UltraHD Blurays and players will start coming by Christmas 2015. Still buying blurays

[FilmFreakosaurus]

Originally Posted by cheecheung

Films that were not filmed in 4K or higher like Casino Royale, Lord of The Rings and Batman Begins. If they get the 4K release is there any point in buying them again since they will only be upscaled?

I couldn't see Star Trek and World War Z on those lists. I have noticed they have been given the 4K treatment whether they are taken from actual 4K transfers (or higher) or upscaled I don't know.

Better color, better contrast, HDR, possible immersive surround re-mixes (Dolby Atmos, DTS: X), etc.

[42041]

Originally Posted by I KEEL YOU

Vinyl can in theory sound better.. But as someone already mentioned, the sound on these modern revival vinyls isn't analogue, but the same digital masters which are used for CDs that are put on vinyl.

Pretty much the equivalent of a digital video shot with the 2.8K digital camera transferred to 35mm film.

Not to go too far on this tangent, but if we define "better" as more accurately reproducing a source, vinyl can sound better neither in theory or in practice. The only theoretical advantage it has is extension into frequencies humans can't hear, but when you weigh that against everything you can hear like noise, dynamic range, stereo separation, harmonic distortion, consistency, reproducibility, durability... CDs trounce it. Much like digital cameras vs film, it's perfectly reasonable to prefer the "flavor" vinyl adds over the sterile accuracy of digital audio, but personally I don't think it's the job of the reproduction medium to "flavor" a recording or a movie.

[FilmFreakosaurus]

Originally Posted by 42041

Not to go too far on this tangent, but if we define "better" as more accurately reproducing a source, vinyl can sound better neither in theory or in practice. The only theoretical advantage it has is extension into frequencies humans can't hear, but when you weigh that against everything you can hear like noise, dynamic range, stereo separation, harmonic distortion, consistency, reproducibility, durability... CDs trounce it. Much like digital cameras vs film, it's perfectly reasonable to prefer the "flavor" vinyl adds over the sterile accuracy of digital audio, but personally I don't think it's the job of the reproduction medium to "flavor" a recording or a movie.

I think the better comparison is vinyl to high resolution audio via SA-CD, DVD-Audio, Pure Audio Blu-ray, etc.

Those media can clearly trounce vinyl and even CD's.

[Geoff D]

Originally Posted by cheecheung

Films that were not filmed in 4K or higher like Casino Royale, Lord of The Rings and Batman Begins. If they get the 4K release is there any point in buying them again since they will only be upscaled?

I couldn't see Star Trek and World War Z on those lists. I have noticed they have been given the 4K treatment whether they are taken from actual 4K transfers (or higher) or upscaled I don't know.

What was wrong with Batman Begins? Nolan finished that on film like most of his other movies, so if they went back to the timed IP (as per Nolan's usual MO) and pulled a fat new 6K scan for a 4K finish off of it I think it'd look luvverly.

[42041]

Originally Posted by cheecheung

Films that were not filmed in 4K or higher like Casino Royale, Lord of The Rings and Batman Begins. If they get the 4K release is there any point in buying them again since they will only be upscaled?

To be clear, they were filmed on 35mm, so effectively, in 4K. They were mastered in 2K (except Batman Begins, which was an analog show), but there is always the possibility the studio could go back and remaster it in 4K - it would just be more difficult, since digital color grading is a much more involved process than analog color timing, and it's even more unlikely that effects shots would be re-done at higher resolutions.

Converting a 2K master to a 1080p blu-ray is hardly a lossless process, so there might be improvements to be had, but they will likely be mild - we'll just have to see on a case-by-case basis. And there's also quite a bit of content shot on 1080p cameras (or 1080p tape), like Apocalypto, Avatar, and many others where even a 2K image is upscaled.

[kidglov3s]

Originally Posted by FilmFreakosaurus

Better color, better contrast, HDR, possible immersive surround re-mixes (Dolby Atmos, DTS: X), etc.

For those 2K DI films the color, contrast, HDR etc wouldn't be inherent to the source but revisionism ala Dawn of the Dead's 7.1 track or whatever, as far as I understand things.

[FilmFreakosaurus]

Originally Posted by kidglov3s

For those 2K DI films the color, contrast, HDR etc wouldn't be inherent to the source but revisionism ala Dawn of the Dead's 7.1 track or whatever, as far as I understand things.

UHD Blu-ray can inherently "capture" more of the original master than regular Blu-ray can even if the master was only 2k.

Wider gamut, 10 bit depth, etc. etc.

[Geoff D]

Originally Posted by 42041

To be clear, they were filmed on 35mm, so effectively, in 4K. They were mastered in 2K (except Batman Begins, which was an analog show), but there is always the possibility the studio could go back and remaster it in 4K - it would just be more difficult, since digital color grading is a much more involved process than analog color timing, and it's even more unlikely that effects shots would be re-done at higher resolutions.

Converting a 2K master to a 1080p blu-ray is hardly a lossless process, so there might be improvements to be had, but they will likely be mild - we'll just have to see on a case-by-case basis. And there's also quite a bit of content shot on 1080p cameras (or 1080p tape), like Apocalypto, Avatar, and many others where even a 2K image is upscaled.

