King Kong 4K UHD (2005) (Ultimate Edition)

[esmuydavista]

Bought this today. Does uhd redeem and is it the extended dig copies?

[nusilver]

My two cents on the King Kong UHD presentation:

The added detail over the Blu-ray presentation is stunning (though there seems to be some odd and unnecessary edge-enhancement that crops up from time to time), but the jump in contrast is hugely offensive to my eyes in many scenes (particularly, prior to the arrival on Skull Island.) And you don't have to take my (highly subjective) word for it: listen to the commentary track while the film plays and you'll hear Pete and Philippa describing the color timing of the film in ways that are completely out of sync with what you're looking at on screen. Dusk shots look grey and washed out; indoor shots on the ship look like they were shot during the day time, rather than in the cramped and dank hull of a rotting boat. Carefully applied HDR could've enhanced a lot of these moments; instead, sloppy application ruins many of them.

Again, these issues mostly go away once the group arrives on the Island, and somehow the denouement in NYC seems to be mostly in sync with the filmmakers' described intentions.

It's a shame, because while I'm very glad to have this version of the film with the complete set of extras (minus the missing Howard Shore production diary from before he parted ways with the production) on Blu-ray, I can't help but feel the post-processors at Universal's home video group were asleep at the wheel for much of this new presentation.

Thank God Warner, not Universal, is in charge of the Middle-earth films; even if Warner is out of touch with what home video enthusiasts want from their discs today as far as bonus features, they at least know what they're doing with HDR.

[reanimator]

Originally Posted by Geoff D

Dafuq does that mean?

Super 2K. It's like, better than regular 2K. Right?

[mysticwaterfall]

You know, I'm the last person to ever say what tv you should watch movies on, but as Geoff says if you choose to watch movies on a non HDR screen you have to acknowledge you are watching them on a display they are not designed for and know that you aren't getting optimal results.

I mean it's sort of like in the DVD days when my TV broke and I had to watch Dvds on an old TV with an RF jack for a bit. Understandably, this was not great for any movie, some were okay, some movies did really bad with this, but I certainly wasn't in a position to judge any particular movie based on that setup.

By Super 2K I'm assuming a high bit rate "superbit" type of thing.

As for Kong itself, I haven't had a chance to watch it yet.

[Geoff D]

Originally Posted by Vangeli

Sony sold 4K mastered 1080p discs that "upscaled back to 4K better than standard upscaled content" so maybe something along those lines.

But that was pure marketing BS anyway. The "Mi4K" mode that Sony put on their 4K TVs & projectors could only be activated when the Reality Creation was turned on, which even at its minimum settings wiped away grain & noise in a decidedly non-film-like way. (Even the almighty RAH seemed quite confused about what these settings actually did on his Sony projector.) Meh.

The only other time I've seen a "super" 2K finish mentioned was for Jurassic World's 2.4K res DI, i.e. that it's 2K with a bit of extra juice on top.

Originally Posted by StingingVelvet

I wasn't trying to imply anything was "extreme." I'm more saying that the Mummy movies and now Kong have more outright "pop" than most catalog movies. Ain't no pop in Goodfellas, very little in Ghostbusters, etc. In contrast Kong has scenes where fire/lava jumps off the screen and things like that. In other words, they use HDR to add pop to catalog titles more than most. How "revisionist" that is will depend on the person, but I think my raves for both movies indicate the pretty has won me over.

P.S. HighDefDigest review of this is live and insane. No real detail increase? Wha? I noticed an obvious detail and crispness increase without even A/Bing it. Also yes the contrast is hot hot hot, but as I said before it's hot in the same scenes on the BD. It was a purposeful artistic choice. I didn't notice anywhere near the loss of detail he talks about, probably because according to their gear page he is maybe using a projector? Reviews really need to mention the gear being used for UHD, but they don't.

Fair enough, but IMO Mummy 1's colour is far removed from Kong's heavily stylised look that was tweaked to hell and back in the DI. As for HDD, people are still reading their reviews why? Mr Magoo could do a better job, and I'm not joking.

Here's a piece from the AC article on Kong, they're talking about the jungle sequences here but I still found it interesting as regards the hot hot highlights elsewhere:

Filmed in all kinds of weather, the sequence has come together in the DI suite at Weta Digital, Lesnie says. “I’ve been reminded of a very valuable lesson. In our studio-controlled jungle sets, I frequently designed lighting that ‘broke’ the dynamic range of the stock and used other flaws, such as lens flares, to create a believable reality. The Windy Point scenario was the reverse; we were dealing with a situation that was essentially out of control. The failure to deliver classically beautiful images actually served this part of the story.” Somewhat ruefully, he adds, “Herb the cameraman doesn’t survive the experience, and I always felt a little sad filming this sequence.”

