[chrishull3]

we watched wolf creek yesterday and enjoyed it on blue ray but i did find a lot of the benefit of any hd lost when around 50 percent of the film was night time,for me most of the great benefit of hd is lost in night and dark filming.
i shall try and find out in future if films have a large amount before purchasing a bd film becouse for me dvd and hd are a lot closer in the dark.

[sdb123]

Originally Posted by chrishull3

we watched wolf creek yesterday and enjoyed it on blue ray but i did find a lot of the benefit of any hd lost when around 50 percent of the film was night time,for me most of the great benefit of hd is lost in night and dark filming.
i shall try and find out in future if films have a large amount before purchasing a bd film becouse for me dvd and hd are a lot closer in the dark.

I don't agree.

An awful lot depends on getting the equipment and environment set up correctly (or at the very least to its optimum level). It shouldn't matter whether there are day or night scenes to see the difference.

All IMO of course.

[Rasczak]

Some films certainly lend themselves to a high def transfer more than others. That said I thought Wolf Creek was a decent enough transfer - and in particular I felt the audio more the justified the purchase (at least on the HD DVD version which is all I've heard/seen).

[tvmonkey]

Originally Posted by chrishull3

we watched wolf creek yesterday and enjoyed it on blue ray but i did find a lot of the benefit of any hd lost when around 50 percent of the film was night time,for me most of the great benefit of hd is lost in night and dark filming.
i shall try and find out in future if films have a large amount before purchasing a bd film becouse for me dvd and hd are a lot closer in the dark.

Surely seen as though HD allows you to get greater detail from different black levels HD would be much better during night scenes than SD?

[Pecker]

Originally Posted by tvmonkey

Surely seen as though HD allows you to get greater detail from different black levels HD would be much better during night scenes than SD?

I totally agree. Some of my favourite HD films have large portions set in the dark, and look better in HD because it can resolve so much more detail than SD.

Whether this is the case for Wolf Creek, I couldn't say, as I haven't seen it. But if you can't see much detail on this one, then either the source is deficient, or the transfer is - not high def.

Steve W

[Romero]

Originally Posted by chrishull3

we watched wolf creek yesterday and enjoyed it on blue ray but i did find a lot of the benefit of any hd lost when around 50 percent of the film was night time,for me most of the great benefit of hd is lost in night and dark filming.
i shall try and find out in future if films have a large amount before purchasing a bd film becouse for me dvd and hd are a lot closer in the dark.

I don't agree look at a film like Blade Runner that is set at night for nearly the whole movie and it looks fantastic, I think HD clarifies Detail that would not be appartent in Night scenes on SD. So the amount of night scenes would not influence my purchase of a movie in either HD format

[Sonic67]

Batman Begins is in the dark a lot. Looks great.

[chrishull3]

well i stand 100percent to what i said,there was nothing wrong with the transfer as all daylight scenes had great resolution,the night scenes must have the resolution as well but for me it does not show true benefit.each to his own.

[bosque]

So, if a movie has quite a few night-time scenes in future you will only watch the SD DVD release ?

[Pinky Floyd]

I find that daytime scenes show off HD best. Night time scenes less so. A bit like real eyes as driving around the glens of antrim last evening definitely looked better until the sun set

[chrishull3]

Originally Posted by bosque

So, if a movie has quite a few night-time scenes in future you will only watch the SD DVD release ?

yes if i want the movie that much.i am not talking about a few scenes but a lot of the film,its the same in real life can eyes see with the same resolution in dim rooms as in bright outdoor light.

[bosque]

Originally Posted by chrishull3

yes if i want the movie that much.i am not talking about a few scenes but a lot of the film,its the same in real life can eyes see with the same resolution in dim rooms as in bright outdoor light.

...could be why they built floodlights for evening football games

[Pincho Paxton]

As a photographer, I understand that there a film types that work in the dark better than other film types. On a standard camera the ASA performance of the film is better for more expensive film standards. HD cannot improve the quality of the master copy, so some films will look bad in the dark. Battlestar Galactica is terrible in the dark scenes, they seem to use the cheapest setup possible to save money. What I am also noticing is that you need good film for Foggy scenes too. Fog can completely ruin a digital transfer, and some films produce a square tile pattern in the fog. This is one of the reasons that Pirates Of The Carribean is such a good transfer. It overcomes Fog, Darkness, and underwater scenes without any faults in the picture.

