Screenshot Comparisons 4K

[ko8ebryant24]

Cronos

Criterion BD vs BFI UHD

https://slow.pics/c/qy1pDGBr?canvas-mode=fit-width

*Colors and luminance in tone-mapped HDR screenshots are not representative, only compare compression and detail.

[fkid]

The comparison below is meant to be viewed in HDR mode on an HDR display.

WAGES OF FEAR - 1953 - PQ - CRITERION USA UHD SDR BLU-RAY VS. BFI GBR UHD HDR BLU-RAY (30)

[barrett75]

Originally Posted by fkid

The comparison below is meant to be viewed in HDR mode on an HDR display.

WAGES OF FEAR - 1953 - PQ - CRITERION USA UHD SDR BLU-RAY VS. BFI GBR UHD HDR BLU-RAY (30)

criterion must have some magic powers to transform an imperfect Fidelity-encoded old/source-related grain structure in some more than perfect refined grain pattern!

[nicwood]

Originally Posted by barrett75

criterion must have some magic powers to transform an imperfect Fidelity-encoded old/source-related grain structure in some more than perfect refined grain pattern!

I must be blind. To me both encodes look very good. Would you mind giving one or two examples where you saw the imperfections on the BFI?

[andreasy969]

Originally Posted by nicwood

I must be blind. To me both encodes look very good. Would you mind giving one or two examples where you saw the imperfections on the BFI?

I'm sure he was being sarcastic. And I'm asking myself the same question he is implying.

[barrett75]

Originally Posted by andreasy969

I'm sure he was being sarcastic. And I'm asking myself the same question he is implying.

i was indeed. there's absolutely no imperfections on BFI, it's criterion that's TOO perfect to my eyes and the end result is way too much suspicios...
look at this one (face of the woman):

https://slow.pics/c/Swgs1OKb

or this other one (the large white area on the left):

https://slow.pics/c/c7bFZfU9

which one looks like more natural and organic grain considering the source and its period? and i'm not talking about the encode but i'm questioning the grain structure

[SpookyDollhouse]

Originally Posted by barrett75

i was indeed. there's absolutely no imperfections on BFI, it's criterion that's TOO perfect to my eyes and the end result is way too much suspicios...
look at this one (face of the woman):

https://slow.pics/c/Swgs1OKb

or this other one (the large white area on the left):

https://slow.pics/c/c7bFZfU9

which one looks like more natural and organic grain considering the source and its period? and i'm not talking about the encode but i'm questioning the grain structure

It looked flawless on my setup, I'd score it above the BFI and even the caps reflect that IMO especially the grain but really the whole greyscale is improved in the SDR image.

[barrett75]

^^ that's precisely my point. at a first glance criterion appears to be muche better re: grain (not talking grayscale here). but they're dealing with the exact same transfer BFI used (as far as we know). so how is it possible the grain structure is so much better? and we also know that Fidelity encoded BFI so no compression problem over there. but looking more deeply grain is suspicious to me. too perfect. too "smooth" and refined considering the source, without adding more detail. same in Seven Samurai and the other Kurosawa set. no doubt in motion they'll look great but i'm not convinced at all.

look at arm here:

https://slow.pics/c/DDbCzYEj

does it look natural to you?

[andreasy969]

Originally Posted by barrett75

^^ that's precisely my point. at a first glance criterion appears to be muche better re: grain (not talking grayscale here). but they're dealing with the exact same transfer BFI used (as far as we know). so how is it possible the grain structure is so much better? and we also know that Fidelity encoded BFI so no compression problem over there. but looking more deeply grain is suspicious to me. too perfect. too "smooth" and refined considering the source, without adding more detail. same in Seven Samurai and the other Kurosawa set. no doubt in motion they'll look great but i'm not convinced at all.

look at arm here:

https://slow.pics/c/DDbCzYEj

does it look natural to you?

Yeah, there being no additional detail at all despite the super grain, has me very sceptical as well. I even think the super grain sometimes comes with a tad less detail (with a dress somewhere for ex where the super grain mush IMO kind of erases the actual texture). I also thought the newspaper looked fishy with the font here: https://slow.pics/c/Avi9MafH

I will reserve judgement and it by no means looks awful to me on the caps and will surely look nice, but I'm afraid it looks fishy to me and I don't trust them/the super grain. But that's just me.

