Sony "Mastered in 4K" Blu-ray Titles May 14 and July 16

[Sherlock_Jr]

Originally Posted by blu-ray_girl_fan

Yes, especially when these discs have between 10 to 20GB of

EMPTINESS.

As do most discs. Why not complain that ALL discs aren't filled up, because they certainly could be. But we all know that a slight increase in bitrate doesn't necessarily lead to a visible change in PQ, so it's really a non-issue.

[blu-ray_girl_fan]

Originally Posted by Sherlock_Jr

As do most discs. Why not complain that ALL discs aren't filled up, because they certainly could be. But we all know that a slight increase in bitrate doesn't necessarily lead to a visible change in PQ, so it's really a non-issue.

You missed the point completely.

At least do something with the leftover space.

[img eL]

Originally Posted by Sherlock_Jr

As do most discs. Why not complain that ALL discs aren't filled up, because they certainly could be. But we all know that a slight increase in bitrate doesn't necessarily lead to a visible change in PQ, so it's really a non-issue.

There is no way in knowing about a visible change in PQ cause they did not fill the blu ray disc's UP! Was'nt that the point to get the best quality possible?

Was it because weaker cpu blu ray players can not handle very high bit rates well? or

[42041]

Originally Posted by img eL

There is no way in knowing about a visible change in PQ cause they did not fill the blu ray disc's UP! Was'nt that the point to get the best quality possible?

Was it because weaker cpu blu ray players can not handle very high bit rates well? or

You can only fill a disc up to the extent that the maximum bitrate of the format allows. A movie like Ghostbusters isn't long enough to fill up the whole disc. Not sure why they still left about 5mbps of headroom on the video encode, though.

[MifuneFan]

Even if they couldn't add all of the existing extras to the disc, they could have at least made some sort of effort to include some. Hell, even the trivia or commentary track on Ghostbusters would have been better than nothing.

Forcing customers to choose between an inferior disc with extras and a better one without is ridiculous. If they cared at all about consumers, they'd create an extra disc to put all the supplemental material on. I just hope the old Ghostbusters release doesn't go OOP, leaving customers with just this gimped version to choose.

[HD Goofnut]

Originally Posted by mifunefan

even if they couldn't add all of the existing extras to the disc, they could have at least made some sort of effort to include some. Hell, even the trivia track on ghostbusters would have been better than nothing.

Forcing customers to choose between an inferior disc with extras and a better one without is ridiculous. If they cared at all about consumers, they'd create an extra disc to put all the supplemental material on. I just hope the old ghostbusters release doesn't go oop, leaving customers with just this gimped version to choose.

+1.

[ricster]

You have to have a xvYCC TV and blu ray player to view the full 24 bit colour picture depth and not the usual RGB coding. This leads to more gradients of colour and leads to higher quality reds etc.,.

Luckily, I am able to view this expanded colour. I am watching ghostbusters now and this is the best it has ever looked. I am we'll impressed with this version. The colors and vivid and the contrast is not too high. The streams from the proton packs is spot on. Also grain is visible and has not been dnr'd out. The outdoor scenes in daylight, you can now make out the clouds in the sky. The night shots have a pop about them too.

When rick moranis is running away towards the cafe, he runs passed some shrubs. The green is vivd and the red roses shine.

Sound is standard Dolby true hd 5.1 with a rate of 1.5 Mbps, so I'm guessing its 16 bit?????

None of my other blurays in my collection transmit x.v. Color or xvvYCC 24 bit or deep color, and reading, this isn't in the BDA specifications. I take it these are the first discs to support this then ?

[IndyMLVC]

Originally Posted by MifuneFan

Even if they couldn't add all of the existing extras to the disc, they could have at least made some sort of effort to include some. Hell, even the trivia or commentary track on Ghostbusters would have been better than nothing.

Forcing customers to choose between an inferior disc with extras and a better one without is ridiculous. If they cared at all about consumers, they'd create an extra disc to put all the supplemental material on. I just hope the old Ghostbusters release doesn't go OOP, leaving customers with just this gimped version to choose.

And, REALLY, there's no reason that they didn't include the extras. DVD was one thing: there was very little space usually left on a DL disc to include any extras. Blu-ray is ENTIRELY different. They're clearly not filling up the discs.

[blu-ray_girl_fan]

Originally Posted by MifuneFan

Even if they couldn't add all of the existing extras to the disc, they could have at least made some sort of effort to include some. Hell, even the trivia or commentary track on Ghostbusters would have been better than nothing.

Forcing customers to choose between an inferior disc with extras and a better one without is ridiculous. If they cared at all about consumers, they'd create an extra disc to put all the supplemental material on. I just hope the old Ghostbusters release doesn't go OOP, leaving customers with just this gimped version to choose.

