Who Framed Roger Rabbit 4K UHD (1988)

[Adam4Rizzel]

Originally Posted by FilmFreakosaurus

There is no "uncompressed" video for consumer use out there. A BD-100 properly space and bandwidth utilized is just less compressed.

100%. Although, many people mistake "uncompressed" with lack of compression artifacts. I think that's what's happening above.

[TheDarkBlueNight]

Originally Posted by Adam4Rizzel

100%. Although, many people mistake "uncompressed" with lack of compression artifacts. I think that's what's happening above.

Plus the difference between lossless and lossy audio compression.

The technology is quite complex after all, most people don't have a grasp on every detail.

[FilmFreakosaurus]

Originally Posted by Adam4Rizzel

100%. Although, many people mistake "uncompressed" with lack of compression artifacts. I think that's what's happening above.

Even digitally shot professional movies use video compression codecs that are deemed "visually" lossless with a very light compression ratio. They're not bit-for-bit lossless like audio file zipping codecs, just to the point that the naked eye cannot discern artifacts between the raw video and the compressed version.



Otherwise, the video capture files would be astronomically large and they couldn't afford the storage required.

[Adam4Rizzel]

Originally Posted by FilmFreakosaurus

Even digitally shot professional movies use video compression codecs that are deemed "visually" lossless with a very light compression ratio. They're not bit-for-bit lossless like audio file zipping codecs, just to the point that the naked eye cannot discern artifacts between the raw video and the compressed version.



Otherwise, the video capture files would be astronomically large and they couldn't afford the storage required.

100% again. There are many, many, many productions that use codecs like ProRes instead of Uncompressed.

[gates70]

I'm down for this.

[Adam4Rizzel]

Originally Posted by TheDarkBlueNight

Plus the difference between lossless and lossy audio compression.

The technology is quite complex after all, most people don't have a grasp on every detail.

I think people also forget that lossless audio is its own form of compression. It's a form of compression with no noticeable or measurable loss of detail or information. ProRes 444 is as lossless as it gets for me in regards to lossless video compression, it's indistinguishable from Uncompressed video.

A Dolby Vision master in HDR10, to me, is a form of lossy compression, as you're losing detail in various individual shots (the dynamic metadata) to serve a tone curve that works for the whole feature (static metadata). For example, if you compare an effects-heavy movie like a Marvel movie's DV presentation on Disney+ vs the HDR10 presentation on disc, you can see more highlight detail in certain effects like lightning (I'm thinking Thor...). You're gaining more refined specular and contrast details on streaming, but you're introducing higher levels of compression, adding artifacts like macro blocking, etc.

The answer is to have Dolby Vision on the disc. Therefore, there are no compromises. I am, personally, not interested in supporting any 4K releases that don't include Dolby Vision, when a DV master exists elsewhere. Disney, Warner, and Sony have no excuses not including DV on their big titles and releases when smaller companies like Paramount, Lionsgate, Kino, and now even Criterion can do it for smaller films. Citizen Kane has Dolby Vision on disc, but Willy Wonka and Avengers: Endgame don't...

[Dubstar]

Originally Posted by Adam4Rizzel

I think people also forget that lossless audio is its own form of compression. It's a form of compression with no noticeable or measurable loss of detail or information. ProRes 444 is as lossless as it gets for me in regards to lossless video compression, it's indistinguishable from Uncompressed video.

A Dolby Vision master in HDR10, to me, is a form of lossy compression, as you're losing detail in various individual shots (the dynamic metadata) to serve a tone curve that works for the whole feature (static metadata). For example, if you compare an effects-heavy movie like a Marvel movie's DV presentation on Disney+ vs the HDR10 presentation on disc, you can see more highlight detail in certain effects like lightning (I'm thinking Thor...). You're gaining more refined specular and contrast details on streaming, but you're introducing higher levels of compression, adding artifacts like macro blocking, etc.

The answer is to have Dolby Vision on the disc. Therefore, there are no compromises. I am, personally, not interested in supporting any 4K releases that don't include Dolby Vision, when a DV master exists elsewhere. Disney, Warner, and Sony have no excuses not including DV on their big titles and releases when smaller companies like Paramount, Lionsgate, Kino, and now even Criterion can do it for smaller films. Citizen Kane has Dolby Vision on disc, but Willy Wonka and Avengers: Endgame don't...

Honestly Disney has not been doing a stellar job with releasing anything new or even it's catalog titles - hell, Paramount had been able to release titles during this pandemic while DHV has been on the down low. Even they can't seem to put 4K DV content of their high profile classic titles on Disney+

[FilmFreakosaurus]

Originally Posted by Adam4Rizzel

I think people also forget that lossless audio is its own form of compression. It's a form of compression with no noticeable or measurable loss of detail or information. ProRes 444 is as lossless as it gets for me in regards to lossless video compression, it's indistinguishable from Uncompressed video.

