the texas GRAIN saw massacre blu-ray - The Texas Chain Saw Massacre (1974) Discussion

[–] rjames1973 10 years ago

Some of initial reviews I've read of this new blu-ray edition have also indicated that the new transfer is not necessarily a mind-blowing improvement over previous versions, but it is definitely an improvement. You have to consider the limitations on the original source material: 16mm film stock. The other thing to consider is that the visual characteristics of this movie are "gritty" for a reason. I seriously doubt that Tobe Hooper had any idea how well the movie would do over time, as well as shooting it in a way that would transfer well to other types of media (e.g., VHS and blu-ray). In any case, I plan to get the new blu-ray edition, keeping all of these things in mind. Blu-ray.com has a great review of the new blu-ray edition here, and I think the author really sums things up with this blu-ray edition quite well.

Here is the link:

http://www.blu-ray.com/movies/The-Texas-Chain-Saw-Massacre-Blu-ray/106447/

BTW, what type of TV are you watching blu-rays on? Keep in mind that just because you're watching a blu-ray on an HDTV, that doesn't mean the blu-ray is going to automatically look amazing. I have a top of the line HDTV that isn't that old, and not every blu-ray I watch on it looks amazing. Again, a lot that goes back to limitations from the source material that was used for the transfer to blu-ray.

reply

[–] macabre_madness 10 years ago

I actually have several hdtv's (2 of them 3d). I have a plasma, led and an lcd. smallest screen is 52". Trust me, I'm not seeing this wrong and I've actually disahreed with bluray.com before most notably the transfer for House Of Wax 3D.

You ask the right question though. There are too many different types of televisions with ranging refresh rates. If you honestly believe this transfer is better then by all means I don't want to kill your buzz. I bought seven or eight titles todays and this is the only one I'm bitching about.

reply

[–] halcyonsummer 10 years ago

Film is supposed to have grain. It isn't supposed to look like a sqweaky clean digital production. I would be more pissed if they used DNR and scrubbed all the grain out and so would most people. It's not a sign of a poor transfer--the grain is supposed to be there.

reply

[–] halcyonsummer 10 years ago

Update: I just watched the disc and I honestly have no idea what you're seeing. It doesn't have any more grain than any other 70s or 80s film I have on Blu. I even think the new Halloween disc has more grain.

Maybe your TV isn't properly calibrated. Mine has been professionally calibrated, as all HDTVs should be really. The presets from the factory are all out of whack and never represent what the image is supposed to look like. Those boosted colors and sharpness are meant to look good to unknowing customers in stores. If the sharpness is too high--and usually right out of the box, it is--all it's going to do is accentuate the grain even more.

Get your TV calibrated or look up online how to do it at home based on eyesight. It should not be overly grainy. I just watched it for the first time myself and it looked fine to me and not any more grainy than any other film I own from that era. It really has to be something on your end.

reply

[–] macabre_madness 10 years ago

(laughing)

reply

[–] halcyonsummer 10 years ago

I'm trying to help. No need to be rude.

If your TV is on one of the settings straight out of the box, it is going to look bad. My sharpness was set at 55 and after calibration it's on 12. My color was 60 and now it's 40. So and so on. The factory really jacks that stuff up to look good on sales floors. Directors use a certain standard when color grading and composing these films so it helps to know what they saw and have your TV calibrated to that so you're seeing it properly.

Grain IS supposed to be there, but it should not be so prevalent that it's distracting. Film is composed of grain by nature. Digital is composed of pixels. If you scrub away the grain you're actually losing detail and information in the picture. Think of it as removing pixels from a digital image. It's going to look worse.

16mm film stock still has more resolution than 4K digital scans can capture. So the image you're seeing on Blu-ray still isn't as good as it can look and it won't be until we get 8K TVs or so. There is no such thing as pre-HD because film by nature has more detail in it that current HD scans can capture.

reply

[–] halcyonsummer 10 years ago

But of course if you don't WANT practical advice on how to fix an issue you're experiencing then just say so. But keep in mind admitting that pretty much just leaves us with the conclusion you want to bitch and nothing else. It sounds like you just want to complain and not do anything to fix the problem.

reply

[–] macabre_madness 10 years ago

I'm laughing because I already addressed the tv issue and to be honest there's not a whole lot I can say that doesn't come off sounding like I'm in a higher class with better electronics and don't really need advice in that dept.
I mentioned grain because it rhymed with chain. There are other major issues with the picture. I've seen this movie on every video format since the 80's and the problem with debating with horror fans is that they tend to be blinded by their own hardon for horror. They are extremely dedicated. They are also extremely gullible.

