Sentences with phrase «film grain looks»

Not exact matches

Kellogg's ® Nutri - Grain ® Bakery Delights package features textured film to represent a bakery treat that looks like its wrapped in kraft paper and twine.

Huntsman is cutting against the grain with his online strategy, using an unconventional web presence that places a heavy emphasis on Internet videos that look a bit like they came from the outtake reel of a documentary film.

Who Framed Roger Rabbit looks like a film, with a pleasant grain pattern and deep texture, thanks to its VistaVision roots, which bolster its old Hollywood appearance.

The digital choice allows the movie to look clean, but perhaps the grain of film would have been better fitting for the overall presentation that Baumbach was going for (especially with some of the production design and set decoration (especially the apartments) by Sam Lisenco and Hannah Rothfield, respectively).

The 2.35:1, 1080p presentation definitely represents a new transfer, as the film elements look cleaner than before in addition to more vibrant, but there is something occasionally electronic about the image, with the fine, Super35 grain turning to noise during a few rogue applications of edge enhancement.

Disc Two features Grains of Sand (the building of the Sandman), Re-Imagining the Goblin, Covered In Black (creating Venom), On Location in New York and Cleveland, Inside the Editing Room & Science of Sound and a behind - the - scenes look at some of the film's stunts.

The computerized black and white look and all the fake film grain stuff that was meant to evoke nostalgia got pretty grating at times, but I understand that they were good cheats to make the concept more effective.

Though film grain is present, dust - busting / noise - reduction efforts have left the picture a mite soft overall, and I'd love to see what it looked like before the processing.

Still, while edge - enhancement is at a minimum and the colours are saturated but free of bleed, it looks like a film from 1969 — a thin patina of filmic grain preserving a sense of authenticity in the experience of watching it at home.

I saw more DVNR than other reviewers seem to be seeing (at least, grain is all but absent, which doesn't jibe with the picture having been shot in Super35), but fear not: Changing Lanes doesn't look anywhere near as processed as the Mountain's concurrent BD issues of the Star Trek film series.

There is a natural film grain to keep from the video looking overly clean and digital.

There is no significant print damage and grain levels are appropriate, but the film looks faded and old.

Flecks and grain are almost consistent throughout the entire film, especially the opening Walt Disney Pictures logo, and several scenes looked washed out.

The extreme remastering doesn't seem to betray the film's original look, but return to its freshest state, eliminating the faded hues, grain, artifacts, and wear & tear that marked both DVDs before it.

1970s American films have generally always looked ugly to me, but Friedkin, amping up the grain and blurring the colors came up with a visual look just as gritty as the hardcore grunginess of his lead character.

THE DVD Shot through with grain and a certain, specific colour blanch I associate with the best movies from what I believe to be the best era in film history, Night Moves looks on Warner's DVD as good as it ever has, or, I daresay, should.

THE DVDs Red Dawn drops onto DVD in a two - disc «Collector's Edition» sporting a nifty 1.87:1 anamorphic widescreen transfer that frees the picture of the excess grain found in previous home video incarnations but doesn't do much to animate what is frankly a flat - looking film.

In short, the film looks better than it has any right to, with healthy grain retention and full colors.

The image looks like a great 35 mm print from the era should, boasting the right amount of film grain and picture detail.

My biggest complaint would be regarding an absurdly aggressive film grain filter, which is fine most of the time, but in particularly dark scenes it's a vulgar haze across the screen, making the game look honestly worse than it actually does.

The film has a little more grain than you might expect of such a 2016 big budget behemoth, but everything looks as it should and the images are sharp, crisp, and suitably detailed.

Grain is present, but at a manageable level, true to the original look of the film.

The cinematic feel of Little Nightmares is enhanced by slightly offset colors, off focus and film grain, making the game look like it's a movie shot on a film stock.

The video bitrate averages 30 Mbps, enough to handle a velvety layer of film grain, and the picture looks just about exactly right.

The 2.35:1 picture has quite a bit of grain and not much sizzle, making the film look more like an early 2000s production than a $ 41 M - budgeted 2011 release.

Light film grain is present for a natural, moderate, theatrical look, and a deep black level and perfectly tuned contrast complete the film's intended effect, never disrupted by digital artifacting.

The film looks great in either condition, with its polished visuals coming across cleanly besides an aptly small amount of fine grain.

As it stands, the 1080p 1.85 X 1 digital High Definition image looks fine throughout, shot with remarkable form by Anderson as an uncredited Director of Photography, his use of the grain in the advanced Kodak Vision 3 35 mm camera negative film stocks is superior and impresses throughout as it usually does in all of his films.

The image here mostly just falls down in shadow detail, which is a significant issue for a film with as many low - light scenes as this one; this is not going to be a disc to show off your home theater, but it's a natural transfer that looks pretty much as one would remember the film looking in 1990, grain and all.

The black - and - white cinematography looks terrific in HD, with excellent contrast and natural film grain (there is a hardly noticeable, intermittent, translucent vertical band that occasionally appears on the right side of the frame, but most properly calibrated TVs won't even display it, so no worries).

Every nuance of the filmic image seems to make its way into the transfer, which gets top marks in every category: natural - looking film grain, spot - on color and contrast, inky blacks, and fine detail.

The film looks quite spectacular on Blu - ray, its dark, moody visuals holding up nicely, with some fine grain and amazing detail (check out the pores on Cage!).

The 2.35:1, 1080p image is mostly, but not entirely, free of celluloid blemishes, with a wash of softly undulating grain ever - present — in fact, the precise look of the film's transfer contributes to its sterling late -»60s aesthetic.

Though Was's film looks better, it's also a decade newer — incidents of grain remind that probably little effort was afforded its move to DVD.

It also meant the Frankenstein-esque collection of footage all had to be augmented to look like it was from that era — duplicating Kubrick's exact lighting, creating all the props to ensure they looked like they were made in the era — even the grain of the 1980s film stock had to be recreated.

Colour is nicely saturated and looks pretty well - balanced, while fine 35 mm film grain is visible at tasteful levels, especially in low - light scenes.

It lacks the vibrancy and precision of the CG animated films I've been looking at lately, and also the grain of the 1950s Stanley Kubrick noir I watched in the past 48 hours.

The film has that dated look of»70s and early»80s cinema, but the clean and detailed element suffers from nothing worse than some infrequent light grain and barely perceptible print imperfections.

Black and white contrast is stable, while the thick grain preserves the film look while also betraying a lack of the same restorative quality of the Archive's other recent hi - def triumphs.

There seems to be no way around the film's grain, nor should there be if we want the movie to maintain its original 1970s look.

The image looks somewhat soft, but appealingly so, as that honors the film's source materials and grain levels.

Grain is well - modulated throughout and the gray scale apparent is nicely graduated, yielding a very film - like look.

It's very natural - looking with solid grain levels and a strong encode, revealing an amazing amount detail (I direct you to the film's sweat - soaked sex scene for further proof).

It could be the equivalent of somebody looking at an old film, and realizing that the film came from a projector, and discovering that there is an image in the projector, and that it's made of molecules of grains of film - and then trying to find the mystery of the story by looking at ever more detailed molecules of film, thinking, If I finally get to the heart of that, will it tell me where my story comes from?