Latest on MJJC

Michael Jackson's Vision' DVD Boxed Set Available Everywhere Monday November 22

mkgenie said:
I told you so
Click to expand...

LOL! You sure did! Thank you!
I'm so excited about this! I don't know why anyone would be negative about it. It's an awesome collection and to have it all together like this is amazing! Sure, we've all seen Ghosts and some of the others, but they've never been released. I'd love to have them all on good quality DVDs. :wild::wild::wild::clapping::clapping::clapping:
 
mier said:
Believe me, I have a 117cm full-hd screen and I'm using the best upscaler possible and on such a big screen, dvd quality IS crappy, even the star wars or lord of the rings dvd's.:yes:
Click to expand...
It's not crappy it just has a lower resolution and it's just normal that you can see the difference between DVD and BluRay on a HDTV.^^
 
Korgnex said:
The version screened on WOW is NOT(!) HD!!!
It's just an upscale from Enhanced Definition Betamax (that's the best master Sony can send to TV stations and which is like DVD quality), that's all!

Also, please note:
Full DVD quality is NOT(!) crappy at all.
It's just that most DVDs in the past only provided VHS to DVD transfers with VHS quality.
Look at the STAR WARS movies on DVD, that's what is possible with DVD and that's what DVD quality actually looks like.

Most Blu-rays of older movies (e.g. "Moonwalker") nowadays show you the full DVD quality - on a Blu-ray!
Yeah, "Moonwalker" is NOT(!) HD, it's actually upscaled from what you would call full DVD quality whereas the DVD only provided digitalized VHS quality back then.

;)
Click to expand...

If I could just add some remarks to this, you make some good points, but certainly not all is right.

You're fully right about dvd quality not being crappy, it's not, it's just MJ dvd's have usually been VHS to dvd (master vhs that is). And that's the problem. I'm hoping for this they'll take the time to rescan the actual film, if it was recorded on film.

And a note about Moonwalker: Moonwalker WAS SHOT IN HD! And what you see on the bluray is true HD, and not upscaled from dvd quality. Moonwalker was shot on 16mm film, which may not look as good as 32mm, or as new digital ways they shoot movies! But the point is they took the original 16mm film and scanned it to HD. If something was shot on film, you can always scan it to HD, and that HD is true HD!

Anyway it's a mistake alot of people make. Old movies can be scanned in HD, but it costs alot of money, and some cheap distributors choose to indeed upscale the footage from dvd. The difference between an old movie shot on film, and a new one shot digitally is the particles in the film, you see movie noise, and you think it's bad quality, it's not! It's just as much HD as the digital one. But it's a different method, the noise is what sets the detail for the movie, the more noise, the more detail! That's why it's very dangerous to digitally lower the noise of old films, because when you do that you lose all the detail in the movie, and again that's a mistake which alot of distributors make, and which makes people think old movies are not so HD then new HD. :)
 
Korgnex said:
The version screened on WOW is NOT(!) HD!!!
It's just an upscale from Enhanced Definition Betamax (that's the best master Sony can send to TV stations and which is like DVD quality), that's all!

Also, please note:
Full DVD quality is NOT(!) crappy at all.
It's just that most DVDs in the past only provided VHS to DVD transfers with VHS quality.
Look at the STAR WARS movies on DVD, that's what is possible with DVD and that's what DVD quality actually looks like.

Most Blu-rays of older movies (e.g. "Moonwalker") nowadays show you the full DVD quality - on a Blu-ray!
Yeah, "Moonwalker" is NOT(!) HD, it's actually upscaled from what you would call full DVD quality whereas the DVD only provided digitalized VHS quality back then.

;)
Click to expand...
Dude, do you have the Moonwakler blu-ray? Did you watched at least? Do you have any 80-90's movies on blu-ray? Or do you judge just by screenshots?
Moonwalker blu-ray IS true HD quality. the quality does varies, especially on the segmens with special effects, mostly on SD LMA.
You have no idea how 80s and 90s movies really look like. they are soft. they are grainy. some are extremely grainy.
As the blu-ray was announced, there was big discussion here about the picture quality. Even shot on film, people said that the special effects are rendered on video (or something like that).
Well, the concern about the picture was approved. the quality in MITM and SC segment, parts of the SD (mostly before the song starts) and CT is excellent. the Retrospective, LMA, SD (song) have lower quality. But over all the picture is great. Moonwalker won't look any better. Even with intensive remastering, which won't be ever done for low buget none blockbuster movie, the result won't be anything better.

the Alien movies and the Back to the future trilogy are coming to blu now. check out the quality, to see what movies from that era look like. Aliens was remastered by Cameron himself. You have wrong expectations for those movies. Because of the film material used in those eras, they won't and can stand the standart you expect.
Only Disney's classics like Dumbo, Sleeping beauty, Pinocchio, Beauty and the Beast have extraordinary picture quality, cause they have extensive frame by frame remastering. And no one will ever do this for Moonwalker or Ghosts.
that's why people like you don't see any benefit of blu-ray, right?

