I received the blu-ray version yesterday. The picture quality is outstanding. You can see the uneven finish in Brian's guitar, the dust and finger prints on the monitors and all the detail in Roger's drum kit. The way film saturates the colored lights is simply amazing. This has to be the best picture I have seen in a blu-ray concert. I agree that there seems to be a slightly washed out green tint to the faces in some of the shots. I attribute this to increasing the light level since much of my original vhs version looks quite dark by comparison.
Highly recommended.
Thread
Posts in chronological order
What now for Queen's back catalogue as far as the digital technologies go?
Have we reached a peak with High Definition pictures and High definition audio?
Nothing more to look forward to?
Have we reached a peak with High Definition pictures and High definition audio?
Nothing more to look forward to?
I find the washed out look really distracting imo. Yes the picture clarity on the Blu-Ray is fantastic, but it just seems to washed out to me.
[QUOTE][QUOTENAME]KevoM wrote: [/QUOTENAME]What now for Queen's back catalogue as far as the digital technologies go?
Have we reached a peak with High Definition pictures and High definition audio?
Nothing more to look forward to?[/QUOTE]
Well, Return of the Champions was shot in HD but only released in standard definition DVD. I am waiting for a re-release of that.
Have we reached a peak with High Definition pictures and High definition audio?
Nothing more to look forward to?[/QUOTE]
Well, Return of the Champions was shot in HD but only released in standard definition DVD. I am waiting for a re-release of that.
[QUOTE][QUOTENAME]queenfanNY wrote: [/QUOTENAME]
I've seen that before with movies on DVD too. Sometimes when new transfers are done in High Def, for technical reasons I do not know, the down conversion to standard def makes it look pretty bad as compared to that same High Def transfer being released in HD also.
[/QUOTE]
That could very well be the case. The Stanley Kubrick films recently went Hi-Def and when I bought the new standard 'The Shining' DVD I immediately noticed how much worse it looked compared to the previous version, which was perfect.. for DVD.
I think you're on to something there.. it makes sense. I hope studios catch on to this problem soon then.
I've seen that before with movies on DVD too. Sometimes when new transfers are done in High Def, for technical reasons I do not know, the down conversion to standard def makes it look pretty bad as compared to that same High Def transfer being released in HD also.
[/QUOTE]
That could very well be the case. The Stanley Kubrick films recently went Hi-Def and when I bought the new standard 'The Shining' DVD I immediately noticed how much worse it looked compared to the previous version, which was perfect.. for DVD.
I think you're on to something there.. it makes sense. I hope studios catch on to this problem soon then.
Got my Blu-ray copy of QRM finally, for $23.31 CDN at HMV.
Will be quite a while before I can watch this in high-def, since I am waiting until after Xmas to get an HDTV + a new 80GB PS3 for my new house that I recently moved into.
But am glad I got it on sale in the meantime :)
Will be quite a while before I can watch this in high-def, since I am waiting until after Xmas to get an HDTV + a new 80GB PS3 for my new house that I recently moved into.
But am glad I got it on sale in the meantime :)
[QUOTE][QUOTENAME]KevoM wrote: [/QUOTENAME]The 5.1 is excellent, though not sure if it's much of an improvement on teh Pioneer though, but then again I can't access the full DTS HD audio on my sytem, only sapled down vanilla 5.1.[/QUOTE]
Sorry to break it to you, but the DTS HD track on there is the same as the DVD version. It isn't the DTS HD "Master Audio" version, which would be lossless. It's the "High Resolution" one, which is lossy and is basically DTS 96/24 with a fancy name.
I knew they were going to do that, based on something JSS wrote where they basically said that they didn't have a need for Dolby TrueHD or DTS-HD MA :(
Sorry to break it to you, but the DTS HD track on there is the same as the DVD version. It isn't the DTS HD "Master Audio" version, which would be lossless. It's the "High Resolution" one, which is lossy and is basically DTS 96/24 with a fancy name.
I knew they were going to do that, based on something JSS wrote where they basically said that they didn't have a need for Dolby TrueHD or DTS-HD MA :(
-double post, sorry-
[QUOTE][QUOTENAME]<b><FONT SIZE=4>inu-liger</b> wrote: [/QUOTENAME][QUOTE][QUOTENAME]KevoM wrote: [/QUOTENAME]The 5.1 is excellent, though not sure if it's much of an improvement on teh Pioneer though, but then again I can't access the full DTS HD audio on my sytem, only sapled down vanilla 5.1.[/QUOTE]
Sorry to break it to you, but the DTS HD track on there is the same as the DVD version. It isn't the DTS HD "Master Audio" version, which would be lossless. It's the "High Resolution" one, which is lossy and is basically DTS 96/24 with a fancy name.
I knew they were going to do that, based on something JSS wrote where they basically said that they didn't have a need for Dolby TrueHD or DTS-HD MA :([/QUOTE]
It's also only 4.1 ;)
Sorry to break it to you, but the DTS HD track on there is the same as the DVD version. It isn't the DTS HD "Master Audio" version, which would be lossless. It's the "High Resolution" one, which is lossy and is basically DTS 96/24 with a fancy name.
