Anyone refusing to go to 4K Blu-ray UHD?

[storythecorgi]

Judging by reviews and comments, a lot of old films don't look as impressive on 4K. I don't see a huge difference in quality like I did when Blu-ray first came out. Plus with our current setup, I'm not willing to drop so much money for a new player, TV, re-wiring and mounting.

For the time being, Blu-ray keeps me happy and satisfied.

[Klattsy]

Has anyone gone "half way" for now? i.e. 4K player with a 1080p Plasma? And are not in a rush to upgrade the screen? And if so:

1. Are you worried a better player might come out before you upgrade the screen? (and to take it further, better content? i.e. 8K)

2. Do you see a visual benefit of the 4K content on the 1080p display?

I'm probably a good 4-5 years away from upgrading my 3D 60" plasma. But i will have my atmos installed by Jan next year and am wondering if I should buy a player now (like the X700 or UBK90). I've been behind the curve for so long, when I do upgrade, i'd like to be current for a while. Funds for home theatre upgrades are hard to come by.

[Blu MacReady]

I find it strange and amusing that anyone who doesn’t have the 4k set up and have sat at home watched a UHD release or even a BD and experience the improvements, can slate it or refuse it as pointless. Just completely uneducated. Although the leap from BD to UHD may not be as great as the leap from VHS to DVD or DVD to BD, it’s still a great improvement and really noticeable. I’m in awe of what I’ve seen.
I can understand when some watch a movie and then can say if it’s good/bad or it’s like film/a DNR wax ball. They’ve seen it I respect their opinion, even I disagree. Those that have not, but give their opinion like they know, I’ve zero respect for.

Reminds me of a child at dinner, when offered something new like green beans. “I don’t like those”
“Have you tried them?”
“No. But I don’t like them!”

I don’t mind the ignorant missing out on greatness, they can join the ones who argue DVD is good enough (again without a BD player) oookkkkk, well done you.

[film11]

Collider's John Schnepp (director of "Death of Superman: What happened?") says "No 4k for me." Basically unnecessary. And to be honest, that's how most people outside of these sites feel about it. Me, I can take it or leave it. If a movie I want is on a 4k disc, that's fine. And if it's not, that's fine too. And if it's 3D, that always trumps (hate typing that word) 4k.

[Agent Kay]

Originally Posted by film11

Collider's John Schnepp (director of "Death of Superman: What happened?") says "No 4k for me." Basically unnecessary. And to be honest, that's how most people outside of these sites feel about it. Me, I can take it or leave it. If a movie I want is on a 4k disc, that's fine. And if it's not, that's fine too. And if it's 3D, that always trumps (hate typing that word) 4k.

With his direction and production value I would want a lower resolution also

[Aragorn the Elfstone]

Originally Posted by Blu MacReady

Reminds me of a child at dinner, when offered something new like green beans. “I don’t like those”
“Have you tried them?”
“No. But I don’t like them!”

You guys really couldn't be more patronizing if you tried.

[Geoff D]

Originally Posted by smithb

I'm not saying anything against the viability or the desirability of the format for others. The question was posed for personal opinions, and that is what i gave, my personal opinion.

There is something I find very interesting about the introduction of HDR. We were all amazed with DVD over VHS when first released for many reasons not just related to the quality. However, it was HD/Blu-ray where people sat back and really started talking about finally being able to emulate the look of film as seen in the theater from the home environment. Were talking more realistic grain structure and image detail, but in all that I don't recall a big negative slant towards the dynamic range of the coloring? I'm old enough that i go back to the VHS days and i do not recall any discussion of this nature at all. All of the sudden HDR comes out and we seen fancy comparisons with dramatic differences. How could everything have been so wrong before and not talked about? I just find this curious.



Possibly so...but most of my decision is based on return on investment. As stated multiple times for the content I have and currently desire there has only been a small percentage that have made it to standard blu-ray, and while i may be shown to be wrong some day, history shows that less older material makes the transition as each new format is introduced.



If not for the teal revisionism I may have believed that, but i think the jury is still out on that one, but i hope you are right. As for mixed or mild reception, that doesn't surprise me at all and I would be surprised if there is more of that in the future for many older films. The reason being is that newer films are planning for HDR and what it offers, but in many older films to be faithful to the original intention, the impacts may end up to be quite a bit less. And if there is a push to be more dramatic to create sales, well there is your potential for revisionism.

