Buying the Blu-ray version instead of the 4K UHD Blu-ray version?

[Goldash]

Apologies if this question was ever posted before. In what cases would you buy the standard Blu-ray over the same title on 4K UHD Blu-ray? Should you ever?

The only reason I ask this is because of the strange reliance by studios to source 4K Blu-rays from outdated masters, 2K scans or 2K digital intermediates.

Of course, going with a newly remastered/rescanned/native 4K image is always preferential to a 1080P source. But when many players and TV's handle upscaling really well, where do you draw the line with releases that contain 2K (or possibly lower) content?

HDR, Dolby Vision and Dolby Atmos make this decision a lot easier for many. But without the Blu-ray.com thread that lists Native 4K masters (https://forum.blu-ray.com/showthread.php?t=270798) I'm sure I would have more than a few cases of buyer's remorse, regardless of the obvious advantages of HDR.

For example, I recently bought Get Out on standard blu-ray during a sale, but only after finding out it doesn't use a native 4K scan on its UHD release.

I can't be the only one who finds the promotion of some 4K content somewhat misleading. That's why I made this thread. I care a lot about picture and audio quality but I find the use of "uprezzed" transfers really confusing on a format designed for optimal quality (even in spite of HDR).

[Captain Flint]

The difference between 1080p and 4K is negligible, most average people can't see a difference. I can see the ever so slightest difference between the two, but I'm fine with Blu-ray. Been upgrading my collection all my life, it's expensive. I'm done upgrading.

[chip75]

Originally Posted by Goldash

Apologies if this question was ever posted before. In what cases would you buy the standard Blu-ray over the same title on 4K UHD Blu-ray? Should you ever?

I think given the choice you'd always go with the UHD BD. But there are factors to consider, budget (which isn't a huge difference), title and user equipment.

UHD BD isn't about resolution gains, so whether a title is finished in 2K or 4K shouldn't be a deciding factor, but the HDR and wider colour gamut (along with superior compression) should be. That's where the difference will be.

As to equipment the display is a huge factor to your enjoyment of HDR, how well a TV handle tone-mapping and it's peak brightness can be substantial.

But with every title it's worth doing a bit of research before buying. The difference with some titles will be negligible but others will revelatory.

[Bullitt]

Originally Posted by Goldash

Apologies if this question was ever posted before. In what cases would you buy the standard Blu-ray over the same title on 4K UHD Blu-ray? Should you ever?

The only reason I ask this is because of the strange reliance by studios to source 4K Blu-rays from outdated masters, 2K scans or 2K digital intermediates.

Of course, going with a newly remastered/rescanned/native 4K image is always preferential to a 1080P source. But when many players and TV's handle upscaling really well, where do you draw the line with releases that contain 2K (or possibly lower) content?

HDR, Dolby Vision and Dolby Atmos make this decision a lot easier for many. But without the Blu-ray.com thread that lists Native 4K masters (https://forum.blu-ray.com/showthread.php?t=270798) I'm sure I would have more than a few cases of buyer's remorse, regardless of the obvious advantages of HDR.

For example, I recently bought Get Out on standard blu-ray during a sale, but only after finding out it doesn't use a native 4K scan on its UHD release.

I can't be the only one who finds the promotion of some 4K content somewhat misleading. That's why I made this thread. I care a lot about picture and audio quality but I find the use of "uprezzed" transfers really confusing on a format designed for optimal quality (even in spite of HDR).

When you don’t have a 4K set-up.

[Goldash]

My original post assumes the viewer already has a 4K setup. Wish I clarified it better, but oh well.

On a semi related note, upscaling standard Blu-rays on the Sony UBP-X800 player has been a lot better than I expected. Higher bitrate Blu-rays like those from Criterion (Blow-Up was the one I watched) look stunning. It's not quite the difference you'll get from a UHD Blu-ray but it's good enough to hold off on abandoning standard Blu-ray releases.

[Gardenhose]

Only if it is not better quality wise (picture/sound). This could also mean cuts.

[KING SNIPER]

Originally Posted by Captain Flint

The difference between 1080p and 4K is negligible, most average people can't see a difference. I can see the ever so slightest difference between the two, but I'm fine with Blu-ray. Been upgrading my collection all my life, it's expensive. I'm done upgrading.

Same Here.

[diamenz]

when movies are put out as 4k + blu combos, the 4k master is obviously new, but what about the blu ray disc? do we get some of the same mediocre transfers from past, or do we get treated to new ones?

[CharmanderTaco]

great info. thanks.

[lpo]

Originally Posted by Captain Flint

The difference between 1080p and 4K is negligible, most average people can't see a difference. I can see the ever so slightest difference between the two, but I'm fine with Blu-ray. Been upgrading my collection all my life, it's expensive. I'm done upgrading.

Spot on. 4k is really nice on video games but i'm not re purchasing my old Blu Ray's.