Sign In

Post #1288447

Parent topic
Link to post in topic
Date created
10-Jul-2019, 4:07 PM
Last modified
10-Jul-2019, 4:11 PM
Edited by
Reason for edit
None provided

Omni said:

dahmage said:

Omni said:

Adywan, Projects 4K77 and 4K83 are definitely 4K. They have less detail than the 1080p BluRays, but they’re absolutely 4K.

Adywan clearly meant that the visible detail level is less that what is already in the 1080p blu-ray, which makes sense as one is from negatives and the other from old release prints.

Sure he did, but he said “even the team would admit these aren’t 4K” and… well, they most definitely are.

No they are not. Just because they are scanned and released in 4k doesn’t make them 4k. Theatrical prints hold between 720p and at max 1080p worth of visual information. The team behind the 4k releases captured the film at 4k to try and squeeze the last bit of detail they could out of the prints. They did a damn good job, but they can’t magically produce detail that is on the negatives that isn;t present on an old theatrical print. The only way they could be 4k is if they were directly scanned from the negatives in 4k or above.

It’s a bugbear of mine with all these 4k commercial releases that are just upscales. It may be in 4k resolution but if the source doesn’t have the resolution to begin with, it’s not 4K. It’s so misleading and causing people to claim that 4k is a waste of time because most of what they are seeing were never even mastered @4k. The BBC here have been releasing old Doctor Who episodes on Blu-Ray from old TV broadcasts. 1080p, yet the source was 480p. And they’re calling them HD. They’re even going to release ones in UHD. It’s madness