Superman: The Movie 4K UHD (1978)

[vjo81]

Originally Posted by slimdude

Don't feel bad or left out because, you're missing anything spectacular! I have DV on my OLED, along with the Oppo 203 and to be honest, DV looks good, but It's not all that as people claimed it to be. To me, DV is over praised. When I've first seen DV, I wasn't that impressed by it. It didn't give me the WOW factor, compared to HDR. HDR still look very good, but the difference between DV and HDR isn't night and day. Whenever you get DV equipped, you may not be able to tell that big of a difference. Never mind about the technical specification of DV because numbers doesn't mean nothing! it's all based on what the person can see with their own eyes, the same as for Dolby and DTS comparisons, it's all based on what a person can hear. People have an tendency to overexaggerate to make things seems better than it really is but IMO, it's the same way with DV. Whether if it's DV, HDR, HDR-10 etc, it's still 4K.

It's a very individual thing. Some movies look better in DV, others in HDR10 and there are those where there's little difference. I generally prefer DV. As an example. Mamma Mia 2 on both my Oppo-203 and Panny UB820 looks very good but on both players the DV verision, at least to me, is reference quality. It's brighter, has more accurate colors and skin tones and no blown highlights at all. The Last Jedi is bit darker in HDR10 but colors are better saturated and jump a bit more. The DV version can come very close with an increase in color and a slight decrease in brightness. At the end of the day a disc spinner that can do HDR10 and DV is, for a lot of us, a must have. Choices are always good. I have a Sony X800 which, even though it's an excellent device, has, due it's lack of DV, been consigned to a bedroom.

[pino]

Reports are coming in that the Superman-The Movie 4K US release contains the 2011 theatrical Blu-ray (143 minutes) and the 4K UK release contains the 2011 Special Edition Blu-ray (151 minutes).

The UK release has the 2011 Special Edition blu-ray, but with a different menu screen and several extras now missing, but definitely the 151 minutes version of the film.

Source: Capedwonder

[RalphoR]

s4gyvt.jpg

[Bourne1886]

I was never happy with the transfer on Blu-ray, finally we’ve got a good one.

[Bourne1886]

Originally Posted by pino

Source: Capedwonder

Wonder why that is? I’ll check my copy tomorrow (Amazon reckon it’s being delivered tomorrow) and confirm.

Amazon description says it’s the theatrical on both discs and remastered Blu-ray Disc!?

[Mierzwiak]

People still judge contrast on UHD disc based on screens converted to SDR?

[JohnCarpenterFan]

Pretty silly to seriously compare SDR mastered content to SDR conversions of a HDR source. I don't know how many UHDs look dull and flat on CAH's SDR conversions that look bright and vibrant with more contrast when actually viewing in HDR.

The reason some never noticed the "egregious" contrast on the Blu-ray is because it isn't egregious at all despite there being some clipping. The UHD when viewed on a HDR capable set is going to have a lot more contrast compared to those caps.

Caps are only useful when the person viewing them takes a lot of other factors into consideration, especially when viewing SDR conversions.

[ray0414]

Originally Posted by Agent Kay

Y'all got any shots of superman in your superman comparison

Times 1000. Who are these dolts?

[KubrickKurasawa]

Originally Posted by Mierzwiak

People still judge contrast on UHD disc based on screens converted to SDR?

Nah man...beer goggles.

[Croweyes1121]

Originally Posted by JohnCarpenterFan

Pretty silly to seriously compare SDR mastered content to SDR conversions of a HDR source. I don't know how many UHDs look dull and flat on CAH's SDR conversions that look bright and vibrant with more contrast when actually viewing in HDR.

I agree. This is actually the whole point of my post.

Originally Posted by JohnCarpenterFan

The reason some never noticed the "egregious" contrast on the Blu-ray is because it isn't egregious at all despite there being some clipping. The UHD when viewed on a HDR capable set is going to have a lot more contrast compared to those caps.

I disagree with the first point here. There is a *lot* of detail loss due to overcooked contrast on the old transfer. You don’t lose that entire front license plate to a white blob without that being the case. And yes, I’m aware that a proper HDR presentation is going to increase the punch of the colors, but if the contrast increase is so dramatic that you’re losing that much detail to highlights, I’d say you’re doing HDR wrong. My overall point is, with this level of detail *as a base*, the UHD is *clearly and inarguably* more natural than the blu-ray ever was. I stand by that statement, as I’m sure I still will once I see this 4K disc on my E6.

