Sony "Mastered in 4K" Blu-ray Titles May 14 and July 16

[dvdmike]

Originally Posted by 42041

Well, you're adding at least 2 stages of generation loss right? The only way to go is down. You lose resolution/sharpness/possibly color fidelity in the film recorder, in the scanner, in optical printing if you scan an IP made from a recorded negative, while that same 2K data can be upsampled to 4K without losing anything in the digital domain.

But that can bring issues in the way of aliasing and the live action stuff in the shot looking crap comparatively, not so bad for bad boys, t2 and the like but something like transformers will be pointless over 1080p if 90% is an upscale.
I just hope they don't think scanning imax dmr prints as an option

[Geoff D]

Why wouldn't there be aliasing in the upconverted IP footage? If anything the upscaling would have to work harder because of the generation loss. I may be wrong but I'm getting the impression that you think upscaling is still stuck in the dark ages, but I can tell you for a fact that Sony's 4K scaling algorithms are exceptional. They've been doing it for long enough with their 4K movies, scaling the 2K effects in Spider-Man 3 to Skyfall through to Big Willy's latest Scientology advert, and they've got it down to a fine art.

I see what you're saying in regards to rebuilding an effects-heavy 2K flick; if the majority of the film has CG (in some manner or another) then 4K would be a waste of time as most of it would be upscaled. But unless you're talking about the average Star Wars prequel, most movies would have enough live action to make it worthwhile. Heck, one of the most oft-repeated criticisms of Bay's Transformers movies is that they have too many humans and not enough giant robots.

As for scanning DMR prints of 2K movies, they'd have to be on crack to even consider it. The source for that would've been the 2K DI or some filmed-out variation thereof, so with the various IP/IN printing stages and the infamous DMR processing taken into account you'd be looking at a brutal reduction in quality. And it would be even more expensive to scan because it's 15/70! No, just no.

[dvdmike]

Originally Posted by Geoff D

Why wouldn't there be aliasing in the upconverted IP footage? If anything the upscaling would have to work harder because of the generation loss. I may be wrong but I'm getting the impression that you think upscaling is still stuck in the dark ages, but I can tell you for a fact that Sony's 4K scaling algorithms are exceptional. They've been doing it for long enough with their 4K movies, scaling the 2K effects in Spider-Man 3 to Skyfall through to Big Willy's latest Scientology advert, and they've got it down to a fine art.

I see what you're saying in regards to rebuilding an effects-heavy 2K flick; if the majority of the film has CG (in some manner or another) then 4K would be a waste of time as most of it would be upscaled. But unless you're talking about the average Star Wars prequel, most movies would have enough live action to make it worthwhile. Heck, one of the most oft-repeated criticisms of Bay's Transformers movies is that they have too many humans and not enough giant robots.

As for scanning DMR prints of 2K movies, they'd have to be on crack to even consider it. The source for that would've been the 2K DI or some filmed-out variation thereof, so with the various IP/IN printing stages and the infamous DMR processing taken into account you'd be looking at a brutal reduction in quality. And it would be even more expensive to scan because it's 15/70! No, just no.

Dark knight had a dmr scan, and where is a disc that's unscaled that is worth a Damn?
As for the ton of cgi flicks this will severely limit 4k content will it not?

[Geoff D]

Originally Posted by dvdmike

Dark knight had a dmr scan, and where is a disc that's unscaled that is worth a Damn?

A DMR print of a 2K movie wouldn't be worth a damn. Dark Knight was finished on film and the 35mm was printed to IP which was scanned at 4K (6K for Dark Knight Rises IIRC). But even in those cases the DMR processing and additional printing steps (the DMR'ed 35mm scan is output to 15/70 internegative which is then used to create the actual print) leach out the detail that the IMAX process is supposed to be preserving.

As for the ton of cgi flicks this will severely limit 4k content will it not?

Well, yeah. Whenever people rag on George Lucas for having the balls to shoot in 1080p, I think of other effects-heavy movies that've been finished at 2K and shoot a wry smile, because those movies are similarly stymied when it comes to the 4K future. Still, seeing as visual effects are STILL being upscaled from 2K for brand new 4K movies, it's not something that's a major concern just yet. IMO upscaling will play a big part well into the consumer lifecycle of 4K.

[dvdmike]

I think dmr is the worst thing to happen to film since colour grading, but that does not stop studios using them apparently!

[Penton-Man]

Originally Posted by dvdmike

I think dmr is the worst thing to happen to film since colour grading, but that does not stop studios using them apparently!

Not always. The IMAX version of Skyfall (https://forum.blu-ray.com/showthread...ll#post7581603 ) did not receive their proprietary DMR (digital media remastering) treatment for image enhancement.

Cue CoCo - http://www.imax.com/about/experience/dmr/

[Zeekomkommer]

Question, is Spider-Man 3 getting the "mastered in 4K" treatment as well?

[HeavyHitter]

Originally Posted by Zeekomkommer

Question, is Spider-Man 3 getting the "mastered in 4K" treatment as well?

