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

[DanFan]

Originally Posted by I KEEL YOU

I think this shot shows pretty clearly the differences between the colors of the two versions for anyone who has seen Spider Man's costume:

http://caps-a-holic.com/hd_vergleich...ss=1#vergleich

Wow! Spidey's suit looks great in the 4K transfer.

[14728]

Out of all the big, important classics that Sony could have chosen, the decided to give Godzilla the 4K master. Smart.

[Blu-21]

Why is it that the first Spider-Man benefited so much more being mastered in 4K then Spider-Man 2?

[AlexBC]

Because Spidey 2 4k was botched.

Some instances like the spider-man suit is better, as show above. On the other hand, the other guy in the frame is completely messed up. There's black crush on his suit and contrast on his face is blown out.

http://caps-a-holic.com/hd_vergleich...ss=1#vergleich


Regarding the framing, I believe there are 2 clear instances and one other nice hint on the screencaps that show the previous one was more accurate:

1) Someone mentioned Pirates 1. Well for me this looks like that kind of mistake. The blacked out area was probably supposed to be out of frame.

http://caps-a-holic.com/hd_vergleich...ss=1#vergleich

2) Again, the elevator scene. From the composition stand point, the old frame was much more balanced, as the characters were more evenly placed in the middle. Now the image is shifted too much to the left side, there's barely any room there, while the right side now gets too much 'head' room.

http://caps-a-holic.com/hd_vergleich...ss=1#vergleich

3) Doc Octopus seems better framed here as well on the old transfer. There's less head room so that you can see the full tentacle 'paw' on the bottom of the frame.

http://caps-a-holic.com/hd_vergleich...ss=1#vergleich

[BrandonJF]

Originally Posted by AlexBC

Regarding the framing, I believe there are 2 clear instances and one other nice hint on the screencaps that show the previous one was more accurate:

1) Someone mentioned Pirates 1. Well for me this looks like that kind of mistake. The blacked out area was probably supposed to be out of frame.

http://caps-a-holic.com/hd_vergleich...ss=1#vergleich

Good point. That does really lend some credence to the original transfer having the more "correct" framing.

[blu-ray_girl_fan]

Originally Posted by AlexBC

Because Spidey 2 4k was botched.

Some instances like the spider-man suit is better, as show above. On the other hand, the other guy in the frame is completely messed up. There's black crush on his suit and contrast on his face is blown out.

http://caps-a-holic.com/hd_vergleich...ss=1#vergleich


Regarding the framing, I believe there are 2 clear instances and one other nice hint on the screencaps that show the previous one was more accurate:

1) Someone mentioned Pirates 1. Well for me this looks like that kind of mistake. The blacked out area was probably supposed to be out of frame.

http://caps-a-holic.com/hd_vergleich...ss=1#vergleich

2) Again, the elevator scene. From the composition point stand point, the old frame was much more balanced, as the characters were more evenly placed in the middle. Now the image is shifted too much to the left side, there's barely any room there, while the right side now gets too much 'head' room.

http://caps-a-holic.com/hd_vergleich...ss=1#vergleich

3) Doc Octopus seems better framed here as well on the old transfer. There's less head room so that you can see the full tentacle 'paw' on the bottom of the frame.

http://caps-a-holic.com/hd_vergleich...ss=1#vergleich

Thank you very much for your post. Actual frame analysis is better than "Oh, Super 35 has loose framing anyway!"

[Deciazulado]

btw I added the 2 Aunty pics into one and it measured 819 x 1953 (2.39)
Cropping the sides of that image to fit 1920 would make it 2.35

(A normal Cineon standard 4k 6µ (or 2K 12µ) scan of S-35 ends 1672x4000/836x2000 for the anamorphic 2.39 print Projector Aperture extraction area)

[42041]

Originally Posted by Blu-21

Why is it that the first Spider-Man benefited so much more being mastered in 4K then Spider-Man 2?

Because Spider-Man 2 was already mastered in 4K, while Spider-man was mostly an analog show? It was kind of a big deal, being the first 4K DI...

[Geoff D]

Originally Posted by blu-ray_girl_fan

Thank you very much for your post. Actual frame analysis is better than "Oh, Super 35 has loose framing anyway!"

Heh. In one thread I get moaned at because I'm a "pixel analyst", now I'm not being precise enough.

