Jurassic Park Collection 4K UHD (1993-2015)

[spiltmilk]

Any scans of the steelbook discs yet? Are the discs the same for all regions?

[The Rider]

Originally Posted by HeavyHitter

Not sure, but the UHD rectified the color woes of the BD which had too much orange/teal applied.

I wonder if the Blu-ray master wasn't closer to the cinema prints of the time. It's not uncommon for a master to cause controversy and a new master to be further removed from the original look, see Jurassic Park.

Originally Posted by PeterTHX

I saw it in two different premium theaters on both coasts and it looked like shit. Those stills don't tell the story. Ugly theatrical presentations, so the ugly video transfers were no surprise.

Can you specify this?

So the images of the 35 mm prints look very good, don't you think? And these pictures look very different from the home entertainment transfers. Jurassic Park also looks very bad in home entertainment and the 35 mm prints are beautiful. Jurassic Park and Jurassic Park III have very similar problems in home entertainment.

[The Rider]

Originally Posted by VickPS

And you are spot on, across the board.

Every fan-made scan of JP, but most movies in general really, is just as "incorrect" as your average home video version.
This is caused by an endless amount of factors including incorrect scan settings, scanner quality, scene by scene adjustments, personal taste of the "fan".. which is also most of time greatly influenced by his memories of versions he is used to.
You truly hit the nail on the head when it comes to the general attitude towards "teal".
As a matter of fact, some 35mm scans born as an answer to modern revisionistic gradings end up mirroring the magenta home video version, only with dirt, scratches, gamma issues, and softer picture.
Looking nothing like the raw scan, which in fact is almost always a copy of the modern revisionistic grading just in organic form.

I honestly wouldn't trust half of the "35mm scans" around.
You can fully trust the JP screenshot I shared though, entirely exempt from every single factor I listed previously.

You have to differentiate a little:

1. It is one thing whether a stylistic element can also be found on the 35 mm prints, but a completely different matter how this was realised digitally. In most cases, the criticism of revisionism is therefore absolutely correct. A good example of this is The Good, the Bad and the Ugly. On the 35 mm prints, the film had a warm grading. Nevertheless, the Italian 4K restoration is completely wrong with all the yellow and teal. Only the regrade of the Ultra HD Blu-ray Disc by Kino Lorber (I hope also at Arrow Video) has corrected these errors.

2. There is indeed a lot of revisionism with a teal and orange color grading that no longer has much to do with the 35 mm prints. Good examples are The Lord of the Rings: The Fellowship of the Ring, Terminator 2: Judgment Day, The Abyss or True Lies.

The lasers should be pink and not blue. The following shots have pink lasers again. This is just terrible work.
https://caps-a-holic.com/c.php?go=1&...185095&i=0&l=0

3. If a digital grading is not completely correct or is revisionist, this of course does not mean that previous home entertainment versions are correct. Jurassic Park 3D was criticised for the vibrant colors and teal. The criticism is absolutely justified, as there were some problems in trying to recreate the look of the 35 mm prints. But this master is still closer to the 35 mm prints than previous and subsequent home entertainment releases.

Originally Posted by VickPS

Which wouldn't explain why black crush is present on every previous version of the movie.
And subsequent, even brighter, versions such as this new release.

I too have to wait the EU release, but if not black crush itself, hopefully the "orange banding" issue is mitigated on the new grade, at least.

What do you mean by "orange banding" at TLW?

[PondaBaba]

Spoilered for being a little off topic:

[Show spoiler]Was it not established (by deduction, rather than officially confirmed) that the initial FotR EE BD grade was done in error in virtue of the tint (at least apparently - not witnessed it myself) switching off mid end credits? Returning white to actual white? I didn’t think this would continue to be a legit example since reading that. A more recent example that I came across and was curious re: the discussion on was the reissue of KL’s rerelease/reissue of the Big Easy. Looked artificially tealed up to the max from the caps to me, but then people in the thread were claiming it’s how it would have originally looked on film back on release. I’m no expert but I do watch a fair amount of stuff on film (both knackered old release prints

[Show spoiler]-to get vaguely on topic - inc. JP a couple of years ago-

and new prints of old and new releases and i don’t ever remember a film on film looking as teal as is shown in those big easy caps

[ruffian]

Sorry if this has been asked and answered already but Blu-ray.com advertises the new 4K discs as having DTS-X audio for the UK release, but from what I’ve seen of the US release they appear to have new Dolby Atmos soundtracks. Does anyone know if the UK discs will have the DA soundtracks?

[Mierzwiak]

Originally Posted by ruffian

Sorry if this has been asked and answered already but Blu-ray.com advertises the new 4K discs as having DTS-X audio for the UK release, but from what I’ve seen of the US release they appear to have new Dolby Atmos soundtracks. Does anyone know if the UK discs will have the DA soundtracks?

