Stardust 4K UHD (2007)

[jabba359]

Site review is up (with a very solid 4.0 score) and seems to contradict the other review I've seen, noting that "Grain is very light; even scrutinizing the picture up close the grain field is very, very fine, but the UHD gives no indication of significant image scrubbing or unnecessary degradation. Likewise, compression artifacts are essentially nonexistent and I noted no obvious print anomalies, either."

But the AVSForum review (which gives it a 6 score - the equivalent of a 3.0 here) says "Both fine detailing and the film grain texture veer wildly from one scene to the next – one minute we’re looking at beautifully detailed costumes, intricate set designs and fine grain that shimmers exactly like it should, an inherent part of the image that resolves itself in a natural and even way…and the next, we’re watching an almost soft-filtered reproduction, complete with absence of almost any real detail and backed up with either blocky, chunky grain blobs (check out the scene at 61 mins when Mark Strong is interrogating Bernard the Goat, look at the sky over his shoulder…horrendous blocking)...A quick check of the playback information also shows that in the scenes where detail drops to its lowest, so too does the encode."

I don't see how it can have such obvious problems from one review and the other reviewer doesn't see such major issues.

[Tylerfan]

I love site reviews that only show pictures of a Steelbook and show zero screenshots of the film being reviewed, especially in the cases where the film reviewed has a new master or has debuted on 4K. Really helps sell ambiguity.

Oh, nevermind, there's another review with caps.

[Medality]

Just received it from WOW HD. Came at $33 CAD and change with the 15% code. Great price for a really great looking steel! The 4K disc is a bonus

[Beardbreath]

Originally Posted by emailking

I like this movie a lot and consider it similar to The Princess Bride, which I did not rebuy in UHD. I might get this one though because I like it so much.

Definitely! At our house for 10+ years, Stardust has been the default movie to put on when we don't know what else to put on. Stardust totally feels like The Princess Bride for a younger generation. We still need to get it on UHD as well.

[PonyoBellanote]

I need to know how this 4K disc fares. Is it worth a grab or do I stick to the Blu-ray? I remember watching the 4K DV iTunes stream a couple of years ago and don't remember it being particularly too bad but I've not heard good things of this disc. Can it be possible they futher filtered it for the disc, or can it REALLY be a case of awful disc encoding on Paramount's side?

I honestly need to know, though I'm better off waiting for the standard to release elsewhere in Europe and possibly grab it for the combo of 4K+BD.

[Bernardo A.]

Originally Posted by PonyoBellanote

I need to know how this 4K disc fares. Is it worth a grab or do I stick to the Blu-ray? I remember watching the 4K DV iTunes stream a couple of years ago and don't remember it being particularly too bad but I've not heard good things of this disc. Can it be possible they futher filtered it for the disc, or can it REALLY be a case of awful disc encoding on Paramount's side?

I honestly need to know, though I'm better off waiting for the standard to release elsewhere in Europe and possibly grab it for the combo of 4K+BD.

Crappy encoding but ultimately a better experience than the old BD.

[PonyoBellanote]

Originally Posted by Bernardo A.

Crappy encoding but ultimately a better experience than the old BD.

Can I ask an elaboration on why, is it that the HDR makes a difference?

[Bernardo A.]

Originally Posted by PonyoBellanote

Can I ask an elaboration on why, is it that the HDR makes a difference?

Grain is mushed but there's more highlight detail and it makes extensive use of WCG (the green fire scene for example). Daylight scenes look more stable and accurate.

[PonyoBellanote]

I wasn't kidding; the old iTunes 4K stream does look miles better..

It's like the colours are way more dull and dimmed in the 4K disc.

[Bernardo A.]

Originally Posted by PonyoBellanote

I wasn't kidding; the old iTunes 4K stream does look miles better..

It's like the colours are way more dull and dimmed in the 4K disc.

Are you watching in HDR10 or DV?

[bebbsie23]

Originally Posted by PonyoBellanote

I wasn't kidding; the old iTunes 4K stream does look miles better..

It's like the colours are way more dull and dimmed in the 4K disc.

Thanks for the heads up. I'll give the itunes version as try. It certainly won't be the first time itunes have provided better compression than the equivalent 4k physical option.

[PonyoBellanote]

Originally Posted by bebbsie23

Thanks for the heads up. I'll give the itunes version as try. It certainly won't be the first time itunes have provided better compression than the equivalent 4k physical option.

You never know if Paramount/iTunes might've updated the encode to something more closer to the UHD disc. Watch out. Wouldn't be the first time they update digital 4Ks.

[Bernardo A.]

Originally Posted by PonyoBellanote

You never know if Paramount/iTunes might've updated the encode to something more closer to the UHD disc. Watch out. Wouldn't be the first time they update digital 4Ks.

They probably received the same ProRes mezzanine file that was used to create the UHD.

[bebbsie23]

Originally Posted by PonyoBellanote

You never know if Paramount/iTunes might've updated the encode to something more closer to the UHD disc. Watch out. Wouldn't be the first time they update digital 4Ks.

Noted. Already have it in my itunes collection, so nothing to lose (other than more disappointment lol) from trying

[Anothrworld]

Originally Posted by jabba359

Site review is up (with a very solid 4.0 score) and seems to contradict the other review I've seen, noting that "Grain is very light; even scrutinizing the picture up close the grain field is very, very fine, but the UHD gives no indication of significant image scrubbing or unnecessary degradation. Likewise, compression artifacts are essentially nonexistent and I noted no obvious print anomalies, either."

But the AVSForum review (which gives it a 6 score - the equivalent of a 3.0 here) says "Both fine detailing and the film grain texture veer wildly from one scene to the next – one minute we’re looking at beautifully detailed costumes, intricate set designs and fine grain that shimmers exactly like it should, an inherent part of the image that resolves itself in a natural and even way…and the next, we’re watching an almost soft-filtered reproduction, complete with absence of almost any real detail and backed up with either blocky, chunky grain blobs (check out the scene at 61 mins when Mark Strong is interrogating Bernard the Goat, look at the sky over his shoulder…horrendous blocking)...A quick check of the playback information also shows that in the scenes where detail drops to its lowest, so too does the encode."

I don't see how it can have such obvious problems from one review and the other reviewer doesn't see such major issues.

Did you get an answer on which of these reviews was more accurate? I’m thinking about picking this up

[jabba359]

Originally Posted by Anothrworld

Did you get an answer on which of these reviews was more accurate? I’m thinking about picking this up

Nope. Seems like this one didn't get many reviews.

[Bernardo A.]

Has anyone got the Australian release? Any chance it hasa different encode? Just saw it’s a different distributor.

[PonyoBellanote]

Originally Posted by Bernardo A.

Has anyone got the Australian release? Any chance it hasa different encode? Just saw it’s a different distributor.

It's Paramount. This site has a terrible habit of putting distributors as studios, even if it's a major doing the disc and the local is merely distributing.

[Bernardo A.]

Originally Posted by PonyoBellanote

It's Paramount. This site has a terrible habit of putting distributors as studios, even if it's a major doing the disc and the local is merely distributing.

Well, at least it isn't a steelbook

[kevin87]

Originally Posted by PonyoBellanote

It's Paramount. This site has a terrible habit of putting distributors as studios, even if it's a major doing the disc and the local is merely distributing.

I don't know, I feel like it should be who is distributing it because discs can vary by distributors sometimes. Like the multiple versions of Empire Records that changed based on who had the license. If Paramount, or MGM or Disney, isn't releasing the actual product they shouldn't be listed as the disc releaser. Just like Universal and Paramount Dreamworks Animation movies should be listed different based on who owns the studio.