Predator Blu-Ray, which one is the better one to get?

[Jungleprince_55]

I've decided to upgrade all of my Alien & Predator films to Blu-Ray but I'm having trouble figuring out which Predator Blu I should get, they both seem to have problems. From what I've read the 1st release is bare bones and has a low bit rate transfer with not much restoration done to it, while the Ultimate Hunter Edition has been given a DNR death bath.

I just want to know which transfer is the lesser of the two evils, If I have to I will just hold onto the DVD for the features. Does the original Blu-Ray look much better than the DVD?

[KubrickFan]

I've decided to upgrade all of my Alien & Predator films to Blu-Ray but I'm having trouble figuring out which Predator Blu I should get, they both seem to have problems. From what I've read the 1st release is bare bones and has a low bit rate transfer with not much restoration done to it, while the Ultimate Hunter Edition has been given a DNR death bath.

I just want to know which transfer is the lesser of the two evils, If I have to I will just hold onto the DVD for the features. Does the original Blu-Ray look much better than the DVD?

If you want Predator to look like film, then go for the first edition. It's not perfect by any means, it has an old master and dated encoding, but it is closer to what the film looked like than the DNR'ed version. Too bad Fox listened to the people who thought the original Blu-ray was too grainy. If they'd done a proper remaster, it would've made the previous BD obsolete.

[dvdjunkie]

WTF is DNR?.............Or are you just trying to impress people that you think you know what you are talking about. I own the 'Ultimate Hunter Edition' on Blu-ray and think that it looks great. So if you can, enlighten me.

[Jungleprince_55]

It's a process that studios use to scrub away grain from a film, unfortunately some studios apply way too much of it causing things to look very artificial and waxy. The screencaps I saw of the most recent Blu-Ray have Arnold Schwarzenegger practically looking like a wax figure, maybe it looks better in motion? I don't know.

Believe me I'm no techie, I thought it was a pretty well known term, lol.

I just want the most natural looking version of the film on Blu-Ray, It was shot on film and has always had a very gritty look so the grain doesn't bother me like it does others.

[dvdjunkie]

Digital Noise Reduction generally as a rule can't be seen if you are watching the movie as a consumer. If you are someone with way too much time on their hands then you watch something one frame at a time, anyone would be able to find flaws with something they are watching.

Why not just sit back and watch a movie and quit trying to take it apart. If you are that critical then you should just try to get a job with a movie company and tell them you can do a better job.

People who waste their time picking out something that isn't normally obvious to the naked, untrained eye, have way too much time on their hands and need to get a life.

I can only think of one movie where DNR was noticeable while you were watching it and that was the original blu-ray release of "The Terminator" and even then I could see what the problem was. The newer releases have corrected this and the only movie I can think of right now that really needs fixing, as far as DNR goes, is "Face/Off"!!!

[KubrickFan]

Digital Noise Reduction generally as a rule can't be seen if you are watching the movie as a consumer. If you are someone with way too much time on their hands then you watch something one frame at a time, anyone would be able to find flaws with something they are watching.

Why not just sit back and watch a movie and quit trying to take it apart. If you are that critical then you should just try to get a job with a movie company and tell them you can do a better job.

People who waste their time picking out something that isn't normally obvious to the naked, untrained eye, have way too much time on their hands and need to get a life.

I can only think of one movie where DNR was noticeable while you were watching it and that was the original blu-ray release of "The Terminator" and even then I could see what the problem was. The newer releases have corrected this and the only movie I can think of right now that really needs fixing, as far as DNR goes, is "Face/Off"!!!

Please don't tell me what to do. Blu-ray has the potential to replicate the theatrical experience, and anything less is just not good enough. If I didn't want to scrutinize the picture and sound quality, I would've stuck to DVD.
Digital Noise Reduction can be quite obvious when it's used egregiously. Patton, The Longest Day and Predator all suffer from it. If you don't see it and are perfectly happy with it, that's fine. I, and I'm repeating myself, want my Blu-rays to replicate their theatrical counterparts. There's nothing wrong with that.

[Jungleprince_55]

I can only think of one movie where DNR was noticeable while you were watching it and that was the original blu-ray release of "The Terminator" and even then I could see what the problem was. The newer releases have corrected this

There is a newer release of The Terminator on Blu-Ray? As far as I was aware of there has only been one edition, just with a lenticular slipcover added (Which is the one I have) around the time when Terminator: Salvation came out.

If I'm wrong, I'd appreciate a link.

[KubrickFan]

I can only think of one movie where DNR was noticeable while you were watching it and that was the original blu-ray release of "The Terminator" and even then I could see what the problem was. The newer releases have corrected this

There is a newer release of The Terminator on Blu-Ray? As far as I was aware of there has only been one edition, just with a lenticular slipcover added (Which is the one I have) around the time when Terminator: Salvation came out.

If I'm wrong, I'd appreciate a link.

He's wrong. There has only been one mediocre version of The Terminator. They have re-released that same disc several times, however. The wait for that title is for Cameron's approved remastered version, which will come eventually.

[DarthPrime]

Based on screen shots I've seen online go with the first release. The DNR in the Ultimate Hunter Edition is pretty obvious, and some of the screen shots I've looked at the actors look like wax figures. Of course I haven't actually seen the film in motion, so it might not be as obvious as it is with the screen shots. The older release is grainy, but looks better overall from what I've seen.

