Oblivion 4K UHD (2013)

[FilmFreakosaurus]

Originally Posted by MisterXDTV

I will never understand why studios are killing this format by forcing upscales and HDR re-grading on us when not needed...

Just give us the original DI/DCP as it was!

For consumer video gear, you need HDR in order to get a closer reproduction of the professional DI/DCP.

For decades we were getting only a fragment of the professional level of the bit depth, color, contrast, etc. of the source material.

[MisterXDTV]

Originally Posted by FilmFreakosaurus

For consumer video gear, you need HDR in order to get a closer reproduction of the professional DI/DCP.

For decades we were getting only a fragment of the professional level of the bit depth, color, contrast, etc. of the source material.

What? HDR is not part of the DCI specs at all. And theatrical HDR didn't exist until May 2015.

Wide Color Gamut has NOTHING to do with HDR. Oblivion is a 2013 movie never intended for HDR. I want it on disc that way, as close as possible to the original theatrical file

I watch movies on one of the biggest screens on the planet (30 meters wide x 16.2 meters tall) with a double Christie 4K projector with NO HDR at all..

Are you telling me i'm getting a sub-par experience at that theater too??

[FilmFreakosaurus]

Originally Posted by MisterXDTV

What? HDR is not part of the DCI specs at all. And theatrical HDR didn't exist until May 2015.

Wide Color Gamut has NOTHING to do with HDR. Oblivion is a 2013 movie never intended for HDR. I want it on disc that way, as close as possible to the original theatrical file

I watch movies on one of the biggest screens on the planet (30 meters wide x 16.2 meters tall) with a double Christie 4K projector with NO HDR at all..

Are you telling me i'm getting a sub-par experience at that theater too??

HDR in terms of consumer video equipment. Now, visual reproduction is starting to expand past the commercial cinema since even front projection can only reproduce so much of what the camera picked up originally due to its very nature.

You have pro level cameras that capture 14 or more stops of dynamic range and, for example, consumer gear could normally display about 5! Not any more.

[MisterXDTV]

Originally Posted by FilmFreakosaurus

HDR in terms of consumer video equipment. Now, visual reproduction is starting to expand past the commercial cinema since even front projection can only reproduce so much of what the camera picked up originally due to its very nature.

You have pro level cameras that capture 14 or more stops of dynamic range and, for example, consumer gear could normally display about 5! Not any more.

So based on what you are saying: movies now will be meant to be seen on home flat panels and not in theaters because of this HDR nonsense?

I don't think film-makers make movies for home TV screens and i hope they never do.

[FilmFreakosaurus]

Originally Posted by MisterXDTV

So based on what you are saying: movies now will be meant to be seen on home flat panels and not in theaters because of this HDR nonsense?

I don't think film-makers make movies for home TV screens and i hope they never do.

They make them for both mediums. However, many filmmakers like the wider HDR grading due to the color range, deeper blacks, solid midtones, and more detailed specular highlighting. Things that looked over or underexposed, but weren't, no longer have to be reproduced that way. More latitude.

[Dom6918]

Confused by all of your complaints over the PQ. Looks stunning on my JS9500 (i have the BDR too). The ATMOS soundtrack is also impeccable - its a standout disc for a great movie with a beautiful M83 score.

[AllOuttaBubbleGum]

Originally Posted by Geoff D

I took delivery of the Oblivion HD Blu-ray just today but this is also due to the lottery of SDR conversion re: re-graded HDR movies on my set-up, I'm fed up with all the chopping and changing of settings whereas new HDR movies are much more consistent. (I also rebought the 1080p Blu of Lucy a few weeks ago for the same reason)

I'm a little out of my depth on this, but you're re-buying a few early titles because of problematic conversion back to standard dynamic range and color space on your set? Were there any other issues with the Lucy transfer? I think I saw one complaint about over-saturated, over manipulated color in a different thread... Is the blu-ray otherwise competitive with the 4K in terms of resolution given your screen's size, etc.?

[Geoff D]

Originally Posted by AllOuttaBubbleGum

I'm a little out of my depth on this, but you're re-buying a few early titles because of problematic conversion back to standard dynamic range and color space on your set? Were there any other issues with the Lucy transfer? I think I saw one complaint about over-saturated, over manipulated color in a different thread... Is the blu-ray otherwise competitive with the 4K in terms of resolution given your screen's size, etc.?

I've no problems with Lucy specifically, what I'm saying is that I'm giving ALL catalogue HDR do-overs a wide berth until I get a proper HDR TV (my current one can do WCG but not HDR). Star Trek '09 had incredibly undersaturated highlights so I had to turn the dynamic range conversion right up from my 'standard' level to bring it back, whereas Ghostbusters II had to be turned right down from my 'standard' level as the highlights were horribly blown out. I think part of the problem is that existing movies don't have as much dynamic range to play with as something made/mastered with HDR in mind from the get-go, so the range that's there is being spread very thinly across the HDR signal and it's ****ing with my SDR conversion big time.

