The Fifth Element 4K UHD (1997) (20th Anniversary Edition)

[James Luckard]

Originally Posted by coolguy25

from what I've seen from just caps I like the colors on the Sony more.. It's a bright popcorn loud flick don't care about fine detail. A little HD looking waxy with bright colors is fine for a movie like this.

To me, in addition to greater detail, the colors look much brighter and more vivid on the SC disc:

StudioCanal:


Sony:

[James Luckard]

Originally Posted by barrett75

not to mention SC disc is one of the last FiM Joint...

Sorry, I'm not familiar with that term, what does it mean?

[dallywhitty]

Originally Posted by James Luckard

Sorry, I'm not familiar with that term, what does it mean?

Fidelity in Motion. Company that specialises in encoding.

[James Luckard]

Originally Posted by dallywhitty

Fidelity in Motion. Company that specialises in encoding.

Ah, did they have a good reputation or a bad one?

[Agent Kay]

Originally Posted by James Luckard

Ah, did they have a good reputation or a bad one?

The best and they are still working

[Filmmaker]

Originally Posted by James Luckard

Sorry, I'm not familiar with that term, what does it mean?

Originally Posted by dallywhitty

Fidelity in Motion. Company that specialises in encoding.

Originally Posted by James Luckard

Ah, did they have a good reputation or a bad one?

Originally Posted by Agent Kay

The best and they are still working

Surely you’ve heard us all waxing rhapsodic around here about the quality of compression done at the hand of David M. (David Mackenzie). FiM is his joint.

[James Luckard]

Originally Posted by Filmmaker

Surely you’ve heard us all waxing rhapsodic around here about the quality of compression done at the hand of David M. (David Mackenzie). FiM is his joint.

Ah, I've heard everyone talk about him, I didn't know that was his company.

If he oversaw the video as well as the audio, hopefully he can tell us the backstory on the two video masters.

[HeavyHitter]

Originally Posted by James Luckard

That's what I suspected. The difference in detail between the SC and Sony discs is too big. The SC disc looks like it comes from the negative. The Sony disc looks like it doesn't.

Just look at the grain structure on Milla's arm (and indeed everything) in this shot:

https://caps-a-holic.com/c.php?a=1&x...3&l=0&i=2&go=1

The Sony has always had an overly digital look to it...improves with each iteration of a release...but still there none the less.

[James Luckard]

Originally Posted by HeavyHitter

The Sony has always had an overly digital look to it...improves with each iteration of a release...but still there none the less.

If Sony only ever had an internegative or an interpositive to work from, that would seem to make sense.

[Evil666]

Studio Canal's version looks a little better than the Sony version. Tough decision because I do want to get this in my collection.

[captainsolo]

Originally Posted by James Luckard

I have a question about both LEON and THE FIFTH ELEMENT. I looked in the last few pages of the threads for each film and didn't see anything clearly addressing this.

The Sony and StudioCanal UHD discs of each look noticeably different, based on caps.

I have a theory, does anyone know if I'm right?

Gaumont financed both of these films. Sony just had distribution rights in the US and a few other markets for each film.

As the financing studio, Gaumont would have retained the negative.

Isn't it likely that the StudioCanal discs are mastered from the original negative, while the Sony discs are mastered from whatever second-generation materials Gaumont sent them back in the 90s to make their release prints from?

This would explain why the StudioCanal discs have greater detail, and also different color timing.

If this is the case, the Sony discs would presumably have color timing matching what was originally there, it would be baked into the film materials, I would think, unless the new digital masters were tinkered with, while the StudioCanal discs would have needed to be color timed again from scratch.

Or is the general opinion that these are the same masters, just cropped differently and processed differently?

Does anyone know for a fact what materials each disc was mastered from?

Thanks!

That would seem accurate. Flash Gordon had the same fate and the original letterbox US master on LD and initial DVD have a darker/grittier cast to them coming from a different presumably US source. The current 4K StudioCanal master was from the negative and also has a much brighter and more vivid appearance.

This situation happens more often than people would think. Fistful of Dollars is this way with the negatives in Italy and MGM always using whatever their US source is. Supposedly they have a FAFDM negative source but I'm not 100% for sure and GBU was also split between UA and Grimaldi.

[James Luckard]

Originally Posted by captainsolo

This situation happens more often than people would think. Fistful of Dollars is this way with the negatives in Italy and MGM always using whatever their US source is. Supposedly they have a FAFDM negative source but I'm not 100% for sure and GBU was also split between UA and Grimaldi.

Yep, I think people assume that because LEON and THE FIFTH ELEMENT are in English, that they're primarily American studio-made films, but I'm fairly sure the principal financing studio for both was Gaumont.

Sony has released these films on countless formats, and I think they did contribute a portion of THE FIFTH ELEMENT's budget before production began, but I believe they're still just an American distributor, not the originating studio.

[Agent Kay]

Originally Posted by Evil666

Studio Canal's version looks a little better than the Sony version. Tough decision because I do want to get this in my collection.

Its tough for me as it doesn't have the original audio and I'm tired of doing their work for them and adding it.

[Scottishguy]

Originally Posted by Evil666

Studio Canal's version looks a little better than the Sony version. Tough decision because I do want to get this in my collection.

The SC disc is a far more authentic video presentation than what Sony put out, in my opinion. The only downside is no OG audio. But the ATMOS is still good, very loud it should be noted.

[Agent Kay]

I have the 35mm tack and the 5.1 audio, but that the defeats the point of physical media if I rip and sync

[Scottishguy]

Originally Posted by Agent Kay

I have the 35mm tack and the 5.1 audio, but that the defeats the point of physical media if I rip and sync

Wait you own a print?

[Geoff D]

Originally Posted by Scottishguy

Wait you own a print?

He may have meant “35mm track”?

[Scottishguy]

Originally Posted by Geoff D

He may have meant “35mm track”?

The mystery is solved. You getting round to watch the Indy film's soon?

[Geoff D]

Originally Posted by Scottishguy

The mystery is solved. You getting round to watch the Indy film's soon?

I doubt it.

[Krynoid-Man]

Originally Posted by captainsolo

That would seem accurate. Flash Gordon had the same fate and the original letterbox US master on LD and initial DVD have a darker/grittier cast to them coming from a different presumably US source. The current 4K StudioCanal master was from the negative and also has a much brighter and more vivid appearance.

This situation happens more often than people would think. Fistful of Dollars is this way with the negatives in Italy and MGM always using whatever their US source is. Supposedly they have a FAFDM negative source but I'm not 100% for sure and GBU was also split between UA and Grimaldi.

Gallipoli and Waterloo have never been released on Blu-Ray in the US even though they have in other territories for the same reason. Because they only have distribution rights in certain territories and not outright ownership, they can't access the negatives and the only materials they can access are battered old IP prints.