There is only 1 version of the Terminator. Its been released a few times. The recent Digibook that came out is still the same disc.

[dvdjunkie]

They did something to it, because I bought the first release and then when the version with the lenticular cover came I saw a side by side comparison at Best Buy and you could actually see the difference. So maybe it was something they did with the master or something, but it is definitely different in quality of picture and sound.

[dvdjunkie]

KubrickFan wrote:

want my Blu-rays to replicate their theatrical counterparts.

Watching a movie frame by frame is not "getting the theatrical experience", that's called 'nit picking'. And paying attention to screen caps posted on another site is the wrong way, in my opinion, to base your biased opinion on a film.

Watching it on anything smaller than a 40" television screen with total surround sound is also not the 'theater experience' you should enjoy.

We have a 55" LG HDTV Flat screen in our living room with an LG Blu-ray Disc Player along with a Sony 6.1 Surround sound home theater system that rocks, and I get the theater experience everytime I watch a movie.

When I want something more, I just venture downstairs into my Home Theater which has a Hi-Def Projection System on a screen that is just shy of 14 feet diagonally. I have an Insignia Blu-ray player hooked to this system along with a JVC 1,000 Watt Dolby Digital Surround System that pumps sound thorugh 13 speakers. We have two rows of theater seats that recline and have cup holders, and a Star popcorn popper that we can make the same popcorn as you get in the theater. Recently we added a hot dog rotisserie to our experience. I have a Harmony universal remote that controls the celing fans, theater lights and the projector and blu-ray player along with the sound. Now that is a theater experience, and I enjoy my Blu-ray titles as much as my 5,000 plus DVD titles that are in my collection. And I never sit and watch a movie frame by frame, that is not 'the theater experience' that I want from my home theater.

Just thought you might like to know that I am what my name says, a dvd junkie, and I know what I like and what I have to make me like it more every time I watch a movie, be it in Blu-ray or standard definition.

[KubrickFan]

KubrickFan wrote:

want my Blu-rays to replicate their theatrical counterparts.

Watching a movie frame by frame is not "getting the theatrical experience", that's called 'nit picking'. And paying attention to screen caps posted on another site is the wrong way, in my opinion, to base your biased opinion on a film.

Watching it on anything smaller than a 40" television screen with total surround sound is also not the 'theater experience' you should enjoy.

We have a 55" LG HDTV Flat screen in our living room with an LG Blu-ray Disc Player along with a Sony 6.1 Surround sound home theater system that rocks, and I get the theater experience everytime I watch a movie.

When I want something more, I just venture downstairs into my Home Theater which has a Hi-Def Projection System on a screen that is just shy of 14 feet diagonally. I have an Insignia Blu-ray player hooked to this system along with a JVC 1,000 Watt Dolby Digital Surround System that pumps sound thorugh 13 speakers. We have two rows of theater seats that recline and have cup holders, and a Star popcorn popper that we can make the same popcorn as you get in the theater. Recently we added a hot dog rotisserie to our experience. I have a Harmony universal remote that controls the celing fans, theater lights and the projector and blu-ray player along with the sound. Now that is a theater experience, and I enjoy my Blu-ray titles as much as my 5,000 plus DVD titles that are in my collection. And I never sit and watch a movie frame by frame, that is not 'the theater experience' that I want from my home theater.

Just thought you might like to know that I am what my name says, a dvd junkie, and I know what I like and what I have to make me like it more every time I watch a movie, be it in Blu-ray or standard definition.

Okay, who said anything about watching a movie frame by frame? I don't do that. If the artifacts are visible while watching a movie in motion, then it's a bad Blu-ray. With Predator that's absolutely the case.

[Mickeyfan1990]

I'd say buy both releases. But if you don't care of the DNR (of which I have mix feeling about) then get the Ultimate Hunter Edition. Dread Central I believe said that rated the transfer of the UHE as good saying it was "slick". Here's a varitey of image comparisons on the 2 releases:

http://caps-a-holic.com/hd_vergleiche/i ... redator_b1

[dvdjunkie]

Here we go again!!! Nobody I know watches a movie one frame at a time, and unless the movie is really filled with DNR you won't notice anything. I will confess here that I did notice "Predator", the first edition I could tell something wasn't just right with the quality of the picture on Blu-ray, but the new UHE edition does look a lot better. I refuse to go through this film one frame at a time just so I can see some DNR.

I will stand by what I said earlier, there is one truly very poor movie that needs to have a re-master done and that is the Blu-ray of "Face/Off", even with the uneducated eye you can see the faults in this one.

Another one that I question the quality of is "Total Recall"!! I had the Blu-ray of this film and traded it away for something else because of the quality of the picture sucked and the sound was very uneven.

[DarthPrime]

I think there are a lot of people that are happy with the Ultimate Hunter Edition.

Anyway I don't watch movies frame by frame either, but I think looking at screen shots does give you a general ideal about the transfer quality. Sure you don't notice as much when the film is in motion, but what I've seen on the Ultimate Hunter screen shots I don't see how the DNR isn't noticeable watching the movie.

http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?t=1259984

This thread on AVSForum has some good comparisons. Image #4 is a perfect example of the DNR on the Ultimate Hunter Edition. The first shot is full of grain, but the 2nd image Arnold is shiny/waxy looking. It just doesn't look right to me. Maybe its better in motion... I don't know.

Both transfers are flawed if you ask me. It comes down to personal preference to which you like better. Maybe down the road a new/better transfer will be released.