Sleepy Hollow 4K UHD (1999)

[iaragorn1]

My steelbook just arrived, it's much heavier than I expected but with the book included it's easy to see why a regular steelbook wouldn't work.

[y2jman]

have you watched movie yet is the 4k worth upgradeing or is it terribe

[Danggar]

Why people is looking at the caps? This movie, the same master, has been available in iTunes for almost six months already. It looks better than the 1080p. Much much more. Sure it has DNR. It looks agressive in some scenes but those are few. There's more fine detail. Grain looks good for the most part. Better contrast and dark levels (some mild crush here and there). I pre-ordered the disc so I'm hoping it'll look a little bit better than the streaming version.

[rikraq]

Originally Posted by AKORIS

this comes out in a few days... are their no reviews anywhere for this disc?

Makes me a little nervous...

I keep waiting for one on this site, but it looks like they were busy reviewing 70s porn.

[Ruined]

Originally Posted by JRcanReid

How are they going to get us to buy the Phase 2 "enhanced" 4K UHD's (2026-2035) with the proper encoding if they give us the last copy we'll ever need to buy right now?

"I got Superbit'd!"

[stvn1974]

Originally Posted by rikraq

I keep waiting for one on this site, but it looks like they were busy reviewing 70s porn.

Probably going to be a few days for any new reviews while they clean up the viewing area.

[LanceL]

Originally Posted by oddbox83

Well that's the issue, if not used carefully it does remove image details you'd want to keep.

There're two main types of DNR, spatial and temporal, and within that you've got variations on algorithms. You can also chose whether you apply it to an entire image, or just a specific channel such as the chroma (colour) channels to reduce chroma noise.

Either version has it's uses, and I'll always argue DNR itself is not the devil itself and it' a valid restoration tool among many others. It's when it's used unnecessarily and in ham-fisted hands that has given it it's bad reputation.

Adding "fake" grain is also a step that should often be done, but is ignored. If there was a justifiable reason for these random DNR spikes, why didn't they add fake grain to match those shots with the fine grain elsewhere in the film? It's just a failure to use the tool properly, since if it was to tackle grain spikes, having shots now free of grain in a film that otherwise has a fine layer of grain is just a spike the opposite way around.

And that is all on a computer, correct?

[The Rider]

I can't understand why DNR is still used in times of 4K. The 4K scan makes the film grain much finer, and unless a rough extreme grainy film stock is used, there is no need for it. In addition, instead of DNR, the industry should invent an algorithm like Lowry Digital's moving-out pattern tool. There, the fine details could still be preserved. It's a shame what Paramount has done here again, as it did with Forrest Gump and To Catch a Thief.

[The Rider]

Originally Posted by Medality

The JP Blu-ray is using an old master. Just look at the caps, it's clear the new 4K has a lot more detail than any of the Blu-rays.
I'd rather have a medium encoding of a high quality source than a 10/10 encoding of a medium source.
The 4K will absolutely top the JP disc.

The encoding is not the problem, but the DNR that Paramount used to remove film grain and fine details. You can imagine what the 4K master looked like before.

[KubrickKurasawa]

Originally Posted by The Rider

I can't understand why DNR is still used in times of 4K. The 4K scan makes the film grain much finer, and unless a rough extreme grainy film stock is used, there is no need for it. In addition, instead of DNR, the industry should invent an algorithm like Lowry Digital's moving-out pattern tool. There, the fine details could still be preserved. It's a shame what Paramount has done here again, as it did with Forrest Gump and To Catch a Thief.

They won't sell you DNR, no Original Audio included or BD-66 junk unless you let them...insert MANDATORY COMPANY POLICY I MUST BREAK YOU GIF. Accepted!

[The Rider]

Originally Posted by WBMakeVMarsMovieNOW

???? The blu-ray looks clipped in the bright spots, zero detail there. The UHD is also using an HDR->SDR conversion with who knows what settings. And look at the tons more detail on the UHD all across her forehead. UHD looks way better to me.

You're mixing up the screenshots here. The Ultra HD has burnt highlights unlike the Blu-ray, look at the right side of the nose and chin. Theoretically this can be a result of the HDR-SDR conversion, but there are so many screenshot comparisons at caps-a-holic where this is not the case.

I wouldn't say tons more detail. It looks very artificial to me, lacking the subtlety and precision of 4K scans. In fact, this image comparison reminds me of Lord of the Rings. Sure, this is not an upscale but a new 4K master, but Paramount has done a lot of damage with DNR and bad encoding.

[Fjodor2000]

Originally Posted by The Rider

The encoding is not the problem, but the DNR that Paramount used to remove film grain and fine details. You can imagine what the 4K master looked like before.

I know it won’t happen, but it would be really lovely if there were png:s from the master available for comparison on caps-a-holic.com!

[The Rider]

Originally Posted by Cplhicks

It's pronounced Bouquet.

Also, looking at the screenshots it looks a lot better than the old BD to me. Not stretched, better color, none of the halos and murky sharpening stuff I see on the old disc. I didn't check every single shot but to me it looks like a big step up.

Check every screenshot. Some screenshots look really good, though not outstanding. Others look pretty bad, muddy without film grain or fine details. A mixed bag.

[The Rider]

Originally Posted by Geoff D

You know these are SDR converted…right?

I know, but caps-a-holic usually gets it very right. Here it seems to me to be more of a grading problem. The same goes for the remastered 1080p Blu-ray of Angel Heart that Studiocanal released in Europe or Terminator 2.

[The Rider]

Originally Posted by Mierzwiak

Yikes.

https://caps-a-holic.com/c.php?go=1&...17014&i=15&l=0

Yes, it looks horrible, no more fine details, no film grain. It may be that the film has a softer, more lazy look and perhaps a film stock with very fine film grain was used here, but this looks very artificial, like a digitally filmed movie from the 2000s.

[The Rider]

Originally Posted by Hedrox

This looks like it came from an early 2K DI, which is weird because it never had a DI (as far as I know).

That's right, Sleepy Hollow was created before the DI era. However, some screenshots reminded me of upscales from old 2K DIs.

[Geoff D]

Originally Posted by The Rider

I know, but caps-a-holic usually gets it very right. Here it seems to me to be more of a grading problem. The same goes for the remastered 1080p Blu-ray of Angel Heart that Studiocanal released in Europe or Terminator 2.

Eh not really. SDR conversion isn’t perfick

[manicsounds]

Originally Posted by iaragorn1

My steelbook just arrived, it's much heavier than I expected but with the book included it's easy to see why a regular steelbook wouldn't work.

Is the standard Blu-ray in the Steelbook a repackaging of the existing release or a new disc?

[Member-167298]

Is the commentary on the UHD, or just the included Blu?

[Filmmaker]

Originally Posted by manicsounds

Is the standard Blu-ray in the Steelbook a repackaging of the existing release or a new disc?

Old disc (and this time, without the cool disc art).

Originally Posted by PrestonXI

Is the commentary on the UHD, or just the included Blu?

No bonus features at all on the 4K (unless they put the commentary under the Audio menu, which I didn’t check and am not at home to look at now).