UHD Titles Worth/Not Worth Upgrading

[onedimension]

Anyone get DNR vibes from those BFI Seventh Seal caps? Looks spectacular, but maybe better than it ought to, artificially so? Or does Dolby mastering bring out what’s there on the original film?

[EddieLarkin]

Is there a cap or part of a cap you're specifically thinking of? All of those I've seen are absolutely swimming in pinpoint ultra fine grain, so to level a DNR accusation seems odd.

As for Dolby mastering, I assume you mean Dolby Vision, which isn't a mastering or grading system (despite terms like "the Dolby Vision grading" or "the new Dolby Vision colours" becoming ever more frequent in reviews), but a metadata system designed to help map the grading and colours to a specific TVs HDR capabilities.

But no, the HDR grading does not by its nature add anything to the movie that wasn't there before, or artificially sharpen or denoise or whatever. It only brings out more from the original elements than is possible in the SDR realm. Though of course the same tools like DNR are available to those who wish to misuse them, whether they're grading SDR or HDR.

[onedimension]

Thank you, I worded carelessly. I meant that heightening contrast with Dolby “grading” might be analogous to DNR in producing a “better-than-new” image, I wasn’t commenting on the level of grain or implying the release had been DNRed.

[tenia]

It is extremely likely (if not commonly accepted) that the new 4k resto of Seventh Seal is lighlty grain managed. That's probably what you're seeing here.

[EddieLarkin]

Is it though? I can see what could indeed be a reduction of grain in the Ingmar Bergman Cinema disc, at least compared to the older Criterion BD, but the grain is back with a vengeance in the UHD caps (the comparison at caps-a-holic is comparing the UHD and the old Criterion BD, so the return of the grain is not so obvious).

[tenia]

I guess it'd need possibly a comparison of the BFI BD with the IBC BD to check, but I don't believe the Criterion's look is down to the encode (their blockiness never looked like how grain management looks) and Criterion aren't used to specifically grain manage stuff (at least not in the past decade in HD). I don't have the BFI disc so can't say how this compares.

[jegharfangetmigenmyg]

Just ordered Seventh Seal. Looks beyond great to me in those screenshots. Will report if I think the grain looks managed.

For the list, I'm missing some titles. There are definitely some Universal ones that I would add:

Animal House -- I would probably place this among the reference titles. Extremely steady and one of the most "filmlike"/35mm experiences I've had on UHD.
Blues Brothers -- beyond solid, but not quite as significant an upgrade, compared to the previous BDs.
Deer Hunter (released by Shout in the US and StudioCanal in the UK, the latter seems to be out of print, though?) -- Why hasn't this been mentioned? Definitely not a bells and whistles transfer, but I don't think you'll ever get that from a Zsigmond lensed feature. By far the best presentation of the film.

And then:
Crash -- superior release by Arrow. Should probably be in the reference titles bracket, although of course the 4K remaster were also released by Criterion on BD, so, again, not that significant an upgrade.
Easy Rider -- I found this to be very unspectacular, and not that big an upgrade compared to the BD. Disappointing, maybe?
It's a Wonderful Life -- don't know what happened here. It almost looks like upscale to me. Disappointing.
The Wizard of Oz -- probably from the same master that was already released on BD, so not a significant upgrade from BD, but definitely appreciable.

[jegharfangetmigenmyg]

Also, Sony's new Guns of Navarone seems to be taken from the same master as the previous blu-ray release (just like many of the titles they cram into their Columbia Classics box to increase the price and try and make us pay for 6 titles instead of just the 1 or 2 of them that we actually want), so probably not that significant an upgrade of an already not too significant film...

[cdnchris]

I guess it'd need possibly a comparison of the BFI BD with the IBC BD to check, but I don't believe the Criterion's look is down to the encode (their blockiness never looked like how grain management looks) and Criterion aren't used to specifically grain manage stuff (at least not in the past decade in HD). I don't have the BFI disc so can't say how this compares.

I have the BFI set and though I have yet to do a full comparison (and I'm still going through it) just doing a quick comparison between a handful of shots on a television between the disc in that set and then the new disc in Criterion's Bergman set they look similar. Getting down to screen grabs the Criterion's looks a bit more managed, admittedly. I'm still of the belief the old Criterion disc is sharpened a bit, making things more pronounced on that one; between the two Criterion discs I'll still take the newer box set presentation over it.

The 4K doesn't look managed at all. It's very fine and clearly there, trumping all of the Blu-rays.

At any rate, here's the BFI Blu-ray (on top) and Criterion box set Blu-ray (on bottom). I no longer have the original screen grabs for the original Criterion Blu-ray. They're not from the exact same frame.

[jegharfangetmigenmyg]

How do the file sizes compare? Couldn't it be a question of compression, rather than grain management?

