Belladonna of Sadness 4K UHD (1973)

[Enigmo_1]

Originally Posted by animeHDR

>are you saying HDR doesn't allow for better defined details compared to SDR?

That's completely different.
Without HDR, it is impossible to express the light and colours that creators desire, but SDR can sufficiently preserve information, color, and light design.
If you understand that SDR is nothing more than a blueprint, you will understand that HDR is essentially about restoring it to its ideal state.

"SDR can sufficiently preserve information, color and light design"

With digipaint animation, yeah, they're produced in SDR so HDR grading isn't going to present any new information in most cases.

When it comes to cel animation it's a whole different story.

With cel animation, once the film is scanned, your goal with color correction might be to restore the colors to look similar to cels, which are vibrant and not washed out, so u do this:

[Show spoiler]

the problem with getting it bright enough to resemble cel vibrancy is you will end up blowing out the non-cel highlights like this:

[Show spoiler]

If you want to preserve the detail and definition of those non-cel highlights, you can dial down the brightness and somewhat roll them off to bring up the cels a bit:

[Show spoiler]

but the problem with trying to preserve the definition of things like backlight effects inside SDR, is that you've had to wash out the animation cel's vibrancy and completely lose the intended cel-like look you was going for. You'd also be losing definition in the areas below those specular highlights by compressing how separated/defined they are.

HDR would be the solution that allows you to preserve the detail and definition of the specular highlights, while also having the vibrant look that has non-compressed mids and upper mids. So yeah I would say SDR isn't sufficient for preserving detail along with ideal color/light design.

[animeHDR]

>When it comes to cell animation, it's a different story.
It depends on the workflow, but it's usually the same.
Even with film, changing to HDR does not add any new information, similar to digital SDR mastering.
Highlight and T-light areas are just light, and it's the colorist's job to determine the intensity of that light.

>Once the film has been scanned, the goal of color correction may be to bring the colors back closer to the cel image.
>The problem is making it bright enough.
HDR can do these tasks better, but it all depends on your workflow.

> If you want to maintain the detail and sharpness of the highlights outside of the cells,
If you want a wide daynamic range as SDR, then yes.
Even if it gets dark and the contrast decreases, if you value the amount of information.
HDR allows you to balance brightness and avoid saturation.

>However, there are problems with trying to maintain definitions.
>HDR will solve the problem
That is correct.
That's what I mean when I say that in SDR, expression comes at the cost of compromise.
With HDR, that compromise can be significantly reduced.
The only time you need to compromise on HDR is when you're dealing with colours and lights that exceed the standard's upper limit of 10000cd/m2 or rec.2020, but you don't need such strong light and high purity colours for actual viewing.
I think the Lightillusion article will be helpful in this regard.
https://lightillusion.com/what_is_hdr.html

[peppapigstan]

Originally Posted by Geoff D

You can flay me if you like but all three caps there look crazy good to my eyes. I will say that HDR as a system exacerbates grain in general, it's exposing parts of the image that were always rolled off in SDR, plus the more brightness you push through it the worse it gets. Fine.

But in this case I'm getting the distinct feeling that the label doesn't actually like grain all that much, not on animation anyway, and HDR has provided the perfick excuse to enable them to smooth it over. The comment about wanting it to play nice on all HDR TVs is rather telling, that these are being done because they don't want complaints about nasty grain stuff, but again that highlights the discord between anime nuts and film fanatics perhaps, that to the former grain is the devil and always has been. Not that there aren't any film buffs who hate grain, there's loads of them too, but with anime the Japanese have themselves been very quick to smooth it over and that attitude has just kinda bled into the fandom maybe?

It'd cost mo money but, knowing what they know about which fans dig what and how there's a bit of a crossover here, it's a shame they can't do a 'purist' release with the grain intact and do another one that's been DNR'ed up the arsehöle. Maybe even do the 'purist' disc as a limited edition exclusive, like strictly limited and not to be reprinted, and keep the DNR'ed disc in print.

I believe it's moreso them trying to say that DNR isn't evil especially when done right, there are still labels out there (especially VAP & Bandai, look at the recent Farewell Yamato UHD, released a couple months ago) that use DNR very inappropriately, but there are other restorations where DNR doesn't hurt the integrity in spite of the lack of the good ol' analog grain like Goku: Midnight Eye

I understand the need for grain with Belladonna though, it's a darker 70s film so I agree that a more stronger presence of grain would suit the image but I think the industry people here are trying to say that DNR is only evil if the applicant is clueless/uncaring about preserving the analog integrity of the film's image
I do agree that having two editions would be great though, I know AnimEigo did something like that for MADOX on one disc and that was a good idea (especially since the restored version had a "revisionist" change done by Aramaki to fix an animation error loop)

[kmhofmann]

Originally Posted by Enigmo_1

With cel animation, once the film is scanned, your goal with color correction might be to restore the colors to look similar to cels, which are vibrant and not washed out, so u do this:

[Show spoiler]

Your first example is an abomination in cranking saturation and contrast to uncomfortable extremes. This is certainly not the goal of any proper restoration, which need to operate within reasonable boundaries.

