[KuriousOranj]

I was thinking of buying this (one of my favourite films!), but it's got a fair old slating over at a review site, at least as far as picture quality is concerned.

Can anyone else who's got the disc confirm if they were as disappointed with the picture quality as hdwars? (I can't find a review of the UK disc on avplay, BTW, although this could be because I'm often dumb that way!)

[jc_dublin]

I just watched it at the weekend and was stunned by how clear some of it was....
particularly the citywide views and outdoor blue sky...
that initial shot of clint walking up steps is amazing to see SO clear and vivid

the dark outdoor shots suffer some grain due to stock used in early 70s,,,but on the whole this is a huge improvement over the previous SD versions

[Geoff_D]

It is an improvement over the DVD, but it's an average transfer compared with Warner's other catalogue remasters.

[lgans316]

Courtesy: benes@AVS

Dirty Harry: Ultimate Collector's Edition
	Dirty Harry			VC-1	1:42:29	23,751,659,520	39,028,323,532	30.90	23.62	Dolby TrueHD 5.1	DD AC3 5.1  640Kbps
	Magnum Force			VC-1	2:02:33	29,596,028,928	32,550,769,660	32.20	25.10	Dolby TrueHD 5.1	DD AC3 5.1  640Kbps
	The Enforcer			VC-1	1:36:36	20,345,948,160	23,440,195,180	28.08	20.95	Dolby TrueHD 5.1	DD AC3 5.1  640Kbps
	Sudden Impact			VC-1	1:57:09	22,726,244,352	24,003,400,456	25.86	18.86	Dolby TrueHD 5.1	DD AC3 5.1  640Kbps
	The Dead Pool			VC-1	1:31:13	20,857,798,656	23,181,576,576	30.48	22.96	Dolby TrueHD 5.1	DD AC3 5.1  640Kbps

[chadrtc]

Originally Posted by Geoff_D

It is an improvement over the DVD, but it's an average transfer compared with Warner's other catalogue remasters.

pretty much spot on.

[neeek]

Originally Posted by jc_dublin

I just watched it at the weekend and was stunned by how clear some of it was....
particularly the citywide views and outdoor blue sky...
that initial shot of clint walking up steps is amazing to see SO clear and vivid

the dark outdoor shots suffer some grain due to stock used in early 70s,,,but on the whole this is a huge improvement over the previous SD versions

Yeah, I thought that shot at the start was fantastic. I was pleasantly surprised by the transfer after all the griping about it in the reviews. Sound is pretty good too.

[Galactic_Dog]

That site seems to mark down movies with grain.

Here's a little fact that some are unaware of. Any movie which retains it's grain also retains its finer detail. Movies which have had the grain removed tend to also remove some of the finer details. Film stock and shooting style of course make a difference to just how much grain you will see but dark nightime shots can be grainier due to low light shooting conditions.

Removing grain is done by using a process called Digital Noise Reduction or for short DNR. It's a pretty nasty process if the compressionist over uses it. If that happens you end up with a smooth waxy look on people's faces and a general lack of detail to the image although the uneducated tend to think it's smooth so it must be great but it's not it will lack detail so really if you want detail and i guess that's one reason for buying into HD then you need to leave the fine grain in the image.

Dirty Harry has never looked better and looks as good as it should. It will never be an eye candy film and no one should expect that or they will be disappointed but it looks great on Blu Ray.

[Pincho Paxton]

Originally Posted by Galactic_Dog

That site seems to mark down movies with grain.

Here's a little fact that some are unaware of. Any movie which retains it's grain also retains its finer detail. Movies which have had the grain removed tend to also remove some of the finer details. Film stock and shooting style of course make a difference to just how much grain you will see but dark nightime shots can be grainier due to low light shooting conditions.

Removing grain is done by using a process called Digital Noise Reduction or for short DNR. It's a pretty nasty process if the compressionist over uses it. If that happens you end up with a smooth waxy look on people's faces and a general lack of detail to the image although the uneducated tend to think it's smooth so it must be great but it's not it will lack detail so really if you want detail and i guess that's one reason for buying into HD then you need to leave the fine grain in the image.

Dirty Harry has never looked better and looks as good as it should. It will never be an eye candy film and no one should expect that or they will be disappointed but it looks great on Blu Ray.

Well it's not really a fact that grain removal uses Noise reduction removal, and loses detail. That is just one of the methods that you can use, and is not a hard rule. Software is called software because you can make it do whatever you want it to do. If you want to write a grain removal system that doesn't remove detail from the film you can write it.

