Best 4K Blu-ray Deals

Best Blu-ray Movie Deals, See All the Deals »

Top deals | New deals  
 All countries United States United Kingdom Canada Germany France Spain Italy Australia Japan
Harry Potter: 8-Film Collection 4K (Blu-ray)
$90.99
 
Brightburn 4K (Blu-ray)
$22.96
18 hrs ago
Don't Look Now 4K (Blu-ray)
$57.73
1 hr ago
The Three Flavors Cornetto Trilogy 4K (Blu-ray)
$43.27
 
John Wick: Chapter 3 - Parabellum 4K (Blu-ray)
$29.99
 
Hacksaw Ridge 4K (Blu-ray)
$8.00
18 hrs ago
Fast & Furious 8-Movie Collection 4K (Blu-ray)
$55.61
 
Godzilla: King of the Monsters 4K (Blu-ray)
$29.99
 
John Wick: Chapter 2 4K (Blu-ray)
$12.00
6 hrs ago
Pokémon: Detective Pikachu 4K (Blu-ray)
$29.95
 
Alita: Battle Angel 4K + 3D (Blu-ray)
$29.96
 
X-Men: Dark Phoenix 4K (Blu-ray)
$29.99
 
What's your next favorite movie?
Join our movie community to find out


Image from: Life of Pi (2012)

Go Back   Blu-ray Forum > Ultra HD Blu-ray and 4K > Ultra HD Blu-ray and 4K Movies


Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 05-24-2019, 04:25 PM   #161
LegacyCosts LegacyCosts is offline
Blu-ray Knight
 
LegacyCosts's Avatar
 
Oct 2013
Sunnydale
46
157
1
11
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Geoff D View Post
Reminds me of some new member (or sock account) not too long back who started dumping on 4K big time despite only having viewed like 20 discs. His first was apparently Kick-Ass which, like the Crank, is about as far away from an optimal UHD visual experience as you're gonna get.
Ouch. I bought the kick ass disc and it's one of my wife's favorite films but she wasn't sure if it looked any better than the original blu ray. That bd was hideous so that's a tough response but shes been kind of spoiled with the likes of the revenant, Prometheus and starship troopers uhds.
  Reply With Quote
Old 05-24-2019, 04:53 PM   #162
sapiendut sapiendut is online now
Special Member
 
sapiendut's Avatar
 
Jul 2009
Canada
2
3
Default

There is also a guy who ditched the entire 4K format only because his TV can’t do HDR properly and he blames it on the format.
  Reply With Quote
Old 05-28-2019, 10:46 PM   #163
lgans316 lgans316 is online now
Blu-ray Ninja
 
lgans316's Avatar
 
Jul 2007
RM16, United Kingdom
17
161
Default

Guys,

Don't go the pics posted at caps a holic.

Got a chance to sample the UHD and do a quick A-B.

The UHD actually looks good. I would say it is quite superior to the BD which has an over-processed look.

The UHD is the definitely better looking than the BD. Sadly I have to return the disc back to my friend which means I have to purchase the UHD.
  Reply With Quote
Thanks given by:
Geoff D (05-29-2019), Havenbull (05-29-2019), sapiendut (05-28-2019), secretsquirrel (05-28-2019)
Old 05-29-2019, 02:54 AM   #164
LegacyCosts LegacyCosts is offline
Blu-ray Knight
 
LegacyCosts's Avatar
 
Oct 2013
Sunnydale
46
157
1
11
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by lgans316 View Post
Guys,

Don't go the pics posted at caps a holic.

Got a chance to sample the UHD and do a quick A-B.

The UHD actually looks good. I would say it is quite superior to the BD which has an over-processed look.

