2001: A Space Odyssey 4K UHD (1968)

[xbs2034]

Originally Posted by Schism213

2 theatres in Buffalo that I know of. Not sure where else or how wide.

Thanks, well at least that suggests it won't be super limited if they are playing it in multiple theaters in the same area.

Hopefully it comes to NYC, as I would be interesting in seeing how a native 70mm title looks as DCP (I've of course seen some in 70mm, and titles like Ben-Hur and Sound of Music are some of my favorite looking classic Blus) and seeing 2001 in a theatrical presentation, though since its 70mm run at Village East Cinemas just ended a couple weeks ago and they do a couple screenings every year in Museum of the Moving Image in early August, possible that they figure the market was already covered by film showings.

[SeeMoreDigital]

Originally Posted by xbs2034

...Hopefully it comes to NYC, as I would be interesting in seeing how a native 70mm title looks as DCP...

The DCI will have the capacity to look quite a bit different to the 4K UHD disc release primarily because the DCI images (which are usually a succession of JPEG2000 images) offer a much greater colour palette

[xbs2034]

Originally Posted by SeeMoreDigital

The DCI will have the capacity to look quite a bit different to the 4K UHD disc release primarily because the DCI images (which are usually a succession of JPEG2000 images) offer a much greater colour palette

Oh I believe it.

And I've been very impressed with some recent DCP restorations of 35mm titles I've seen: namely River of No Return (shown as part of the New York Film Festival), and The Maze (by 3D film archive, though did have perhaps a half dozen iffy shots). Obviously there was no UHDs to compare them to, but the image quality on them was spectacular, while still retaining that clear film-like look originally intended.

[Croweyes1121]

Originally Posted by Geoff D

It literally says this in the 4K press release which is on page 118 of this thread, along with direct quotes from Nolan about the 4K UHD version:

Interesting that he goes out of his way to say that this will be the best way to see an approximation of a film PRINT (i.e., not the OCN). If that wording wasn't unintentional, that could go a long way toward explaining his approach, both (presumably) toward this film and also toward his own films on UHD.

[Geoff D]

Originally Posted by SeeMoreDigital

The DCI will have the capacity to look quite a bit different to the 4K UHD disc release primarily because the DCI images (which are usually a succession of JPEG2000 images) offer a much greater colour palette

How's that work? DCI is based around an XYZ container but the images contained therein are usually mastered in P3 and are mapped into the XYZ space. (JPEG2000 being an intraframe system rather than the interframe codecs of consumer video has no such bearing on colour reproduction.) Sure, DCI doesn't have to worry about chroma subsampling but apart from sharper chroma vs the UHD I fail to understand where this "much greater colour palette" is stemming from.

Originally Posted by Croweyes1121

Interesting that he goes out of his way to say that this will be the best way to see an approximation of a film PRINT (i.e., not the OCN). If that wording wasn't unintentional, that could go a long way toward explaining his approach, both (presumably) toward this film and also toward his own films on UHD.

That's always been his goal with his video based versions, even for digital cinema: grading them to emulate the prints.

[Doctorossi]

Originally Posted by Croweyes1121

Interesting that he goes out of his way to say that this will be the best way to see an approximation of a film PRINT (i.e., not the OCN). If that wording wasn't unintentional, that could go a long way toward explaining his approach, both (presumably) toward this film and also toward his own films on UHD.

He's on record as designing his home video masters to replicate the look of viewing a print.

[frozenhamster]

Originally Posted by Geoff D

It literally says this in the 4K press release which is on page 118 of this thread, along with direct quotes from Nolan about the 4K UHD version:

Don't know how much clearer that can get

As someone who has written promotional press releases in the past, trust me when I say they cannot possibly be considered "clear" about facts.

Nothing in there says he oversaw anything, or made decisions about anything. "Worked closely with" can mean anything. And Nolan's own quote doesn't actually say he did any decision-making work on the project. Sounds more like promotional patter about how great 4K is.

That press release could more easily be read as WB using Nolan's proximity to the project as a way of selling it than that he actually oversaw anything. It's possible he did, but I've seen nothing so far that would seriously indicate that.

[xbs2034]

Originally Posted by Geoff D

How's that work? DCI is based around an XYZ container but the images contained therein are usually mastered in P3 and are mapped into the XYZ space. (JPEG2000 being an intraframe system rather than the interframe codecs of consumer video has no such bearing on colour reproduction.) Sure, DCI doesn't have to worry about chroma subsampling but apart from sharper chroma vs the UHD I fail to understand where this "much greater colour palette" is stemming from.


That's always been his goal with his video based versions, even for digital cinema: grading them to emulate the prints.

