Heat 4K UHD (1995)

[sephirothkefka]

Noticed the HDR metadata max light and max frame average is 0. Perhaps thats why it's so dark?

[Bellicose]

So I can kind of see where they were going with the remaster. You can see they wanted the sun a bit more prominent in a more Southern atmosphere I guess.

Remaster vs OG:

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

But now look at 4k vs remaster?! Like what the **** it's even darker and warmer lol. It doesn't even look like he's outside in daylight anymore!

https://caps-a-holic.com/c.php?a=1&x...2&l=1&i=3&go=1

Obviously, these are just scans. Not opening my disc and playing on my C1 cuz this ain't worth it at the price. MAYBE a steelbook I guess. Gonna be a tough sell on me.

This is kind of that Rambo thing all over again like Rambo 4. The UHD being slightly worse because of color timing. This seems to have HDR issues though.

[RageATL]

My UHD arrived today, but I think I'm also going to hold onto my 2009 Blu just in case (which I almost never do when upgrading to a UHD + Blu combo pack).

[Bellicose]

Originally Posted by RageATL

My UHD arrived today, but I think I'm also going to hold onto my 2009 Blu just in case (which I almost never do when upgrading to a UHD + Blu combo pack).

This absolutely does NOT have the 2009 disc right? I am placing an order on Ebay for one right now for like 8 bucks. I just want both color timings for this.

I think T2 is the only older disc I am really holding onto honestly. I know a couple other films have some hugely different color timings as well. I think Midnight Cowboy was one of them too.

[Matt89]

Picked up the UHD this afternoon and I can't believe people actually prefer that '09 disc with its chunky blocky grain and VC-1 codec. Grain and detail are a LOT better on the UHD. It's definitely darker, but I didn't find that it was too dark on my OLED.

~Matt

[Formal Andy]

Originally Posted by StingingVelvet

The added range is minimal, basically. It looks like a 4k SDR image. Those of us who watched Heat in "HDR" on streaming warned this was the case.

Ah, alrighty. Damn... I think this release serves alot of good and that there's too much hate going on for it, but do wish it was better in alot of aspects.

[Bellicose]

Originally Posted by slimjean

Again, as someone that processed thousands of colors per day, we use computers to check for color correction, but when you have skill you just remember.

This included Eastman pigments back in the day to spandrel for ceramics.

There are color tests taken where you must line up hundreds of shades to prove that you can see the difference.

A skilled colorist can beat a computer and only uses it for final reference while getting batches out the door. Color memory is a necessity.

So again, I am not understanding any of this nonsense. As I have stated many times, I am a chemist and that is my job.



So in your mind, if there is a McDonald's sign, and it comes out teal or green instead of yellow and red that we all know....gee that must just be one's memory gone bad huh?

Trademark colors are just a figment of the imagination and showing that as a proper reference to what anyone remembers is all just mumbo jumbo that doesn't have to do "with anything"??

If you don't understand, I please suggest you re-read, because again it is pretty basic information.

When Patton walked out, the color of the American flag on the latest remaster was more close to right. When my dad saw the 70mm print, it also came from him seeing it in the military where the color of the American flag was a specific look. This is not up for debate no matter how many people just love re-writing history and passing off the memory as just sillyness that cannot be measured. It isn't just memory, it is obvious correlation.

If you watch movies not paying attention to these kind of details and comparing through the years..then yes your opinion is faulty. On the other hand, if you are an observant person that has studied the look of favorite films, it is absolutely an informed and very distinct memory.

I don't know where this crap started that a memory is always unreliable. Even the so called studies have quite a few holes in them that have no real reliable data other than the average joe...who lets face it, are streaming fans that wouldn't know quality if it smacked them upside the face repeatedly.



One thing about me is how much of a nut I am about Pacino (I have said this for more often than I have been saying about being a chemist).

I saw the movie in several movie theaters, and I did this because I was promoting this movie all the way around. Saw it with my father, alone, with 2 different friends, and a girlfriend.

