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

[bigrob]

Originally Posted by DR Herbert West

Yep, love the warm/golden look of the Canal disc. The Sony looks way too cold.

The Sony version has always looked liked this. lacked the vibrancy of what got released overseas.

At least their transfers have been consistent though.

same situation with Joan of Arc. I've not compared the early Sony release of Leon with it's international counterparts yet though

[emgesp]

Originally Posted by Telemachus

I've been saying this since I got it, it's a 10/10 FiM stunner, people holding the Sony disc just don't know

What other FIM releases do you recommend?

[Telemachus]

Originally Posted by emgesp

What other FIM releases do you recommend?

I always forget everything I own that they did, usually their name will be dropped in the booklet if the disc comes with one, but lately they did a bunch of Arrow discs like Mallrats, Weird Science, Waterworld, Time Bandits, Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas, I think they also did Tremors, Pitch Black, and Second Sight stuff like Texas Chain Saw Massacre and Dawn of the Dead. Also some VinSyn stuff like Beastmaster, Rad, Six String Samurai, I think I read they just did eXistenZ. Out of those Fear and Loathing is a big recommend the upgrade is gigantic, Tremors is a perfect disc, Weird Science for sure, eXistenZ cause it's awesome and has never had a good disc till now.

[lgans316]

Originally Posted by StingingVelvet

Finally got the Studio Canal and wow is it a massive improvement. I remember being pessimistic about that back in the day and I'll offer a total mea culpa. Stunning disc with way better color and film look. Happy to have it.

+1. I believe the Sony disc has some non-AI sharpening if memory serves me right.

[Hedrox]

Originally Posted by lgans316

+1. I believe the Sony disc has some non-AI sharpening if memory serves me right.

The sharpening is obviously baked into their master, otherwise they would've gotten rid of it a long time ago when they did the Mastered in 4K BD.

[emgesp]

I've had the UK 4K release for some time now and its hard to imagine how this movie could look any better. I guess the only nitpick is some of the scenes where highlights can be slightly blown out, but its really not a big deal as most scenes look fantastic.

[sfmarine]

Add me to the list of those who love the look of the Canal disc! So glad I was able to get the Zavvi edition. Missed out on Leon though.

[Filmmaker]

The sixth elements:

[JohnCarpenterFan]

Originally Posted by Hedrox

The sharpening is obviously baked into their master, otherwise they would've gotten rid of it a long time ago when they did the Mastered in 4K BD.

I don't understand the notion that the sharpening is something Sony are stuck with and that they're just unable to release a non-sharpened presentation of this film even if they wanted to.

There has been a lot of misinformation and conjecture spread on this forum regarding Sony's treatment of this title for years so it's unsurprising that some of these myths still live on. This part isn't directed at you personally, Hedrox, but I found it amusing the lengths some people went to in order to excuse Sony's treatment of this title over the years. First the excuse was that the film always looked this way (even though I provided evidence in the form of 35mm scans to disprove this narrative and international releases lacked this sharpened look too), then IIRC since the VFX showed signs of processing in all releases then the sharpening was baked into the whole film, then it was Sony were stuck with some sort of subpar film-out or something with digital sharpening and didn't have access to the original non-digitally processed elements.

Forget all that though, StudioCanal stated that their UK UHD release used the same master as the US release except their encode from by David M showed some differences. This suggests that Sony made further alterations to that master themselves. David M stated that the underlying scan seemed to have been used to create other masters with different grading and sharpening applied so this should have put to rest the notion that Sony were stuck with some subpar element/master with sharpening that was unavoidable. I can't fathom why this was so hard for some people to accept as Sony weren't strangers to using artificial sharpening around that time.

[Hedrox]

Originally Posted by JohnCarpenterFan

I don't understand the notion that the sharpening is something Sony are stuck with and that they're just unable to release a non-sharpened presentation of this film even if they wanted to.

There has been a lot of misinformation and conjecture spread on this forum regarding Sony's treatment of this title for years so it's unsurprising that some of these myths still live on. This part isn't directed at you personally, Hedrox, but I found it amusing the lengths some people went to in order to excuse Sony's treatment of this title over the years. First the excuse was that the film always looked this way (even though I provided evidence in the form of 35mm scans to disprove this narrative and international releases lacked this sharpened look too), then IIRC since the VFX showed signs of processing in all releases then the sharpening was baked into the whole film, then it was Sony were stuck with some sort of subpar film-out or something with digital sharpening and didn't have access to the original non-digitally processed elements.

Forget all that though, StudioCanal stated that their UK UHD release used the same master as the US release except their encode from by David M showed some differences. This suggests that Sony made further alterations to that master themselves. David M stated that the underlying scan seemed to have been used to create other masters with different grading and sharpening applied so this should have put to rest the notion that Sony were stuck with some subpar element/master with sharpening that was unavoidable. I can't fathom why this was so hard for some people to accept as Sony weren't strangers to using artificial sharpening around that time.