Colour grading decisions are preserved as CDL's, just as edits are preserved as EDL's. It wouldn't be especially difficult to pull the 35mm camera original neg and give it a new scan (or just utilise the original >2K scans, if available) and/or the RAW camera files, cue them up on their grading suites and reel off an identically colour-timed 4K version inside a few days. Upscale the 2K VFX shots - which is what most 4K shows have done up until this point anyway - drop them into the edit and BAM! There's your new 4K master of whatever 2K movie.

The wags will note that the footage captured on Alexa is mostly only at 2.8K but most 35mm negatives won't yield 4K's worth of absolute information either, and when you've got footage that looks so crisp with such a capable dynamic range and such a low SNR it upscales absolutely beautifully; Sony had no qualms about doing a 4K master for the Alexa-captured Skyfall.

It's not a question of difficulty but of corporate will (in terms of time and money vs possible earnings) IMO; if the thirst for UHD content really picks up then I can see 4K rebuilds becoming a reality, and once the ball gets rolling the process will only get cheaper and more efficient as time goes on. Or the studios might just cheap out totally and do simple 2K to 4K upscales of the original 2K DSM's.

[HD Goofnut]

Originally Posted by Geoff D

Colour grading decisions are preserved as CDL's, just as edits are preserved as EDL's. It wouldn't be especially difficult to pull the 35mm camera original neg and give it a new scan (or just utilise the original >2K scans, if available) and/or the RAW camera files, cue them up on their grading suites and reel off an identically colour-timed 4K version inside a few days. Upscale the 2K VFX shots - which is what most 4K shows have done up until this point anyway - drop them into the edit and BAM! There's your new 4K master of whatever 2K movie.

The wags will note that the footage captured on Alexa is mostly only at 2.8K but most 35mm negatives won't yield 4K's worth of absolute information either, and when you've got footage that looks so crisp with such a capable dynamic range and such a low SNR it upscales absolutely beautifully; Sony had no qualms about doing a 4K master for the Alexa-captured Skyfall.

It's not a question of difficulty but of corporate will (in terms of time and money vs possible earnings) IMO; if the thirst for UHD content really picks up then I can see 4K rebuilds becoming a reality, and once the ball gets rolling the process will only get cheaper and more efficient as time goes on. Or the studios might just cheap out totally and do simple 2K to 4K upscales of the original 2K DSM's.

I could definitely see Lionsgate, Paramount, and Warner doing that.

[Geoff D]

Some folks are speculating that a lot of the 'blockbuster' finished-in-2K content on UHD BD will be presented as straight HD, albeit regraded in HDR (which is NOT dependent on viewing distance or spatial resolution) with all the other benefits that the format has to offer, like the increased bit depth and wider colour gamut.

[FilmFreakosaurus]

Originally Posted by Geoff D

Some folks are speculating that a lot of the 'blockbuster' finished-in-2K content on UHD BD will be presented as straight HD, albeit regraded in HDR (which is NOT dependent on viewing distance or spatial resolution) with all the other benefits that the format has to offer, like the increased bit depth and wider colour gamut.

It's possible, but unlikely. They'll try to fool unsuspecting consumers to make it seem like they're not only getting better color, greater depth and contrast, etc., but greater detail too. Not everyone frequents audio/video forums or is savvy.

They already market 2k DI sourced, up-rezzed films as true 4k both commercially and via consumer media.

[StingingVelvet]

Originally Posted by Geoff D

Some folks are speculating that a lot of the 'blockbuster' finished-in-2K content on UHD BD will be presented as straight HD, albeit regraded in HDR (which is NOT dependent on viewing distance or spatial resolution) with all the other benefits that the format has to offer, like the increased bit depth and wider colour gamut.

I'd almost rather that than a baked in upscale, since upscaling technology improves over time while a baked-in upscale on a disc does not. Though I wouldn't buy it either way, so perhaps who cares.

I really think, at least at the start, the studios should only release real 4k masters to UHD. Blu-ray was really hurt by an influx of DVD masters in the early days, which set up the whole "it looks the same as DVD" mainstream complaint.

[HeavyHitter]

Originally Posted by Geoff D

Some folks are speculating that a lot of the 'blockbuster' finished-in-2K content on UHD BD will be presented as straight HD, albeit regraded in HDR (which is NOT dependent on viewing distance or spatial resolution) with all the other benefits that the format has to offer, like the increased bit depth and wider colour gamut.

I've read that and wondered myself, but not sure if they will be allowed to do that just like they are not allowed to upscale a 480 disc to 1080p and call it Blu-ray or high definition (although it's been done a few times lol).

[HD Goofnut]

Originally Posted by StingingVelvet

I'd almost rather that than a baked in upscale, since upscaling technology improves over time while a baked-in upscale on a disc does not. Though I wouldn't buy it either way, so perhaps who cares.

I really think, at least at the start, the studios should only release real 4k masters to UHD. Blu-ray was really hurt by an influx of DVD masters in the early days, which set up the whole "it looks the same as DVD" mainstream complaint.

