Sony "Mastered in 4K" Blu-ray Titles May 14 and July 16

[Deciazulado]

frequency x amplitude = definition
. . . . .noise


or in more used terms:


resolution x acutance-sharpness-contrast = image quality
. . . . . grain

[Geoff D]

Originally Posted by gotexas872

Did they get the screen caps reversed? The old transfer has more detail than the new one.

It loses something in the highlights, yes, but as for actual fine detail you're seeing a minor touch of sharpening work its dubious magic on the old one, adding subtle ringing to contrasting edges to fool the eye into thinking that there's more information, but it usually masks real detail as a result!

I wish that capsaholic had done a grab of the shot where Peter visits Aunt May and she's packing up to move. As Pete comes up the path there's a conical lampshade on screen left. On the old version, the fine lines of the lampshade converge about halfway up the cone, whereas they go all the way to the top on the M4K disc. Yes, it's only a lampshade but it's a perfect example of the extra high frequency detail that the new transfer has squeezed out, and the adjustments to Spidey 2 add up to a more 'filmic' experience IMO.

[tylergfoster]

Originally Posted by Bolty

Sony when they put this 4k version together weren't thinking "We're only going to include Raimi's preferred version of this movie cause it's the only legit version." That's not what billion dollar companies do.

"Legit" is probably the wrong word. But I genuinely believe Sony doubted it would sell more discs to include it.

[Bolty]

Originally Posted by tylergfoster

I don't think it would've been complicated for Sony to add 2.1. I just found it surprising anyone cared about 2.1. Raimi pretty much dismissed it and I didn't really see any fanfare when it came out. That's not a judgment on anyone who does like it, like Bolty. It's just that Spider-Man 2 is routinely hailed as one of the better superhero movies and I've never read anyone bringing up 2.1 until now.

It may not be an "illegitimate" cut, but there's something to be said about the director's lack of interest or investment in it beyond a curiosity piece because the studio pushed him to do it.

It says something about the director's interest in that cut, but how about the precedent of declaring certain movies unworthy of Blu-ray or unworthy of 4k Blu-ray? can you go along with that?

I hope it hasn't come to that around here.

[MifuneFan]

Originally Posted by Deciazulado

frequency x amplitude = definition
. . . . .noise


or in more used terms:


resolution x acutance-sharpness-contrast = image quality
. . . . . grain

Exactly!

[Show spoiler]I have no idea what you just said

[Bolty]

Originally Posted by tylergfoster

"Legit" is probably the wrong word. But I genuinely believe Sony doubted it would sell more discs to include it.

100% agree--they did it because they 'doubted it would sell more discs" and if they thought it would have---- they WOULD HAVE included it!

Capitalism.

And as a consumer who has purchased the movie 4 times so far (I hope that's what they like in a customer) I won't be buying this version.

At this point it probably doesn't matter because it is a release that has been done multiples times already.

[Bolty]

Originally Posted by MifuneFan

Exactly!

[Show spoiler]I have no idea what you just said

That's a riot. I read that post and said---- Whaaa?

and when I read your 'exactly' I was about to post "I'm glad you understand because i have no clue."

Then I opened your spoiler box---LOL

Yeah, I'm way too old to understand that much tech.

[Geoff D]

Originally Posted by ssjgoku90501

If only other studios would do M4K, like imagune the the original star wars trilogy without aalterations in M4K

Originally Posted by 42041

In light of the Ghostbusters release, I'm imagining a bunch of people whining about how soft it is

Right, right, along with how "crushed" the blacks are, even though the high gamma's perfect for covering up things like garbage mattes, which would come to the aid of many a space shot in the Star Wars trilogy, especially Jedi. (Dennis Muren has expressed his distaste for how Star Wars looks on video on several occasions; I guess he's another one of those nitpicking 'never satisfied' types. )

[tylergfoster]

Originally Posted by Bolty

It says something about the director's interest in that cut, but how about the precedent of declaring certain movies unworthy of Blu-ray or unworthy of 4k Blu-ray? can you go along with that?

I hope it hasn't come to that around here.

"Unworthy" is like "legit," it has too much of a connotation for me. Suffice to say that even if I liked or loved 2.1, I would not consider it a problem that it wasn't included, because it is a cut that is secondary in priority to the director's theatrical cut.

[Bolty]

Originally Posted by tylergfoster

"Unworthy" is like "legit," it has too much of a connotation for me. Suffice to say that even if I liked or loved 2.1, I would not consider it a problem that it wasn't included, because it is a cut that is secondary in priority to the director's theatrical cut.