Controversial colour grading decisions don't begin and end with 4K UHD. I've also been around for a while and have had 25 years of serious home video collecting in that time, and I've seen certain favourites newly transferred over and over and they looked different EVERY time. I don't know how long you've been on boards like these but you only have to look at something like the Suspiria head to head (which has nothing to do with HDR) for the most recent example of a film being restored with two vastly different looks, each one being purported to be the most accurate by its respective purveyors.

[smithb]

Originally Posted by Geoff D

Controversial colour grading decisions don't begin and end with 4K UHD. I've also been around for a while and have had 25 years of serious home video collecting in that time, and I've seen certain favourites newly transferred over and over and they looked different EVERY time. I don't know how long you've been on boards like these but you only have to look at something like the Suspiria head to head (which has nothing to do with HDR) for the most recent example of a film being restored with two vastly different looks, each one being purported to be the most accurate by its respective purveyors.

Yes, which is why I brought up teal movement and the Leone movies that have nothing to do with HDR. HDR is just another technology to be used correctly or misused at someones whim. But you have to admit the advent of HDR provides a reason to do another run at the color grading of a film. Hopefully, those doing it will do the proper research to maintain the intent of the original.

[smithb]

Originally Posted by Aragorn the Elfstone

You guys really couldn't be more patronizing if you tried.

What can one say, discussions like this bring out all types. Some times it is best to just ignore and move on.

[Ryandj]

After starting this thread 53 pages ago and going against my original comment and jumping into 4k with a sony 900f and a sony x800 im honestly not that impressed with the format.

imo opinion the quality is "marginally" better and I feel 4k has laser disc written all over it- enthusiast prefer it but unless the quality gains consistency and catalog titles decrease in cost it will never catch mass appeal

[levcore]

Originally Posted by Ryandj

After starting this thread 53 pages ago and going against my original comment and jumping into 4k with a sony 900f and a sony x800 im honestly not that impressed with the format.

imo opinion the quality is "marginally" better and I feel 4k has laser disc written all over it- enthusiast prefer it but unless the quality gains consistency and catalog titles decrease in cost it will never catch mass appeal

That's your problem, you're trying to play laser discs in a 4K player.

[brainofj72]

Originally Posted by storythecorgi

Judging by reviews and comments, a lot of old films don't look as impressive on 4K. I don't see a huge difference in quality like I did when Blu-ray first came out. Plus with our current setup, I'm not willing to drop so much money for a new player, TV, re-wiring and mounting.

For the time being, Blu-ray keeps me happy and satisfied.

What are you reading? This couldn’t be further from the truth.

[smithb]

Just saw this review posted.

"Grease has always been a terrifically entertaining film, but never in any past release for home video, has it ever attained pictorial, and aural perfection.

For me, the track was always sonically crippled.

Paramount has returned to the camera negative, and as far as I'm aware, accessed the 70mm mix for the first time for home theater use.

And the results are beyond startling.

Vocals and music are crisp, clear and proscenium filling.

Colors pop, with blacks being truly black, while a very fine sheen of grain, keeps the image in play. HDR has been delicately applied.

The difference between this new 4k release, and any of the older Blu-rays is so immense, that it leaves everything else in the dust.

Grease, in 4k, will be one of the reference discs of the year."

For those fans of "Grease" this is an obvious reason to have a 4K/HDR setup.

[Blu MacReady]

Originally Posted by Ryandj

After starting this thread 53 pages ago and going against my original comment and jumping into 4k with a sony 900f and a sony x800 im honestly not that impressed with the format.

imo opinion the quality is "marginally" better and I feel 4k has laser disc written all over it- enthusiast prefer it but unless the quality gains consistency and catalog titles decrease in cost it will never catch mass appeal

How further from reality could that be? Laser disc was a product that was bulky expensive and niche. 4k has cinemas showcasing, TVs and players relating, tv channels, streams, remastering of film for home.

Laser disc offered none of this aside from the player.

But at least you have the system and can share your valid opinion on the content. Respect that. Totally disagree, but respect it.

[JimDiGriz]

I think there are quite a lot of people out there desperately convincing themselves they don't need to go 4K whilst knowing, deep down, that they will eventually....but must not admit it.

I tried doing the same for a while. I failed miserably when certain titles starting going 4K - titles I have to have the best version of.

