UHD Titles Worth/Not Worth Upgrading

Discuss North American DVDs and Blu-rays or other DVD and Blu-ray-related topics.
Post Reply
Message
Author
mhofmann
Joined: Sun Dec 06, 2015 7:01 pm

Re: UHD Titles Worth/Not Worth Upgrading

#226 Post by mhofmann » Tue Nov 30, 2021 3:37 pm

EddieLarkin wrote:
Tue Nov 30, 2021 9:11 am
brundlefly wrote:
Tue Nov 30, 2021 9:00 am
EddieLarkin wrote:
Sat Nov 27, 2021 1:16 pm
(which is why Apocalypse Now's compression is fine on UHD but a hot mess on the new BDs)
Oof, thanks for this head's up.
It's probably the most horrific example of this good UHD/bad BD compression phenomenon
Oh god, my eyes!

kekid
Joined: Tue Nov 02, 2004 9:55 pm

Re: UHD Titles Worth/Not Worth Upgrading

#227 Post by kekid » Tue Nov 30, 2021 5:40 pm

I am not sure I understand why there are so many cases where the UHD is very good but the BD is poor. (1) Why do UHD's not have the problems that accompanying BD's seem to have? It seems to be something more than higher resolution? (2) Are the problems with the BD's that accompany UHD's different from those that pertain to stand-alone BD's? ( 2) Are the BD's that accompany the UHD's being encoded differently than the standalone BD's or the BD's before UHD's came into existence? If so, how and why? Since I am not a technical person, these questions may not have been expressed in the correct technical lingo, so please feel free to re-state them as you se appropriate before answering them. Thank you.

User avatar
MichaelB
Joined: Fri Aug 11, 2006 6:20 pm
Location: Worthing
Contact:

Re: UHD Titles Worth/Not Worth Upgrading

#228 Post by MichaelB » Tue Nov 30, 2021 6:30 pm

4K masters have far more fine detail than standard HD/2K ones, which means that they need very careful handling at the encoding stage when downscaling to 1080p - and all too often they don't get it.

And sometimes they simply throw in the old BD - for instance, the 4K of Gladiator comes with the much-criticised 2009 disc instead of anything derived from the newer master.

User avatar
EddieLarkin
Joined: Sat Sep 08, 2012 10:25 am

Re: UHD Titles Worth/Not Worth Upgrading

#229 Post by EddieLarkin » Tue Nov 30, 2021 8:24 pm

True, it makes sense that the higher the resolution and the more fine detail and grain that is present, the harder it'll be to encode for Blu-ray vs UHD. But that doesn't explain entirely why this one particular authoring house would get good results on UHD and very poor results on BD, because there are other authoring houses that get very poor results with both formats! Studio Canal have always put out shoddy encodes on BD and they've got worse if anything with UHD (except of course when they hire David M now and again), and to a lesser extent the same can be said of Shout Factory and Kino. It may just be the case that Pixelogic lucked out and happened to hit on better software or better working practices when they started authoring UHDs, vs. what they've always done for BDs.

Glowingwabbit
Joined: Wed May 01, 2013 1:27 pm

Re: UHD Titles Worth/Not Worth Upgrading

#230 Post by Glowingwabbit » Wed Dec 01, 2021 7:35 am

Why is the Criterion Citizen Kane in the 1st tier? I understand that their are parts that look spectacular but it definitely has issues.

User avatar
MichaelB
Joined: Fri Aug 11, 2006 6:20 pm
Location: Worthing
Contact:

Re: UHD Titles Worth/Not Worth Upgrading

#231 Post by MichaelB » Wed Dec 01, 2021 8:03 am

Glowingwabbit wrote:Why is the Criterion Citizen Kane in the 1st tier? I understand that their are parts that look spectacular but it definitely has issues.
But are these “issues” to do with the encode or the source materials, given that the original neg no longer survives?

Glowingwabbit
Joined: Wed May 01, 2013 1:27 pm

Re: UHD Titles Worth/Not Worth Upgrading

#232 Post by Glowingwabbit » Wed Dec 01, 2021 8:29 am

MichaelB wrote:
Wed Dec 01, 2021 8:03 am
Glowingwabbit wrote:Why is the Criterion Citizen Kane in the 1st tier? I understand that their are parts that look spectacular but it definitely has issues.
But are these “issues” to do with the encode or the source materials, given that the original neg no longer survives?
Perhaps I've just misunderstood what this means then:
Reference 4k titles and/or spectacular upgrades from the most recent BD:

User avatar
hearthesilence
Joined: Fri Mar 04, 2005 4:22 am
Location: NYC

Re: UHD Titles Worth/Not Worth Upgrading

#233 Post by hearthesilence » Wed Dec 01, 2021 11:31 am

MichaelB wrote:
Wed Dec 01, 2021 8:03 am
Glowingwabbit wrote:Why is the Criterion Citizen Kane in the 1st tier? I understand that their are parts that look spectacular but it definitely has issues.
But are these “issues” to do with the encode or the source materials, given that the original neg no longer survives?
Which reminds me, in case anyone missed it, the negative may have been accidentally destroyed by some asshat who made a colossal mistake. Nicolas Falacci, co-creator of the television series NUMB3RS, related a story this year on Twitter about Turner Entertainment’s restoration of the RKO Pictures film for its 50th anniversary back in 1991 - Falacci was working in a lab involved with finding the best elements, and the rest is in that link.

