VCDQuality Forums - Land Of The Dead *SVCD* *PROPER* *READNFO* - CAM

Pages (3): « 1 [2] 3 »
Show all 57 posts from this thread on one page

VCDQuality Forums (http://www.vcdhq.com/forum/index.php)
- VCD (http://www.vcdhq.com/forum/forumdisplay.php?forumid=19)
-- Land Of The Dead *SVCD* *PROPER* *READNFO* - CAM - HYdRO (http://www.vcdhq.com/forum/showthread.php?threadid=65377)

Posted by Doomsdayer on 08-09-2005 12:17 AM:

I'm alittle confused, I thought you rate on the video type that is posted, between 1 to 10... So going into this you know it's a cam and you'll rate from 1 to 10 how good the cam is..... Anyhow, now about the movie

8/7.343/9 - I enjoyed the movie!

Posted by mattmatt02 on 08-09-2005 12:49 AM:

quote:
Originally posted by Doomsdayer
I thought you rate on the video type that is posted, between 1 to 10.

yes your right. so this being very good for a cam it would be rated somewhere in the 8s or 9s

Posted by vcdman on 08-09-2005 01:25 AM:

Video from sample looks decent for a cam but if the movie looks like that all the way through then i'd never rate it an 8 for a cam(IT'S A CAM!!!)...Audio is hollow, nowhere near an 8. so how you guys can rate it that high shows that you guys definetly don't know how to vote on quality ,it should have gotten no higher than 6(IT'S A CAM!!!)what are you guys gonna vote on a TC or TS when it comes out a 9 or 10???...moviewise i heard it was sweet...flame me if you want for sounding harsh for this release but come on..almost 8.5's for sound and vid for a CAM???... gimme what ur smokin
7/6/?

::EDIT:: I'll flame you for not understanding the voting system and lecturing everybody else on it! Rate releases LIKE FOR LIKE (i.e. it's an 8 compared to the average CAM)... Now, leave the moderating to the Moderators, thanks - Neversoft::

Posted by Mega-Man on 08-09-2005 02:49 AM:

PLEASE FLAME ME!!*

quote:

PLEASE FLAME ME!!*

Your a piss infected cum bubble and noone likes you so go stick ur head and dog shit and hope you dont die from flys eating your n00b foreskin!
as for rls:
I would give this cam a 6.5 or even a 7 or 7.5 but no more than that. audio isnt great cuz its a cam so 6 would do. movie was cool i give it a 6 or a 7 dunno unsure of myself really!

__________________
/me farts

Posted by danimal39 on 08-09-2005 03:04 AM:

good colors,hiss in audio, movies cool 8/6/9

Posted by dbg17891 on 08-09-2005 06:45 AM:

the audio seems to be off synce arround 25mins of cd 1 but it only last for about a 1min or so and then it syncs back up

__________________
http://www.freesighosting.com/uploads/8cc9bb7bde.gif

Posted by BLUE-NEO on 08-09-2005 08:04 AM:

all I can say is very f..king nice...hands down...long awaited for..

9/7/7 movie was alright but not great...

__________________
Reality Is Only A State Of Mind...

Posted by 4NAK8TR on 08-09-2005 09:58 AM:

If they keep pumping CAMs out like this one, the CAM stigma wont be around much longer. The colors a picture are very good, the sound is clear, just a hint hollow.

Rated as CAM 9/8/7

Posted by magnet on 08-09-2005 11:41 AM:

Still waiting on the whole thing, from sample I see the video is very nice and the audio, wow! Honestly, if there's no coughing or laughter this could've passed as a TS I think. Will rate further upon full viewing.

edit: Okay, have finally fully viewed it. Video was good, I wouldn't be surprised if someone steals it and makes a nice TS. Audio was also generally really good. Only a few momnts of audience talking, which was nearly inaudible, and as someone mentioned a cellphone does go off (but also pretty quiet). The only big audio wuirk is when someone right next to the cam opens a bag or something, but hey, for cam audio this is great.

9/8.5/3.5 (watching it again reminded me of why I didn't like this when I saw it opening night :-| )

Posted by mattmatt02 on 08-09-2005 12:48 PM:

Re: PLEASE FLAME ME!!*

quote:
Originally posted by Mega-Man
Your a piss infected cum bubble and noone likes you so go stick ur head and dog shit and hope you dont die from flys eating your n00b foreskin!

no offence dude but you were the guy who thought screeners never had markings on them lol! (lords of dogtown thread)

9/9/?

Posted by ddb on 08-09-2005 03:47 PM:

very nice cam
7.5/7.5/7.0

__________________
HARLEY FUCKING DAVIDSONS
LIVE TO RIDE RIDE TO LIVE

Posted by vcdman on 08-09-2005 03:59 PM:

quote:
Originally posted by vcdman
Video from sample looks decent for a cam but if the movie looks like that all the way through then i'd never rate it an 8 for a cam(IT'S A CAM!!!)...Audio is hollow, nowhere near an 8. so how you guys can rate it that high shows that you guys definetly don't know how to vote on quality ,it should have gotten no higher than 6(IT'S A CAM!!!)what are you guys gonna vote on a TC or TS when it comes out a 9 or 10???...moviewise i heard it was sweet...flame me if you want for sounding harsh for this release but come on..almost 8.5's for sound and vid for a CAM???... gimme what ur smokin
7/6/?

