It's a Wonderful Life 4K UHD (1946)

[gooseygander2001]

Originally Posted by Scottishguy

I'd say Apocalypse Now is the DV gold standard to beat right now.

But It's A Wonderful Life is indeed excellent.

I'm intrigued about the DV on these two as both look excellent in HDR10 with Panasonic tone mapping...

[Scottishguy]

Originally Posted by gooseygander2001

I'm intrigued about the DV on these two as both look excellent in HDR10 with Panasonic tone mapping...

To simply describe Apocalypse Now, the dynamic metadata is just perfectly dialed in scene after scene.
It's clear when viewing how meticulous attention was given, that those responsible knew it was high art, and treated it as such.

[Geoff D]

Originally Posted by gooseygander2001

I'm intrigued about the DV on these two as both look excellent in HDR10 with Panasonic tone mapping...

The DV makes a fractional difference, if at all, on the ZD9 with both these movies. Their actual underlying grading is what's doing the heavy lifting here, not the metadata.

[gooseygander2001]

Originally Posted by Geoff D

The DV makes a fractional difference, if at all, on the ZD9 with both these movies. Their actual underlying grading is what's doing the heavy lifting here, not the metadata.

Superb, thanks chaps!

[Scottishguy]

Originally Posted by Geoff D

The DV makes a fractional difference, if at all, on the ZD9 with both these movies. Their actual underlying grading is what's doing the heavy lifting here, not the metadata.

That would make sense. The DV you could just call it insurance.

[Geoff D]

That's a great description of what dynamic metadata is: insurance, insurance against the in-house tone mapping in whatever TV. The grading has already been done, there's no tone mapping metadata created at all during that process. It's only the DV analysis pass of the finished article that then creates the mapping data according to whatever nits levels are specified e.g. 100-nit SDR 709 usually being the first trim pass with 600/1000/2000-nit HDR versions created if required.

Even though the DV montage on Spears & Munsil UHD Benchmark regularly tips into >4000 nit territory Stacey Spears said that the 2000-nit pass required very little manual intervention and the 1000-nit was similar, while the 600 and 100 nit passes were much more difficult in trying to properly scale down the megawatt HDR and retain the creative intent. Point being that when the HDR is as already as tastefully applied as it is on IAWL and AN then many TVs are going to be capable of handling them using their static tone mapping (or even converting to SDR) without wrecking the intent. DV is just the icing on the cake.

[RockyIII]

Originally Posted by KubrickKurasawa

Well you do get zero WCG with zero HDR. Well the whites can pop a little more...and the sharpness goes up a little as well. But only if you're 4 feet from the glass. Will anyone actually notice its a 4k. If enough spiked egg nog is consumed...perhaps.

Bingo

[fighthefutureofhd]

Ok, Ocean Blue.

[fighthefutureofhd]

Originally Posted by mar3o

it's entitlement to want to wait for a deal?

[PeterTHX]

Originally Posted by Geoff D

The DV makes a fractional difference, if at all, on the ZD9 with both these movies. Their actual underlying grading is what's doing the heavy lifting here, not the metadata.

Well these are also FEL DV titles, so they might have better compression as well.

[giedrys]

I do have 4K player but only 1080P display for now. Worth upgrading over 2009 BD?

[Scottishguy]

Originally Posted by giedrys

I do have 4K player but only 1080P display for now. Worth upgrading over 2009 BD?

Absolutely. As long as you understand what upgrading to UHD means in terms of picture quality.

[FilmFreakosaurus]

Originally Posted by giedrys

I do have 4K player but only 1080P display for now. Worth upgrading over 2009 BD?

Yes.

[Geoff D]

Originally Posted by PeterTHX

Well these are also FEL DV titles, so they might have better compression as well.

Only if the base layer was compressed by a partially sighted orangutan. And who'd spot it anyway apart from dedicated pixel peepers?

[RalphoR]

Originally Posted by ROSS.T.G.

I haven’t watched a movie in my collection since end of October. Watched yesterday and a very solid release. DV has really hit its stride now. Highlights weren’t aggressive. I really didn’t see any black crush either.

Totally agree. Marvelous release of a terrific movie. The restoration extra is full of information about how they were able to pull this off. The two women who narrated it showed how passionate they were about bringing the absolute best version of the movie to home media as they could.

[Scholer]

Originally Posted by kristoffer

https://caps-a-holic.com/c.php?d1=13...35&i=4&l=0&a=0

This shot is quite interesting. Firstly to my eyes the grain on the UHD looks okay, in fact more on the heavy side. But on the other hand for this particular shot, the older master seems to have a better source as there is simply a lot more detail on the older screen-capture (even though it looks really rough round the edges, on closer inspection the uptick in detail in undeniable).

I recently saw the new 4K restoration projected on a 4K DCP on a pretty solid screen size, and the film looks stunning overall but some bits clearly look like they were taken from dupes. Often in the middle of the same shot the clarity and color density shifted the least bit from one instance to another. It's one of those things which in 2K/1080p or probably even in a film print would just be evened out but on high end digital projection they kind of stick out in an otherwise stellar master.

[Scholer]

Originally Posted by RalphoR

Totally agree. Marvelous release of a terrific movie. The restoration extra is full of information about how they were able to pull this off. The two women who narrated it showed how passionate they were about bringing the absolute best version of the movie to home media as they could.

Didn't bother to check any of the extras as I had the impression the release was almost bare bones in terms of extras (sadly it is kind of so on checking, as 3 short featurettes are all we get), but the restoration extra sounds like a must watch.

[PeterTHX]

Originally Posted by Geoff D

Only if the base layer was compressed by a partially sighted orangutan. And who'd spot it anyway apart from dedicated pixel peepers?

Studio Canal says "hi"

Plus Saving Private Ryan?

[Geoff D]

All of those, yep, but thankfully they are rare in the grand scheme of DV things and I say again that it's only people like me who'd even spot the difference in compression anyway.

[oddbox83]

Originally Posted by Scholer

This shot is quite interesting. Firstly to my eyes the grain on the UHD looks okay, in fact more on the heavy side. But on the other hand for this particular shot, the older master seems to have a better source as there is simply a lot more detail on the older screen-capture (even though it looks really rough round the edges, on closer inspection the uptick in detail in undeniable).

I’ve surmised that is one of the rare positives of heavier filtering on the older one. The detail is there in the grain, temporal DNR probably averages it out over a few frames or so worth. However in motion it might not be so positive, since our eyes will average it out anyway on the superior newer one.