[SpookyDollhouse]

Originally Posted by barrett75

^^ that's precisely my point. at a first glance criterion appears to be muche better re: grain (not talking grayscale here). but they're dealing with the exact same transfer BFI used (as far as we know). so how is it possible the grain structure is so much better? and we also know that Fidelity encoded BFI so no compression problem over there. but looking more deeply grain is suspicious to me. too perfect. too "smooth" and refined considering the source, without adding more detail. same in Seven Samurai and the other Kurosawa set. no doubt in motion they'll look great but i'm not convinced at all.

look at arm here:

https://slow.pics/c/DDbCzYEj

does it look natural to you?

Yes, and watching the UHD the grain field looks natural and filmic. There were similar discussions about Seven Samurai re:fake grain and contrast that I don't think are worth the time having seen both of these discs. I haven't compared the subs but IMO the new US is the better choice for image for the greyscale alone

[JohnCarpenterFan]

Originally Posted by barrett75

^^ that's precisely my point. at a first glance criterion appears to be muche better re: grain (not talking grayscale here). but they're dealing with the exact same transfer BFI used (as far as we know). so how is it possible the grain structure is so much better? and we also know that Fidelity encoded BFI so no compression problem over there. but looking more deeply grain is suspicious to me. too perfect. too "smooth" and refined considering the source, without adding more detail. same in Seven Samurai and the other Kurosawa set. no doubt in motion they'll look great but i'm not convinced at all.

look at arm here:

https://slow.pics/c/DDbCzYEj

does it look natural to you?

Just by looking at those comparisons, the grain on the Criterion looks much more organic to me (just as it did for Seven Samurai). I even said in the Seven Samurai thread, that the grain on that was the most natural-looking film grain I've probably seen on home video. It legitimately looked like a fine-grain scan done at a preservation level you'd expect to see in actual film archives; grain on home video masters tends to be noticeably different from how grain appears on digital preservation masters scanned using archival-quality scanners which usually have much greater fidelity than what is typically seen on home video.

Does anyone have the restoration notes for this release? Judging by those comparisons, the grain looks very much like what you'd expect to see on a nitrate negative from that period. If film archives were involved in this restoration then I'd assume the scanner used would far surpass most scanners used for commercial means when it comes to accurately capturing the texture of film.

As with Seven Samurai, I'm really confused as to why the Criterion is being scrutinized when it's the BFI release that has done an HDR pass on a master which I believe was graded using an SDR curve. Creating an HDR grade based on such sources can very easily exacerbate the grain (making it look "sharper" or harsher) and any noise that may have been captured during the initial scan can be brought to the forefront. I really think people are barking up the wrong tree here.

[qw0aszx]

Originally Posted by andreasy969

I will reserve judgement and it by no means looks awful to me on the caps and will surely look nice, but I'm afraid it looks fishy to me and I don't trust them/the super grain. But that's just me.

To be honest, I had the same feeling when I compare two versions, but regarding to this film, I had access to the original UHD ProRes 444 file sent from TF1 for the Chinese blu-ray release released back in 2022 and the grains on the original file looks almost the same as ones on the Criterion screenshots. I did direct comparsions of the same frames that you felt off and the sharpness of grains from the ProRes file looks way closer to Criterion caps rather than BFI.

[andreasy969]

Originally Posted by qw0aszx

To be honest, I had the same feeling when I compare two versions, but regarding to this film, I had access to the original UHD ProRes 444 file sent from TF1 for the Chinese blu-ray release released back in 2022 and the grains on the original file looks almost the same as ones on the Criterion screenshots. I did direct comparsions of the same frames that you felt off and the sharpness of grains from the ProRes file looks way closer to Criterion caps rather than BFI.

I appreciate the comment and I am also only just skeptical, that's all. The Criterion might very well be better. But as I just said in the other thread, Criterion, for the most part, really have to blame themselves re. me being skeptical.

But it might not be warranted in this case.

