Titanic 4K UHD (1997)

[Geoff D]

Originally Posted by Count Orlok

Titanic was shot at 24fps, so where are the extra frames coming from? I get the tech behind converting 2D into 3D, but not 24fps to HFR. It sounds interesting, but I have a hunch it'll look like the motion interpolation function built into TV's. Once you see the jaggies and motion artifacts that come with interpretation, you can't unsee them.

However, if Cameron is overseeing the 24 to HFR similarly to how he oversaw the 3D conversion, it might look pretty damn good and I'll definitely be checking it out.

I was bummed when we didn't get a UHD after it was released in Dolby Vision for its 20th anniversary. Maybe we'll get the 36 hour long cut this time!

Interpolation has been around for donkey's years, it's just not been very good! But there are modern systems that revolve around 'motion grading' like TrueCut, which can take 24fps (or higher) and adjust the frame rate, judder and blur on a shot by shot basis so people can fine tune the output for a 48fps or 120fps deliverable. Clips of The Hobbit that were 'motion graded' using this system were shown off at a recent tech expo thingy, now I know it was shot and finished to 48fps anyway but the TrueCut tech is all about adjusting the HFR so you can get more smoothness when you want it and more of a film like look in other shots.

Indeed, this is James Cameron's remit for HFR as he hates the 'soap opera effect' just like most people do, but he wants smoother motion with less strobing on the action scenes especially in 3D. They've been touting a "remastered" version of the first Avadah movie too and it's highly likely that it's also been interpolated for selective HFR using this system or one like it.

[RICKBONDOO7]

Titanic (1953) and A Night to Remember (1958) I have on Bluray and that's all I need. Over rated 1997 version is all B.S. It never happened that way. Saw it once and that was enough. The 1958 British version is the Best and most realistic !

[Count Orlok]

Originally Posted by RICKBONDOO7

Titanic (1953) and A Night to Remember (1958) I have on Bluray and that's all I need. Over rated 1997 version is all B.S. It never happened that way. Saw it once and that was enough. The 1958 British version is the Best and most realistic !

No Titanic movie is 100% accurate or realistic, not even ANTR, but different strokes for different folks.

[Count Orlok]

Originally Posted by Geoff D

Interpolation has been around for donkey's years, it's just not been very good! But there are modern systems that revolve around 'motion grading' like TrueCut, which can take 24fps (or higher) and adjust the frame rate, judder and blur on a shot by shot basis so people can fine tune the output for a 48fps or 120fps deliverable. Clips of The Hobbit that were 'motion graded' using this system were shown off at a recent tech expo thingy, now I know it was shot and finished to 48fps anyway but the TrueCut tech is all about adjusting the HFR so you can get more smoothness when you want it and more of a film like look in other shots.

Indeed, this is James Cameron's remit for HFR as he hates the 'soap opera effect' just like most people do, but he wants smoother motion with less strobing on the action scenes especially in 3D. They've been touting a "remastered" version of the first Avadah movie too and it's highly likely that it's also been interpolated for selective HFR using this system or one like it.

Interesting. Thanks Geoff!

[Warm Gun]

Originally Posted by Geoff D

Except that the only person who seems to have issues with them flashing black bars on recent UHDs is you, for some reason. Even if they are 'flashing' that's a problem with the mastering, i.e. it's incompetence on behalf of the people doing it, and not some built-in flaw of black bars themselves.

And that's not how scope looks on a 21:9 display. At all. As they have custom crops for that exact reason, some even go so far as to have an anamorphic lens installed with a custom squeeze added by their processor.

The black bars have no picture information inside them and the fraction of space devoted to encoding this black nothing is pretty damned small.

Anything else?

No, a few people have said they see the same anomalies as me in the black bars. As I recall, one in the Great Escape 4K thread, one in the Don't Breathe BD thread, one in the Fistful of Dollars 4K thread. And I got two likes for an Agnes Varda boxset comment about the flashes in the Criterion thread. Maybe your TV is so big and you're so close that the black bars are barely in your field of view. But it's very easy to notice for me, even as I stare at the middle.

How well do those custom crops work? Do you have to set them yourself? How many button presses, normally? madVR has automatic cropping of black bars, but it's kind of bad, so I don't use it. It always takes a moment, and if the aspect ratio of the video happens to shift slightly (like on the Halloween 4K), it will adjust again after a moment, which is distracting.

I just re-encoded one minute of Scarface in Handbrake, first with the black bars cropped and then with no cropping, in 10-bit H.265 with an RF (compression factor) of 28.5 on both. My re-encodes are tiny. I don't know why. I never re-encode 4K videos. Anyway, the original aspect ratio version is 7.79 MB, while the 16:9 version is 8.05 MB. So, 3.3 percent. Wish I knew why they are under 9 MB so that I could get more accurate readings. But 3.3 percent is not nothing. It adds up. It would mean an 80 GB video becomes 82.4 GB. That's about enough for another uncompressed audio track. All for black bars that don't need to be there. Computers can figure out the scaling. Why couldn't disc players in 2016? Probably the studios have better compression tools, but those compression artifacts in some of their black bars tell me they are automated in much the same way and therefore have similar limitations.