User avatar
therewillbeblus
Joined: Tue Dec 22, 2015 3:40 pm

Re: UHD Titles Worth/Not Worth Upgrading

#234 Post by therewillbeblus » Wed Dec 01, 2021 5:52 pm

Is there any opinion on whether the Interstellar UHD is worth upgrading to from the current BD (I have the Canadian version, though from what I understand it's the same transfer)? It's been out for four years apparently, I don't see it on the first page's master list, and it seems like the perfect film to upgrade *if* the quality-jump is noticeable

User avatar
swo17
Bloodthirsty Butcher
Joined: Tue Apr 15, 2008 10:25 am
Location: SLC, UT

Re: UHD Titles Worth/Not Worth Upgrading

#235 Post by swo17 » Wed Dec 01, 2021 5:59 pm

First two reviews I found in a Google search say it's exceptional and a noticeable improvement on the already great Blu-ray

User avatar
therewillbeblus
Joined: Tue Dec 22, 2015 3:40 pm

Re: UHD Titles Worth/Not Worth Upgrading

#236 Post by therewillbeblus » Wed Dec 01, 2021 6:15 pm

Hmm yeah but then the comment sections from consumers detract from these accolades and say there's hardly a difference, or at times it's worse. I'll be curious to hear if anyone here owns it and has detected a difference to warrant the upgrade on a visual level (I don't have an audio setup to get the most from the UHD Dolby upgrade).

User avatar
mfunk9786
Under Chris' Protection
Joined: Fri May 16, 2008 4:43 pm
Location: Philadelphia, PA

Re: UHD Titles Worth/Not Worth Upgrading

#237 Post by mfunk9786 » Wed Dec 01, 2021 7:51 pm

It looks much better on my OLED, tested both discs once upon a time. Would be generally distrustful of "hardly a difference" comments - if you're not seeing a difference in a movie shot by Nolan in (at least partially) 65mm, you should stop commenting on home video sites altogether and save up for nicer equipment. Interstellar is a great example of how black levels alone can be vastly improved by the format in a way that changes the viewing experience.

User avatar
EddieLarkin
Joined: Sat Sep 08, 2012 10:25 am

Re: UHD Titles Worth/Not Worth Upgrading

#238 Post by EddieLarkin » Wed Dec 01, 2021 8:02 pm

They used a far superior source for the IMAX 15/70 shots on the UHD than they did the BD, and the difference is huge. I've seen the disc and thought it looked fantastic, with nice HDR.

The normal 35mm shots look softer than one would usually expect, but this is directly a result of how Nolan insists his films are presented on home video. He does not allow the OCN to be used as a source, insisting the IP be used instead. So that ultra detailed ultra fine grain OCN look we're used to seeing on UHD and even BD is sadly lacking in Nolan's films (naturally the IMAX moments help make up for this), regardless of format. It's particularly ironic because he's really the only major filmmaker that does not post-produce his films in the digital space, meaning they are not locked at 2K like just about everyone else's are (even Tarantino, film stock lover that he is, post produces in digital, which is why Inglourious Basterds had to be upscaled from its 2K DI for UHD release, as will Kill Bill, Death Proof and Django Unchained when they reach UHD).

Anyway, all the Nolan films are worth upgrading to UHD, they're all fantastic, with the exception of Batman Begins, which has been DNR'd to shit. And yes, ignore comments from the great unwashed (and heck, professional reviewers for that matter), few of them have any idea what they're talking about, let alone understand how their equipment affects the images they are seeing.
Last edited by EddieLarkin on Wed Dec 01, 2021 8:06 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
Finch
Joined: Mon Jul 07, 2008 5:09 pm
Location: Edinburgh, UK

Re: UHD Titles Worth/Not Worth Upgrading

#239 Post by Finch » Wed Dec 01, 2021 8:05 pm

Citizen Kane was listed in both the Reference UHD and Solid upgrade tiers but I removed it from the top column given how many people expressed concerns here and in the Kane thread over how they applied HDR to an admittedly problematic source.

User avatar
therewillbeblus
Joined: Tue Dec 22, 2015 3:40 pm

Re: UHD Titles Worth/Not Worth Upgrading

#240 Post by therewillbeblus » Wed Dec 01, 2021 8:17 pm

Thanks mfunk and EddieLarkin! Looks like there's a Nolan 4K collection box set with his Dark Knight trilogy, and The Prestige, Inception, Interstellar, and Dunkirk, which I imagine is all the same up-to-date UHD discs available for those films at the moment

User avatar
EddieLarkin
Joined: Sat Sep 08, 2012 10:25 am

Re: UHD Titles Worth/Not Worth Upgrading

#241 Post by EddieLarkin » Wed Dec 01, 2021 8:23 pm

Yes, that's what I have.

