's the brightness: there's much more detail in the Fox Lorber due to the more defined black levels.

That said, I await the DVD (in the post) and am sure the image will look better in motion. Even if it's not the best this film will look on DVD, I applaud MoC for releasing it with a nice thick booklet.

[Gary Tooze]

Hold on a second. Aren't you the same individual who was casting aspersions on my screen captures claiming they look nothing like they how do on your 'perfectly calibrated system’? (this was for The Last Emperor).

Yet now you talk with such authority...

Then there's the brightness: there's much more detail in the Fox Lorber due to the more defined black levels.

without even having the disc in question in your possession. How does that work? and for this:

Don't know why Gary overlooked that. I assume the MoC is correct... Monica Vitti certainly looks a bit too gaunt in the Fox Lorber.

How about that it's not germane to the comparison - being that the F/L is non-anamorphic, single-layered, has combing/ghosting and filled with artifacts. Being slightly stretched or squished wouldn't surprise me one way or the other… but who cares? Aren’t the obvious deficiencies enough? and far more relevant?

Regards,
Gary

[denti alligator]

Hold on a second. Aren't you the same individual who was casting aspersions on my screen captures claiming they look nothing like they how do on your 'perfectly calibrated system’? (this was for The Last Emperor).

Wait a second, Gary, I thought we cleared that up. Are you going to dismiss my comments on the basis of that completely unrelated review? That's unfair, don't you think?

Yet now you talk with such authority...

Then there's the brightness: there's much more detail in the Fox Lorber due to the more defined black levels.

without even having the disc in question in your possession. How does that work?

Um, by looking at your caps. That's how that works. Brightness = black level. You know that, so what's the problem. Contrast has to do with the luminance of the whites, and brightness with the overall luminance, but largely makes "black levels" more or less intense. Yes, I think MoC shows a marked difference in brightness to the Fox Lorber. You don't?

And anyway, this has NOTHING to do with your review. I was commenting on the difference between what your caps show, not what you said about them.

Whereas...

and for this:

Don't know why Gary overlooked that. I assume the MoC is correct... Monica Vitti certainly looks a bit too gaunt in the Fox Lorber.

How about that it's not germane to the comparison - being that the F/L is non-anamorphic, single-layered, has combing/ghosting and filled with artifacts. Being slightly stretched or squished wouldn't surprise me one way or the other… but who cares? Aren’t the obvious deficiencies enough? and far more relevant?

Not germane to the comparison??

You certainly make a point of these kinds of distortions in other reviews, why not here? I don't get it. This is one point where I agree with you that the Fox Lorber is inferior and you jump on me by saying it's irrelevant. WTF, man!

I wasn't taking a stab at your review, Gary; I was simply pointing out that the FL is sharper and has better levels of brightness, imo, making it show more detail and not look as washed out. (Would anyone disagree with me on this?) It's exactly the distorted image (the "pinching," as David calls it) that makes these differences moot, not--as you suggest--the other way around.

And, by the way, anamorphic does not always = better. I'll take a non-anamorphic image that is sharper and in other ways more accurate (e.g. the Czech Cremator) over an anamorphic version any day. Most players and displays can easily correct the non-anamorphic image without distortion. The loss in resolution is hardly an issue when you're dealing with a superior transfer in every other way.

[ellipsis7]

For me, in terms of technical quality, MoC's LA NOTTE is on a par with CC's L'AVVENTURA, while CC's L'ECLISSE is slightly above both...

As regards the print, towards the latter end (as Michael B has noted) there are a few small tramline scratches, where there are on L'AVVENTURA too..

On projection on HD screen via HDMI & Motion Adaptive Progressive Scan, I get a lovely image, lots of detail, nice contrast and no problems with the nighttime party sequence...

Missing maybe is that tiny bit extra of grain and detail that CC manage to squeeze out of an image with a special technique, apparently not available or other producers... But this is an imperceptible difference...

