4K Movies Releases

[Opips3]

Originally Posted by RealorFake4K

I just found this much needed feature!


--- Back on Topic ---

It's nice to see more movies coming out in 4K in theaters! I just hope the trend continues. Some big movies coming up are Dunkirk, Sully, and Rogue One. I am sure I am missing a few more though...

Good one! If you can ingored me.

I'm good an idiot and funny guy. You enjoy out it quietly...

[MisterXDTV]

Originally Posted by puddy77

Hey MisterXDTV, what's the source on the info in that spreadsheet? While I intend to see a true 70mm Imax presentation, I'm disappointed the 4k will be created from the 35mm IP. I can only hope that the eventual UBD release will be sourced from the 8k directly.

The spreadsheet is based on Nolan's previous movies: The standard DCP has always started from a 35mm IP.....

I thought he might have used 65mm IP this time but then I realized that the DCI specs don't include 2.20:1 ratio at all.

Based on the teaser trailer, we already know that the Aspect Ratio will be scope: 2.39:1

And guess what's the only source for a 2.39:1 scope version?: yes, the 35mm final IP once again.

Nolan doesn't consider Non-IMAX digital cinema as a premium format, actually he considers it exactly like a 35mm film projection

I will keep the spreadsheet updated with new information as they come but right now I believe this is correct. I will be glad to be proven wrong....

[MisterXDTV]

Originally Posted by Geoff D

This is originally from the Interstellar site but pasted from in70mm.com re: the digital cinema version:

[edit]Reading between the lines I'd say that the digital version of Interstellar was composed of IMAX and VistaVision scanned at 8K and 35mm at 4K, so Dunkirk's DCDM should be good for 8K (or 6K minimum) from the original large format elements from start to finish.

Unfortunately that writing about the digital version of Interstellar is not exactly true: when it refers to the "color graded elements" he's talking about the 35mm IP as documented by American Cinematographer. He believes that IMAX scenes even from a 35mm reduction will give you 6K or 8K of detail anyway because of the quality of the original source but we know it's a little stretched

American Cinematographer:

FotoKem produced the 35mm ’Scope film prints, which consisted of the 35mm ’Scope camera negative, 4K visual-effects elements (filmouts) from ’Scope and VistaVision that was scanned at Warner Bros. MPI, digital ’Scope extractions from 8K Imax scans, and optical ’Scope extractions directly from the 65mm negative to a 35mm IP/IN. FotoKem also created the 2.40:1 4K DCPs from 6K/4K over-scans of the color-timed 35mm IP.

[Geoff D]

But the 35mm won't be the predominant original source this time, do you see what I'm getting at?

As for the aspect ratio, since when can't a 5/65 source simply be matted for 2.35 instead of using a stupidly convoluted route like taking it all back down to 35mm just because that's the same ratio (or at least it is once the anamorphic squeeze is forced upon it)? It just makes no sense to me.

[Geoff D]

Originally Posted by RealorFake4K

Fingers crossed! I wish more directors and studios put forth this much effort into preserving the integrity of the film/image.

On a related note... Mr. Cameron, forget about Avatar 2, 3, 4, and 5 and get back to work on restoring 'True Lies', 'The Abyss', 'Terminator', and obviously 'Piranha 2' for 4K. As I recall, T2 and Titanic have already been restored/converted for 4K and are ready for UHD.

The Terminator was restored in 4K by Lowry several years ago. It's ready to rumble, HDR aside.

[MisterXDTV]

Originally Posted by Geoff D

But the 35mm won't be the predominant original source this time, do you see what I'm getting at?

As for the aspect ratio, since when can't a 5/65 source simply be matted for 2.35 instead of using a stupidly convoluted route like taking it all back down to 35mm just because that's the same ratio (or at least it is once the anamorphic squeeze is forced upon it)? It just makes no sense to me.

Geoff, I obviously agree with you but I'm trying to think like Nolan thinks

For him: 35mm projection = Standard Digital Projection

That's my prediction. We'll see what happens

[puddy77]

Originally Posted by Geoff D

Well, due to the Blus of other Nolan movies having the switching aspect ratios they clearly weren't sourced from the fixed-aspect 4K DCDMs, so I wouldn't be too concerned.

I forgot about the BDs having dynamic aspect ratios while the DCP has a static one. So I assume they derive the home deliverables from the 65mm IP scans, not the 35mm IP scan.

Originally Posted by MisterXDTV

The spreadsheet is based on Nolan's previous movies: The standard DCP has always started from a 35mm IP.....

Thanks. I was thinking it was your assumptions based on past Nolan workflows, but wasn't sure.

[Geoff D]

Exactly right puddy, by definition the BD is not derived from the same source master as the fixed aspect DCDM, so even if the digital cinema version of Dunkirk is derived from the fully conformed 35mm IP the alternating aspect versions won't be. I think it was Riddhi who pointed out the cropping on the IMAX scenes in the BD of Interstellar versus the fixed aspect version, as if they just took the 1.90 IMAX digital master of those scenes (derived from various elements as we know) and cropped it at the sides for 1.78 viewing.

[MisterXDTV]

Originally Posted by Geoff D

Exactly right puddy, by definition the BD is not derived from the same source master as the fixed aspect DCDM, so even if the digital cinema version of Dunkirk is derived from the fully conformed 35mm IP the alternating aspect versions won't be. I think it was Riddhi who pointed out the cropping on the IMAX scenes in the BD of Interstellar versus the fixed aspect version, as if they just took the 1.90 IMAX digital master of those scenes (derived from various elements as we know) and cropped it at the sides for 1.78 viewing.

