The Wizard of Oz 4K UHD (1939) (80th, 85th Anniversary Edition)

[lgans316]

Originally Posted by DR Herbert West

Ignore YouTube reviews.

If you meant ignore some YT reviewers then it makes sense. A blanket ignore is quite extreme. There are few good reviewers out there and let's be reminded that not all are after bit rates, looking for issues etc.

[Nitroboy]

Originally Posted by lgans316

If you meant ignore some YT reviewers then it makes sense. A blanket ignore is quite extreme. There are few good reviewers out there and let's be reminded that not all are after bit rates, looking for issues etc.

True. Some of them show off their set-up and settings, and as such are really no different than some of the people posting here - only that their 2 cents are given in the form of a video

[lgans316]

Originally Posted by Nitroboy

True. Some of them show off their set-up and settings, and as such are really no different than some of the people posting here - only that their 2 cents are given in the form of a video

True and some of the silent readers here with proper gear and decent knowledge about AV don't even bother to post as they don't care and don't brag either and are enjoying the movies lol.

[Dsneybuf]

Originally Posted by jaydecay

i have the 70th anniversary edition but not the 75th. if i buy the 4K then do i need to hold onto both disc-1 and disc-2 from the 70th? or just disc-2? or keep both those discs and ditch the blu that comes with the 4k (which i believe is from the 75th?) Let me know, its all confusing, i don't like to have more than one edition on my shelf so i like to buy multi-disc cases and combine it all so i don't lose any special features. lemme know what to do, thanks (i don't care about the When The Lion Roars disc because I have the standalone DVD of that)

Without disc one of the 70th Anniversary Edition, you'd risk losing these extras:
*The Art of Imagination: A Tribute to Oz
*The Legacy of Oz
*Memories of Oz
*Prettier Than Ever: The Restoration of Oz
*Another Romance of Celluloid: Electrical Power (transferred to iTunes Extras and Movies Anywhere)
*Cavalcade of the Academy Awards Excerpt (transferred to iTunes Extras and Movies Anywhere)
*Off to See the Wizard Excerpts
*Harold Arlen's Home Movies
*Outtakes and Deleted Scenes (transferred to iTunes Extras and Movies Anywhere)
*It's a Twister! It's a Twister! The Tornado Tests (transferred to iTunes Extras and Movies Anywhere)

75th Anniversary bonus features not included on the 70th Anniversary Edition include the documentary The Making of the Wonderful Wizard of Oz and a trailer for the 3D IMAX re-release; the digital copy doesn't have them, either.

[Castor18]

In this comparison of selected frames, as expected, the results apparently do not always favor the new 4K disc. The sepia sequence in Kansas now looks more photographic and less processed in 4k, maybe DNR previously applied gave the illusion of a sharper image, but now has better clarity and stability.
Once in the Land of Oz, probably the trend continues with improved clarity and detail given by the extra resolution, but again the illusion of a slightly sharper image from previous releases probably was traded off with more discernible texture, and maybe better matching whatever little softness was part of the original source.
It’s a mix bag, where some scenes looking darker (the witch castle) or slightly softer (Scarecrow, …) from previous releases, while other look really gorgeous, like the ruby sand clock, where now it’s possible to better distinguish sand grain.
In the end, some might think it’s not a huge improvement in PQ, but never the less an improvement … and might be interesting to know what would be the most popular way to watch it, knowing that they did a very good job when they released it in 3D, which might be a more rewarding alternative, compared to a not substantial improvement in PQ.
BD, 4K, … 3D all good to visit the Land of Oz.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BZXhx7PoPyA

[bnmdjm]

Originally Posted by DR Herbert West

Ignore YouTube reviews.

In my experience, this particular YouTube reviewer's impressions are more consistently reliable and realistic than virtually anyone on this site. Carry on.