It doesn't matter a single bit what kind of animation technique was used to produce the film. The goal cannot be to emulate any intermediate stages. The Film-out (e.g., to negative film) is the final product that has to be used as reference.

Furthermore, Belladonna of Sadness almost certainly was never projected at brightness levels >250 nits, so there is no possible rationale to go any higher in a restoration, HDR or not.

[Enigmo_1]

Originally Posted by kmhofmann

The Film-out (e.g., to negative film) is the final product that has to be emulated.

Sure thing, here you go boss

[Show spoiler]

I too hope Discotek learns to start releasing their anime UHDs like this

I'm sure this is what our lord and savior David Mackenzie would've wanted too

[kmhofmann]

Originally Posted by peppapigstan

I understand the need for grain with Belladonna though, it's a darker 70s film so I agree that a more stronger presence of grain would suit the image but I think the industry people here are trying to say that DNR is only evil if the applicant is clueless/uncaring about preserving the analog integrity of the film's image
I do agree that having two editions would be great though, I know AnimEigo did something like that for MADOX on one disc and that was a good idea (especially since the restored version had a "revisionist" change done by Aramaki to fix an animation error loop)

You don't get the point.

The grain isn't "needed" because we have a '70s movie here and it suits the mood. That doesn't matter at all. It could be a comedy shot in 2024, for all I know, and still deserving of the same respectful treatment.

It's important because the whole damn film was shot on this thing called, well, film stock. Every single frame consists of silver halide crystals, which, exposed to light not only form the whole image but, depending on their size and structure duration of exposure to light, might resemble a grain pattern in composition. The grain is not obscuring any information, the grain is the information.

Any substantial/noticeable attempt to remove this grain will, and I repeat, will - even with the very latest algorithms (temporal, AI-based, whatever) - falsify what constitutes the film. By definition, this is what you mention: uncaring about preserving the analog integrity of the film's image.

Discotek seem to have gone way too far here, by their own admission. They seem to not care about the film as a medium but only like to produce their own personal interpretation of what animated film "should" look like (assuming it'll be WAY too bright and thus way too grain reduced).

I've been re-reading their announcement tweet and the first bullet point ("(...) with a new HDR grade; the colors are eyeball-searing") is a big fat disgusting red flag.

That said, let's get some reliable HDR caps and directly compare to the UK 4K UHD, which, compression issues and inherent Rec.709 limitations aside, presents the film quite well.

[kmhofmann]

Originally Posted by Enigmo_1

Sure thing, here you go boss

[Show spoiler]

I too hope Discotek learns to start releasing their anime UHDs like this

Sigh. Maybe learn to listen to the intended message instead of twisting words around and taking things a tad too literally.

[Geoff D]

Originally Posted by kmhofmann

You don't get the point.

The grain isn't "needed" because we have a '70s movie here and it suits the mood. That doesn't matter at all. It could be a comedy shot in 2024, for all I know, and still deserving of the same respectful treatment.

It's important because the whole damn film was shot on this thing called, well, film stock. Every single frame consists of silver halide crystals, which, exposed to light not only form the whole image but, depending on their size and structure duration of exposure to light, might resemble a grain pattern in composition. The grain is not obscuring any information, the grain is the information.

Any substantial/noticeable attempt to remove this grain will, and I repeat, will - even with the very latest algorithms (temporal, AI-based, whatever) - falsify what constitutes the film. By definition, this is what you mention: uncaring about preserving the analog integrity of the film's image.

Discotek seem to have gone way too far here, by their own admission. They seem to not care about the film as a medium but only like to produce their own personal interpretation of what animated film "should" look like (assuming it'll be WAY too bright and thus way too grain reduced).

I've been re-reading their announcement tweet and the first bullet point ("(...) with a new HDR grade; the colors are eyeball-searing") is a big fat disgusting red flag.

That said, let's get some reliable HDR caps and directly compare to the UK 4K UHD, which, compression issues and inherent Rec.709 limitations aside, presents the film quite well.

Pity they didn't put 'freshly grain reduced for your viewing pleasure' in the bullet points. They DNR'ed Street Fighter's UHD as well, didn't they?

[Kyle15]

Originally Posted by Geoff D

Pity they didn't put 'freshly grain reduced for your viewing pleasure' in the bullet points. They DNR'ed Street Fighter's UHD as well, didn't they?

The Japanese licensor did that one. They were responsible for the weird HDR grade too and wouldn't let anyone change it iirc.

[Geoff D]

Originally Posted by Kyle15

The Japanese licensor did that one. They were responsible for the weird HDR grade too and wouldn't let anyone change it iirc.

That's what I mean tho, are Discotek in that 'if you can't beat 'em, join 'em' Stockholm syndrome kinda mindset now?

