Inglourious Basterds 4K UHD (2009)

[Bostonyte]

As the cat stated earlier, this was not shot on film, correct?

[Gacivory]

Originally Posted by Bostonyte

As the cat stated earlier, this was not shot on film, correct?

Correct, it was filmed with a potato. Weird choice, but they really mashed out a great movie.

[rroeder]

Why are folks making a big deal about this being an upscale?, seems like standard fare for movies from this time frame(2000's)

What movies are native 4K from that time period?

[dickdarlington]

Originally Posted by rroeder

Why are folks making a big deal about this being an upscale?, seems like standard fare for movies from this time frame(2000's)

What movies are native 4K from that time period?

Very few and far between. Sony was the only studio at the time really pushing for 4K DIs (and that might have something to do with the fact they were one of the few manufacturers of 4K digital projectors being sent to theaters).

[Bostonyte]

So there is an original negative, ie. film?

[danman227460]

Originally Posted by rroeder

Why are folks making a big deal about this being an upscale?, seems like standard fare for movies from this time frame(2000's)

What movies are native 4K from that time period?

My theory. Tarantino. Since he loves film, he wouldn't have done IG this way. He would have made sure the picture was worthy of 4K and nothing but a complete rescan would have justified his work. That is what I seem to be getting from all these people hating on it. They hold Tarantino in such high regard that doing this was akin to throwing water in his face.

I think some members mentioned that the 35MM print he shows comes from the same 2K DI?

[Scottishguy]

Originally Posted by Bostonyte

So there is an original negative, ie. film?

Of course there is. He shot it using film.

Originally Posted by danman227460

My theory. Tarantino. Since he loves film, he wouldn't have done IG this way. He would have made sure the picture was worthy of 4K and nothing but a complete rescan would have justified his work. That is what I seem to be getting from all these people hating on it. They hold Tarantino in such high regard that doing this was akin to throwing water in his face.

I think some members mentioned that the 35MM print he shows comes from the same 2K DI?

Yeah a print of that DI. As has been done with other films from exhibition purposes.

[Deciazulado]

Originally Posted by wright96d

Oh, well, yeah. Clearly you've had experience with this, you just didn't quite understand me calling it "linear". And yeah, your correction of my linear graph is more accurate, I just didn't feel like putting in that work to match the new tonal range points. Also, how does BR.com process 4K HDR screenshots for SDR nowadays? I couldn't help but notice how dark the caps for The Shawshank Redemption were, and how that's not really representative of the source.

The Shawshank Redemption 4K Review ones, for example, are 1080p SDR downconverted output from the 4K disc done by the reviewer. They should be accurate to his particular equipment's conversion. Of course every conversion, be it software, hardware, DV, Optimizer etc , can be slightly different depending on its particular parameters. I tou.. quote myself:

Originally Posted by Deciazulado

These days most people do HDR shots with software "conversions" to sRGB/709 SDR, which like DV and Panny's Optimizer, are all forms of tone mapping, which is in a sense another kind of "remastering" to fit your screen, and highlights, shadows, tonal curves and colors on screenshots will not look exactly like they do on the disc trying to fit in something "bigger" than they can hold.

The ones in 4K (2160p) size on some of the earlier reviews (example) on the other hand are true direct 4K in PQ 2020, to 320nits. (you can see the raw RGB PQ values from 0-10,000 behind the screenshot by clicking on their full sized display, on the top of them the [Display in 4K HDR (will look grey in normal monitors)] like this:

320 nits PQ 2020 (brightness of a 2016 4K/5K iMac for example)

Above320 nits well there is where the hull reflection goes. A 1000 nit PQ one would have that but you'll need a 1000nit computer monitor

RAW PQ 2020 values as seen without PQ 2020 monitor.



If screenshots look dark which I mentioned in an earlier post, click on the white moon on the top right corner of our pages ^ and of course, select also black background when seeing the large actual size ones. Also note that discs are usually (or should be) mastered in studio dark conditions and they would use 2.4 contrast, while most web images are usually in 2.2 sRGB (which is brighter than even 2.2 gamma in the shadows), so an accurate screenshot duplicating the 0-100% values would have the values coded for 2.4 (or PQ) for dark viewing conditions. (so turning or dimming off the room lights like when watching in a home theater would make evaluating screenshots closer to expected)

[Show spoiler]Now to say why no recent 4Ks would make this post longer. Has to do with converting 10-12bit PQ to 8bits PQ, ( for example if you look closely at this
you can see the 4K conversion has magenta green splotches), PQ vs 2.2sRGB vs 2.2gamma ad 2.4gamma. And real life.

Soon I hope.

[Scottishguy]

[Show spoiler]

Originally Posted by Deciazulado

The Shawshank Redemption 4K Review ones, for example, are 1080p SDR downconverted output from the 4K disc done by the reviewer. They should be accurate to his particular equipment's conversion. Of course every conversion, be it software, hardware, DV, Optimizer etc , can be slightly different depending on its particular parameters. I tou.. quote myself:


The ones in 4K (2160p) size on some of the earlier reviews (example) on the other hand are true direct 4K in PQ 2020, to 320nits. (you can see the raw RGB PQ values from 0-10,000 behind the screenshot by clicking on their full sized display, on the top of them the [Display in 4K HDR (will look grey in normal monitors)] like this:

320 nits PQ 2020 (brightness of a 2016 4K/5K iMac for example)

Above320 nits well there is where the hull reflection goes. A 1000 nit PQ one would have that but you'll need a 1000nit computer monitor

RAW PQ 2020 values as seen without PQ 2020 monitor.