It's a mistake, I corrected it.

[HeavyHitter]

Originally Posted by The Rider

I wonder if the Blu-ray master wasn't closer to the cinema prints of the time. It's not uncommon for a master to cause controversy and a new master to be further removed from the original look, see Jurassic Park.

I won't be that guy who claims to precisely remember what film prints looked like 40+ years ago, but I saw Raiders about a dozen times between 1981-1982. Of course, had it on other formats leading up to seeing it on IMAX in 2011 (same master from BD). Immediately, I was struck with how odd the yellowish opening looked when the Paramount logo transformed into the mountain and the entire opening sequence. I had never seen that before, and it was global tint was removed for the UHD. There were some other color oddities as well that were only on the BD and not on the UHD. The UHD looks far superior which its more earthy tone look which I think resembles more of the original look which admittingly is a moving target for reasons disussed before, but that BD color timing was something of another kind just like its ridiculously boosted bass that was also remedied for the UHD. That BD was just flawed all of the way around. I have seen a 35mm scan where the idol is golden for what it's worth and it looks nothing like the BD...and oh how I loved the optical 2.0 track.

[PeterTHX]

Originally Posted by The Rider

So the images of the 35 mm prints look very good, don't you think? And these pictures look very different from the home entertainment transfers. Jurassic Park also looks very bad in home entertainment and the 35 mm prints are beautiful. Jurassic Park and Jurassic Park III have very similar problems in home entertainment.

Yeah, sure as hell isn't the 35MM prints I saw. What I saw was bleached, colorless, and not very sharp. In other words, what's on the 4K. But even dirtier and a lot granier too.

[JohnCarpenterFan]

Originally Posted by anand-venigalla

In retrospect and hindsight, which releases would you say are the most “filmic” of Spielberg UHDs and BDs?

Probably the Jaws and Schindler's List UHDs.

Originally Posted by The Rider

How close are the Blu-ray Disc master and the Ultra HD Blu-ray Disc master of Raisers of the Lost Ark in terms of color grading to the 35 mm prints?

With Jurassic Park there can be deviations in the prints, some with the blue a little more magenta, others more cyan. The images from the fan project look very good so far, in the blue we have more cyan than on Universal's Blu-ray Disc and Ultra HD Blu-ray Disc releases. It's such a beautiful navy blue like this, not teal.

https://caps-a-holic.com/c.php?go=1&...69271&i=12&l=0

I'd say both the Blu-ray and the UHD are in the same ballpark but home video historically has never been about completely matching the exact look of any print; the vast majority of older masters and new iterations based off of them probably don't even resemble the prints for the same films (I can't think of one magenta-pushed master that resembled an original print I've seen). Home video is inherently revisionist and it's a completely different medium so differences are kind of inevitable even if it's not intentional "revisionism"; stuff like adjusting color/brightness inconsistencies (that are present on the prints) from shot-to-shot has been commonplace since VHS for an example of routine and widely-accepted revisionism.

Originally Posted by VickPS

And you are spot on, across the board.

Every fan-made scan of JP, but most movies in general really, is just as "incorrect" as your average home video version.
This is caused by an endless amount of factors including incorrect scan settings, scanner quality, scene by scene adjustments, personal taste of the "fan".. which is also most of time greatly influenced by his memories of versions he is used to.
You truly hit the nail on the head when it comes to the general attitude towards "teal".
As a matter of fact, some 35mm scans born as an answer to modern revisionistic gradings end up mirroring the magenta home video version, only with dirt, scratches, gamma issues, and softer picture.
Looking nothing like the raw scan, which in fact is almost always a copy of the modern revisionistic grading just in organic form.

I honestly wouldn't trust half of the "35mm scans" around.
You can fully trust the JP screenshot I shared though, entirely exempt from every single factor I listed previously.

Sadly, I think a lot more than only half of them are wildly inaccurate due to the reasons you noted. I think these projects are done out of love, but I hate to see people waste so much time and money ultimately creating a novelty experience as opposed to even beginning to reach the quality and accuracy of 35mm print scans seen in film archives. If these hobbyists want to produce more faithful results then they should do something like what you did with your print, or actually look into taking courses concerning grading and film. I've known students, who after just lax 1-2 day training sessions, could achieve much better results than what I usually see with these fan scans (and sometimes even grades from labels or major studios in Jurassic Park's case) so that's something that would definitely be worth looking into if one wants to continue doing fan scans.

I've actually seen comments from a film archivist on one of those fan sites though. I remember seeing one where they were stating that the print(s) of Thief in their archive had "teal" similar to the Criterion Blu-ray which was accused of being highly revisionist. If someone in that position is willing to help out then that's invaluable assistance right there because outside of film archives, you're not seeing the original photochemical look or a decent representation of it for the majority of films.

