The Fifth Element 4K UHD (1997) (20th Anniversary Edition)

[andjar01]

The Fifth Element UHD is in my top 5 transfers out of the 40 4k discs i have. I don't think it's as sharpened as Saving Private Ryan , Apollo 13 or E.T. which i also love. I just think it received just a touch to much of contrast enhancement if anything.

[HD Goofnut]

Originally Posted by andjar01

The Fifth Element UHD is in my top 5 transfers out of the 40 4k discs i have. I don't think it's as sharpened as Saving Private Ryan , Apollo 13 or E.T. which i also love. I just think it received just a touch to much of contrast enhancement if anything.

What exactly is contrast enhancement? Do you mean edge enhancement?

[brainofj72]

Saving Private Ryan sharpened? Huh?

[HD Goofnut]

Originally Posted by brainofj72

Saving Private Ryan sharpened? Huh?

None of the ones he mentioned are sharpened. I think he's confusing heavy grain with sharpening.

[Vangeli]

The source Sony has for TFE has some sharpening baked into it much like many movies of the time and there's nothing they can really do about it.

Apparently Gaumont has a better source but I doubt we'll ever see it at this point and the UHD looks pretty dang good.

[Sky_Captain]

If it's anything like the BD Gaumont put out, they can f*** right off.

Just be thankful that Sony decided to fix Leon, as Gaumont ruined that too, (as per the original US BD release).

[Agent Kay]

Originally Posted by Sky_Captain

If it's anything like the BD Gaumont put out, they can f*** right off.

Just be thankful that Sony decided to fix Leon, as Gaumont ruined that too, (as per the original US BD release).

As Geoff said the German one is the same master, so I am guessing this is all we get

[Noremac Mij]

Originally Posted by Vangeli

The source Sony has for TFE has some sharpening baked into it much like many movies of the time and there's nothing they can really do about it.

Apparently Gaumont has a better source but I doubt we'll ever see it at this point and the UHD looks pretty dang good.

If the source is film, how can it have baked in sharpness?

[LoSouL]

Originally Posted by Vangeli

Apparently Gaumont has a better source but I doubt we'll ever see it at this point and the UHD looks pretty dang good.

If they have a better source they certainly didn't do it any justice 'cause it looks godawful in those BD caps from the last page or so. That last thing I want is a blurry, yellow UHD with less detail and fewer colors.

[Agent Kay]

Originally Posted by LoSouL

If they have a better source they certainly didn't do it any justice 'cause it looks godawful in those BD caps from the last page or so. That last thing I want is a blurry, yellow UHD with less detail and fewer colors.

As I said previously, an HDR pass could reign in some of that and all the gaumont Besson masters looked the same, so it may have been by design.

[HeavyHitter]

Originally Posted by Vangeli

The source Sony has for TFE has some sharpening baked into it much like many movies of the time and there's nothing they can really do about it.

Apparently Gaumont has a better source but I doubt we'll ever see it at this point and the UHD looks pretty dang good.

I've always felt like whatever Sony's source is for TFE, it's something digital (like an existing, maybe older master with EE baked in). It doesn't seem to me they have any access to an analog source (neither IP or ON).

The Gaumont BD wasn't perfect, but looks far more analog indeed.

[Geoff D]

I really liked the Gaumount BD because it wasn't sharpened to death. It had other issues like the blown-out contrast but the softer look was much more pleasing to my eyes.

[Agent Kay]

Originally Posted by Geoff D

I really liked the Gaumount BD because it wasn't sharpened to death. It had other issues like the blown-out contrast but the softer look was much more pleasing to my eyes.

It's far from all bad like some paint it.
I would live them to give it another go in 4k, does Pathe still own it now?

[StingingVelvet]

Originally Posted by Geoff D

I really liked the Gaumount BD because it wasn't sharpened to death. It had other issues like the blown-out contrast but the softer look was much more pleasing to my eyes.

