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

[Aragorn the Elfstone]

Originally Posted by Kryptonic

LD's were like $100 a movie. VHS were about a quarter of that or less.

I recall many New Release VHS movies being $100+. I remember I had to wait for a lot of movies to go on sale at my local video store months after release. It was one of the things that got me so excited about DVDs - that they were immediately available for sale at a reasonable price.

[Kryptonic]

Originally Posted by Aragorn the Elfstone

I recall many New Release VHS movies being $100+. I remember I had to wait for a lot of movies to go on sale at my local video store months after release. It was one of the things that got me so excited about DVDs - that they were immediately available for sale at a reasonable price.

VHS were very expensive if you bought them from a rental store, because you had to pay what the store had to pay which was typically north of $100. But a commercially available VHS tape at a store back when the format was popular was around $15-$30.

[Aragorn the Elfstone]

Originally Posted by Kryptonic

VHS were very expensive if you bought them from a rental store, because you had to pay what the store had to pay which was typically north of $100. But a commercially available VHS tape at a store back when the format was popular was around $15-$30.

Really? I guess I was so young that I just assumed the rental store prices were the set prices. It could be that rental stores were the only places I was finding many titles. It's not like there was Best Buy and the like back then (at that age, I wasn't exactly searching out video specialty stores).

[ZoetMB]

Originally Posted by metaridley

Personally, I'm not upgrading until we get hologram discs.

If you mean the actual display of moving holograms as opposed to holographic storage of data, I can't think of a worse way to watch a movie. You'd essentially be looking at a bunch of little dolls running around and you would lose the director's/cinematographer's perspective as you'd be able to look around and see anywhere.

It would have a similar effect to that when you shoot down with a tilt-shift lens. It turns large objects, like cars on highways into looking like a small toy set.

Luckily, I'll probably be dead by the time we get moving holograms.

[blu-ray_girl_fan]

Originally Posted by ZoetMB

If you mean the actual display of moving holograms as opposed to holographic storage of data, I can't think of a worse way to watch a movie. You'd essentially be looking at a bunch of little dolls running around and you would lose the director's/cinematographer's perspective as you'd be able to look around and see anywhere.

It would have a similar effect to that when you shoot down with a tilt-shift lens. It turns large objects, like cars on highways into looking like a small toy set.

Luckily, I'll probably be dead by the time we get moving holograms.

[Sherlock_Jr]

Originally Posted by McCrutchy

That's because Breaking Bad was shot on 35mm film. A number of high profile television shows are still shooting in 35mm, even if the film is then being scanned at 2K and edited as 2K video.

If a film is scanned at 2K then has a 2K DI, how can they master it at 4K without going back to the negative, re-scanning it and re-doing the entire DI? Or is that the point? lol

[IndyMLVC]

Originally Posted by Kryptonic

LD's were like $100 a movie. VHS were about a quarter of that or less.

Dude...seriously? You have your #'s flopped. VHS were $100. New lasers were usually $30-40.

I'm begging you. Do SOME research before trying to argue this. You're making a fool of yourself.

Originally Posted by Kryptonic

VHS were very expensive if you bought them from a rental store, because you had to pay what the store had to pay which was typically north of $100. But a commercially available VHS tape at a store back when the format was popular was around $15-$30.

Jesus Christ....you're dense.

NO commercially available VHS tape was available for that price, save certain titles like Last Crusade, Batman, etc. The rest were ALL $100.

Originally Posted by Aragorn the Elfstone

Really? I guess I was so young that I just assumed the rental store prices were the set prices. It could be that rental stores were the only places I was finding many titles. It's not like there was Best Buy and the like back then (at that age, I wasn't exactly searching out video specialty stores).

Don't worry about it. He's wrong.

Think about his logic: rental stores have to pay $100 while a regular person could go and buy it for $15.

[42041]

Originally Posted by Sherlock_Jr

If a film is scanned at 2K then has a 2K DI, how can they master it at 4K without going back to the negative, re-scanning it and re-doing the entire DI? Or is that the point? lol

That's what they're doing. Can't see how they'll recoup that financially but I'm not complaining.

[Sherlock_Jr]

Originally Posted by 42041

That's what they're doing. Can't see how they'll recoup that financially but I'm not complaining.

Interesting. I'm assuming, having worked in Avid and FCP, that they won't have to re-cut each episode, just re-import the new footage on the same timecode.

Yes, it seems weird for Breaking Bad, which is a great show, but doesn't have nearly the numbers of something like The Walking Dead, or even Sons of Anarchy. For being as big of success that it is, BB has never pulled the numbers that most other high-profile cable shows do, but I guess it's about on par with Mad Men in terms of viewers.

[HeavyHitter]

Originally Posted by 42041

That's what they're doing. Can't see how they'll recoup that financially but I'm not complaining.

Yeah. It might be a situation where they take the hit there for the greater good of pushing the 4k displays, networks, etc. We 1080p minions can leach off the benefit.

[DMRI2006]

Dude...seriously? You have your #'s flopped. VHS were $100. New lasers were usually $30-40.