This is exactly what the studios should do with UHD or they will repeat 2006-2009 with BD, which were not good years for the format.

[film11]

Originally Posted by kidglov3s

Most of them stopped buying movies on physical media around 2008 and nowadays DVD only has a meager 70% of the dying home video market.

If one is going to use charts like this, one should also look at the titles being sold last year vs this year. I can tell you that there have been almost no new releases this year that have interested me enough to purchase. One has to remember that that sales are title-dependent. And one must also ask if those figure include specialty companies like Kino, Shout/Scream, Twilight Time, etc.

I must say that I find a 25% BD rate suspicious. This year, GUARDIANS OF THE GALAXY in 3D accounted for about 30% of the combined BD/DVD sales. That's a higher percentage than the chart shows for BD during the indicated week. So unless 3D is now outselling standard BD, I'll just assume it was a slow week. Plus, there is no FROZEN to boost sales this time around.

I'm not trying to say that disc sales aren't dropping, but I doubt BD is at the 25% range, generally speaking.

[cheecheung]

Originally Posted by Geoff D

What was wrong with Batman Begins? Nolan finished that on film like most of his other movies, so if they went back to the timed IP (as per Nolan's usual MO) and pulled a fat new 6K scan for a 4K finish off of it I think it'd look luvverly.

On both of those links that HD Goofnut provided, there is no mention of Batman Begins being mastered in 4K. Also I can't see studios going back to the original print for every single release. It would cost them too much. A simple upscale with slight changes will be a lot cheaper.

For 1080p blurays, we got a lot of bad releases. Many titles got re-released or were not full 1080p HD like the UK release of The King's Speech but the average Joe will not even notice.

I can see this happening with UHD bluray. The newer titles will not have many problems as they will have the original print in hand once the film is made but older releases, I really can't see them going back to the beginning to remaster again unless it's a title they know will sell.

[Geoff D]

Originally Posted by cheecheung

On both of those links that HD Goofnut provided, there is no mention of Batman Begins being mastered in 4K. Also I can't see studios going back to the original print for every single release. It would cost them too much. A simple upscale with slight changes will be a lot cheaper.

I don't think we're on the same wavelength. If a movie is finished photochemically on film - edit: as most movies were up until 2002/2003 - then it can be scanned at any resolution they please. The current transfer of BB is probably an old 2K effort but the movie's not locked into that resolution. If the original film material is available - I should think it hasn't turned to vinegar just yet - then they could do a new 4K master with ease.

As for not going back to the "original print" for every single release, why wouldn't they? The studios not wanting to rebuild movies digitally finished at 2K is one thing, but not putting out a true 4K master of a movie finished on film would be sheer laziness and tantamount to commercial suicide IMO.

[Bates_Motel]

Originally Posted by film11

If one is going to use charts like this, one should also look at the titles being sold last year vs this year. I can tell you that there have been almost no new releases this year that have interested me enough to purchase. One has to remember that that sales are title-dependent. And one must also ask if those figure include specialty companies like Kino, Shout/Scream, Twilight Time, etc.

I must say that I find a 25% BD rate suspicious. This year, GUARDIANS OF THE GALAXY in 3D accounted for about 30% of the combined BD/DVD sales. That's a higher percentage than the chart shows for BD during the indicated week. So unless 3D is now outselling standard BD, I'll just assume it was a slow week. Plus, there is no FROZEN to boost sales this time around.

I'm not trying to say that disc sales aren't dropping, but I doubt BD is at the 25% range, generally speaking.

That's ONE title. Some titles will be higher, but some lower. Hence, 25% is about right as an average.

[42041]

Originally Posted by Geoff D

What was wrong with Batman Begins? Nolan finished that on film like most of his other movies, so if they went back to the timed IP (as per Nolan's usual MO) and pulled a fat new 6K scan for a 4K finish off of it I think it'd look luvverly.

If he goes back to the IP, he may as well not bother IMO. I think with UHD, it will be original negative or bust - when 35mm IP scans fall considerably short of even great blu-ray quality, putting that on UHD will just be a waste of everyone's time and money.

[Geoff D]

Damn that's harsh. IP material is still only one generation removed from the negative, it's not like you're not losing half the resolution in one fell swoop. As for 35mm IP scans which fall "considerably short of even great Blu-ray quality", care to give me a few examples? And I don't mean examples of jittery old HD telecines which have been DNR'ed and/or sharpened to death because that'd make even the most pristine negative look less than stellar, but a modern pin-registered scan.

Batman Begins itself doesn't count because it's an old, filtered, bitstarved HD DVD encode and for some reason Nolan loves to make his 35mm stuff look extremely soft in general so that's his movies off the table. And Shout's transfer/mastering/encoding practices leave a lot to be desired so their in-house IP-sourced transfers aren't much cop for those exact reasons.

You only have to check the BD of Apocalypse Now to see how good IP material can look when it's given competent treatment. Would I love everything to go back to the negative? Of course. Would I kick an IP out of bed if that's all that was offered? Hell no.