[Warm Gun]

My dream video software would be one that can crop off the shitty black bars with no loss in quality. A kind of scissor remuxer.

[Geoff D]

Originally Posted by Warm Gun

No, a few people have said they see the same anomalies as me in the black bars. As I recall, one in the Great Escape 4K thread, one in the Don't Breathe BD thread, one in the Fistful of Dollars 4K thread. And I got two likes for an Agnes Varda boxset comment about the flashes in the Criterion thread. Maybe your TV is so big and you're so close that the black bars are barely in your field of view. But it's very easy to notice for me, even as I stare at the middle.

How well do those custom crops work? Do you have to set them yourself? How many button presses, normally? madVR has automatic cropping of black bars, but it's kind of bad, so I don't use it. It always takes a moment, and if the aspect ratio of the video happens to shift slightly (like on the Halloween 4K), it will adjust again after a moment, which is distracting.

I just re-encoded one minute of Scarface in Handbrake, first with the black bars cropped and then with no cropping, in 10-bit H.265 with an RF (compression factor) of 28.5 on both. My re-encodes are tiny. I don't know why. I never re-encode 4K videos. Anyway, the original aspect ratio version is 7.79 MB, while the 16:9 version is 8.05 MB. So, 3.3 percent. Wish I knew why they are under 9 MB so that I could get more accurate readings. But 3.3 percent is not nothing. It adds up. It would mean an 80 GB video becomes 82.4 GB. That's about enough for another uncompressed audio track. All for black bars that don't need to be there. Computers can figure out the scaling. Why couldn't disc players in 2016? Probably the studios have better compression tools, but those compression artifacts in some of their black bars tell me they are automated in much the same way and therefore have similar limitations.

I don't know if specific projektors have 21:9 modes built-in but when I had a 21:9 TV (which I loved, shame the panel was a bit shit) it was as easy as selecting any other aspect ratio. For outboard processors like Lumagens or whatever then no, there isn't any kind of momentary shift, the AR stays wherever you set it if you so wish.

Edit: I know that other stuff has had flashing bars, but for UHD you kinda seem to be the only one? IIRC you don't have a player, you route everything thru a PC so I wonder if that's got anything to do with it, like it's overly sensitive to such mastering blips?

[Warm Gun]

Originally Posted by Geoff D

I don't know if specific projektors have 21:9 modes built-in but when I had a 21:9 TV (which I loved, shame the panel was a bit shit) it was as easy as selecting any other aspect ratio. For outboard processors like Lumagens or whatever then no, there isn't any kind of momentary shift, the AR stays wherever you set it if you so wish.

Edit: I know that other stuff has had flashing bars, but for UHD you kinda seem to be the only one? IIRC you don't have a player, you route everything thru a PC so I wonder if that's got anything to do with it, like it's overly sensitive to such mastering blips?

I have an LG UP870. No, watching the disc directly doesn't fix it. Just checked one to be sure. My PC setup is in the exact same color space as my player. With 4K, I've only seen it on Kino Lorber SDR discs.

[IndyMLVC]

Gee. What could POSSIBLY go wrong with this? Remember the last time a Cameron movie was converted to another format before the home video release?

[Count Orlok]

Originally Posted by IndyMLVC

Gee. What could POSSIBLY go wrong with this? Remember the last time a Cameron movie was converted to another format before the home video release?

Wasn't that Studio Canal's fault for using the DNR 3D transfer for the T2 4K disc instead of the correct master?

[Bates_Motel]

Originally Posted by Count Orlok

Wasn't that Studio Canal's fault for using the DNR 3D transfer for the T2 4K disc instead of the correct master?

No. That was the master Cameron wanted.

[Count Orlok]

Originally Posted by Bates_Motel

No. That was the master Cameron wanted.

Eek! Hopefully Titanic is treated better. He mentioned he moderately removed some grain from both Titanic and Aliens, but both still look great. Titanic's DV release was so sharp and detailed.

At least they're not the abortion that is Predator's UH release. I honestly can't believe someone signed off on that dumpster fire. I hope he doesn't tweak it beyond the 24 to HFR conversion.

I'm curious if this will create some sort of 3D TV renaissance with 4K 3D +HDR/HFR capabilities. Since Disney abandoned 3D a few years ago, I can see Cameron demanding it be available at home in 3D, similarly how he had Fox release a 3D BD of Alita.

[Bates_Motel]

Originally Posted by Count Orlok

Eek! Hopefully Titanic is treated better. He mentioned he moderately removed some grain from both Titanic and Aliens, but both still look great. Titanic's DV release was so sharp and detailed.

At least they're not the abortion that is Predator's UH release. I honestly can't believe someone signed off on that dumpster fire. I hope he doesn't tweak it beyond the 24 to HFR conversion.

I'm curious if this will create some sort of 3D TV renaissance with 4K 3D +HDR/HFR capabilities. Since Disney abandoned 3D a few years ago, I can see Cameron demanding it be available at home in 3D, similarly how he had Fox release a 3D BD of Alita.

