Are 2004-2007 transfers totally outdated now?

[UniSol GR77]

It seems so, despite some rare exceptions like 'Terminator 2', 'Universal Soldier' and some other movies.

[Mr. Cinema]

I'd say HD masters from 2000-2002 are probably outdated. I don't know if I'd go as far as saying anything above 2005 is dated. Peter Jackson's King Kong master is likely the same one from '05 that was used for the dvd and it looks great.

[threefiftyrocket]

close encounters was at the end of 2007 and its amazing! blade runner was at the end of 2007 and again, AMAZING! I know this probably isn't what you are looking for but these two are some of the best catalogue titles in my collection and they are just stunning.

[Donat96]

Yeah, it really depends on what they did to create the master in the first place. Many studios back in 2004 didn't really look ahead when they created their masters, as is the case with the Star Wars OT, for example. The master was fine back then for DVD, but on BD it starts to show it's age. Often times they did a relatively low-res scan and then added some digital noise reduction and edge enhancement. Those processes looked ok when down-scaled to DVD, but on BD they really start to downgrade a potentially good looking image. That is why remastering for BD is mostly the best option.

[42041]

Originally Posted by UniSol GR77

It seems so, despite some rare exceptions like 'Terminator 2', 'Universal Soldier' and some other movies.

hm? Terminator 2 is pretty much a textbook outdated transfer.

it's hard to speak in absolutes, but in the early days of blu-rays they liked to re-use old transfers made in the DVD days. Most of these are unlikely to hold up to close scrutiny, since they were usually made from 2nd generation film elements on now-obsolete equipment.