Screenshot Comparisons 4K

[Dubstar]

I actually watched the Dolby Vision streaming version last Saturday night and it looked fantastic.

[infiniteCR]

Kind of odd that one wand shot having the HDR highlite blown out compared with the BD, even at 1000 nits. Look around the wand you can't make out the second lace end of his hoody except in the BD. Doesn't work this way in the other shots though

[Geoff D]

Originally Posted by infiniteCR

Kind of odd that one wand shot having the HDR highlite blown out compared with the BD, even at 1000 nits. Look around the wand you can't make out the second lace end of his hoody except in the BD. Doesn't work this way in the other shots though

Without a 4000-nit cap there's no definitive answer to that. I reckon it'll show at least as much highlight information as the BD, if not more.

[andreasy969]

Originally Posted by Geoff D

I loved how Azkaban's HDR pass alleviates the black crush of the Blu-ray, mentioned it previously: https://forum.blu-ray.com/showthread...3#post14533633

(Sorry guys, I know you must be getting annoyed with me chiming in and saying "look how right I was, here's a link!" when x movie's caps appear, but I just can't help it.)

I for one do appretiate the feedback.

Originally Posted by Jim Collins

Thank You!
It's definitely an upgrade over the BD, but doesn't it look too dark?

The 200 nits caps will (most of the time) be "too dark" by design. You might want to read the disclaimer and the subsequent links.

Originally Posted by infiniteCR

Kind of odd that one wand shot having the HDR highlite blown out compared with the BD, even at 1000 nits. Look around the wand you can't make out the second lace end of his hoody except in the BD. Doesn't work this way in the other shots though

Originally Posted by Geoff D

Without a 4000-nit cap there's no definitive answer to that. I reckon it'll show at least as much highlight information as the BD, if not more.

When I do the additional caps, I tend to (and did with this one) increase the nits setting in rather large thousands steps until no new information becomes visible. That's why some shots have only a 1000 nits cap and others 1000, 2000 and 4000 nits caps in addition (above 4000 is extremely rare - Azkaban's max seemed to be between 3000 and 4000 - not sure right now though, but I think another shot went above 2000). So I think it is what it is with this one in regard to what I can do with the caps. I'd have to check back again to be 100% sure though. (The higher nits caps are also still a conversion anyway and might therefore still blow out some information and there are also other settings that may (or may not) affect it as well.)

I do believe that this scene should look rather impressive/nice at any rate (be that with or without a little information lost).

EDIT: Above 1000 nits remains basically exactly the same with this shot as I indicated above - below cap is at 4000 nits:

[Pyoko]

The biggest problem of the old BD is obviously the insane amount of sharpening, second is bad gamma that boosts the shadows way too much, needlessly enhancing the sharpened grain even further and ruining a lot of the tension. The UHD has much darker shadows that not only look correct, but help sell the dinos, particularly the T-rex sequence.

Screenshot Comparison

BD left, UHD right

[Pieter V]

Wow, those screenshots really show the benefit and have the lovely 4K look. I had my doubts on JP1 after seeing some earlier screenshots some days ago, but this looks good.

Can't wait to see those Lost World screenshots.

[gnj1958]

A little better but I wouldn't say leaps and bounds. Digital noise is cleaned up and detail, contrast and color are improved somewhat. Not seeing much grain.

[MisterXDTV]

Very disappointing job from Universal, a minor upgrade: this should have been the look of the Blu-ray seven years ago...

Are you telling me this is a new 4K master from OCN? Of course it isn't, it's Universal we are talking about....

[infiniteCR]

Originally Posted by Geoff D

Without a 4000-nit cap there's no definitive answer to that. I reckon it'll show at least as much highlight information as the BD, if not more.

And since that's been determined to likely not be the case either, any chance someone tinkered with the glow to make it more HDR'esque? Usually as the highlites become more defined, they look more like the wand shots above this series, but in this case its backwards.

[cleeve]

Originally Posted by MisterXDTV

Very disappointing job from Universal, a minor upgrade: this should have been the look of the Blu-ray seven years ago...

Are you telling me this is a new 4K master from OCN? Of course it isn't, it's Universal we are talking about....

It's a 25 year old film that marked the beginning of mainstream blockbuster CGI. It's not going to look like it was shot yesterday. I have no idea what you were expecting but this is about as good as this film is ever going to look.

[Pyoko]

Originally Posted by Pieter V

Can't wait to see those Lost World screenshots.