[cdnchris]

I'd almost expect it to be noisier if it came down to compression, but that shouldn't matter here as the files are both around 28GB (The BFI is maybe 200MB larger)

[FlickeringWindow]

The Wizard of Oz -- probably from the same master that was already released on BD, so not a significant upgrade from BD, but definitely appreciable.

According to this article, it was a new restoration:
https://postperspective.com/the-wizard- ... -remaster/

I only have the 2009 "Emerald Edition" Blu-ray, but the UHD is absolutely an upgrade at least for color. Has almost a metallic sheen to the image that the 2009 disc doesn't capture. The better your setup is, the more you'll probably see the difference.

Also, Sony's new Guns of Navarone seems to be taken from the same master as the previous blu-ray release (just like many of the titles they cram into their Columbia Classics box to increase the price and try and make us pay for 6 titles instead of just the 1 or 2 of them that we actually want), so probably not that significant an upgrade of an already not too significant film...

Many of Sony's UHDs use 4K masters that had their first home release via Blu-ray, thus didn't necessarily need to be re-done from scratch. According to the Columbia Classics liner notes... Dr Strangelove, Lawrence of Arabia, and Taxi Driver are sourced from the same base 4K restorations that were utilized to make the 1080p masters for Blu-ray, but all had additional cleanup and color correction work prior to the 4K masters output for the UHDs. Criterion's upcoming The Red Shoes will probably be another example of the same since it's not really going to produce much of a different

[EddieLarkin]

Chris' caps do show that the BFI and IBC Blu-rays are essentially the same, and both show traces of some DNR.

But, the UHD doesn't suffer from the same: if you open Chris' BFI cap and flick between it and here, without any zoom to maintain the same resolution between both, you can see the UHD has far more grain, and the image no longer has the softening effect brought on by the DNR (look at the rock to the left of Death). What's perhaps happened is this new HDR go around was initiated from a point before any DNR was added to the new 4K transfer. Meaning it's probably incorrect to say the UHD uses the same source as the Blu-rays; the same scan and restoration yes, but it's evidently a different DNR free master. Which means all other discs are coasters compared to the UHD.

[EddieLarkin]

Easy Rider -- I found this to be very unspectacular, and not that big an upgrade compared to the BD. Disappointing, maybe?
It's a Wonderful Life -- don't know what happened here. It almost looks like upscale to me. Disappointing.

Easy Rider is another one where the UHD shares the same transfer as the aging Blu-rays, so its perceived lack of upgrade is more to do with that. But Sony tend to have the best restorations in the biz so maybe it's fairer to say the Blu-rays are already so good from them it's harder for some of their UHDs to impress if you're specifically comparing formats. That said, Geoff D really liked it and provides some comparisons here that demonstrate the HDR and the vastly improved colour grade.

It's a Wonderful Life I thought was stunning, maybe you put the old BD in by mistake? I mean...

[videozor]

I don't mind doing so at all. I'll add affected titles in both columns. If anyone can think of more films that had had a simultaneous BD re-issue with the UHD, please let me know (right now, I am only aware of the Ferrera and Argento but I'm sure there's a few more).

This additional information is indeed very useful - knowing exactly which BD the UHD is compare to. Thank you!

I think The Good, the Bad and the Ugly shoud be in both top categotries - the BD in UHD package is based on the same restoration as UHD, so UHD is a solid upgrade from the latest BD, while a spectacular upgrade from old BDs, both Kino and MGM.

Not sure, but I think the same is the case with both 2001 and Apocalypse Now.

And can anyone, please, comment on Total Recall (1990)?

[EddieLarkin]

And can anyone, please, comment on Total Recall (1990)?

The new restoration used is great and much better than the two older ones that appeared on Blu-ray. Sadly the compression is quite poor, especially if you are not Dolby Vision capable. Overall though it's still easily the best way to watch the film.

[bad future]

And can anyone, please, comment on Total Recall (1990)?

The new restoration used is great and much better than the two older ones that appeared on Blu-ray. Sadly the compression is quite poor, especially if you are not Dolby Vision capable. Overall though it's still easily the best way to watch the film.

Consensus on the 'other forum' seems to be that the encode on the Italian release from Eagle Pictures improves on the Lionsgate and StudioCanal significantly, but I haven't had the occasion to splurge on it myself.

[Finch]

Thank you all for the comments, those help a lot!

Added The Hills Have Eyes and The Guest to Tier 1 (the colors on The Guest look stunning -even with caps a holic's SDR conversion- and the Blu-Ray also has a green tint by comparison).

Kino's The Good, The Bad & The Ugly is featured in both tiers depending on what your point of comparison is (which, I think, for everyone is going to be the old Blu-Rays since I think Kino's own new BD is only sold as part of the UHD release).