[AML]

With the right set up there is a huge difference between a standard/older 1080p release and a remastered 4k release.
I cant say the same for upscaled releases, but anything that has received a fresh re-scan looks way better than anything that came before. Its simply the best these movies have ever looked.
You cant argue against that.

But again, you need the right set up. The right kind of screen and player.

[jruc03]

I'm kinda on the fence about it. It's a little harder for us guys running projectors as their main display. The amount of cost involved is just too much for me at the moment considering I don't feel i'll see that huge of bump for the cost involved. Plus they all seem to have some sort of issue or kink at the moment that hasn't been worked out yet (flickering, faux 4K, HDR calibration ect.). When I upgrade I always look for something on the higher end of the market but with costs for those still pushing into the $5-10k plus category it makes it difficult. I don't have enough complaints against my current setup to really force me to go for it. I've also started buying a few 4K movies for new releases specifically when they are 2D only movies.

I do really want to see what my setup would look like with 4k HDR though so I'll eventually cave but I do worry by the time I do 8K won't be far behind and have to start the whole process over again.

[smithb]

Originally Posted by JimDiGriz

I think there are quite a lot of people out there desperately convincing themselves they don't need to go 4K whilst knowing, deep down, that they will eventually....but must not admit it.

I tried doing the same for a while. I failed miserably when certain titles starting going 4K - titles I have to have the best version of.

Your right, you got me. I'll go out right now to Costco and buy the cheapest 4K/HDR flat panel they have because I'm sure it will blow away what i currently have. No need for content of interest to be released yet. I can always stare at the pretty demo picture until then. End of discussion. Enjoy. (sarcasm intended)

[Blu MacReady]

Originally Posted by JimDiGriz

I think there are quite a lot of people out there desperately convincing themselves they don't need to go 4K whilst knowing, deep down, that they will eventually....but must not admit it.

I tried doing the same for a while. I failed miserably when certain titles starting going 4K - titles I have to have the best version of.

I was like that with BD, cause as a film fan and collector (of my favourites) I had plenty and grew up with VHS and recordings from tv and dodgy pirate copies etc. DVD was amazing blew me away and I fully appreciated the improvements on PQ but also extras and things like chapter/bookmark (VHS era will recall the rewinding/forwarding and chewed tape).
I spent a lot and built up around 2000 discs. I struggled to accept BD, more expensive and would I really notice etc. I did. Massively.

I wanted to go 4k and go bigger for TV size etc because it is the way forward and maybe the finish line? With streaming being the death of physical media etc blah blah. 8k here but not the content and I’m unsure our eyesight can see as well as the image should be lol so....

I didn’t jump on 4k and was also skeptical as am/was/still am happy with BD. I was just fortunate to go 4k with a decent system to appreciate it and enjoy it.

I’ll still be selective, for me it’s going to be film the will impress like sci-fi, fantasy adventure, war etc. I’m unsure I’d need to splash out on Football Factory in UHD. But there is a clear difference. A clear improvement. Not as drastic as previous formats. Although, sometimes I’m sure there will be especially if the BD was crap.

The way I can describe it is like when you go to the opticians and they put a lense across your eyes that although a slight adjustment, just makes everything seem clearer and sharper. For those who don’t wear glasses etc having what already seemed like a clear windscreen, actually cleaned professionally. It’s just that something you realise once you see it.

I’m surprised people who own a 4k system are unable to see a difference, an improvement as it is quite obvious. Even those that don’t, with normal blu rays where a new remastered version comes out and it’s a clear improvement on the old disc. It’s not some massive leap, but it’s clearly obvious it’s much better. How could you not then want all movies to be improved? Arrow Videos release of Ronin remastered in 4k. The improvement on quality over the Ronin disc releases 10years previous. Smashes it away.

But some believe actual 4k discs on a 4k tv through a 4k player isn’t any better? Strange.

[Nothing371]

Originally Posted by JimDiGriz

I think there are quite a lot of people out there desperately convincing themselves they don't need to go 4K whilst knowing, deep down, that they will eventually....but must not admit it.

I tried doing the same for a while. I failed miserably when certain titles starting going 4K - titles I have to have the best version of.

Yep, that's all this is, is a whine. It's people that have previously spent a bunch of money on their home A/V setups and are now irritated and reluctant that they are behind the times again.