Yeah, I noticed he is willing to even leave in some imperfections from film onto digital versions (noticed dust specs on the IMAX laser version of Dunkirk, there is a hair on the UHD of Interstellar- which I still have to say I like a lot overall). Since they decided to leave a couple scratches there in the negatives they were scanning of 2001 in order for the "unrestored" prints to more authentic, I wouldn't be at all shocked if they make it to the DCP or UHD as well.

[Geoff D]

Originally Posted by frozenhamster

As someone who has written promotional press releases in the past, trust me when I say they cannot possibly be considered "clear" about facts.

Nothing in there says he oversaw anything, or made decisions about anything. "Worked closely with" can mean anything. And Nolan's own quote doesn't actually say he did any decision-making work on the project. Sounds more like promotional patter about how great 4K is.

That press release could more easily be read as WB using Nolan's proximity to the project as a way of selling it than that he actually oversaw anything. It's possible he did, but I've seen nothing so far that would seriously indicate that.

I've heard other intel beyond the fripperies of press releases. NOT that Nolan has ****ed it up, but that he has taken over the mastering for the home video deliverables....and the chips will fall where they may. Preferably not onto a Melting Dullea's face.

Originally Posted by xbs2034

Yeah, I noticed he is willing to even leave in some imperfections from film onto digital versions (noticed dust specs on the IMAX laser version of Dunkirk, there is a hair on the UHD of Interstellar- which I still have to say I like a lot overall). Since they decided to leave a couple scratches there in the negatives they were scanning of 2001 in order for the "unrestored" prints to more authentic, I wouldn't be at all shocked if they make it to the DCP or UHD as well.

They erased the most infamous hair on Interstellar's 4K disc, for what that's worth: https://forum.blu-ray.com/showthread...r#post14489751

[Doctorossi]

Originally Posted by Geoff D

he has taken over the mastering for the home video deliverables...

[Ernest Rister]

I want Nolan to oversee the home video release of Fantasia. The video would look like it did in theaters in 1990, Deems Taylor's dialog would be inaudible, and the music would be so damn loud, the neighbors would be calling in complaints.

[CarlosMeat]

Originally Posted by Vangeli

Color-wise, I'm fine with the look of the trailer.

Your posts generally are very interesting ,balanced etc are you being sarcastic in this one ?

[CarlosMeat]

Originally Posted by Ernest Rister

I want Nolan to oversee the home video release of Fantasia. The video would look like it did in theaters in 1990, Deems Taylor's dialog would be inaudible, and the music would be so damn loud, the neighbors would be calling in complaints.

So it wasn't just me. Dunkirk had essentially never ending foreground music.... tedious and tiring.

[Pyoko]

Originally Posted by Vangeli

The highlights with WCG don't have to be brought into dim yellow for the image to still recieve a warm push, though. SDR can only handle so much, that's why entire frames in SDR have a blanket yellow push, teal push, blue push, etc. WCG offers much more refinement and we've seen it plenty by now; you can somewhat heavily grade frames without draining them of all the shades of color.

So even if they go extreme with the warmth + teal push in WCG/HDR, it'll still look less "pushed" than the trailer. But based off of Nolan's UHDs, I figure (and hope) it's closer to natural color on UHD.

It's mostly that they're graded differently, WCG itself has no such property, and you could just as well end up with less saturation/color contamination from the highlight compression for SDR, it depends on the order of operations.

WCG can be fantastic together with HDR, but it also seems to be somewhat misunderstood (as better color everywhere all the time). Take a look at Dunkirk for example, colorwise the BD and UHD are nearly identical because there's just nothing in the movie that makes use of the additional saturation that WCG allows for, and of course the whites are just as creamy.

Originally Posted by Doctorossi

I’m surprised at how many are stating they’d be fine with whatever look as long as holy detail is retained. Uneven detail (as a product of heavy DNR applied scene by scene) would be a problem for me, but if I could choose accurate chroma with 80% of the potential resolution or 100% resolution on a teal and orange funhouse, I’d give up that top end detail in a heartbeat every time.

The teal war was over before it even began, the last 10 years have just been people banging their heads against a wall. It's just not worth the effort in my opinion, or should I have skipped buying Blade Runner, Terminator and Aliens in protest when they looked so great otherwise? I don't think so.

For me it's also mitigated by a number of points:

- Just like with the whitepoint you get used to it and stop seeing it that clearly after a while.
- From some semi-objective color theory standpoint, the teal and cream grade of Dunkirk and the 2001 trailer at least looks good, it would have been worse if it were inaccurate/revisionist and looked amateurish and ugly.
- For every tealified transfer there's almost never any proof that it's actually inaccurate, other than comparisons to old magenta video transfers or people claiming to remember the exact colors from 35 years ago. So even if it's unlikely there's still that shadow of a doubt you could cling to in most cases.

