Does UHD improve B&W movies?

[anthonyls]

I understand that UHD 4k with HDR or DV does improve the PQ of movies. But what about B&W movies? How does HDR or DV affect the PQ of B&W movies? Have there been any B&W movies (from the 30s - 50s) released in this new UHD 4k format yet?

[gkolb]

Originally Posted by anthonyls

I understand that UHD 4k with HDR or DV does improve the PQ of movies. But what about B&W movies? How does HDR or DV affect the PQ of B&W movies? Have there been any B&W movies (from the 30s - 50s) released in this new UHD 4k format yet?

Better blacks, better shading and gradations, even more refinement of picture.
They already have a 4k or higher master for Casablanca. Make it so in 2018.

Hey, somebody in the back there kick out a press release, stat!
(Oh heavens, the OAR will have black bars. Let the wailing begin. )

[singhcr]

Most definitely.

The first 35mm print that I saw at an arthouse theater was in black and white. I saw much richer and finer tonality in the greys, more depth, and more detail compared to what I've seen on BD or even a DCP. Perhaps a DCP may be sharper compared to a 35mm release print but the superior color of the film makes for a better experience in my opinion.

So there's no reason to expect this not to occur with 4K HDR.

[Aidenag]

Yep, logan noir edition looks amazing

[HD Goofnut]

Originally Posted by gkolb

Better blacks, better shading and gradations, even more refinement of picture.
They already have a 4k or higher master for Casablanca. Make it so in 2018.

Hey, somebody in the back there kick out a press release, stat!
(Oh heavens, the OAR will have black bars. Let the wailing begin. )

I wouldn't expect another release of Casablanca until the anniversary in 2022, but I'd certainly buy it if it came earlier.

[anthonyls]

Hmmmm, I still seem skeptical about this. I guess your points could be true... but it all depends on the scan of the film, the condition of the negative, and the scan that was used for the UHD disc. As we have seen from many b&w BDs... the state of the original negative is really important and the care taken for the mastered scan.

[XGEEKEDGERX]

Originally Posted by anthonyls

Hmmmm, I still seem skeptical about this. I guess your points could be true... but it all depends on the scan of the film, the condition of the negative, and the scan that was used for the UHD disc. As we have seen from many b&w BDs... the state of the original negative is really important and the care taken for the mastered scan.

Criterion have loads of 4K restorations out there that would make amazing UHD releases (especially if they decide to dip their toes into the water) as i'm sure WB have with their 30s/40s noir titles. The only movie i've seen in 4K that is from that's roughly from the same ballpark time frame is The Bridge On The River Kwai, granted it's not B&W but given its age the film looks amazing in UHD so I image we might see some more classics showing up on the format sooner rather than later.

[thecalm_7]

Originally Posted by anthonyls

Hmmmm, I still seem skeptical about this. I guess your points could be true... but it all depends on the scan of the film, the condition of the negative, and the scan that was used for the UHD disc. As we have seen from many b&w BDs... the state of the original negative is really important and the care taken for the mastered scan.

right there. Will B&W look good in UHD? yes, especially if it came from a film negative. But how can they foul it up? DNR, EE, poor encode, poor compression, etc.
Just looking at throwing a 4k scan on a BD100 should be better than a 4k scan on a BD25/50 @1080p if everything is done proper. More space to play.
My concern with Older films will be what they do with the audio. Many films done with Mono or Stereo really dont need to be expanded upon to Atmos/7.1 in my opinion. So hopefully as we see older films appearing in the 4K format, the audio stays true or at the very least, offer both a remix and the original.

[oddbox83]

Most studios doing 4K restorations have moved away from the dreaded filters. Terminator 2 is the notable exception...

Anything coming from Sony is probably very safe, they've been leading the way on quality catalogue releases with 4K.

[tjritter79]

Many of these archival scans were done in 4K, then "dumbed down" to 1080 for a blu-ray release. I think we have to see a larger share of the 4K market before we see these archived editions moved to UHD discs, it seems likely we'll see these first on streaming services like iTunes, Amazon, Vudu, etc.