No word yet, but surely likely.

[dvdmike]

Originally Posted by Penton-Man

Not always. The IMAX version of Skyfall (https://forum.blu-ray.com/showthread...ll#post7581603 ) did not receive their proprietary DMR (digital media remastering) treatment for image enhancement.

Cue CoCo - http://www.imax.com/about/experience/dmr/

My quote stands, it is crap skyfall not using it does not make it less crap

[42041]

Didn't James Cameron also tell them to lay off the DMR for Titanic?
It definitely looked less crappy than the usual blowups I see...

Spider-Man 3 was already mastered from 4K to my knowledge, so don't expect something revelatory.

[Geoff D]

I noticed that too re: Titanic. Every DMR movie I'd seen up until that point had obvious edge halos, but Titanic looked superb. I saw Prometheus at the same venue a few weeks later and it was business as usual, EE all over the place.

Dark Knight Rises was much better, but Star Trek Into Darkness let the side down again, albeit for a different reason. The 15/70 bits were amazing, but many of the 35mm shots were DNR'ed up the wazoo. It's not the sort of thing you can get away with on a 65ft screen.

[dvdmike]

Originally Posted by Geoff D

I noticed that too re: Titanic. Every DMR movie I'd seen up until that point had obvious edge halos, but Titanic looked superb. I saw Prometheus at the same venue a few weeks later and it was business as usual, EE all over the place.

Dark Knight Rises was much better, but Star Trek Into Darkness let the side down again, albeit for a different reason. The 15/70 bits were amazing, but many of the 35mm shots were DNR'ed up the wazoo. It's not the sort of thing you can get away with on a 65ft screen.

They need to bring back photochemical blow ups, their imperfections somehow made the films more filmic for want of the better word

[Penton-Man]

Originally Posted by dvdmike

My quote stands, it is crap skyfall not using it does not make it less crap

Just a tad defensive today Mike.

You don’t understand. Perhaps I typed the comment in a cursory fashion. I was simply elaborating by offering the fact that all studio productions don’t use the dmr treatment for the IMAX version essentially for the reason you mentioned, i.e. sometimes the filmmakers’ determine (the mechanics of the process involve IMAX first doing tests on footage from the motion picture)…that it makes the material actually appear worse looking, for one reason or another, than if the material was simply *left alone*.

In essence, the post was agreeing with your concept of dmr.

[The Fallen Deity]

Originally Posted by Geoff D

I noticed that too re: Titanic. Every DMR movie I'd seen up until that point had obvious edge halos, but Titanic looked superb. I saw Prometheus at the same venue a few weeks later and it was business as usual, EE all over the place.

Dark Knight Rises was much better, but Star Trek Into Darkness let the side down again, albeit for a different reason. The 15/70 bits were amazing, but many of the 35mm shots were DNR'ed up the wazoo. It's not the sort of thing you can get away with on a 65ft screen.

So that explains why I was seeing faint edge halos on the Blu-Ray transfer of Prometheus. Damn DMR lol

I personally prefer the look of film, it looks more organic to me. Although the processed look of digital cameras really helps the look of certain films.

I'm glad though that there's still filmmakers out there using traditional film stock. It looks gorgeous when displayed properly.

[dvdmike]

Originally Posted by Penton-Man

Just a tad defensive today Mike.

You don’t understand. Perhaps I typed the comment in a cursory fashion. I was simply elaborating by offering the fact that all studio productions don’t use the dmr treatment for the IMAX version essentially for the reason you mentioned, i.e. sometimes the filmmakers’ determine (the mechanics of the process involve IMAX first doing tests on footage from the motion picture)…that it makes the material actually appear worse looking, for one reason or another, than if the material was simply *left alone*.

In essence, the post was agreeing with your concept of dmr.

I miss read, my apologies but was not trying to be defensive we need text to speech

[Geoff D]

Originally Posted by The Fallen Deity

So that explains why I was seeing faint edge halos on the Blu-Ray transfer of Prometheus. Damn DMR lol

I personally prefer the look of film, it looks more organic to me. Although the processed look of digital cameras really helps the look of certain films.

I'm glad though that there's still filmmakers out there using traditional film stock. It looks gorgeous when displayed properly.

Prometheus on Blu-ray looks stunning to me. No EE, tons of detail, it's quite lovely in an obviously digital way.

[dvdmike]

Originally Posted by Geoff D

Prometheus on Blu-ray looks stunning to me. No EE, tons of detail, it's quite lovely in an obviously digital way.

+1
Hands down one of the best looking/sounding discs made

[42041]

Sounds like I need to check it out. I was crammed into one of the first few rows in an IMAX theater and it looked like complete ass.

[Geoff D]

The DMR version wasn't pretty. But the BD sho' is.

[Tech-UK]

Originally Posted by 42041

Sounds like I need to check it out. I was crammed into one of the first few rows in an IMAX theater and it looked like complete ass.

Yeah, if anything, avoid the first couple of rows or the sides at IMAX.