4K UHD - Movies & TV - Forums : Best Ever Albums

badseed

Gender: Male
Age: 35
Location: FL

So I've recently upgraded to 4k. Watched Blade Runner 2049 on the format last night. Looked and sounded so amazing. I honestly was skeptical about how much better it can get than Bluray but now that question has been answered. With that said I'm still not sold on older films benefiting from new technology. I've got a few older films (2001, Alien, Terminator 2, handful of Spielberg films) so I'll get back to y'all on that.

Has anyone else gone 4k yet? Any films you've seen that are definitely worth picking up on the format?
_________________
Hey! I made a country music chart. Check it out!

CA Dreamin

Gender: Male
Location: LA

As someone who works on sets, I can talk all night about this. When you see a film in theaters, you may be watching it in 4K already. It's part of the theater experience, where it has an upper hand over TV. Still, you could check with your local theaters because not all theaters have had 4K projectors installed. But anyway, yes TVs and 4K Blu-Rays are closing the gap between the home and theater experience. TVs and Blu-Rays are now compatible with such a high resolution, for also a high price, I'm sure. There was skepticism in the industry that consumers wouldn't buy 4K TVs because for one, they are very expensive. And two, no TV network in the US broadcasts in 4K (as of now, that I know of). So the only way to see something in TV's 4K potential, was to also buy 4K Blu-Rays/DVDs, or just wait for TV networks to broadcast in 4K (which could be a very long wait in the US, but I believe in Japan and South Korea, some TV networks broadcast in 4K, thus 4K TVs are a much bigger seller over there).

But it seems there is growing demand, and badseed is a new customer. Blade Runner 2049 should look amazing on a 4K Blu-Ray because it was shot in at least that resolution to begin with:

https://www.imdb.com/title/tt1856101/technical

Thus there was little to be done in making the 4K Blu-Ray disc. They took the master copy and made a duplicate on the disc. It already looked that good to begin with. badseed, most big-budget movies filmed in the last ten or so years were probably in at least 4K. So any recent film you're interested in buying a 4K disc for, should look just as clear as if you were watching it in theaters. Mad Max: Fury Road, Ex Machina, Gone Girl, you name it.

But as for older movies, or newer movies shot on film as opposed to digital, it gets trickier. First off, film has no definite resolution because it's a different process. 35 mm film was a popular choice in the industry for decades, which is estimated to have 4K resolution (with the graininess of course). So in theory, digitizing older movies shot in 35 mm should come out to approximately a 4K look. However, that's assuming the master copy has been properly preserved. Film naturally deteriorates over time, which is why older films have to be restored. Do your research beforehand, but film historians and preservationists know what they're doing so I'd say you're safe with most titles. You mentioned Alien and 2001, two beloved classics that I'm sure will get a fine treatment and look great on a 4K Blu-Ray. I don't know if they removed the grainy look that naturally accompanies film (if that bothers you one way or the other), but the clarity should the great and original, and (hopefully?) was not digitally altered. In fact, 2001 was shot on 70 mm film, which has even higher resolution than 35 mm and 4K. So by getting a 4K Blu-Ray copy of 2001, you're actually getting a scaled-down version from the 1968 original. Nevertheless, I'm sure it will look awesome. Same goes for modern directors who prefer to continue shooting on film as opposed to digital. QT famously shoots everything on 35 or 70 mm and he works with great DPs, so there should be no problem with any of his films on a 4K disc.

Anyway, badseed, I hope my nerd rambling wasn't bothersome. It's just an interesting subject to me. In short, any film with great cinematography will look even better in 4K. Most titles should be fine but do your research beforehand. The worst thing that can happen is you get ripped off a few bucks. I don't know if any discs are being sold as 4K, when they're actually 2K, but research beforehand. And due to different formats over the years and film deterioration, some movies simply can't be in 4K without digital enhancement or altering from its original version, which may or may not bother you. But again, research beforehand.

Enjoy

PurpleHazel

StreetSpirit wrote:

And two, no TV network in the US broadcasts in 4K (as of now, that I know of). So the only way to see something in TV's 4K potential, was to also buy 4K Blu-Rays/DVDs, or just wait for TV networks to broadcast in 4K (which could be a very long wait in the US)

I'm no expert on 4K, but I believe many current and very recent Netflix seasons are 4K (of course, it's possible that some recent seasons are upscaled).

