The Matrix 4K UHD (1999)

[i_max2k2]

Originally Posted by Nothing371

This is the best deal I've ever gotten on 4K UHD steelbooks. Best $60.70 I have ever spent. BB wins again.

Indeed. I already had justice league and the Meg was okay, but the best value ever, 2 4K steels are closer to $70 for me with taxes. I wish they do this often.

[eddievanhalen]

Originally Posted by Geoff D

The DV layer is just metadata on this one, although playing it in DV means it goes thru the DV engine anyway which helps with chroma noise.

What are the differences between a metadata only Dolby Vision disc and one with a second video stream? Does this improve mostly color?

[Geoff D]

The 'Minimum Enhancement Layer' or MEL version just carries the metadata in a 1080p stream atop the 10-bit HDR10 2160p base layer. The 'Full Enhancement Layer' or FEL version carries actual extended picture information in the 1080p stream along with the metadata, this is then combined with the base layer.

It's not so much about colour as HDR10 and DV are both graded to hit P3 primaries with D65 white point (within a BT.2020 container as per UHD specs) but that can be a part of it if the HDR10 layer has been downconverted in a way that deviates noticeably from the DV master. Basically the HDR10 layer is compared to the DV master and this 'difference' data - inc. 12-bit depth (so ~4000 gradations in 12-bit vs ~1000 in 10-bit), any grading differences, >1000 highlights (if available) if the base layer has been capped to 1000 nits - is compressed into a 1080p stream.

[bradnoyes]

Just saw this in Dolby Cinema and I highly recommend it if you have the opportunity. Really awesome, though my ears are ringing a bit.

[eddievanhalen]

Originally Posted by Geoff D

The 'Minimum Enhancement Layer' or MEL version just carries the metadata in a 1080p stream atop the 10-bit HDR10 2160p base layer. The 'Full Enhancement Layer' or FEL version carries actual extended picture information in the 1080p stream along with the metadata, this is then combined with the base layer.

It's not so much about colour as HDR10 and DV are both graded to hit P3 primaries with D65 white point (within a BT.2020 container as per UHD specs) but that can be a part of it if the HDR10 layer has been downconverted in a way that deviates noticeably from the DV master. Basically the HDR10 layer is compared to the DV master and this 'difference' data - inc. 12-bit depth (so ~4000 gradations in 12-bit vs ~1000 in 10-bit), any grading differences, >1000 highlights (if available) if the base layer has been capped to 1000 nits - is compressed into a 1080p stream.

Thank you Geoff.

[Bn43]

Originally Posted by shrex

Just picked up my copy of the first one, man these covers are ugly as hell.

I don't even like the slipcases on the previous releases, which is why I threw them all away. Just Reeves, Moss and Fishburne trying to look cool on all three. The bullets flying at them on the cover of The Matrix is so lame.



I prefer the symbols they used for the sleeves. I do wish I had a box to put them all in, the one on the left:



I bought the three movies separately because I didn't want to wait.

[Jumpman]

Originally Posted by bradnoyes

Just saw this in Dolby Cinema and I highly recommend it if you have the opportunity. Really awesome, though my ears are ringing a bit.

Just came back from this as well...and holy shit, was this an experience. Top notch. One of the best theatre experiences I’ve had over the years. WB did a splendid job with this print.

[Riddhi2011]

This is the difference between Matrix on 35mm and UHD. There is greater colour separation on 35mm and the projected print is delicious to look at. The colours on the UHD are not only very different but have a dull green overlay that kills the various colours that you can otherwise see on film-

[Jumpman]

Originally Posted by Riddhi2011

This is the difference between Matrix on 35mm and UHD. There is greater colour separation on 35mm and the projected print is delicious to look at. The colours on the UHD are not only very different but have a dull green overlay that kills the various colours that you can otherwise see on film-

Are you sure because both looked very similar to me. I mean, you can tell that the Dolby Cinema and the UHD are one in the same. Obviously the Dolby Cinema version looks better but it's not like two different visual experiences in my opinion.

[OutOfBoose]

Does the 35mm print have the same neon teal of cops flashlights like on UHD in the intro with Trinity? Or teal highlights in general.

[Vangeli]

Originally Posted by OutOfBoose

Does the 35mm print have the same neon teal of cops flashlights like on UHD in the intro with Trinity? Or teal highlights in general.

I assume not but am very interested too.

[Riddhi2011]

Originally Posted by Jumpman

Are you sure because both looked very similar to me. I mean, you can tell that the Dolby Cinema and the UHD are one in the same. Obviously the Dolby Cinema version looks better but it's not like two different visual experiences in my opinion.

I was talking about the 35mm print version, not Dolby, IMAX or any digitally graded version, which will never be authentic because they weren't timed photochemically like the original prints were.

Originally Posted by OutOfBoose

Does the 35mm print have the same neon teal of cops flashlights like on UHD in the intro with Trinity? Or teal highlights in general.

Actually, I was unable to complete my post because blu-ray.com went down for a while. I was about to post a 35mm print projection still so you could compare the 4K UHD counterpart with that -

Matrix 35mm Oracle 2 lowrez.jpg

Now, don't tell me that those beautiful 35mm colours are a result of wrong HD camcorder video recording. It's almost impossible to create such brilliant colour separation on a digital camcorder. I doubt the recording went through any Rec 2020 colour correction either. What tells me that the colours are right is that the teeth are white. So, it's properly white balanced. The stripes on the Oracle's dress look blue, while on UHD, they look like just another shade of green.

