...
...
....im not spam fuck off captcha..
...
>>69206714
>>69206759
EASY
...
O.O
OFFENSIVE
...
...
Son of a bitch!
>>69207642*sigh*
...>not using super HD version
>>69206714
>Angel Eyes
>has ugky, stupid, non-angelic eyes
>>69207781
Wow, that looks incredible
>>69207840
It really does.
>>69207101
Someone post the scene.
>>69207894
Fuck, where did you get this copy?
>>69207968
Here you go:
https://kat.cr/the-good-the-bad-and-the-ugly-1966-bdrip-1080p-t10451520.html
>>69208015
Cheers, anon. I appreciate it
>>69207894
All that fucking charisma. You don't get shit like that no more in movies.
>>69207894
How did they do this?
>>69209393
Do what?
>>69207781
>Breaking-Bad-scenes-in-Mexico filter added for some reason
>>69209409
enhance the image
>>69209468
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I_8ZH1Ggjk0
How
>>69209462
Why did I think this was from Jurassic Park from the thumbnail?
>>69209468
Ah.
Well, you see, film has always been very high quality, even higher than the digital that is used to film movies today. The problem is that back then we didn't have the technology to properly playback that film in its highest quality.
With re-mastering a movie, we're now able to use technology we have to project the film reel to its true quality. Something like the 70mm version of The Hateful Eight would have looked pretty shit in cinemas say 50 years ago, but now we have the technology to play it back with high quality.
At least, this is my understanding of it. I wasn't even around 25 years ago to see what the quality of movies before digital cameras was like.
>>69207894
Not a drop of sweat on Eastwood
>>69209561
More like Her Ass Lick Pork amirite
>>69209609
Because he knows he's going to win.
>>69209600
That's cool, I thought it had to have been something like that. What about the sound? Were they able to do anything with that?
>>69209631
Sound is something I'm not too sure about, I'd imagine it would bea little more difficult to work with that.
But yeah, there is definitely a noticeable improvement in the sound in the re-mastered versions of films.
>>69207894
>only one is called ugly
>all three are ugly
Heh, those silly old movies
>>69209700
>Clint Eastwood is ugly
What are you, a fucking faggot?
>>69209777
Are you?
>>69207781
>>69207894
The definition is good but I fucking hate how the blu-ray made everything so goddamn yellow. What gives them the right to do that shit?
>>69210568
Yeah, I don't really like it desu.
Apparently the yellow tint is what Sergo originally had planned or someshit.