And Full dvd quality is not crappy, but stretched to 1080 resolution on tv, it looks and gets crappy. Doesn't matter if it's some of todays releases.


e5d5652a7afad53bc3e685e.png


0c8fd023a82f43e4651d6c3.png


4b955637ae020e42216e9db.png


only 720, can't find 1080 right now
3408_1_large.jpg


3408_4_large.jpg


3408_9_large.jpg



Not looking good, right?
here is review from blu-ray.com about Back to the future. And the guy is very right:
"Hoo-boy, there may be some (unfounded) controversy with the image quality of these releases, so let the games begin! Let's state for the record that these new VC-1 encoded 1080p 1.85:1 Blu-rays present all three films with the best image quality they have ever had on home video. That probably still won't stop the brickbats from being thrown by some who either never saw these films theatrically, don't remember what films looked like in the 1980s, or who have unrealistic expectations of what restoration can achieve, especially in films this laden with optical effects. Let's discuss the basics first. All of these films were grainy and soft looking in their original theatrical releases; I know, because I saw them all. Special effects, even by the wizards of ILM, were still largely optically created back then, and that ups the softness quotient even more. Therefore, this Blu-ray's superior resolution only reveals some of the tricks of the trade to a lot of these effects sequences.
If you are expecting digitally pristine image quality from any of these films, you will probably be sorely disappointed. If you remember how these films looked theatrically (and they were frankly never "gorgeous" films even in their day), or realize that hi-def can only do so much depending on the source elements and the unique characteristics of any given film, you will most likely agree that this is the best looking the Back to the Future trilogy has ever been."


And some fair review of Moonwalker:
http://www.blu-ray.com/movies/Moonwalker-Blu-ray/10513/#Review
png
 
Last edited:
Why do the people here say dvd quality isn't crappy but it just looks that way when it's stretched out on a big full-hd tv?
If it LOOKS crappy, then it IS crappy!

I know it does look good on a normal tube and I won't argue with that, but we live in 2010 now and dvd is not up to the standards we need right now.
 
It doesn't look crappy to me... I recently watched three new 2009 DVDs on my 42" Full HD. It looked VERY good. No sign of bad quality, perfectly clear.
 
Well at least let's hope they gave us widescreen videos edition. I don't know if Sony Entertainement would use the masters photographic film (Only the Estate could allow this), but then again All MJ's videos were not shot with Panavision 35mn optical (which is btw 3 to 5 times better quality than Bluray), few examples with 35mn shooting :
- Thriller - 1:85 - 35mn
- Bad - 1:85 - 35mn
- Moonwalker - 1:85 - 35mn
- Black or White - 1:85 - 35mn
- Remember the Time - 1:85 to 2:35 - 35mn
- Scream - 1:85 - 35mn

Otherwise, the 1:85 aspect ratio will definately afford us widescreen (16/9 kinda) within DVD resolution thanks to BR player transferring mode.

Wait and See, I hope the Estate and Sony will not disapoint like many times before with poor VGA/4:3 quality on DVD.

Anyway, don't hope All 35mn videos gathered in one single BLURAY, it's about business, you know?
 
You say DVD is not crappy, but depends what your viewing it on, tv's these days are made for hd viewing at 1080p, if I play any dvd on my 52" 1080p led tv it looks crap, thats why need a blu-ray source, ok not everyone has a hdtv, but we need to cater for todays technology at least don't we? Plus if we going to take Mj into a new era at least get the fundamentals correct.
 
bramhawk said:
You're fully right about dvd quality not being crappy, it's not, it's just MJ dvd's have usually been VHS to dvd (master vhs that is). And that's the problem. I'm hoping for this they'll take the time to rescan the actual film, if it was recorded on film.

