List of UHDs that utilize 4K or Higher Masters

[Pieter V]

Nice catch. I also edited the Jason Bourne info last year on IMDb, but someone was so stupid to change it back to 2K DI. While I submitted all proof a 4K was used.

[Geoff D]

Originally Posted by Pieter V

Nice catch. I also edited the Jason Bourne info last year on IMDb, but someone was so stupid to change it back to 2K DI. While I submitted al proof a 4K was used.

Hmmm. I sent IMDB a message that Jason Bourne was shot on 4-perf Super 35mm - which it was, according to AC August '16 - and it was changed, but I see it's reverted back to 3-perf again. *Le sigh*

And I wondered about Ex Machina, having posted that same AC info in the thread, but as usual their descriptions of the final masters are either super-precise, down to the exact resolution, or puzzlingly opaque.

[Pieter V]

[imsounoriginal]

Surprised about the Ex Machina news, I guess I will be upgrading that one but I'll still wait til the price comes down a bit. Even though it's already relatively cheap lol

[RockyIII]

Originally Posted by PeterTHX

Funny, I always thought the script and direction made a film good or bad.

Only in part. Sometimes even the sets have a large role in the final result.
You shoot a movie in a Hollywood set dressed as a haunted house and then go shoot the same movie in a real old house somewhere in Europe, and I guarantee you the end result will be totally different.
Perfect example is Robert Redford's Gatsby and Leonardo Di Caprio's Gatsby.
In the new Gatsby they CGed the hell out of everything: the house, the patios, the backyards, the landscapes, the lake.

[Pieter V]

[HD Goofnut]

Originally Posted by Pieter V

[Show spoiler]

Done.

[Wickerman1972]

This is a great thread as the films mastered in 4k are the ones that will truly pop and take advantage of what the format has to offer. It's unfortunate though that nearly everything is being put onto 66gb discs and 100gb discs are pretty much being ignored as though they don't even exist.

[puddy77]

HD Goofnut,

I thought Life might be up for discussion. It's not a 4k master, but as Pieter found out, a 3.2k master. So is 4k a hard line? Just wondering for the inevitable release of Elysium as well since it had a 3.3k master.

Also, we have movies on the list that were shot anywhere from 2.8k to 3.4k, but upscaled to 4k for the master. So if you choose to omit it from the list, would that only be based on when it is upscaled? Because technically, a 3.2k master has more information than a 2.8k shot 4k master.

Or maybe there are other arguments about quality of upscaling? Does anyone know if the upscale at the master stage is any different than the upscale at the disc stage?

I just thought this opened up an interesting can of worms.

[Geoff D]

It may well be 3.2K but it certainly couldn't be exhibited at that resolution so it would have to be blown down/up accordingly. The DCP for Life was 2K but would anyone here really argue the toss if they took the 3.2K DI and uprezzed that for the UHD? I'd never, EVER kick a 2.8K to 4K master out of bed either, as Roger Deakins has stated several times already. If it's good enough for him...

As for the upscaling, Alexa can do that in-camera if need be, although that's more for TV productions where post-production time is even more squeezed than it is on features. Grading suites all offer their own upscaling nodes or packages, but without any concrete knowledge on who's using what at the theatrical mastering stage - never mind the home video versions - I think that's a rabbit hole best left avoided.

[puddy77]

Originally Posted by Geoff D

As for the upscaling, Alexa can do that in-camera if need be, although that's more for TV productions where post-production time is even more squeezed than it is on features. Grading suites all offer their own upscaling nodes or packages, but without any concrete knowledge on who's using what at the theatrical mastering stage - never mind the home video versions - I think that's a rabbit hole best left avoided.

I agree. The only differences I can think of as to upscaling is that the camera and fx are upscaled separately then conformed to 4k at the master stage. But the master as a whole is upscaled if done at the later home deliverable stage. I doubt there is much difference.

[Geoff D]

Yeah, I think the various components are upscaled by themselves before being slugged into the final 4K master, e.g. the VFX on Rogue one were done at 2.2K but were ultimately delivered at 4.5K by ILM (both inclusive of 10% overshoot to account for repositioning and the offset for 3D). It's neater that way instead of having to use lots of different scaling factors during your final conform which would only confuse matters.

You make a good point though. Even though I said that's a question best avoided I'd rather have an upscale of the whole show done by someone intimately familiar with such post processes rather than, say, the dunderheads who seem to be in charge of Universal's home video mastering right now.

[swifty7]

I didn't know Close Encounter was out in 4k!!!!! Can't freaking wait to get it.

[Pieter V]

[HD Goofnut]

Originally Posted by Pieter V

[Show spoiler]

Done.

[Pieter V]

[HD Goofnut]

Originally Posted by Pieter V

[Show spoiler]

Done.

[Pieter V]

[HD Goofnut]

Originally Posted by Pieter V

[Show spoiler]

Done.

[Ben_R]

Any new on Alien:Covenant?