For me MoC's LA NOTTE scores highest on framing, capturing all Antonioni's meticulous composition... In this I believe MoC may have bettered even the CC... For on projection I get the anamorphic picture pillar boxed to the correct AR, but also half a centimetre or so very slight window boxing on top and bottom of frame ensuring every little bit of picture is seen and there is no cropping whatsoever... This is subtle and deftly achieved, compare with CC's pictureboxing which leaves yawning gaps on all sides of a 1.33:1 frame, or their anamorphic transfers which have slight cropping such as on L'ECLISSE...

[Gary Tooze]

Wait a second, Gary, I thought we cleared that up. Are you going to dismiss my comments on the basis of that completely unrelated review? That's unfair, don't you think?

Unfair? - but the screen caps are done the EXACT same way... where you had said less than a month ago:

I pulled up Gary's caps on my laptop and paused the DVD to compare: big difference.

So why would a judgement based on viewing these captures make your findings accurate when you recently stated 'big difference'. You can't have it both ways. My The Last Emperor caps are NOT representing how you see the image on you system, yet these are? (even though you don't own it yet). Very convenient logic.

Gary

[HerrSchreck]

Hold on a second. Aren't you the same individual who was casting aspersions on my screen captures claiming they look nothing like they how do on your 'perfectly calibrated system’? (this was for The Last Emperor).

Yet now you talk with such authority...

Then there's the brightness: there's much more detail in the Fox Lorber due to the more defined black levels.

without even having the disc in question in your possession. How does that work? and for this:

Don't know why Gary overlooked that. I assume the MoC is correct... Monica Vitti certainly looks a bit too gaunt in the Fox Lorber.

How about that it's not germane to the comparison - being that the F/L is non-anamorphic, single-layered, has combing/ghosting and filled with artifacts. Being slightly stretched or squished wouldn't surprise me one way or the other… but who cares? Aren’t the obvious deficiencies enough? and far more relevant?

Wowie zowie! An atomic bomb dropped on a feather!

Looking at the caps, they both look like they're from analog sources, and for an anamorphic transfer, there are caps of the Moc which exhibit less side info than the FL. I think this is without doubt one of the more disappointing transfers-- based soley by the caps anyhoo-- from MoC.

[denti alligator]

Wait a second, Gary, I thought we cleared that up. Are you going to dismiss my comments on the basis of that completely unrelated review? That's unfair, don't you think?

Unfair? - but the screen caps are done the EXACT same way... where you had said less than a month ago:

I pulled up Gary's caps on my laptop and paused the DVD to compare: big difference.

So why would a judgement based on viewing these captures make your findings accurate when you recently stated 'big difference'. You can't have it both ways. My The Last Emperor caps are NOT representing how you see the image on you system, yet these are? (even though you don't own it yet). Very convenient logic.

Nothing's convenient here, Gary. I'm being very consistent and you're jumping all over me for no reason.

With the Last Emperor the issue had solely to do with color. You know that. There was never any question of black or white levels being off. Yes, I know that brightness and contrast can effect colors, too, but with TLE that wasn't the main issue.

Here we're looking at a black and white film. My main point of contention is the difference of image dimensions (x to y scale) between the caps from the two discs (one is scrunched or the other widened). No monitor (no matter how fucked up) can distort one image on a page and not the other.

Anyway, a) what makes you think I was using the same computer to view these caps as with TLE? And b) even if I were (which you don't know), why wouldn't I have correctly calibrated that computer since our TLE discussion?

Clearly you were being disingenuous when you said there were no hard feelings about that last discussion and now you're taking it out on me.

As the Schreckster noted:

Wowie zowie! An atomic bomb dropped on a feather!

Exactly.

[Gary Tooze]

Nice to have you join in HerrSchreck - when I first saw your name I thought for sure it would be in defense of Kino again. No?
***

Anyway, a) what makes you think I was using the same computer to view these caps as with TLE? And b) even if I were (which you don't know), why wouldn't I have correctly calibrated that computer since our TLE discussion?

LOL. Hilarious. Stretch a little more why don't you.

What angers me most about you, aside from your negativity ('Don't know why Gary overlooked that.'), is that you post to my entire ListServ and this forum that you question my methodology of screen capture comparison. Then, after taking a full morning to prove your accusations totally baseless - with support of other members of this Forum - GigiM

I can say Gary's system looks identical to mine.

