Titanic 4K UHD (1997)

[KMFDMvsEnya]

Originally Posted by dorian

Here's a comparison of the two, overlaid

Keep in mind the 2012 publicity scan is in 2k so the UHD should naturally have more detail and finer grain. The UHD has likely had noise reduction and sharpening (look at the ringing artefacts at the edges of her eyelashes). That is what gives the plastic look.

Here's a comparison of the chroma channel/s (histograms stretched for better visibility)

The chroma channel/s are a mess on the UHD. You can see why the dye clouds aren't present. Is that due to chroma NR? Bad compression? Both?

Here's a comparison of the luma channel

Here's a comparison of the UHD luma channel combined with the chroma channel/s from the 2012 scan

Thank you and that is very interesting.

If you get a chance it would illuminating and appreciated if you could do similar with the other comparisons I posted.

[Count Orlok]

Originally Posted by Filmmaker

My life’s mission objective accomplished!

Well played, sir!




I scored the Russian Amazon BD set a few years ago. I need to update the first photo with it in with the other copies.

[mar3o]

Originally Posted by By_His_Strypes

I can't take anyone seriously anymore if they think this disc looks bad. Good Grief Charlie Brown.

You and some others are willfully ignoring what's really being said here.

It does not look bad. Many obviously think it looks stunning.

But it doesn't look as it should. Why is that so hard for some of you to understand?

[Pocketkid2]

Originally Posted by mar3o

You and some others are willfully ignoring what's really being said here.

It does not look bad. Many obviously think it looks stunning.

But it doesn't look as it should. Why is that so hard for some of you to understand?

Some of us would rather not waste our energy looking a gift horse in the mouth

[blakninja]

Originally Posted by mar3o

"A new 4K digital intermediate has since been built using the original scan data."

The original scan data was 4k.

I understand that the new 4K DI is built using the 4K scan. But Bill said the 4K UHD disc is built upon the 2K DI. Why is it not built upon the new 4K DI?

[sperezmore]

Originally Posted by Aragorn the Elfstone

*sigh*

Again...this is not about the release needing to be the reference of all reference discs.

This is about it being true to its source. And not plagued with DNR, Edge Enhancement, A.I. upscaling, etc.

Plenty of other releases manage it somehow.

My friend, I think you need also to let people be and move on.

Just my opinion.

Kind regards,

[stevenpaulalejandro]

Originally Posted by Aragorn the Elfstone

Right again! I love James Cameron movies and want them to look great on 4K because I'm anti-Cameron.

I hate James Cameron as a film maker.
I like only 2.5 of his films.
I think the rest are dog poop.
I generally like my home video releases to replicate the look of film as much as possible.
I think The Terminator 2 4k looked awful.
I think Titanic in 4K looks tinkered with but not awful or unwatchable. Perhaps it's because of lowered expectations. But whatever. I watched it and enjoyed it.

[moonstruck]

I just spent the last 3+ hours with this extraordinary film. I am sorry but nothing froze, my magnifying glass detected no anomalies. The final 45 minutes provided one of the most intense cinematic experiences ever. Celine Dion's legendary one-take masterpiece (f*** you Walter Afanasieff) allowed for the total submersion into grief and mourning. Everything came together just as it did 26 years ago when I sat in that wonderful Annapolis theater with dozens of teenage girls crying for Leo. Don't let the a**hats keep you from enjoying this beautiful presentation of a billion dollar film.

[Aragorn the Elfstone]

Originally Posted by moonstruck

Don't let the a**hats keep you from enjoying this beautiful presentation of a billion dollar film.

Is it any wonder I get irritated in these threads?

We really should all (myself included) chill it with the name calling.

[samlop10]

Originally Posted by dorian

Here's a comparison of the two, overlaid

Keep in mind the 2012 publicity scan is in 2k so the UHD should naturally have more detail and finer grain. The UHD has likely had noise reduction and sharpening (look at the ringing artefacts at the edges of her eyelashes). That is what gives the plastic look.

Here's a comparison of the chroma channel/s (histograms stretched for better visibility)

The chroma channel/s are a mess on the UHD. You can see why the dye clouds aren't present. Is that due to chroma NR? Bad compression? Both?

Here's a comparison of the luma channel

Here's a comparison of the UHD luma channel combined with the chroma channel/s from the 2012 scan

Great comparison. It's very obvious the film has been heavily digitally manipulated. Not just the artificial sharpening, but the way the grain was handled as well.

[LMFAObros]

Hopefully Disneys release has a better encode

[TXMoviebuff77]

Originally Posted by Rich Pure Doom

So we just blindly accept and totally ignore obvious issues with the disc, just to please you?