There were two things that stood out to me. The grey had a distinct look and the movie was exceptionally dim. This gave a weird bluish look that was always there.

Now one could say that all the movie theaters had burned out bulbs, but I don't think so. These were film prints, and to me, as real as it gets.

While digtial sources cannot and will not hold a candle to a film print, the 4K looks closer to right for me. I will be watching it on my Z9D soon, and I have to say that I am looking forward to an improvement over the bluray which was beyond lackluster.

Screen caps on capsaholic will not do this one justice. You can bet on that.

There's no blue left in this image lol. It's warm as all hell now. Warmer than the remaster as you can see from my comparisons. Yeah, I remember it being bluish too. Just like the OG 2009 disc. The remaster is something else entirely IMHO. But the 4K is even dimmer and more warm as you can clearly see. You don't need goggles or AI memory for that. It's not going to change a whole lot if you ask me.

Not saying what is right or wrong, but I definitely want one of the old discs for this classic. Just like T2, this is a vastly different color timing than I have ever seen. I did not see the remaster, but this is clearly dimmer and darker than that one while being even warmer.

[Bellicose]

Originally Posted by Matt89

Picked up the UHD this afternoon and I can't believe people actually prefer that '09 disc with its chunky blocky grain and VC-1 codec. Grain and detail are a LOT better on the UHD. It's definitely darker, but I didn't find that it was too dark on my OLED.

~Matt

How chunky is that grain? It's a completely different color timing, which some people find to be very important. I never said what I prefer, nor did anybody else. I don't know what I prefer lol. But I do like the old release too, and I am someone that usually loves new color timings, e.g., Aliens, Blade Runner, because sometimes they blend in with the film's setting better. I'll give this one a chance.

There is no way in hell I am watching T2 as a definitive edition on 4K as it is even if the detail is 10x better next time. That color timing is bizarre as hell for T2, which was firmly rooted in desert tones. So yeah color timing does matter more than average grain to me.

Same thing here. The OG disc is cold steel and dark and grimey. I thought that was the way the film was supposed to look.

[slimjean]

Originally Posted by Bellicose

There's no blue left in this image lol. It's warm as all hell now. Warmer than the remaster as you can see from my comparisons. Yeah, I remember it being bluish too. Just like the OG 2009 disc. The remaster is something else entirely IMHO. But the 4K is even dimmer and more warm as you can clearly see. You don't need goggles or AI memory for that. It's not going to change a whole lot if you ask me.

Not saying what is right or wrong, but I definitely want one of the old discs for this classic. Just like T2, this is a vastly different color timing than I have ever seen. I did not see the remaster, but this is clearly dimmer and darker than that one while being even warmer.

Do you have the 4K? I will get mine and reserve judgement until then.

[Bellicose]

Originally Posted by slimjean

Do you have the 4K? I will get mine and reserve judgement until then.

I have it, but I forgot to cancel because I wanted the steel.

I don't want to pay 25 for this really anymore. I just don't really like the slip and this will be a 5 dollar disc in a couple years anyway.

[Matt89]

I don't think you can compare this release to the absolute disaster that is T2 on 4K. That is not an apt comparison. And the colour timing on T2 is honestly the least of its problems lol.

~Matt

[jeffarent]

Originally Posted by Cheese

Thanks for the info. I decided to go with the UK set now.

I ended up buying a 3 disc case from Amazon. Had to do the same thing with Touch of Evil.

[Bellicose]

Originally Posted by Matt89

I don't think you can compare this release to the absolute disaster that is T2 on 4K. That is not an apt comparison. And the colour timing on T2 is honestly the least of its problems lol.

~Matt

No the color timing is as different as T2 is. Yes, the DNR is another thing entirely lol. But the color timing differences are as extreme but different as well. T2 went from warm and sunny in many places with a blue steel look for many scenes to just weird darker teal look. Heat went from colder and dark with higher contrast to sunny and dim.

