Unforgiven 4K UHD (1992)

[StingingVelvet]

Originally Posted by bbwiscfan

And yet I love several of Clint's films (the later films he has directed like Gran Torino, Mystic River, Sully, etc.). I am contemplating getting this as a blind buy, I assume you all would have no problem recommending this film?

It's easily his best later work, and one of the best westerns of all time. Can't imagine a Clint fan not loving it.

[DJJez]

Originally Posted by ncraft

I only saw it in one other scene. I thoroughly enjoyed the PQ and think it's a worthy upgrade. The good definitely outweighs the bad.

aside from being slighly too dark at night (i agree with other dude though, it was very dark in these times so kinda fits the movie), the movie looks stunning. the resolution is so impressive. one of the best 35mm movies ive seen on 4k for sure

[ncraft]

Originally Posted by DJJez

aside from being slighly too dark at night (i agree with other dude though, it was very dark in these times so kinda fits the movie), the movie looks stunning. the resolution is so impressive. one of the best 35mm movies ive seen on 4k for sure

Yeah it's an incredibly crisp picture. When my wife puts down the iPad and comments on the great PQ, I know I'm watching a winner.

[mzupeman]

It's a good lookin' catalog title, for sure.

[L'armée des ombres]

Originally Posted by bbwiscfan

And yet I love several of Clint's films (the later films he has directed like Gran Torino, Mystic River, Sully, etc.). I am contemplating getting this as a blind buy, I assume you all would have no problem recommending this film?

One of the best films made in my opinion

[Khronikos]

Originally Posted by StingingVelvet

It's easily his best later work, and one of the best westerns of all time. Can't imagine a Clint fan not loving it.

I don't know how anyone can actively dislike the film unless they are averse to violence. I would say Mystic River is pretty close to this one in quality though.

[vincentric]

Originally Posted by ncraft

I only saw it in one other scene. I thoroughly enjoyed the PQ and think it's a worthy upgrade. The good definitely outweighs the bad.

Definitely getting it now though will try to hold out for it to go $20-25~ before pulling the trigger. Like with Aliens, I've seen and bought Unforgiven across several media formats so many times I've got it darn near memorized.

[StingingVelvet]

Originally Posted by Khronikos

I don't know how anyone can actively dislike the film unless they are averse to violence. I would say Mystic River is pretty close to this one in quality though.

Well I meant ones he starred in. I haven't seen Mystic River since a DVD rental when it first came out. Should get that sometime soon.

[HeavyHitter]

I watched the disc last night in SDR + rec 2020 and thought it looked good. I didn't find it too dark (especially with the UB900 conversion slider at +2) and the color took on a very natural look. It's nice to see the original color timing in place and no new teal suddenly appearing. I did see a little bit of ringing at times that almost looked like mild edge enhancement, but the image itself didn't look oversharpened if that makes sense. It had a generally smooth, pleasing look that projected well. Some of the film grain didn't render quite as well in some scenes as I've seen on other 35mm sourced UHD BDs but this was not a major issue - I'm not sure if this was an encoding issue or just something in the master but the early scene with the skies and the pigs was an example.

I only looked a few scenes from the BD which it too looked good. However, I felt the color was just a bit more natural looking on the UHD BD. The BD looked just a tad softer in comparison too and maybe a little brighter. The comparison kind of reminded me the same of Goodfellas UHD BD vs BD.

[Geoff D]

VERY quick impressions on the 65ZD9 + UB900: the UHD doesn't look darker to me at all, both remastered versions have a lot of dark scenes and the UHD resolves more shadow detail in those moments. The colour does seem slightly richer and warmer on the BD. The UHD resolves a bit more grain than the BD which is par for the course, it's not a grainy movie anyway so it doesn't become a grain fest, it's just a nice little extra dusting of the stuff. Didn't notice any shenanigans with the grain itself, but then the SDR conversion can make these things more apparent.

The 'force field' scene when English Bob is carted out of town looks FAR worse in still form than in motion, there's still some odd ringing there but unless I pause it then I don't see the weird cloaking device wibbling. I spotted some fizzing noise on the horizon behind Clint during his close-ups in the valley shooting scene (when Morgan Freeman can't shoot). Someone posted a photo of the two men on horses in silhouette as an example of ringing but that shot looked perfect to me.

Will post again when I've done some proper side by side comparisons.

[bbwiscfan]

Originally Posted by StingingVelvet

Well I meant ones he starred in. I haven't seen Mystic River since a DVD rental when it first came out. Should get that sometime soon.