If screenshots look dark which I mentioned in an earlier post, click on the white moon on the top right corner of our pages ^. Also note that discs are usually (or should be) mastered in studio dark conditions and they would use 2.4 contrast, while most web images are usually in 2.2 sRGB (which is brighter than even 2.2 gamma in the shadows), so an accurate screenshot duplicating the 0-100% values would have the values coded for 2.4 (or PQ) for dark viewing conditions. (so turning or dimming off the room lights like when watching in a home theater would make evaluating screenshots closer to expected)

[Show spoiler]Now to say why no recent 4Ks would make this post longer. Has to do with converting 10-12bit PQ to 8bits PQ, ( for example if you look closely at this
you can see the 4K conversion has magenta green splotches), PQ vs 2.2sRGB vs 2.2gamma ad 2.4gamma. And real life.

Soon I hope.

[Deciazulado]

Originally Posted by Bostonyte

So there is an original negative, ie. film?

Yes there was but then the rest of the movie making process comes into play:

Originally Posted by Geoff D

I think that's the fundamental misunderstanding here: people think that the movie was finished to film, got a standard 'transfer' to HD and that Universal have just upscaled that old HD transfer, like with Bourne Identity. No.

It was "upgraded" from the final 2K digital source master of the film which was created from the digital intermediate - AS THE MOVIE WAS NOT FINISHED OUT TO FILM - and is the highest quality version available of the finished content, not the naked camera negative with no conform, VFX etc. In other words, this source is not an old HD telecine designed for 1080p SDR home video but is a master-grade 2K source with 10-bit depth and P3 colour gamut at the minimum.

Could they have rebuilt it? Sure I guess. But how many other 2K DIs - remember, these are not Blu-ray transfers of conformed camera negatives but final source masters for DIGITALLY FINISHED FILMS - have Universal previously rebuilt into 4K? I cannot think of a single example, so why should Basterds have come in for the same treatment.

^^

Originally Posted by Deciazulado

translated to the folks at home:

In other words, this source IS the MASTER.



The 2K is the MASTER

[Scottishguy]

More importantly Geoff mentioned the colour information exists on said master. Which I thought went without saying, but, guess someone had to say it.

[Jlouisbarrett]

That review from Bill Hunt actually surprises me, I didn’t think he was so dense and ignorant about the technological side of film and the filmmaking process.

[Mierzwiak]

Originally Posted by The Digital B(it)S

...you are essentially getting what was meant for Blu-ray dumped onto a higher quality format.

Or is it?

[NeilZ]

It seems this release was done using the best materials that exist, and undoubtedly this release is good and people are making a mountain out of nothing.

[tama]

Originally Posted by Jlouisbarrett

That review from Bill Hunt actually surprises me, I didn’t think he was so dense and ignorant about the technological side of film and the filmmaking process.

It seems to be a reviewer for the Bits but not Bill Hunt himself.

[Deciazulado]

Originally Posted by Scottishguy

More importantly Geoff mentioned the colour information exists on said master. Which I thought went without saying, but, guess someone had to say it.

Yes now in the digital era, most of films are finished into the digital realm, into file formats designed for film and beyond parameters, and only exist in virtual form, and is now with UHD, that some of that is now possible at home. For example 2020 is a much larger color space, and there are others. While BD/709/sRGB is basically PAL and SMPTE-C used on TVs in the 70s and 80s, while P3 is more like the original designed wider NTSC colors (similar to Technicolor too) that were seldom or never achieved in bright TVs at all and discarded for the narrower PAL and SMPTE-C.

[IXOYE1989]

https://caps-a-holic.com/c.php?go=1&...179903&i=8&l=0

Just curious, but what would cause the burnt subtitles to have a slight shift like that?

[Jlouisbarrett]

Originally Posted by tama

It seems to be a reviewer for the Bits but not Bill Hunt himself.

That makes a bit more sense, but Bill still let it get posted…

[Scottishguy]

Originally Posted by Jlouisbarrett

That review from Bill Hunt actually surprises me, I didn’t think he was so dense and ignorant about the technological side of film and the filmmaking process.

It's by Tim Salmons. He can easily be found on Facebook if you want to give him your thoughts on his review.

Edit: And I just did...

Inglorious Basterds was filmed in 35mm (Fujifilm Eterna-CP Type 3513DI), and FINISHED DIGITALLY. That's to say seen as you seem to know absolutely nothing, all of the post production was finished on a 2K digital intermediate. That intermediate is thus the master for the film, and all that exists on the camera negative is the principle photography itself.

So there will never be a native 4K presentation unless a rebuild is commissioned. Even then all the auxiliary CGI will remain in 2K, and shall be upscaled. But, besides that, Universal are very unlikely to blow $100,000 on the off change of yielding some more spacial detail.

All the relevant colour information exists on the 2K DI master for an HDR anyway.

Stop spreading to misinformation. There is more chance of seeing a bloody unicorn than a mythical native 4K presentation.

[JPK]

Originally Posted by rroeder

Why are folks making a big deal about this being an upscale?, seems like standard fare for movies from this time frame(2000's)

What movies are native 4K from that time period?

Most of the films released on 4K UHD from that period are in fact released as 'native 4K'. More so than from the decade after 2010.

Just did a quick skim through my 4K collection and the only ones that aren't 'native 4K' releases between 2000 and 2010 are Casino Royale, Quantum of Solace, Lord of the Rings, Fast & Furious, Pans Labyrinth, Shutter Island, Transporter 3, Toy Story 3 and Underworld by the looks of it.