[EddieLarkin]

I would say the vast majority of those in the catalog anime releasing industry, along with most of the fandom, are big into the idea of making old animation "look like the original cels" or whatever, rather than preserving the filmic integrity, a la Heavy Metal above (Sony wouldn't be caught dead treating any title like these guys do).

Even fan restorers like Seed of Might, who in all other respects are brilliant, have stated they are not against noise reducing when they feel things are too grainy.

Funny that at last Disney of all people are finally starting to treat some of their classic titles with respect on UHD, after releasing mushy shite for years on Blu-ray. 20 years of this DNRing crap and not once has any example of its use been justified in the long run.

[Brian81]

Is that a red hand holding that sword?

[PonyoBellanote]

Most anime restorations, barring some exceptions, have always made it a goal to look like the cels. Which imo is not always an issue, but it depends of the movie and how it was made. Some look fine, others have glaring issues. Disney had issues doing that thing, actually, trying to make their animated movies look like cels and not like film, hence the heavy denoise/degraining and filtering.

Which reminds me, god, we're in May and so far, no more Disney 4Ks announced? I hope we get more restorations like Cinderella and Snow White right now. Please Disney.

[peppapigstan]

Originally Posted by kmhofmann

You don't get the point.

The grain isn't "needed" because we have a '70s movie here and it suits the mood. That doesn't matter at all. It could be a comedy shot in 2024, for all I know, and still deserving of the same respectful treatment.

It's important because the whole damn film was shot on this thing called, well, film stock. Every single frame consists of silver halide crystals, which, exposed to light not only form the whole image but, depending on their size and structure duration of exposure to light, might resemble a grain pattern in composition. The grain is not obscuring any information, the grain is the information.

Any substantial/noticeable attempt to remove this grain will, and I repeat, will - even with the very latest algorithms (temporal, AI-based, whatever) - falsify what constitutes the film. By definition, this is what you mention: uncaring about preserving the analog integrity of the film's image.

Did you take a look at the screencaps I posted? I'm implying no info there was lost for Midnight Eye Goku, despite being DNR'd. I know that film grain is there bc of how film stock works.

[CrashOveride95]

Originally Posted by peppapigstan

Did you take a look at the screencaps I posted? I'm implying no info there was lost for Midnight Eye Goku, despite being DNR'd.

You see, if there's not a bunch of noise in my image then the remaster sucks
We don't care about the actual detail here, only grain
Grain is love grain is life
Who needs nuance
Please understanding

[Enigmo_1]

yeah you know what, looking at cinderella's 4K remaster again (which I know this forum loved so much), i think you guys are right:

[Show spoiler]

grain should always be left untouched like that. is it super grainy? sure but I'm starting to get what you all mean that it was shot on a grainy medium so we should respect it and leave the grain even if it's as intense as it is up there.


just LOOK at how much more grainy it is compared to Discotek's 40% reduction of grain in SF2:

[Show spoiler]

if you ask me, discotek did 40% too much and should've left it as grainy as cinderella

Discotek, do better or go home, bud.

[peppapigstan]

low-key i'm curious, what do y'all think of the robotech BDs?
for reference:
https://www.blu-ray.com/movies/Robot...0/#Screenshots

there's also one part of the infamous superman cartoons BD left untouched and also wanted to see how people feel about it lol:

[TremiRodomi]

To add onto the DNR discussion here, while this is reaching a bit, there is one other 4K release of an animated production MushiPro had a hand in that can support the usage of the DNR here... Rankin/Bass' Frosty the Snowman. I wouldn't know the exact specifics of its production, but me being a huge Rankin/Bass nerd I would imagine it was shot on 35mm film stock similar to what Belladonna had over here, since that's what Rankin/Bass generally preferred to have their productions stored on anyways.

The 2022 4K restoration seems to use some level of DNR, but it isn't as heavy-handed as any of its previous VHS/DVD presentations and even the HD master used on the previous Blu-Rays, where it got rather horrid at times. It also uses HDR, though admittedly its a bit reserved with it and generally stays in the SDR range. And guess what? It looks completely fine and still has a visible grain field. And as someone who has watched it more times than I can count, its the best home media release of it by far besides some audio annoyances. If Universal, a large company who generally puts out great 4Ks was smart enough to apply some level of DNR when they restored it and it still looked fine, I assume Discotek did the right move here as well. I'll just wait to have the disc in hand before I made a total judgement on it rather than see iffy tonemapped screencaps.

[Geoff D]

Originally Posted by peppapigstan

low-key i'm curious, what do y'all think of the robotech BDs?
for reference:
https://www.blu-ray.com/movies/Robot...0/#Screenshots

there's also one part of the infamous superman cartoons BD left untouched and also wanted to see how people feel about it lol:

Is this supposed to be a trick question? I likes them all. But then I don't thinks grain is the devil.

[peppapigstan]

was just curious, those are like the most grain-heavy stuff on BD I know, just wanted to gauge some observations
also Enigmo can be a troll sometimes but I mean some of the stuff they say is interesting, i'd still wouldn't 100% discount their arguments