Also, when you say "older films" that's pretty vague. Films in the older aspect ratio 1.375:1 (Academy) and B&W likely would not see much improvement to 4K without massive digital cleaning which could make the image look "artificial" . We see enough DNR and filtering in current and more recent releases...plus we're talking about the source having been filmed 60 years ago or more. You are bound to see more grain and imperfections when you "enhance" this image.
So post-1953 releases, wider formats are used in most productions, as the movie industry began to compete with television. These wider ratios permit a better scan without magnifying the imperfections. Certainly color films will translate better to 4K/HDR...B&W in the wider ratios will too. However in the 60's seemed like a lot of lesser studios still filmed in the smaller Academy ratio. Unless the print is a mint copy, you may still find imperfections with the transfer to 4K. And that's prolly the reason WHY more of these type films haven't been released in UHD yet.
A very recent example: Batman Begins on UHD. Remember this movie was filmed BEFORE the blu-ray technology was released. Even on UHD, this film has parts where it looks excellent, then the DNR & color shading give you a gut punch. The movie looks "soft" all the way around. Overall, the UHD IS an improvement over the blu ray release (location of black bars)...but its far from perfect. Compare to The Dark Knight, a sequel released 3 years later....and blu-ray was out on the market. While some see slight imperfections, this film on UHD looks crisp, clear, the IMAX scenes look excellent....see when this was filmed they KNEW blu-ray was out and I think filmed accordingly. Not so lucky with BB!

[MrMahn]

Originally Posted by tjritter79

Also, when you say "older films" that's pretty vague. Films in the older aspect ratio 1.375:1 (Academy) and B&W likely would not see much improvement to 4K without massive digital cleaning which could make the image look "artificial" . We see enough DNR and filtering in current and more recent releases...plus we're talking about the source having been filmed 60 years ago or more. You are bound to see more grain and imperfections when you "enhance" this image.
So post-1953 releases, wider formats are used in most productions, as the movie industry began to compete with television. These wider ratios permit a better scan without magnifying the imperfections. Certainly color films will translate better to 4K/HDR...B&W in the wider ratios will too. However in the 60's seemed like a lot of lesser studios still filmed in the smaller Academy ratio. Unless the print is a mint copy, you may still find imperfections with the transfer to 4K. And that's prolly the reason WHY more of these type films haven't been released in UHD yet.

Lots of things wrong here. First off, the Academy aperture is larger than the flat widescreen format, and so technically has higher quality (although is still beaten by the anamorphic formats). Second, while B&W films obviously don't have much to gain from WCG, they most certainly surpass standard Blu-ray's capability for dynamic range, especially the beautiful but deadly nitrate films. Lastly, there is absolutely nothing wrong with more grain. Grain is natural. Grain is the image. Grainier is ok if it accurately represents the original image. But also remember that negative film has been really high quality since like the 30's. Restorations may be necessary, but DNR is not. UHD w/ HDR will allow us to finally films similar to how they were meant to be seen.

[tjritter79]

Originally Posted by MrMahn

Lots of things wrong here. First off, the Academy aperture is larger than the flat widescreen format, and so technically has higher quality (although is still beaten by the anamorphic formats). Second, while B&W films obviously don't have much to gain from WCG, they most certainly surpass standard Blu-ray's capability for dynamic range, especially the beautiful but deadly nitrate films. Lastly, there is absolutely nothing wrong with more grain. Grain is natural. Grain is the image. Grainier is ok if it accurately represents the original image. But also remember that negative film has been really high quality since like the 30's. Restorations may be necessary, but DNR is not. UHD w/ HDR will allow us to finally films similar to how they were meant to be seen.

You are speaking about the film and a projected image. I'm looking at a standpoint where we're talking specifically about the home-video market within the subject of the thread which is "Does UHD improve B&W movies"?
I tried to answer that it depends on the "source" material, and an earlier post asked about "older" films. My mention of the Academy ratio was to draw a line in the sand so to speak. Unless it's already restored and released on Blu-ray, any B&W film prior to 1953 is likely to contain too many imperfections where 4K/UHD/HDR would enhance these imperfections. Then you have to get into DNR, filtering , etc. Now you risk ruining the intended presentation of the film. As far as grain, I'll agree that a certain amount of grain is acceptable. But when it gets digitally enhanced and transferred to home video, at times the grain becomes overwhelming to the film and draws attention away from it. (Look at the older A&C Meet Frankenstein on blu BEFORE Universal restored it!). Films post-1953 would be better candidates for a 4K/UHD/HDR transfer because of the colors, the widescreen quality, and general better condition the film was kept in as well as the better condition of the film stock itself and the equipment that recorded it.
This topic is really to general to answer with an "all-inclusive" answer. I think you have to look at each film as an individual, and consider the age and shape of the source before you can really answer this question. A classic film, already with a 2k/4K scan just from a resolution standpoint wouldn't see much improvement. Adding HDR would likely grant more of a separation of contrast/brightness which could make the picture more pleasing. Again, it depends on the source.