Jurassic Park Collection 4K UHD (1993-2015)

[MuffinMcFluffin]

I wouldn't want that as my color grade anyway.

Gimme that detail, though.

[Riddhi2011]

Originally Posted by MuffinMcFluffin

I wouldn't want that as my color grade anyway.

Gimme that detail, though.

I have no idea why you wouldn't want the original lush, vibrant, warm and tropical look of the film that Spielberg and his colorist settled on in 1993. It has better white balance and the colours look natural and lively. Do you prefer the lifeless, dull, drained and pinkish look of the older DVDs and the 2011 Blu-ray instead, where the grasses look dead, the contrast is poor, the white balance is non-existent and everything looks gray, pink and blue? Even the UHD, despite better detail, chose to ignore the 35mm and go for the dull blues and pinks of the 2011 Blu-ray, in addition to cropping the frame further. The grading for the DVD, Blu-ray [and UHD] is revisionist. It does disservice to the original look of the film. The 35mm with its inherent softness and grain has enough detail for me.

[Riddhi2011]

Another thing I noticed is how they rotated the 4K scan sideways, clockwise. Grant, who stands more-or-less straight in the 35mm print, looks slanted to the right on the UHD. The revisionist slanting also has the side effect of cropping out more picture from all four corners of the frame.

Images - 35mm (top), UHD (bottom) -

JP 35mm Sick Trike Grant and Harding 1-85-1 lowres.jpg

JP UHD Sick Trike Grant and Harding 1-85-1 lowres.jpg

[Ernest Rister]

Originally Posted by cybersoga

Because the Jurassic Park original camera negatives haven't been scanned since the film was made. This is one film that deserves a full restoration like they did with star wars but do they still have all the original elements?

Spielberg's 3D conversion used a 4K scan of the original negative, if this article can be trusted...

"Next comes a step that will warm the hearts of film preservation advocates: a full 4K digital scan of the original negative, followed by a restoration to eliminate scratches, grain noise, and other natural artifacts incurred in the 20 years since its completion."

https://www.flavorwire.com/382554/ju...mes-a-3d-movie

[Riddhi2011]

Originally Posted by Ernest Rister

Spielberg's 3D conversion used a 4K scan of the original negative, if this article can be trusted...

"Next comes a step that will warm the hearts of film preservation advocates: a full 4K digital scan of the original negative, followed by a restoration to eliminate scratches, grain noise, and other natural artifacts incurred in the 20 years since its completion."

https://www.flavorwire.com/382554/ju...mes-a-3d-movie

They did scan the original negatives, but the fact that they based the remastering on the 2000-era master with its dull grey, pink and cold tones instead of the original warm, tropical look; the fact that they cropped a lot into the picture, sacrificing vital headroom, ruined their efforts at presenting the film faithfully. The laserdisc [and widescreen VHS] was the last time they stuck to the framing philosophy. The colour was more accurate on the very first 4:3 VHS editions (1994, 1997 and 2001) of the three films.

[HeavyHitter]

That over-processed look on the original BD is like nails on a chalkboard.

[StingingVelvet]

I actually like the cool temp look of the night shots a lot, though I would still rather they be accurate at the end of the day.

Main problem with the UHD to my memory is any shot with effects is processed to crap. The natural shots looked pretty good IIRC, accurate color debate aside.

[batman2000]

I wish videophiles had a huge voice so blu rays uhds etc. would come out perfect.

[Pocketkid2]

TL;DR none of the Bluray/4K versions have amazing color grading and Universal doesn't seem to care

[jpilla415]

Wow, those 35mm scans look amazing.

[Kyle15]

All of the Blu releases look disgusting. The blue gel lighting in the night shots is totally wrecked. Periwinkle blue cast invades every inch of the first master. UHD is closer but man, that processing. Nasty.

[Kyle15]

Originally Posted by jpilla415

Wow, those 35mm scans look amazing. Anyone know where I might look?

It's not ready yet. Rest assured you will know when the time comes.

[sfmarine]

Originally Posted by Pocketkid2

TL;DR none of the Bluray/4K versions have amazing color grading and Universal doesn't seem to care

Basically. We're still waiting for the definitive release of JP. The film definitely deserves better.

[WBMakeVMarsMovieNOW]

Originally Posted by jpilla415

Wow....

There is nowhere to found but just some random frames.

[BenjaminG]

There was talk that a 30th anniversary re-release of JP1 might be coming this year. Still no weird on that. I really hope it does though.