[captainjoe]

Criterion’s Seven Samurai looked absolutely beautiful in motion. Whatever they’re doing to get these results they should keep doing.

[andreasy969]

Originally Posted by captainjoe

Criterion’s Seven Samurai looked absolutely beautiful in motion. Whatever they’re doing to get these results they should keep doing.

Didn't they also introduce some weird glitch with this one IIRC? Seven Samurai I mean. Which must've been the result of some digital tinkering and, surprise, wasn't there with the BFI? And which also causes suspicion btw. of course.

Here's not convinced at any rate.

Oh, and slightly related: Kino suddenly, based on caps, also has perfect compression (with Snake Eyes) while at the same time also coming with fishy looking super grain.

[qw0aszx]

Originally Posted by andreasy969

Didn't they also introduce some weird glitch with this one IIRC? Seven Samurai I mean.

I agree on this, some glitches were introduced due to the additional dirt cleanup they applied, looks like something caused by auto-restoration software and was not detected when they doing the checks. Even though I don't think these glitches were obvious unless you pause and compare it with a different source.

[andreasy969]

Originally Posted by qw0aszx

I agree on this, some glitches were introduced due to the additional dirt cleanup they applied, looks like something caused by auto-restoration software and was not detected when they doing the checks. Even though I don't think these glitches were obvious unless you pause and compare it with a different source.

I'm also not saying that glitch is an issue. It just adds to me being somewhat cautious if you want is all.

Anyway, I just looked at the comparison again (Wages of Fear I mean) and I think I will give Criterion the benefit of the doubt and will give this one a try. Criterion really must've stepped up their game quite some then though, which just seems a little too good to be true. But maybe they just had to. With "Seven Samurai" I won't bother because I'm not the biggest fan of this one anyway and what I have will suit me just fine (actually considered not buying Seven Samurai at all - I'm afraid I'll watch "The Magnificent Seven" instead any day). But with "Wages of Fear" I'll have to see it myself now. Not right away, but I'll put it on my list.

And other than the grain I think I also did spot a tad more actual detail on the Criterion now (here for ex). So I'll withdraw my according comment.

[JohnCarpenterFan]

Originally Posted by andreasy969

Didn't they also introduce some weird glitch with this one IIRC? Seven Samurai I mean. Which must've been the result of some digital tinkering and, surprise, wasn't there with the BFI? And which also causes suspicion btw. of course.

Here's not convinced at any rate.

Oh, and slightly related: Kino suddenly, based on caps, also has perfect compression (with Snake Eyes) while at the same time also coming with fishy looking super grain.

Re: the Seven Samurai glitch. In that moment, the Criterion sorted one glitch present in the BFI and Japanese UHDs but introduced another. I don't think it's indicative of anything applied to the whole film by Criterion. As I said, it's one of the most convincing representations of film texture-wise I've ever seen on home video.

[dwk]

Originally Posted by JohnCarpenterFan

Does anyone have the restoration notes for this release? Judging by those comparisons, the grain looks very much like what you'd expect to see on a nitrate negative from that period. If film archives were involved in this restoration then I'd assume the scanner used would far surpass most scanners used for commercial means when it comes to accurately capturing the texture of film.

The Criterion Forum finally posted the restoration notes from The Wages of Fear's booklet

The Wages of Fear is presented in the aspect ratio of 1.37:1. This 4K restoration was undertaken by TF1 Studio, in collaboration with La Cinematheque francaise and with the support of the CNC, the Archives audiovisuelles de Monaco, Kodak, and the CGR cinemas.

The 35 mm original camera negative was scanned using a wet-gate system to mitigate significant damage, and a 35 mm fine-grain positive was used to replace some sections. The use of the two elements resulted in an additional four minutes of film compared with previously released version. The original monaural soundtrack was remastered from the 35 mm optical soundtrack negative.

[fkid]

Here is what comes up in the BFI/Criterion on-screen notes for Wages of Fear UHD Blu-ray.

Restored in 4K from the nitrate image negative and a sound duplicate.

Image grading supervised by Guillaume Schiffman.

With the support of the CNC, Monaco
Audiovisual Archives, Kodak, CGR Cinemas.

Digital and photochemical processing by Hiventy, 2017