The UHD is the definitely better looking than the BD. Sadly I have to return the disc back to my friend which means I have to purchase the UHD.
good to know, now we need crank 2 as well.
  Reply With Quote
Thanks given by:
Wingman1977 (05-29-2019)
Old 06-01-2019, 10:52 PM   #165
Geoff D Geoff D is online now
Blu-ray King
 
Geoff D's Avatar
 
Feb 2009
Swanage, Engerland
426
1632
5
12
Default

You know when people compare something and they say it's "not better, but it's different"? That's Crank's UHD right there. Yes, it loses quite a bit of detail vs the BD. The expansion of the dynamic range at the upper end is minimal, at the lower end the gamma is considerably higher than the BD so it crushes shadow detail. Colour is much of a muchness, for while the movie has this kinetic visual style they didn't opt for a supremely whacked out colour grading to begin with and the UHD doesn't do much to upset that apple cart. Oh, and those horizontal lines (visible in some caps) stay there for like 20 minutes of the movie, I suspect that one of the reels wasn't filmed out too good.

So....did I like it or not? I liked it, mainly because the usage of a filmout for transfer counteracts that harshly digital 'shot on a camcorder look', toning down the rampant sharpness and giving it some texture via the light layer of grain. Some would say that that was the whole point of shooting it on cheapy digital like that, to give it that sharp 'you are there' sense of immediacy, and yet it doesn't lose any of its inherent craziness. It's also worth mentioning that the 35mm prints we'd have seen in theaters in 2006 would have been FAR closer to the UHD than the BD, what with the softened detail and very high gamma, creating a very contrasty image. It's even got a bit of telecine wobble as well, just to add to the printy-fresh flavour.

Something I noticed with this and with other LG filmout transfers is the dirt, not just white specks from the negative but black specks too - which means that these transfers aren't even being done from the "original" filmout negative, they're being done from an interpositive that's been contact printed from that filmout neg. With smaller movies like this they simply couldn't afford to record out multiple digital negatives (say, $50K each) for creating theatrical prints from, so they did one or two then took them through the traditional IP -> IN stages, using the INs to run off the prints as per the norm.

"Okay then, so you liked it. Why don't you like Dredd or Kick-Ass or the other LG filmouts?"

Why, that's a great question Timmy! The thing about Dredd is that it looks like boiled shit no matter how its viewed, but there's an undeniable 'pop' to the colour on the 3D version that's simply not there on the UHD, which looks even duller than the proper 2D 1080p transfer on the French BD. Without that then even the added texture via the filmout doesn't amount to much because some of the source material is just soooo badly shot. As for Kick-Ass, it was shot on film so the filmout transfer adds nothing in that respect, there's no screamingly 'digital' look there to start with that the filmout is toning down, and it's another movie that looks so bad anyway (Vaughn even laments the DI on the commentary IIRC) that filmout or not it's just not a great advert for 4K UHD.

Crank itself is not UHD visual demo material in any way, shape or form. It loses a bunch of detail vs the BD. And if it's the last filmout transfer I ever see then I won't be sorry. But in this ONE case the cock-eyed way that Lionsgate produces some of their UHD transfers has resulted in something that is at least giving a very different 'feel' to the imagery. One version looks VERY digital, the other looks VERY filmic. Pick your poison...just don't inject it into Chev's neck!
  Reply With Quote
Thanks given by:
andreasy969 (06-02-2019), DR Herbert West (06-02-2019), drawn (06-01-2019), Fat Phil (06-01-2019), foxborough (06-02-2019), Havenbull (06-02-2019), lgans316 (06-02-2019), maverick22 (06-02-2019)
Old 06-01-2019, 11:21 PM   #166
Sky_Captain Sky_Captain is offline
Blu-ray Baron
 
Sky_Captain's Avatar
 
Jan 2008
378
1456
1
4
Default

Quote:
I liked it, mainly because the usage of a filmout for transfer counteracts that harshly digital 'shot on a camcorder look', toning down the rampant sharpness and giving it some texture via the light layer of grain.
This.
  Reply With Quote
Thanks given by:
Geoff D (06-01-2019)
Old 06-02-2019, 03:04 AM   #167
LegacyCosts LegacyCosts is offline
Blu-ray Knight
 
