4K Blu-ray Confirmed, Coming in

[FilmFreakosaurus]

Originally Posted by Alix

Guys is there any information about The Lord Of The Rings & The Hobbit in 4K release?

I have a hunch they're working on them, but whether or not they will consult with Peter Jackson first... I know Jackson wanted to fix a few items on LOTR, but WB may not want to put any extra money into them.


Unless they don't give two shits about image quality, they'll still have to split the Extended Cuts to two discs a piece as they're very, very long movies.


Dolby Atmos on the theatrical and extended cuts of LOTR (The Hobbit Trilogy already has Atmos) and Dolby Vision on all 6 would be fantastic...



We'll see...

[Tns49]

Originally Posted by FilmFreakosaurus

I have a hunch they're working on them, but whether or not they will consult with Peter Jackson first... I know Jackson wanted to fix a few items on LOTR, but WB may not want to put any extra money into them.
Unless they don't give two shits about image quality, they'll still have to split the Extended Cuts to two discs a piece as they're very, very long movies.
Dolby Atmos on the theatrical and extended cuts of LOTR (The Hobbit Trilogy already has Atmos) and Dolby Vision on all 6 would be fantastic...
We'll see...

HFR for The Hobbit? Actually the big problem with the Hobbit is that it was designed for 3d. So no sale for me for that.

On the other hand LOTR could be great in UHD with Dolby Vision.

[FilmFreakosaurus]

Originally Posted by Tns49

HFR for The Hobbit? Actually the big problem with the Hobbit is that it was designed for 3d. So no sale for me for that.

On the other hand LOTR could be great in UHD with Dolby Vision.

They can't do HFR for The Hobbit because the BDA failed to add 48 fps into the specs. They would have to do some funky frame pull-down conversion to 60 fps and I doubt it would look good.


I bet it'll be 24 fps.

[Geoff D]

I reckon they could use the tech that was deployed on Billy Lynn's to derive the 60 and 24 versions out of the 120 original, obviously that's going down rather than up (which would be needed for Le Hobbit going from 48 to 60) but the principal is the same: each version didn't simply have x frames removed from the 120, the frames that you see are actually new ones blended from the originals with the requisite motion blur applied. The problem is that this process is likely to be expensive, running across three lengthy films, so yeah, I can see Warners just dumping the 24p upscales on there and calling it a day.

[PeterTHX]

They've been doing 24->30 for decades and decades.
48->60 should be cake. 3:2 x 2.

[Spooked]

I hope it's okay to ask this here. I've been looking through threads and am just getting turned around. And around.

If I upgrade to a 4K player, and keep my 42" 1080p HD TV, will I notice any difference in picture quality when playing 4K discs?

I ask because there's nothing wrong with my television, and I'm honestly not sure I'd ever be able to afford a 4K TV, though I do have a couple of 4K discs. Does anyone have any relatable experience?

[Agent Kay]

Originally Posted by Geoff D

I reckon they could use the tech that was deployed on Billy Lynn's to derive the 60 and 24 versions out of the 120 original, obviously that's going down rather than up (which would be needed for Le Hobbit going from 48 to 60) but the principal is the same: each version didn't simply have x frames removed from the 120, the frames that you see are actually new ones blended from the originals with the requisite motion blur applied. The problem is that this process is likely to be expensive, running across three lengthy films, so yeah, I can see Warners just dumping the 24p upscales on there and calling it a day.

It's not that hard, but it can go wrong

[steel_breeze]

Originally Posted by Spooked

I hope it's okay to ask this here. I've been looking through threads and am just getting turned around. And around.

If I upgrade to a 4K player, and keep my 42" 1080p HD TV, will I notice any difference in picture quality when playing 4K discs?

I ask because there's nothing wrong with my television, and I'm honestly not sure I'd ever be able to afford a 4K TV, though I do have a couple of 4K discs. Does anyone have any relatable experience?

I'm in a similar situation... can't see upgrading my beloved 1080p Panasonic projector any time soon, but DID just pull the trigger in May on the Oppo 203 UHD player, 'cuz I didn't want to miss out on the last wave of Oppo product. I still have my Oppo BDP-83 Blu-ray player hooked up as well, so I'm able to toggle back and forth between the two images. Recently, I put in the LAST JEDI Blu-ray on one, and the UHD disc on the other and compared... and did notice a SLIGHT up-tick in detail on the UHD (on my 92-inch screen), due to the UHD's higher disc capacity requiring less/better compression... but frankly, it wasn't enough of an up-tick to go nuts over. What I lost, however, was 24fps playback, since LAST JEDI is encoded with DolbyVision, which only down-converts to 1080 at 1080/60. (If it's an HDR-10 disc, you could retain the 24fps playback in 1080.) Also... the gamma is VERY different coming off an HDR source into an SDR playback environment, so you'll have to compensate with your picture settings. I had to increase the Contrast by 20 on the LAST JEDI UHD disc, to compensate for the lowered white level.

All in all... I personally don't think you gain much in perceived RESOLUTION if you're sticking with a 1080p playback environment like I did, and you might lose 24fps if it's DolbyVision -- which is a deal breaker, for me. Where you DO gain something is the ability to play certain releases that have remastered the movie onto UHD, but have not released a concurrent Blu-ray... like the recent PREDATOR remaster, or THE MATRIX, or DIE HARD. But if it's something like LAST JEDI... or even an older release like E.T., where the Blu-ray is from the exact same source as the UHD disc, I'm sticking with the Blu-ray for now on my 1080p projector.

[Geoff D]

Originally Posted by Agent Kay

It's not that hard, but it can go wrong

I didn't say it was hard, just expensive to reprocess some 8 or 9 hours of video in a professional environment and to make sure it's properly QC'd after that.