Quote:

But as for older movies, or newer movies shot on film as opposed to digital, it gets trickier. First off, film has no definite resolution because it's a different process. 35 mm film was a popular choice in the industry for decades, which is estimated to have 4K resolution (with the graininess of course). So in theory, digitizing older movies shot in 35 mm should come out to approximately a 4K look. However, that's assuming the master copy has been properly preserved. Film naturally deteriorates over time, which is why older films have to be restored. Do your research beforehand, but film historians and preservationists know what they're doing so I'd say you're safe with most titles. You mentioned Alien and 2001, two beloved classics that I'm sure will get a fine treatment and look great on a 4K Blu-Ray. I don't know if they removed the grainy look that naturally accompanies film (if that bothers you one way or the other), but the clarity should the great and original, and (hopefully?) was not digitally altered. In fact, 2001 was shot on 70 mm film, which has even higher resolution than 35 mm and 4K. So by getting a 4K Blu-Ray copy of 2001, you're actually getting a scaled-down version from the 1968 original. Nevertheless, I'm sure it will look awesome. Same goes for modern directors who prefer to continue shooting on film as opposed to digital. QT famously shoots everything on 35 or 70 mm and he works with great DPs, so there should be no problem with any of his films on a 4K disc.

I read that 4K is the lowest resolution that can contain 100% all the information of 35mm film. What pisses me off a little is in the early days of Blu-ray/HD, an article in the NY Times claimed the same thing about 2K, so until recently I thought Blu-rays could hold all the information of pre-digital films. However, whether 4K or 2K, a lot of the time the most important issue for older films is the restoration. I have standard DVDs of black-and-white films that look great on my HD TV because the restorations were so good to begin with. And way too many Blu-rays look like shit. I've seen Blu-rays that look worse than DVDs of the same movie. In the Blu-ray era, Sony has had the reputation of releasing the best-looking Blu-rays. Presumably that has something to do with them being the ones who developed the format. Universal has a rep of putting out subpar Blu-rays though most of their B&W titles look pretty good (they haven't released that many). Haven't heard which studios have the best and worst reps regarding 4K, because I haven't read any reviews, but as time goes on, it will become more apparent -- wouldn't be surprised if Sony's still on top.

Quote:

I don't know if they removed the grainy look that naturally accompanies film (if that bothers you one way or the other), but the clarity should the great and original, and (hopefully?) was not digitally altered.

One of the two main factors -- other than restoration -- in the picture quality of a Hollywood studio Blu-ray is how much DNR (digital noise reduction; also used for video) and edge enhancement was used on the movie. These tools were originally used to make DVDs look better, but with Blu-rays' higher resolution, these tools usually make the films look worse. Hopefully, the studios have learned from the mistakes of the early Blu-ray era and keep the natural-looking grain of older films in 4K. For instance, when Warner first released 2001: A Space Odyssey on Blu, I believe the PQ was considered pretty good. But as the format progressed, it became considered to be not so great: it was an older restoration and a little DNR and edge enhancement was visible. But it was an early Blu-ray (2007), so Warner has had plenty of time to do a new restoration, and if the 4K has a natural, filmic look, it should look the best the film ever has, except a restored version in a good theater.

Quote:

some movies simply can't be in 4K without digital enhancement or altering from its original version, which may or may not bother you.

I'm no expert, but I don't believe this is right. All you need is a top-notch restoration and proper encoding (and probably some other technical stuff I don't recall/know). From what I understand, the higher the resolution, the more it exposes the flaws of DNR and edge enhancement -- loss of detail, unnatural-looking grain, waxy-looking skin, haloing from edge enhancement. You want an older film's grain to look as natural as possible. That's become the ideal for critics, collectors and a majority of technicians (especially the ones who work for the high-end boutique labels like Criterion, Arrrow US/UK and the UK's Masters of Cinema). It's possible that very delicate, restrained digital tweaking could help, but the problem is the studios can't be trusted to always do that.

Quote:

I don't know if any discs are being sold as 4K, when they're actually 2K

Yes, they are. Some are upscaled 2K, but I don't know which ones -- hopefully there aren't that many. Obviously movies from the last few years should be safe.

OK, now I've nerded out a little. I have no professional expertise; I'm not even a videophile -- just picked this stuff up over the years by frequenting Blu-ray and DVD forums.

badseed

Gender: Male
Age: 35
Location: FL

Thanks for all the info guys...

For the record I've heard the Ex Machina 4k is not that impressive. I'm no expert and I don't remember what the issue is but apparently there is one.
_________________
Hey! I made a country music chart. Check it out!

PurpleHazel

badseed wrote:

For the record I've heard the Ex Machina 4k is not that impressive. I'm no expert and I don't remember what the issue is but apparently there is one.

Think that's the one I heard was a little subpar too! Though Bluray.com gives it a good review.