And who the hell are you anyway? Just another troll it seems. I’ve been on this forum for 7 years and have noticed more and more trolling on any little flaw. Since I made my post last night, there’s been no more than 12 pages of posts and to me that’s just ridiculous. It’s usually just the same ole oh well if you can accept this transfer you don’t know how 4K works or you don’t mind flaws and this and that or you’re an idiot for not caring. It’s just becoming embarrassing at this point. Someone always has to find a “flaw” in these releases.

[Riddhi2011]

Originally Posted by blakninja

I understand that the new 4K DI is built using the 4K scan. But Bill said the 4K UHD disc is built upon the 2K DI. Why is it not built upon the new 4K DI?

From my understanding, all the changes, digital tweaks (altered skies, etc.) were done on the 2K DI (2012) which was downscaled from the 4K scan done in 2011-12. So, apparently, they used the original 11-year-old 4K scan, used the "altered" 2K master to match it. Since they spent only about a week on this, I'd say they superimposed the 2K DI above the 4K scan, de-grained, used AI sharpening and added fake grain before releasing it.

On a bigger note, what crushes me are the Youtube comments on Peter Jackson's documentary, They Shall Not Grow Old. The comment in the middle is alarming, to say the least.

They Shall Not Grow Old Trailer comments.jpg

People who are proponents of AI are waiting for such validation. And if they are influential folks, like Peter Jackson or Cameron, then it means they get the validation to continue altering the past as much as they like. I can't help if members here feel I am overreacting or being "dramatic," but these are worrying signs for archiving of cinema and past documentation in general. A day may come when archivists will become jobless except for the scanning part. The scanned data will be fed through an AI program with "machine learning" which will just produce a hyper clean, synthetic and digital-looking footage.

It's also sad reading how Peter Jackson manipulated the public into believing that older films are bad because they are "this grainy, flickery – kind of, you know – sped up footage," and how his heavily altered, de-grained images are "better" by comparison. And he did fool the public for the most part. Now, Cameron has also joined him in that mission.

https://atthepictures.photo.blog/201...acred-archive/

It's quite clear that such filmmakers cannot be called "restorers" of the past, but rather "manipulators." The term may sound extreme, but in terms of meaning, it's just about right, methinks.

[Torgon]

Originally Posted by Bolty

If my Titanic from Movies Unlimited doesn't have a slip it will be the last time I order from them.

Titanic didn’t but Point Break did (though it’s wrapped in plastic). My thought is maybe it got damaged trying to pack it, so they ripped it off. No the norm because I don’t think I’ve gotten anything from them without a slip.

[TheSweetieMan]

Originally Posted by Geoff D

It's the same with George Lucas. It's the same with Peter Jackson. Being a genre-defining filmmaker and a technological pioneer is not and never will be a guarantee of good taste. It's thinking of them as having this "creative pureness" that's the mistake; lionise their achievements by all means, and they are incredible achievements, but they are each of a singular creative vision and it's not necessarily going to be the one that everyone else shares. That's the point really, their iconoclasm is what made them who they are and it carries through in everything they do.

What's wild is all three of them are so good at their crafts.

I'd be curious to see them asked by people within the physical media collecting community, why they think these techniques yield desirable results for home viewing.

The fact that a studio like Blue Underground can put out absolutely exceptional UHD releases that respect and adhere to the films' intended looks -- while James Cameron, who again I think is maybe one of the most important filmmakers to ever live -- gives a pass to the techniques used on a release like this one, despite all of the glaring oddness to some shots and scenes, is so mind boggling to me.

[spanky87]

[Show spoiler]

Originally Posted by TXMoviebuff77

Eat a dick! Own what you say here period!

[Aragorn the Elfstone]

[sperezmore]

Originally Posted by TXMoviebuff77

Eat a dick! Own what you say here period!

That's not nice. He apologized to everybody, I truly think you are out of line

[TXMoviebuff77]

Originally Posted by sperezmore

That's not nice. He apologized to everybody, I truly think you are out of line

Five plus pages of him being so critical of anyone who questions his own “personal” views of this transfer and gets called out and then cops out with a “sincere” apology. Please get real here, who’s this guy anyway?

[Aragorn the Elfstone]

For the record, I apologized for one out-of-line comment. I stand by my assessment of this release. And I have repeatedly said, in this thread, that if you like the PQ in spite of its issues, more power to you.

If my apology isn’t enough for you, so be it. That’s your prerogative. I won’t lose sleep over it. Especially given the rude and vulgar comment you responded with.