Sony Blu-Ray rep attempts to silence compressionist on AVSFORUM!

[Ruined]

Note that this compressionist CJPlay has worked on both HD DVD and Blu-Ray titles. He has also been posting on AVSFORUM for MONTHS and has given loads of useful technical info; much of the technical info we know about the software side of both formats has come from this very poster. Then in the insider thread, he implied criticism of Sony's Talledega Nights BD MPEG2 encode... So what happens? A Sony Rep who registered on AVSFORUM recently tries to silence him!

http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?p=9256182&&#post9256182

This pretty bold coming from another studio. Are you so candid about WB titles? If not, I suggest you walk a bit softer when discussing another studios properties, regardless of format.

After being called on it, it was edited to this:

This is pretty bold coming from another studio. Are you so candid about WB titles? If not, maybe you could walk a bit softer when discussing another studios properties, regardless of format.

Sounds rather Big-Brotherish to me - I think Sony would prefer that we DON'T know the facts so they can sell us their brand of PR instead. :/

 

[pascal]

Bad, very bad from the Sony rep.

 

[archie4oz]

That's assuming he really is one...

 

[Ty]

Err, I thought B3D doesn't allow cross posting from other forums. In other words, topics like this are usually frowned upon.

 

[patsu]

Well... he was refering to Cjplay calling Talledega Night "500k copies of crap".
I can imagine someone being offended by that kind of statement. It doesn't seem like a big deal to me. Is this really worth its own thread ?

 

[Rolf N]

A Sony Rep who registered on AVSFORUM recently tries to silence him!

No he doesn't.

I have had great success with calling out sensationalism as of late, and I have a hunch that this might be a real case.

 

[Arun]

So what happens? A Sony Rep who registered on AVSFORUM recently tries to silence him!

Am I the only one who thinks people are trying to read wayyyy too much into so few words, especially so given his explanation of why he was pissed off is perfectly valid?

Uttar

 

[Geo]

"Compressionist" is an actual specialty/job description now? :smile:

As for threads from other forums, what B3D severly frowns upon is pugilists continuing a battle from elsewhere here. Pointing at another thread elsewhere, so long as there is interesting and useful information there, is not per se against the rules. Now, if the two worthies show up here and keep going at it, we'd do something about it.

Edit: Ahhh, Ruined is a primary participant in controversy on that thread, it appears. So if someone follows him back here this will be locked.

 

[INKster]

Man, now Sony takes a beating for everything...
What if he was just a studio rep, a movie producer, an MPAA official/laywer, etc ?

I don't see a single shred of evidence that Sony has got something to do with that post...

 

[Babel-17]

Fwiw, a review:

http://www.dvdtalk.com/reviews/read.php?ID=25415

Video:

I make it a point of not reading other reviews before I write up a film. I don't want myself influenced, even if subconsciously, by someone else's opinion. I broke that rule for this disc however when I read all the buzz about the poor transfer that this disc was supposed to have. I perused Peter M. Bracke's review before I received this disc but tried not to let his opinions influence me. After screening the movie I have to say, as objectively as possible, that Peter is right in his comments. The disc isn't horrible, but it does have some problems that makes it a poor candidate to show off a system. Why Sony decided to bundle a movie-only edition of this with the PS3 is beyond comprehension.

The first thing that viewers will notice about the 2.40:1 image is that it is very flat for a Blu-ray disc, and doesn't have that 3D "pop" that is always so impressive. Even in the brightly lit exterior daylight scenes the movie is two dimensional and doesn't jump out at you like many other BDs. I didn't see this in the theaters, so I can't honestly say whether this is a problem with the encoding or if it was just filmed this way (though I strongly suspect the latter.) The contrast is rather limited and the image is a bit dark in many scenes too.

However the rest of the disc looks fine. The level of detail is very good, and the blacks were solid. There wasn't any evidence of digital defects, posterization and grain, two things that have plagued Blu-ray releases, weren't a problem at all. The colors looked fine, though not as eye-popping as the best HD releases. If it wasn't for the flat appearance of the film, this would have been a nice choice to bundle with the PS3.

The above refers to the 50 GB retail version of Talladega Nights. The disc bundled with the PS3 is a 25 GB movie only disc.

 

[RobertR1]

Having watched TDN that came with the PS3, it's a horrible choice to wow the masses the BR.

The picture flat out sucks in comparison to HD (BR or HD DVD) reference titles. It's flat with no pop whatsoever. The general consumer wouldn't know it's HD at all to be honest.

The audio is also lacking. Where? Bass. A race car coming at your screen should be loud and send the whole room rumbling! not the case at all. There is only a DD track on the PS3 version.

The menu's look as if they're picked from a kindergarten drawing competition. No extra's or advanced interactivity present.

Trust me, CJ had it right on the spot. Just that paidgeek got his feelings hurt over it.

On the other hand, just watched Black Hawk Down on Blu Ray today. Now THAT is good stuff!

Still though if you want the best wow effect, grab MI3 or King Kong.

 

[patsu]

The first thing that viewers will notice about the 2.40:1 image is that it is very flat for a Blu-ray disc, and doesn't have that 3D "pop" that is always so impressive. Even in the brightly lit exterior daylight scenes the movie is two dimensional and doesn't jump out at you like many other BDs. I didn't see this in the theaters, so I can't honestly say whether this is a problem with the encoding or if it was just filmed this way (though I strongly suspect the latter.) The contrast is rather limited and the image is a bit dark in many scenes too.

Trust me, CJ had it right on the spot. Just that paidgeek got his feelings hurt over it.

It may very well be a bad choice of Blu-ray demo but did you or Cjplay watch the source movie and can confirm that the film looks great while the encoding s*cks ? If not, you may be shooting at the wrong people.

 

[RobertR1]

It may very well be a bad choice of Blu-ray demo but did you or Cjplay watch the source movie and can confirm that the film looks great while the encoding s*cks ? If not, you may be shooting at the wrong people.

No one is debating the encoding. The discussion had drifted to the choice of packaging TDN as the showcase for Blu Ray to the masses. Simply put, not all movies will look spectacular on HD (either format).

 

[patsu]

No one is debating the encoding. The discussion had drifted to the choice of packaging TDN as the showcase for Blu Ray to the masses. Simply put, not all movies will look spectacular on HD (either format).

That is your thought train (whether TN is the right choice) but the original thread has multiple arguments running in parallel. Cjplay's "500k copies of crap" comment is directed at TN's quality.

 

[Bobbler]

TN definitely wasn't the best choice for wowing the masses. The encode and transfer are very good (looked like what I remember seeing in theatres) and the master seemed to be pristine, it's just not a film that really takes advantage of HD well. I'm not sure why they chose that film, but I definitely wouldn't call it crap -- it's true to the film, so I'm not sure what more you could ask for.

I'm not sure I can blame paidgeek, CJPlay, although generally informative, was acting a bit childish. I don't know about you guys, but I definitely expect a little more from people (behavior wise) working in a given industry in situations like that. Ruined, you're definitely grasping at straws on this one. I know people love to hate Sony, but this is pretty stupid.

 

[pascal]

Well, the avsfoum thread was a question&answer thread, the supposed Sony rep post was not a question or an answer. Paidgeek should have sent a message to CJPlay and/or moderator with his complains. CJPlay may have not used the best words possible but he was not directing to anyone in a personal level as paidgeek was. The thread is now closed for clean up. We can always learn a lesson from that.