Wembley DVD Critique /Quality and other prefered concerts over Wembley go here

[SmoothC21]

I have posted this now the third time since there are so many posts and I guess no one has seen it..

Original VHS Quality:

"Restored" "DVD Quality":

My mistake, sorry But thanks for pointing this out to me.

I can say, from what I can see and compare on both pics, that whites were a lot better at the source than on the final DVD -_- I hate this blue highlight so much... ugh... We can also notice, that they didn't even bother themselves to get rid of or at least reduce the halos. That's sad...

P.S. Even my father, who's not really into all new technology like blu-rays etc, who don't know what the restoration is said (I quote here): "The quality is rather bad, isn't it? Why did they release it on official DVD?".... I think it's a self-explenation...

 

[SmoothC21]

Let me show you another thing... These two screens were taken like a few mins one after another. First one comes form I Want You Back, the second one from The Love You Save. Take a look

Less than a minute between those two screens, so big difference... We can see that in some parts, hights and whites are corrected with a good results, in some not. Why? Ask the crew...

Another shot where whites and hights looks good:

 

[code753cr]

Let me show you another thing... These two screens were taken like a few mins one after another. First one comes form I Want You Back, the second one from The Love You Save. Take a look

Less than a minute between those two screens, so big difference... We can see that in some parts, hights and whites are corrected with a good results, in some not. Why? Ask the crew...

Another shot where whites and hights looks good:

Yeah I noticed that. There are also times where the video is too dark. Rock With You, J5 medley, Thriller, Bad are messed up with the colors and how bright the video is, I think the worst of the whole concert was Smooth Criminal. Many times the colors are off, or too high, or way to bright or too dark! I wish they did a better job and I know! They ruined the video quality instead of enhancing it in quite a few parts!

 

[Malcolm X]

WHY ISN'T IT BLU-RAY???
have they been using bad cameras while shooting this tour or what..?????
I mean IT IS Michael Jackson at the peak of his career!!!

I have watched Led Zeppelin concert at Madison Square Garden 1973 and it was Blu-ray ......

look at the quality of the video

how come concert from 1988 cannot be HD quality.....


or were they Lazy while doing this DVD??

 

[SmoothC21]

WHY ISN'T IT BLU-RAY???
have they been using bad cameras while shooting this tour or what..?????
I mean IT IS Michael Jackson at the peak of his career!!!

I have watched Led Zeppelin concert at Madison Square Garden 1973 and it was Blu-ray ......

look at the quality of the video

how come concert from 1988 cannot be HD quality.....


or were they Lazy while doing this DVD??

Why not blu-ray? Because The Estate had only personal Michael's VHS copy available as they couldn't find the film tape of the show. Some Bad Tour shows were recorded on 35mm film tapes, but as fans always wanted Wembley, and Estate owned the multitracks of this show, they decided to release it with watchable video quality and great sound quality. What's the result? You can juge by yourself

 

[TheMan1998]

Damn, I wasn't able to spot myself!! I've been there back when I was only 16 yo... I was also disappointed from the image quality of the DVD. With today's technology and the advanced algorithms in digital video processing, they could easily enhanced the image quality and even upscale it to 720P and release it on Bluray.. The very least they could have done is to re-Pan & re-Scan it into 9:16 widescreen format. I thing I"ll do it myself when I'l find the time (it's a lot of work, as you have to corp it frame by frame to make sure you don't corp out the main action). As usual I didn't expect much from $ony... One thing is for sure, being there is a whole different experience... especially when you're only 16..The Wembley stadium looks twice as large to a teenager that to an adult.. This DVD sure bought back a lot of memories...

 

[h0opman31]

WHY ISN'T IT BLU-RAY???
have they been using bad cameras while shooting this tour or what..?????
I mean IT IS Michael Jackson at the peak of his career!!!

I have watched Led Zeppelin concert at Madison Square Garden 1973 and it was Blu-ray ......

look at the quality of the video

how come concert from 1988 cannot be HD quality.....


or were they Lazy while doing this DVD??

Woah, Love that live shot of the Twin Towers and the city from 1979 in the beginning there

 

[ivy]

P.S. Even my father, who's not really into all new technology like blu-rays etc, who don't know what the restoration is said (I quote here): "The quality is rather bad, isn't it? Why did they release it on official DVD?".... I think it's a self-explenation...

