Nvidia 4090RTX

[RedFox 1]

Seeing it as the director intended. Video and audio don't make the story. They inform it.

Sent from my Pixel 6 using Tapatalk

Absolutely correct.

 

[coopervid]

Seeing it as the director intended. Video and audio don't make the story. They inform it.

Sent from my Pixel 6 using Tapatalk

We are on the same page.

 

[DaveO88]

So for me a good film should contain everything, a good story, great graphics and great sound. That's exactly why I like to edit films, well - I can't change the story myself, but I can shoot the picture and especially the sound (DTS:X) and that's exactly why I love my RTX 3070. But now I find 40xx in the price range very daring, whereby a new PC will probably have to be built - I won't go along with such nonsense at first.

 

[SamuriHL]

Look at it a different way. To really understand the concept of video and audio for movie storytelling.....

Dune 2021:

Streamed on a 6" phone screen?

IMAX 100' screen with massive surround sound?

It's the same story. Which is the more immersive experience, however? And THAT is the point.

 

[DQ]

Look at it a different way. To really understand the concept of video and audio for movie storytelling.....

Dune 2021:

Streamed on a 6" phone screen?

IMAX 100' screen with massive surround sound?

It's the same story. Which is the more immersive experience, however? And THAT is the point.

I think you make my point without realizing it. How many people are watching movies/shows (stories) on their 6" phone vs. IMAX screens?

Yes visuals can help a story and they can make it more thrilling, but again, those are just ornaments placed upon the story.

Great conversation by the way and that way a great way to compare how people watch movies you made.

 

[SamuriHL]

I made exactly the opposite point. A phone is hardly immersive. Even the average tv/ home setup doesn't compare to a theater experience. If you think you get the same story watching dune on a phone or average TV than you do in a large screen theater, you are woefully mistaken. The director himself does not want people watching it on a small screen because you will not get the impact of the story. There are details that add to the story that you will miss on a small screen. And those details are massively important to the story. Iow you aren't getting the complete story in that case... you're missing it. In order to experience what the director intended, to pull you into the story and give you a sense of the scope of this world, it requires a big theater experience. He was very clear that seeing it for the first time in a small screen is not the way he wants people to experience his movie. Director intent matters in story telling.

Sent from my SM-G998U1 using Tapatalk

 

[coopervid]

I made exactly the opposite point. A phone is hardly immersive. Even the average tv/ home setup doesn't compare to a theater experience. If you think you get the same story watching dune on a phone or average TV than you do in a large screen theater, you are woefully mistaken. The director himself does not want people watching it on a small screen because you will not get the impact of the story. There are details that add to the story that you will miss on a small screen. And those details are massively important to the story. Iow you aren't getting the complete story in that case... you're missing it. In order to experience what the director intended, to pull you into the story and give you a sense of the scope of this world, it requires a big theater experience. He was very clear that seeing it for the first time in a small screen is not the way he wants people to experience his movie. Director intent matters in story telling.

Sent from my SM-G998U1 using Tapatalk

I agree completely but as you also can see in the forum many people still buy DVDs instead of BDs or UHDs. So they miss greatly what is technically possible today and what makes at least for me a huge difference. Seems they don't care...

 

[SamuriHL]

Which is fine. People are free to experience the content they watch how they want. My only point is to not pretend how you view content has no bearing on the story as in some cases that's simply not true. If all you watch is romcom all good you can watch it on a phone and not miss a thing. But something like dune where things happening in the background tell huge parts of the story, you will definitely miss out.

Eternals is another one that should be experienced in a big screen. It's a massive story in and of itself and they use a lot of visuals and sound to augment it. Seeing it on a massive rpx screen versus my home theater, as good as it is, is the only real way to experience the full movie.

If people don't care and want to watch it on smaller screens in lower resolutions, that is indeed their prerogative, but for these epic films they will miss out.

Sent from my SM-G998U1 using Tapatalk

 

[DQ]

Which is fine. People are free to experience the content they watch how they want. My only point is to not pretend how you view content has no bearing on the story as in some cases that's simply not true. If all you watch is romcom all good you can watch it on a phone and not miss a thing. But something like dune where things happening in the background tell huge parts of the story, you will definitely miss out.

Eternals is another one that should be experienced in a big screen. It's a massive story in and of itself and they use a lot of visuals and sound to augment it. Seeing it on a massive rpx screen versus my home theater, as good as it is, is the only real way to experience the full movie.

If people don't care and want to watch it on smaller screens in lower resolutions, that is indeed their prerogative, but for these epic films they will miss out.

Sent from my SM-G998U1 using Tapatalk

My point was never at all to suggest how you viewed made no difference. I was merely trying to highlight how I believe the story itself is far more important than the visuals alone. If that wasn't the case we would have books about movies and not the other way around.