I personally never thought that Sony's presentation is how the movie was supposed to look, which is why I never bought any of their releases. I preferred the Gaumont aesthetic.

I want to believe Sony are at a point where they don't mess about anymore with stuff like sharpening and DNR in their transfers so it doesn't make much sense why their Fifth Element looks the way it does. Like, surely they would've produced a clean scan with no digital tampering for the 4K, if they could, right?
Then again, titles like Cliffhanger and Lawrence of Arabia say otherwise, so maybe you have a point.

[celluloidboy]

... maybe release this with the original S.D.D.S. 8-channel configuration ? ....

[Geoff D]

Originally Posted by JohnCarpenterFan

I don't understand the notion that the sharpening is something Sony are stuck with and that they're just unable to release a non-sharpened presentation of this film even if they wanted to.

There has been a lot of misinformation and conjecture spread on this forum regarding Sony's treatment of this title for years so it's unsurprising that some of these myths still live on. This part isn't directed at you personally, Hedrox, but I found it amusing the lengths some people went to in order to excuse Sony's treatment of this title over the years. First the excuse was that the film always looked this way (even though I provided evidence in the form of 35mm scans to disprove this narrative and international releases lacked this sharpened look too), then IIRC since the VFX showed signs of processing in all releases then the sharpening was baked into the whole film, then it was Sony were stuck with some sort of subpar film-out or something with digital sharpening and didn't have access to the original non-digitally processed elements.

Forget all that though, StudioCanal stated that their UK UHD release used the same master as the US release except their encode from by David M showed some differences. This suggests that Sony made further alterations to that master themselves. David M stated that the underlying scan seemed to have been used to create other masters with different grading and sharpening applied so this should have put to rest the notion that Sony were stuck with some subpar element/master with sharpening that was unavoidable. I can't fathom why this was so hard for some people to accept as Sony weren't strangers to using artificial sharpening around that time.

Don't necessarily disagree with any of that, but for me the question remains thus: why do Sony keep over-seasoning this particular movie in this particular way? From release to release, format to format, they keep sharpening it in a much more blatant fashion than most anything else they've put out on whatever format and I just don't gets it.

[StingingVelvet]

I feel like some random dipshit filled in for the boss's vacation the week they finalized The Fifth Element and sharpened it, then no one has paid attention since.

[Kyle15]

Leeloo

[DR Herbert West]

Multipass

[Surge92]

I have the SC 4K, but it's the standard edition, with no special features. I don't think the last Zavvi 4K steelbook had any either, if I recall correctly.

[Hedrox]

Originally Posted by Surge92

I have the SC 4K, but it's the standard edition, with no special features. I don't think the last Zavvi 4K steelbook had any either, if I recall correctly.

Nope. Get one of these two for the extras and replace it with the SC BD.

[Surge92]

Originally Posted by Hedrox

Nope. Get one of these two for the extras and replace it with the SC BD.

I have the Sony "Mastered in 4K" digibook, so I guess that will do.

[JohnCarpenterFan]

Originally Posted by Geoff D

Don't necessarily disagree with any of that, but for me the question remains thus: why do Sony keep over-seasoning this particular movie in this particular way? From release to release, format to format, they keep sharpening it in a much more blatant fashion than most anything else they've put out on whatever format and I just don't gets it.

From what I remember, the original Blu-ray release from Sony was heavily criticised for looking too soft and not detailed enough to the point that Sony actually did a replacement program and issued a remastered and sharpened Blu-ray the following year. I can't recall the original Blu-ray release having a sharpened look at the time and I actually thought it looked more organic compared to some HD-DVDs and other early Blu-rays which were well-received despite being sharpened to hell and back. I can only assume that Sony sharpened the 2007 release to combat the barrage of "softness" criticisms and used the same mentality for the later Blu-ray and UHD releases.

Regarding your comment about Sony sharpening it in a "much more blatant fashion than most anything else they've put out on whatever format" - did the earlier releases of The Fifth Element really stand out as being much more sharpened and artificial compared to a lot of Sony's other catalog releases? Sony would regularly use sharpening and EE on a lot of their masters and I can't really remember The Fifth Element sticking out compared to the rest of the stuff they were releasing at the time until the 2015 Blu-ray.

Anyway, it's clear that whatever the reasoning behind the sharpening is it's not because the digital sharpening is baked into the entire cut negative or because Sony are stuck with an inferior and digitally manipulated film source or some master that they've had to use for all these releases since 2007. Had they wanted to release a version sans-sharpening then I'm sure they would have been able to, I doubt their hands were tied by another entity forcing them to release sharpened editions of this film in particular.

[Geoff D]

I'm Korben Dallas