Congo 4K UHD (1995) coming from Vinegar Syndrome

[ntotoro]

Originally Posted by Zukb

So is this title already gone? I was looking on the Vinegar Syndrome website and couldn't find it.

December is Partner Month, so only their partner labels are featured. It'll be back January 1st.

[jim-p]

Originally Posted by Zukb

So is this title already gone? I was looking on the Vinegar Syndrome website and couldn't find it.

VS does a partners only month during December so you can't buy their own titles then. Should be back up in January for regular orders. Might be able to find it through a third party site in the meantime. That happened to me last year with D.A.R.Y.L. I missed the preorder window and then couldn't order my copy until early January.

[Cobalt Blu]

Originally Posted by PeterTHX

Which is why I despise them using this term for every 4K disc release that comes down the pike. A true "restoration" would have digitally erased those scratches.

It's a 4K transfer/remaster. Nothing more and typical for a major 1995 studio film.

So you want digital artifacts instead?

[sfmarine]

Originally Posted by Zukb

So is this title already gone? I was looking on the Vinegar Syndrome website and couldn't find it.

They had a few thousand left and I expect it to be around for the next sale. As others pointed out, it will be back next month.

[PeterTHX]

Originally Posted by Cobalt Blu

So you want digital artifacts instead?

LOL. Lawrence of Arabia, The Ten Commandments, My Fair Lady - all true digital restorations on 4K UHD. Countless frames rebuilt, tears, scratches, fades, and other destruction painstakingly fixed. Now tell me where the digital artifacts are.

[Robert George]

Disc Title: Congo 1995 UHD
Disc Size: 86,993,947,446 bytes
Protection: AACS2
Playlist: 00005.MPLS
Size: 85,669,638,144 bytes
Length: 1:48:29.503
Total Bitrate: 105.29 Mbps
Video: MPEG-H HEVC Video / 94001 kbps / 2160p / 23.976 fps / 16:9 / Main 10 @ Level 5.1 @ High / 10 bits / HDR10 / BT.2020
* Video: MPEG-H HEVC Video / 118 kbps / 1080p / 23.976 fps / 16:9 / Main 10 @ Level 5.1 @ High / 10 bits / Dolby Vision / BT.2020
Audio: English / DTS-HD Master Audio / 5.1 / 48 kHz / 3829 kbps / 24-bit (DTS Core: 5.1 / 48 kHz / 1509 kbps / 24-bit)
Audio: English / DTS-HD Master Audio / 2.0 / 48 kHz / 2145 kbps / 24-bit (DTS Core: 2.0 / 48 kHz / 1509 kbps / 24-bit)
Audio: English / Dolby Digital Audio / 2.0 / 48 kHz / 192 kbps / DN -27dB
Subtitle: English / 36.692 kbps

[Robert George]

Originally Posted by PeterTHX

LOL. Lawrence of Arabia, The Ten Commandments, My Fair Lady - all true digital restorations on 4K UHD. Countless frames rebuilt, tears, scratches, fades, and other destruction painstakingly fixed. Now tell me where the digital artifacts are.

Technically LOA was restored photochemically and the restored element got a 6K (I think) scan with the requisite tweaks for video.

Robert Harris over at Home theater Forum could give you the exact scoop on that restoration.

[aviosis]

Originally Posted by PeterTHX

LOL. Lawrence of Arabia, The Ten Commandments, My Fair Lady - all true digital restorations on 4K UHD. Countless frames rebuilt, tears, scratches, fades, and other destruction painstakingly fixed. Now tell me where the digital artifacts are.

Yes and Congo stands mightily above them pounding its chest, deserving the best restoration money can buy

[cascade 15]

That picture isn't in my VS 4K LE of Congo. That might be from the standard 4K version.

[PeterTHX]

Originally Posted by aviosis

Yes and Congo stands mightily above them pounding its chest, deserving the best restoration money can buy

Way to miss the point.

I'm saying it wasn't restored and they shouldn't use that nomenclature in their marketing materials. It's a standard 4K transfer/remaster.