[StingingVelvet]

Originally Posted by nusilver

My two cents on the King Kong UHD presentation:

The added detail over the Blu-ray presentation is stunning (though there seems to be some odd and unnecessary edge-enhancement that crops up from time to time), but the jump in contrast is hugely offensive to my eyes in many scenes (particularly, prior to the arrival on Skull Island.) And you don't have to take my (highly subjective) word for it: listen to the commentary track while the film plays and you'll hear Pete and Philippa describing the color timing of the film in ways that are completely out of sync with what you're looking at on screen. Dusk shots look grey and washed out; indoor shots on the ship look like they were shot during the day time, rather than in the cramped and dank hull of a rotting boat. Carefully applied HDR could've enhanced a lot of these moments; instead, sloppy application ruins many of them.

So I can avoid listening to a 3+ hour commentary, can you give some examples? Because I agree the contrast is very hot in the opening city daytime scenes, but when I put the BD in to compare I thought it was hot there too. If there's a specific scene and commentary comment that might change my mind I'd like to look at it.

Also I wonder if my bias light makes it less eye-piercing.

At least everyone seems to agree it looks stunning once the ship leaves dock.

[EbonDragon]

Originally Posted by esmuydavista

Bought this today. Does uhd redeem and is it the extended dig copies?

Yes, redeem through the site it states in the slip. It’ll port to FandangoNow in 4K. Not sure which version though.

[ray0414]

Jon Thompson just explained what super 2k is on his Twitter with an article link. Guess us amatures better go back to school


Here's the link, what is super 2k?

http://www.gammaraydigital.com/blog/case-super2k

[celboy]

Originally Posted by singhcr

What is "Super 2K?"

In film scanning, it pertains to a 2k scan (or higher) of the 35mm Full aperture aka Super35. But the output is 2k. So you can scan @ 4k but the 4k is downrezzed to a 2k file.This allows for a slighty better scan than a 2k scan. The scan takes longer because its 4k & oversampled but the end result--a 2k frame--is less hard/"taxing" on the "post workflow".

[Patsfan123]

The UHD disc definitely is brighter than the standard blu-ray. I actually AB'd this one since it looked sorta blown out in the NYC and Skull Island scenes. The NYC scenes have a completely different look with a bright sepia toned on the UHD while the BD looks more monochrome grey. The transition on the boat to the first "filmed" scenes around min 33 on the UHD is a much more drastic contrast change than on the BD. It looks like they were going for the technicolor look. The scenes on Skull Island, again, are much brighter on the UHD but it makes more sense considering the setting. I've got an hour left on the movie so I'll comment on those later.

I do see how on at least the UHD, there are lots of inconsistency between grain and detail levels between camera angles which is more common on older films than those of the 2005+ era.

[LoSouL]

Ok, pardon my crappy offscreen pic, but the internal player's tools->picture settings during playback on my K8500 seems to help bring some rich color back into the image:



...although it gives the old high-blood pressure look to skin, requiring TV color settings to be readjusted (ones that work for everything else, mind you, and this doesn't look so hot with others now). It's a good starting point for my reconsideration. I will definitely rewatch it sometime soon and give a second impression after I fully grock how these playback settings mix with other TV settings and other internal player settings.

I only thought to try it because I was trying to enable the English 5.1 audio track on an import copy of Cyborg DC/Slinger to circumvent it's buggy disc menu, and remembered there was additional picture settings there.

Still strange imo that I had to change anything for this release versus ~40 other UHD's. For discussion's sake, I'm on the same KS8000 as always.

[ray0414]

Originally Posted by LoSouL

Ok, pardon my crappy offscreen pic, but the internal player's tools->picture settings during playback on my K8500 seems to help bring some rich color back into the image:



...although it gives the old high-blood pressure look to skin, requiring a smidge lower color settings to be readjusted (ones that work for everything else, mind you, and this doesn't look so hot with others now). It's a good starting point for my reconsideration. I will definitely rewatch it sometime soon and give a second impression after I fully grock how these playback settings mix with other TV settings and other internal player settings.

I only thought to try it because I was trying to enable the English 5.1 audio track on an import copy of Cyborg DC/Slinger to circumvent it's buggy disc menu, and remembered there was additional picture settings there.

