Halloween 4K UHD (1978)

[WhiskeyGnome]

Originally Posted by Geoff D

It's not any deliberate filtering. The base layer encode is a contorted pulsing mess which is turning the grain into digital sludge, as per the usual bias of autopilot encodes which de-prioritise the bright areas of the image where so much of the grain lives.

I guess I don't really understand how this happened from a pretty big release with more audio options and what not. Seems weird as hell. But is it the same master being used? Because that would be really weird too as they look quite different in a lot of shots.

And what really are the differences between interpositive, IF that was used on Lion, and the negative on Shout? Is it finer grain and a bit more detail at times? I guess I am really not familiar with interpositives, but it seems weird Lion would not use the negative here.

Either way I don't really have a problem with their disc except the lack of more audio options. I feel like it suits the Halloween film and its themes pretty well. Never was the hugest ever fan of this film regardless I guess so it's all whatever to me as long as my copy isn't DNR'd into the pits of hell. I definitely prefer the art on the Lion release though by a country mile.

[gigan72]

Originally Posted by WhiskeyGnome

I guess I don't really understand how this happened from a pretty big release with more audio options and what not. Seems weird as hell. But is it the same master being used? Because that would be really weird too as they look quite different in a lot of shots.

Shouts was a new scan from the OCN, while the Lionsgate was from an IP if I remember right. Shouts terrible encoding is what held it back, even while having a big bit rate and being put on a BD-100.

[WhiskeyGnome]

Originally Posted by gigan72

Shouts was a new scan from the OCN, while the Lionsgate was from an IP if I remember right. Shouts terrible encoding is what held it back, even while having a big bit rate and being put on a BD-100.

Yeah wow I just don't understand how your algorithm can do that to film even on autopilot in 2025.

It's time for them to search for new people to do their algorithms and coding then. Because dear lord it looks bad.

I will be very wary of Shout from here on out I guess.

I think the Lion looks a little chunkier in grain size, but I don't really hate its look for this type of film either. It's at least quite detailed and there doesn't seem to be a TON of extra detail between the two outside of the grain being finer.

[Matt89]

Originally Posted by WhiskeyGnome

I guess I don't really understand how this happened from a pretty big release with more audio options and what not. Seems weird as hell. But is it the same master being used? Because that would be really weird too as they look quite different in a lot of shots.

And what really are the differences between interpositive, IF that was used on Lion, and the negative on Shout? Is it finer grain and a bit more detail at times? I guess I am really not familiar with interpositives, but it seems weird Lion would not use the negative here.

Either way I don't really have a problem with their disc except the lack of more audio options. I feel like it suits the Halloween film and its themes pretty well. Never was the hugest ever fan of this film regardless I guess so it's all whatever to me as long as my copy isn't DNR'd into the pits of hell. I definitely prefer the art on the Lion release though by a country mile.

Imprint are using the same MASTER, but giving it a new ENCODE. If that makes sense.

That's what I meant when I said the underlying master is gorgeous. The actual restoration carried out is stunning, but Shout mucked it up at the last stage when they compressed it to be put on disc. That's where you're getting all the weirdness with the grain. That being said, Shout's 4K encodes have (thankfully) improved since then. I feel if they were to do Halloween now, it would look better than what they did to it 4 years ago.

I suspect the Imprint will look really nice, with FiM handling the compression this time around.

[steel_breeze]

Originally Posted by Geoff D

And yet their Halloween II UHD encode is fine, glitchy tits aside. But as none of it takes place in daylight, unlike the first one, then it'd look betterer even if encoded using the same settings as the first.

Glitchy Tits was my prison name.

[Telemachus]

I can't believe I watched the absolutely subpar Shout version all these years it really does look like a DivX video with the awful compression I have DVDs that look better thank goodness for Imprint my money and body are ready!

[gigan72]

Originally Posted by WhiskeyGnome

Yeah wow I just don't understand how your algorithm can do that to film even on autopilot in 2025.

It's time for them to search for new people to do their algorithms and coding then. Because dear lord it looks bad.

I will be very wary of Shout from here on out I guess.

I think the Lion looks a little chunkier in grain size, but I don't really hate its look for this type of film either. It's at least quite detailed and there doesn't seem to be a TON of extra detail between the two outside of the grain being finer.

They've made significant improvements since then, it's mainly their earlier titles that had big errors and bad encodes. Halloween just ended up coming out as possibly their worst encoding job because it was an early title, but a lot of their newer stuff like Night of the Demons and The Burning are encoded very nicely.

[Matt89]

Originally Posted by Telemachus

I can't believe I watched the absolutely subpar Shout version all these years it really does look like a DivX video with the awful compression I have DVDs that look better thank goodness for Imprint my money and body are ready!

That's the spirit!!

[dallywhitty]

Originally Posted by Telemachus

I can't believe I watched the absolutely subpar Shout version all these years it really does look like a DivX video with the awful compression I have DVDs that look better thank goodness for Imprint my money and body are ready!

Oliver says to stop calling him. Also, you can keep his surfboard.

[nathanashby]

Originally Posted by steel_breeze

Glitchy Tits was my prison name.

It's my drag name. Small world.

[WhiskeyGnome]

Originally Posted by gigan72

They've made significant improvements since then, it's mainly their earlier titles that had big errors and bad encodes. Halloween just ended up coming out as possibly their worst encoding job because it was an early title, but a lot of their newer stuff like Night of the Demons and The Burning are encoded very nicely.

Well that is good to hear then I guess. I mean they all make errors. Arrow still has yet to own up to their Conan color timing error.

[gigan72]

Originally Posted by WhiskeyGnome

Well that is good to hear then I guess. I mean they all make errors. Arrow still has yet to own up to their Conan color timing error.

Shouts stuff was riddled with sloppy things for a while, though. They mislabeled the audio tracks on Return of the Living Dead and Night of the Demons (+ the newly mastered mix for NOTD had errors), bonus features were listed on the package for a few releases that just... weren't there, Halloween 2 had the infamous 'nipple glitch', Prince of Darkness and They Live were released in the wrong color space, etc etc. In addition to the generally mediocre encoding jobs. And none of these have been corrected or acknowledged.

I'd say they're one of the labels who've made the most improvements since the start of 4K (while others like Kino have gone the opposite direction and gotten worse). It's been a while since I've caught wind of a Shout release that's got blatant errors or encoding problems.

[jordanjabroni]

Originally Posted by WhiskeyGnome

Well that is good to hear then I guess. I mean they all make errors. Arrow still has yet to own up to their Conan color timing error.

Isn't that literally for one camera shot?