Ghost in the Shell 4K UHD (2017)

[StingingVelvet]

The fact no one really knows for sure speaks to how irrelevant it is, in the end.

[RockyIII]

Originally Posted by Opips3

It awesome Japan animated movie looks more adult mature.
I think remake movie Ghost in the Shell is a real life than art animated.

I would like to see "D" vampire hunter real life movie.

It seems to be the trend these days to turn games into movies

[monanza]

I think this one is the other way around. The game is based on the Vampire Hunter D movie and books.

[Resettito]

If you want official source, really only trust American Cinematographer. I'm stunned this isn't a 4K DI, especially being shot on the Alexa 65.

[FilmFreakosaurus]

Originally Posted by Resettito

If you want official source, really only trust American Cinematographer. I'm stunned this isn't a 4K DI, especially being shot on the Alexa 65.

2k effects and it's CGI effects heavy, so that will normally spell a 2k DI for cost savings.

God, how I miss practical effects!! And yes, some shots did have animatronic, in-camera props, but they were layered with CGI.

[Geoff D]

Didn't have the most ginormous budget either, and with the insane amount of VFX this had I think 2K was always looking very likely. Yes, Passengers had a similar budget and still got a 4K finish but it's not as wall-to-wall on the VFX as GITS is, and Passengers was made by Sony who don't mind doing separate 2K 3D and 4K 2D finishes.

In the AC article the DP talks about how the downscale from 5K to 2K looked so good because of the amount of pixels they were starting with, they knew they could use a higher ISO in certain scenes and not have to worry about noise.

[StingingVelvet]

That's what I meant above, about it kind of being irrelevant. When you start with a 4k film scan or a 4k (or more) raw digital file and then downscale to 2k, you're still getting an amazing image. Since the CG is mostly all 2k anyway, and we've been watching 2k on giant screens in theaters for years, I really think it's not something to bum yourself out over.

HDR and WCG are the big draws of the format anyway, as myself and others nag on and on about.

[Geoff D]

Right. Oversampling plays a huge part in this whole process. I'd still rather have a 4K finish than not but an oversampled 2K finish along with WCG and HDR is a kick-ass second prize, especially if the Blu has been filtered in some way as the improvements in spatial resolution I've seen on some upscales is not subtle.

[Vangeli]

I remember the excitement when Spider-man 2 and I, Robot were some of the first to utilize 4K scanning (and in the case of Spider-man 2, a 4K DI w/ 2K VFX, I, Robot was finished at 2K) and it definitely makes a difference.

The I, Robot 3D conversion has some 2.35:1 shots cropped to fill 16:9 and they still look amazing at 1080p. I mean, look at it.

[Geoff D]

Oh, don't show that to Velvet. He don't need no stinking CG!

[Vangeli]

Originally Posted by Geoff D

Oh, don't show that to Velvet. He don't need no stinking CG!

Switched shots anyway, that shot had the letterbox removed instead of being cropped down so it was suuuper sharp. My mistake.

But yeah, still. They did such an amazing job with the VFX in I, Robot.



Really wish it had a UHD/HDR remaster. They did scan the film at 4K for the 3D conversion, even though it was printed onto film at 2K. But then analog softness is better than hard-coded upscaled pixels I suppose.

[brainofj72]

I just watched the BD of I, Robot recently and it still looked amazing. Pretty shocking for such an old 1080p master to hold up so well on a 4K set.

[StingingVelvet]

Originally Posted by Geoff D

Oh, don't show that to Velvet. He don't need no stinking CG!

The CG and shoe commercial really turned me off I, Robot in the theater. I remember leaving with a "harumph." I watched it again on DVD though, and then again on BD, and now I like it a lot. My stance on CG has softened a ton over the years because it either had to or I had to stop watching new movies, and, well... f' that.

[starman15317]

Do we have a guesstimation on when this is coming out? I would guess probably July. Missed it in theaters and I even hade a movie code.

[rewak]

UK release is 6th August

[Chaotic]

Originally Posted by starman15317

Do we have a guesstimation on when this is coming out? I would guess probably July. Missed it in theaters and I even hade a movie code.

I'm guessing either the last 2 weeks of June.

[Geoff D]

Originally Posted by Vangeli

Really wish it had a UHD/HDR remaster. They did scan the film at 4K for the 3D conversion, even though it was printed onto film at 2K. But then analog softness is better than hard-coded upscaled pixels I suppose.

Sorry to keep riding you on tech details but where did you get that from? I always thought Fox simply turned to the original 2K master (which was already downsampled from 4K scans), as it's worth bearing in mind that 2.39 movies shot flat and not anamorphic are usually finished in an open-matte version (sometimes with cropped VFX) for 16:9 TV etc.

[Vangeli]

Originally Posted by Geoff D

Sorry to keep riding you on tech details but where did you get that from? I always thought Fox simply turned to the original 2K master (which was already downsampled from 4K scans), as it's worth bearing in mind that 2.39 movies shot flat and not anamorphic are usually finished in an open-matte version (sometimes with cropped VFX) for 16:9 TV etc.

Could've sworn back when I, Robot 3D was first announced that there was a write-up on it and it detailed the entire process JVC went through, but alas, I can't find it. I remember thinking "If you have a DI then why are you scanning?" but who knows... Maybe I'm imagining things again.

[Geoff D]

No worries! It just seems strange to use a scan of a filmout of a scan when they've got the finished DI sitting there.

[Vangeli]

Originally Posted by Geoff D

No worries! It just seems strange to use a scan of a filmout of a scan when they've got the finished DI sitting there.

Unless they didn't have access to or lost the DI. Seems unlikely though.