The TV Diagnostic

[Metalane]

I think my eyesight is too crap for 4K I haven't yet got anything to play 4K discs. I only upgraded to bluray for Twin peaks though, so it might yet happen!

Make sure you have a 4K TV too of course. And I love AV stuff (mostly just the “V” lol), so if you want tips on how to best optimize your TV, no matter the model, just let me know. I love getting the most out of displays for people.

 

[baxter]

Yep, I would need a TV and player. Have just moved house, and it is a good excuse to upgrade the TV before mounting it on a wall. My previous TV had an infuriating thing where you couldn't turn off motion smoothing when using any of the apps on it. I hate the soap opera effect!

 

[Metalane]

Yep, I would need a TV and player. Have just moved house, and it is a good excuse to upgrade the TV before mounting it on a wall. My previous TV had an infuriating thing where you couldn't turn off motion smoothing when using any of the apps on it. I hate the soap opera effect!

Haha, I love that effect believe it or not. I have motion smoothing on the max actually. But if you need any model recommendations for a certain budget, just let me know!

 

[Metalane]

You know what's wild, is that the TP series as a whole is roughly 44 hours long (so far ), which is less than two days worth. But in real life when tou visit somewhere for that long, it doesn't feel like much at all, just a few memories here and there.

But in these 44 hours you truly felt like you've visited someplace you've known for a long time. And familiar enough where you could look at a single establishing shot and grasp a feeling of the atmosphere and feeling they want you to have. And it's less than 2 days worth of time we're all experienced with.

Secondly, I can only imagine what the original rin felt like watching it live. I could picture a typical 90's setup of a carpet floor, CRT TV, all that, must've been great.

 

[baxter]

I watched it for the first time in the 90s via the reruns on the Bravo channel. That channel shaped my tastes for all time - it's also how I watched The Prisoner. I often watch stuff on my VR headset now, and I really want someone to make a retro TV room with a small screen!

 

[Mr. Reindeer]

Man, I never want to go back to that era! When I was a kid, we had a roof antenna with some cables grounding it. When there was a storm, I’d be outside trying to manipulate the cables to keep the antenna stable, fighting the wind. I’d be yelling in the window to my sisters watching a show, “Better or worse?” “Worse! We can’t see anything!” Trying to get the signal as decent as possible so I could later go back and watch the recording on VHS. Give me my widescreen 4K TV and 24-hour streaming any day. I understand the nostalgia, but not from me.

 

[Jordan Cole]

Haha, I love that effect believe it or not. I have motion smoothing on the max actually.

Please tell me this is a joke.

 

[baxter]

I find that some shows need a small screen - 60s and 70s shows look crap on a big one. But for sure I want the highest resolution possible!

 

[Metalane]

Man, I never want to go back to that era! When I was a kid, we had a roof antenna with some cables grounding it. When there was a storm, I’d be outside trying to manipulate the cables to keep the antenna stable, fighting the wind. I’d be yelling in the window to my sisters watching a show, “Better or worse?” “Worse! We can’t see anything!” Trying to get the signal as decent as possible so I could later go back and watch the recording on VHS. Give me my widescreen 4K TV and 24-hour streaming any day. I understand the nostalgia, but not from me.

Haha, oh yeah, I much prefer the technology of today. But there's still something nostalgic for me about the slower, less polished, and crummy days of old tech.

 

[Metalane]

Please tell me this is a joke.

My TV model is the Sony A90J, and it legit has the best motion-interpolation I've ever seen. Most TV's it looks rubbish, but if you have a high quality bitrate, then it can sometimes look like a professional 60fps remaster for certain content (new and old) on this TV. I'm always blown away by how clean it looks, with little blurring or artifacting.

I find that some shows need a small screen - 60s and 70s shows look crap on a big one. But for sure I want the highest resolution possible!

That's why you need the best remasters for older content. Mine is 55", and I really want an 80+", but I am very cautious with PPI at those sizes.

There are many edits between the originally released versions of TPTR and the current BluRay/streams. For example I am baffled that so many other's seem to have forgotten that when Carrie Page and Cooper are driving at night and getting close to the Palmer house, she asks to see his FBI badge a second time. And this time Cooper presents it with much more hesitation, as if he doesn't really believe it himself anymore. This is what I saw, and I have no way to prove it. There were also other edits made to that last episode.

In terms of what you are asking Stovrogyn, I think people were a bit confused about exactly what was being said in the dialogue between Steven and Gersten, so maybe if we dig on Dugpa (or similar) we might find a transcript of the scene.

Woah, this is my first time hearing about this. I also heard that certain scenes, like when Sarah takes off her face, the blu-ray version has a digital zoom as opposed to no zoom on the original.