[slimjean]

Originally Posted by Bellicose

No the color timing is as different as T2 is. Yes, the DNR is another thing entirely lol. But the color timing differences are as extreme but different as well. T2 went from warm and sunny in many places with a blue steel look for many scenes to just weird darker teal look. Heat went from colder and dark with higher contrast to sunny and dim.

I love the 3D though. I guess I am so enamored by it that it clouds my vision. lol

[ctujackbauer]

I kinda want to buy the steelbook just to see what the big hubbub is about.

Anyways, Jim Gaffigan never got to see the blu-ray forum in action talking about this movie:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Imhcq5s9OLs

[Bellicose]

Originally Posted by ctujackbauer

I kinda want to buy the steelbook just to see what the big hubbub is about.

Anyways, Jim Gaffigan never got to see the blu-ray forum in action talking about this movie:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Imhcq5s9OLs

Honestly, I kinda want the steel too. Just not sure I want to spend that much on it. Heat is awesome. But this release is really strange looking if you ask me.

I'm not sure how a bunch of professionals and Mann himself at the boards came up with this look. I'd like to understand why in particular the older look is so much more neutral. I mean you don't usually just get that kind of a change on the negative lol. They obviously tinkered with this quite a bit.

[jeff BD]

So in your mind, if there is a McDonald's sign, and it comes out teal or green instead of yellow and red that we all know....gee that must just be one's memory gone bad huh?

I think you just wanna argue about product placement more than this disc.

[IvyMike]

Originally Posted by JohnCarpenterFan

...

The difference in overall look hasn't even been dramatically changed compared to the 2009 release. The 2009 release also has a dark look with cold blue/grey tones which looks completely different from the prints in many scenes (I did post comparisons of the 35mm compared to the old Blu-ray on here a number of years ago which shows this) . I can't see how someone fine with the 2009 Blu-ray being such an alteration compared to the prints could be so against this latest version when really, it's no more revisionist compared to the original disc.

...

Can you dig up that 35mm comparison or repost the image here? I couldn't find it in your post history, unless it was in a thread for a completely different title (maybe someone else has more time to do a deeper dive for that...).


Also, regarding the audio, Geoff had mentioned back when the 2017 disc came out that there was clipping in the newer Definitive Edition audio mix. He gave the plane landing at the airport as an example. Anyone know if that's the same here since I assume it's possibly the same mix? I know these days Geoff doesn't talk much about audio due to hearing loss and lack of a surround setup, so otherwise it'd be a direct question for him.

[Aemstel]

Originally Posted by Bellicose

Honestly, I kinda want the steel too. Just not sure I want to spend that much on it. Heat is awesome. But this release is really strange looking if you ask me.

I'm not sure how a bunch of professionals and Mann himself at the boards came up with this look. I'd like to understand why in particular the older look is so much more neutral. I mean you don't usually just get that kind of a change on the negative lol. They obviously tinkered with this quite a bit.

I agree with most everything you've said @Bellicose. This disc looks really bad and weird to me. I don't understand the high score in the review for PQ.

I also think the sound deserves a lower score. They simply ported over the old track. That track is very good, but this movie and especially the shootout scene in the streets deserved an Atmos or DTS:X upgrade. That is such a lazy move to just reuse the old track and a big missed opportunity.

[ctujackbauer]

Originally Posted by Bellicose

Honestly, I kinda want the steel too. Just not sure I want to spend that much on it. Heat is awesome. But this release is really strange looking if you ask me.

I'm not sure how a bunch of professionals and Mann himself at the boards came up with this look. I'd like to understand why in particular the older look is so much more neutral. I mean you don't usually just get that kind of a change on the negative lol. They obviously tinkered with this quite a bit.

I have the 2009 version and not the 2017 definitive edition. I think I read it comes with the 2017 definitive edition.

Reading reports of people walking into Best Buy to get a copy heightens my purchase-inertia.