And a note about Moonwalker: Moonwalker WAS SHOT IN HD! And what you see on the bluray is true HD, and not upscaled from dvd quality. Moonwalker was shot on 16mm film, which may not look as good as 32mm, or as new digital ways they shoot movies!
Click to expand...

The previous dvd's were not made from VHS tapes, they were made from the broadcast masters. It's the poor encoding that makes them look bad. I'm pretty sure this new collection will come from the same broadcast masters but "enhanced" digitally. Notice how they say enhanced color in the press release, not enhanced picture. It's also why no Blu Ray release is out, it isn't possible at this time. If they did their job right this new dvd will present these video's in the best possible quailty. DVD is not crap, a dvd can still wonderful, it's just compared to full HD dvd is a lesser format.

Moonwalker was shot on 35mm film, not 16mm or 32mm(32mm doesn't exist).

Salomons said:
- Bad - 1:85 - 35mn
- Black or White - 1:85 - 35mn
- Scream - 1:85 - 35mn
Click to expand...

While there is no doubt these videos were shot on 35mm film, I have never seen any indication that they were framed for anything other than 1.33:1. All versions on dvd and tv have been full screen and the framing suggests so. Several videos for Dangerous and HIStory were shot wide screen and letter boxed for home viewing, I see no reason why these videos wouldn't have been letter boxed as well if they were anything other than full frame.


FOR THE LAST TIME! :eek:) (As mentioned in detail on page two of this thread)
90% of MJ's videos were shot on film, and can/will have AWESOME HD versions.
The problem is everything since the early 90's was edited on SD VIDEO! (Sometimes
with the special effects rendered in SD, Ghosts and Moonwalker are the exceptions because they had film prints made for theatrical release, therefor they were edited on film). So in order for proper Blu/HD versions to be
released they would have to find the original film negative and scan that it, then recreate the video's edits and possibly redo the special effects. It is an expensive and time consuming process. To get it right will take a few years.
 
I'm sure its already been mentioned in this thread (if not more than once), but if there is a NOTICEABLE difference in video quality of TWYMMF, then I will probably grab this. That will be my benchmark, since if that one comes out looking much improved, then I would imagine work would have been done on the rest of them to an extent.

Plus checking out "One More Chance" for the first time ever doesn't hurt matters that much either.
 
Loneman1 said:
I'm sure its already been mentioned in this thread (if not more than once), but if there is a NOTICEABLE difference in video quality of TWYMMF, then I will probably grab this. That will be my benchmark, since if that one comes out looking much improved, then I would imagine work would have been done on the rest of them to an extent.

Plus checking out "One More Chance" for the first time ever doesn't hurt matters that much either.
Click to expand...

That it is one thing that I agree with you there. When I watched TWYMMF on standard definition I didn't notice. But when I upgraded to HD the graininess of this short film in particular was really evident so hopefully that will be improved in this one.
 
kreen said:
They could have gone the extra mile and included behind-the-scene extras as well as director commentaries on some of the videos. Including the remix of BOTDF is also a bone-headed decision. It looks like a good product, but I don't need it personally, and it's aimed more at the mainstream market than at fans.

And as a replacement for a new album, this is completely disappointing.

Also, some people on another board are disputing the idea that the new OMC video will be the actual video they started shooting in 2003. Some say it will be the montage-like thing they eventually showed on TV for the promotion on the Number Ones CD.
Click to expand...

151 posts, and 100% of them are negative! Congrats!
Who said this is a replacement for the new album? It's NOT. :doh:
 
well, negative comments come from the fact in the past the dvd's of mj's video's have not been remastered to show them off to the best of available technology. the 3 video on the Thriller 25 cd/dvd were better than the old one, but they had very obvious colour issues and funny lines. However, since this VISION collection has yet to be released and know one has seen the videos we should wait.
Either way it will be good to have them all together, better than the vhs versions i grew up with.
 
I am looking forward buying Vision! I think Sony will release the 'real' One More Chance music video and not a compilation of clips, cause if you look at the official tracklist of Vision, you can see that the duration of the video is 4.03 minutes, while the full song is only 3.49 minutes. The lenght of most Michael's short films are longer than the actual song. However, the extra lenght of OMC could also be explaned by inclusion of credits, but I hope not.

I don't know if anyone already noticed that the lenght of Can You Feel It is 9.37 minutes on the Vision tracklist! The long version on the internet is about 7 minutes. So this makes me curious what the dvd will bring us.