[WBMakeVMarsMovieNOW]

Originally Posted by sfmarine

Basically. We're still waiting for the definitive release of JP. The film definitely deserves better.

It would be awesome for them to put out a non-DNR'ed, original colors UHD from that OCN scan. It's weird that they did so much DNR since the film seems to be relative low on rough grain to start, way less tons of harsh grain than tons of other films, so surprising they even thought to go with DNR at all for any parts of it. It also could have done without quite so much digital type processing for details which make it seem a touch computery at times, especially since with the OCN scan versions there is way no need for that.

[WBMakeVMarsMovieNOW]

Originally Posted by BenjaminG

There was talk that a 30th anniversary re-release of JP1 might be coming this year. Still no weird on that. I really hope it does though.

There were some smaller chains that did the re-release a little while back. Saw it on a huge screen! Awesome! (same DCP as has been used in other recent showings like the Fathom a few years back, etc. nothing new)

[WBMakeVMarsMovieNOW]

Originally Posted by Ernest Rister

Spielberg's 3D conversion used a 4K scan of the original negative, if this article can be trusted...

"Next comes a step that will warm the hearts of film preservation advocates: a full 4K digital scan of the original negative, followed by a restoration to eliminate scratches, grain noise, and other natural artifacts incurred in the 20 years since its completion."

https://www.flavorwire.com/382554/ju...mes-a-3d-movie

umm not so much! the bolded, that is what all the film preservationists dislike (aside from changed colors), all that DNR and JP didn't even have tons of film grain like some movies so all they did is made wax of some scenes and made others look a touch 'off' and odd

[Riddhi2011]

Originally Posted by WBMakeVMarsMovieNOW

It would be awesome for them to put out a non-DNR'ed, original colors UHD from that OCN scan. It's weird that they did so much DNR since the film seems to be relative low on rough grain to start, way less tons of harsh grain than tons of other films, so surprising they even thought to go with DNR at all for any parts of it. It also could have done without quite so much digital type processing for details which make it seem a touch computery at times, especially since with the OCN scan versions there is way no need for that.

A proper restoration of Jurassic Park trilogy would look closer to the awesome work done on The Mummy (1999). It looks sharp, but has a gorgeous warm, high contrast look with ample film grain and subtle gate weave. Also, the UHD has a wider frame than the previous blu-ray and DVD versions.

So, JP's re-release should have those rich yellow and green tones, plus film grain and a wider framing, like the widescreen laserdisc. But, so far, such a restoration effort has not been undertaken by Universal.

Just look at the deep contrast and that gorgeous colour separation between the black and the blues and the greens of the Explorer of the 35mm. Compare it with the UHD below it -

JP 35mm Rex pushes car lowres_1-85-1.jpg
JP UHD Rex pushes car lowres.jpg

The nuances in the colours of the 35mm can be improved, as would the shadow details when they remaster it again, but overall, the 35mm colours are so delicious that they make me hungry for more, while the UHD gives my eye-strain.

They tried it with the 3D version, but rather than bright yellows and greens, they went orange and cropped too much into the picture.
The current UHD looks like a upscaled and DNR'd version of the 2000 master, despite being a 4K scan. It has too much of a cold, blue, pink and grey look with increased saturation but no warmth. And like the 3D blu-ray, it too suffers from heavy cropping at the edges, unlike the 35mm projected image which had more headroom; a fact that was maintained in the WS Laserdisc.

[MuffinMcFluffin]

Originally Posted by Riddhi2011

I have no idea why you wouldn't want the original lush, vibrant, warm and tropical look of the film that Spielberg and his colorist settled on in 1993. It has better white balance and the colours look natural and lively. Do you prefer the lifeless, dull, drained and pinkish look of the older DVDs and the 2011 Blu-ray instead, where the grasses look dead, the contrast is poor, the white balance is non-existent and everything looks gray, pink and blue? Even the UHD, despite better detail, chose to ignore the 35mm and go for the dull blues and pinks of the 2011 Blu-ray, in addition to cropping the frame further. The grading for the DVD, Blu-ray [and UHD] is revisionist. It does disservice to the original look of the film. The 35mm with its inherent softness and grain has enough detail for me.

Way to straw man what I was trying to say. I never once said I liked anything about any current releases from a DVD, Blu-ray, or UHD.

I just don't like my whites being Matrix-green. I would've preferred something probably like this:




(versus this)




It may seem subtle, but I promise that it's not.

Of course it's an improvement over our past releases. I never said that it wasn't.