Die Hard 4K UHD (1988)

[fighthefutureofhd]

This could be the start of a Die Hard reboot. Only this time it's Mrs. McClaine who's in charge. As "Al Powell" starts to leave Nakatomi Plaza a 4K tv and UHD collection falls out of the building instead of a body.

[Pieter V]

Blu-ray.com review

[mar3o]

Originally Posted by infiniteCR

Not going to discuss advanced color volume calibration topics with you regarding the LGs m4rco. Its not going to change your settings and will only derail this thread further.

Well I posted video proof, and it is also well-known on the AVS forum that the LGs have confusingly labeled "wide color gamut" as "normal" in their 2016 sets. I wasn't trying to derail the thread. I started just by making a comment that settings are as important as the equipment itself.

[mar3o]

Originally Posted by Croweyes1121

I have never heard of this...I also have an E6 and have never enabled DC.

Don't know what to tell you. I have posted links to an article discussing it. What people want to believe is up to them. The AVS forums have a lot of info on TV settings and quirks.

Also, as I explained, there's no guarantee that every LG set follows the same rules. That article referred to OLED, yet my LCD certainly benefits greatly with dynamic contrast enabled for HDR - it matches what is described in the Forbes article. Anyways, I tried to offer a suggestion for others to try if they are complaining about UHD discs looking too dark. With my set, that's certainly the case without dynamic contrast enabled. I wasn't looking to make a big thing out of it. People can ignore my suggestion (and the information posted in that Forbes article) or they can give it a try.

By the way, the whole reason that Forbes article was published was because there was a whole thing in the LG TV forums back when LG made some changes to how game mode processed HDR using dynamic contrast. Many complained it was too dark without using dynamic contrast after the changes, forcing LG to comment and explain why they made the changes they did in the updates, with the recommendation that dynamic contrast be enabled for HDR. The Forbes article also says they were considering tying dynamic contrast into all HDR modes, not just game mode. I even highlighted that part in the quote.

Originally Posted by evoll

2016 oleds do not need dynamic contrast set to low but the 2017 does need it set to low to activate active hdr. Maybe he just likes that dynamic contrast adds more color on bright scenes and less in dark scenes but I talked to my calibrator about this and he said what I wrote.

Like I said, it's not worth getting in an argument over it. I know what looks good on my set. There is no way HDR is meant to look like it does on my TV with dynamic contrast disabled. It has nothing to do with "more color". The color is perfectly natural with it enabled for me. I hate over-saturated color. I'm talking about overly dark images with completely lost shadow detail and crushed blacks and weak highlights. I'm aware of "active HDR" on later models. The article I linked to referred to the changes they made on the 2016 models. There was discussion of the changes with HDR/game mode over on the AVS owner's thread for my 2016 model LCD set.

Again, from the article:

"Last week I ran a story about LG’s rather strange initial response to problems gamers have been experiencing with their 2016 LG OLED TVs following a recent firmware update."

"the changes made to the HDR Game mode might be extended to cover all of LG’s HDR modes, not just the game one!.."

"Pretty much everyone says that activating Dynamic Contrast is a must"

"Fans of the update suggest that the Dynamic Contrast setting doesn't seem to work in the same way that Dynamic Contrast settings usually do."

In the end, nobody really knows what these companies are baking into their firmware updates. LG has been misleading in the past (as other companies have been) regarding their specs, and their updates are rather mysterious, with very poor documentation about changes. Their article focuses on OLEDs but there's no reason to think they didn't do the same thing with their LCD sets. All I know is what I see. It doesn't hurt to give it a try.

[ROSS.T.G.]

LOL @ the comment about not liking film grain for this format. Maybe find reviewers that like film?

[elwaylite]

IMO, grain looks better to me on the UHD format than it did on 1080p Blu (any older movie Ive watched).

[Geoff D]

Originally Posted by ROSS.T.G.

LOL @ the comment about not liking film grain for this format. Maybe find reviewers that like film?

looooooooool

[fighthefutureofhd]

Hire Christopher Nolan to do reviews. I hear he likes film.

[elwaylite]

Originally Posted by fighthefutureofhd

Hire Christopher Nolan to do reviews. I hear he likes film.

Just dont let him do audio reviews.

[Geoff D]

Originally Posted by fighthefutureofhd

Hire Christopher Nolan to do reviews. I hear he likes film.

The UHD of Batman Begins would suggest otherwise

[fighthefutureofhd]

Originally Posted by elwaylite

Just dont let him do audio reviews.

I think he already does for Disney.

[fighthefutureofhd]

Originally Posted by Geoff D

The UHD of Batman Begins would suggest otherwise

I don't know what's wrong with Batman Begins. But then I don't know what's wrong with Grease either. So don't ask me.

[Vilya]

The review is up.

https://www.blu-ray.com/movies/Die-H...201103/#Review

And I quote:

"Over all, though, grain looks really wonderfully organuc throughout the presentation."

I am not one to be a grammar, spelling, or typo cop in the forum comments section (I make plenty of my own errors), but a "professional" review should be proofread before publication.

My nit picking is done for the day.

[professorwho]

And it mentions the lack of an Atmos track. Really? Do we need one?

No.

It’s listed has having a stereo mix, which I assume is the original mix, and the review never mentions it. To me, at least, the review should cover at least the original mix, or all of them.

[PeterTHX]

Originally Posted by professorwho

And it mentions the lack of an Atmos track. Really? Do we need one?

No.

It’s listed has having a stereo mix, which I assume is the original mix, and the review never mentions it. To me, at least, the review should cover at least the original mix, or all of them.

It has a 35MM LtRt mix, a 70MM 4.2 mix and Fox commissioned an Atmos remix in 2015. Fox Home Video either didn't get the memo or was too cheap to author the Atmos mix.


Read The Matrix 4K review on how Atmos enhanced the experience without adding needless additional sound FX or other gimmicks.

[jess1581]

So uh.... that's a definite that the blu included is the old 2007??

[1924]

Is the Blu ray included the same one from 2007?

[Pieter V]

Originally Posted by 1924

Is the Blu ray included the same one from 2007?

Yes.

[Leonidas King]

Picked it up from Walmart this afternoon. Only 2 left, 1 now on the sales floor.

Can’t wait to give this bad boy a watch!

[Woolfy123]

Originally Posted by Vilya

I am not one to be a grammar, spelling, or typo cop in the forum comments section (I make plenty of my own errors), but a "professional" review should be proofread before publication.

My nit picking is done for the day.

My exact thoughts on seeing "overall" as two words. I'm right there with you (and I am one to do exactly what you've described yourself as not doing, so no worries)!