Titanic 4K UHD (1997)

[blakninja]

I think it's important that a movie looks its era.. if you make everything look modern (sharp, bright) then it loses its character.

[punisher]

very busy tonight and tomorrow night..I hope to get a chance to play it on my projector for a few minutes later...

ps: it rips no problem so an easy backup

[TheSweetieMan]

Originally Posted by PeterTHX

Remaster, not restoration.

gold jacket, green jacket, who gives a shit - YouTube

[blakninja]

Does the US and UK have the exact same "encode", meaning the video file has the exact same bitrates?

[blakninja]

So in 70 years Titanic becomes public property, does that mean we'll have access to the Super35 scans and restore the movie ourselves?

[TheSweetieMan]

One other note I'd like to make mention of;

I genuinely think James Cameron is one of, if not the most important filmmakers to ever live. His educational background outside of filmmaking has played a huge role in allowing him to continue to push the boundaries of what is possible in movie making. Regardless if you love or hate the Avatar films, or his emphasis on VFX and what they can do as a filmmaking resource, there's no denying his impact on the industry -- as well as his encyclopedic knowledge on filmmaking as a whole. The guy has forgotten more about film than what anyone on this forum will ever know. He truly does continue to push the medium forward in revolutionary ways whenever he releases a film.

Which is what makes UHDs like this so frustrating. How can someone be as technologically gifted and artistically creative as he is -- with a singular, idiosyncratic visual style that is only recognizably James Cameron's -- yet he's OK with one of his biggest and most well known films being so heavily revised like this visually? It just doesn't make sense. Even if he's developed some sort of autistic obsession with his films having to look hyper-realistic, you would think someone of his creative pureness would want to retain the original looks of his films through and through, no matter how dated the tech and resources were for their times. His films have already aged so incredibly well visually. Every single one of them.

So why make them look so visually compromised when you don't need to?

It's pretty frustrating as a fan of his.

[mar3o]

Originally Posted by samlop10

Just look at his hand holding the phone in the full size image. Is that supposed to be hair? The artificial sharpening is definitely there.

Again with his hand in that shot? I commented once on this already - it's his skin. Dry skin can look like that. Haven't you ever had dry skin? Yes it's a bit too processed so it exaggerates the skin texture too much, and that's the main issue with this disc in general. But it's not hair, it's his skin.

[tankryankr19]

I’ve just passed the third class jig where Jack takes Rose after the dinner, so far I noticed that the colors look fantastic and it does have this 1997 look to it, nice and warm but also not too yellow (example: king of the world scene which had a piss yellow tint and the even ship looked yellow, in the 4K it looks like the model) Atmos Mix sounds good so far and I’m getting quite a bit of bass response (when they open up the engines “let’s stretch her legs”). Grain Management seems good but there’s something very unnatural about it at the same time, faces carry a lot of detail (i.e. Kate Winslet’s Peach Fuzz) but the grain is around the character and none on their faces (unless it’s an up close shot). Aside from that detail is phenomenal and it’s like you’re looking into a window in another world. To me it’s reference quality but I will probably get jumped for having that opinion here

[Jbabler]

It almost seems like the intent was to make the modern stuff look modern and the historic stuff a bit more "old timey". I dunno.

[Kris Deering]

Originally Posted by TheSweetieMan

One other note I'd like to make mention of;

I genuinely think James Cameron is one of, if not the most important filmmakers to ever live. His educational background outside of filmmaking has played a huge role in allowing him to continue to push the boundaries of what is possible in movie making. Regardless if you love or hate the Avatar films, or his emphasis on VFX and what they can do as a filmmaking resource, there's no denying his impact on the industry -- as well as his encyclopedic knowledge on filmmaking as a whole. The guy has forgotten more about film than what anyone on this forum will ever know. He truly does continue to push the medium forward in revolutionary ways whenever he releases a film.

Which is what makes UHDs like this so frustrating. How can someone be as technologically gifted and artistically creative as he is -- with a singular, idiosyncratic visual style that is only recognizably James Cameron's -- yet he's OK with one of his biggest and most well known films being so heavily revised like this visually? It just doesn't make sense. Even if he's developed some sort of autistic obsession with his films having to look hyper-realistic, you would think someone of his creative pureness would want to retain the original looks of his films through and through, no matter how dated the tech and resources were for their times. His films have already aged so incredibly well visually. Every single one of them.