Still strange imo that I had to change anything for this release versus ~40 other UHD's. For discussion's sake, I'm on the same KS8000 as always.

your not alone. a lot of people with the k8500 were using dynamic or a boosted custom mode. I also found the picture to be very plain when it was on standard. like the color was sucked out of the picture.

[LoSouL]

Originally Posted by ray0414

your not alone. a lot of people with the k8500 were using dynamic or a boosted custom mode. I also found the picture to be very plain when it was on standard. like the color was sucked out of the picture.

Good to know. After letting it play for a bit, I can't seem to reconcile how overblown Dynamic makes the color without changing my TV settings so much that it'll be a chore to make sure I set them back afterwards.

I dropped down to Standard where I usually have it for everything, and I kind of just have to accept that it's subdued and a bit dry. Otherwise, blowing out the color compromises the image quality imo, and makes it harder on the eyes.

Getting the "something's not right here" out of my system is helping me appreciate the clarity of the image at least, and there's no yellowing or green tincture applied to it like the BD, so points for that.

[Brad1963]

I bought it this evening. Just got home and popped it in the player. I have to say, it is a beautiful transfer.

[d514]

Originally Posted by LoSouL

Ok, pardon my crappy offscreen pic, but the internal player's tools->picture settings during playback on my K8500 seems to help bring some rich color back into the image:

Don't use the dynamic mode. It changes a lot more than just the color/brightness. It also artificially sharpens the picture. If you really want to adjust the image, use the user mode. You can have the same colors/brightness as in the dynamic mode but without the other adjustments.

But honestly: For every scene that looks better in that mode there are five scenes that look worse. I tried those adjustments only once and never touched them again.


From the review:

Note that the review score for the Blu-ray dates back many years and is from a different reviewer. A lower numerical score for the UHD is not an error but rather an unavoidable limitation of the scoring system.

Instead of apologizing for the Blu-ray score why not just re-score it by today's standards?

[LoSouL]

Originally Posted by d514

Don't use the dynamic mode. It changes a lot more than just the color/brightness. It also artificially sharpens the picture. If you really want to adjust the image, use the user mode. You can have the same colors/brightness as in the dynamic mode but without the other adjustments.

But honestly: For every scene that looks better in that mode there are five scenes that look worse. I tried those adjustments only once and never touched them again.

Thanks for the warning and confirmation. That's the impression I got and went back after trying other UHD's with it. I've had an incredibly stable and pleasing viewing experience for a few months now with my settings how I've had them, and don't want to go back to inconsistency and obsessive scrutiny loops. Not worth it for one movie that I'm not likely to watch often... definitely not worth calibrating to it, and shortchanging everything else in the process trying to achieve a balance.

[benhoppel]

Originally Posted by celboy

In film scanning, it pertains to a 2k scan (or higher) of the 35mm Full aperture aka Super35. But the output is 2k. So you can scan @ 4k but the 4k is downrezzed to a 2k file.This allows for a slighty better scan than a 2k scan. .

Considerably better, not slightly (as above example).

[Geoff D]

Wait, so they're just talking about their special sauce method oversampling? Why the hell didn't they just say so? Kong may have been an outlier for it back then but it's common practice today. Although bear in mind they're using a 16mm frame for reference above, not 35mm, [edit] and that gammaraydigital place seems to specialise in smaller gauges in general so how that relates to Kong's 35mm acquisition I'm not sure. Seems like this Thompson guy is getting his wires crossed, does someone wanna tell him that Kong wasn't shot on 16mm?

[Geoff D]

Right, yeah, he's just talking about oversampling, basically. As he says, Cinesite of London developed a "special sauce" downrezzing from 4K to "super 2K" several years ago: https://www.filmlight.ltd.uk/store/p...st-article-29/ but the theories of oversampling have been adopted by most major post houses since.

[edit] Weta's DI facility at the time included several ARRIscans, it's got a native 3K sensor which can be used "as is" for downsampling to 2K (see: Wonder Woman, and Matty Libatique did the same for Noah) or it can be used in a slightly offset double-scan mode which scans at 6K for a downsampled 2K or 4K output.

Peter Doyle's a bad mothertrucker when it comes to colour grading though, he helped to develop & refine the modern DI pipeline so if there's one person I wanna hear from regarding Kong's UHD colour grade, it's him. He's no stranger to HDR either.

[Leonidas King]

Dynamic mode on the K8500 just doesn't cut it for me. Way too bright and washes out the skylines.

I use User mode and I've adjusted it to my liking and it looks perfect.