Still not convinced

[reanimator]

Originally Posted by 42041

Do you mean rec709 as opposed to some HDR format like Dolby Vision, or the standard DCI color space?
I'm unaware of a movie that is Dolby Vision exclusive but if there was such a movie, SDR would certainly be the "incorrect" flavor.

Docrossi was talking about what is "accurate to the theatrical release." I'm pointing out that rec709 is not accurate to the theatrical release.

[Doctorossi]

Originally Posted by bruceames.

Sorry I meant the color space. HDR uses the wider color space and 10 bit doesn't it? And so it's not limited to rec709.

Yes, but that's true of almost all modern movies, HDR or not.

[Doctorossi]

Originally Posted by reanimator

Docrossi was talking about what is "accurate to the theatrical release." I'm pointing out that rec709 is not accurate to the theatrical release.

It is, however, aiming for "as accurate to the theatrical release as the technology allows", not for something intentionally different.

That's the biggest frustration for me- the 10-bit color that UHD offers means no such compromise is necessary and the theatrical grade could be reproduced perfectly. Meanwhile, the industry is racing off in another direction, instead.

[MisterXDTV]

Originally Posted by reanimator

Docrossi was talking about what is "accurate to the theatrical release." I'm pointing out that rec709 is not accurate to the theatrical release.

Accurate doesn't necessarily mean an exact copy of the theatrical file....

It means as close as possible to the theatrical release. A Blu-ray with an SDR grade is FAR more accurate than a HDR re-graded UHD Blu-ray....

[42041]

Originally Posted by reanimator

Docrossi was talking about what is "accurate to the theatrical release." I'm pointing out that rec709 is not accurate to the theatrical release.

Comparing a relatively small difference in potential color saturation to a huge difference in luminance, dynamic range and overall "look" is just being pedantic. For almost all meaningful purposes, rec709 can accurately capture DCP colors.

[pawel86ck]

it's supposed to be because they've converted that SDR movie into HDR.

Doctorossi@ I dont know how HDR conversion looks like, but it's hard to imagine, that film studios are adding nonexistent details. HDR is not simple contrast boost, HDR include real details in white or dark areas.

HDR dosnt looks like that


But more like that


Ray0414 have included spider man UHD pictures, and even on these phone pictures I could easly see, that UHD picture had actual details in areas, that were blowout on BD picture. Also reviews mention the same thing. Without actual picture details in the original source materials, I doubt they could add something like that.

[42041]

Originally Posted by pawel86ck

Without actual picture details in the original materials, how they could add something like that?

Both film negatives and electronic sensors capture much more dynamic range than typically ends up on a cinema screen. This information exists, it just wasn't necessarily "meant" to be seen.

[dvdmike]

Originally Posted by reanimator

Docrossi was talking about what is "accurate to the theatrical release." I'm pointing out that rec709 is not accurate to the theatrical release.

Can you prove that?
And not by quoting specs about colour and light levels.

[pawel86ck]

Both film negatives and electronic sensors capture much more dynamic range than ends up on a cinema screen. This information exists, it just wasn't necessarily "meant" to be seen.

The same with DVD and BD's. Resolution information exsisted, and so it was possible to make BD movies with much higher resolution. Because of that resolution increase sometimes you could also see things, that wasn't necessarily "meant" to be seen as you said. For example wires in some older films. Because wires are visible on HD, they even applying "fixes" that would make wires disappear.

[ray0414]

I like this illustration

[reanimator]

Originally Posted by Doctorossi

Meanwhile, the industry is racing off in another direction, instead.

It's actually not, Doc. The industry is all moving in the same direction: high dynamic range.

The reason you have comparatively few theatrical films graded in HDR is that there are comparatively few movie theaters that are capable of projecting HDR. As you know, that is changing with Dolby Cinemas and laser projection. In the future, HDR will be the norm in theaters -- not the exception.

In the meantime, many movies that want an HDR theatrical release won't get them -- for no other reason than HDR capable auditoriums are still rare. It's nearly impossible for movies like JOY or BROOKLYN to get an HDR theatrical release when FORCE AWAKENS and REVENANT have booked literally all the HDR capable theaters in the world. What are we to make of "filmmakers intent" in those cases? Yes, the UHD-BD will have an HDR grade that was not shown in theaters -- but the reason for that has less to do with artistic intent than you probably realize.

[42041]

Originally Posted by ray0414

I like this illustration

I have nothing against HDR conceptually. I think it's a great idea - though the current UHD implementation seems half-baked.
But the idea that studios are going to use it to give "old" movies a radical makeover and there being no way to properly undo this process is frightening if you care about accuracy.

[bruceames]

Originally Posted by 42041

I have nothing against HDR conceptually. I think it's a great idea - though the current UHD implementation seems half-baked.
But the idea that studios are going to use it to give "old" movies a radical makeover and there being no way to properly undo this process is frightening if you care about accuracy.

Fox has gone on record as saying they won't regrade in HDR without the filmmaker's approval (although that statement apparently isn't good enough for some around here, who seem to require written consent by director/producer/cinematographer in every movie), so I don't think the intent is as malicious as that.

[ray0414]

Originally Posted by 42041

I have nothing against HDR conceptually. I think it's a great idea - though the current UHD implementation seems half-baked.
But the idea that studios are going to use it to give "old" movies a radical makeover and there being no way to properly undo this process is frightening if you care about accuracy.

Catelog titles are optional for everyone. You don't have to buy it if you don't want to.

The format is about moving forward into the future. Now that 4k hdr is here, directors and film makers now have the tools moving forward and know what to expect.

I've been impressed with the 4k hdr shows on amazon, probably because they knew they were getting hdr treatment and we're using 4k+ cameras too. Hopefully the format forces the studios to stop being cheap and lazy and do everything right and create the 4k masters for all content moving forward.

[mar3o]

Originally Posted by Geoff D

But then I am the lone kook who still enjoys watching a well-mastered DVD on his TV in the year 2016 AD.

Considering DVDs still outsell blu-rays, apparently you're certainly not alone.

I don't mind watching a DVD if a proper blu-ray release isn't available. I'd prefer the blu-ray of course, as long as the image hasn't been drastically altered for the worse (like adding teal or orange).

[Penton-Man]

Originally Posted by ray0414

I like this illustration

I like these philosophical discussions ….reminds me of the endless (for years) film vs. digital capture debates.

[Penton-Man]

Originally Posted by 42041

....But the idea that studios are going to use it to give "old" movies a radical makeover and there being no way to properly undo this process is frightening if you care about accuracy.

Are filmmakers like Francis Ford Coppola allowed to further express themselves? Reference first paragraph….https://forum.blu-ray.com/showthread...s#post11886241

People liked what they saw at CES.

[Penton-Man]

Originally Posted by ray0414

Catelog titles are optional for everyone. You don't have to buy it if you don't want to....

That common sense sentiment can not be overstated.

[clemdog]

Fox has gone on record as saying they won't regrade in HDR without the filmmaker's approval (although that statement apparently isn't good enough for some around here, who seem to require written consent by director/producer/cinematographer in every movie), so I don't think the intent is as malicious as that.

All these films recently released on 4K discs are relatively new releases and the film makers ARE involved.

Anyone who thinks any of these studios are releasing these without the film makers approving the "look" of the final masters is badly misinformed...

No studio is just spinning knobs and adding colors on a whim. That's not how this works. It's not how any of this works.

[ray0414]

Seems to be conflicting reports on avs about the orange/red flare in mad max. Some are saying it's red on their hdr tv and others say orange. Some are saying that if some do see red, that means that the ones seeing orange probably have a P3 color out of whack.