Yeah, and they went the 2-disc route with The Amazing Spider-Man and Total Recall. Furthermore, Target (also Walmart for TASM) had Bonus Discs for both movies, too.

[PowellPressburger]

Originally Posted by ricster

You have to have a xvYCC TV and blu ray player to view the full 24 bit colour picture depth and not the usual RGB coding. This leads to more gradients of colour and leads to higher quality reds etc.,.

Luckily, I am able to view this expanded colour. I am watching ghostbusters now and this is the best it has ever looked. I am we'll impressed with this version. The colors and vivid and the contrast is not too high. The streams from the proton packs is spot on. Also grain is visible and has not been dnr'd out. The outdoor scenes in daylight, you can now make out the clouds in the sky. The night shots have a pop about them too.

When rick moranis is running away towards the cafe, he runs passed some shrubs. The green is vivd and the red roses shine.

Sound is standard Dolby true hd 5.1 with a rate of 1.5 Mbps, so I'm guessing its 16 bit?????

None of my other blurays in my collection transmit x.v. Color or xvvYCC 24 bit or deep color, and reading, this isn't in the BDA specifications. I take it these are the first discs to support this then ?

This is good info and I know it has been mentioned previously.

I need to find out if my Panasonic Plasma handles this esp my PS3? I am using a Pioneer Elite SC-65 model receiver.

*** I looked up my model # with Panasonic and it mentions it is capable of x.v.Color So would that be the same or just as good as xvvYCC 24 bit? What are the differences? ****

[marine92104]

Funny to think that a few years back some of these same people were arguing that Blu-ray needed to win the format war because we would get highrt bitrate transfers of films with the extra space.

They wanted to use that space for the higher bitrates which would lead to better transfers of the film.

Years later after Warner & Universal have been giving us low bitrate transfers & the same people are complaining to up the bitrate & give us better transfers Sony does give them high bit rate transfers & then the same people are complaining that there is no difference in PQ.

How funny it is how things have changed for those people. Some things never change tho. I think they just like to complain.

I've only purchased a couple of them But it was a significant upgrade over the previous version. I'm watching them on a Kuro TV & an Oppo Blu-ray player but it's really easy to see the difference.

Maybe the difference is easier to spot dependent on the equipment you're viewing it on.

[blu-ray_girl_fan]

Originally Posted by marine92104

Funny to think that a few years back some of these same people were arguing that Blu-ray needed to win the format war because we would get highrt bitrate transfers of films with the extra space.

They wanted to use that space for the higher nitrates which would lead to better transfers of the film.

Years later after Warner & Universal have been giving us low bitrate transfers &the same people are complaining to up the bitrate & give us better transfers Sony does give them high bit rate transfers & then the same people are complaining that there is no difference in PQ.

How funny it is how things have changed for those people. Some things never change tho. I think they just like to complain.

I've only purchased a couple of them But it was a significant upgrade over the previous version. I'm watching them on a Kuro TV & an Oppo Blu-ray player but it's really easy to see the difference.

Maybe the difference is easier to spot dependent on the equipment you're viewing it on.

Forget about bitrates -- the transfers for some of these movies are clearly identical to what we already got. The new transfer for Ghostbusters was changed in many different ways having nothing to do with bitrates.

[marine92104]

Originally Posted by blu-ray_girl_fan

Forget about bitrates -- the transfers for some of these movies are clearly identical to what we already got. The new transfer for Ghostbusters was changed in many different ways having nothing to do with bitrates.

If you look at the transfers for Spider-man & Ghostbusters are clearly not identical. Look at the colors on the screencaps. The transfers are sharper with more detail.

When screencaps are posted for the other titles then they can be judged as those two have.

You reply as if you know 100% for sure that what you say is true but most of your replies are just your opinion.

In this thread you've brought up a lot of things about Sony that you don't like that don't have anything to do with these titles.

I would trust someone that has actually viewed the titles over someone that has never seen them. Especially someone that is extremely biased against the studio that released them.

I do own two of these so far & plan on getting a couple more of them based on actually seeing them on my equipment. I have no bias to any studio.

I just want the best PQ & AQ on every title I buy. That's why I import some titles.

[Sherlock_Jr]

Originally Posted by blu-ray_girl_fan

You missed the point completely.

At least do something with the leftover space.

Again, the same could be said for every disc out there that has "empty space" on it, which is 99.9% of them. So no, I didn't miss the point at all.

Originally Posted by img eL

There is no way in knowing about a visible change in PQ cause they did not fill the blu ray disc's UP! Was'nt that the point to get the best quality possible?