Originally Posted by JohnCarpenterFan

Caps are only useful when the person viewing them takes a lot of other factors into consideration, especially when viewing SDR conversions.

Factors you’re apparently assuming I’m *not* taking into account. I am. I’m only pointing out that the new transfer contains more detail, is more natural, and gets rid of the contrast-boosting clearly present on the blu-ray. Viewing this with more vibrant colors and proper color space isn’t going to magically change that assessment or make the blu-ray look any better.

[Geoff D]

Yes, but we didn't know that X old Blu was boosted to balls without a frame of reference. If SDR is all we've known then the traits of that visual system won't warrant a second glance, but once you get used to HDR these things can become amazingly obvious.

[imsounoriginal]

Originally Posted by pino

Source: Capedwonder

If UK got the longer cut then I'll import.

[Croweyes1121]

Originally Posted by imsounoriginal

If UK got the longer cut then I'll import.

The 4K disc is the theatrical version, both in the US and in the UK. It's the blu-ray that's (apparently) different. If anything, it's more of a selling point to get the theatrical version in this release over the 151-minute cut on blu-ray, as the theatrical has only been available on blu to this point in the box set.

[Croweyes1121]

Originally Posted by Geoff D

Yes, but we didn't know that X old Blu was boosted to balls without a frame of reference. If SDR is all we've known then the traits of that visual system won't warrant a second glance, but once you get used to HDR these things can become amazingly obvious.

Yep, exactly. The new disc looks simply outstanding. Cannot wait to check this out.

[motorheadache95]

Originally Posted by Croweyes1121

The 4K disc is the theatrical version, both in the US and in the UK. It's the blu-ray that's (apparently) different. If anything, it's more of a selling point to get the theatrical version in this release over the 151-minute cut on blu-ray, as the theatrical has only been available on blu to this point in the box set.

Yeah I misread that post above, and for a minute my mind was literally going "Dare I... dare I buy BOTH?" Well I saved some money anyway

[Croweyes1121]

Originally Posted by motorheadache95

Yeah I misread that post above, and for a minute my mind was literally going "Dare I... dare I buy BOTH?" Well I saved some money anyway

I had the same thought for a minute! I WOULD have bought both.

[KubrickKurasawa]

Marlon Brando in HDR tin foil suit! Lets go!

Actually I enjoy the fact that you can tell this one was filmed in the 70's.

[MisterXDTV]

.......................

[captainsolo]

FINALLY it looks like the teal is gone! For years I've been discredited for mentioning the fact that the color work on all the new masters in the Anthology box were fubar'ed (I and II theatrical, III and IV) and there were the youtube comparison videos that first brought it up.

This looks incredibly better in mostly subtle but very noticeable ways. All four Supermans have always been made to look very flat on video and it has been very hard to get away from that. The VHS looked bad, the LD looked bad, the DVD looked bad, the BD looked bad etc.

I'm dying to check this out. Why does 4K have to be so pricey? If the lossy 5.1 is indeed the 70mm mix it's very likely they already had it laying around in the digital domain somewhere.
Does it have the opening mono to stereo surround transition? If so that would indicate my long held belief that the 1990 letterboxed LD audio which so far is the best sounding version anywhere is the 70mm mix.

Originally Posted by Adam_ME

So we went from DTS HD-MA 2.0 to Dolby Digital 5.1 for the original theatrical mix?

The 2.0 is the Dolby Stereo with little to no surround information. The film was released in three formats: Dolby Stereo, Dolby Stereo 70mm and mono. Each mix was done separately at the mixing stage one at a time. I think it's silly to dump the Dolby Stereo since there's obviously the space for it and the 70mm audio should have been lossless.
And of course nobody cares about poor mono mixes. The mono for this film doesn't seem any different outside of being single channel but I've only heard samples.


Ultimately this is the FIRST and only time a video release looks like the 1978 release print. This looks damn near close to the pristine nonfaded print I saw three years ago.

[MisterXDTV]

1) 2011 BD (Director's Cut)
2) 2011 BD (Theatrical Cut)
3) 2018 UHD BD (Theatrical Cut)
4) 2017 BD (Extended TV Cut)

https://diff.pics/JTascwjgUunY/1