So why make them look so visually compromised when you don't need to?

It's pretty frustrating as a fan of his.

What would be more interesting to know is what display he was using when he did his looks at it and gave it his thumbs up. It is very possible that had a lot to do with it. Seems like a lot of people with smaller displays seem to really like it. On my 140" scope screen using a reference level projector, the sharpening just looks a bit too much for my taste.

[Telemachus]

So how much DNR does the slipcover have on this

[crackedknee]

Originally Posted by Telemachus

So how much DNR does the slipcover have on this

Just to add insult to injury: none

[sfmarine]

Originally Posted by Telemachus

So how much DNR does the slipcover have on this

[blakninja]

Originally Posted by TheSweetieMan

One other note I'd like to make mention of;

I genuinely think James Cameron is one of, if not the most important filmmakers to ever live. His educational background outside of filmmaking has played a huge role in allowing him to continue to push the boundaries of what is possible in movie making. Regardless if you love or hate the Avatar films, or his emphasis on VFX and what they can do as a filmmaking resource, there's no denying his impact on the industry -- as well as his encyclopedic knowledge on filmmaking as a whole. The guy has forgotten more about film than what anyone on this forum will ever know. He truly does continue to push the medium forward in revolutionary ways whenever he releases a film.

Which is what makes UHDs like this so frustrating. How can someone be as technologically gifted and artistically creative as he is -- with a singular, idiosyncratic visual style that is only recognizably James Cameron's -- yet he's OK with one of his biggest and most well known films being so heavily revised like this visually? It just doesn't make sense. Even if he's developed some sort of autistic obsession with his films having to look hyper-realistic, you would think someone of his creative pureness would want to retain the original looks of his films through and through, no matter how dated the tech and resources were for their times. His films have already aged so incredibly well visually. Every single one of them.

So why make them look so visually compromised when you don't need to?

It's pretty frustrating as a fan of his.

Cameron is great but not perfect. I mean, his Avatar movies are boring yet he thinks it's the greatest thing.

That's the problem with people with his status.. you think you're always right and stop listening to criticism.

[blakninja]

Originally Posted by DigitalDeluge24

3D Blu-ray with TV color settings
Fullscreen LD
Widescreen LD
JP Rental Only VHS
Fullscreen VHS
2005 DVD
Thai VCD
4K Blu-ray
2D Blu-ray
2012 DVD
1999 DVD
Widescreen VHS

Curious to know why JP Rental Only VHS and LDs are that high?

Also, is the Fullscreen VHS the "Pan and Scan" version that is not really P&S but open matte?

[dalemc]

In reference to the comments about the colour grading, I've got some comparisons here from the 2005 DVD, and the later 2012 version (which I think has also been used for this new 4K release).

I do prefer the 2005 look, and feel they look more natural with the pinks and blues. The newer colour grade feels a touch yellow sometimes (I miss that actual sepia/terracotta shade for the very opening newsreel-type shots at the very beginning) - but in motion, immersed in the film, I don't mind it at all Less cropping in the 2005 release, too.

[Rich Pure Doom]

Originally Posted by tankryankr19

I’ve just passed the third class jig where Jack takes Rose after the dinner, so far I noticed that the colors look fantastic and it does have this 1997 look to it, nice and warm but also not too yellow (example: king of the world scene which had a piss yellow tint and the even ship looked yellow, in the 4K it looks like the model) Atmos Mix sounds good so far and I’m getting quite a bit of bass response (when they open up the engines “let’s stretch her legs”). Grain Management seems good but there’s something very unnatural about it at the same time, faces carry a lot of detail (i.e. Kate Winslet’s Peach Fuzz) but the grain is around the character and none on their faces (unless it’s an up close shot). Aside from that detail is phenomenal and it’s like you’re looking into a window in another world. To me it’s reference quality but I will probably get jumped for having that opinion here

It is not even close to reference quality. Like, not even remotely close.

[tankryankr19]

The Ship has Sunk, absolutely loving the DV and WGC because colors look so much more natural and more colder during the sinking scenes

[tankryankr19]

Originally Posted by Rich Pure Doom

It is not even close to reference quality. Like, not even remotely close.

To each their own

[Wes_k089]

Just watched it. I think it looks/sounds great
Perfect? No