The various Uni and Sony titles mentioned further up on this page are in the "Solid/Appreciable" column plus Wizard of Oz and It's A Wonderful Life.

I'm conflicted about adding Kino's Body Snatchers disc to Tier 1: a true reference disc should not have a disappointing sound mix even if it's a modern 5.1 remix and many people, me included, will likely only be listening to the 2.0 track. I also have a feeling that folks might want to hold on to their Arrow BDs for the extras.

[jegharfangetmigenmyg]

The various Uni and Sony titles mentioned further up on this page are in the "Solid/Appreciable" column plus Wizard of Oz and It's A Wonderful Life.

You skipped Animal House, though. A reference title in my book if you want to see how wonderfully UHD can render fine film grain. And you also skipped The Deer Hunter which I would highly recommend. The same restoration was released on blu-ray along with the UHD, so if you own that one the upgrade is not significant.

Easy Rider is another one where the UHD shares the same transfer as the aging Blu-rays, so its perceived lack of upgrade is more to do with that. But Sony tend to have the best restorations in the biz so maybe it's fairer to say the Blu-rays are already so good from them it's harder for some of their UHDs to impress if you're specifically comparing formats. That said, Geoff D really liked it and provides some comparisons here that demonstrate the HDR and the vastly improved colour grade.

It's a Wonderful Life I thought was stunning, maybe you put the old BD in by mistake? I mean...

I can see the far better rendering of colours in Geoff D's review, so yes, definitely an upgrade, but still not that significant because it came from the same master. I agree that Sony has the best restorations along with Universal nowadays, but I'm not a fan of Sony's releasing older masters on UHD. Take for example the mentioned Guns of Navarone. It looks like HDR is the only improvement where a new scan would have bested the BD's grain rendering by miles: https://caps-a-holic.com/c.php?d1=16713&d2=16712&c=6293

@Wonderful Life: Ha, you're right! The UHD was sitting on the left side of the case, behind a sheet, and it looks great! Actually, I've made this mistake before. Usually, the UHD is in the right side of the case, but sometimes it's the other way around. I found out that I was viewing the blu-ray when I was demoing Groundhog Day.

Speaking of which: I would add Sony's Groundhog Day to solid upgrade, maybe even a reference title. It's up there with Animal House in its grain rendering, and it's a really good disc to showcase the popping colours of HDR, as there are lots of strong colours on snowy white backgrounds throughout the film.

[rrenault]

Would anyone happen to know if there's a substantial difference between the French UHD of Casino from TF1 and the Universal one released in the US and UK? For instance, does the former have forced French subtitles? That's been the case with several 1080p blu-rays from TF1, such as Casino, Pulp Fiction, and Carol(Haynes), but I'm not sure whether it'll apply to their UHDs or not.

[Finch]

OP amended with Uni and Sony titles I forgot last night.

[nitin]

Easy Rider -- I found this to be very unspectacular, and not that big an upgrade compared to the BD. Disappointing, maybe?
It's a Wonderful Life -- don't know what happened here. It almost looks like upscale to me. Disappointing.

Easy Rider is another one where the UHD shares the same transfer as the aging Blu-rays, so its perceived lack of upgrade is more to do with that. But Sony tend to have the best restorations in the biz so maybe it's fairer to say the Blu-rays are already so good from them it's harder for some of their UHDs to impress if you're specifically comparing formats. That said, Geoff D really liked it and provides some comparisons here that demonstrate the HDR and the vastly improved colour grade.

It's a Wonderful Life I thought was stunning, maybe you put the old BD in by mistake? I mean...

The difference for It's a Wonderful Life compared to the concurrently released remastered blu ray is not huge though in terms of detail.

Re Easy Rider, I thought it looked amazing, appreciably better than the Criterion BD in terms of both detail and colour/HDR range.

[jegharfangetmigenmyg]

Mad Max 2 looks great. Check out the detail level and colours especially in number 3, and generally the colour of the sky in the various shots, and colours in generel. Sometimes the blu-rays look almost monochromatic in comparison. Also, the image on the blu-rays appear to have been stretched.

[Finch]

I have to agree. Added as a Reference title.

[EddieLarkin]

Maybe it's not going to be top of the typical criterionforum user's to buy list, but I watched 300 on UHD today and it is absolutely a reference disc, and probably the best 2K upscale title I've seen. People tend to get their knickers in a twist over 2K upscales, but they REALLY get them in a twist when the 2K upscale is of a title that was shot on film, like 300 was (revealing their ignorance of how these films were finished*, see MichaelB's comments on Irreversible, which apply just as equally to every title that was shot on film but post produced in the digital realm). Yet the UHD absolutely mops the floor with the Blu-ray, the grain is pin sharp and much better resolved, and the HDR is fantastic.

*the response to Inglourious Basterds being a 2K upscale has been nothing short of bonkers