Was it because weaker cpu blu ray players can not handle very high bit rates well? or

Regardless, there's still limitations of 1080p. Maxing out the bitrate isn't going to change something that substantially, so you're still getting the best quality possible for the format.

The original Avatar release maxed out the disc and bitrate and was reference quality. Then the special edition came along, added 3 cuts via seamless branching (and an added 16 minutes) plus audio commentary, and the review states that "despite the addition of 16-minutes of new high definition footage, the quality of the image hasn't dropped in the slightest. I popped in my copy of the standalone disc to spot check several scenes, and I really couldn't make out any negligible differences." Not to mention, the original movie only disc maxed out at 28.81 Mbps, which isn't great by any means — there are quite a few discs that hit the 30s and some even the 40s.

Another review concurs: "If the bit rate was already maximized for the theatrical length, wouldn't that mean that a longer version has to suffer a lower bit rate? Indeed, mathematically, that's correct. This realization caused a minor freakout in some internet quarters, among people who assume that bit rate is the only factor important to determining video quality. The reality of the situation is far more complex than that, of course. The long and short of it is that this Extended Collector's Edition looks exactly the same as the original release, despite what the bit rate meter may say. "

[marine92104]

Originally Posted by Sherlock_Jr

Again, the same could be said for every disc out there that has "empty space" on it, which is 99.9% of them. So no, I didn't miss the point at all.



Regardless, there's still limitations of 1080p. Maxing out the bitrate isn't going to change something that substantially, so you're still getting the best quality possible for the format.

The original Avatar release maxed out the disc and bitrate and was reference quality. Then the special edition came along, added 3 cuts via seamless branching (and an added 16 minutes) plus audio commentary, and the review states that "despite the addition of 16-minutes of new high definition footage, the quality of the image hasn't dropped in the slightest. I popped in my copy of the standalone disc to spot check several scenes, and I really couldn't make out any negligible differences." Not to mention, the original movie only disc maxed out at 28.81 Mbps, which isn't great by any means — there are quite a few discs that hit the 30s and some even the 40s.

Another review concurs: "If the bit rate was already maximized for the theatrical length, wouldn't that mean that a longer version has to suffer a lower bit rate? Indeed, mathematically, that's correct. This realization caused a minor freakout in some internet quarters, among people who assume that bit rate is the only factor important to determining video quality. The reality of the situation is far more complex than that, of course. The long and short of it is that this Extended Collector's Edition looks exactly the same as the original release, despite what the bit rate meter may say. "

When you're talking about Avatar that is a whole different ball game. If I remember correctly on that title it was shot with an all digital camera (possible red one) & was done in IMAX.

The titles we are talking about were not.

The differences that I see on my equipment are the way that grain is handled & the colors are different than the original. The transfers are sharper without any halos or ringing. The transfers are more film like.

It was very easy for me to spot from the beginning to the end of the movie. There is a clear difference on the ones I have seen so far.

It may be a case of the better your display is the more you'll be able to see any differences. People with projectors will would be able to see it even more.

[blu-ray_girl_fan]

Originally Posted by marine92104

If you look at the transfers for Spider-man & Ghostbusters are clearly not identical. Look at the colors on the screencaps. The transfers are sharper with more detail.

When screencaps are posted for the other titles then they can be judged as those two have.

You reply as if you know 100% for sure that what you say is true but most of your replies are just your opinion.

In this thread you've brought up a lot of things about Sony that you don't like that don't have anything to do with these titles.

I would trust someone that has actually viewed the titles over someone that has never seen them. Especially someone that is extremely biased against the studio that released them.

I do own two of these so far & plan on getting a couple more of them based on actually seeing them on my equipment. I have no bias to any studio.

I just want the best PQ & AQ on every title I buy. That's why I import some titles.

I was referring to Total Recall and The Amazing Spider-Man. Screencaps for the latter are online, and reviews of the former indicate that it is essentially the same transfer as the one used in the previous release.

[nagysaudio]

Originally Posted by blu-ray_girl_fan

Forget about bitrates -- the transfers for some of these movies are clearly identical to what we already got. The new transfer for Ghostbusters was changed in many different ways having nothing to do with bitrates.

I don't think you understand what a transfer is.

[ZoetMB]

Originally Posted by JohnnyPresley21

In the case of Amazing Spider-Man it appears that he picture is more zoomed in

I sure as hell hope not. Why would Sony change the frame? It's either original AR and framing or it's not.

[blu-ray_girl_fan]

Originally Posted by ZoetMB

I sure as hell hope not. Why would Sony change the frame? It's either original AR and framing or it's not.

The framing does seem a little different. @_@

[reanimator]

Originally Posted by Dubstar

anyone get Glory? a penny for your thoughts?

The 4k remaster of GLORY is breathtaking -- a clear improvement over the first BD.