I'm begging you. Do SOME research before trying to argue this. You're making a fool of yourself.

Hey, having an argument or discussion with someone who's clueless on a certain topic is what the internet is all about, isn't it?

The only lasers ever priced over $40 were usually box-sets or expensive Criterion releases. It's one reason people bought laserdiscs instead of renting, because the price of the discs was -- unless it was a sell-through VHS title like you said (like Batman) -- always much lower than new-release VHS tapes.

I realize some of you guys weren't around back in the day -- but a couple of you are severely misinformed. At least get a clue what you're talking about before arguing the subject.

[DMRI2006]

Originally Posted by Aragorn the Elfstone

Really? I guess I was so young that I just assumed the rental store prices were the set prices. It could be that rental stores were the only places I was finding many titles. It's not like there was Best Buy and the like back then (at that age, I wasn't exactly searching out video specialty stores).

Don't listen to him. He's completely wrong about almost everything he's saying.

[Sherlock_Jr]

Originally Posted by DMRI2006

Hey, having an argument or discussion with someone who's clueless on a certain topic is what the internet is all about, isn't it?

The only lasers ever priced over $40 were usually box-sets or expensive Criterion releases. It's one reason people bought laserdiscs instead of renting, because the price of the discs was -- unless it was a sell-through VHS title like you said (like Batman) -- always much lower than new-release VHS tapes.

I realize some of you guys weren't around back in the day -- but a couple of you are severely misinformed. At least get a clue what you're talking about before arguing the subject.

I remember the day I got The Abyss director's cut on Laserdisc. What a package, and only $99.99! Same with Aliens and T2... Cameron sure loved the Laserdisc format. Back then, those were the pinnacle of special editions.

[Trekkie313]

Originally Posted by MifuneFan

I'm banking on Ghostbusters being the most significant upgrade of the ones listed.

The "stunt packs" are gonna be all the more obvious now in the Gozer scenes. Twist ties and hollow handles.

[AngelGraves13]

Originally Posted by Sherlock_Jr

If a film is scanned at 2K then has a 2K DI, how can they master it at 4K without going back to the negative, re-scanning it and re-doing the entire DI? Or is that the point? lol

It's not difficult to make a 4K master if the editing was done at 2K. They use timecodes and it syncs up really quickly. I've done some editing this way. We did most of our editing on low res footage then just replaced it with the 2K footage by using timecode. You really don't have to do much.

Color correction should be done before this step though.

[Sherlock_Jr]

Originally Posted by AngelGraves13

It's not difficult to make a 4K master if the editing was done at 2K. They use timecodes and it syncs up really quickly. I've done some editing this way. We did most of our editing on low res footage then just replaced it with the 2K footage by using timecode. You really don't have to do much.

Color correction should be done before this step though.

Oh, me too, it's just the process of rescanning everything, then re-synching the timecode. It's the work on the DI that will take more time. I know nothing about DIs, so I assume they can plug in the new footage to the existing files and the computers will apply all the same color corrections automatically? Or will they have to completely re-time each episode manually?

[Aragorn the Elfstone]

And I presume visual effects would have to be completely redone, no?

[Trekkie313]

Originally Posted by Aragorn the Elfstone

And I presume visual effects would have to be completely redone, no?

No. I mean they could do it if the original FX reels or CGI data still exist. I know most of the Ghostbusters VFX footage still exists, but its in a private collection.
However compositing film and doing color correction still costs a lot of money in the digital age.

[Kris Deering]

Originally Posted by Tech-UK

The encodes will feature a higher video bitrate than the original releases, to compensate for 4K upscaling (very slight difference in PQ when viewing at 1080p resolution depending on screen size) and will feature xvYCC, that extends the colour gamut, but people will only benefit from that, if they are running equipment compatible with that feature.

Where are you getting this from? The BD spec is 4:2:0 YCbCr and I've been told these titles won't be any different. The "improvements" to color are made on the authoring side which I take with a grain of salt considering that I heard from the guy that does this stuff from Sony said they were already doing new stuff for their color conversions that improved color performance well before they even announced the VW1000ES. I am under the opinion that these are going to be EXACTLY the same as the transfers available now with new branding to suggest that based on their source files they look great upscaled on Sony 4K displays, nothing more nothing less. I would LOVE to be proved wrong on this by the way.

[MifuneFan]

Originally Posted by Kris Deering

Where are you getting this from? The BD spec is 4:2:0 YCbCr and I've been told these titles won't be any different. The "improvements" to color are made on the authoring side which I take with a grain of salt considering that I heard from the guy that does this stuff from Sony said they were already doing new stuff for their color conversions that improved color performance well before they even announced the VW1000ES. I am under the opinion that these are going to be EXACTLY the same as the transfers available now with new branding to suggest that based on their source files they look great upscaled on Sony 4K displays, nothing more nothing less. I would LOVE to be proved wrong on this by the way.

Is it not possible that there could be improvements from getting rid of the extras and filling te entire disc with just the movie? Assuming that's what they do, a smaller compression should lead to higher bitrates and at least a slightly better PQ .