Sony "Mastered in 4K" Blu-ray Titles May 14 and July 16

[Geoff D]

Spidey 2 was shot Super 35. The reframing of such shows is not a new development, it usually happens every time a new transfer is done.

http://caps-a-holic.com/hd_vergleich...ss=0#vergleich

http://caps-a-holic.com/hd_vergleich...ess=#vergleich

[I KEEL YOU]

I think this shot shows pretty clearly the differences between the colors of the two versions for anyone who has seen Spider Man's costume:

http://caps-a-holic.com/hd_vergleich...ss=1#vergleich

[dvdmike]

Originally Posted by Geoff D

Spidey 2 was shot Super 35. The reframing of such shows is not a new development, it usually happens every time a new transfer is done.

http://caps-a-holic.com/hd_vergleich...ss=0#vergleich

http://caps-a-holic.com/hd_vergleich...ess=#vergleich

Exactly, the old master was used for every release, it is kind of simple

[Nostalgic2001]

Whats with that layer in the back of uncle Ben's head in the 4k screenshot #7?

[blu-ray_girl_fan]

Originally Posted by Geoff D

Spidey 2 was shot Super 35. The reframing of such shows is not a new development, it usually happens every time a new transfer is done.

http://caps-a-holic.com/hd_vergleich...ss=0#vergleich

http://caps-a-holic.com/hd_vergleich...ess=#vergleich

That is an excuse, not a reason.

By that logic, the first batch of Pirates of the Caribbean 1 Blu-rays was perfectly fine b/c reframing Super 35 happens all the time.

[42041]

Excuse for what? What exactly is the problem here?

[dvdmike]

Originally Posted by 42041

Excuse for what? What exactly is the problem here?

The frame moved and because people assume the old framing was correct as it came first also they are terrified of seeing new pixels

[blu-ray_girl_fan]

Originally Posted by dvdmike

The frame moved and because people assume the old framing was correct as it came first also they are terrified of seeing new pixels

Is there any reason to believe that the new framing is what the director and cinematographer want?

[42041]

Originally Posted by blu-ray_girl_fan

Is there any reason to believe that the new framing is what the director and cinematographer want?

Is there any reason to believe the framing on the original disc is what the director and cinematographer want?
Is there any reason to believe such a minute difference matters one bit with regard to the photographic intent, when the filmmakers would anticipate that the framing can vary quite a bit between theaters?

[dvdmike]

Originally Posted by 42041

Is there any reason to believe the framing on the original disc is what the director and cinematographer want?
Is there any reason to believe such a minute difference matters one bit with regard to the photographic intent, when the filmmakers would anticipate that the framing can vary quite a bit between theaters?

Ding DingDingDingDingDingDingDingDingDingDingDingDingDi ng

Yep every new master, in this series and every release even anamorphic films can have new framing

[blu-ray_girl_fan]

Originally Posted by 42041

Is there any reason to believe the framing on the original disc is what the director and cinematographer want?
Is there any reason to believe such a minute difference matters one bit with regard to the photographic intent, when the filmmakers would anticipate that the framing can vary quite a bit between theaters?

The old framing has been out for years, but the director and cinematographer never complained about it.

We are talking about home video, not movie theaters. Besides, a Super 35 movie would be "pre-framed" when it got to theaters. We're not talking about a movie that was shot 1.33:1 and then masked to 1.66:1 or 1.85:1 by a projectionist.

[blu-ray_girl_fan]

Originally Posted by dvdmike

Ding DingDingDingDingDingDingDingDingDingDingDingDingDi ng

Yep every new master, in this series and every release even anamorphic films can have new framing

So did you keep the first version of Pirates of the Caribbean 1?

[dvdmike]

Originally Posted by blu-ray_girl_fan

So did you keep the first version of Pirates of the Caribbean 1?

Yes actually mistakes can be worth money, you also assume this is a mistake.

So are all these then:

http://caps-a-holic.com/hd_vergleich...ess=#vergleich

http://caps-a-holic.com/hd_vergleich...ess=#vergleich

http://caps-a-holic.com/hd_vergleich...ess=#vergleich

I could go on and on, damn Criterion needs to recall that Night of the Hunter like Pirates then

[42041]

Originally Posted by blu-ray_girl_fan

The old framing has been out for years, but the director and cinematographer never complained about it.

How many times have filmmakers publicly complained about discs with obvious flaws, let alone minor differences in framing?

[dvdmike]

Originally Posted by 42041

How many times have filmmakers publicly complained about discs with obvious flaws, let alone minor differences in framing?

Once, Scott with Gladiator and that is it

[Geoff D]

Originally Posted by blu-ray_girl_fan

That is an excuse, not a reason.

By that logic, the first batch of Pirates of the Caribbean 1 Blu-rays was perfectly fine b/c reframing Super 35 happens all the time.

Heh. There's a difference between a blatant framing error and an image that's been shifted by a few pixels here and there, which is clearly what I was referring to in my previous post. Nice try, though. And yes, the matting can change from theater to theater, which is why there's always a bit of leeway as regards the framing of the periphery of the image.

[joie]

Eveything may get re-framed. It's an easy way to layer another copyright on top of all the others.

[BrandonJF]

Originally Posted by 42041

How many times have filmmakers publicly complained about discs with obvious flaws, let alone minor differences in framing?

Exactly. And if we're using the logic that a filmmaker's complaint is the basis for invalidating the framing on home video, we're about to be in for a bit of a paradox since I have a feeling that Raimi and co. aren't going to say a word about the framing of this mastered-in-4k disc. Plus, it seems like some think the color timing is correct on the new disc. If that's the case and the old releases have had the wrong color this whole time, is it a huge leap to think the framing could've been off too?

[blu-ray_girl_fan]

Originally Posted by BrandonJF

Exactly. And if we're using the logic that a filmmaker's complaint is the basis for invalidating the framing on home video, we're about to be in for a bit of a paradox since I have a feeling that Raimi and co. aren't going to say a word about the framing of this mastered-in-4k disc. Plus, it seems like some think the color timing is correct on the new disc. If that's the case and the old releases have had the wrong color this whole time, is it a huge leap to think the framing could've been off too?

All the more reason not to buy any version of Spider-Man 2.

[Geoff D]

Watched Spidey 1 M4K again yesterday, it really is a lovely transfer. It's got a wonderfully clean, crisp look (occasional baked in EE notwithstanding) and there's so much detail. The closeup of Dafoe as he goes full Goblin in the mirror is staggeringly good.