KokoNigel

DJPitaB said:

Dek Rollins said:

DJPitaB said:

I have the 4K discs, but unless I was misreading, the DCP is 4:3. Am I correct, or did I misunderstand?

Not sure where you read that, but I have the DCP and it isn’t 4:3.

My mistake. Thanks.

The only change remains, which is “The easy way” in Back to the Future II starting from 2010 Blu-ray, in which it cuts straight to the next sequence quickly after the blackout in 1985A unlike before that, where there is around 5 seconds black screen before the music continues after the line. That was probably because during the film showings, the projectionist would have to change reels by the time they reached that scene, and they commonly changed the reels before Marty could answer Biff’s goons “The easy way.”

WXM said:

KokoNigel, a lot of that was actually covered (with some back and forth) in this very thread, pages ~7-10.

Here’s a quite damning comparison. The blu-ray literally has a lot more detail than the 4k, lots of detail turned to mush 😦

https://caps-a-holic.com/c.php?d1=5240&d2=15006&s1=48928&s2=156526&x=665&y=172&i=16&a=2&go=1&l=1

And the more famous “detail death by DNR” compare that people were sharing

https://screenshotcomparison.com/comparison/8656

So, BD has poorer contrast but less DNR and sharpening. 4K on the other hand has better contrast but more DNR and sharpening.

CloakedDragon97 said:

SHM said:

I am thinking about making a regrade of the new UHD Transfers of LOTR, so they look like the DVDs, in terms of sharpness and definition would it be worth it or should i stick to this version?

I would go with the UHD versions. They are definitely improvements.

But it turns out that many Blu-Ray reviewers have found out that all six movies and the Extended Editions were very likely all the older master files (the sloppy color grading job on the HD version of FOTR Extended excluded) upscaled and regraded one more shot-for-shot with extra digital noise reduction and sharpening. Jackson even admits that the color grading in FOTR was analog compared to the sequels, while he said that the green tint was intentional alongside director of photography Andrew Lesnie to bring it in line with The Hobbit. Also, this video has proven a good point about the 4K UHD releases and the problems within the transfers.

https://youtu.be/I3Z58uiwcME

44rh1n said:

KokoNigel said:

44rh1n said:

Chewielewis said:

Im casting doubt on them doing 4K re-renders. At best it will be 4K recompositing for shots that are simple composites. I doubt they will be re-rendering any complex CGI.

All non-CGI shots have been scanned in 4K from the original negatives, and all CGI shots have been scanned in 4K from the original VFX film-outs. So yes, the CGI remains 2K (although scanned in 4K), but I believe it’s at least been re-composited with the newly-scanned 4K footage. So overall, it should be a nice uptick in quality!

That is, as long as they didn’t majorly eff up the color grading again! IMO, this NEEDS to have an HDR grade that’s very much in the spirit of the original theatrical/DVD look (although with higher dynamic range and a wider color gamut, of course). If it has a new revisionist grade – or if it has a stupid, dark green grade again – then I’m going to be pissed.

If you want to integrate the scenes from the 4K version (if it turns out good) into the regrade, you have to use Media Player Classic Home Cinema with MadVR to obtain tonemapped PNG screen grabs of the individual frames for the scenes and splice them into the project on DaVinci Resolve.

Nah, that’s the wrong way to go about it, IMO. I’d do a ProRes transcode of the whole film, without tone-mapping. That way I’d have the entire dynamic range and gamut of the footage at my disposal. Using footage that’s already been automatically tonemapped would be very restricting.

It probably won’t come to that though, at least not anytime soon. I don’t have as much free time as I used to when I made this restoration. (Plus, I have faith that this new 4K version will be good! If it ends up sucking though, I may change my mind and decide to do it, haha).

I believe that according to some website, DaVinci Resolve tonemapping has the correct luma but not the right chroma. However, I’ve seen that MadVR gives out both the correct chroma and luma, as seen in some 4K screenshots of modern films giving a similar result to the Blu-ray using MadVR.

44rh1n said:

Chewielewis said:

Im casting doubt on them doing 4K re-renders. At best it will be 4K recompositing for shots that are simple composites. I doubt they will be re-rendering any complex CGI.

All non-CGI shots have been scanned in 4K from the original negatives, and all CGI shots have been scanned in 4K from the original VFX film-outs. So yes, the CGI remains 2K (although scanned in 4K), but I believe it’s at least been re-composited with the newly-scanned 4K footage. So overall, it should be a nice uptick in quality!

That is, as long as they didn’t majorly eff up the color grading again! IMO, this NEEDS to have an HDR grade that’s very much in the spirit of the original theatrical/DVD look (although with higher dynamic range and a wider color gamut, of course). If it has a new revisionist grade – or if it has a stupid, dark green grade again – then I’m going to be pissed.

If you want to integrate the scenes from the 4K version (if it turns out good) into the regrade, you have to use Media Player Classic Home Cinema with MadVR to obtain tonemapped PNG screen grabs of the individual frames for the scenes and splice them into the project on DaVinci Resolve.

The new 4K Blu-ray is mentioned by SpareChange to have some DNR, causing faces to look somewhat smooth, but he also mentions a fine layer of grain, which can possibly mark as an improvement over the previous Blu. Also, he didn’t mention a thing about edge enhancement.

According to this screencap at Caps-a-Holic, https://caps-a-holic.com/c.php?go=1&a=0&d1=11844&d2=11843&s1=116732&s2=116718&i=12&l=0, it appears that the image on the 4K disc comes close to the 35mm scan.