4K Movies Releases

[Penton-Man]

Post from April 21st…..

Originally Posted by Penton-Man

As I'm typing this post the tech specs on imdb for Café Society are actually incomplete as they only list the Sony F65 camera; however, fact is, the F55 was utilized for the steadicam shots. Among the cameras in the Sony CineAlta stable, the F65 remains the Gold standard for big screen projection if one has a critical eye, although if the cinematographer is careful during acquisition the F65 and F55 intercut well in post as mentioned last August.

imdb Tech Spec has since been finally revised to take into account the above ^ acquisition info.

Thank you.

[Penton-Man]

For those who missed the Café Society happenings at Cine Gear 2016, Carolyn posted a spiel on THR…..http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/beh...s-major-899691

the same double duty weekend as also serving as a moderator for a panel at a Producers conference on the Sony Pictures Studios lot……http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/beh...y-urges-899766

[Penton-Man]

Originally Posted by Penton-Man

...Couldn’t regular readers just feel a tie-in coming, esp. if I could hook it to USC?

Not surprisingly. thee invites to the master class scheduled for yesterday at USC with VS – https://www.eventbrite.com/e/master-...ts-25512463465 (<-if still password protected, enter storaro2016) quickly sold out once word got out about his speaking appearance at the School ->

[PeterTHX]

Something for the folks who think HDR is all about "exaggerated brightness" and older films cannot benefit.


https://pro.sony.com/bbsccms/assets/..._explained.pdf


As you can see, HDR can mean DARKER.

[Penton-Man]

Originally Posted by PeterTHX

Something for the folks who think HDR is all about "exaggerated brightness" and older films cannot benefit.
https://pro.sony.com/bbsccms/assets/..._explained.pdf

Good primer for newbies, plus also serves as a respectable refresher to more seasoned Blu-ray.com readers.

Some minor updates/additions to the article which were posted last year….https://forum.blu-ray.com/showthread...s#post10485983. Plus, for the record, the info with regards to film scanning (in the hyperlink) was posted well before publication of the CineAlta magazine article.

[Penton-Man]

Originally Posted by Penton-Man

Some minor updates/additions to the article which were posted last year….https://forum.blu-ray.com/showthread...s#post10485983.

With regards to #2 ^, on the other hand, in fairness to Sony F65 aficionados, the Sony flagship camera does color, especially realistic skin tones, without problem , compared to the RED, which is probably why people from Panavision/ Light Iron are gently highlighting the *color science package* is coming from Light Iron, not RED (https://forum.blu-ray.com/showthread...e#post12281859 ).

And I assume also making a point of the color science within one minute’s time in the recent testimonial which was posted after the camera’s reveal at the Clubhouse and later Cine Gear…..

https://vimeo.com/169289501

[Penton-Man]

Originally Posted by PeterTHX

As you can see, HDR can mean DARKER.

For folks willing to sacrifice perhaps a wee bit on quality, but personally prefer/demand watching their HDR content with much more surround lighting than that exercised by typical home theater enthusiasts, HLG will serve as a good alternative for sports, concerts, etc. and parental viewers having to keep one eye on little children playing in the same room.

[Penton-Man]

dvdmike, heed the warning…..http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/beh...l-tools-899964

and what one can easily add to this sentence in the article - “other members of a production beyond the cinematographer now have the ability to manipulate the images the cinematographer creates”…….especially after the cinematographer is dead and buried in the ground.

[dvdmike]

Originally Posted by Penton-Man

Not surprisingly. thee invites to the master class scheduled for yesterday at USC with VS – https://www.eventbrite.com/e/master-...ts-25512463465 (<-if still password protected, enter storaro2016) quickly sold out once word got out about his speaking appearance at the School ->

Did he talk about ****ing up aspect ratios for years?

Originally Posted by Penton-Man

dvdmike, heed the warning…..http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/beh...l-tools-899964

and what one can easily add to this sentence in the article - “other members of a production beyond the cinematographer now have the ability to manipulate the images the cinematographer creates”…….especially after the cinematographer is dead and buried in the ground.

#ShockingNews

[Penton-Man]

Originally Posted by dvdmike

Did he talk about ****ing up aspect ratios for years?

We won’t go there.

Originally Posted by dvdmike

#ShockingNews

Although, several years ago, at least one cinematographer/Director (still active in the industry) had the foresight to clearly express his wishes after the feature film was finished and in the can so that nobody from a studio would ever mess with (or what’s the popular word now, 're-imagine'?) his original work, despite advances in technology….last paragraph in red here.

[Penton-Man]

Throwback Thursday post (by mike)
So, mike, I imagine you still feel the same ^ as you did ~ 1½ years ago.

Scrolling down 3 posts, in retrospect, I know my view regarding active filmmaker participation in the grading suite with HDR remasters for Ultra HD Blu-rays hasn’t changed.

It’s kind of funny that not so long ago there was sooo much studio marketing (and thusly reviewer attention) and consumer discussion afforded to whether or not the color grading for new 4K restorations leading to new Blu-ray movie versions was Director (or cinematographer) supervised, or at least ‘approved’…..and yet now with HDR grades to produce the new Ultra HD Blu-ray iterations, no such similar order of attention is being expressed regarding filmmaker involvement to authenticate the HDR product with the filmmaker’s artistic intent.

