Jurassic Park Collection 4K UHD (1993-2015)

[sleeman]

Just finished watching the first movie. Actually looked pretty good for a 25 year old movie, better than I expected. Some shots were soft here and there but overall looked good. Outdoor shots were excellent, nice and bright, colors vivid, HDR doing its thing beautifully, nice contrast and shadow details. DTS:X was awesome, nice atmospherics and good bass. Quite satisfied with the purchase so far.

[brainofj72]

Originally Posted by Legend293

Then we have seen different things. I feel like with grain it loses detail it makes the image soft and blurry. The walking dead is the worse with it.

Well, you are wrong. It's not even a matter of opinion. It is just fact. There is grain in film. You can't get around it. If you try, the image is compromised. End of story.

If you prefer the clean look of digital to the grainy look of film, that's one thing. But if we're just talking film? Grain = detail.

I believe The Walking Dead is shot on 16mm, and that's gonna have a rougher, more lo-fi look than most shot-on-film movies, which are usually 35mm. It's a stylistic choice, which, if I'm not mistaken, is meant to emulate some of the horror movies that inspired the show.

[zallapo]

I'm incredibly pleased with how the 4K of JP looks, a real improvement over the over-sharpened blu-ray mess. But the real stunner for me is JP:TLW. Wow!!! Its like watching a whole new film.

[nick4Knight]

Originally Posted by solid12345

When will these studios learn if they really want this format to survive they have to go all out on the presentation? The format is risking becoming another SACD. It doesn't help with the cost of some of these discs like almost $40 for the Matrix, are you kidding me, I can buy a videogame for that.

I don't think you can be taken seriously when you so casually inflated the cost by "almost" 25% to justify this foolish, entitled, whiny-baby train of thinking.

[MerrickG]

My only issue with the image was that the UHD seemed like the gamma was cranked way up.

Since nobody else seems to have this complaint I wonder why.

[solid12345]

Originally Posted by nick4amber

I don't think you can be taken seriously when you so casually inflated the cost by "almost" 25% to justify this foolish, entitled, whiny-baby train of thinking.

Wow can you carry any more water for the studios? This isn’t the laserdisc and Suncoast era anymore. Paying anything beyond $20 for 2 hours of entertainment is a farce, especially considering a large chunk of these industry 4k remaster jobs were done years ago and scaled down to blu-ray and kept in the vault to be released again later on a better format. Their initial investment has long been returned over before UHD was even a thing.

So tell me, why should the same exact master on a UHD cost as much as double, in many cases even thrice the SAME master on a blu-ray? They’re both enscribed on a nickels worth of plastic, the manufacturing cost is virtually the same, but one format is taxing you extra. The economics of it all make no sense if you examine it other than recognizing it as pure greed, much like how companies like Best Buy or Monster made insane margins for years selling customers $60 HDMI cables because they wanted to get their new TV hooked up now and not wait a week for a $2 cable to ship from monoprice. Same concept, “Deep down I know this Matrix disc costs way too much but damnit I want my reference disc nowwwww!”

[ray0414]

Originally Posted by Legend293

Then we have seen different things. I feel like with grain it loses detail it makes the image soft and blurry. The walking dead is the worse with it.

heres probably the worst shot in the entire film. you can see that removing the grain really smoothed over this scene and quite a bit of detail was smeared.


http://screenshotcomparison.com/comp...4137/picture:3

[WJWS Channel 13:Amity]

I would have bought if they included Jurassic Park 3D and Jurassic World 3D.
Without those I’ll stick with my current collection.

[Optimus]

Originally Posted by Legend293

Then we have seen different things. I feel like with grain it loses detail it makes the image soft and blurry. The walking dead is the worse with it.

Lol well now I've seen everything

[CHONK!]

Was expecting this to look like utter trash, after reading all the posts here. Hold on to your butts... Jurassic Park looks pretty good!

Classic Movie, Full Screen 4K, Decent Highlights and Glistening Jeff Goldbloom

[AVfile]

Originally Posted by ray0414

heres probably the worst shot in the entire film. you can see that removing the grain really smoothed over this scene and quite a bit of detail was smeared.


http://screenshotcomparison.com/comp...4137/picture:3

I saw that here too:

https://caps-a-holic.com/c.php?go=1&...116774&i=2&l=1

The UHD is so bad I thought they had the pics backwards!

Here's another:

https://caps-a-holic.com/c.php?go=1&...116781&i=8&l=1

Less detail and the brown is back. Could they have cobbled in some scenes from the 3D version?