I also want to say that I don't really believe that expensive electronics are always better than low end electronics. Last Christmas I bought a friend a 55" 3D tv from Walmart for like 11 hundred and at the same time bought a larger 3D tv from Sears for about 35 hundred for a spare bedroom. I think the picture quality on the Walmart tv is much better and that was a Vizio.

I buy blu-rays every single Tuesday. It's obscene how many I own. It is very rare that I jump online to bitch about picture quality. I am actually a little surprised that everyone thinks this transfer is amazing because I knew I was in trouble as soon as the opening credits began.

reply

[–] JesusBaldwin 10 years ago

Could you possibly sound any more snobby than you already do? That was painful.

'Yeah I spent $1100 on my friend for christmas, I thought you would all like to know about that. I have lots of money to spend'

'Anything more I say will sound like im in a higher class and I have better electronics. I don't really need any help in that dept.'

It's obvious that you want everyone to think you're in a higher class, so I don't know why you're pretending to be embarrassed. I like how you're subtely getting in that you own a ridiculous amount of blu-rays too. As if we weren't annoyed enough that every sentence you type is a big pat on the back for owning 3 huge tv's '(two of them 3d)'.

reply

[–] macabre_madness 10 years ago

We are in life where we are and I'll not feel bad about where I am.

That said, I realized what my concerns were. I did a comparison of both blurays and at first had an "oh crap" feeling when I realized the older blu was also by Dark Skys.

First, a daylight scene. I noticed how well the grass stood out in the scene where Franklin exited the van to urinate. So I put in the old blu and went to that scene. The old blu was not as sharp yet all the grain and static was gone, so I jacked up my sharp settings to full and guess what...same effect as the 4k only minus the static and distortion.
I did the same thing with a night scene where Sally and Franklin get attacked by leatherface and got the same result.
The problem with the 4k version is that they have taken the picture and sharpened it to 100% and kept on sharpening the picture until the pq is distorted.
Any of you who have tooled around with photoshop knows how this works. Another user has asked why the deleted scenes look just as good only minus the grain...and this is why. You are watching a film that has been over sharpened to the point that the picture quality is distorted.

reply

[–] halcyonsummer 10 years ago

I knew it had to be something with the sharpness, hence why on my TV it's set at 12. That must be why I couldn't see all the grain you were talking about.

reply

[–] macabre_madness 10 years ago

I dont keep my tvs on high sharpness. I just sharpened the old blu to see what it would do. Like I said, I got the same effect from the old blu only minus the grain and static.
I would like to see a new company do something with this title. I see a lot of room for improvement.

reply

[–] StanleyVonAnderson 10 years ago

Jesus Christ. One can't say much more to someone stupid enough to believe that lack of grain and wax figures constitutes a good restoration. You do realise that the only reason for excessive DNR is as a fine detail filter that allows less work do be done on physical restoration of a negative? It is objectively resulting in a less detailed image, and one far detached from the intended look upon being shot.

Granularity is a natural texture of film stock and constitutes everything about the image itself. As I said, reduction of grain through digital means can only be done by making it less detailed. The low quality, generally high iso 16 mm film stock that the film was shot on is naturally going to have a large grain structure.

If you like a lack of grain, that's fine, watch movies shot in the last 5 years or so that are shot on digital. The answer isn't to scrub out detail and violate film to the point that it has the effective detail of a DVD with disgustingly unnatural textures.

reply

[–] 10 years ago

[deleted]

[–] StanleyVonAnderson 10 years ago

Having just compared stills from both releases, I think one has to conclude that you are a total *beep* moron. The original Blu-Ray release is barely even acceptable,in particular it lacks the same level of detail and the colours are washed out and unnatural with an overbearing level of blues likely present to evoke a more "modern" look.