I'm not going to jump into 4K till Criterion embraces it, and I'd like to see a few B&W Hollywood classics on the format too, like Citizen Kane or The Maltese Falcon. Also, I can't really afford to upgrade my TV till it's on its way out.

badseed

Gender: Male
Age: 35
Location: FL

PurpleHazel wrote:

Think that's the one I heard was a little subpar too! Though Bluray.com gives it a good review.

I'm not going to jump into 4K till Criterion embraces it, and I'd like to see a few B&W Hollywood classics on the format too, like Citizen Kane or The Maltese Falcon. Also, I can't really afford to upgrade my TV till it's on its way out.

I've been bitten by the OOP bug too often so I can't help but start now in case some BS goes down and suddenly a basic film (hello Apocalypto) disappears from sight and goes for stupid numbers online. But it's not an exclusive thing. Not everything even gets 4K yet (I didn't see one for The Favourite, but maybe Wal-Mart just didn't stock it?) I'm mainly going for titles with really good cinematography or visual effects for the most part. A few all time favorites but action and sci-fi mostly. Maybe some musicals. Horror too of course but that still really depends. For example, the first two Evil Deads and the original Pet Sematary are on 4k but do those movies really call for crisp visuals? Then again I feel the same for the original Halloween but I put that movie on a higher level so of course I got it (I currently own it 6 times between VHS, DVD, Blu and 4k). Torn on whether I want to repurchase all the Disney, Pixar, Marvel and Christopher Nolan movies I already have because although I'm sure they're great, that's a lot of movies that generally don't drop below 25 bucks each (with the exception of the WB films) so I feel like I'd rather spend that money on some Criterion or Arrow titles.

Another note, again this is very vague because I don't remember specifics but Kino released Hannibal of all movies as their first 4k and I think due to low sales they've decided not to make anymore. Criterion has a larger more dedicated fanbase than Kino but it's still a risk they may not plan to take anytime soon. I mean you're looking at 30 bucks minimum for one of those. They would probably want to experiment with that one before going all in. Hopefully they pick a better title than Hannibal for their first release.
_________________
Hey! I made a country music chart. Check it out!

Tha1ChiefRocka
Yeah, well hey, I'm really sorry.

Location: Kansas

I worked at a bestbuy for several years, and I had all of this stuff a long time ago. Wink

CA Dreamin

Gender: Male
Location: LA

StreetSpirit wrote:

And two, no TV network in the US broadcasts in 4K (as of now, that I know of). So the only way to see something in TV's 4K potential, was to also buy 4K Blu-Rays/DVDs, or just wait for TV networks to broadcast in 4K (which could be a very long wait in the US, but I believe in Japan and South Korea, some TV networks broadcast in 4K, thus 4K TVs are a much bigger seller over there).

PurpleHazel wrote:

I'm no expert on 4K, but I believe many current and very recent Netflix seasons are 4K (of course, it's possible that some recent seasons are upscaled).

Ah yes, I forgot about Netflix. But this is accurate. Netflix can stream in 4K for a higher subscription. I don't think they would be upscaled. They were very likely filmed in 4K to begin with.

PurpleHazel wrote:

I read that 4K is the lowest resolution that can contain 100% all the information of 35mm film. What pisses me off a little is in the early days of Blu-ray/HD, an article in the NY Times claimed the same thing about 2K, so until recently I thought Blu-rays could hold all the information of pre-digital films. However, whether 4K or 2K, a lot of the time the most important issue for older films is the restoration. I have standard DVDs of black-and-white films that look great on my HD TV because the restorations were so good to begin with. And way too many Blu-rays look like shit. I've seen Blu-rays that look worse than DVDs of the same movie. In the Blu-ray era, Sony has had the reputation of releasing the best-looking Blu-rays. Presumably that has something to do with them being the ones who developed the format. Universal has a rep of putting out subpar Blu-rays though most of their B&W titles look pretty good (they haven't released that many). Haven't heard which studios have the best and worst reps regarding 4K, because I haven't read any reviews, but as time goes on, it will become more apparent -- wouldn't be surprised if Sony's still on top.

Those NY Times bastards, haha. It's worth noting DVD resolution is only 720, which can look fine because it leaves little room for error, which you brought up next...

Quote:

I don't know if they removed the grainy look that naturally accompanies film (if that bothers you one way or the other), but the clarity should be great and original, and (hopefully?) was not digitally altered.