On Dutch websites they show Vision for preorder without the lenticular images on the cover:
visionmjdutchwithoutlenticular.jpg

I hope the lenticular box is not only for the US or other NTSC-countries (NTSC in terms of TV format) . Cause the boxset with lenticular that is for preorder at the Official Michael Jackson website is only NTSC. And I want a PAL (most used TV format in Europe and Australia) version cause I have heard that PAL is better in quality than NTSC when you play the disc in Europe for example, or is this not true?
 
this whole OMC video thingy makes me sad and mad....Michael could not even finnish filming it because he was taken from the set to get arrested in 2003-_- and we know the rest which is very sad:(
 
I'm afraid it will be NTSC because otherwise they would have to speed up the audio in order to stay in sync with the video. That's why almost every Music DVD is in NTSC.
 
That cover posted above is horrible. I doubt they will release it that way here in EU.
 
This brown cover is terrible, I really hope it's kind of slipcase or something like that. On amazon.co.uk and amazon.com they've changed this nice colourful cover to this brown one, so I guess we can expect the same release in Europe and US.
I ordered mine at hmv, the price is really low. Wondering why the Japanese version is soooo expensive, I mean US$ 92.40??
This all new releases are so bitter-sweet: I really do want to see and hear some 'new' stuff, but at the same time... *sigh* :(
 
maybey the brown cover is how it looks and when you put your fingers across it the images will apear? just thinking out loud! :)
 
markmark11 said:
well, negative comments come from the fact in the past the dvd's of mj's video's have not been remastered to show them off to the best of available technology. the 3 video on the Thriller 25 cd/dvd were better than the old one, but they had very obvious colour issues and funny lines. However, since this VISION collection has yet to be released and know one has seen the videos we should wait.
Either way it will be good to have them all together, better than the vhs versions i grew up with.
Click to expand...

It reads on www.sonymusicdigital.com (Michael Jackson Official Store) that

---All of the short films have been meticulously restored and remastered for the ultimate audio and visual experience...
Click to expand...

so I think we can expect some great work having been done on them :wild:

And if they haven't...:no: What a mistake would that be considering short films are a huge part of Michael's legacy and this is the ultimate collection of them..! So fingers crossed they will look as amazing as they should :angel:
 
Ágnes;3023362 said:
this whole OMC video thingy makes me sad and mad....Michael could not even finnish filming it because he was taken from the set to get arrested in 2003-_- and we know the rest which is very sad:(
Click to expand...
I also think that the OMC video on Vision probably won't be exactly the full 'vision' Michael had for this video, but I am glad we will see some moving pictures of his last music video ever made. I consider it a gift, like the movie 'This Is It' :).

The Lost Child;3023410 said:
This brown cover is terrible, I really hope it's kind of slipcase or something like that. On amazon.co.uk and amazon.com they've changed this nice colourful cover to this brown one, so I guess we can expect the same release in Europe and US.
I ordered mine at hmv, the price is really low. Wondering why the Japanese version is soooo expensive, I mean US$ 92.40??
This all new releases are so bitter-sweet: I really do want to see and hear some 'new' stuff, but at the same time... *sigh* :(
Click to expand...
&
Moonwalker91;3023365 said:
I'm afraid it will be NTSC because otherwise they would have to speed up the audio in order to stay in sync with the video. That's why almost every Music DVD is in NTSC.
Click to expand...

I just looked on Amazon.co.uk and saw that they will release the box in PAL format and it has the lenticular packaging! So I am happy! On Bol.com (a Dutch online shop) they listed two Vision's. So one has the brown cover for 30 Euro, and the other has no picture but costs 40 euro. I think that might be the lenticular one.

This is stated on Michael Jackson.com:
'' Michael Jackson's Vision will be available in a LIMITED EDITION DELUXE boxed set featuring a 60-page glossy hard-bound book that includes behind-the-scenes photos from Michael's personal archives. The state-of-the-art packaging includes cover art using lenticular virtual imaging technology to vividly represent memorable scenes from Michael Jackson's signature short films.''

So I guess the brown one will be the regular edition of the release, while the lenticular are the limited ones, but I hope they won't be that limited, so that every fan get the chance to own one.

And Cdjapan.co.jp is indeed sometimes extremely expensive (don't know why). Like the Thriller 25 USB stick, which was around 80 euro if I could remember.

Eterna.;3023448 said:
maybey the brown cover is how it looks and when you put your fingers across it the images will apear? just thinking out loud! :)
Click to expand...

That could also be an explanation for this mystery ;)
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top