[DR Herbert West]

Originally Posted by bnmdjm

In my experience, this particular YouTube reviewer's impressions are more consistently reliable and realistic than virtually anyone on this site. Carry on.

Cool.

[lgans316]

We have few gems out here (not official reviewers but our own members who possess great knowledge on the video front) whose opinions matters to me but at the same we do have some hardcore AV-philes in YT who can also offer a half decent PQ review. Ultimately one should be their own judge and not be influenced heavily by others.

[Jason1978]

Originally Posted by BluBonnet

Every time I've seen a blu-ray that was put on the shelves before the street date at a BB/Target/Costco, a warning always came up when trying to pay for it - the system basically tells employees they aren't supposed to sell before street date. So there's no way they can sell it to you.

I have bought stuff from Wal-Mart days or even a week early. Most recently Black Hawk Down on 4k a week before it's released and even had it marked at the wrong price

[Matt89]

Originally Posted by Castor18

In this comparison of selected frames, as expected, the results apparently do not always favor the new 4K disc. The sepia sequence in Kansas now looks more photographic and less processed in 4k, maybe DNR previously applied gave the illusion of a sharper image, but now has better clarity and stability.
Once in the Land of Oz, probably the trend continues with improved clarity and detail given by the extra resolution, but again the illusion of a slightly sharper image from previous releases probably was traded off with more discernible texture, and maybe better matching whatever little softness was part of the original source.
It’s a mix bag, where some scenes looking darker (the witch castle) or slightly softer (Scarecrow, …) from previous releases, while other look really gorgeous, like the ruby sand clock, where now it’s possible to better distinguish sand grain.
In the end, some might think it’s not a huge improvement in PQ, but never the less an improvement … and might be interesting to know what would be the most popular way to watch it, knowing that they did a very good job when they released it in 3D, which might be a more rewarding alternative, compared to a not substantial improvement in PQ.
BD, 4K, … 3D all good to visit the Land of Oz.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BZXhx7PoPyA

Yeah these YouTube videos are never accurate because of the tone mapping on a computer screen that doesn't properly convert HDR so you get sorta washed out, wonky-looking colours. They look sorta flat.

I'd take that YouTube "review" with a grain of salt. You can't ever really tell the true difference unless you're comparing them on an HDR-capable screen.

EDIT: Yeah, just looking at the video, those comparisons are bullsh*t. Look at the screwed up black levels on the UHD. That's not what this disc is gonna look like. That video is 4K without HDR so the comparison is absolutely pointless.

~Matt

[jh901]

Originally Posted by kedavis

I'll have to see the disc for myself, but on a YouTube review with both a b&W and color comparison screenshot, I preferred the Blu-ray shots.

It is a fact, as far as I know, that the Blu-ray is flawed in one or more ways. Contrast boosting and mediocre encode should be enough to pretty much guarantee that the UHD with HDR will trounce it. Sure, there are ways to screw up a UHD release, but none of those concerns have been mentioned.

[Broken Hope]

Mines just arrived from the Warner shop, will be watching later. Saw it in the cinema earlier this year, will be nice to compare on my OLED.

[Kyle15]

Originally Posted by lgans316

If you meant ignore some YT reviewers then it makes sense. A blanket ignore is quite extreme. There are few good reviewers out there and let's be reminded that not all are after bit rates, looking for issues etc.

It's pretty obvious he means "ignore youtube reviews of 4k content that show 4k content because they consistently don't know what they're talking about."

[Matt89]

Also what kind a of a serious review doesn’t take into account things like compression and bitrates? Like that’s the point of a review. The technical aspect. Nobody cares about a review of the film, everyone has already seen The Wizard of Oz.

~Matt

[HD Goofnut]

Originally Posted by Matt89

Also what kind a of a serious review doesn’t take into account things like compression and bitrates? Like that’s the point of a review. The technical aspect. Nobody cares about a review of the film, everyone has already seen The Wizard of Oz.