Does this mean digital colorists in regards to a greater dynamic range and color volume are better mind readers of Directors (or cinematographers) than they were with a simple bump up in spatial resolution brought about by a 4K restoration leading to a regrade?

[dvdmike]

Originally Posted by Penton-Man

Throwback Thursday post (by mike)
So, mike, I imagine you still feel the same ^ as you did ~ 1½ years ago.

Scrolling down 3 posts, in retrospect, I know my view regarding active filmmaker participation in the grading suite with HDR remasters for Ultra HD Blu-rays hasn’t changed.

It’s kind of funny that not so long ago there was sooo much studio marketing (and thusly reviewer attention) and consumer discussion afforded to whether or not the color grading for new 4K restorations leading to new Blu-ray movie versions was Director (or cinematographer) supervised, or at least ‘approved’…..and yet now with HDR grades to produce the new Ultra HD Blu-ray iterations, no such similar order of attention is being expressed regarding filmmaker involvement to authenticate the HDR product with the filmmaker’s artistic intent.

Does this mean digital colorists in regards to a greater dynamic range and color volume are better mind readers of Directors (or cinematographers) than they were with a simple bump up in spatial resolution brought about by a 4K restoration leading to a regrade?

Funny thing is I don't have to buy anything I don't want to.

[Geoff D]

Originally Posted by Penton-Man

Throwback Thursday post (by mike)
So, mike, I imagine you still feel the same ^ as you did ~ 1½ years ago.

Scrolling down 3 posts, in retrospect, I know my view regarding active filmmaker participation in the grading suite with HDR remasters for Ultra HD Blu-rays hasn’t changed.

It’s kind of funny that not so long ago there was sooo much studio marketing (and thusly reviewer attention) and consumer discussion afforded to whether or not the color grading for new 4K restorations leading to new Blu-ray movie versions was Director (or cinematographer) supervised, or at least ‘approved’…..and yet now with HDR grades to produce the new Ultra HD Blu-ray iterations, no such similar order of attention is being expressed regarding filmmaker involvement to authenticate the HDR product with the filmmaker’s artistic intent.

Does this mean digital colorists in regards to a greater dynamic range and color volume are better mind readers of Directors (or cinematographers) than they were with a simple bump up in spatial resolution brought about by a 4K restoration leading to a regrade?

Thing is though Mr P, it's not like HDR alone has suddenly created a digital box of tricks whereby Mr Random L. Colourist is able to retime any movie he likes at the touch of a button, filmmaker involvement optional. Damned if I can find the post but I've said this before: HDR is just another addition to the already extensive suite of digital tricks and traps that await a new transfer of x movie. That doesn't make it right, but it doesn't make it some radically new situation either IMO.

If it can be applied with prudence and taste - dat oh so crucial taste - and with filmmaker involvement then fine. If the filmmakers aren't around any more then we're still at the mercy of Mr Colourist's whims and fancies, just as we are with any number of recent new transfers, where we know not from whence they came.

[Penton-Man]

Originally Posted by dvdmike

Funny thing is I don't have to buy anything I don't want to.

Well that was too easy for you. You mean you don’t have money burning a hole in your pocket for the newest software? Then tell me this mike, could they entice you into buying an HDR version of Mad Max (1979), if instead it being HDR graded by colorist only (or God help us, an editor ), suppose the studio recruited Kevin Smith to supervise the grade. Would you bite then?

[Penton-Man]

Originally Posted by Geoff D

Thing is though Mr P, it's not like HDR alone has suddenly created a digital box of tricks whereby Mr Random L. Colourist is able to retime any movie he likes at the touch of a button, filmmaker involvement optional. Damned if I can find the post but I've said this before: HDR is just another addition to the already extensive suite of digital tricks and traps that await a new transfer of x movie. That doesn't make it right, but it doesn't make it some radically new situation either IMO.

Geoff, that’s where we differ. It’s not just ‘another addition’ to the toolset. That’s like saying she is just 'another' (typical fan) at a football match in the US. Depending upon what you show and how you express it, it can be much more powerful than what improvement a 4K restoration added to the table. Heck, many colorists have admitted they hardly do anything different whether it be a 2K or 4K finish project.

Grading in HDR is a whole new (gigantic) ball of wax. How much do you ‘re-imagine’ the original look to offer more eye candy to the HDR version but still remain *true* to the original look? That’s completely subjective without active input from the filmmaker as to his creative intent and an order of magnitude different than a re-grade for a 4K restore. It’s ok if a studio wants to sell more product, be it physical media or OTT with streaming and consumers like what they get with the new iteration , but…

my point is that given all the attention/publicity in the past as to Director (or Cinematographer) supervised 4K restorations for home media deliverables and essentially none now with the MUCH more visually powerful tool of high dynamic range (even if you conservatively re-grade in HDR)…..smacks of studio and reviewer hypocrisy.