Yeah, people say "why don't you get the UHD and you can always play the HD in the meantime" but given the price difference (got Oblivion and Lucy for £6 each, but the UHDs are minimum £20) I'd rather keep my powder dry. [edit] Atmos isn't a driving factor either, I've given it a try as best I can with a new amp and some front heights but it's made very little difference. Besides, as Paul said, much of this HDR business is still up in the air so I'm more inclined than ever to sit it out re: upgrading my TV until the manufacturers, studios and calibration standards are all singing from the same hymn sheet.

So, that just leaves new UHD titles because they're mastered with much greater consistency, or are at least consistent enough to not require me ramping the SDR conversion up or down each time using the SDR Blu-ray as a guide which, like a steering wheel attached to my groin, drives me nuts.

[moviemike4]

It is true through my experience that some 1080p movies do look better than some 4k version, On Ef9500 oled deadpool looks much better in hdr 4k compared to 1080p ,deadpool was also shot in 4k oblivion was shot in 2k , i don't buy any more UHD movies anymore that were shot in 2k . Note if you have a high end tv that has a deep color setting it is going to handle hdr a bit better .

[MisterXDTV]

Originally Posted by Geoff D

So, that just leaves new UHD titles because they're mastered with much greater consistency, or are at least consistent enough to not require me ramping the SDR conversion up or down each time using the SDR Blu-ray as a guide which, like a steering wheel attached to my groin, drives me nuts.

Exactly, and i find this ironic: before this format came out i thought it would give us the best experience with catalog titles because of the "native" 4K (2160p) resolution. But in practice, it's just the opposite: this format seems to work best with new releases especially those that were graded for HDR from the beginning. Based on this, right now I would consider only these for UHD-BD:

- Movies with HDR grading from the start (Dolby Vision since May 2015)
- Movies shot digitally with native 4K DI. At least 3.4K source (but I would fear the HDR re-grading)
- Movies shot on large format film 8/35, 65mm, IMAX 65mm (but I would REALLY fear the HDR re-grading)

These conditions basically make more than a century of movie history worthless on the new format.

[Doctorossi]

Originally Posted by MisterXDTV

These conditions basically make more than a century of movie history worthless on the new format.

The capability of the format to serve that history well is definitely there- it just needs to be thoughtfully approached and well-implemented in practice and, to date, that is a rare exception to the rule.

[MisterXDTV]

Originally Posted by Doctorossi

The capability of the format to serve that history well is definitely there- it just needs to be thoughtfully approached and well-implemented in practice and, to date, that is a rare exception to the rule.

The capability WAS there, but studios have clearly decided otherwise with unnecessary HDR re-gradings and/or upscales

[Doctorossi]

Originally Posted by MisterXDTV

The capability WAS there, but studios have clearly decided otherwise with unnecessary HDR re-gradings and/or upscales

It's still there in the format, itself. There were a lot of pan & scan discs released in the early days of DVD, but that didn't prevent the format being a great destination for movies well-presented in their original aspect ratios. The same thing applies here: just because one distributor applies an inappropriate HDR re-grade to an older title doesn't mean that all of them will.

[tenia]

Originally Posted by MisterXDTV

Exactly, and I find this ironic: before this format came out I thought it would give us the best experience with catalog titles because of the "native" 4K (2160p) resolution. But in practice, it's just the opposite: this format seems to work best with new releases especially those that were graded for HDR from the beginning.

I believe UHD has 2 interesting ways of being used :
- The resolution uptake which, well, just is what it is. And indeed, it should be of best use with film-shot catalog titles scanned (and if possible) restored in 4K. In these cases, I don’t believe HDR should matter. Just give us a disc with a closer approximation of the 4K restoration. Don’t release Star Wars Episode II on UHD. Release My Fair Lady or Spartacus instead.

- Very recent movies with HDR-native grading (or, in the worst case, HDR-UHD grading made by the DoP as an addition photography step). I’ve read recently that regular people, when placed in a “blind test” of a 1080p VS 2160p screen (46” IIRC, which is a tad small for that), don’t perceive the difference in resolution, whereas the Wide Color Gamut and the HDR have a much more easily perceived consumer aspect. It probably explains why the studios progressively rerouted their main selling arguments from “hey, it’s more detailed !” to “hey, it has better colors and deeper contrast !”. It also goes with some CES feedback saying that people were more impressed by Full HD OLED screens than by LED 4K/UHD ones. Again : it’s more a color/contrast question than a resolution one. It actually helps the current industry since very recent movies still aren’t 100% done at 4K (only Fincher’s Gone Girl is 100% 4K from shooting to post-prod to DI, but that came with a price of a tremendously DIY on-stage setup – plus it’s Fincher, the guy who had RED making him a custom camera just for him).

The issue to me lies in... everything in the middle. Why releasing movies such as The Lego Movie, Mad Max Fury Road or Creed on UHD since they weren’t even shot in 4K and weren’t graded with HDR in mind ? It’s basically the updated move of taking an SD master, encoding it in 1080p with xvYCC and say “Hey ! It’s in HD with extended colors !”.