KevYip1

I've never had a problem with Gary's pics. His Last Emperor caps match mine

You continue to state

I felt misled by your caps (still do),

THEN you use those same caps (that you have no faith in?) to make judgements about a DVD you don't even own. Can't you see how hypocritical this sounds?
***

New...

Image Entertainment - Region 0 - NTSC "Les Vampires" vs. Artificial Eye - Region 2 - PAL

Image Entertainment


Artificial Eye


http://www.dvdbeaver.com/

Best,

[HerrSchreck]

Gary, chill man. The point here is that nobody is (or was) attacking YOU. Your caps sometimes start conversations.. about the caps.

So people are having them. Why have this thread if you're going to carpet bomb resulting convos?

RE the question viz Kino "Watchmaker": No. The Kino looks like shit.

[Gary Tooze]

nobody is (or was) attacking YOU...

Beg to differ... in the past month - all from the same source:

'Maybe you should check your calibration, because I find your comparison to be very misleading...'

'The colors in Gary's caps (DVD Beaver) seem to me to be totally inaccurate....'

'I don't know what's going on with Gary's system...'

'I felt misled by your caps (still do)...'

'Don't know why Gary overlooked that....'

If these were sent to me privately, I'd appreciate them more (and I always respond to email, well - except Feng) but sent to everyone in earshot?

Okay - moving on...
Gary

[denti alligator]

Gary, I don't know who poisoned your coffee this morning, but this is ridiculous. You're clearly still angered by our Last Emperor exchange, to which I very graciously and kindly conceded my mistake, and apologized (several times), but you've obviously not gotten over that.

So if that exchange makes you read "negativity" in everything I say, that's your problem. My "don't know why Gray overlooked that" was not meant that way. It wasn't: "that idiot Gary overlooked that AGAIN!" or anything like that. I was simply surprised that you didn't make note of a difference between the two DVDs that you usually make note of. That's it.

THEN you use those same caps (that you have no faith in?) to make judgements about a DVD you don't even own. Can't you see how hypocritical this sounds?

"Those same caps"? No, Gary, I'm not using the Last Emperor caps to make a judgment about La notte. "I felt mislead by your caps" means I felt misled by your caps (of the Last Emperor). NOT: I've always felt misled by the caps Gary posts at his site for every review. Dude, you're starting to sound paranoid! Chill. I'm bowing out.

But, don't leave me hanging here folks! I hope Schreck isn't the only one who agrees that Gary is overreacting. Of course Schreck is on Gary's "bad buy" list, so his opinions clearly don't matter.

[carax09]

No, Denti, I'm pretty appalled by the WAY out of proportion negativity coming from Gary on this. Just ridiculous! In fact, I thought his reaction the first time (TLE) was unreasonably venomous. I'm sorry I didn't speak up sooner, but I thought the thing was worked out. Like Schreck said, discussion (which denotes interest/passion/etc.) on Gary's findings should be encouraged, non given a mean-spirited public smackdown.

[denti alligator]

Thanks, carax, so I'm not going crazy.

[Person]

Last week, I payed Mr Tooze to paint my house. I gave him the light blue paint that Martha and I picked out at the store. Came home after the weekend on the Isle of Skye - fucking house was RED. Unbelievable.

[Gary Tooze]

..."I felt mislead by your caps" means I felt misled by your caps (of the Last Emperor). ...

All done in the exact same manner. You can't pick and choose to suit your mood or arguement.
****

WAY out of proportion negativity coming from Gary on this
Just ridiculous!

MY NEGATIVITY???!?!?!?!!?
Are you not capable of reading the quotes I posted or something?
Let's try again... Here are some of Denti's remarks of the last 30 days...

'Maybe you should check your calibration, because I find your comparison to be very misleading...'

'The colors in Gary's caps (DVD Beaver) seem to me to be totally inaccurate....'

'I don't know what's going on with Gary's system...'

'I felt misled by your caps (still do)...'

'I don't know why Gary overlooked that....'

Most were sent for maximum exposure - this Forum and my 500 strong Listserv. No queries through private email.

Yeah... my negativity. Right.. Gee, I'm really sorry if I'm confronting one your cliche of perma-posters here by simply quoting him/her.
Am I not able to respond to these attacks? Just let this armchair critic jab me continuously?