 

[SamuriHL]

My point was never at all to suggest how you viewed made no difference. I was merely trying to highlight how I believe the story itself is far more important than the visuals alone. If that wasn't the case we would have books about movies and not the other way around.

Then you miss the point. A book offers descriptions, often detailed, about things going on in a scene. A movie offers a glimpse of that. It doesn't have the luxury of a narrative. It has to turn that narrative into a visual representation. This is why many people believe books are always superior to a movie. Good directors are able to use visuals and audio cues to provide some of the missing narrative that sets a scene. Without that context, the story is incomplete. Context in storytelling is everything. If visuals weren't important to the story, why not just listen to the story being told on books on tape? Some people do. But if you are consuming content in movie form, visuals obviously play a huge part in telling the complete story. That's why they can turn a 1000 page book into a 2 hour movie. Anything with any depth and complexity is relying on visual and audio cues to fill in those gaps.

Sent from my SM-G998U1 using Tapatalk

 

[DQ]

Then you miss the point. A book offers descriptions, often detailed, about things going on in a scene. A movie offers a glimpse of that. It doesn't have the luxury of a narrative. It has to turn that narrative into a visual representation. This is why many people believe books are always superior to a movie. Good directors are able to use visuals and audio cues to provide some of the missing narrative that sets a scene. Without that context, the story is incomplete. Context in storytelling is everything. If visuals weren't important to the story, why not just listen to the story being told on books on tape? Some people do. But if you are consuming content in movie form, visuals obviously play a huge part in telling the complete story. That's why they can turn a 1000 page book into a 2 hour movie. Anything with any depth and complexity is relying on visual and audio cues to fill in those gaps.

Sent from my SM-G998U1 using Tapatalk

None of that conflicts with what I said. I think we are really agreeing but saying it a bit different. But either way those are good points for sure.

I am not at all trying to argue with you I just appreciate good discussion.

 

[SamuriHL]

No worries. Not taking it as argument at all. Simply a discussion about perspective. I agree it's a good discussion. How humans consume entertainment is not a trivial matter. E.G. why would someone bother going to broadway when they can see the same thing streamed at home? The answer is purely a matter of experience. It's a 3 dimensional experience (without the glasses! LOL) that allows for a greater connection. And that's really what storytelling is about....connecting with the audience. In books, you do that by setting a scene with narrative and emotionally connecting the reader to that scene through the use of language. With movies, there's a reason they spend millions of dollars creating elaborate sets with minutia for details in every scene. Even costumes have an unbelievable level of detail. Let's give you a quick example of what I mean. And while story wise this makes absolutely zero difference, if you think about this detail a little bit, you will come to realize it actually DOES add some depth. Inifinity War. Spider-man's suit, Iron Man's suit, and Dr Strange's cape. All red. On DVD, red. On blu-ray, still red but maybe SLIGHTLY perceived differently. On UHD on a fully calibrated screen, it's very clear that all 3 are actually different shades of red, each unique. Doesn't add to the story line in any real way, but, the attention to detail gives the viewer a deeper connection to the characters and the scene. Good directors use these kinds of details to clue in the viewer subtle differences about the characters. Spider-man's costume, as an example, is a much brighter almost optimistic red. It informs about his character, even if it's not an in your face beat you over the head clue. Dr Strange's cape is a darker red, which informs that his character is perhaps more complex. Iron Man....well, we know he's a grade A a-hole. LMAO But you get the point I'm trying to make. Those visuals add context to the story, and if you're not viewing them as the director intended, you're missing out on subtle details that are an integral part of the storytelling. That's why a lot of us get REALLY pissed off when some dumbass screws up a grading of HDR or Dolby Vision so badly that they end up having to re-release it to correct it. If the director isn't involved in the grading, often times those subtle details that they were trying to convey get lost. The same with watching movies in an uncalibrated environment. It's why directors really want their movies seen in a theater. It's NOT just about money and saving the theater industry. It's that these films are meant to be seen a certain way, and movie theaters are often professionally calibrated to ensure they are showing the director's intent. Home theater equipment at best is the wild wild west, and at worst someone's watching Dune on a goddamn phone. LOL Perception is everything.