[Penton-Man]

Originally Posted by Penton-Man

Shown at the Society’s Clubhouse on Wednesday was an upcoming (rentable in early 2017) new large format camera choice for filmmakers joining the ranks of the Sony F65 and Red 8K Dragon. The public can see it at CineGear 2016 tomorrow….

https://vimeo.com/168869375

From last weekend I forgot something in terms of *combination* cameras…. for the record, there is actually a Panavised (Sony) F65 camera and one with a Panny 70mm lens was on display at Cine Gear 2016.

[Penton-Man]

Originally Posted by Penton-Man

Geoff, that’s where we differ. It’s not just ‘another addition’ to the toolset. That’s like saying she is just 'another' (typical fan) at a football match in the US. Depending upon what you show and how you express it, it can be much more powerful than what improvement a 4K restoration added to the table. Heck, many colorists have admitted they hardly do anything different whether it be a 2K or 4K finish project.

Grading in HDR is a whole new (gigantic) ball of wax. How much do you ‘re-imagine’ the original look to offer more eye candy to the HDR version but still remain *true* to the original look? That’s completely subjective without active input from the filmmaker as to his creative intent and an order of magnitude different than a re-grade for a 4K restore. It’s ok if a studio wants to sell more product, be it physical media or OTT with streaming and consumers like what they get with the new iteration , but…

my point is that given all the attention/publicity in the past as to Director (or Cinematographer) supervised 4K restorations for home media deliverables and essentially none now with the MUCH more visually powerful tool of high dynamic range (even if you conservatively re-grade in HDR)…..smacks of studio and reviewer hypocrisy.

Although, we are like-minded on just about everything else I can think of.

[Geoff D]

Originally Posted by Penton-Man

Geoff, that’s where we differ. It’s not just ‘another addition’ to the toolset. That’s like saying she is just 'another' (typical fan) at a football match in the US. Depending upon what you show and how you express it, it can be much more powerful than what improvement a 4K restoration added to the table. Heck, many colorists have admitted they hardly do anything different whether it be a 2K or 4K finish project.

Grading in HDR is a whole new (gigantic) ball of wax. How much do you ‘re-imagine’ the original look to offer more eye candy to the HDR version but still remain *true* to the original look? That’s completely subjective without active input from the filmmaker as to his creative intent and an order of magnitude different than a re-grade for a 4K restore. It’s ok if a studio wants to sell more product, be it physical media or OTT with streaming and consumers like what they get with the new iteration , but…

my point is that given all the attention/publicity in the past as to Director (or Cinematographer) supervised 4K restorations for home media deliverables and essentially none now with the MUCH more visually powerful tool of high dynamic range (even if you conservatively re-grade in HDR)…..smacks of studio and reviewer hypocrisy.

It's your world, not mine, so I bow to your opinion but you only have to look at the huge amount of kvetching that usually greets a modern new transfer of X film in the main forum to see how divisive that apparently hideously limited DI suite can be. Movies can look so different from one transfer to another to another in terms of colour, density, brightness, contrast, grain etc that I fail to see just how much more damaging that adding HDR into the mix can be. And when some modern directors change their minds as often as the wind blows (Scott, Fincher) about how their movies look then the idea of the 'intended' image being a moving target is very much apparent to me. Others will lock it down like Soderburgh, sure, but others love to have a tinker.

I'm not saying HDR doesn't have the potential to do murder to x film's original intent - of course it does - but then so does everything else at a colourist's fingertips. Just look at the shit that L'Immagine Ritrovita keep putting out, brown/yellow coloured movies with horribly low gamma time after time after time. If they're supposed to be the damned experts then I'll take my chances with Mr R.L. Colourist.

[dvdmike]

Originally Posted by Penton-Man

Well that was too easy for you. You mean you don’t have money burning a hole in your pocket for the newest software? Then tell me this mike, could they entice you into buying an HDR version of Mad Max (1979), if instead it being HDR graded by colorist only (or God help us, an editor ), suppose the studio recruited Kevin Smith to supervise the grade. Would you bite then?

The Max trilogy's colour grade is ****ed on bluray anyway, so it's not like this will make a diffrence plus you think MGM will make a new scan?

[Geoff D]

Originally Posted by dvdmike

The Max trilogy's colour grade is ****ed on bluray anyway, so it's not like this will make a diffrence plus you think MGM will make a new scan?

^ exactly my point above in action, Penton. When most (or it seems like most ) catalogue releases get dismissed by the cognoscenti anyway then I wonder just how much more "wrong" an HDR version of any movie could get. I/we trust that x new transfer on Blu-ray comes signed, sealed and delivered directly from the filmmaker's hands but I remember a round table discussion you posted a while back which had a bunch of cinematographers all nod in agreement when one of them said "what I see on Blu-ray is not what I shot" (which almost makes a mockery of the slavish adherence to accuracy that we love to espouse).

Or are there different and even worse levels of wrong when it comes to respecting the original intent where HDR is concerned? If that's the case then that's fair enough, but AFAIC Pandora's Box was opened as soon as them ones and zeroes went mainstream. Like I said, that doesn't make it right but neither do I assume that every single Blu-ray ever made has the designated intent translated 100%, either by the limitations of SDR 709 video or because it was graded by Colin the Tea Boy.