Personally I only bought the first movie so I'm going to have to disappoint, but I'm sure they'll turn up very soon.

Originally Posted by gnj1958

A little better but I wouldn't say leaps and bounds.

Originally Posted by MisterXDTV

a minor upgrade

It might not be amazing as a UHD, but it really is leaps and bounds over the old BD. It's a completely different look without the digital harshness and massive wall of sharpened grain.

[andreasy969]

Originally Posted by cleeve

It's a 25 year old film that marked the beginning of mainstream blockbuster CGI. It's not going to look like it was shot yesterday. I have no idea what you were expecting but this is about as good as this film is ever going to look.

I'm also disappointed. I think it's true that this is the best it's ever going to look, but that's only because Universal sucks. With some caps, even the old BD shows that it could look much better, if it wasn't for Universal. The filtering in some of the caps is just terrible imo and I do agree that it looks more like what the BD should've looked like years ago, but not the UHD. Hell, even going by BD standards some caps look bad.

I just hate Universal. Really.

I ordered all 4 anyway (still on the way) and at least 2 and 4 should be better going by some comments, but I was really hoping for more with part 1.

[pawel86ck]

Thanks Pyoko for your effort making this comparison. I'm not planing to sell my box with JP BD's (for now), but UHD looks like a decent upgrade over BD, especially on 5# and 13# comparison (although, but based on comparsions I have seen today TLW shows even bigger difference in sharpness .
http://screenshotcomparison.com/comparison/114144
JP2 on BD looks REALLY blurry in comparison to UHD

[Pieter V]

Originally Posted by Pyoko

The biggest problem of the old BD is obviously the insane amount of sharpening, second is bad gamma that boosts the shadows way too much, needlessly enhancing the sharpened grain even further and ruining a lot of the tension. The UHD has much darker shadows that not only look correct, but help sell the dinos, particularly the T-rex sequence.

Screenshot Comparison

Do you also have a screenshot of this scene:



And of the night vision shots on the t-rex scene in the car? Curious how green that looks.

[s_har]

Originally Posted by Pieter V

Do you also have a screenshot of this scene:

[img]https://static.afbeeldinguploaden.nl/1805/407410/c1X8685S.jpg[/img

I have one of my ''messed up conversion'' ones if that helps? (colors and dynamic range being messed up obviously)

[Geoff D]

Originally Posted by infiniteCR

And since that's been determined to likely not be the case either, any chance someone tinkered with the glow to make it more HDR'esque? Usually as the highlites become more defined, they look more like the wand shots above this series, but in this case its backwards.

Yep, andreas' 4K-nit cap proves me quite wrong. And yet the HDR still looks vastly more 'dimensional' than the SDR blu-ray on my TV because of the ultra-bright wand and the reduction in black crush, if anything the black level is actually deeper than the Blu yet it resolves more shadow detail and it just looks gobsmacking.

In my write-up of Goblet of Fire I did however note that some highlights were more blown out (even when resolving 4K nits) than in the SDR version, like the spotlights in the Quidditch stadium when Krum flies in, so there does indeed seem to have been a decision to push some of these highlights in favour of brightness over detail retention. For what it's worth, the Harry Potters were graded in HDR by their original DI colourist, Peter Doyle.

[Ben_UK]

Bah, it’s a little bit disappointing to see JP not have a bigger improvement. I don’t see much in the way of grain, just mushy details. It’s good that it looks less digital and the colours seem better resolved, however it’s not as detailed as I’d hoped.

I did wonder how things like the CGI shots would be produced in “4K” since I don’t know how the “final masters” were produced for such things back in 1993. Perhaps someone can comment on how the visual FX shots were delivered as I know from other restorations that the FX shots were finished at a relatively low resolution for some productions.

[infiniteCR]

Originally Posted by Geoff D

I did however note that some highlights were more blown out (even when resolving 4K nits) than in the SDR version, like the spotlights in the Quidditch stadium when Krum flies in, so there does indeed seem to have been a decision to push some of these highlights in favour of brightness over detail retention.

That seems to confirm my suspicions from that shot if you noticed it elsewhere as well. The black levels do look a bit better.

[barrett75]

JP is the same old 2011 master with the same old grading everybody hated. how's possible to say it's a decent one? just because it is a little bit less filtered? CGI scenes are definitely unwatchable....

[WorkShed]

It's obviously not the same master