So you too don't care if a version is included on the Blu-ray if it's not a certain cut?

Wow, that floors me--I thought it was anaccepted thing that Blu-ray should have multiple cuts for various reasons.

But for you it's 'no problem'--unless it's the version you agree is 'the right one' in which case you would be unhappy it wasn't included.

[tylergfoster]

Originally Posted by Bolty

So you too don't care if a version is included on the Blu-ray if it's not a certain cut?

Wow, that floors me--I thought it was anaccepted thing that Blu-ray should have multiple cuts for various reasons.

But for you it's 'no problem'--unless it's the version you agree is 'the right one' in which case you would be unhappy it wasn't included.

It's not that I wouldn't be unhappy. I would prefer the inclusion of both cuts. But I understand the logic in not including an alternate version that is secondary in nature -- another example would be the various extended cuts of Bruckheimer action movies by Buena Vista, which I believe were not done with the participation of the filmmakers.

And again, "the right one" is determined by the filmmaker. It is predictable and non-disappointing to me that Lucas only included the altered Star Wars on Blu-Ray. Am I happy about it? No. But it's not surprising.

[bodybag]

Originally Posted by Geoff D

I wish that capsaholic had done a grab of the shot where Peter visits Aunt May and she's packing up to move. As Pete comes up the path there's a conical lampshade on screen left. On the old version, the fine lines of the lampshade converge about halfway up the cone, whereas they go all the way to the top on the M4K disc. Yes, it's only a lampshade but it's a perfect example of the extra high frequency detail that the new transfer has squeezed out, and the adjustments to Spidey 2 add up to a more 'filmic' experience IMO.

Open it different tabs:

http://abload.de/img/111.m2ts_snapshot_01.ses66.png
http://abload.de/img/00001.mpls_snapshot_03tswe.png

[Geoff D]

Originally Posted by bodybag

Open it different tabs:

http://abload.de/img/111.m2ts_snapshot_01.ses66.png
http://abload.de/img/00001.mpls_snapshot_03tswe.png

Nice one sir, that's exactly it! See how the lines on the shade just smoosh together on the old version, with a bit of moiré patterning to boot? They're resolved right to the top on the new version. And I noticed it on my TV without the aid of screenshot science. Damn, I'm good.

[BillWatkins]

Is that a floating plant in the bottom right corner?

[rickah88]

Originally Posted by BillWatkins

Is that a floating plant in the bottom right corner?

Yes, good spot!

No, it's a few plants on a suspended on a tiered loop holder.

[Blu-21]

The MI4K version of Spider-Man 2 doesn't look good to me. Highlights are clipped and gamma is too high, also the magenta/pinkish tint is still as obvious as ever with screenshot #8 that looks exactly the same as the s.m.a.r.t.p.h.o.n.e screencap versions that somebody posted earlier. It looks softer and hardly any more filmitic (though the orignal release is sharpened and doesn't look filmitic itself either). Still the original release looks better to me and with all the special features it has plus the extra cut, it would be much better value to get that edition then the Mi4K edition.

There is also something up with the framing of the Mi4K edition as well.

[blu-ray_girl_fan]

Originally Posted by Blu-21

The MI4K version of Spider-Man 2 doesn't look good to me. Highlights are clipped and gamma is too high, also the magenta/pinkish tint is still as obvious as ever with screenshot #8 that looks exactly the same as the s.m.a.r.t.p.h.o.n.e screencap versions that somebody posted earlier. It looks softer and hardly any more filmitic (though the orignal release is sharpened and doesn't look filmitic itself either). Still the original release looks better to me and with all the special features it has plus the extra cut, it would be much better value to get that edition then the Mi4K edition.

There is also something up with the framing of the Mi4K edition as well.

That's the thing. I can understand if they "moved back" and showed more of the captured image. Instead, they shifted the framing up and to the right after multiple iterations of the movie on DVD and BD. Why?

[Blu-21]

Originally Posted by blu-ray_girl_fan

That's the thing. I can understand if they "moved back" and showed more of the captured image. Instead, they shifted the framing up and to the right after multiple iterations of the movie on DVD and BD. Why?

To be different for the sake of being different perhaps. Even when its so obviously a poor decision.

[42041]

[mrpink134]

Originally Posted by blu-ray_girl_fan

That's the thing. I can understand if they "moved back" and showed more of the captured image. Instead, they shifted the framing up and to the right after multiple iterations of the movie on DVD and BD. Why?

Originally Posted by Blu-21

To be different for the sake of being different perhaps. Even when its so obviously a poor decision.

LOL no extended cut or extras and they shifted the framing? Way to go Sony!