The Two Jakes 4K UHD (1990) Kino Studio Classics

[professorwho]

Originally Posted by Karate_Bullfrog

Edit 2:Lowering the sharpness helps a lot for both formats.

One would hope so

[DMRI2006]

The encoding blows. The outdoor background behind Jack at 31:18 is some of the worst mush I've ever seen on UHD.

[Kyle15]

Gotta see some caps. Not surprised though! Kino gonna Kino!

[DMRI2006]

Originally Posted by Kyle15

Gotta see some caps. Not surprised though! Kino gonna Kino!

It's bad. For whatever reason the encoding issues seem worse on their Paramount licensed titles in general. If there's a lot of fine detail in them, the encoding really manifests itself...and it does here. Very obviously. Having to "turn down the sharpness" is not a solution and is a telltale sign of poor authoring/encoding.

This will probably look better in the streaming version, and I'm not exaggerating.

[AngelGraves13]

Is the 2.0 just another dual mono?

[Yosef Quilty]

Originally Posted by DMRI2006

It's bad. For whatever reason the encoding issues seem worse on their Paramount licensed titles in general. If there's a lot of fine detail in them, the encoding really manifests itself...and it does here. Very obviously. Having to "turn down the sharpness" is not a solution and is a telltale sign of poor authoring/encoding.

This will probably look better in the streaming version, and I'm not exaggerating.

How was the Blu-ray that came with the Chinatown 4K? Is this still an “upgrade” I wonder

[tylergfoster]

Originally Posted by Yosef Quilty

How was the Blu-ray that came with the Chinatown 4K? Is this still an “upgrade” I wonder

To be clear, the encoding would have to be really bad, IMO, for a new 4K from the OCN to ultimately look worse than a Blu-ray sourced from whatever master Paramount had on hand. In this case, probably one prepped for the special edition DVD, which would make it 18 years old. (Can't help but think of Coneheads, which I watched on digital, and that master would've been from around 2001, if not even older, and it was one of the worst "HD" home video transfers I've suffered through recently -- worse in my opinion than 200 Cigarettes.)

[Compson]

Originally Posted by DMRI2006

The encoding blows. The outdoor background behind Jack at 31:18 is some of the worst mush I've ever seen on UHD.

The exterior is seen through a screen door there.

[DMRI2006]

Originally Posted by Compson

The exterior is seen through a screen door there.

Yes but it doesnt look right. Nor does the encoding in basically that entire sequence.

[alexpeden2000]

Originally Posted by TPF

I will keep this fine picture (Blu-ray looks mostly good) but cancelled all KL preorders for the foreseeable future.

Is the Blu-ray from the new scan?

[TPF]

Originally Posted by alexpeden2000

Is the Blu-ray from the new scan?

Sorry, I was in the wrong thread. These were my observations about Lords of Discipline. But, from what I can tell, The Two Jakes Blu ray is also from the new 4K restoration.

[defwarrior4000]

Originally Posted by tylergfoster

To be clear, the encoding would have to be really bad, IMO, for a new 4K from the OCN to ultimately look worse than a Blu-ray sourced from whatever master Paramount had on hand. In this case, probably one prepped for the special edition DVD, which would make it 18 years old. (Can't help but think of Coneheads, which I watched on digital, and that master would've been from around 2001, if not even older, and it was one of the worst "HD" home video transfers I've suffered through recently -- worse in my opinion than 200 Cigarettes.)

It also includes extras on it where the older Blu omits the Jack interview from the DVD and adds new extras as well.

For the worst HD transfer, I would probably go with Moontrap. The DNR use makes any Cameron 4K or American Graffiti look like 2001 A Space Odyssey or Blade Runner by comparison.

[Telemachus]

So just like the Cheerleader UHD? Kino always Kinoing. They should just farm these out to Mill Creek to release for $14.99.

[Yosef Quilty]

Is the new Kino bluray any better then?

[tylergfoster]

I still think we're jumping to conclusions. Two people posted in this thread, one saying it looked good and the other saying the compression was bad. Kino's encoding may not be great, but I would be pretty surprised if it was bad as But I'm a Cheerleader, which looks like an unmitigated disaster.

EDIT: Just saw that DVDBeaver has screens up from the BD version. Encoding isn't great, but the PQ still seems pretty good. Certainly not as bad as Cheerleader.

http://www.dvdbeaver.com/subsite/fil...kes_4K_UHD.htm

[Fat Phil]

Originally Posted by DMRI2006

The encoding blows.

Impossible! Kino are The Best Label In The World™

It must be a problem with everybody’s eyes, not the disc. Which is perfect. As always.

[nicwood]

Kino have set the precedent for Cheerleader multiple times in the past, so it wouldn’t surprise me in the least if The Two Jakes or others turned out just as poorly. Caps also sometimes don’t give away how bad they actually look in motion, which I’ve observed quite a number of times with these poor encodes. If one frame looks good, chances are that the next is mushy.

[tylergfoster]

Originally Posted by nicwood

Kino have set the precedent for Cheerleader multiple times in the past, so it wouldn’t surprise me in the least if The Two Jakes or others turned out just as poorly. Caps also sometimes don’t give away how bad they actually look in motion, which I’ve observed quite a number of times with these poor encodes. If one frame looks good, chances are that the next is mushy.

What can I say? I certainly don't want to come off like I think Kino are infallible, but I also think this strikes me as a severe underestimation of how bad Cheerleader looks in terms of compression. Kino can be lazy, Cheerleader struck me as all-time worst-of-the-format stuff, and nothing I've seen from Kino achieves comes anywhere near that level of inexcusable -- but there are also many of their releases I haven't seen.

[nicwood]

Originally Posted by tylergfoster

What can I say? I certainly don't want to come off like I think Kino are infallible, but I also think this strikes me as a severe underestimation of how bad Cheerleader looks in terms of compression. Kino can be lazy, Cheerleader struck me as all-time worst-of-the-format stuff, and nothing I've seen from Kino achieves comes anywhere near that level of inexcusable -- but there are also many of their releases I haven't seen.[

Trust me, I’ve seen Cheerleader and I’ve seen too many of Kino’s worst. Kino’s Fear and Desire together with the Kubrick shorts is equivalent to Cheerleader and there are others that are not far behind.

[tylergfoster]

Look, you've seen both in motion, so maybe that would change it for me. But I just don't see the similarity between this:

https://i.slow.pics/GDLvU73V.webp

and this:

http://www.dvdbeaver.com/27/fear_and...D__blu-ray.jpg

in terms of how bad the compression is. One looks like a bad jpg!

Based solely on the screenshots (which I will again grant are not definitive) I would put Fear and Desire's 4K a notch or two ahead of the far superior Cheerleader BD in terms of compression.