Fallen Angels: R4 vs R3K Remaster vs R1 Kino

Lourdes · Post by **Lourdes** » 27 Nov 2006, 08:16

Taken with my own settings (MPC, WMR9RL, PureVideo). Bicubic resize to 1024x576 in PS.

The R3K DTS track has a bit more detail and presence than the DD5.1 as you'd expect. Both tracks blow the stereo on the R4 away, so much clearer. Really improves the viewing experience.

Tough to call the video. The R3K is a lot cleaner, far fewer dirt specks and scratches and this is very welcome. But as a result of more cleaning it loses a little grain and detail and it doesn't look as good as the R4 in places.

The R3K has a better subtitle font but the R4 subtitles themselves are better. The R3K has bits of Engrish and errors throughout, nothing really bad but you notice and it does distract a somewhat. Additionally, in a few places there are timing issues such as subtitles appearing 2-3 secs before dialogue is spoken.

Personally I'm going to buy it. The audio more than makes up for any shortcomings in my opinion.

R4 Top, R3K Remaster Middle, R1 Bottom

EvaUnit02 · Post by **EvaUnit02** » 27 Nov 2006, 09:39

Could you please provide approximate time signatures? Then I could take some R1 captures.

Are there stereo tracks on the R3K remasters, or just 5.1 remixes?

EDIT:
Nevermind, found the answer.
Perhaps more controversially, the original Dolby Digital 2.0 tracks of both films have been dropped in favour of new Dolby Digital 5.1 and DTS 5.1 remixes. Considering the rights to the films belong to the filmmakers themselves and that the films have doubtlessly been restored by Jet Tone/Block 2 Pictures, I would expect that these would be official restorations and remixes of the original soundtracks.
WKW probably approved of them then, that's perfectly acceptable.

Lourdes · Post by **Lourdes** » 27 Nov 2006, 10:31

Remastering = Making a new master from original materials or a higher level master to be used in creating products. In video terms it can be a new telecine, or improvements to an existing master. Same wth audio.
Remixing = Well it's obvious. Adding new effects, making a surround mix etc.

So here both have happened.

I think a few companies must have licensed Accents master including the Koreans. That telecine was supervised by Doyle and then Accent did inhouse restoration afaik. The audio however is not to be found on any other release. It's lovely.

No timecodes, these are the only discs worth looking at.

grim_tales · Post by **grim_tales** » 27 Nov 2006, 12:22

The KR remaster has a very green tint/filter (in the last Michelle Reis shot)

EvaUnit02 · Post by **EvaUnit02** » 27 Nov 2006, 12:38

grim_tales wrote:The KR remaster has a very green tint/filter (in the last Michelle Reis shot)

WOW, where would we be without you Captain Obvious?!

grim_tales · Post by **grim_tales** » 27 Nov 2006, 12:47

Point taken but I was also saying it to say "Is that the intended look?"

Keung · Post by **Keung** » 27 Nov 2006, 19:51

Who's the woman in the last cap?

grim_tales · Post by **grim_tales** » 27 Nov 2006, 20:00

Michelle Reis (I think).

bradavon · Post by **bradavon** » 27 Nov 2006, 23:58

Thanks Lourdes. Nice job there.

EvaUnit02 wrote:I would expect that these would be official restorations and remixes of the original soundtracks.[/i]
WKW probably approved of them then, that's perfectly acceptable.

That's quite some stretch. Not that it bothers me per say as I hear they're decent/faithful 5.1 remixes but it's still some stretch.

Lourdes wrote:No timecodes, these are the only discs worth looking at.

Not so it's not a proper comparison without all editions and besides like Eva I have the R1 so want to know if it's worth upgrading or only minutely better.

It's a bit much to say these are the only ones worth looking at when others have already bought various other DVDs.

Please provide time codes so Eva can add the R1 captures.

As for the R4 and R3K overall I'd say the R3K but only because of the grain, both are decent. As you say the R3K also has 5.1 which I here from others too is an improvement.

Some may still not like it of course as it's not original.

Lourdes · Post by **Lourdes** » 28 Nov 2006, 00:36

I have the old R3K and R3HK discs but I didn't bother including them either. Same with the CE comparison, I also have the R3HK and old R3K (R1) of for that. Just no point including inferior discs.
http://www.dvdbeaver.com/film/DVDCompar ... angels.htm That includes the Kino and the R1 and R4 caps were both taken equally and accurately for once in the history of DVDBeaver.

But if you really want timecodes:
First frame, 8 minutes after that, 4 mins later, 7 mins later, 7 mins later, 15mins later, give it another 2, 8 mins maybe, maybe 20 here, 10, then about 3.

bradavon · Post by **bradavon** » 28 Nov 2006, 01:14

There is a mammoth difference between the HK and R1 DVDs, the former are disasters.

p.s - Thank you.

EvaUnit02 · Post by **EvaUnit02** » 28 Nov 2006, 02:03

bradavon · Post by **bradavon** » 28 Nov 2006, 19:51

Thanks Eva.

Apart from the yucky interlacing the R1 holds up very well.

Is £14 still the cheapest the Korean SE can be picked up?