[Pieter V]

Originally Posted by samuelkhan999

Could you do 1 for JP please.

JP (1993)

Old disc:

Color Range : Limited
Primary Colors : BT.2020
Transfer Characteristics : PQ
Matrix Coefficients : BT.2020 non-constant
MasteringDisplay_Luminance : min: 0.0050 cd/m2, max: 1000 cd/m2
MaxCLL : 910 cd/m2
MaxFALL : 101 cd/m2

New disc:

Color range : Limited
Color primaries : BT.2020
Transfer characteristics : PQ
Matrix coefficients : BT.2020 non-constant
Mastering display color primaries : Display P3
Mastering display luminance : min: 0.0050 cd/m2, max: 4000 cd/m2
Maximum Content Light Level : 1470 cd/m2
Maximum Frame-Average Light Level : 38 cd/m2

[JohnCarpenterFan]

Originally Posted by PeterTHX

Yeah, sure as hell isn't the 35MM prints I saw. What I saw was bleached, colorless, and not very sharp. In other words, what's on the 4K. But even dirtier and a lot granier too.

I can't remember what it looked like but the print I saw definitely wouldn't have been that bad. I just remember feeling that it looked ugly on home video and it's not just that it's an unattractive looking image, but it's shortcomings feel more video-like in origin. I can see why some would confuse it for being an early DI-finished film by its current state on home video.

[eXtofer]

I’m not going to lie, I enjoyed these discs. I know for sure the color grade is wrong in JP1, as it’s one of the few titles I remember the distinct golden look of back when I was 13 and saw it for the first time in the theater. But I also hadn’t purchased any of these films on physical media since I bought the widescreen VHS of Jurassic Park back in the 90’s. So this was a huge upgrade for me, regardless. I know there are others here that are adamantly against this release, but I refuse to feel guilty for enjoying these movies again as much as I did. Still love TLW. Still love JP3 and even the talking raptor. Lol

These films just take me back to such a wonderful time in my life!

[Pieter V]

Lost World (1997)
Old disc:

Color Range : Limited
Primary Colors : BT.2020
Transfer Characteristics : PQ
Matrix Coefficients : BT.2020 non-constant
MasteringDisplay_Luminance : min: 0.0050 cd/m2, max: 1000 cd/m2
MaxCLL : 929 cd/m2
MaxFALL : 129 cd/m2

New disc:

Color range : Limited
Color primaries : BT.2020
Transfer characteristics : PQ
Matrix coefficients : BT.2020 non-constant
Mastering display color primaries : Display P3
Mastering display luminance : min: 0.0001 cd/m2, max: 1000 cd/m2
Maximum Content Light Level : 1000 cd/m2
Maximum Frame-Average Light Level : 136 cd/m2

JP III (2001)
Old disc:

Color Range : Limited
Primary Colors : BT.2020
Transfer Characteristics : PQ
Matrix Coefficients : BT.2020 non-constant
MasteringDisplay_Luminance : min: 0.0050 cd/m2, max: 1000 cd/m2
MaxCLL : 915 cd/m2
MaxFALL : 70 cd/m2

New disc:

Color range : Limited
Color primaries : BT.2020
Transfer characteristics : PQ
Matrix coefficients : BT.2020 non-constant
Mastering display color primaries : Display P3
Mastering display luminance : min: 0.0001 cd/m2, max: 1000 cd/m2
Maximum Content Light Level : 1000 cd/m2
Maximum Frame-Average Light Level : 75 cd/m2

[anand-venigalla]

Originally Posted by JohnCarpenterFan

Probably the Jaws and Schindler's List UHDs.



I'd say both the Blu-ray and the UHD are in the same ballpark but home video historically has never been about completely matching the exact look of any print; the vast majority of older masters and new iterations based off of them probably don't even resemble the prints for the same films (I can't think of one magenta-pushed master that resembled an original print I've seen). Home video is inherently revisionist and it's a completely different medium so differences are kind of inevitable even if it's not intentional "revisionism"; stuff like adjusting color/brightness inconsistencies (that are present on the prints) from shot-to-shot has been commonplace since VHS for an example of routine and widely-accepted revisionism.



Sadly, I think a lot more than only half of them are wildly inaccurate due to the reasons you noted. I think these projects are done out of love, but I hate to see people waste so much time and money ultimately creating a novelty experience as opposed to even beginning to reach the quality and accuracy of 35mm print scans seen in film archives. If these hobbyists want to produce more faithful results then they should do something like what you did with your print, or actually look into taking courses concerning grading and film. I've known students, who after just lax 1-2 day training sessions, could achieve much better results than what I usually see with these fan scans (and sometimes even grades from labels or major studios in Jurassic Park's case) so that's something that would definitely be worth looking into if one wants to continue doing fan scans.