A Dolby Vision master in HDR10, to me, is a form of lossy compression, as you're losing detail in various individual shots (the dynamic metadata) to serve a tone curve that works for the whole feature (static metadata). For example, if you compare an effects-heavy movie like a Marvel movie's DV presentation on Disney+ vs the HDR10 presentation on disc, you can see more highlight detail in certain effects like lightning (I'm thinking Thor...). You're gaining more refined specular and contrast details on streaming, but you're introducing higher levels of compression, adding artifacts like macro blocking, etc.

The answer is to have Dolby Vision on the disc. Therefore, there are no compromises. I am, personally, not interested in supporting any 4K releases that don't include Dolby Vision, when a DV master exists elsewhere. Disney, Warner, and Sony have no excuses not including DV on their big titles and releases when smaller companies like Paramount, Lionsgate, Kino, and now even Criterion can do it for smaller films. Citizen Kane has Dolby Vision on disc, but Willy Wonka and Avengers: Endgame don't...

Dolby Vision post work is different for cinema vs streaming vs disc, especially if the disc contains a 12 bit FEL dual layered DV encoding, which streaming, at this time, cannot do. There are also three different and separate licensing fees involved. Your answer lies in the fact that some studios are cheap.

[Monterey Jack]

Jeepers, Jessica in HDR...?

[Adam4Rizzel]

Originally Posted by FilmFreakosaurus

Dolby Vision post work is different for cinema vs streaming vs disc, especially if the disc contains a 12 bit FEL dual layered DV encoding, which streaming, at this time, cannot do. There are also three different and separate licensing fees involved. Your answer lies in the fact that some studios are cheap.

Streaming doesn't need a 12 bit FEL dual layered encode. Based on how I understand things, a UHD DV disc uses two 10bit sources, an HDR10 layer at 4K and an DV layer at 1080p. Add those together and you get the 12 bit DV presentation. Streaming uses a backwards-compatible approach, where there are a base SDR layer with HDR10 layers and DV layers.

The difference is that streaming is optimized to have one source file that works on SDR and HDR displays. 4K UHD layers don't prioritize optimization for SDR displays. (Most 4K HDR content, aka anything new, on Netflix will be watched mostly in SDR on HD TVs, while most 4K UHD discs will be watched on 4K HDR displays).

Source: https://www.avsforum.com/threads/wha...layer.2964550/

[Starman22]

What a great announcements... I seen this in theater twice in 1988. This one of my childhood favorite movie. I still have this Blu-ray with slipcover in my collection and love to getting this in one day.

[BNex99]

Originally Posted by Bolo Seagull

So just how censored is this movie at this point? Does Baby Hermann still smoke and smack women's bums? Have they made Jessica's a B cup? I'd heard about them toning this movie down over the years, but haven't kept up with it. I still just have my old standard def DVD from back in the day.

The 4K version on Disney+ has the same changes that have been there since the Vista Series DVD. No more, no less. (And they're actually more subtle than the ones on the initial DVD.)

So I imagine that'll be true for the UHD.

[Dubstar]

I may have asked prior, but wasn't the cut "Pig-head" scene actually featured in the broadcast TV version ??

[AdmiralNoodles]

Originally Posted by BNex99

The 4K version on Disney+ has the same changes that have been there since the Vista Series DVD. No more, no less. (And they're actually more subtle than the ones on the initial DVD.)

So I imagine that'll be true for the UHD.

https://www.movie-censorship.com/report.php?ID=545028
Big pass on the Steelbook. I don't care about Atmos, original cinematic audio, please and thank you kindly! Going to keep the BD+DVD release I own since I literally got it for a quarter from a friend who got it from Disney Movie Club. Keeping the Vista Series DVD too since I like the packaging and added printed materials.

[dervdude]

Originally Posted by Dubstar

I may have asked prior, but wasn't the cut "Pig-head" scene actually featured in the broadcast TV version ??

Yes, the original CBS airing in November 1991 added that scene back into the movie. Skip to the 2:40 mark of this video for a CBS promo ad, which mentions “never-before-seen scenes”:

https://youtu.be/CuOJqkexHUs

[rexcrk]

I’ve been meaning to watch this again, so I guess I’ll wait for the 4K

[Brian81]

That link only has a couple censored bits. I thought more was censored in this?

[Brian81]

Not a fan of either art. The standard lacks Hoskins and the steel is kind of awkward with Roger being really close to Jessica but zero physical contact points, plus the art style is different from the actual film as are the colors. If it were live action, a drawing would be alright, but when it is already animated. And the art is different, it is weird like the Pixar steels.

[DanTheMan]

Originally Posted by Monterey Jack

Jeepers, Jessica in HDR...?

[Show spoiler]

We almost got Jessica Rabbit and Margot Robbie (TWOWS 4K) on the same release day. Would’ve been a crazy day, that.

[King O.A.]

Which version has absolutely no cuts or censors?