FYI Funny story; last night I looked online and found that BB's website still has this for pre-order for a release date of May 23. I thought, so I saw this at BB early and could have snagged it! Nope, it was released last week and BB just has this as an error (may have been brought up earlier on this forum).

Anyway, I just came back from my regular BB and picked this up while looking for a new phone case for my wife so decision made . Can't wait to see this one.

[Geoff D]

Just done some AB comparisons and whoever mentioned this is another Goodfellas is spot on. While Michael states in his review that one was outsourced while the other stayed in-house the results of BD vs UHD are remarkably similar, with more colour saturation on the proper SDR graded BD against the more balanced UHD grade. Spoilered for comfort:

[Show spoiler]Sure, that extra saturation is eye-catching but as with Goodfellas it also overcooks it to the point of gaudiness, e.g. all the lamp-lit interiors have this intense Tangy Cheese Doritos look on the new Unforgiven BD while the UHD cools it down somewhat, and that boosted saturation does the grain no favours on the BD as it looks coarser and noisier vs the finer and more even-tempered grain on the UHD. The BD looks almost comic-booky at times such is the boost in the colour. The UHD grade itself favours a greener, earthier kind of look, it's Relevant-esque in some spots.

Regarding detail, there IS more refinement in the UHD. It's a mighty close run thing to be sure and again proves that in real-world circumstances 35mm is reaching the limits of resolution in 4K but it hits you in the long-distance shots, things like the detail on houses and barns (with their myriad straight lines, being made out of planks of wood and all) are more finely rendered. Reminds me of Magnificent Seven's UHD in that respect.

As for The Darkness, the UHD giveth and it taketh away. The BD has a contrastier look to it while the blacks are a bit flatter on the UHD so it's duller but not darker to my eyes, if that makes sense. So while the campfire scenes look a little more subdued there's more shadow detail on the ground around them in UHD, while the highlights of the fire (and most of the flames/lamps in the movie in general) are just orange globs of light on the BD whereas the UHD holds more detail in the flames AND makes them burn brighter at the same time.

That brings me to the dynamic range itself, which reveals itself in the other usual areas like skies and clouds. In a way the BD has a more painterly, distant look to the skies while in the UHD they look more detailed and immediate and just more 'real' (technical term there). At the very start of chapter 26 (pause it and then manually skip to 26, leave it on pause) there's a good example of the dynamic range. There's a bunch of fellas sat at a table playing cards with some bright fixtures behind them (windows, doorframe) and on the BD the cards that the fella nearest camera is holding are almost completely blown out, as is the window on the right side of them. The UHD brings back more information on the cards and said window is no longer blown out with brightness, the scenery visible through the open doorway is also more keen.

Regarding the infamous force field shot, could that be an early example of a digital sky replacement? Some of that stuff would be a b*tch to roto around which is maybe why it looks so squinky. Or it's just plain been ****ed up in the new transfer. Didn't spot much in the way of haloing in the rest of the movie though.

All in all, not the kind of thing to show off to friends and neighbours (as has been mentioned) but a nicely refined 4K experience, one that eschews the overblown saturation of the BD for a look that's less romanticised and more realistic which some might argue is a better fit considering the themes of the film.

What bakes my noodle is that we've two different looks here so which is truer to the answer print as mentioned by Michael in his review? I don't doubt the veracity of his words as he's got an in with Warners, it's just that it can't be both that got colour corrected side-by-sided to the AP because they're markedly different in terms of colour. Was the 4K HDR done as the primary version and the BD trimmed from that, them boosting the colour in response to the smaller gamut of 709 perhaps? Dunno.

[Geoff D]

On a more mercenary note, I just sold the UV code for a fiver so all in all this release cost me £14, or roughly $18 of your American dollars. Verr naice!

[HeavyHitter]

Originally Posted by Geoff D

Just done some AB comparisons and whoever mentioned this is another Goodfellas is spot on. While Michael states in his review that one was outsourced while the other stayed in-house the results of BD vs UHD are remarkably similar, with more colour saturation on the proper SDR graded BD against the more balanced UHD grade. Spoilered for comfort:


All in all, not the kind of thing to show off to friends and neighbours (as has been mentioned) but a nicely refined 4K experience, one that eschews the overblown saturation of the BD for a look that's less romanticised and more realistic which some might argue is a better fit considering the themes of the film.

What bakes my noodle is that we've two different looks here so which is truer to the answer print as mentioned by Michael in his review? I don't doubt the veracity of his words as he's got an in with Warners, it's just that it can't be both that got colour corrected side-by-sided to the AP because they're markedly different in terms of colour. Was the 4K HDR done as the primary version and the BD trimmed from that, them boosting the colour in response to the smaller gamut of 709 perhaps? Dunno.