[Sonic67]

Just a note but on blu-ray you have:
http://www.optimumreleasing.com/dvd.php?id=645

On HD DVD you have the version from Weinstein:
http://hddvd.highdefdigest.com/wolfcreek.html

or the Optimum Release

http://www.optimumreleasing.com/dvd.php?id=644

So maybe one may be better.

[chrishull3]

Originally Posted by Sonic67

Just a note but on blu-ray you have:
http://www.optimumreleasing.com/dvd.php?id=645

On HD DVD you have the version from Weinstein:
http://hddvd.highdefdigest.com/wolfcreek.html

or the Optimum Release

http://www.optimumreleasing.com/dvd.php?id=644

So maybe one may be better.

i had this one http://www.foxy.co.uk/Wolf-Creek-Blu...5730/?elLPS=57 but it is now two pounds more for some reason.
regarding the film it was shot on hd video[sony cameras]all out door shots are great ,nothing wrong with the dark ones but it takes the hd buzz out for me just like my eyes are now in our dim room.on another point the film based on true events was spoiled a bit why did they not let us see the scumbag get his comeupance i would have enjoyed it more.[do they ever]

[bosque]

Originally Posted by Pincho Paxton

As a photographer, I understand that there a film types that work in the dark better than other film types. On a standard camera the ASA performance of the film is better for more expensive film standards. HD cannot improve the quality of the master copy, so some films will look bad in the dark. Battlestar Galactica is terrible in the dark scenes, they seem to use the cheapest setup possible to save money. What I am also noticing is that you need good film for Foggy scenes too. Fog can completely ruin a digital transfer, and some films produce a square tile pattern in the fog. This is one of the reasons that Pirates Of The Carribean is such a good transfer. It overcomes Fog, Darkness, and underwater scenes without any faults in the picture.

It is of course also a question of which film-stock the director and/or the cinematographer elect to use when filming - for example, the recent Miami Vice was shot in a particular style because that was the effect Michael Mann (the director) was looking for. (There are a lot of night scenes in this movie). Battlestar Galactica is also shot in an intentionally grimy style, don't think it's to save money - it's the exact look that the show's creators are trying to achieve; they succeed and it probably would be the same no matter how much money was spent.

[Pincho Paxton]

Originally Posted by bosque

Battlestar Galactica is also shot in an intentionally grimy style, don't think it's to save money - it's the exact look that the show's creators are trying to achieve; they succeed and it probably would be the same no matter how much money was spent.

That's just their excuse, it's deffinately not true. Look at the repeated CGI scenes they are re-used but depending on how much storage room is used on a disc the scene will either be grey or black. Take Cloud 9 passby for example, it is black on disc 4 season 2, but grey on disc 5 which compresses more data. Don't believe the hype created by studios... they will not admit that they saved money. Besides which.. who would want a particular grainy look only in the dark scenes???

Computer games companies do the same thing, and I have worked for 3 of them.

[bosque]

Originally Posted by Pincho Paxton

Besides which.. who would want a particular grainy look only in the dark scenes???

Battlestar has a grainy look throughout the series, not only in dark scenes.

[Pincho Paxton]

Originally Posted by bosque

Battlestar has a grainy look throughout the series, not only in dark scenes.

Not really. It has some grainy scenes in the light, and I can't tell if they are deliberate, or messed up. But the dark scenes are nearly always messed up. It is so random that you cannot call it a style, you can just say.. "Why are they messed up?" Then of course the people resposible will say.. "It's artistic!"

The only thing that does look artistic about Battlestar Galactica is the bright, golden light effect that they sometimes use, but again, you could say that it is there to hide the bad grain. They did this sort of thing to the Live Led Zeppelin DVD, and that was to hide defects in the film, because the DVD was made from old, random footage.

[Sonic67]

300 is grainy to make it look comic book. It still benefits from HD.