4K Movies Releases

[reanimator]

Originally Posted by ray0414

It's gonna get annoying correcting every person who parrots this with no actual knowledge of how these are made.

"But it was a 2K DI!" -- is becoming the new teal-squealing.

[Geoff D]

Originally Posted by PeterTHX

Hardly, but we've all seen certain people have to be dragged kicking and screaming into current times, time and time and time again.


Filmmakers who are fine with a 2K final product.
Filmmakers who color grade their films teal & gold.
A certain filmmaker who pretty much mixes in MONO.
Filmmakers who destroy the composition to keep their films "TV safe".
A certain filmmaker who shot in IMAX and then refused to open up the frame on the BD version, despite numerous requests to do so.


So they're all correct in your book? No question?

But surely that's THEIR prerogative to make their art as they see fit, Peter? I don't see how that's even an issue. Retrofitting something years after the fact is more of a problem in my book (Friedkin's batty colour timing, Storaro's cropping) and what I don't want is HDR to be wheeled out in much the same sort of revisionist fashion.

[doctor_who]

I've got to be honest. I have sold off most of my blu-rays over the past couple years, and have built up a 2000+ title collection of HD movies on iTunes and in Ultraviolet.

I have kept only the physical copies of the best of the best movies and best of the best releases, often with top notch special features.

That being said, I do think that 4k Ultra HD has a pretty decent chance of impacting the market pretty strongly. A lot of "commoners" who still only buy DVDs to this day may not see the difference between a Blu-ray and a DVD (or find it negligible) but they certainly will see the difference between a 4K HDR and DVD release. With pretty much all TVs moving into 4k territory in the next couple years, a lot of these DVD buyers will be buying into 4k even if they skipped 1080p in its fullest.

While it will certainly will be a niche product overall, I do think that UHD discs will have a far bigger impact than 3D releases ever did. I will certainly be buying some UHD releases personally, as the cost of a digital 4k purchase seems to be equivalent but without special features. For titles like Mad Max, Sicario, and the Lego Movie, all titles that I only acquired digital UV/iTunes codes for and didn't consider a blu-ray purchase, I am planning on buying the 4k UHD BD.

Just my 2 cents. Summary, niche but less niche than 3d.

PS: Dig the black cases, and nice to see the slipcovers even though they don't matter at all.

[Geoff D]

I can definitely see it becoming more of a thing than 3D ever was, but one of the things that didn't help with the uptake of that format was the non-standardisation of the tech and the same sort of confusion could be generated by all the different HDR technologies that are out there (some people are already bracing themselves for a Dolby Vision UHD Blu double dip when that's finally ready for prime time). Silly consumer electronics industry: it never learn.

[dvdmike]

Originally Posted by Geoff D

I can definitely see it becoming more of a thing than 3D ever was, but one of the things that didn't help with the uptake of that format was the non-standardisation of the tech and the same sort of confusion could be generated by all the different HDR technologies that are out there (some people are already bracing themselves for a Dolby Vision UHD Blu double dip when that's finally ready for prime time). Silly consumer electronics industry: it never learn.

Very much so, its beyond confusing for most people

[Pieter V]

Originally Posted by PeterTHX

A certain filmmaker who shot in IMAX and then refused to open up the frame on the BD version, despite numerous requests to do so.

Brad Bird. The only reason I would re-buy Mission Impossible 4 is for the IMAX footage.

[Geoff D]

Originally Posted by Pieter V

Brad Bird. The only reason I would re-buy Mission Impossible 4 is for the IMAX footage.

I was as pissed about that as anyone, but it's his decision to make and he's made his reasons quite clear (same for not opening up Tomorrowland on Blu). And it's not like the movie wasn't shown like that theatrically, as the overwhelming majority of cinema-goers would've seen the fixed widescreen version, so it's still a representation of theatrical intent even if it's not the the one that some people are after. I'm kinda in the same boat with Nolan's IMAX movies, albeit in reverse: he only releases the embiggened editions on Blu whereas I happen to prefer the fixed aspect versions! (Incidentally Nolan doesn't dig all that 7.1/Atmos stuff, I guess he's also off of PeterTHX's Christmas card list!)

[dvdmike]

People second guessing and calling directors choices wrong is the new level of armchair expert round these parts.
But if the director was not involved people would be out with torches

[ray0414]

Originally Posted by dvdmike

People second guessing and calling directors choices wrong is the new level of armchair expert round these parts.
But if the director was not involved people would be out with torches

And the director also has the right to make changes based on advances in technology that weren't previously available.