PurpleHazel wrote:

One of the two main factors -- other than restoration -- in the picture quality of a Hollywood studio Blu-ray is how much DNR (digital noise reduction; also used for video) and edge enhancement was used on the movie. These tools were originally used to make DVDs look better, but with Blu-rays' higher resolution, these tools usually make the films look worse. Hopefully, the studios have learned from the mistakes of the early Blu-ray era and keep the natural-looking grain of older films in 4K. For instance, when Warner first released 2001: A Space Odyssey on Blu, I believe the PQ was considered pretty good. But as the format progressed, it became considered to be not so great: it was an older restoration and a little DNR and edge enhancement was visible. But it was an early Blu-ray (2007), so Warner has had plenty of time to do a new restoration, and if the 4K has a natural, filmic look, it should look the best the film ever has, except a restored version in a good theater.

Quote:

some movies simply can't be in 4K without digital enhancement or altering from its original version, which may or may not bother you.

PurpleHazel wrote:

I'm no expert, but I don't believe this is right. All you need is a top-notch restoration and proper encoding (and probably some other technical stuff I don't recall/know). From what I understand, the higher the resolution, the more it exposes the flaws of DNR and edge enhancement -- loss of detail, unnatural-looking grain, waxy-looking skin, haloing from edge enhancement. You want an older film's grain to look as natural as possible. That's become the ideal for critics, collectors and a majority of technicians (especially the ones who work for the high-end boutique labels like Criterion, Arrow US/UK and the UK's Masters of Cinema). It's possible that very delicate, restrained digital tweaking could help, but the problem is the studios can't be trusted to always do that.

My "some films can't be in 4K" was referring to older films that have been damaged, or were shot with an inferior quality of film that wouldn't translate to 4K. But anyway, your points on DNR and edge enhancement are completely valid. As long as the master copy or original negative are well preserved, the capacity to produce a fine-looking 4K is there. They would use a 4K scanner and scan each frame one by one. Then digital artists would go in there and do cleanup work on every frame such as removing dirt, scratches, cue marks, DNR and edge enhancement. I imagine it's a lengthy, laborious process. And yeah, if they do a half-assed job, it will show. It sucks though that DNR and EE can backfire because they make old movies look better. Some older films are just too grainy, or have faded or deteriorated. DNR and EE solve some problems but create others, such as haloing, loss of natural grain, and waxy skin as previously mentioned. But that can be corrected as well with subtle CGI, rotoscoping, and other post-production magic. My point was, I believe with proper time and labor, anything can get a fine 4K treatment. But it's up to the studios, and again background research before buying always helps.

Quote:

I don't know if any discs are being sold as 4K, when they're actually 2K

PurpleHazel wrote:

Yes, they are. Some are upscaled 2K, but I don't know which ones -- hopefully there aren't that many. Obviously movies from the last few years should be safe.

I don't see a problem with selling upscaled 2K on a 4K disc, as long as they don't charge as much money, and it simply says so on the label. Kind of like labeling genetically modified food, haha.

I'm surprised Ex Machina would look subpar on a 4K Blu-Ray. It was filmed in 4K, so what could go wrong?
https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0470752/te...tt_dt_spec

As for The Favourite, according to imdb, it was filmed on 35 mm, but the DI is in 2K, which could explain why you can't find it as a 4K Blu-Ray yet:
https://www.imdb.com/title/tt5083738/te...tt_dt_spec

Anyhoo, more nerding out. Just watch Jurassic World: Fallen Kingdom in 4K already.

badseed

Gender: Male
Age: 35
Location: FL

Yesterday I noticed Into the Spider-Verse had dropped in price on Amazon. The 4k was listed at $14.99. Before I got around to ordering it I stopped by Best Buy today and found it for the same price. Strangely both of them have them priced at 9.99 for the DVD, 14.99 for the blu, and 17.99 for the DVD (WTF). Been to Wal-Mart and Target today too and the 4K is still $28 and $30 respectively at those places so I'm guessing this is some kind of special sale if anyone wants to jump on it. I don't see why a film that good would have dropped so tremendously otherwise unless its sales have been ridiculously low, which would shock me.
_________________
Hey! I made a country music chart. Check it out!

PurpleHazel

When Amazon has a mainstream studio release for sale these days, they're usually price-matching Best Buy, Walmart or Target. In this case they're obviously price-matching Best Buy. Don't think it's a reflection of sales for Spider-Verse in particular -- in this case it may be tied to Spider-Man: Far From Home opening in a couple of weeks. Also Best Buy seems to have a good relationship with Sony -- BBy used to have those Sony Savestation displays.

badseed wrote:

both of them have them priced at 9.99 for the DVD, 14.99 for the blu, and 17.99 for the DVD (WTF)

You saying they have the DVD priced at both 9.99 and 17.99?