LegacyCosts's Avatar
 
Oct 2013
Sunnydale
46
157
1
11
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Geoff D View Post

Crank itself is not UHD visual demo material in any way, shape or form. It loses a bunch of detail vs the BD. And if it's the last filmout transfer I ever see then I won't be sorry. But in this ONE case the cock-eyed way that Lionsgate produces some of their UHD transfers has resulted in something that is at least giving a very different 'feel' to the imagery. One version looks VERY digital, the other looks VERY filmic. Pick your poison...just don't inject it into Chev's neck!
Almost always will choose filmic unless were talking Michael Mann or some other freakish outlier. Great insight like usual, I couldn't resist and I bought it yesterday. I don't like the lead's other franchises or films very much, transporter, death race etc but for a guy who struggles with low energy CRANK is a nice shot of adrenaline I like to indulge in. I kind of miss amy smart, what a fox.

Update: Watched it tonight, Geoff is right on the money. Looks completley different than I remember but in a good way. I have no clue why this got a 4k release but I'm grateful, I loved revisiting this trashy film.

Last edited by LegacyCosts; 06-02-2019 at 09:00 AM.
  Reply With Quote
Thanks given by:
thediscman (06-02-2019)
Old 06-02-2019, 10:46 AM   #168
Agent Kay Agent Kay is offline
Blu-ray Knight
 
Agent Kay's Avatar
 
May 2018
57
57
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sky_Captain View Post
This.
So what I said then
  Reply With Quote
Old 06-02-2019, 09:31 PM   #169
Geoff D Geoff D is online now
Blu-ray King
 
Geoff D's Avatar
 
Feb 2009
Swanage, Engerland
426
1632
5
12
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Agent Kay View Post
So what I said then
  Reply With Quote
Old 06-04-2019, 12:12 AM   #170
4Dblu 4Dblu is offline
Expert Member
 
4Dblu's Avatar
 
Aug 2008
15
210
2
2
Default

watched this thought the PQ was a little dark but mostly PQ was good.
  Reply With Quote
Old 06-04-2019, 12:19 AM   #171
DVD Josh DVD Josh is offline
Expert Member
 
DVD Josh's Avatar
 
Jan 2019
137
647
50
192
50
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Geoff D View Post
You know when people compare something and they say it's "not better, but it's different"? That's Crank's UHD right there. Yes, it loses quite a bit of detail vs the BD. The expansion of the dynamic range at the upper end is minimal, at the lower end the gamma is considerably higher than the BD so it crushes shadow detail. Colour is much of a muchness, for while the movie has this kinetic visual style they didn't opt for a supremely whacked out colour grading to begin with and the UHD doesn't do much to upset that apple cart. Oh, and those horizontal lines (visible in some caps) stay there for like 20 minutes of the movie, I suspect that one of the reels wasn't filmed out too good.

So....did I like it or not? I liked it, mainly because the usage of a filmout for transfer counteracts that harshly digital 'shot on a camcorder look', toning down the rampant sharpness and giving it some texture via the light layer of grain. Some would say that that was the whole point of shooting it on cheapy digital like that, to give it that sharp 'you are there' sense of immediacy, and yet it doesn't lose any of its inherent craziness. It's also worth mentioning that the 35mm prints we'd have seen in theaters in 2006 would have been FAR closer to the UHD than the BD, what with the softened detail and very high gamma, creating a very contrasty image. It's even got a bit of telecine wobble as well, just to add to the printy-fresh flavour.

Something I noticed with this and with other LG filmout transfers is the dirt, not just white specks from the negative but black specks too - which means that these transfers aren't even being done from the "original" filmout negative, they're being done from an interpositive that's been contact printed from that filmout neg. With smaller movies like this they simply couldn't afford to record out multiple digital negatives (say, $50K each) for creating theatrical prints from, so they did one or two then took them through the traditional IP -> IN stages, using the INs to run off the prints as per the norm.