Yep, that was me about the comparison to Goodfellas. Yes, it felt very similar in that regards. I am guessing the color grading was done originally for the 4K version (in P3) and then downsampled to the BD for 709 since these were newer 4K transfers done in HDR with UHD BD in mind. I think this is causing the BD's colors to look a little artificial as a result of Warner's process. I cannot speak for other studios and haven't compared Star Trek 09 from Paramount yet. I say this because when I saw Raiders of the Lost Ark in DCP a couple of years ago, it was a similar effect compared to the BD. The skintones on the DCP looked more naturally (less) saturated and the reds were more red as some complained the reds looked too orange on the BD (such as on the Nazi flag). The DCP still had a tinge of orange, but more red for sure compared to the BD.

You mentioned before about the SDR conversion processing affecting grain - can you explain?

[Iffy]

Originally Posted by jh901

So, why wasn't Unforgiven filmed with a Red Epic Dragon camera? Gotta blame the DP for going with 35mm film (back in 1992).

Many younger people today don't know how actual films should look, much less how they did look after having been projected over and over again...

[DJJez]

as others have said this def reminds me of goodfellas. transfer wont blow you away and the differences are subtle buts its def a nice improvement as geoff said for the big wide shots the resolution is insane

[Geoff D]

Originally Posted by HeavyHitter

Yep, that was me about the comparison to Goodfellas. Yes, it felt very similar in that regards. I am guessing the color grading was done originally for the 4K version (in P3) and then downsampled to the BD for 709 since these were newer 4K transfers done in HDR with UHD BD in mind. I think this is causing the BD's colors to look a little artificial as a result of Warner's process. I cannot speak for other studios and haven't compared Star Trek 09 from Paramount yet. I say this because when I saw Raiders of the Lost Ark in DCP a couple of years ago, it was a similar effect compared to the BD. The skintones on the DCP looked more naturally (less) saturated and the reds were more red as some complained the reds looked too orange on the BD (such as on the Nazi flag). The DCP still had a tinge of orange, but more red for sure compared to the BD.

You mentioned before about the SDR conversion processing affecting grain - can you explain?

I honestly don't know why it does (grain/noise is affected by contrast, and that's one of the key things that the SDR slider is messing with) but the settings at the display end make a big difference, when my contrast was much too high the grain on older stuff looked distractingly bad and the artefacts on ID4 and ST '09 were absolutely horrible to watch. I dialled in my SDR contrast more sympathetically and the artefacts were much reduced, I've since watched a few key scenes of ST '09 on the ZD9 in proper HDR and although still the grain looks kinda messy at key points it doesn't break up into outright artefacts.

[imsounoriginal]

Originally Posted by Geoff D

On a more mercenary note, I just sold the UV code for a fiver so all in all this release cost me £14, or roughly $18 of your American dollars. Verr naice!

There's a similarly priced copy on eBay over here, plus $4 shipping. Has everything but the code. But it only shows a stock photo and I have a rule about not buying things unless I can see a pic of what I'm buying, so... the wait continues lol

[chip75]

Originally Posted by HeavyHitter

Yep, that was me about the comparison to Goodfellas. Yes, it felt very similar in that regards. I am guessing the color grading was done originally for the 4K version (in P3) and then downsampled to the BD for 709 since these were newer 4K transfers done in HDR with UHD BD in mind.

Wouldn't it be unusual for it to be mastered to DCI-P3? I would have thought it would be Rec. 2020 as P3 is only used as a standard for theatres and not domestic use home video.

[HeavyHitter]

Originally Posted by Geoff D

I honestly don't know why it does (grain/noise is affected by contrast, and that's one of the key things that the SDR slider is messing with) but the settings at the display end make a big difference, when my contrast was much too high the grain on older stuff looked distractingly bad and the artefacts on ID4 and ST '09 were absolutely horrible to watch. I dialled in my SDR contrast more sympathetically and the artefacts were much reduced, I've since watched a few key scenes of ST '09 on the ZD9 in proper HDR and although still the grain looks kinda messy at key points it doesn't break up into outright artefacts.

On my set-up, I found on Planet Earth II UHD BD with the Fox hunting in the snow scene I had to reduce the slider to -2 to avoid clipping. Only disc I've encountered so far like that, but indeed there are some 'effects' that can happen with the slider and how it interacts with the display contrast.