StudioCanal re-released T2 and everyone hoped they would use the non-DNR 4K master (which does exist, and from people I know who have seen it, it looks great), but they confirmed this was the master he wanted. Whether it's true or not, who knows.

He seems to be similar to Peter Jackson in wanting to remove grain. Aliens had a lot of grain removal due to the bad film stock that was used, and at times even the blu looked suspect, but at least it still looked decent.

[Count Orlok]

Originally Posted by Bates_Motel

StudioCanal re-released T2 and everyone hoped they would use the non-DNR 4K master (which does exist, and from people I know who have seen it, it looks great), but they confirmed this was the master he wanted. Whether it's true or not, who knows.

He seems to be similar to Peter Jackson in wanting to remove grain. Aliens had a lot of grain removal due to the bad film stock that was used, and at times even the blu looked suspect, but at least it still looked decent.

I don't understand why DNR was thought of in the first place. If it's shot on film, it should have grain. It's what makes up the details. It shouldn't be scrubbed away to make everything look like it was captured digitally or smothered in Vaseline.

[Geoff D]

Originally Posted by Bates_Motel

StudioCanal re-released T2 and everyone hoped they would use the non-DNR 4K master (which does exist, and from people I know who have seen it, it looks great), but they confirmed this was the master he wanted. Whether it's true or not, who knows.

He seems to be similar to Peter Jackson in wanting to remove grain. Aliens had a lot of grain removal due to the bad film stock that was used, and at times even the blu looked suspect, but at least it still looked decent.

Please don’t perpetuate that “bad film stock” nonsense. Loads of other movies were shot on the same emulsions as Aliens and yet they don’t have this same myth following them around - no, that was the premium high speed stock from that period. In actuality Cameron’s never been much of a grain fan and has been scrubbing that nasty stuff from Aliens since the LaserDisc days (though the Blu still looks stunning IMO, and that’s because it got regrained once they’d scrubbed it).

[Rooivalk]

So I was able to compare 5.1 EX mix from DVD with DTS HD MA 5.1 from Bluray. Noremac wrote that bluray mix is a remix and a horrible one when compared with original mix. I am not able to compare with original, but comparing blu mix with dvd 5.1 ex, the dvd is certainly different. I would even say that it is better than blu.

The best example is when Hockley is trying to shoot Jack and Rose. When he shoots being higher on stairs and he hits the water, splash is visible on the left and on blu ray mix you can hear it in the left surround. On 5.1 EX with DSU decoding or even without it there is this effect that splash into left side surround and then goes to back surrounds ending at the right side surround.

So maybe DVD is more gimmicky but at the same time it is more enveloping. LFE sounds very similar and I must say that lower bitrate of DD compared with DTS HD MA wasn't an issue. Which got me thinkging that DD+ in streaming could be great and very comparable with looseless if they didn't change the dynamics.

Since DVD 5.1 EX edition can sound bit more gimmicky than blu, then maybe remix on blu is still more closer to original mix? Noremac mentiond the scene when Rose is on the lifeboat: "Instead of watching the scenery and listening to the score, we now hear a super loud pulley and rope squealing along like a rusty bed frame." I didn't hear it that way, for me it wasn't very loud and when the music kicks in you can hear it very well. It is true for both versions, I didn't hear the difference between both mixes in that scene.

[OutOfBoose]

Originally Posted by Geoff D

Please don’t perpetuate that “bad film stock” nonsense. Loads of other movies were shot on the same emulsions as Aliens and yet they don’t have this same myth following them around - no, that was the premium high speed stock from that period. In actuality Cameron’s never been much of a grain fan and has been scrubbing that nasty stuff from Aliens since the LaserDisc days (though the Blu still looks stunning IMO, and that’s because it got regrained once they’d scrubbed it).

It felt like T1 and Aliens were remastered the same way. Both look gorgeous.

[Geoff D]

Originally Posted by OutOfBoose

It felt like T1 and Aliens were remastered the same way. Both look gorgeous.

They were handled the same way. Lowry did them both.

[OutOfBoose]

Originally Posted by Geoff D

They were handled the same way. Lowry did them both.

I wonder if they will be redoing them from scratch for UHD, including Titanic. Those masters, as good as they look, are 10 years old.

[Show spoiler]Assuming they will get UHD releases ever. Good news Cameron appears to be tired of blue people after 15 years and won't be doing Avatar 4 and Avatar 5.

[BLMN]

Originally Posted by Count Orlok

I'm curious if this will create some sort of 3D TV renaissance with 4K 3D +HDR/HFR capabilities. Since Disney abandoned 3D a few years ago, I can see Cameron demanding it be available at home in 3D, similarly how he had Fox release a 3D BD of Alita.

a 3D bluray for Avatar 2 perhaps likely in some territories not sure about the US market in 2023, a new format with 4k 3D and HDR with the possibility for 48fps ? i don't think so and remember for passive to achieve it in full res. it would have to be on 8k sets then we would have the whole active vs passive stuff again (active would work on 4k sets), then active 4k sets would be cheaper than the passive 8k sets, etc... it's the same mistakes all over again.