Back to the Future Trilogy 4K UHD (1985-1990)

[Geoff D]

Originally Posted by wildphantom

I’m fixated on it being in my postbox tomorrow. I can’t get Silvestri’s theme out of my head. It’s a special kind of anticipation, reserved only for the holy grail kind of movies, of which this trilogy is to me. Drink it in folks, as the feeling doesn’t come around that often.

This is heavy.

I know, I feel like I'm a kid on Christmas eve.

[wildphantom]

Originally Posted by Geoff D

I know, I feel like I'm a kid on Christmas eve.

There’ll be hell to pay if this doesn’t arrive tomorrow. I’ll be raging old man Peabody-style, like someone reversed over my pine trees.

[Pyoko]

Originally Posted by jerclay

Ok, I am no expert, but to my untrained eye Gremlins and BTTF Part I filmed a year apart have a lot in common grain-wise and color-wise. Even if it’s just me, I love both transfers. But I also find E.T. transfer absolutely fantastic, but a lot of people say it was grain managed. Sometimes I do wonder how do they know exactly? I mean, you can see what a bleeding disaster were T2 and Forrest Gump, where DNR is just so obvious. But how can you tell in cases like this?

It's mostly experience. Having looked closely at and stored in your mind the characteristics of a large number of transfers—good, bad and everything inbetween—you get a pretty good sense if something looks natural or digitally manipulated by subconsciously cross-referencing it with everything you've seen before.

What does the grain look like, is it reasonably sharp? Does it have both high and low-frequency components? Is there a color component to it or completely monochromatic (yellowish dye blobs were mentioned previously.) Does there appear to be smudged or smeared image detail and textures underneath the grain? How does the grain move?

For example every frame of a piece of film is a different physical object unrelated to the others and so every frame should have a completely different grain field. With time you learn what this grain that changes 24 times every second looks like, and so can easily pick up on it if the grain instead appears to change slightly in slow-motion or if it moves slightly with or trails after the movement in the image, a tell-tale sign of noise-reduction since it largely works by analyzing and reducing temporal changes.

With regards to BTTF it seems to be a mix as is so often the case, but relatively inoffensive overall. Shots like this appear more or less untouched, this optical is clearly heavily denoised (but it's an optical so, ehhh) and I'm somewhat suspicious of examples like this because the grain looks just a tad soft and lacking contrast, and I sense some possible diagonal smearing on her left cheek, eye and temple. Of course impressions can change a lot once you see things in motion.

[ilovewaterslides]

Caps to the Future part II

[Geoff D]

Originally Posted by wildphantom

There’ll be hell to pay if this doesn’t arrive tomorrow. I’ll be raging old man Peabody-style, like someone reversed over my pine trees.

If the postie don't have it with him I'll be chasing him down the street shouting "take that you mutated sonofab!tch!"

[Geoff D]

Originally Posted by ilovewaterslides

Caps to the Future part II

Blur on, blur off, blur on, blur off

https://caps-a-holic.com/c.php?go=1&...52004&i=10&l=0

[jokercard]

Oh my god... everything looks just that much more natural. I always thought the old age makeup was just very very poorly blended on Lloyd's face...
Turns out, it was oversharpening and blown out highlights that caused that look

Also, there are no framing inconsistencies noted yet right?

[wright96d]

Ahhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh

i've been waiting ten years for this

ahhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh hh

[SpazeBlue]

Originally Posted by ilovewaterslides

Caps to the Future part II

[SpazeBlue]

https://caps-a-holic.com/c.php?go=1&...152026&i=9&l=0

[maperez1987]

Originally Posted by Mierzwiak

You must be joking.

See more detail in the second picture then the first one.

[Pyoko]

Originally Posted by wright96d

i've been waiting ten years for this

I don't think I've given the trilogy a proper rewatch since the VHS days thanks to all the crappy video transfers over the years. Looking forward to it!

Mucho improved color on Part II as well. The changes may seem small individually; some proper saturation and color balance here, a lack of green tint there, but it makes a big difference to the overall impression as a whole.

Take this shot for example. On the BD the gold coat is undersaturated while the red shirt is saturated but way too bright, making it pop out in a very radioactive, digital way. On the UHD the red shirt actually looks like it belongs in that color space, plus the lack of purplish/pinkish "video whites" on Marty's shirt.

[dcx4610]

Got my shipping confirmation from Best Buy on the steelbooks and due here Saturday. Probably the first time I've ever gotten a movie early. Maybe I'll have to try Best By more often.

[Jason Rietman4k]

WOW. Had no idea how bad the regular blus were. THANK GOODNESS Universal did this one right.

Yes. The 4K is a massive improvement.

[Conan The Barbarian]

Originally Posted by dcx4610

Got my shipping confirmation from Best Buy on the steelbooks and due here Saturday. Probably the first time I've ever gotten a movie early. Maybe I'll have to try Best By more often.

As someone who pre ordered on day one, that irritates me lol. Maybe it’s because I’m only spending 15 dollars for the steels.

[KindredCoda]

There's only one thing that I'm annoyed by, and it's the lack of the original stereo track on these discs.

[REPLAY]

My BB Steelbooks are in UPS hands tonight. They say I should have them Sat.

[WBMakeVMarsMovieNOW]

Originally Posted by johnnyringo7

The bluray is full of artificial sharpness and EE, if we see the UHD has a higher level of detail but as it comes from the negative scan, it's totally natural. In addition, the color temperature is much more appropriate and the image retains the filmic look. The black levels are improved as well.

something does look a little odd with the UHD caps though, there are some sections where you just see many pixels the exact same color, exactso they do seem to have muddled the grain to some degree especially on some shots which is unfortunate

it does lack artificial sharpening either large or small radius and seems to have a better grading

[WBMakeVMarsMovieNOW]

Originally Posted by DJ Mike

What's with the strange colour blemishes all over the picture in certain shots like this one on the 4K?

https://caps-a-holic.com/c.php?a=1&x...&l=0&i=10&go=1

You'll have to excuse me for my red colour blindness, but it looks like lots of little pink/purple/blue flecks. Is this a result of the film stock they shot this on?

not seeing anything weird there, the UHD looks natural even for grain in that shot
a few slightly yellowish blobs maybe, but that's natural film

Originally Posted by Mark Malmstrøm

how about this

https://caps-a-holic.com/c.php?a=1&x...7&l=0&i=5&go=1

if you pan up to the sky it seems a bit unnatural on the UHD with the grain seemingly scrubbed almost totally bleh
i don't knwo why they ahve do so much crap DNR, some scenes look maybe totally fine but it looks like plenty get that nasty weird effect to one degree or another, not the worst, but far from what it should be, a shame since everything else is nearly perfect it seems most likely

the blu-ray is way sharpened and edged up, the blu has some weird processing all throughout

[johnnyringo7]

Originally Posted by WBMakeVMarsMovieNOW

something does look a little odd with the UHD caps though, there are some sections where you just see many pixels the exact same color, exactso they do seem to have muddled the grain to some degree especially on some shots which is unfortunate

it does lack artificial sharpening either large or small radius and seems to have a better grading

Didn't notice that.