The only thing you are correct about is the gloriously natural and present grain structure. I can hardly fathom why you would rather a transfer that looks like it has had semen smeared all over it.

reply

[–] 10 years ago

[deleted]

[–] leermartinez 9 years ago

Just wondering but are you watching this 4K transfer on a new 4K TV? I ask this because I want to know if it makes any difference. Is it possible the movie looks better on a 4k then any tv already mentioned.

Now as for comparing this transfer to the last blu ray outing of this movie, It does look brighter in color and louder in audio. As for the grain, it's tolerable. At least it's not as bad as Zombi from Fulci. I got that movie on blu and man the grain on that is terrible and at times the picture is so grainy I couldn't believe they even released it that way.

reply

[–] nimmy1 9 years ago

4K tv would be a waste of money really unless it was a huge TV. My tv is a lg 42355t, it has a high contrast which is one of the most important things to look out for, especially static contrast.

Texas was only filmed on 16mm so it will never look wonderful. I think it looks fine considering.

Only those with no valid argument pick holes in people's spelling and grammar. 

reply

[–] ElectricWarlock 10 years ago

This is one of those movies I like better the more grainy it is anyways. I feel like the grain adds to the realistic vibe of this whole film and would lose a little of it's effect if it was in crystal clear high definition. Other movies (like The Blair Witch Project, Cannibal Holocaust, Night of the Living Dead, etc.) are the same way. So I don't really have any desire to buy a 4K Blu-Ray for this movie anyways. I support high definition transfers for some films (including the Hammer films which relied a lot on color and beautiful, extravagant sets) but others don't need it.

Burn, witch! Burn, witch! Burn! Burn! Burn!

reply

[–] macabre_madness 10 years ago

A lot of fans would agree with you. It seems to have come into fashion ever since the Grindhouse films by Tarantino and Rodriguez were released.

I however see no commodity value to grain. I would rather these films get expert transfers to ensure that the best picture quality be retained for future generations.

reply

[–] leonwatson79 10 years ago

This is one of those films that looks better with lots of grain.

reply

[–] balthazar_bee 10 years ago

The picture quality is as good as can be expected for a forty year old, 16mm film -- particularly under special circumstances (which I won't go into, not being an expert -- something to do with non-existence of the negative?).

Moreover, it's a distinct improvement on the previous blu-ray, which was made in 2008. Needless to say, there have been advances since then.

But don't take my word for it. Pop over here: http://www.caps-a-holic.com/hd_vergleiche/multi_comparison.php?art=par t&x=515&y=254&action=1&image=1&hd_multiID=319& cap1=44337&cap2=26554&disc1=4769&disc2=2877&lossless=# vergleich

Still don't see a difference? If your TVs are as big and properly calibrated as you assert, I can't imagine not recognizing that the new release is superior.

reply

[–] 10 years ago

[deleted]

[–] nimmy1 10 years ago

May be you don't have your tv settings correctly set. Oh my tv i have v sharp and h sharp and the grain is carried on the v sharp.

Only those with no valid argument pick holes in people's spelling and grammar. [yes]

reply

[–] rockyjm 9 years ago

I got and watched the UK Second Sight Blu-ray of the 40th Anniversary edition of the film and it blew my mind how good it looked.

I have owned the old Second Sight Blu-ray that came out years ago and I have also owned the US Dark Sky Blu-ray, and i Have to say that the new Second Sight Blu-ray is the best I've seen it.

Yes, there's grain, but there's supposed to be grain, it's a film from the seventies shot on cheap, grainy film stock. I'd rather have a Blu-ray which replicates the look of how a film originally looked, than one where all the grain and detail have been removed by DNR. The detail on this Blu-ray is amazing, as are the colors and there are no traces of digital tinkering. I don't see why people expect everything to look as clean as modern productions like Avatar and The Hobbit.

Look at comparisons between the new Blu-ray and the old, you will see that the old one is very soft, blurry and has poor contrast. The new Blu-ray is miles better. If you don't like it then buy the old release or just turn on the DNR option on your TV to remove the grain.

I, for one am happy the companies behind the restoration and Blu-ray releases never catered to the people who wanted it to look like a Pixar movie, and chose to keep it as close to the original look as possible.

reply