4K Movies Releases

[Penton-Man]

Originally Posted by Penton-Man

This larger pic illustrates a nice relaxing job ....at least for the shader (that’s the job description term we use in the biz) seated on the left.




For as you can see, he’s enjoying life relatively stress free , leaning back with arms folded in front enjoying the event, whereas the shader on the right is busy tinkering with all dem dials and buttons, rigid seating position, etc. Because for one thing, ‘lefty’ is dealing with ST 2084 which is reversible whereas with ‘righty’, knee and Rec. 709 is being constantly adjusted per situation and often is not reversible.

From there ^ , viewers in close quarters realtime assessing for the resultant picture quality here….




Note: Far left is the HDR feed. Far right the SDR feed. Pic snapped in haste with a cheap camera.

[ADWyatt]

The truly odd thing about Blu-ray.com is that there are two rooms pertaining exclusively to new 4k disc releases, and neither one of them is any good. When a person accesses these areas for the purpose of finding out what's soon to be released, he has to scroll through seemingly-endless pages of totally unrelated information to try to find what he's looking for.

And in that light, I'd like to dedicate Blu-ray.com to Donald Trump. Why? Because the more critical a person is of a policy that makes zero sense, the more resistant fanatical followers become. As such, there will never be a proper policy, followed by all, that will rule this forum. But here's a suggestion...

Make one of these rooms purely a new and impending release area, which only the moderators can enter, and rename the other room into something more appropriate. Will that actually happen? No. Instead, Trump-style, the suggestion will be met by the usual flurry of insults, with no one engaging in common sense, assuming they have the ability to do so in the first place.

[Geoff D]

Dude, the format's only been officially out for a few weeks, every thread's bound to be a bit of a cluster**** of opinions (informed or otherwise), settings, experiences etc at this early stage.

[ray0414]

Originally Posted by Geoff D

Dude, the format's only been officially out for a few weeks, every thread's bound to be a bit of a cluster**** of opinions (informed or otherwise), settings, experiences etc at this early stage.

The good reviews keep coming out about that panasonic tv..you better get your preorder ready!

[puddy77]

Originally Posted by Penton-Man

Switching off the next gen parameter of HDR for a moment….
‘Real’ 4K, many seem preoccupied with ‘real’ 4K movies, e.g. ‘I don’t want no stinkin upscales, etc. I want my 4K ‘pure’. Nothing wrong with that but since the preoccupation with rez, can anyone list all the cameras (digital) which actually qualify as having enough resolving power to produce a ‘real’ 4K image in 4:2:2 sampling? Or if that seems too demanding, just name the camera which qualifies for 4K 4:4:4 (Stacey, keep quiet).

Originally Posted by Penton-Man

Need a little help? She’s holding one from on the list…..

[Show spoiler]

Originally Posted by Penton-Man

I’m restricting the real 4K camera list challenge to digital motion picture cameras as we’ve already been through determining (beyond urban myths) the max resolution of film back in the day…. https://forum.blu-ray.com/showthread...t#post10326202

P.S.
I realize this challenge isn’t quite as exciting as comparing the per cent coverage of the DCI P3 color spectrum between different UHD/4K consumer TVs, i.e. this one has 94%....this one has 95%, but for at least non-VFX content, I think everyone interested in 4K does want their ‘real’ 4K, don’t they?....and that starts from the acquisition.

Penton, are you saying that the Sony F65 is the only "real 4k camera"? Could you elaborate? Do the raw formats of Arri and Red not count? Or are you referring to the oversampling of pixels to be converted down to a "real" 4k 4:4:4 image? Would the new Red 8k sensor then also count? And what about the Arri Alexa 65?

[Fritz]

A question for you folks that know more about this stuff than I do. Some of the recent Blu-ray releases that used a 4k scan, the Universal Classic Monsters box set, Halloween etc....will these be easier for studios to convert to UHD? Would they just use the original scan since it's 4k?

[Adrian Wright]

Originally Posted by ADWyatt

No. Instead, Trump-style, the suggestion will be met by the usual flurry of insults, with no one engaging in common sense, assuming they have the ability to do so in the first place.

Check out the Still not convinced thread, cowboys and indians in there. Proper Wild West

Learn to use the ignore list Wyatt, makes it A LOT easier round here

[dvdmike]

Originally Posted by Adrian Wright

Check out the Still not convinced thread, cowboys and indians in there. Proper Wild West

Learn to use the ignore list Wyatt, makes it A LOT easier round here

It sure does

[Geoff D]

Originally Posted by dvdmike

It sure does

Doesn't help when people quote them though

[Penton-Man]

Originally Posted by puddy77

[/SPOILER]
Penton, are you saying that the Sony F65 is the only "real 4k camera"? Could you elaborate? Do the raw formats of Arri and Red not count? Or are you referring to the oversampling of pixels to be converted down to a "real" 4k 4:4:4 image? Would the new Red 8k sensor then also count? And what about the Arri Alexa 65?

I’m referring to the lack of oversampling and bayer pattern sensor use.

