Inglourious Basterds 4K UHD (2009)

[uVSthem]

Does anything think if the studios released 1080P with HDR encodes on UHDs and advertised it as such that people would be more willing to buy films that were finished with 2K DI?

Kind of like the whole SD on Bluray done for some TV shows.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SD_Blu-ray

[Ishai]

Originally Posted by Tuc0

Rescan of what?

I think they should've went back on location and shot the whole thing again with the new higher resolution cameras available today, all this rescanning in 4K of negatives just isn't good enough for my consumer grade TV

[kannibaliztik]

Originally Posted by evanft

Shame that this didn't get a rescan. Looks like it's an upgrade over the standard BR, but nearly as big of a difference as it could have been. I'll pick it up when it's cheap, but I'm in no rush.

[Mierzwiak]

Originally Posted by Ishai

I think they should've went back on location and shot the whole thing again with the new higher resolution cameras available today, all this rescanning in 4K of negatives just isn't good enough for my consumer grade TV

Exactly. I can even imagine Quentin shooting the entire thing in The Volume used in Disney's The Mandalorian!

[evanft]

Originally Posted by Tuc0

Rescan of what?

A new scan of the negative.

EDIT: Or should I say a full on remaster using the 2k VFX shots and camera negative when feasible since this wasn't finished to film. I think the LOTR set was done that way, though it's been a while since I looked into it so I might be misremembering.

[kannibaliztik]

Originally Posted by evanft

A new scan of the negative.

When will this madness end?! for f**ks sake.

[Scottishguy]

[Show spoiler]

Originally Posted by dickdarlington

It would cost more than $100,000, but Universal wouldn’t spend the money because the time it would take to nearly rebuild the film from the ground up. Time is more valuable than currency in this situation.

Could Universal have spent the time and money on this like they did for Scott Pilgrim’s 4K master which was also sourced from a 2K DI? Yes. They could’ve gone the extra mile to create a Dolby Vision grade and/or remix the soundtrack in Atmos.

But as I said earlier - it’s a good upgrade, but it’s not great. It’s not reference quality, but I own worse looking catalog UHDs from the same studio (Hot Fuzz) amongst others.

People are just getting worked up because they think Tarantino is some sort of lord and savior of cinema. Just wait until they find out Nolan’s 4K masters are sourced from IPs and not the OCN.

SPVW is also a 2K upscale. And probably the reason you think it's better is simply due to the fact it has more striking colours and luminosity. Things which human visual acuity loves.

So nothing to do with resolution.

[Jlouisbarrett]

Originally Posted by evanft

A new scan of the negative.

EDIT: Or should I say a full on remaster using the 2k VFX shots and camera negative when feasible since this wasn't finished to film. I think the LOTR set was done that way, though it's been a while since I looked into it so I might be misremembering.

Omg. There is no “new scan of the negative” for them to just go ahead and do. They’d have to dig hundreds if not thousands of individual pieces of filmy out of some salt mine and then put the entire film through post-production all over again, as if they just finished shooting today. It’s not going to happen. It was never going to happen. The 4K UHD still has substantially more refined detail than the Blu-ray, due to being properly upgraded from a MASTER-QUALITY SOURCE which contains extra resolution and color information than the downscaled, 1080p SDR Blu-ray did.

[evanft]

Originally Posted by Jlouisbarrett

Omg. There is no negative for them to just go ahead and scan. They’d have to dig hundreds if not thousands of individual pieces of filmy out of some salt mine and then put the entire film through post-production all over again, as if they just finished shooting today. It’s not going to happen. It was never going to happen. The 4K UHD still has substantially more refined detail than the Blu-ray, due to the extra resolution and color depth.

Oh really? Ah then that's a shame. But like you said, the 4k is still an improvement over the standard BD, so it still looks like it's worth the upgrade.

[ViewtifulJC]

guys don’t worry arrow will do a rescan of the OCN forget this cash grab

[spiltmilk]

Originally Posted by Geoff D

I think that's the fundamental misunderstanding here: people think that the movie was finished to film, got a standard 'transfer' to HD and that Universal have just upscaled that old HD transfer, like with Bourne Identity. No.