User avatar
mfunk9786
Under Chris' Protection
Joined: Fri May 16, 2008 4:43 pm
Location: Philadelphia, PA

Re: UHD Titles Worth/Not Worth Upgrading

#242 Post by mfunk9786 » Wed Dec 01, 2021 9:16 pm

therewillbeblus wrote:
Wed Dec 01, 2021 8:17 pm
Thanks mfunk and EddieLarkin! Looks like there's a Nolan 4K collection box set with his Dark Knight trilogy, and The Prestige, Inception, Interstellar, and Dunkirk, which I imagine is all the same up-to-date UHD discs available for those films at the moment
Yeah, it's often quite heavily discounted, think I got it from Amazon Italy. Same exact discs you'd get in the US. Worth every penny.


User avatar
mfunk9786
Under Chris' Protection
Joined: Fri May 16, 2008 4:43 pm
Location: Philadelphia, PA

Re: UHD Titles Worth/Not Worth Upgrading

#244 Post by mfunk9786 » Thu Dec 02, 2021 2:46 pm

EddieLarkin wrote:
Thu Dec 02, 2021 6:26 am
Who Framed Roger Rabbit
Anyone lurking in this thread wondering what the big deal is with HDR, take a look at the last two examples provided in this post!

User avatar
Finch
Joined: Mon Jul 07, 2008 5:09 pm
Location: Edinburgh, UK

Re: UHD Titles Worth/Not Worth Upgrading

#245 Post by Finch » Thu Dec 02, 2021 7:33 pm

Added WFRR as a reference disc. The color in the screens from the opening cartoon were divine.

User avatar
Finch
Joined: Mon Jul 07, 2008 5:09 pm
Location: Edinburgh, UK

Re: UHD Titles Worth/Not Worth Upgrading

#246 Post by Finch » Sun Dec 05, 2021 11:41 am

Another Kino UHD added to the Disappointing disc list, Hard Target has a muddled 2.0 track and the 5.1 channels are reversed.

User avatar
Finch
Joined: Mon Jul 07, 2008 5:09 pm
Location: Edinburgh, UK

Re: UHD Titles Worth/Not Worth Upgrading

#247 Post by Finch » Sun Dec 12, 2021 1:32 pm

Hard Target getting a replacement and caps a holic caps are out. If the replacement disc turns out fine, I'll move it to the Solid/Appreciable update tier. Also added a note to Apocalypse Now regarding the bad compression on the BD included with the UHD (thanks brundlefly!).

Also: Amazon as of today have My Fair Lady for $15.99.

User avatar
Finch
Joined: Mon Jul 07, 2008 5:09 pm
Location: Edinburgh, UK

Re: UHD Titles Worth/Not Worth Upgrading

#248 Post by Finch » Sun Dec 12, 2021 4:12 pm

Mulholland Drive added: Studio Canal's disc is a reference title for video and audio but you might want to hang on to the previous SC Blu-Ray for the extras as they've inexplicably dropped quite a few interviews from the new release. The enclosed Blu-Ray is also the version to get for this film as it's sourced from the same 4k restoration and compressed by David McKenzie too (as was the previous Blu-Ray).

Criterion's UHD is not quite as good as the Studio Canal because of the inferior compression but is still a very respectable disc and far superior to their dreadful Blu-Ray (cheapskates didn't bother to upgrade the 1080p disc). It also has all the extras so the biggest fans of the film will want either both UHDs or a combo of the Studio Canal UHD with whichever Blu-Ray they can get cheapest for all the bonus stuff.

best video: Studio Canal UHD
best audio: tie between the UHDs
best extras: Criterion UHD/BD & Studio Canal's previous BD of the film

Stefan Andersson
Joined: Thu Nov 15, 2007 1:02 am

Re: UHD Titles Worth/Not Worth Upgrading

#249 Post by Stefan Andersson » Mon Dec 13, 2021 9:19 am

For two pages of forum discussion, in French, about the 4K UHD restos of Kieslowski´s Three Colours trilogy (upcoming from Potemkine on UHD), go here:
https://www.dvdclassik.com/forum/viewto ... 6&start=15
Includes links to relevant screencaps and videos.

User avatar
MichaelB
Joined: Fri Aug 11, 2006 6:20 pm
Location: Worthing
Contact:

Re: UHD Titles Worth/Not Worth Upgrading

#250 Post by MichaelB » Mon Dec 13, 2021 9:51 am

Handily, White was always my favourite of the three, so it's good to know that it's come out the best.

Although I don't think I'll be in any hurry to pick this box up.

Post Reply