Interesting. I had the opposite experience. Took the DVD to my parents house and mid way I asked my parents if they think the quality was poor. My dad looked to me liked I was crazy and said "This concert is decades old, it's real good for old stuff".

 

[HIStory]

P.S. Even my father, who's not really into all new technology like blu-rays etc, who don't know what the restoration is said (I quote here): "The quality is rather bad, isn't it? Why did they release it on official DVD?".... I think it's a self-explenation...

Why? Because fans are interested in it, that's why. And the quality is good enough to let us enjoy Michael's fantastic performance. If the Estate had not been released it, then that's what fans would complain about. Damned if you do, damned if you don't do...

 

[max000]

Too bad when MJ was at his most beautiful, estate was browbeaten into releasing video, not showing MJ to best advantage. So ticked.

 

[Dorian]

Too bad when MJ was at his most beautiful, estate was browbeaten into releasing video, not showing MJ to best advantage. So ticked.

Go to MJJPictures if you want to see how beautiful MJ was from different angles. You got a lot of HQ pictures there.

I want to enjoy the performance, which was incredible.

 

[Frankyboy5]

Re: Wembley DVD Critique /Quality - All discussion on the quality of Wembley DVD go here

Yes! They did edit the audio. If you listen to MITM there are times you hear Who's when they shouldn't be there and it's been said they have edited the audio and times where he sings something and it doesn't match the video. They most likely used July 15th with this. They did a bad job editing the audio at times too, they messed up.

sucks, but it was corrected in the live CD of MITM. You do hear another "hoo" in both versions as he falls to his knees again but it's very faint it's prolly background singer or audience.

 

[Rudolf]

LOL I've actually heard Queen fans complaining about this.




Stef Fletcher
Sep. 21, 201209 07:44 am
I was really looking forward to seeing this on the big screen with surround sound to hopefully recapture some of the live magic that was Queen. Unfortunately I came away very disappointed.
The sound quality was appalling, very quiet and undynamic compared to the documentary. The soundtrack seemed to be in stereo, with all sounds coming from the front speakers and very little "surround".
Film edit was poor, out of focus shots, bad quallity night shots and terrible synchronisation eg Brian's guitar strikes not sounding notes in the guitar solo.
I know this may seem a bit "Nitpicky", but having been a Queen fan for longer than I care to remember, I guess I still care about what comes out of the Queen Closet.
I feel this is a very inferior product and Freddie would have been appalled that it is been released in it's present form, but hey ho I guess it's out just in time for Christmas !


I wonder what would he say about MJ release h34r: xD

 

[HIStory]

Again comparing this to the Queen DVD...

Was an old VHS the only thing they could find for making the Queen DVD?

 

[Rudolf]

Again comparing this to the Queen DVD...

Was an old VHS the only thing they could find for making the Queen DVD?

No, not about that. What some of people here call "negative" is the complete truth. That Queen fan comment was example of how far negative can some people be even about HD release. No one here is being like that. Fans are actually incredibly pleased overall even though this is one of poorest quality releases I've ever seen.
My point wasn't about sources. My point is that you simply haven't seen real negativity here lol.

 

[SmoothC21]

Why? Because fans are interested in it, that's why. And the quality is good enough to let us enjoy Michael's fantastic performance. If the Estate had not been released it, then that's what fans would complain about. Damned if you do, damned if you don't do...

Hey, take it easy I just quoted what my father said to me.

 

[Boggy]

Interesting. I had the opposite experience. Took the DVD to my parents house and mid way I asked my parents if they think the quality was poor. My dad looked to me liked I was crazy and said "This concert is decades old, it's real good for old stuff".

Funny. I did almost the same.

Last night, I invited some friends (non fans) to watch the DVD.
Before watching, I warned them about the quality. that it would not be a Pure DVD quality because it was a VHS from 1988 that was restored.
At the end of the show, they told me I was maniac because the quality was really really good for a stuff from 1988.

