List of UHDs that utilize 4K or Higher Masters

[RealorFake4K]

Originally Posted by Opips3

https://www.arri.com/news/news/new-a...2k-for-uhd-tv/

Are you fraking kidding me?! "Arri" is a camera manufacturer. "UHD" and "4K" is an industry standard measurement. Arri makes cameras that shoot in many different resolutions. They are not the people who decide what UHD is or is not. That is done by these people. On Arri's site they said 2.8K/3.2K/3.4K can be used for UHD, not that those resolutions are UHD. They are not.

[gates70]

[Opips3]

I'm sorry man!

I messing and make mistake.

I understand puddly77 explained me.

[ray0414]

Originally Posted by RockyIII

X-Men: DOFP

So your saying that DOFP looks better than the revenant, Lucy, Sicario, Smurfs 2, resolution wise? I'm calling BS on that claim

[RealorFake4K]

Originally Posted by ray0414

So your saying that DOFP looks better than the revenant, Lucy, Sicario, Smurfs 2, resolution wise? I'm calling BS on that claim

I think he is saying that a quality 2K upconvert CAN look better than a mismanaged Real 4K disc.

[ray0414]

Originally Posted by RealorFake4K

I think he is saying that a quality 2K upconvert CAN look better than a mismanaged Real 4K disc.

Well he needs to be more specific. Because to date, none of the 2k upscales look better than the movies with true 4k masters (I'm not counting the older movies shot on film that supposedly got recanned).

[RockyIII]

Originally Posted by ray0414

So your saying that DOFP looks better than the revenant, Lucy, Sicario, Smurfs 2, resolution wise? I'm calling BS on that claim

Have you even watched XMen DOFP in its entirety?

[RockyIII]

Originally Posted by RealorFake4K

I think he is saying that a quality 2K upconvert CAN look better than a mismanaged Real 4K disc.

Thank you...Let's not put down upconverted 2K too quickly

[RockyIII]

Originally Posted by ray0414

Well he needs to be more specific. Because to date, none of the 2k upscales look better than the movies with true 4k masters (I'm not counting the older movies shot on film that supposedly got recanned).

Is Amazing Spiderman 2 a true 4K masters feature?

[Geoff D]

Originally Posted by ray0414

But was the 35mm scanned at 4k or scanned at 2k? Big difference.

I wouldn't worry about it too much, BvS is very much an outlier in the 2K for 4K finish kinda deal. I saw Catching Fire in 15/70 IMAX and the anamorphic 35mm scenes were the best I've ever seen DMR'ed 35mm look in IMAX, they shat on BvS from a great height. There's also a fair smattering of full-frame Super 35 standing in for full-height IMAX in the big VFX scenes in the arena and that also looked the balls when embiggened onto a 65ft screen.

The Mockingjays were indeed shot 2.8K but the anamorphic lensing means that they used much more of the Alexa's sensor area than a flat 2.8K movie (e.g. Fury Road) would use (some of the best 2K upscales I've seen were shot anamorphic, e.g. San Andreas, Kingsman). DP Jo Willems was hesitant about using digital but they decided on the Alexas for their dynamic range, owing to the prevalence of darker, murkier locations in the Mockingjay story.

He carried on using similar old-school Panavision glass as he did on Catching Fire (some lenses dated from the 1960's) allied with extra diffusion (smoke etc) to make it look a bit less clinically sharp, so don't be surprised if the Mockingjays aren't the shiniest, sharpest movies you ever did see in UHD (I can hear your complaints now, ray) BUT given how clean the digital source is I think they'll look great for what they are....Lionsgate screw ups notwithstanding.

[RockyIII]

Originally Posted by Geoff D

I wouldn't worry about it too much, BvS is very much an outlier in the 2K for 4K finish kinda deal. I saw Catching Fire in 15/70 IMAX and the anamorphic 35mm scenes were the best I've ever seen DMR'ed 35mm look in IMAX, they shat on BvS from a great height. There's also a fair smattering of full-frame Super 35 standing in for full-height IMAX in the big VFX scenes in the arena and that also looked the balls when embiggened onto a 65ft screen.

The Mockingjays were indeed shot 2.8K but the anamorphic lensing means that they used much more of the Alexa's sensor area than a flat 2.8K movie (e.g. Fury Road) would use. DP Jo Willems was hesitant about using digital but they decided on the Alexas for their dynamic range, owing to the prevalence of darker, murkier locations in the Mockingjay story.

He carried on using similar old-school Panavision glass as he did on Catching Fire (some lenses dated from the 1960's) allied with extra diffusion (smoke etc) to make it look a bit less clinically sharp, so don't be surprised if the Mockingjays aren't the shiniest, sharpest movies you ever did see in UHD (I can hear your complaints now, ray) BUT given how clean the digital source is I think they'll look great for what they are*.


*Lionsgate screw ups notwithstanding

So, let's say you are trying to sell a friend on the whole UHD thing, what film would you play for him/her first and foremost?

[elwaylite]

It is easy for me to see the spectral highlight advantage in anything, especially dark scenes with bright areas on the OLED. I personally think The Revenent is one of the best-looking movies I have ever watched. The fire, the subtle sun highlights shimmering on the water, and the overall detail. Deadpool had some good shots too, and the fire in that movie is pretty good in HDR.

lets face it though, some people like my wife are just going to shrug regardless when you try and explain it.

[RockyIII]

Originally Posted by elwaylite

It is easy for me to see the spectral highlight advantage in anything, especially dark scenes with bright areas on the OLED. I personally think The Revenent is one of the best-looking movies I have ever watched. The fire, the subtle sun highlights shimmering on the water, and the overall detail. Deadpool had some good shots too, and the fire in that movie is pretty good in HDR.

lets face it though, some people like my wife are just going to shrug regardless when you try and explain it.

...or like mine, ask you what the difference is from the regular bluray as they cant see any

[Geoff D]

Originally Posted by RockyIII

So, let's say you are trying to sell a friend on the whole UHD thing, what film would you play for him/her first and foremost?

Won't be a popular choice amongst the cognoscenti (because for most people it's about dat rez, 'bout dat rez, no scaling), but IMO Lego Movie looks utterly amazing in UHD. The expansion to the colour and dynamic range is extraordinary.

Deadpool is another fantastic one. That's got expanded colour, range AND - just to keep everyone here happy - a significant bump in detail compared to the Blu-ray.

[elwaylite]

Yeah, I was trying to point out the fire in Deadpool, and the sun in Revenant, nothing.

I did some pics of SDR and HDR on Divergent Allegiant with the Philips, and you can easily see more cloud detail on the HDR version.

[RockyIII]

Originally Posted by elwaylite

Yeah, I was trying to point out the fire in Deadpool, and the sun in Revenant, nothing.

I did some pics of SDR and HDR on Divergent Allegiant with the Philips, and you can easily see more cloud detail on the HDR version.

would you be able to post pics for us? that would be very useful

[elwaylite]

https://forum.blu-ray.com/showpost.p...&postcount=337

[RockyIII]

Originally Posted by elwaylite

https://forum.blu-ray.com/showpost.p...&postcount=337

I see increased contrast/details in the clouds, in Pic 1

[gates70]

Originally Posted by RockyIII

...or like mine, ask you what the difference is from the regular bluray as they cant see any

I get my new PJ tomorrow and I totally expect my girlfriend to say she doesn't see a difference

[RockyIII]

Originally Posted by gates70

I get my new PJ tomorrow and I totally expect my girlfriend to say she doesn't see a difference

Hey at least we got them to make the move from DVD to Bluray...It's a start