[Geoff D]

Originally Posted by Pyoko

The teal war was over before it even began, the last 10 years have just been people banging their heads against a wall. It's just not worth the effort in my opinion, or should I have skipped buying Blade Runner, Terminator and Aliens in protest when they looked so great otherwise? I don't think so.

For me it's also mitigated by a number of points:

- Just like with the whitepoint you get used to it and stop seeing it that clearly after a while.
- From some semi-objective color theory standpoint, the teal and cream grade of Dunkirk and the 2001 trailer at least looks good, it would have been worse if it were inaccurate/revisionist and looked amateurish and ugly.
- For every tealified transfer there's almost never any proof that it's actually inaccurate, other than comparisons to old magenta video transfers or people claiming to remember the exact colors from 35 years ago. So even if it's unlikely there's still that shadow of a doubt you could cling to in most cases.

Exactly this, I've made my peace with it. Sure, I love to mention in my write-ups about how x movie on UHD has "dialled out the green tint of the Blu-ray" but when I watched Aliens on Blu yet again a couple months back all I could do was marvel at how stunning it looked, colour and all. And on MGM's exceedingly yellow TGTBATU remaster I can just change my TV's colour temp to Cool if it still bugs me.

[Doctorossi]

Originally Posted by Pyoko

It's just not worth the effort in my opinion, or should I have skipped buying Blade Runner, Terminator and Aliens in protest when they looked so great otherwise? I don't think so.

I'm not saying I would skip a tealed 2001, either; just that if given a choice, an accurate grade is much more important to me than the finest level of detail (that level of detail that people never saw on commercial film prints in the first place).

[Agent Kay]

Originally Posted by Geoff D

It literally says this in the 4K press release which is on page 118 of this thread, along with direct quotes from Nolan about the 4K UHD version:





Don't know how much clearer that can get

I had not seen that, that is why I was asking.
I had no hope for this when I heard his name and was waiting in shots anyway.

[CarlosMeat]

Originally Posted by Pyoko

- For every tealified transfer there's almost never any proof that it's actually inaccurate, other than comparisons to old magenta video transfers or people claiming to remember the exact colors from 35 years ago. So even if it's unlikely there's still that shadow of a doubt you could cling to in most cases.

Yet you know that Blade Runner isn't accurate ..how ? I simply use films for fifty years up to the time the teal cancer started. Not one or two or some vague memory but every single one.

I agree at least for new films the war is lost but it is their choice to go down that path from day one. With films like 2001 it is indeed a revisionist travesty if the final UHD ends up like that trailer.

Just use the UHD Lawrence as the reference absolutely incredible:

[Geoff D]

Originally Posted by Pyoko

It's mostly that they're graded differently, WCG itself has no such property, and you could just as well end up with less saturation/color contamination from the highlight compression for SDR, it depends on the order of operations.

WCG can be fantastic together with HDR, but it also seems to be somewhat misunderstood (as better color everywhere all the time). Take a look at Dunkirk for example, colorwise the BD and UHD are nearly identical because there's just nothing in the movie that makes use of the additional saturation that WCG allows for, and of course the whites are just as creamy.

Point taken with Dunkirk but with 709 trim passes of digitally-finished stuff there's definitely a trend of them having a blanket tint of one shade or another on the Blu-rays whereas the UHD is more neutral. Not all of them do to be sure, as some UHDs reverse the trend and add their own blanket tint while the BD is way more natural (Straight Outta Compton springs to mind), but for the most part it's certainly been the case with my own visual comparisons of SDR and HDR.

There's a piece which Penton alerted us to on the BBC R&D website about the Royal Wedding and the challenges of capturing it in HDR, the author making note of how SDR 709 is often over-saturated as a quirk of this transfer function being intended for ye olde low-brightness CRTs, referencing how the walls of a castle did indeed have more of a yellowy look in SDR but were paler - and more accurate - in HDR. So while I've made my peace with the teal menace I'm pretty sure that 709 has played its part in amping it up. Something like Dunkirk may well fall inside the 709 gamut anyway, but all the colour science shiznit that was employed on that flick by Fotokem ensured that the deliverables would adhere to the original intent as closely as possible for each format.

[The Fallen Deity]

Originally Posted by CarlosMeat

Yet you know that Blade Runner isn't accurate ..how ? I simply use films for fifty years up to the time the teal cancer started. Not one or two or some vague memory but every single one.

I agree at least for new films the war is lost but it is their choice to go down that path from day one. With films like 2001 it is indeed a revisionist travesty if the final UHD ends up like that trailer.

It's a well known fact that Blade Runner got "modernized" colourwise for the Final Cut release.