They really enjoyed the concert, they were impressed by MJ performance and energy. He has something special.
It was funny to see them struck in front of MJ performances, they sung, they smile

At last but not least, they asked if I had other MJ concerts to watch

 

[SmoothC21]

Again comparing this to the Queen DVD...

Was an old VHS the only thing they could find for making the Queen DVD?

No, it wasn't. But whose fault is it that they don't have the original 35mm film tape? Michael's?! Gosh...

I'm wondering how it came that the original tapes of other performers are available for use nowadays, while the shows comes from late 70s or 80s and at the same time, film tapes from MJ shows from the late 80s are missing or destroyed so they are unusable? Who was responsible to take care of them? And why 'they' let them got damaged? Can you answer me?

If Queen fans are negative about the quality of the 'Hungarian Rhapsody' while it's really great, then let us complain about the Wembley show quality. We do not complain about performance, about choosing Wembley for the release etc. We are just disappointed that the FIRST and HISTORICAL release of BWT and only second official release of Michael's live show, looks like this.

I can see your point that you enjoy watching this DVD and you're glad that Estate released at least something but you have to be lenient to us. This thread is about the Wembley quality critcs so entering it, you have to be aware that you'll see such opinions. Try to respect them as we respect others. Do not deny or undermine our point of view cuz it only lead to the great quarrel.

 

[Rudolf]

Funny. I did almost the same.

Last night, I invited some friends (non fans) to watch the DVD.
Before watching, I warned them about the quality. that it would not be a Pure DVD quality because it was a VHS from 1988 that was restored.
At the end of the show, they told me I was maniac because the quality was really really good for a stuff from 1988.

They really enjoyed the concert, they were impressed by MJ performance and energy. He has something special.
It was funny to see them struck in front of MJ performances, they sung, they smile

At last but not least, they asked if I had other MJ concerts to watch

No offense but perhaps those people simply don't have any knowledge about sources and what quality could be available for an official release even from 70s and 80s. See LA 89 video for example. Maybe they're just referring to some crappy 3rd gen 1000 times copied bootleg tapes in which comparison this would look great.

Age doesn't really mean a thing when it comes to an official release. All depends on source and in this case source was really poor. Even video from 2006 can look poor depending on source.

I don't think "this looks amazing for 80s" is an argument.

Elvis Comeback live in 1968 DVD release -

 

[HIStory]

No, it wasn't. But whose fault is it that they don't have the original 35mm film tape? Michael's?! Gosh...

I'm wondering how it came that the original tapes of other performers are available for use nowadays, while the shows comes from late 70s or 80s and at the same time, film tapes from MJ shows from the late 80s are missing or destroyed so they are unusable? Who was responsible to take care of them? And why 'they' let them got damaged? Can you answer me?

If Queen fans are negative about the quality of the 'Hungarian Rhapsody' while it's really great, then let us complain about the Wembley show quality. We do not complain about performance, about choosing Wembley for the release etc. We are just disappointed that the FIRST and HISTORICAL release of BWT and only second official release of Michael's live show, looks like this.

I can see your point that you enjoy watching this DVD and you're glad that Estate released at least something but you have to be lenient to us. This thread is about the Wembley quality critcs so entering it, you have to be aware that you'll see such opinions. Try to respect them as we respect others. Do not deny or undermine our point of view cuz it only lead to the great quarrel.

Jesus! Don't you think you are putting words in my mouth just a little bit?

Why was my question disrespectful? All I asked was what was the point of bringing up the Queen DVD once again, when there is no comparison. The circumstances of both releases are totally different. I'd LOVE to have a HD DVD of Bad Tour like anyone else, but if we can't then we can't. There's no point in comparing it to HD/Blue-ray releases.

MJJLatvia actually answered my question that his point was not comparing but to point out that one can have a HD release and still complain. Point taken. Though I'm pretty sure here too there would be such people who would complain even if we had a HD release. There are people who will always complain, no matter what. (I'm not talking about anyone here, but human nature generally.)

 

[Boggy]

No offense but perhaps those people simply don't have any knowledge about sources and what quality could be available for an official release even from 70s and 80s. See LA 89 video for example. Maybe they're just referring to some crappy 3rd gen 1000 times copied bootleg tapes in which comparison this would look great.