It was "upgraded" from the final 2K digital source master of the film which was created from the digital intermediate - AS THE MOVIE WAS NOT FINISHED OUT TO FILM - and is the highest quality version available of the finished content, not the naked camera negative with no conform, VFX etc. In other words, this source is not an old HD telecine designed for 1080p SDR home video but is a master-grade 2K source with 10-bit depth and P3 colour gamut at the minimum.

Could they have rebuilt it? Sure I guess. But how many other 2K DIs - remember, these are not Blu-ray transfers of conformed camera negatives but final source masters for DIGITALLY FINISHED FILMS - have Universal previously rebuilt into 4K? I cannot think of a single example, so why should Basterds have come in for the same treatment.

By all means have your opinion on something - even if you're just parroting what some other misinformed person has said - but when it's based on said misinformation then that opinion holds less sway.

Thank you Geoff D for taking the time to write down what many of us in this thread are thinking but couldn't be bothered to write down or have explained as well. Like you say, the main misunderstanding seems to be the idea that the 2K DI is something that was made just as a blu ray master, when it is the actual MASTER of the film (which is used to provide theatrical copies as well as being the source the new UHD, and the old blu ray for that matter).

Again, as has been stated by several people, although it is theoretically possible to go back to the actual film negatives, that would mean that you would basically need to redo everything that has been done in the digital editing process.

As the misconceptions keep popping up, maybe Geoff's comment above should be made a permanent sticky to this thread.

[Scottishguy]

Originally Posted by ViewtifulJC

guys don’t worry arrow will do a rescan of the OCN forget this cash grab

10000% done!

If you aren't willing to read the FACTUAL information posted in this thread REPEATEDLY, then go parrot Fraud At Home, HD Movie Hoax, Digital S*its ignorance somewhere else. We aren't a dosshouse for Blue Pill
junkies.

[ghostof82]

The Digital Bits have given the video C+ and those guys know what they're talking about, lol.

[Scottishguy]

Originally Posted by ghostof82

The Digital Bits have given the video C+ and those guys know what they're talking about, lol.

Is this sarcasm? Please be sarcasm.

[ROSS.T.G.]

I thought this looked solid.

[Christian Muth]

Originally Posted by evanft

A new scan of the negative.

EDIT: Or should I say a full on remaster using the 2k VFX shots and camera negative when feasible since this wasn't finished to film. I think the LOTR set was done that way, though it's been a while since I looked into it so I might be misremembering.

The LOTR films WERE NOT done this way. This was misinformation published on the Digital Bits and then repeated ad nauseum elsewhere. The LOTR films are upscales with DNR applied and new HDR color grading from the exiting 2K DIs.

Chris

[KubrickKurasawa]

Upgrading my VHS of this for the DVD. Then I'll mux in the Laserdisc Audio.

[Deciazulado]

Inglourious Basterds 4K Blu-ray Steelbook

[Scottishguy]

Originally Posted by Christian Muth

The LOTR films WERE NOT done this way. This was misinformation published on the Digital Bits and then repeated ad nauseum elsewhere. The LOTR films are upscales with DNR applied and new HDR color grading from the exiting 2K DIs.

Chris

So we are over that getting a 4K rebuild, yes? Good.

[Geoff D]

Originally Posted by OutOfBoose

Subs layer isn't a part of the DI.

It's interesting though because it proves this isn't the exact same master as the Blu-ray, they've had to newly overlay the subs because they went back to the source master. Pity that the Euro version of the UHD apparently has player generated subs, the UK BD was just a clone of the US disc so I was hoping the same would apply for our UHD but it seems not. With the delay to the UK tat editions anyway I've ordered the US version.

Originally Posted by sonicyogurt

Do you not consider Miramax or The Weinstein Company to be studios? Sometimes these films would be co-productions, and a non-Weinstein studio would have international and/or home video rights, but the films Tarantino directed were consistently released through whatever company the Weinsteins were running for more than twenty years.

Production company, sure, not a "studio" as such so they always needed to wheel and deal to fund & widely distribute their movies across the world.