But that pin scene you mention sounds very exciting. Is there anyway to verify that? Like can you still stream the orginal epsiodes on Showtime?

If we can't find those scenes anymore, that's almost spooky, like some parts of the mystery/story are hidden forever now.

As Reindeer pointed out, you are correct about the Steven dialogue.

However, I don't believe anything was altered in the final episode. I have the originally streamed episodes downloaded and saved. There is no second instance of Carrie asking to see the badge, and the episode is the exact same length as it is on disc. I think that's just Lynch getting under your skin to the point that you're genuinely feeling what the characters are in their uncertainty. (Cooper does have his badge out and announce himself as FBI when he shows up to her place, and then she later asks him to see the badge again as they start driving, so perhaps this is what youre remembering.)

Although someone had once pointed out that the scene of Sarah biting the trucker's neck contained a slightly different shot at one point, I do not believe anything has been altered in the series transition from streaming to Blu-ray. It's all an illusion.

This all just makes me wonder if we'll ever get a Missing Pieces style cut where we see some deleted scenes. There's no way with 18 hours shot, that they left 0 on the cutting room floor.

 

[Jordan Cole]

My TV model is the Sony A90J, and it legit has the best motion-interpolation I've ever seen. Most TV's it looks rubbish, but if you have a high quality bitrate, then it can sometimes look like a professional 60fps remaster for certain content (new and old) on this TV. I'm always blown away by how clean it looks, with little blurring or artifacting.

Are you actually saying you turn motion smoothing on for movies, tv shows, etc? Again, are you being serious or am I misunderstanding something?

I can't understand why anybody would do that. It's a crime. It's hideous. It's not what the artists intended, and it looks like total garbage. There's no "good" motion smoothing, except I understand some like it for video games or sports. But films? TV shows?

The best settings for a TV are as neutral as possible. When you buy a TV, just turn all that crap in the settings to OFF, and then do slight adjustments to brightness, blacks, or contrast depending on the brightness of your room or if something seems slightly off about how things are looking.

I can't believe I'd need to say this on a David Lynch forum, but motion smoothing is a complete disaster. It's a disgusting and ugly manipulation of the frame rate of the piece of art you're engaging in, affecting all nuances of it, the timing, the motion, the movement, the feeling. You might as well smear diaper shit on the screen. Though I'd actually prefer that to changing the frame rate.

 

[Jasper]

Are you actually saying you turn motion smoothing on for movies, tv shows, etc? Again, are you being serious or am I misunderstanding something?

I can't understand why anybody would do that. It's a crime. It's hideous. It's not what the artists intended, and it looks like total garbage. There's no "good" motion smoothing, except I understand some like it for video games or sports. But films? TV shows?

The best settings for a TV are as neutral as possible. When you buy a TV, just turn all that crap in the settings to OFF, and then do slight adjustments to brightness, blacks, or contrast depending on the brightness of your room or if something seems slightly off about how things are looking.

I can't believe I'd need to say this on a David Lynch forum, but motion smoothing is a complete disaster. It's a disgusting and ugly manipulation of the frame rate of the piece of art you're engaging in, affecting all nuances of it, the timing, the motion, the movement, the feeling. You might as well smear diaper shit on the screen. Though I'd actually prefer that to changing the frame rate.

I detest motion smoothing, and this post made me laugh, particularly the end, but let's all try to keep the tone as kind as possible, even with a subject as deeply disturbing as this one.

 

[MasterMastermnd]

I first learned of motion smoothing when I picked up a blu-ray of The Tree of Life when visiting my mom. I'd already seen it in theaters, popped it in her blu-ray player, and couldn't believe the travesty unfolding before my eyes. The slow, dreamlike motion of Malick's camera work became this really fast, flat-looking desecration. Composing movement at the pointedly unrealistic 24fps rate is so core to the magic of cinema to me. Couldn't imagine having it any other way.

 

[Metalane]

indeed:
View attachment 782 “DO YOU REMEMBER?”

There's also the scene when Andy is with the Fireman, before he sits down.

Are you actually saying you turn motion smoothing on for movies, tv shows, etc? Again, are you being serious or am I misunderstanding something?

I can't understand why anybody would do that. It's a crime. It's hideous. It's not what the artists intended, and it looks like total garbage. There's no "good" motion smoothing, except I understand some like it for video games or sports. But films? TV shows?

The best settings for a TV are as neutral as possible. When you buy a TV, just turn all that crap in the settings to OFF, and then do slight adjustments to brightness, blacks, or contrast depending on the brightness of your room or if something seems slightly off about how things are looking.

I can't believe I'd need to say this on a David Lynch forum, but motion smoothing is a complete disaster. It's a disgusting and ugly manipulation of the frame rate of the piece of art you're engaging in, affecting all nuances of it, the timing, the motion, the movement, the feeling. You might as well smear diaper shit on the screen. Though I'd actually prefer that to changing the frame rate.