Age doesn't really mean a thing when it comes to an official release. All depends on source and in this case source was really poor. Even video from 2006 can look poor depending on source.

I don't think "this looks amazing for 80s" is an argument.

Elvis Comeback live in 1968 DVD release -

Yes you are right, the argument is not the age is the source. In our case : a damaged tape.

 

[lom kit]

Interesting. I had the opposite experience. Took the DVD to my parents house and mid way I asked my parents if they think the quality was poor. My dad looked to me liked I was crazy and said "This concert is decades old, it's real good for old stuff".

Hmm, and what should this mean?

thats the same as the comments I read in forums about new tv's and blu-rays. Something like: "My girlfriend, who doesn't know anything about quality and doesn't pay much attention about such things, said its horrible/great quality".

Should this mean how a noob judges the quality of something, is how good or bad really is?

 

[dmehta]

The MJ Wembley DVD was never going to be the same quality as the Queen DVD because Michael's Estate only had access to a VHS tape for this show, whereas the Queen gig was sourced from the original film. It's comparing apples to oranges.

Who knows, maybe some of the restoration work on the VHS could have been done a little better, or maybe the condition of the VHS was so poor that this was the best they could do.

Ultimately, Michael's performance is what shines through, and once you see him any niggling concerns over quality just fade away. I watched the DVD at a friends house yesterday, and neither of the two friends I was with made complaints about the quality - all they could say was how good MJ's performance was.

 

[Galactus123]

I really hope they find the film reels someday. It would be great to see Bad Tour on blu-ray or even in movie theater. But until that day comes I will enjoy watching this Wembley dvd.

 

[lom kit]

In that Warren Eagles article he talks about shows from Australia, Japan and Europe been filmed.
I think at least 2, problably all Tokyo concerts from 87 are filmed on film.
If you have that version of the "Bad Commpany" special, you can see that the videos of red shirt have very film like look. and if you look carefully, you'll see that the some frames have dirt. this are not tape or vhs noises and damages or hot pixels in the camera.

I'm not sure if black shirt was also on film. the quality i have doesn't give clear evidence. the white dot on Michaels hair, its not from the lights or tape.

 

[WildStyle]

That sure looks like film to me lom kit! Nice find! Not so sure on the last screen. Now... where is this stuff?

 

[Galactus123]

That sure looks like film to me lom kit! Nice find! Not so sure on the last screen. Now... where is this stuff?

Here is the videos

 

[Hunterr]

In that Warren Eagles article he talks about shows from Australia, Japan and Europe been filmed.
I think at least 2, problably all Tokyo concerts from 87 are filmed on film.
If you have that version of the "Bad Commpany" special, you can see that the videos of red shirt have very film like look. and if you look carefully, you'll see that the some frames have dirt. this are not tape or vhs noises and damages or hot pixels in the camera.

I'm not sure if black shirt was also on film. the quality i have doesn't give clear evidence. the white dot on Michaels hair, its not from the lights or tape.

The Bad Company footage was DEFINITELY shot on film, HOWEVER, I'd imagine that (since it's not jumbo tron footage), the people who made that documentary, plus photographers, were only granted X amount of time to film at the front of the stage.
That's usually how it goes for concerts and music festivals. People with a photo/press pass are permitted to film for a limited amount of time.
This might also be why there's only footage from WBSS up to Human Nature.
There could have been more, sure, but maybe not. Also, there were only like 2 or 3 angles/cameras shooting on at least 2 different nights (red and the brief silver shirt parts).

In any case, some where lies the raw film of what was used for this.

The black shirt thing looks like jumbo-tron footage, maybe? It it was at Yokohama stadium, it could have been the same camera crew that would end up shooting the full show we have all seen.

 

[SmoothC21]

The MJ Wembley DVD was never going to be the same quality as the Queen DVD because Michael's Estate only had access to a VHS tape for this show, whereas the Queen gig was sourced from the original film. It's comparing apples to oranges.

But the thing is, why The Estate don't have film tapes? Whose fault is it? Or if they have, why don't they release them...

 

[Eric]

But the thing is, why The Estate don't have film tapes? Whose fault is it? Or if they have, why don't they release them...

The estate con't find the film. If they knew whose fault it was that they are missing, they'd probably be able to find them.