Titanic 4K UHD (1997)

[By_His_Strypes]

Originally Posted by videopat

So people just come here to complain, while citing specific examples of what doesn't look right to them, just to stick it to James Cameron?

Do you hear how nuts that sounds?

some actually do... as hard as that is to believe.

[videopat]

Originally Posted by By_His_Strypes

some actually do... as hard as that is to believe.

For the record I love nearly all of Cameron's films, he's one of our most accomplished and visionary filmmakers. I came to this thread because after watching about 30 minutes of the TITANIC 4K, expecting a transfer that would be true to its filmic roots, I could see that something (to my eyes) had gone terribly wrong; and I wanted to see if others were experiencing the same thing. The last thing I'd want to do is diminish somebody's legitimate enjoyment of what they're seeing.

[mar3o]

Originally Posted by jvonl

One person's "obvious issues" is another person's "WTF are you talking about".

Sure, but if you're happy with it, why heckle those that notice issues?

[aiman04]

Originally Posted by lazerface

Man, glad to see everyone on twitter singing praises for this release, gives hope that Aliens and The Abyss will be stunners as well.

True Lies and The Abyss, yes. Not sure I want Aliens to be as clean, bright, sharp and with vibrant colours.

I'll say this again, I'm going against my usual preference that I like how the Titanic 4K looks, but I will never deny the extreme processing that was done. Consider this my lollipop, my guilty pleasure.

Those who talking about the issues are not nitpicking, their concerns are valid.

[cgpublic]

Originally Posted by Geoff D

If you're doing that thing where people say "everything's DNR'ed!" to deflect charges of visible tinkering on whatever movie then that's fine, "everything's been AI'ed!" will do just as well in its stead, but the reply is always the same: it's when people can see the side effects of the various processes that the problems start.

I'm definitely not doing that, so we're fine, and I completely agree with your point that when using these tools there is a tipping point where an image transitions from the same image but 'better' to a point where an image now may appear 'very similar and yet new.'

In the right hands, these tools can work wonders, just as in the past DNR applied judiciously would be perceptible but not radically noticeable. The same is true for encoding, one tool in the right hands can be magic, the same tool in someone's else hands creating havoc.

Originally Posted by dorian

People put a lot of stock into 'AI' when it's almost always a marketing gimmick. Especially now with the advent of LLMs. Anything even remotely computational is ascribed 'AI'. Are all algorithms AI?

The concept of noise reduction isn't new, even the more sophisticated attempts such as DNR have existed for a while. It's the concept itself that is flawed because the grain we see is the absence of information. Blurring the image locally or globally will not restore that information, no matter how you finesse the parameters.

ML focuses on regression and classification, so I really don't see how it can benefit noise reduction in a meaningful way until we get to the point of regenerating the frames completely using something like diffusion. Imagine the discourse on revisionism then.

There's no question that AI as a trend has up to now enjoyed a halo effect, that in turn be applied to justify a price premium, drive sales and add value, so it's predictable that more or less everyone is assigning the term or using the language for everything under the sun.

Specific to imaging, however, there's no question we are looking at a monumental shift in the landscape. As an amateur photographer, fellow photographers have shared the feeling this is the end of photography as we have known it, and we are now heading into uncharted territory.

Certainly the same discussions are taking place between filmmakers and others within the industry, and to your point, imagine the discourse to come.

[mar3o]

Originally Posted by spanky87

I’m no “expert” and it’s no issue to me if people love the release and think it’s definitive or whatever. I wouldn’t try to persuade anyone to think otherwise.

But I just think it’s a pointless release. It’s been established it’s the 4K master used for the blu-ray spruced up with sharpening and AI to make the film look more clean and contemporarily digital. The blu isn’t the most organic either, but I’d might as well just to stick to that and have my 4K player do the upscale since I prefer the film to look more like film. HDR isn’t worth the trade-off for me.

It’s disappointing but no big deal. The blu-ray already uses a 4k master and I’ll just spend the money elsewhere.

I agree, though I'll point out that the blu-ray of course means dealing with the tinting that has improved on the UHD, plus you have to deal with the blu-ray compression which isn't as tight as the UHD.

[By_His_Strypes]

Originally Posted by videopat

For the record I love nearly all of Cameron's films, he's one of our most accomplished and visionary filmmakers. I came to this thread because after watching about 30 minutes of the TITANIC 4K, expecting a transfer that would be true to its filmic roots, I could see that something (to my eyes) had gone terribly wrong; and I wanted to see if others were experiencing the same thing. The last thing I'd want to do is diminish somebody's legitimate enjoyment of what they're seeing.