I’m saying that just because a camera is marketed as a ‘4K camera’ because it has a 4K sensor, that doesn’t qualify it (e.g. the Sony F55 and lesser known ‘4K’ cameras like the Red Scarlet MX, Blackmagic Ursa, Varicam35, Canon C300 mark II) as capturing real 4K resolution. They are not.

The F65, the Red Dragon and the Arri Alexa 65 would make the list.

[Penton-Man]

Originally Posted by Fritz

A question for you folks that know more about this stuff than I do. Some of the recent Blu-ray releases that used a 4k scan, the Universal Classic Monsters box set, Halloween etc....will these be easier for studios to convert to UHD? Would they just use the original scan since it's 4k?

Geoff, mike, help the guy out.

[Penton-Man]

Originally Posted by Adrian Wright

Wild West....

Covered that with Inside knowledge - https://forum.blu-ray.com/showthread...n#post11913029
Given the current real 4K camera query, that ^ definitely would not qualify as real 4K original acquisition.

[ray0414]

Originally Posted by Penton-Man

I’m referring to the lack of oversampling and bayer pattern sensor use.

I’m saying that just because a camera is marketed as a ‘4K camera’ because it has a 4K sensor, that doesn’t qualify it (e.g. the Sony F55 and lesser known ‘4K’ cameras like the Red Scarlet MX, Blackmagic Ursa, Varicam35, Canon C300 mark II) as capturing real 4K resolution. They are not.

The F65, the Red Dragon and the Arri Alexa 65 would make the list.

Thats interesting.

I've seen some excellent video shot with the F55 and they looked about as 4k as I've ever seen.

According to imbd.com, the blacklist is shot with the f55, and season 1 on Netflix in 4k is one of the best looking 4k shows I've seen. So I've got no problem watching F55 shot content

[Penton-Man]

Originally Posted by ray0414

I've seen some excellent video shot with the F55...

No argument there .

[Wendell R. Breland]

Originally Posted by ray0414

I've seen some excellent video shot with the F55 and they looked about as 4k as I've ever seen.

If you compared the F55 to the F65 you would probably see the difference between the two. Some info here. Please note there is no mention of depth of modulation transfers in this article. Also note all these cameras are Bayer type sensors (1 sensor) as opposed to 3 sensors used in most professional studio cameras (1920 x 1080). Have not looked into 4K studio cameras yet.

I’ve seen content shot with a Sony Handycam FDR-AX1 (≈ $5000.00) that looked better than many A title movies in terms of color and detail. Best guess, movies are processed to the extreme. Another problem with many movies of recent years is the use of handheld cameras. When that lens is moving spatial resolution goes out the window (but what the heck, they save a lot of money).

[Geoff D]

But even when using a camera with a Bayer pattern, having a larger and greatly oversampled sensor shooting 6K or 8K will still boil down to what people would call a "true" 4K image once it's been debayered etc, hence the inclusion of the Alexa 65 and the RED Weapon in Penton's little list above. [edit] And the F65 has a unique layout on its CMOS sensor so while it's not the all-hallowed triple-chip solution for RGB it's got double the density of the average 4K Bayer array. (But as you say Wendell, there's no accounting for what happens to the image during the grade!)

In other words they're still capturing enough data over and above 4K, allowing the source to be reduced to an output that has both the spatial and chroma resolution to really count as "true 4K". I think.

[Wendell R. Breland]

Originally Posted by Geoff D

In other words they're still capturing enough data over and above 4K, allowing the source to be reduced to an output that has both the spatial and chroma resolution to really count as "true 4K". I think.

I have no doubt content shot 16-bit linear RAW on the F65 is outstanding in 4K but by the time the finished product is delivered it may be underwhelming .

[Geoff D]

Sure, as I said in my edit to that post there's no accounting for what the final graded product will look like.

[Wendell R. Breland]

From the Digital Bits (article here)

I was shown side by side comparisons of Deadpool, The Revenant, and Ice Age: Collision Course in regular 1080p HD without HDR and then full 4K with HDR, each uncompressed and on the same model monitor. The difference in each case was striking, although it’s important to note that the color timing pass done for each is often very different – either done by different people or simply at different times. The Revenant is a perfect example of this – the color timing pass for the regular HD version was done first and then the 4K pass followed, by different grading technicians, though I should also note that cinematographer Emmanuel Lubezki (aka “Chivo”) was involved in and approved each. Still, the result is that color timing is noticeably different for each version of the film. How then does one compare the two? It’s difficult.

IOW, what goes in has little resemblance to what comes out

[Penton-Man]

Originally Posted by Penton-Man

Heads-up, not EOTF nor OETF ( https://www.smpte.org/sites/default/...-2-handout.pdf ) but a new acronym in regards to HDR for Blu-Dog to learn, namely….OOTF, bookmark it .....

Originally Posted by Penton-Man

Work progresses.....

in mike’s favorite format ….https://www.itu.int/pub/R-REP-BT.2390-2016