~Matt

I've felt this way for years. Most review sites, including this one, will spend 3/4 of their review talking about the film instead of the technical attributes of the disc in question.

[LeonardH]

Originally Posted by Castor18

In this comparison of selected frames, as expected, the results apparently do not always favor the new 4K disc. The sepia sequence in Kansas now looks more photographic and less processed in 4k, maybe DNR previously applied gave the illusion of a sharper image, but now has better clarity and stability.
Once in the Land of Oz, probably the trend continues with improved clarity and detail given by the extra resolution, but again the illusion of a slightly sharper image from previous releases probably was traded off with more discernible texture, and maybe better matching whatever little softness was part of the original source.
It’s a mix bag, where some scenes looking darker (the witch castle) or slightly softer (Scarecrow, …) from previous releases, while other look really gorgeous, like the ruby sand clock, where now it’s possible to better distinguish sand grain.
In the end, some might think it’s not a huge improvement in PQ, but never the less an improvement … and might be interesting to know what would be the most popular way to watch it, knowing that they did a very good job when they released it in 3D, which might be a more rewarding alternative, compared to a not substantial improvement in PQ.
BD, 4K, … 3D all good to visit the Land of Oz.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BZXhx7PoPyA

The colours are all wrong in the YouTube video. On a 4K TV the yellow brick road is yellow not orange!

[ROSS.T.G.]

I find that hard to believe considering how accurate BoobTube is.

[hoejunter]

An American Werewolf in London turned up today but no Wizard of Oz even though it was dispatched on Wednesday

[captainsolo]

Originally Posted by moviebuff75

The original prints were very soft and warm. The skin tones were very yellow. The version we have now is the color on the negatives...color that the original prints couldn't achieve at the time

I dunno about very soft and warm. What would happen was the IB technicolor printing process could yield a different result from the negative due to it being a painstaking and manual process of printing that made for heartstoppingly gorgeous works of art-when done right. Like anything else they could have bad runs. And because it was done with the tools of the era no two prints turn out 100% identical. This is the end result three strip Technicolor was designed for and thus non fading IB prints should always be used as a reference when you have them available with the mindset in place that they can have differentiation and look different to the negative results.

Originally Posted by TravisTylerBlack

A former classmate of mine recently rebuffed my invite to watch the Gone With The Wind blu upscaled on my 4K projector. I just wanted to do something fun at home with a few fellow film nerds as GWTW turns 80 this year as well.

He immediately exclaimed that classic films on blu-ray in general are revisionist, uneeded, and anything on disc would be incomparable with the beauty of an original Technicolor print that he'd seen 20 years ago.

Given his aggressive response I didn't even attempt a debate. Life is short and I've learned to pick my battles. May mail him a copy of OZ in 4K this Christmas though just to be an a**.

Good grief. The BD of GWTW is about the closest anyone has come to mimicking an original release print as far as I can tell. Even seeing it compared to any older version will show the night and day differences in densities, fine detail and getting the look across. I was shocked when I first saw it. I never thought GWTW could look that good in the home.
I wonder what print he might have seen 20 years ago. I have no idea if any 1939 prints survive after all the years of reissues and GWTW would have had its share of bad prints and bad reissue prints like anything else.

The only downside to the current BD like Oz and other WB classic catalog titles is that it still has the lossy mono track that doesn't sound as good as it should and has too much cleanup applied making the Laserdisc mono much better.

[Grey2Grey]

Originally Posted by LeonardH

The colours are all wrong in the YouTube video. On a 4K TV the yellow brick road is yellow not orange!

Yeah. The comparisons between the Blu-ray and UHD on that guys channel are always crap. Don't waste your time.

The most accurate BD/UHD comparison sites I know of are:

https://caps-a-holic.com/ (the best in the biz)
http://www.dvdbeaver.com/ (only occasionally does 4K reviews)
https://www.hdnumerique.com/ (mainly does 4K reviews, but rarely posts)