In my opinion, a director would be thrilled to have his movie go to a new format, as it will help the movie to live on in a new age. Of course nothing is 100%

[Geoff D]

Originally Posted by dvdmike

People second guessing and calling directors choices wrong is the new level of armchair expert round these parts.
But if the director was not involved people would be out with torches

It's always the way, mike: the director is God...unless they do something we don't like and then they become a dingbat who doesn't have a clue about what's best for their movies. I'm as guilty of this as anyone so I'm not throwing stones from within my glass house, just saying it like it is.

[dvdmike]

Originally Posted by Geoff D

It's always the way, mike: the director is God...unless they do something we don't like and then they become a dingbat who doesn't have a clue about what's best for their movies. I'm as guilty of this as anyone so I'm not throwing stones from within my glass house, just saying it like it is.

Wasn't directed toward you

[Geoff D]

Originally Posted by ray0414

And the director also has the right to make changes based on advances in technology that weren't previously available.

In my opinion, a director would be thrilled to have his movie go to a new format, as it will help the movie to live on in a new age. Of course nothing is 100%

Would you have said that about all the movies that were shot in black and white, that their directors would be thrilled to have the movie in colour as it would help the movies to live on in a new age? People have just got to accept that not everything is destined for HDR, not should it be, because it simply wasn't all designed & shot with such a display medium in mind. And even in these modern times movies are still made in such 'old fashioned' formats as B&W 1.33 as a stylistic choice (winning a bunch of Oscars along the way), so maybe even quaint old outdated SDR will make a comeback one day.

Still, this argument comes around every time there's some new revision of a movie (multi-channel audio remixes, new cuts, new colour timing etc etc) and the age-old solution to such problems is to provide both the original *and* the revised version to consumers, that way everyone's happy. If I have to stick to regular Blu to get a properly graded SDR version of x movie while I still have an SDR set, then so be it.

[Geoff D]

Originally Posted by dvdmike

Wasn't directed toward you

Oh, I didn't take that as a I dig, just making a point: we all think we know better than the director at times.

[dvdmike]

Originally Posted by Geoff D

Oh, I didn't take that as a I dig, just making a point: we all think we know better than the director at times.

Depends on what is changed, visual stuff like colour and stuff is not their call see French Connection.
It's when they start doing stuff that was not their job

[ray0414]

Originally Posted by Geoff D

Would you have said that about all the movies that were shot in black and white, that their directors would be thrilled to have the movie in colour as it would help the movies to live on in a new age? People have just got to accept that not everything is destined for HDR, not should it be, because it simply wasn't all designed & shot with such a display medium in mind. And even in these modern times movies are still made in such 'old fashioned' formats as B&W 1.33 as a stylistic choice (winning a bunch of Oscars along the way), so maybe even quaint old outdated SDR will make a comeback one day.

Still, this argument comes around every time there's some new revision of a movie (multi-channel audio remixes, new cuts, new colour timing etc etc) and the age-old solution to such problems is to provide both the original *and* the revised version to consumers, that way everyone's happy. If I have to stick to regular Blu to get a properly graded SDR version of x movie while I still have an SDR set, then so be it.

I wasn't alive then so I don't have the correct understanding of "how things were".

But what I can say, is that the situations are a little different because the studios have made it very clear that not only do they attempt to either have the director or colorist present to help, but all movies must be approved by either the director or someone the director appoints to do so.

In the case of black &white to color conversions, using the same protocols being used with hdr, if the director didn't want it then the director would have not approved it.

[Geoff D]

And, I hope, that the exact same thing will apply to HDR: if the director doesn't want it then the director will not approve it. We've had anecdotal evidence of HDR regrades having been turned down, so clearly the HDR train hasn't reached terminal velocity just yet.

[dvdmike]

Originally Posted by Geoff D

And, I hope, that the exact same thing will apply to HDR: if the director doesn't want it then the director will not approve it. We've had anecdotal evidence of HDR regrades having been turned down, so clearly the HDR train hasn't reached terminal velocity just yet.

Far from it!

[PeterTHX]

@7:10 for those concerned with artistic intent:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k3z1...ature=youtu.be

[applemac]

Originally Posted by PeterTHX

@7:10 for those concerned with artistic intent:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k3z1...ature=youtu.be

Yea there was also an interview with the CEO of IMAX:

"a lot of our museum theaters are still film based systems, projection systems that will stay that way for a while, so we remain committed to film"

"we will protect film until the last second were just simply not able too anymore, As a company I never see us turning our back on film, in fact, well do the exact opposite; well kick and scream and fight for it because we really believe in it"


We know how thats going.

These interviews are nice and all, but I won't believe it until we start seeing discs in public and know that they haven't messed them up by blowing out colors and brightness.

[Penton-Man]

Peter, rebuttal?

Allow me to invigorate you with a past ACES production and post from 2013 -

Originally Posted by Penton-Man

....characterized by ACES digital intermediates in their cinematographic process...

RUBINROT -- Musikvideo „Faster" (Sofi de la Torre) - YouTube