[OutOfBoose]

Originally Posted by Vangeli

I assume not but am very interested too.

I also don't think it's supposed to be there. Whoever grades WB films, adds that stuff not only to The Matrix, but other recent UHDs as well....

[JEArgumedo]

Saw it in a Dolby Cinema and wow, what a mind-blowing experience! I know I'll probably never be able to match a proper Dolby Cinema, but I really want to upgrade my home theater set-up to come even a little closer to that.

[sanjuro_61]

Originally Posted by Riddhi2011

Now, don't tell me that those beautiful 35mm colours are a result of wrong HD camcorder video recording. It's almost impossible to create such brilliant colour separation on a digital camcorder. I doubt the recording went through any Rec 2020 colour correction either. What tells me that the colours are right is that the teeth are white. So, it's properly white balanced. The stripes on the Oracle's dress look blue, while on UHD, they look like just another shade of green.

Sorry, mate, but I gotta tell you...

[VonMagnum]

Originally Posted by Riddhi2011

I was talking about the 35mm print version, not Dolby, IMAX or any digitally graded version, which will never be authentic because they weren't timed photochemically like the original prints were.

Good luck finding one of those to view at the theater. The rerelease at the theaters is UHD Dolby Vision and is not the original. The Atmos soundtrack is new too (I've got the DTS cinema soundtrack here and it's night and day in terms of dynamics compared to the watered down Atmos soundtrack; yes the overhead placements are nice, but it's clear some studios tone down explosions, etc. relative to dialog compared to the cinematic version. WB is nowhere near as bad as Disney in that regard, but comparing playback, they're clearly turning down the dynamics a good 4-6dB. I'm not sure about the soundtrack they're using in the theaters since it's probably been touched up again for theatrical playback.

Now, don't tell me that those beautiful 35mm colours are a result of wrong HD camcorder video recording. It's almost impossible to create such brilliant colour separation on a digital camcorder. I doubt the recording went through any Rec 2020 colour correction either. What tells me that the colours are right is that the teeth are white. So, it's properly white balanced. The stripes on the Oracle's dress look blue, while on UHD, they look like just another shade of green.

I would have to say that a camcorder capture of a 35mm film is probably invalid for making points about the color output. It's capturing and recoloring the entire scene (i.e. you can't trust the colors). I'm pretty sure there was no massive cyan push in the original, for example, but as was pointed out many times, you can't really remember the exact colors. Human memory just isn't orientated that way. I'd prefer a lot less cyan in some scenes, but otherwise, it's not too bad. Now whether the sequels should have green tint added when they were shown in the theater that way is another argument altogether. I tend to think they went a little overboard (it was supposed to be a "hint" that there was something wrong with the world in the original, not blatantly obvious).

[Riddhi2011]

Originally Posted by VonMagnum

I would have to say that a camcorder capture of a 35mm film is probably invalid for making points about the color output. It's capturing and recoloring the entire scene (i.e. you can't trust the colors). I'm pretty sure there was no massive cyan push in the original, for example, but as was pointed out many times, you can't really remember the exact colors. Human memory just isn't orientated that way. I'd prefer a lot less cyan in some scenes, but otherwise, it's not too bad. Now whether the sequels should have green tint added when they were shown in the theater that way is another argument altogether. I tend to think they went a little overboard (it was supposed to be a "hint" that there was something wrong with the world in the original, not blatantly obvious).

I wouldn't really get into technicalities, but the overall tonal difference (night and day) between the 35mm projected colours and the UHD/BD/DVD is clearly visible on that screenshot I just provided. You can see the video[s] on youtube. The key to getting the colours right is white balance. The video is white balanced quite well. Colour corruption cannot create such a beautiful looking image. The evidence that the 35mm colours are much more gorgeous is there. Whether people want to accept that evidence or not is obviously up to them. If the UHD makes people drool, then so be it. For me personally, after seeing the 35mm colours, I cannot stand to look at that "drained" UHD image.

[sanjuro_61]

Originally Posted by Riddhi2011

I wouldn't really get into technicalities, but the overall tonal difference (night and day) between the 35mm projected colours and the UHD/BD/DVD is clearly visible on that screenshot I just provided. You can see the video[s] on youtube. The key to getting the colours right is white balance. The video is white balanced quite well. Colour corruption cannot create such a beautiful looking image. The evidence that the 35mm colours are much more gorgeous is there. Whether people want to accept that evidence or not is obviously up to them. If the UHD makes people drool, then so be it. For me personally, after seeing the 35mm colours, I cannot stand to look at that "drained" UHD image.

Try this: play a movie and take a photo of the TV with your cellphone. Then compare the two pictures.
The one taken with your phone will look like that video from youtube.

[Riddhi2011]

Originally Posted by sanjuro_61

Try this: play a movie and take a photo of the TV with your cellphone. Then compare the two pictures.
The one taken with your phone will look like that video from youtube.

Don't have a phone that can record HD video. Also, the brightness and blown-out highlights can be an artefact of HD camcorder recording, but I believe the colours wouldn't have had such beautiful separation if it wasn't there on the projected image itself.

[sanjuro_61]

Originally Posted by Riddhi2011

Don't have a phone that can record HD video. Also, the brightness and blown-out highlights can be an artefact of HD camcorder recording, but I believe the colours wouldn't have had such beautiful separation if it wasn't there on the projected image itself.

Just try and take a photo. You will see how much colors can "change".