 

[DaveO88]

No worries. Not taking it as argument at all. Simply a discussion about perspective. I agree it's a good discussion. How humans consume entertainment is not a trivial matter. E.G. why would someone bother going to broadway when they can see the same thing streamed at home? The answer is purely a matter of experience. It's a 3 dimensional experience (without the glasses! LOL) that allows for a greater connection. And that's really what storytelling is about....connecting with the audience. In books, you do that by setting a scene with narrative and emotionally connecting the reader to that scene through the use of language. With movies, there's a reason they spend millions of dollars creating elaborate sets with minutia for details in every scene. Even costumes have an unbelievable level of detail. Let's give you a quick example of what I mean. And while story wise this makes absolutely zero difference, if you think about this detail a little bit, you will come to realize it actually DOES add some depth. Inifinity War. Spider-man's suit, Iron Man's suit, and Dr Strange's cape. All red. On DVD, red. On blu-ray, still red but maybe SLIGHTLY perceived differently. On UHD on a fully calibrated screen, it's very clear that all 3 are actually different shades of red, each unique. Doesn't add to the story line in any real way, but, the attention to detail gives the viewer a deeper connection to the characters and the scene. Good directors use these kinds of details to clue in the viewer subtle differences about the characters. Spider-man's costume, as an example, is a much brighter almost optimistic red. It informs about his character, even if it's not an in your face beat you over the head clue. Dr Strange's cape is a darker red, which informs that his character is perhaps more complex. Iron Man....well, we know he's a grade A a-hole. LMAO But you get the point I'm trying to make. Those visuals add context to the story, and if you're not viewing them as the director intended, you're missing out on subtle details that are an integral part of the storytelling. That's why a lot of us get REALLY pissed off when some dumbass screws up a grading of HDR or Dolby Vision so badly that they end up having to re-release it to correct it. If the director isn't involved in the grading, often times those subtle details that they were trying to convey get lost. The same with watching movies in an uncalibrated environment. It's why directors really want their movies seen in a theater. It's NOT just about money and saving the theater industry. It's that these films are meant to be seen a certain way, and movie theaters are often professionally calibrated to ensure they are showing the director's intent. Home theater equipment at best is the wild wild west, and at worst someone's watching Dune on a goddamn phone. LOL Perception is everything.

I totally agree, but that also has something to do with subjective perception, I cheekily claim that most would not even notice this difference as in your example, no matter where you see it, maybe in direct comparison and if so because Perceptions they do not know how to classify (that it helps characterize the main character)

 

[SamuriHL]

Sure, fair enough. It also depends on how many times you watch a movie before you pick up on these kinds of subtle details. I may have seen Infinity War "once or twice". (To be fair, you do get that exact direct comparison on Titan as they are all together in one scene where the difference is visible in the right viewing environment)

But the fact that some directors decide to go to that level of detail does add to the experience. Again, it's not really all that important and doesn't detract from the story in any way, but it CAN add to it. There's a scene at the end of Dune, and I'm not going to detail it because I'm sure not everyone's seen it yet, where even on my calibrated 65" OLED set up in movie theater mode it was difficult to see in great detail. On a smaller screen or lower resolution, the scene probably wouldn't have the same impact. But if you know Dune and you've seen the movie, you likely know the scene and how important it will be to the storyline going forward (i.e. in the next chapter). Little moments like that can have a big impact.

 

[DaveO88]

but already very interesting which turns a conversation can take, starting with 4090 up to finding details in films, but very interesting

 

[coopervid]

Sure, fair enough. It also depends on how many times you watch a movie before you pick up on these kinds of subtle details. I may have seen Infinity War "once or twice". (To be fair, you do get that exact direct comparison on Titan as they are all together in one scene where the difference is visible in the right viewing environment)

But the fact that some directors decide to go to that level of detail does add to the experience. Again, it's not really all that important and doesn't detract from the story in any way, but it CAN add to it. There's a scene at the end of Dune, and I'm not going to detail it because I'm sure not everyone's seen it yet, where even on my calibrated 65" OLED set up in movie theater mode it was difficult to see in great detail. On a smaller screen or lower resolution, the scene probably wouldn't have the same impact. But if you know Dune and you've seen the movie, you likely know the scene and how important it will be to the storyline going forward (i.e. in the next chapter). Little moments like that can have a big impact.

Fine with everything. Now audio comes in the game. I have a 5.1.4 setup for Dolby Atmos. But I use Auro-3D for those audio Atmos tracks with my Denon receiver . DTS-Neural for DTS. You can ask me why... The best movie experience also needs a good audio surround setup. Best examples are Midway, Saving Private Ryan, 2001 - Space Odyssey and Close Encounters of the third kind. And of course Pearl Harbor. Without a good audio setup a perfect video setup is just wasted money. Balance your investment to have at least a good video (UHD) and a good audio setup (5.1.4).

 

[SamuriHL]

Well I have 7.1.2 so I have that covered. LOL

 

[coopervid]

Any other spectacular movies with spectacular audio recommended?

 

[DaveO88]

Godzilla vs. Kong

 

[coopervid]

Yap!