[Geoff D]

Oh, don't mistake my words for an anti-HDR feeling, it's purely for technical reasons that I'm avoiding these HDR do-overs, not an ideological crusade.

BUT it'd be nice if any SDR UHDs carry the wider gamut encoding, as SDR 2020 is fully part of the UHD Blu spec and SDR movies are graded using P3 or custom LUTs as it is. It won't provide the full mansion experience but it's a shame that some of the SDR stuff seen so far is 709. I guess the problem with extant home video masters is that they won't have WCG by default, having already undergone a 709 trim pass.

[ray0414]

Sorry this is off topic to the movie at hand, but the topic of hdr I recently brought up in the Huntsman Winter War thread, where a movie not shot with hdr in mind, blew the directors mind when it came time to grade for hdr after the fact. He went from hdr doubter to true believer. And while the director believes the best place to experience a movie is the theater, the best VERSION of his VISION is the hdr version.



https://www.avforums.com/article/int...s-troyan.12854



.....Yes I was and you know it’s funny, at first I wasn’t that keen on the idea of High Dynamic Range. I was thinking is this just going to be a waste of my time? But when I saw it I was blown away, it looked incredible. In fact in some ways it looked better than the version we graded for the cinema release. So I went into the grading suite an HDR doubter and came out a true believer, I was completely stoked! After that I agreed to go on some panels for Universal to help promote Ultra HD and HDR because I was so impressed. Although I still think that the cinema is the best place to see a film, there’s no doubt that in some respects the home video experience is becoming even better. I think the 4K HDR version of The Huntsman is the best representation of our vision of what the film should look like.




Q: Do you think that the introduction of HDR will affect how you shoot your next film?

A: Definitely, in fact I was just talking about that with my director of photography Phedon (Papamichael) and we both agreed that there is greater potential now than ever, not just in terms of the cinema release but also for home video. We can now show more of what we actually captured on set in the HDR grade and that’s very exciting.

[Geoff D]

Tenia: it's not just a progressive thing re: the resolution or lack thereof because the studios and the BDA knew years ago that the resolution upgrade alone wasn't enough to sell 4K Blu. This is what tickles me when folks outside of this forum section start ragging on upscales like they're going to kill the format or that you'll never see certain movies on UHD because they're 2K, whereas the simple fact is that upscales will continue to form the bulk of UHD's new/recent releases for some time yet. As long as they're done as transparently as possible, I don't have a problem with that.

As for movies like Lego and Fury Road, they were recent enough to have been captured with plenty of dynamic range which was then preserved throughout the mastering process (e.g. Lego used ACES and they also used HDR photography tools when doing the textures for backgrounds), so they respond on my SDR set-up like any "new" HDR movie would and I don't care what anyone says: Lego looks utterly spectacular with the WCG and expanded dynamic range, even with the limited amount of the latter that I can discern on my TV. (Example of which is here, albeit for BvS: https://forum.blu-ray.com/showpost.p...&postcount=847)

[Opips3]

Originally Posted by Geoff D

Tenia: it's not just a progressive thing re: the resolution or lack thereof because the studios and the BDA knew years ago that the resolution upgrade alone wasn't enough to sell 4K Blu. This is what tickles me when folks outside of this forum section start ragging on upscales like they're going to kill the format or that you'll never see certain movies on UHD because they're 2K, whereas the simple fact is that upscales will continue to form the bulk of UHD's new/recent releases for some time yet. As long as they're done as transparently as possible, I don't have a problem with that.

As for movies like Lego and Fury Road, they were recent enough to have been captured with plenty of dynamic range which was then preserved throughout the mastering process (e.g. Lego used ACES and they also used HDR photography tools when doing the textures for backgrounds), so they respond on my SDR set-up like any "new" HDR movie would and I don't care what anyone says: Lego looks utterly spectacular with the WCG and expanded dynamic range, even with the limited amount of the latter that I can discern on my TV. (Example of which is here, albeit for BvS: https://forum.blu-ray.com/showpost.p...&postcount=847)

Yeah yeah I heard you!

I just buy UHD Bluray to my HDTV was 1080p. I think look good picture. I stick audiophile for Atmos and DTS:X give me pleasure than sex.

[imsounoriginal]

Originally Posted by Opips3

Yeah yeah I heard you!

I just buy UHD Bluray to my HDTV was 1080p. I think look good picture. I stick audiophile for Atmos and DTS:X give me pleasure than sex.

Best post ever, by far lmao

[MisterXDTV]

Originally Posted by Doctorossi

It's still there in the format, itself. There were a lot of pan & scan discs released in the early days of DVD, but that didn't prevent the format being a great destination for movies well-presented in their original aspect ratios. The same thing applies here: just because one distributor applies an inappropriate HDR re-grade to an older title doesn't mean that all of them will.

One distributor? Every major studio that has commited to UHD BD is making HDR mandatory for the format: Warner, Universal, Paramount, Fox and Sony. If you want you can also add Lionsgate to the list (I don't consider it a major studio).

As usual Sony uses a very gentle touch because they are the best in the home video business. I trust them far more than the others