I've actually seen comments from a film archivist on one of those fan sites though. I remember seeing one where they were stating that the print(s) of Thief in their archive had "teal" similar to the Criterion Blu-ray which was accused of being highly revisionist. If someone in that position is willing to help out then that's invaluable assistance right there because outside of film archives, you're not seeing the original photochemical look or a decent representation of it for the majority of films.

I have the old BDs for the Indy films. Would I be confident in purchasing the UHDs for the movies as well and getting something good out of them? I know they're acclaimed and all, though some have said they're revisionist and all and have the Paramount issues.

[JohnCarpenterFan]

Originally Posted by anand-venigalla

I have the old BDs for the Indy films. Would I be confident in purchasing the UHDs for the movies as well and getting something good out of them? I know they're acclaimed and all, though some have said they're revisionist and all and have the Paramount issues.

Absolutely. I never had issues with the Blu-ray of Raiders like some so the upgrade for that one isn't as drastic in my eyes, but just look at how much better the UHDs are for Temple and Crusade whose Blu-rays exhibited sharpening and inexcusable aliasing. I didn't find the Blu-rays too bad when they were first released because my display back then was much smaller and these issues weren't noticeable. I mean just look at the difference between the two here in Temple of Doom:



As for revisionism, shortcomings of some optical effects and such were fixed which didn't distract me and honestly I wouldn't be able to tell what all was done if there weren't direct comparisons showing this: https://www.movie-censorship.com/report.php?ID=596106

I guess Kingdom of the Crystal Skull is revisionist because the original "teal and orange" grade was toned down a considerable amount but I doubt anyone on here was complaining about that being revisionist.

There are some Paramount issues but they're nowhere near as distracting or as frequent on a lot of their other releases. I think the Indy UHDs are some of their very best work on the format.

[HeavyHitter]

Originally Posted by anand-venigalla

I have the old BDs for the Indy films. Would I be confident in purchasing the UHDs for the movies as well and getting something good out of them? I know they're acclaimed and all, though some have said they're revisionist and all and have the Paramount issues.

In my view, even Raiders on UHD is a major upgrade over the BD. The improvement in color (even SDR converted) on the UHD is apparent as is the detail. The soundtrack is also far more balanced too.

https://caps-a-holic.com/c.php?go=1&...169277&i=3&l=0
https://caps-a-holic.com/c.php?go=1&...169275&i=1&l=0

[anand-venigalla]

Originally Posted by JohnCarpenterFan

Absolutely. I never had issues with the Blu-ray of Raiders like some so the upgrade for that one isn't as drastic in my eyes, but just look at how much better the UHDs are for Temple and Crusade whose Blu-rays exhibited sharpening and inexcusable aliasing. I didn't find the Blu-rays too bad when they were first released because my display back then was much smaller and these issues weren't noticeable. I mean just look at the difference between the two here in Temple of Doom:



As for revisionism, shortcomings of some optical effects and such were fixed which didn't distract me and honestly I wouldn't be able to tell what all was done if there weren't direct comparisons showing this: https://www.movie-censorship.com/report.php?ID=596106

I guess Kingdom of the Crystal Skull is revisionist because the original "teal and orange" grade was toned down a considerable amount but I doubt anyone on here was complaining about that being revisionist.

There are some Paramount issues but they're nowhere near as distracting or as frequent on a lot of their other releases. I think the Indy UHDs are some of their very best work on the format.

Thanks. Will purchase this and the Schindler’s UHD at some point. I have the Jaws and Close Encounters UHDs, and the old Close Encounters BD.

For Close Encounters, do you prefer the UHD+included BD of the new restoration, or the old BD?

[JohnCarpenterFan]

Originally Posted by anand-venigalla

Thanks. Will purchase this and the Schindler’s UHD at some point. I have the Jaws and Close Encounters UHDs, and the old Close Encounters BD.

For Close Encounters, do you prefer the UHD+included BD of the new restoration, or the old BD?

I'm never going back to the old Blu-ray of Close Encounters, but I'm not a massive fan of Sony's earlier UHDs.

[PeterTHX]

Originally Posted by JohnCarpenterFan

I guess Kingdom of the Crystal Skull is revisionist because the original "teal and orange" grade was toned down a considerable amount but I doubt anyone on here was complaining about that being revisionist.

Standard Blu-ray's REC709 has a habit of "turning up" the teal & orange.

I've seen quite a few films now on 4K UHD where it's toned down as you said - well it actually was more like that theatrically too. The expanded REC2020 color range of 4K UHD brings out the original intended grade.

[anand-venigalla]

Originally Posted by JohnCarpenterFan

I'm never going back to the old Blu-ray of Close Encounters, but I'm not a massive fan of Sony's earlier UHDs.

Fair. I think a DV upgrade of Close Encounters could be in order, since a lot of the old UHDs have been getting those.