[Geoff D]

Originally Posted by PeterTHX

They've been doing 24->30 for decades and decades.
48->60 should be cake. 3:2 x 2.

But that process adds extra judder which people have been trying to remove from 24->30 content for decades and decades. I know I have, I can't stand it. And double the amount of judder that I see on 3:2 content? I can't even fathom a word that sums up the distaste I'd have for that.

Sure, it'd be awesome if some TVs could use their reverse 3:2 mode or multiple thereof to then unpack the proper 48fps presentation from the 60p encode, but would the powers-that-be go for that?

[Paul.R.S]

Originally Posted by steel_breeze

Also... the gamma is VERY different coming off an HDR source into an SDR playback environment, so you'll have to compensate with your picture settings. I had to increase the Contrast by 20 on the LAST JEDI UHD disc, to compensate for the lowered white level.

Isn't it even more complicated than you already got into in the other portion of this quoted para? Since you're also using the 203, I'm specifically referring to our ability (under Video Output Setup) to turn HDR "Off" (for HDR-to-SDR conversion) or choose "Strip Metadata" in which case HDR isn't converted at all it's just removed. So it seems to me that this is yet another variable that makes it impossible to offer a universal answer to Spooked's question ("If I upgrade to a 4K player, and keep my 42" 1080p HD TV, will I notice any difference in picture quality when playing 4K discs?"). It seems to me the best answer is, "Sometimes yes, sometimes no. It depends on your UHD BD player's settings." And I don't think it's even an across-the-board feature on all UHD BD players that you even have the ability to convert or strip HDR. That may be an OPPO exclusive?

Originally Posted by steel_breeze

Where you DO gain something is the ability to play certain releases that have remastered the movie onto UHD, but have not released a concurrent Blu-ray... like the recent PREDATOR remaster, or THE MATRIX, or DIE HARD.

Geoff you've commented on this elsewhere. I thought what Warner did is new encodes of Unforgiven and The Matrix but a new pass at the same old encode of Batman Begins.

And ironically, this is further sauce for the "can I get PQ improvements from playing UHD BDs on a HD display" goose: Due to the complications of HDR, it seems to me very likely that whatever improvements one might get under the right player and display settings circumstances are eclipsed by what we're seeing on, say, the new Unforgiven BD--which from what I've read is a (long overdue) judicious remaster of the 1080.

[Geoff D]

Yes, Unforgiven and Matrix were new BDs derived from the new transfers. BB is a fresh AVC encode of the existing transfer.

As for Last Jedi, that UHD is basically an SDR version in an HDR container so when we're converting to SDR - using curves that are assuming a certain level of HDR performance and are compressing the range accordingly - then it can badly affect the image especially in terms of APL, making it look much too dark.

[newtbludger]

Originally Posted by FilmFreakosaurus

Dolby Atmos on the theatrical and extended cuts of LOTR (The Hobbit Trilogy already has Atmos) and Dolby Vision on all 6 would be fantastic

The Hobbit has atmos? Where? I don't know of any discs for the Hobbit that had Atmos

[LexInHD]

Originally Posted by newtbludger

The Hobbit has atmos? Where? I don't know of any discs for the Hobbit that had Atmos

The theatrical releases had Atmos in the cinemas.

[Geoff D]

I know 24->30 can be fixed with modern gear, it's why I mentioned the reverse 3:2 pulldown mode, so you registered for nothing.

I have a 120Hz TV and whenever I'm watching 24->30 content (NTSC DVDs, a few HD film encodes in 1080i60) I engage the relevant mode to get the proper 24fps cadence back which is then extrapolated x5 into the TV's 120Hz native rate. Fine. It's how they THEN make that work for 48 encoded into 60 - as was mooted in the post I was replying to - without adding additional processing into the TV (almost impossible after the fact) because it's NOT a recognised processing standard as you rightly say, nor have they included actual 48p in the UHD Blu-ray specifications. And isn't 48x3=144? I'm no maths genius, mind you.

So...we're back to square one.

[edit]

Hah! I knew I should've quoted matey's post as I had a sneaky feeling it would mysteriously disappear after I replied to it. Better luck next time Tonioroffo

[ROSS.T.G.]

It was fun going back and reading some of these posts and predictions.

[Geoff D]

Originally Posted by ROSS.T.G.

It was fun going back and reading some of these posts and predictions.

I'm not doing too badly in them first 13 pages

[ROSS.T.G.]

Originally Posted by Geoff D

I'm not doing too badly in them first 13 pages

Lol you’re right. I was laughing out loud saying the bugger called it. I will admit your praise was one of the reasons I upgraded. I was feeling so worn out having upgraded my projector, AVR and speakers. The thought of upgrading again was daunting. But I’m really glad I did.

[Geoff D]

I have moments. Pity that KRW's confidence about the indies jumping into 4K didn't come to pass, but that we're a couple months away from the first major indie release in the US (Kino's Hannibal) is a case of better late than never. And it could be worse, we could be Bill Hunt who doubted that 4K Blu would even happen.

[ROSS.T.G.]

Originally Posted by Geoff D

I have moments. Pity that KRW's confidence about the indies jumping into 4K didn't come to pass, but that we're a couple months away from the first major indie release in the US (Kino's Hannibal) is a case of better late than never. And it could be worse, we could be Bill Hunt who doubted that 4K Blu would even happen.

Yeah I think everyone is waiting to see if the boutiques will throw in. As much I beat up on SF I would like nothing more to see them enter with some gems. I’m still surprised we I have several Carpenters on the format,