Well, I'm not going to anymore. I have no idea why Denti continues to attempt to find fault in what I do, but I'm here to tell you all that these layabouts may find there houses purple when they come home. Bright purple.

[denti alligator]

Ok, last time:

Of those 5 quotes you use as evidence of my negativity, the first 4 were from our discussion of The Last Emperor. That discussion was, I thought, amicably ended. I guess I was wrong.

And yes, Gary, "I felt misled" in context (!!) refers to the Last Emperor caps, no others.

The last of your 5 examples is being taken by you as being an attack. It was never meant as such. I'm sorry* if my tone came across in this way.

(*The number of apologies from our first--Last Emperor--discussion far exceeds any "negative" comments.)

Shit, man, I just pointed out that the Lorber looks sharper and with better black levels, and that it's obviously been scrunched. Let's discuss that, please. These comments aren't meant as attacks on you. You didn't produce these DVDs. Let's discuss the relative merits of the DVDs based on your caps and then, when I (and others) have the DVD in hand, based on the DVDs themselves.

[carax09]

Yeah, I read the posts that you quoted, and what's more I read them in their original context, and I fail to see them as attacks. To be honest, I thought Denti displayed remarkable tact and restraint the last time you got a big ol' bee in your bonnet, which I interpreted as him showing respect to you, and the fine dvd consumer service which you provide.

[Gary Tooze]

Well, I guess we'll just have to disagree.
I don't consider

I thought Denti displayed remarkable tact

spewing accusations (eventually proven false) about my work methods to public Forums and, my own, ListServ as demonstrating tact and I don't see how those quotes, I provided, display anything but an attack.

Plus I feel labeling myself as the one in this exchange as negative entirely inaccurate. I also, don't feel I've been out of line defending myself.

Perhaps I have been too sensitive but I put an extensive amount of unrewarded effort in providing this

fine dvd consumer service which (I) you provide.

and I won't allow it to be carelessly torn down. I hope you can appreciate that I am very passionate about it.
Regards,

[manicsounds]

Gary, I don't know who poisoned your coffee this morning, but this is ridiculous.

I didn't think that exchanging his coffee to Folger's crystals would do something like this....

[reno dakota]

Gary, after reading through your exchange with denti, I have a question for you, which I hope will shed some light on what is happening here. From your point of view, is it ever acceptable for any member of this forum to post critical remarks in this thread about your screencaps and/or comparisons?

Let us ignore for a moment the most aggressive instances of this and instead consider cases in which such criticism is offered humbly and without any intended malice. Would this be acceptable, from your point of view? If not, what then is the purpose of this thread? Is it just to direct us to new content on your site? I would wager that most (perhaps all) who read this thread are familiar with your website and check it often (I check it every morning), and thus really do not need to be directed to new content. We crave it and seek it out.

Given that this is a discussion forum, I would hope that one of your aims in creating and maintaining this thread is that we *discuss* your screencaps/comparisons. And, if this is the case, then is it not acceptable for us to post critical remarks just as well as complimentary ones? If, from your point of view, discussion on this thread ought to be limited to posts of the complimentary variety, then I wonder yet again what you have in mind as the purpose of this thread. Certainly it does not exist just as a conveyance of flattery, does it? Again, I would wager that most (perhaps all) here appreciate your very dedicated and meticulous work. I would also wager that you do not pour your efforts into your screencaps/comparisons (and, let's not forget, your very helpful reviews), simply because you are seeking praise. You do it, it seems, because you are passionate about film and dvd, and you have made that quite clear both in this thread and on your site.

So, all of this leads me back to the critical side of discussion on this thread. If you really do not think it is appropriate for any of us to post critical remarks in this thread about your work, then I wonder why you do not believe that that side of the discussion can be fruitful. I certainly do not believe you must lie down and take abusive or hateful criticism of your work, but not all criticism is of this variety. Certainly we can agree upon that, right? Or, does "critical post" always equal "personal attack" in your view?

Please help me out here, Gary. I am afraid I am losing my sense of how to approach this thread.

* And, by the way, I do not intend any remark above as either a criticism of your work or a personal attack. Apologies in advance if anything I have said seems hostile or overly negative.