[jobalexang]

I would've liked to have seen a slightly warmer tint and more natural film grain, but I think this is a very solid transfer. It does look pretty filmic, with earthier colors compared to the garishly bright 2011 blu-rays.

[coaster]

Quick question, if I redeem the digital codes on Vudu will I get the UHD versions, or do I have to go to the universalredeem site?

You get the UHD versions straight through VUDU and it will port over to MA as well.

[Riddhi2011]

Originally Posted by ray0414

SDR image:


original HDR shot from above:

The colour grading is too bluish; same tones as the 2011 BD. This is not how it looked in the prints. The 3D is closer to accurate -

JP3D Helicopter.jpg

[nerdy916]

https://youtu.be/aaETPVVQAHs

Check out my unboxing

[Riddhi2011]

The only thing the 3D image needed was a bit of brightness in 2D. Like this perhaps -

JP3D Helicopter brightened.jpg

[kristoffer]

Originally Posted by Brian81

Those look bad!

Wax on

[StingingVelvet]

Watched two of these tonight...

Jurassic Park: Really torn on it. The HDR adds a TON of depth and film-like contrast to the picture. Looked at the BD afterward and it looked super faded and flat in comparison. That said I am definitely on the side of those who see it as waxy and suffering from too many hits of the DNR stick. I'm sure this is due to the 3D conversion, same as T2, but it looks really bad a lot of the time. Also, as some have mentioned, I feel the grain/noise of the BD helps the CGI a good bit, especially in daytime shots.

One weird part I noticed was when Lex and Tim run to the kitchen. On the BD the kitchen looks bright, then Lex turns off the lights and it gets dark. On the UHD I noticed it is pretty dark to begin with, not changing nearly as much when she turns off the lights. Not saying the HDR is "wrong" here, but just something interesting I noticed.

I'm really 50/50 on which I would watch next time, which is a bummer. Was hoping for a surprise homerun like The Mummy got.

Jurassic World: Stunning disc, as every has said. The BD is stunning upscaled too though, so unlike a catalog title I wasn't exactly basking in drool. HDR definitely adds some nice pop and texture, but putting the BD in afterward I didn't find it a night and day experience like I have so many UHD->BD comparisons before it (mostly catalog titles, granted). If you're the type of person who thinks something like X-Men: Days of Future Past was a stunning upgrade then I'd say this is in the same league. Well done.

P.S. Just to annoy Geoffy

Originally Posted by Geoff D

Clare in the Unimog with the boys. Please please PLEASE note that I've had to jack up the exposure to silly levels to try and capture the difference in black levels so IGNORE HOW HORRIBLY BLOWN OUT THE HIGHLIGHTS ARE. But you should be able to see how the UHD is drawing out more shadow detail on the back of the boy's head and around her eyes:

[Show spoiler]
BD



UHD

I compared this shot directly because I saw your post earlier today and I gotta say, I see equal detail on both discs on my setup, which shows a LOT more of her face and VERY clearly than either of your shots do. Don't ask me!

P.P.S. I know people hate digibooks but hot damn is this packaging gorgeous. Love the original movie posters being used. I put the discs in the BD packaging for safe keeping but like with the Spider-Man sets I am happy to have this thing on the shelf!

[oddbox83]

Those screenshots from the first film look horrible. Worse than T2 in my opinion, because it looks processed and rough. Exactly the sort of look when a non-optimum scan is heavily processed. They wouldn't have though, would they?

[Riddhi2011]

Guys, the original film never looked as cold or pink as the 2D BD/UHD have us believe. Look at these photos of the Jeep below. They were officially SAND BEIGE and red coloured, not pink and orange -

1. Production still -

JP Jeep BTS lowrez.jpg

2. ILM still -

JP_Jeep.jpg

3. 3D BD brightened

JP 3DBD Jeep colour brightened.jpg

4. UHD -

JP UHD Jeep colour.jpg

The UHD does not look show the original Jeep colours at all. It's a travesty!

5. Below is what a proper sand beige Jeep looks like. Notice how it matches all the stills except the UHD (and 2D LD,BD,UHD) one? -

JP sand Beige.jpg

For more solid proof, look no further than JP Motor Pool. They have been doing cinema-accurate paint jobs on the Jeeps and the Explorers for years -

http://www.jpmotorpool.com/reference...eep_guide.html

I've tried my best to proove to you guys how farther removed from the original colour timing the UHD is. Now, if you still prefer the present colours then I really don't know what to say to you guys. Universal home video department has destroyed the original look of the films in favour of a pale video-like pink and cold look.