[Galactic_Dog]

Originally Posted by Pincho Paxton

Well it's not really a fact that grain removal uses Noise reduction removal, and loses detail. That is just one of the methods that you can use, and is not a hard rule. Software is called software because you can make it do whatever you want it to do. If you want to write a grain removal system that doesn't remove detail from the film you can write it.

It's a fact that current DNR techniques from most major studio's to remove grain if used excessively remove fine detail. If used in moderation you are left with fine grain and lots of detail.

Go look at the recent release of Patton - Region B to see how excessive DNR can make everyone look like waxworks.

I like your signature. The bit about the ex lol

[Daytrader]

fact 1 if they use DNR on movie to remove grain you loose detail period, there is no way it can just take grain out and not loose detail, now if there was such software to just remove grain and there aint, every player should have it, especially if like you say it wont effect detail, i cant see that happening for a long time, wish someone would program some software like that thou would require a super computer and about a 100 years to do it per movie, so we wont see such thing able to do that in the next 10 years on the fly if ever

[pRot3us]

It looks very good, far better than dvd. Although it does have a few dirt specks and strangely exhibits some digital noise (not grain, but perhaps as a result of poor encoding of grain) but this is mainly at the start of the movie and few and far between.

Buy it this instant!!

[Pincho Paxton]

Originally Posted by Daytrader

fact 1 if they use DNR on movie to remove grain you loose detail period, there is no way it can just take grain out and not loose detail, now if there was such software to just remove grain and there aint, every player should have it, especially if like you say it wont effect detail, i cant see that happening for a long time, wish someone would program some software like that thou would require a super computer and about a 100 years to do it per movie, so we wont see such thing able to do that in the next 10 years on the fly if ever

It's not that hard, because grain is always a very similar percent darker than the pixels surrounding it, and always the same hue, but darker. Whereas for example skin tones are a much lower percent different, stubble is a much higher percent darker, and even if you found an exact match for grain in for example the bark of a tree, you could tell the software to ignore this particular part of the screen in its grain removal, and then save the tree screens separately, and use a much more accurate grain removal on just these few sections of scenes, keeping some of the bark intact. Dark backgrounds that are black, and look messy are quick to fix on the other end of the scale. But Noise Reduction doesn't really have any clever programming involved in it, and it just averages out pixels between two values, which is like a noob programming technique.

[MarkusThatch]

Is there a comparison anywhere with US version or is it essentially the same disc?

I remember watching Dirty Harry on beeb 1 as a kid - it was so edited and chopped about and the pq was dire. Seeing it on dvd was like seeing a new film!

[rebel_scum]

The Dirty Harry Blu ray is the best this movie has ever looked. The reviewers that have marked this disc low are idiots that don't look at how a film SHOULD look, as opposed to how they THINK it should look. This is a 1971 movie that has an amazingly intact grain structure and quite a vivid colour pallette. Anyone that thinks it looks bad is quite frankly deluded and should seek out Specsavers 2 for 1...

[chadrtc]

Originally Posted by rebel_scum

The Dirty Harry Blu ray is the best this movie has ever looked. The reviewers that have marked this disc low are idiots that don't look at how a film SHOULD look, as opposed to how they THINK it should look. This is a 1971 movie that has an amazingly intact grain structure and quite a vivid colour pallette. Anyone that thinks it looks bad is quite frankly deluded and should seek out Specsavers 2 for 1...

Apart from the obvious white speckles of dirt that are clear throughout the runtime of the film.

Its not bad, just not up to the standard of other Warners remasters such as The Adventures of Robin Hood, The Searchers, Forbidden Planet, Rio Bravo and Blade Runner, which makes it a dissapointment.

[KuriousOranj]

Thanks to everyone who's taken the trouble to reply to this thread.

I've now given in to the inevitable and bought the Dirty Harry Blu-ray... and have to say that I actually rather agree with the HDwars review.

Some parts of the picture look great, and I totally take on board the comments about HD transfers revealing grain. But to my admittedly uneducated eyes there's a lot of noise in the picture - especially during dark scenes - that I really doubt was there on the original print.

I certainly have a couple of other vintage Warners titles that look less messy than Dirty Harry on my projector screen, so in the end I feel that while the film does look better than the DVD by far, it could and probably should have looked better.

And for the record, last time I had my eyes checked, I was told I had 20/20 vision!