"Okay then, so you liked it. Why don't you like Dredd or Kick-Ass or the other LG filmouts?"

Why, that's a great question Timmy! The thing about Dredd is that it looks like boiled shit no matter how its viewed, but there's an undeniable 'pop' to the colour on the 3D version that's simply not there on the UHD, which looks even duller than the proper 2D 1080p transfer on the French BD. Without that then even the added texture via the filmout doesn't amount to much because some of the source material is just soooo badly shot. As for Kick-Ass, it was shot on film so the filmout transfer adds nothing in that respect, there's no screamingly 'digital' look there to start with that the filmout is toning down, and it's another movie that looks so bad anyway (Vaughn even laments the DI on the commentary IIRC) that filmout or not it's just not a great advert for 4K UHD.

Crank itself is not UHD visual demo material in any way, shape or form. It loses a bunch of detail vs the BD. And if it's the last filmout transfer I ever see then I won't be sorry. But in this ONE case the cock-eyed way that Lionsgate produces some of their UHD transfers has resulted in something that is at least giving a very different 'feel' to the imagery. One version looks VERY digital, the other looks VERY filmic. Pick your poison...just don't inject it into Chev's neck!
Reading this I think I'll just keep my BD. I had strong doubts UHD would do much for this title anyway.
  Reply With Quote
Old 06-04-2019, 12:40 AM   #172
Geoff D Geoff D is online now
Blu-ray King
 
Geoff D's Avatar
 
Feb 2009
Swanage, Engerland
426
1632
5
12
Default

Yeah, it's a "pick 'em" fight for sure. Go with what you like.
  Reply With Quote
Old 06-04-2019, 10:59 PM   #173
ApeRyan10 ApeRyan10 is offline
Member
 
ApeRyan10's Avatar
 
Nov 2018
6
17
Default

I always loved Crank and I did finally pop in the 4k disc. It isn't leaps and bounds but it does look nice on 4k. Some nice details in faces, clothing, buildings, cars etc, HDR gives the presentation a natural side but there is a few things that will pop, The Atmos was the best part of the movie. For $14 bucks it was a no brainer. Now we need Crank 2.
  Reply With Quote
Thanks given by:
maverick22 (06-05-2019), Pi905 (06-05-2019), solarrdadd (06-04-2019)
Old 06-05-2019, 02:28 PM   #174
andreasy969 andreasy969 is offline
Power Member
 
Aug 2008
Default

I received mine today, took a very brief look and have some thought as well.

In general, I think I prefer the look of the UHD despite its flaws, which is extremely subjective though (and yes, I'm well aware of the fact that the BD is truer to the source). Both look like crap. The main issue I have with the UHD are the crushed blacks, not the loss of detail.

I also took a look at the odd lines introduced by the UHD, which I mentioned before re. caps. The UHD has those not only in this shot, but throughout (#3 and #4 and less pronounced examples being #5 and #6) and I don't really think they do belong there. Then again, I see a glimpse of it with #5 and #6 on the BD as well, so don't know...

EDIT: Initially skipped over the part of Geoff's review where he mentioned them as well. So yes, they are there for quite some time.

#1 and #2 are there to show that the HDR actually does nothing here detail wise - it actually reduces the highlight detail.

tl/tr: I think the release is utter crap, but I will still look both and had to see it for myself (especially since I didn't own the TC yet).

BD (upscaled) | UHD (100 nits)

1. (#3 279 nits)

2. (#3 406 nits)

3.

4.

5.

6.

Last edited by andreasy969; 06-05-2019 at 04:27 PM. Reason: forgot one comment
  Reply With Quote
Thanks given by:
Agent Kay (06-05-2019), drawn (06-09-2019), Geoff D (06-06-2019)
Reply
Go Back   Blu-ray Forum > Ultra HD Blu-ray and 4K > Ultra HD Blu-ray and 4K Movies


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 12:26 PM.