[Geoff D]

Originally Posted by PeterTHX

LOL. Lawrence of Arabia, The Ten Commandments, My Fair Lady - all true digital restorations on 4K UHD. Countless frames rebuilt, tears, scratches, fades, and other destruction painstakingly fixed. Now tell me where the digital artifacts are.

Good god you love your some antics. First of all it can't be a "restoration" unless it's one of them old-timey films. Now it can't even be a "digital restoration" unless it's "truly" pristine? Gimme a break. Constant vertical scratches are one of the hardest things to paint out because cloning a small patch for a frame at at time is one thing, but cloning an entire column or smaller scratch that stays there for the duration of the scene/shot is much harderer, often resulting in artefacts as said, even now with all the power that technology has to offer. If they had the time and money to endlessly frame-f*ck it then fine, but they didn't, no indie does (see also: the scratches on VS' 4K transfer of Madman).

You mentioned Lawrence as being some sort of presumed paradigm, but one of the drawbacks of the UHD for me is that it lays bare the exact kind of restoration artefacts being talked about. Vertical columns of frozen noise in backgrounds, patches of frozen grain in others, it's not seamless so can we not call that a "true digital restoration" either? Or is the fact that the Lawrence resto was done in SDR in 2012 going to be used as a get-out clause for the HDR version revealing the digital crud? Them goalposts keep on shiftin'

[PeterTHX]

Originally Posted by Geoff D

Good god you love your some antics. First of all it can't be a "restoration" unless it's one of them old-timey films. Now it can't even be a "digital restoration" unless it's "truly" pristine?

Would you call Congo a "restoration"? Because whatever transfer cleanup they did - they also did when they remastered if for Blu-ray as well and those weren't called restorations either. I've told you before, I'm just sick of the term being thrown around so much now it means precisely shit.

[Geoff D]

Originally Posted by PeterTHX

Would you call Congo a "restoration"? Because whatever transfer cleanup they did - they also did when they remastered if for Blu-ray as well and those weren't called restorations either. I've told you before, I'm just sick of the term being thrown around so much now it means precisely shit.

I'm just not sure that it matters a whole lot. Not that any of this does really, and I love technological pedantry as much as the next person, but this particular one being such a sore spot will always baffle me because film - as in the OG negative - can never truly be 'restored'. Whatever damage is on Lawrence or The Godfather or whatever is still physically on the emulsion that's slowly decaying in a salt mine somewhere, and none of the restorations (be they chemical or digital) actually fixed any of that nor could they, so in that context what does 'restoration' even mean? Reinstating a previously cut version to former glory? If so then that's a pretty short list.

[zepol]

Skin tones are too pink at times. Sound is very good.

[ko8ebryant24]

WB BD vs Vinegar Syndrome UHD HDR10

150 nits

Reminder:
Colors and luminance in tone-mapped HDR screenshots are not representative, only compare compression and detail.

https://slow.pics/c/WvJ7nMub?canvas-mode=fit-width

[jwb]

What is Amazon Canada smoking?! $86 for this...

[Cobalt Blu]

Originally Posted by jwb

What is Amazon Canada smoking?! $86 for this...

I bought it from the Vinegar Syndrome store in Toronto for $65.

[jwb]

Originally Posted by Cobalt Blu

I bought it from the Vinegar Syndrome store in Toronto for $65.

That's overpriced too lol

[celluloidboy]

... ordered and paid in early November during black friday sale, but not a subscriber, for the clasp box thingy for about $45, just finished watching my copy of the regular blu disc and it looked pretty darn tootin' good. Lots of fine grain intact, but I've never watched the Paramount or Warner pressings when they were at Best Buy for 9.99, probably because it was transfered at 1.78:1 instead of 1.85 ... colors robust, nice sound mix and effects shots, for 1997 ... (Ernie Hudson is the man) ...

[Cobalt Blu]

Originally Posted by jwb

That's overpriced too lol

It was cheaper than anywhere else. This is a limited edition product from a boutique retailer. We're not talking Twisters here.