I knew they were going to do that, based on something JSS wrote where they basically said that they didn't have a need for Dolby TrueHD or DTS-HD MA :([/QUOTE]
It's also only 4.1 ;)
[QUOTE][QUOTENAME]konijn met goud broek wrote: [/QUOTENAME][QUOTE][QUOTENAME]<b><FONT SIZE=4>inu-liger</b> wrote: [/QUOTENAME][QUOTE][QUOTENAME]KevoM wrote: [/QUOTENAME]The 5.1 is excellent, though not sure if it's much of an improvement on teh Pioneer though, but then again I can't access the full DTS HD audio on my sytem, only sapled down vanilla 5.1.[/QUOTE]
Sorry to break it to you, but the DTS HD track on there is the same as the DVD version. It isn't the DTS HD "Master Audio" version, which would be lossless. It's the "High Resolution" one, which is lossy and is basically DTS 96/24 with a fancy name.
I knew they were going to do that, based on something JSS wrote where they basically said that they didn't have a need for Dolby TrueHD or DTS-HD MA :([/QUOTE]
It's also only 4.1 ;)[/QUOTE]
Yes that too!
(Too bad it wasn't the first lossless 4.1 mix on any high-def release....but then again, I suspect there may be a release or so with a mix like that....will look into it further ;)
Sorry to break it to you, but the DTS HD track on there is the same as the DVD version. It isn't the DTS HD "Master Audio" version, which would be lossless. It's the "High Resolution" one, which is lossy and is basically DTS 96/24 with a fancy name.
I knew they were going to do that, based on something JSS wrote where they basically said that they didn't have a need for Dolby TrueHD or DTS-HD MA :([/QUOTE]
It's also only 4.1 ;)[/QUOTE]
Yes that too!
(Too bad it wasn't the first lossless 4.1 mix on any high-def release....but then again, I suspect there may be a release or so with a mix like that....will look into it further ;)
And apparently, at least they were smart to use VC-1 for the video codec (was scared they would REALLY go backwards and use MPEG-2) on the BD release (unsure about HD DVD, but maybe KevoM would like to confirm if it's also VC-1 encoded?):
http://forum.blu-ray.com/showthread.php?t=25155&page=3&highlight=Queen+Rock+Montreal
[QUOTE][QUOTE][QUOTENAME]Originally Posted by inu-liger:[/QUOTENAME]What video codec is it that's used on this?
I got the BD, but don't have a player atm so I can't tell :P[/QUOTE]
[QUOTENAME]Hollywoodguy wrote:[/QUOTENAME]VC-1.[/QUOTE]
http://forum.blu-ray.com/showthread.php?t=25155&page=3&highlight=Queen+Rock+Montreal
[QUOTE][QUOTE][QUOTENAME]Originally Posted by inu-liger:[/QUOTENAME]What video codec is it that's used on this?
I got the BD, but don't have a player atm so I can't tell :P[/QUOTE]
[QUOTENAME]Hollywoodguy wrote:[/QUOTENAME]VC-1.[/QUOTE]
HighDefDigest.com posted their reviews:
http://bluray.highdefdigest.com/1044/queenrocksmontreal.html
http://hddvd.highdefdigest.com/1045/queenrocksmontreal.html
http://bluray.highdefdigest.com/1044/queenrocksmontreal.html
http://hddvd.highdefdigest.com/1045/queenrocksmontreal.html
[QUOTE][QUOTENAME]<b><FONT SIZE=4>inu-liger</b> wrote: [/QUOTENAME]HighDefDigest.com posted their reviews:
http://bluray.highdefdigest.com/1044/queenrocksmontreal.html
http://hddvd.highdefdigest.com/1045/queenrocksmontreal.html[/QUOTE]
Great review. Although I found this amusing: "audience at the height of their fandom"
http://bluray.highdefdigest.com/1044/queenrocksmontreal.html
http://hddvd.highdefdigest.com/1045/queenrocksmontreal.html[/QUOTE]
Great review. Although I found this amusing: "audience at the height of their fandom"
[QUOTE][QUOTENAME]PieterMC wrote: [/QUOTENAME][QUOTE][QUOTENAME]<b><FONT SIZE=4>inu-liger</b> wrote: [/QUOTENAME]HighDefDigest.com posted their reviews:
http://bluray.highdefdigest.com/1044/queenrocksmontreal.html
http://hddvd.highdefdigest.com/1045/queenrocksmontreal.html[/QUOTE]
Great review. Although I found this amusing: "audience at the height of their fandom"[/QUOTE][/QUOTE]
Yeah, they're not exactly the brightest with their comments all the time.
I've had to call them out once or twice on other reviews and news items before.
http://bluray.highdefdigest.com/1044/queenrocksmontreal.html
http://hddvd.highdefdigest.com/1045/queenrocksmontreal.html[/QUOTE]
Great review. Although I found this amusing: "audience at the height of their fandom"[/QUOTE][/QUOTE]
Yeah, they're not exactly the brightest with their comments all the time.
I've had to call them out once or twice on other reviews and news items before.