[Gary Tooze]

From your point of view, is it ever acceptable for any member of this forum to post critical remarks in this thread about your screencaps and/or comparisons?

I believe you are missing my meaning. The 5 quotes I used did not have to do with the screen captures per se - but rather with how they were casting aspersions on the integrity of my efforts - more accurately, the technical reproductions we create.

*discuss* your screencaps/comparisons

Of course - my objection regarded an unsubstantiated criticism of my methodology for creation of those captures. I utilize a very strict procedure so as adhere to the highest level of accuracy for the Internet surfers who view them at DVDBeaver.

I would say this also missed my point:

These comments aren't meant as attacks on you. You didn't produce these DVDs.

I fully realize that.
I'm a little dumbfounded here. Don't those quotes I posted indicate, not a discussion of the image quality of a DVD, but rather inferring inaccuracy in the posted images I put on the webpage?

Our settings are sacred to us and without the zero-calibrations of brightness/contrast/hue/saturation and the lack of any filters - our comparisons would be totally useless.

I'm no novice at this - I'll wager I've done 1000 SD comparisons and (despite some minor variances) without the exact frame matches (lighting can change from one frame to the next) or following a uniform procedure we may as well scrap the site.

We eventually hope to get this perfected for Hi-def too...
If I'm going to spend a large portion of my time continuously defending our extensively thought out procedures - well, I'm not going to get a lot of work done. I might have got Irma Vep done tonight without all this palava.

I already mentioned it took an entire morning to verify to Denti in The Last Emperor accusation - I'd prefer not to do that on a monthly basis. My suggestion is that if you at all in question of the reviews or comparisons we create at DVDBeaver - don't surf there. What I don't need are continuous attacks.

To more fully answer your question - discuss the caps all you like BUT if you feel we've made some sort of blunder - contact me first and perhaps (just perhaps) I can explain to your satisfaction. I am quite approachable in email and get 10-20 Beaver-related messages a day - that I diligently try to respond to.

Cheers,
Gary

[bunuelian]

This whole discussion is very disappointing.

Gary, you have to realize that you are a public figure of sorts, and you need to measure your responses and let a lot of criticism just slide. Your responses here read like just more Internet bile. Your undeniable stature as an important source for dvd information means you are held to a higher standard, a professional standard that doesn't have much room for this kind of inane "no u!" level of discussion. We had enough of it with the whatshisface firing drama. If someone disagrees with your caps, no matter how strongly, it's not for you to come here to defend yourself. Let others do the mudslinging. You should chill out and not worry so much. You can't decide where people post their criticisms, but you can control how you respond. Most of the time, no response is better than parsing out quotes for inconsistencies.

I for one will keep clicking through via your site (except for the occasional bump for this site) because the service you provide is awesome and incredibly valuable.

[Jeff]

This whole discussion is very disappointing.

It certainly is. Respectful discussions, questioning, and even criticism are the foundations of any useful forum; they will continue to be welcome here. Rejoinders, rebuttals, and clarifications regarding such criticism are more than welcome as well.

There are no sacred cows here. Several prominent DVD producers and distributors, filmmakers, critics, and webmasters post here, and there are surely many more lurking in the shadows. All are fair game for criticism providing that the smarm and sarcasm are kept to a minimum. Even our namesake and the impetus for this forum’s creation, Criterion, receives more than their fair share of finger-wagging. That doesn’t mean that they’re not the very best at what they do, it just means that they’re not infallible.

I think we all acknowledge that you’re the best at what you do too, Gary. After reading everything in context though, I can’t see any personal attacks or mean-spiritedness in anything that Denti has posted. Regardless of the strict quality-control measures that DVD Beaver obviously adheres to, I see nothing inherently wrong with questioning the methods of Beaver's captures or the comparisons that result from them. I hope that we can continue to have meaningful conversations here about the merits of various film transfers and region comparisons. Surely that is the purpose of this thread.

[domino harvey]

I'm guessing Gary had a bad day and this was just one of those minor things that sends a stressed person off, because it's really inexplicable under any other circumstances. Hopefully cooler heads will prevail after a night's rest.