The Sony definitely has mild sharpening, worse in the effects shots, but I'll still take it over the Gaumount, which in addition to the contrast issues also has really shit color IMO. If you compare it to the Sony 4k remaster BD, to take SDR conversion out of the equation, the Gaumount looks truly ugly by comparison in every way to my eye, other than Sony's mild sharpening (which I still think is baked into the elements on the effects at least, as you can see slight effects of it even in the Gaumount).

If you really can't stand even mild sharpening, like I know JohnCarpenterFan can't, then I get avoiding the Sony releases though.

[Noremac Mij]

Originally Posted by StingingVelvet

The Sony definitely has mild sharpening, worse in the effects shots, but I'll still take it over the Gaumount, which in addition to the contrast issues also has really shit color IMO. If you compare it to the Sony 4k remaster BD, to take SDR conversion out of the equation, the Gaumount looks truly ugly by comparison in every way to my eye, other than Sony's mild sharpening (which I still think is baked into the elements on the effects at least, as you can see slight effects of it even in the Gaumount).

If you really can't stand even mild sharpening, like I know JohnCarpenterFan can't, then I get avoiding the Sony releases though.

That “ugly” Gaumont color grading is what the original 35mm prints looked like. And you cannot have baked in sharpening in film. Sony’s really doing something weird on this one. It has been a mystery for years.

[Geoff D]

Originally Posted by StingingVelvet

The Sony definitely has mild sharpening, worse in the effects shots, but I'll still take it over the Gaumount, which in addition to the contrast issues also has really shit color IMO. If you compare it to the Sony 4k remaster BD, to take SDR conversion out of the equation, the Gaumount looks truly ugly by comparison in every way to my eye, other than Sony's mild sharpening (which I still think is baked into the elements on the effects at least, as you can see slight effects of it even in the Gaumount).

If you really can't stand even mild sharpening, like I know JohnCarpenterFan can't, then I get avoiding the Sony releases though.

It's always ground my gears with Sony's handling of TFE, not gonna lie. I still think that this UHD looks great in the main for how it improves over past releases but damn it's one sharpened-up cookie. Thankfully I can dial it down, just as I did when I got the Mi4K Blu-ray.

[Vangeli]

Originally Posted by Noremac Mij

That “ugly” Gaumont color grading is what the original 35mm prints looked like. And you cannot have baked in sharpening in film. Sony’s really doing something weird on this one. It has been a mystery for years.

Look at the first two Harry Potter releases; especially in the second movie, many shots appear to be digitally sharpened then transferred back to film like the digital effects shots. Ironically, these shots have softer detail because of it.

[Noremac Mij]

I know it’s been mentioned a few times, but I’m not seeing any sharpening in the effects shots at all in the Gaumont’s version. Those halos are not from sharpening, at least it doesn’t look like it to me.

[Geoff D]

Originally Posted by Vangeli

Look at the first two Harry Potter releases; especially in the second movie, many shots appear to be digitally sharpened then transferred back to film like the digital effects shots. Ironically, these shots have softer detail because of it.

Correct, anything that's been manipulated digitally can still have some sharpening baked in (I vividly remember seeing edge enhancement in Charlie's Angels 2 in the cinema, 35mm print and all). Spidey 1 is a good example but it's not there in the WHOLE film it's just the VFX, whereas Sony's TFE has sharpening all of the time so when the sharpened VFX is cut in it looks even worse.

Originally Posted by Noremac Mij

I know it’s been mentioned a few times, but I’m not seeing any sharpening in the effects shots at all in the Gaumont’s version. Those halos are not from sharpening, at least it doesn’t look like it to me.

I can see the haloing in the Diva Plavalaguna shot. Which then gets turned up to 11 for the Sony transfer.

[Vangeli]

Ah, I think it looks fine aside for the Diva shot which was always pretty bad.

Maybe I just love really sharp grain.