I don't know what else could have been done here. You also have to take into consideration the film stock used at the time. What exactly in your determination went terribly wrong?

[jvonl]

Originally Posted by mar3o

Sure, but if you're happy with it, why heckle those that notice issues?

If I can be heckled for liking something because "I just don't understand" and "Why did I waste all that money on decent gear", guess what happens next....

[Aragorn the Elfstone]

Originally Posted by By_His_Strypes

I don't know what else could have been done here. You also have to take into consideration the film stock used at the time. What exactly in your determination went terribly wrong?

DNR, EE, AI manipulation, you name it. As has been discussed extensively.

[tsaville]

How do people know what this film *should* look like? My time machine is broken and my old notes on color timing and grain management were lost in the fire.

My only recollection from 1997 is that my girlfriend at the time was obsessed with the soundtrack, and it's the only thing that would put her "in the mood" lol...

I watched the first 1.5 hours tonight, and the picture is certainly very sharp (revealing things we probably aren't supposed to see like wrinkles at the wig line), but I'm still enjoying it...

[mar3o]

Originally Posted by lazerface

Man, glad to see everyone on twitter singing praises for this release, gives hope that Aliens and The Abyss will be stunners as well.

Because folks on twitter are the ones everyone should be listening to?

[Aragorn the Elfstone]

I do have to wonder, for those of you who would be happy with absolutely anything (so long as you can "get lost in the movie"), why even bother coming onto a 4K forum?

[mar3o]

Originally Posted by tsaville

How do people know what this film *should* look like? My time machine is broken and my old notes on color timing and grain management were lost in the fire.

My only recollection from 1997 is that my girlfriend at the time was obsessed with the soundtrack, and it's the only thing that would put her "in the mood" lol...

I watched the first 1.5 hours tonight, and the picture is certainly very sharp (revealing things we probably aren't supposed to see like wrinkles at the wig line), but I'm still enjoying it...

Because people in here (at least some of them) know what film from the 90's should look like.

[bmick23]

Originally Posted by tsaville

How do people know what this film *should* look like? My time machine is broken and my old notes on color timing and grain management were lost in the fire.

White balance and film grain are fairly universal, and it's easy to tell when they're off or have been manipulated.

[spanky87]

Originally Posted by Aragorn the Elfstone

I do have to wonder, for those of you who would be happy with absolutely anything (so long as you can "get lost in the movie"), why even bother coming onto a 4K forum?

Exactly. By that logic, why anticipate ANY 4k catalogue release when you can just “get lost” in the blu-ray release?

[Aragorn the Elfstone]

Originally Posted by spanky87

Exactly. By that logic, why anticipate ANY 4k catalogue release when you can just “get lost” in the blu-ray release?

Off-topic...I love your avatar! Keira's an absolute angel. (And P&P is my second favorite movie of all time. )

[spanky87]

Originally Posted by Aragorn the Elfstone

Off-topic...I love your avatar! Keira's an absolute angel. (And P&P is my second favorite movie of all time. )

Nice. It’s my fave and I get lost often in the blu-ray despite it’s limitations. But I’m still over here waiting for the 4K release like:



I’m sure it’ll turn out better than this. I’d even take a digital 4k release in the meantime.

[videopat]

Originally Posted by By_His_Strypes

I don't know what else could have been done here. You also have to take into consideration the film stock used at the time. What exactly in your determination went terribly wrong?

I guess I was expecting that the movie would be fully restored and remastered from its original 35mm negative, while preserving fine grain. I wasn't expecting the image to be so completely devoid of any texture whatsoever. I didn't think it would be such an obvious upscale from the pre-existing master with such aggressive sharpening and contrast boosting. I didn't think the DNR would be so prevalent as to make the Oscar-winning sets and costumes look so flat and unconvincing.

[By_His_Strypes]

Originally Posted by Aragorn the Elfstone

DNR, EE, AI manipulation, you name it. As has been discussed extensively.

Well, sure I've read many of the posts but I couldn't say (without going back and looking) what exactly was attributed to you. That's why I was asking. I'll agree to disagree then, the whole "you name it" throws up a red flag for me.

[Aragorn the Elfstone]

Originally Posted by spanky87

Nice. It’s my fave and I get lost often in the blu-ray despite it’s limitations. But I’m still over here waiting for the 4K release like:



I’m sure it’ll turn out better than this. I’d even take a digital 4k release in the meantime.

You and me both. Would absolutely love a 4K of this and more of Keira's films (especially the rest of the KK/Joe Wright trilogy - Atonement & Anna Karenina). *fingers crossed*