::EDIT:: I'll flame you for not understanding the voting system and lecturing everybody else on it! Rate releases LIKE FOR LIKE (i.e. it's an 8 compared to the average CAM)... Now, leave the moderating to the Moderators, thanks - Neversoft::

maybe the rating system needs to be changed then....
....I SAY if the MOVIE QUALITY is great or if it sucks then THAT'S what we should be voting on...
...I SAY if the SOUND QUALITY has sync issues or it has people in background or other noises other then the film..then THAT"S what we should be voting on...
...this LIKE FOR LIKE VOTING IS LAME!!!

"(i.e. it's an 8 compared to the average CAM)..." those days should be over...it should just say
"hey this movie looks very good i give it and 8 not because its a great copy from a cam but its a great copy PERIOD!!!"" then give some reasons why it looks good or bad and then do the same for the audio

::EDIT:: Don't like the rating system? SOD OFF THEN!

Banned for disagreeing with a Mod? No. Banned for totally failing to understand the rating system AND the posting rules? Almost!
The movie and audio quality is what you're voting on, but is it fair to compare a CAM's audio/video with a DVD Screener? Nope. This is the only way to ensure that if a CAM (for example) is spectacular quality then it should be reflected in the score, not given <5 simply because "it's a CAM". You can still point out that the audio is cunted, obviously! ... I think I'm making sense here

- Neversoft::

Posted by bugsybuk on 08-09-2005 06:20 PM:

Not too bad for a cam,

7/7/ not watched all yet gonna go to the cinema.

Posted by bdub on 08-09-2005 09:03 PM:

7/7/7

The guy eating from a chip bag or candy bag kinda sucked but hey it's free.

Posted by antihero on 08-10-2005 01:03 AM:

quote:
Originally posted by vcdman
maybe the rating system needs to be changed then....
....I SAY if the MOVIE QUALITY is great or if it sucks then THAT'S what we should be voting on...
...I SAY if the SOUND QUALITY has sync issues or it has people in background or other noises other then the film..then THAT"S what we should be voting on...
...this LIKE FOR LIKE VOTING IS LAME!!!

Surely its not that difficult to get your head around? Yes, NS, you are making sense.

Releases need voting on by their format;

1-10 for a Cam, 1-10 for a TS, 1-10 for a TC, etc. How the hell can you use a blanket voting system? they need to be judged individually, otherwise all cams would be a 1 or a 2...

...in this case,

Video: 8. (compared to other cams), no heads, not overly cropped, can tell whats going on in dark scenes, no obvious motion blur. Pretty sweet.

Audio: 7.Not bad for cam audio, pretty clear most of the time, although i thought i had got a russian version which meant i was swearing away till the film started proper. Goes out of sync for a few mins, but no big deal. Same with the rustling of crisp packets.

Movie: 7.Enjoyed it. Best zombie flick ive seen for years, no one does it as good as Mr.Romero. Nice comedy elements, and like the way he's chucked in a few characters from his past movies, Bub (Day of the Dead) and Blades (Dawn of the Dead - 1978).

Posted by immun3 on 08-10-2005 01:55 AM:

Great CAM about time this one was done properly worth the wait.

Video - colors are good only minor bluriness. slight issues with brightness during a few of the darker scenes but manageable none the less. Good crop, and no twat factor during the entire release.

Audio - a little hollow but still above average. Audience participates with laughter during a few scenes but its none too often........also a mobile phone went off at one point in CD2.

Movie - an improvement over recent attempts at the zombie flick, a large amount of gore and fast paced action keeps the plot going. Bit lazy on the storyline but still well worth the watch.

8/6.5/7

Posted by acme420 on 08-10-2005 08:28 AM:

Video 8 i watchied it on my comp, kinda grainy in the darker scenes.
audio 8 it was pretty nice, didnt seem hollow to me, maybe cuz i tweak the output with a sound profile. some sort of crunching/shuffling noise i heard once or twice. didnt hear any laughter, or screaming i can recall. i forgot it was a cam actually.

movie 5. it was pretty weak actually. not up to snuff as far as zombie movies go, i found myself laughing at what were supposed to be suspensefu;/ scary parts.

8/8/5

__________________
eat me balls!!

Posted by shaunaldo on 08-10-2005 12:23 PM:

ok im a newbie but i understand that all you veterans rate this as a cam and i apreciate that! and thats what i go by! and from the sample this is a great cam!

id give the pic and 8
the sound a 7.5
and the movie will watch 2nite!

considering it comes out in sept in the uk! im not complaining!

thanks to all the people that give proper ratings!

::EDIT:: Thank you! - NS::

Posted by nykid on 08-10-2005 03:56 PM:

7/8/6

bit pixelated in the action scenes..pretty good over all.

Posted by CCkid on 08-10-2005 04:41 PM:

pretty nice for a cam. Sound is slightly hollow but good. No complaints on the pic watching on the standalone. Rated against other cams, of course.

V-7.5
A-7
M-7

__________________

Sexy, Dangerous, Seductive ... 3 top Q's

All times are GMT. The time now is 09:40 AM.

Pages (3): « 1 [2] 3 »
Show all 57 posts from this thread on one page