Yes, Blu-ray is not a problem because the source it's the IMAX digital version, not the standard DCP one. And this time with the advent of IMAX Laser there will be an IMAX digital version with the full uncropped 1.43:1 aspect ratio that can be used

[puddy77]

Originally Posted by MisterXDTV

Yes, Blu-ray is not a problem because the source it's the IMAX digital version, not the standard DCP one. And this time with the advent of IMAX Laser there will be an IMAX digital version with the full uncropped 1.43:1 aspect ratio that can be used

Imax Laser also brings HDR. I wonder how Nolan's going to address that?

[MisterXDTV]

Originally Posted by puddy77

Imax Laser also brings HDR. I wonder how Nolan's going to address that?

I don't think that IMAX laser supports HDR at all, I think you are mistaken

[puddy77]

Originally Posted by MisterXDTV

I don't think that IMAX laser supports HDR at all, I think you are mistaken

Yes it does. 75 nits and rec.2020.
http://www.imax.com/news/engadget-im...pricier-ticket

[MisterXDTV]

Originally Posted by puddy77

Yes it does. 75 nits and rec.2020.
http://www.imax.com/news/engadget-im...pricier-ticket

I think it's optional anyway, Nolan will never grade for HDR IMO. His movies are based on the "film" projection experience. HDR is a digital "tool"

The projectors CAN do a little HDR but that doesn't mean the digital file actually has it....

[Penton-Man]

Originally Posted by Pieter V

For discussing upcoming 4K movies:

https://forum.blu-ray.com/showthread.php?t=189830

It seems the industry constantly moves forward....https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/quant...-koichi-sampei, but I think this thread still has a lot of life left in it.

[Penton-Man]

Originally Posted by Geoff D

Londinium

“I do not criticize persons, but only a state of affairs. It is they, however, who will have to answer for defensiveness at the bar of history.”
-Liddell-Hart, 1935

^ From the Forward of Why England Slept…..https://babel.hathitrust.org/cgi/pt?...iew=1up;seq=30 , the book/thesis that is, written by some kid who was in his senior year at Harvard at the time.

[Pieter V]

Originally Posted by Penton-Man

It seems the industry constantly moves forward....https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/quant...-koichi-sampei, but I think this thread still has a lot of life left in it.

My post was merged by a mod, which links to this topic of course.

[Penton-Man]

Originally Posted by MisterXDTV

...The projectors CAN do a little HDR but that doesn't mean the digital file actually has it.

but the fact is, it has

[Kris Deering]

Originally Posted by MisterXDTV

I think it's optional anyway, Nolan will never grade for HDR IMO. His movies are based on the "film" projection experience. HDR is a digital "tool"

The projectors CAN do a little HDR but that doesn't mean the digital file actually has it....

IMAX can definitely do HDR with their newer 4K laser system. Whether a filmmaker takes advantage of it is obviously up to them.

You bring up an interesting conundrum with Nolan though. I am well aware of his love of film and film projection but in this case the film stock he is using is capable of so much more than what the actual projector can take advantage of. So in this case, the projection system is the limiting factor. So why not shoot it on the film stock and take away the film projector that is limiting its potential (and honestly this applies to more than just HDR since we all end up seeing dups that have multiple plays on them and always end up disappointing in quality).

I saw Interstellar in true IMAX 70 and The Hateful Eight in true 70 and both of them looked like ass compared to what I see from 4K digital playback at the Cinerama in Seattle. Crappy contrast, judder, inherent noise/scratches, and more. I'm all for film capture, but lets move away from the crappy film projection.

[MisterXDTV]

I wasn't saying he's right or wrong, but he's the filmmaker and he has 100% control of the final product: Nolan will always be old-fashioned it's part of his charm IMO.

He makes movies with film projection in mind, If he could, he probably wouldn't even release his movies in digital theaters. I would be shocked if he let anybody change his intended "photochemical" look for HDR, it wouldn't make any sense given his opinion of "digital cinema"

We are talking about the only director on the planet that still doesn't use a Digital Intermediate for main photography

[ray0414]

Originally Posted by Kris Deering

IMAX can definitely do HDR with their newer 4K laser system. Whether a filmmaker takes advantage of it is obviously up to them.

You bring up an interesting conundrum with Nolan though. I am well aware of his love of film and film projection but in this case the film stock he is using is capable of so much more than what the actual projector can take advantage of. So in this case, the projection system is the limiting factor. So why not shoot it on the film stock and take away the film projector that is limiting its potential (and honestly this applies to more than just HDR since we all end up seeing dups that have multiple plays on them and always end up disappointing in quality).

I saw Interstellar in true IMAX 70 and The Hateful Eight in true 70 and both of them looked like ass compared to what I see from 4K digital playback at the Cinerama in Seattle. Crappy contrast, judder, inherent noise/scratches, and more. I'm all for film capture, but lets move away from the crappy film projection.

His widescreen stuff looks like sh*t. Interstellar, dark Knight, etc. The imax stuff is all that looks good, the rest is garbage. Yellow skin tones, artifacts, grain. People aren't watching on 32" tvs anymore. These bigger tvs are more sensitive to that stuff.