The funny thing is, I've always thought that Spidey 2 wasn't balanced quite right. There's a shot during the first fusion meltdown of a graphic saying 'overload in progress' and it's always been shifted off-centre, over to the left. Don't believe me? Pull your Blu-ray copy and check it yourself. Is that indicative of something that was perfectly framed to begin with? I don't think so. I didn't notice whether it was still off-centre in the M4K version, I'll have to double check.

And the shot in the elevator isn't exactly centred to begin with, so losing a bit more of the left side of frame won't keep me awake at night. As for part of a tentacle not being visible, again: no sleep lost.

[42041]

Originally Posted by blu-ray_girl_fan

Thank you very much for your post. Actual frame analysis is better than "Oh, Super 35 has loose framing anyway!"

I don't have the old disc, but here's some possibly informative shots from the new disc; I drew a center line down the 960th pixel...
http://imageshack.us/a/img843/113/dlv5.jpg
http://imageshack.us/a/img823/9606/3e8p.jpg

[Penton-Man]

Originally Posted by Geoff D

Heh. In one thread I get moaned at because I'm a "pixel analyst", now I'm not being precise enough.

Don’t feel badly, there are different levels of precision, see B. 5. http://www.film-tech.com/warehouse/m...GUIDELINES.pdf

[Geoff D]

Originally Posted by Penton-Man

Don’t feel badly, there are different levels of precision, see B. 5. http://www.film-tech.com/warehouse/m...GUIDELINES.pdf

Good stuff, even THX theater standards allow for 5% maximum crop of the image. It makes the complaining about the framing all the more superfluous because we'll have seen it lined up differently from theater to theater (as 42041 said earlier), never mind the home versions.

What I don't get is why the new framing is such a contentious issue in this case? Even anamorphic shows get bits lopped off, e.g. Alien has been brought in tighter and tighter with each new Sir Ridley approved transfer. Is it because people don't want to see me happy? I find a title that I, the nitpicker's nitpicker, actually like and all other people wanna do is slam it.

Oh, I just checked that 'overload' shot I mentioned on the M4K version and it's just as hinky (pushed over to the left) as it is on the regular BD.

[BenjaminG]

Any word on the quality of Godzilla compared to the standard Blu?

[Blu-21]

Agreed Alex, good post.

Originally Posted by 42041

Because Spider-Man 2 was already mastered in 4K, while Spider-man was mostly an analog show? It was kind of a big deal, being the first 4K DI...

Whatever the reason I have nothing to complain about as I couldn't care less about Spider-Man 2, the first one is great and I'm glad that the 'Mastered in 4K' Blu-Ray downscale looks not only fantastic in general, but much better then the Spider-Man 2 'Mastered in 4K' version.

[gonzo_fool]

Originally Posted by AlexBC

Because Spidey 2 4k was botched.

I don't think it was botched. I looked over my original Spider-Man 2 DVD and the color timing and framing are identical (including that weird bar on the right side of Uncle Ben, which I never noticed before but can live with) to the new 4K release. And since detail is up to par, I'd say this is far from a botched transfer.

[The Fallen Deity]

The new transfer doesn't looked botched to me.

The old transfer is too contrasty and magenta pushed. I'm glad these issues have been fixed, the film looks more filmic now imo.

The new transfer has much better colour timing. Look at the shot of Spidey's suit, it's red on the new release, it looks almost orange on the old release.

[HD Goofnut]

Caps for Moneyball: http://caps-a-holic.com/hd_vergleich...459&lossless=1

I honestly prefer the better compression/grain structure on the 4K release. I will probably pick it up when it's $10 or less.

[42041]

The ugly bit of sharpening is gone and that's a good thing. Which begs the question of why Sony's HD mastering people are futzing around with sharpening on DI-based films to begin with...

[blu-ray_girl_fan]

Originally Posted by HD Goofnut

Caps for Moneyball: http://caps-a-holic.com/hd_vergleich...459&lossless=1

I honestly prefer the better compression/grain structure on the 4K release. I will probably pick it up when it's $10 or less.

The original release looks like it has more detail. The MI4K looks too soft.

[dvdmike]

Originally Posted by HD Goofnut

Caps for Moneyball: http://caps-a-holic.com/hd_vergleich...459&lossless=1

I honestly prefer the better compression/grain structure on the 4K release. I will probably pick it up when it's $10 or less.

You beat me as I searched for the thread!

I would agree but on the compression

http://www.caps-a-holic.com/hd_vergl...=131#vergleich