Believe it or not when it comes to any other part of the image, I want to get as close as possible to reference quality, but motion is my exception. Yes, during fast paced scenes it can look mushy, but the depth and motion-clearness it adds is worth it for me.

I admit it does a non-director intended uncanniness sometimes to people's motion and such, which can add a nice little touch.

But on this model it's way more consistent than something you may be used too. I just feel it adds overall more realism, even if not intended.

Ha, I knew I probably shouldn't have mentioned it, but trust me, I'm still a hard-core accuracy buff any other way.

 

[secretlettermkr]

but motion is my exception. Yes, during fast paced scenes it can look mushy, but the depth and motion-clearness it adds is worth it for me.

I admit it does a non-director intended uncanniness sometimes to people's motion and such, which can add a nice little touch.

 

[Metalane]

Maybe I should record a video sometime contrasting motion-smoothing off and on and to show how this specific TV does it, you'll be surprised.

 

[LateReg]

Or you can just like what you like because you are an adult entitled to your own opinion and people can shut the fuck up about it.

I mean...I don't agree with that at all. The artist's intent should be valued, motion smoothing does corrupt the image, this is a very interesting discussion to be had, and Metalane has admitted that this is an unorthodox preference, and then explained it in a very satisfactory fashion that has made me curious about the TV.

Incidentally, where did the disagree button go?

 

[Metalane]

Sorry for the stank, it's just a dynamic within the world of cinephilia that I just can't stand. I worked in movie theaters and video stores for decades and just got sick of the pretension over the "right" way to consume media. I definitely had a phase of thumbing my nose up at somebody watching this work of art this way or that way but I outgrew it. If somebody wants to watch Eraserhead on an iPhone, no headphones from 100 yards away, I don't care. It's not the way I would do it and not the way Lynch would want them to but at the end of the day it doesn't really matter. People are going to do what they are going to do and who is to judge if they find whatever format or way of watching satisfactory? I just cannot stand the judgemental gatekeeping. It's why the holier than now snobbish video store guy is such a cliche and why I don't really consider myself a cinephile anymore. It's embarrassing.

Absolutely, and I’m glad we’re pretty civil here about it. It’s just that when you really want to practically dig into it, there’s so many different factors if you truly want to achieve reference quality, that it just gets overwhelming, so I do choose to take some liberties. Same with audio, as I only use the built in speakers, although the A90J’s built in speakers are also sound-bar quality (good enough for me, and the best I’ve ever had).

And plus, sometimes the released master is only optimized for low-end displays anyway to accommodate most viewers. Especially in video games (looking at you Ghost of Tsushima).

I mean...I don't agree with that at all. The artist's intent should be valued, motion smoothing does corrupt the image, this is a very interesting discussion to be had, and Metalane has admitted that this is an unorthodox preference, and then explained it in a very satisfactory fashion that has made me curious about the TV.

Incidentally, where did the disagree button go?

Well, for people who are bothered by motion smoothing, how do you feel when/if you’ve seen those old 1900’s-1920‘s films remastered in 60fps? Back then I believe it was standard to film at varying framerates, so like teens to 20’s. And I forget when the 24fps standard was established, but it makes me wonder what it would be like if higher framerates became the standard instead.

We’re so used to 24fps that we take it for granted, but do you think if 60, 80, 15, etc, was the standard you’d feel the same about 24fps you do now? I honestly don’t know how I’d feel, but it’s an interesting cinematic-philosophical question to ponder.

 

[MasterMastermnd]

I take some liberties with video games from time to time, making them a little brighter than intended and messing with the audio levels a bit.

Guess I'm not sure about how I'd feel about 24fps if it wasn't standard, but I know I simply don't feel the same when it's different. Cinematic weight is so important. Early films were often in 16 but that caused a lot of flicker so they went up.

 

[Cde.]

Well, for people who are bothered by motion smoothing, how do you feel when/if you’ve seen those old 1900’s-1920‘s films remastered in 60fps? Back then I believe it was standard to film at varying framerates, so like teens to 20’s. And I forget when the 24fps standard was established, but it makes me wonder what it would be like if higher framerates became the standard instead.

We’re so used to 24fps that we take it for granted, but do you think if 60, 80, 15, etc, was the standard you’d feel the same about 24fps you do now? I honestly don’t know how I’d feel, but it’s an interesting cinematic-philosophical question to ponder.

No, I don't. I think it's probably psychological and down to associations. I am anti motion-smoothing but welcoming of directors experimenting with higher framerates.

I like to see old pre 24fps silent films presented with as close to normal speed motion preserved as possible, as they were intended to be seen.