criterionforum.org

nicolas wrote: Sun Oct 01, 2023 6:39 pm

Finch wrote:Is the Walkabout 4k worse looking than the BD from Criterion?

I'd also really appreciate getting a heads-up on the booklet notes. Hopefully Criterion don't stop providing those stats, and the new authoring house get their shit together fast if that's their new permanent gig. Maybe future UHDs will be split between Pixellogic and NexSpec.

I was already more inclined towards the Second Sight edition of Mean Streets and this development seals it for me. With Paramount's seeming reluctance to license to UK labels, I really hope that whoever ends up encoding Days of Heaven for Criterion takes proper care of it.

Regarding the BD, I’d say all in all yes. The inconsistency of the UHD is horrendous. The unaffected portions of the frame are flat-out phenomenal alongside some of the worst possible encoding in skies etc.

I’ve made screenshots of the UHD: https://forum.blu-ray.com/showpost.php? ... stcount=59

I don't know, I still think I'd take the 4K over the dated Blu-ray (though still good for the time), BUT probably with some hesitation. Even in motion the 4K just looks off, and I kept coming back to it on my television and parts of it look pretty great and then other moments had this weird smoothing effect or something (I really didn't know how to describe it) popping up that I guess might look like what your captures there show (though maybe exaggerated a bit). And then I finally got around to doing screen captures and holy fuck, some of them are a mess. I still don't think screen captures are the end-all-be-all but there are some messed up checkerboard, blocky patterns present at times and I'm positive that's leading to the effect I was seeing. Within the same frame, there are quadrants with an impeccable amount of detail and then others completely smoothed over. And as you pointed out it seems to effect the "open" areas more (the sky and such) and not areas that have more details and textures, as much at least.

There were parts of The Princess Bride where I thought things looked a little buzzy in the sky, even with Dolby Vision on, but it looked pretty solid otherwise (playback issues aside). To jump from that to Walkabout gave a serious case of whiplash.

Going back and really zooming in on The Trial (also done by NexSpec) I see something similar but far milder (though those are still my ones with the messed up black levels), and I still don't see a similar effect on the TV. NexSpec also did Moonage Daydream and I don't see the same effect in any of the grabs I took (after fixing the black levels), so maybe it's not entirely a sign of things to come...?

Regarding Walkabout, I suppose the question then is whether Second Sight's BD is at the moment a better technical option than Criterion's UHD.

nicolas wrote: Sun Oct 01, 2023 12:16 pmI’ve watched U-571 on StudioCanal’s UHD last night and wrote my thoughts here: https://forum.blu-ray.com/showpost.php? ... stcount=99

I see that caps-a-holic has a comparison now, but have also seen the screencaps on blu-ray.com : is there really such a color difference between the remastered BD and the UHD ? It looks at times like the UHD is a bit more "neutral" compared to a more obviously Ritrovata'd remastered BD, which would make little sense.
Texture-wise, I'm amazed at a comparison like this one, and not in a good way. I wonder what is the instant video bitrate on the UHD at this time code, and wouldn't be surprised if it dropped to very low figures à la Total Recall.

tenia wrote:Regarding Walkabout, I suppose the question then is whether Second Sight's BD is at the moment a better technical option than Criterion's UHD.

nicolas wrote: Sun Oct 01, 2023 12:16 pmI’ve watched U-571 on StudioCanal’s UHD last night and wrote my thoughts here: https://forum.blu-ray.com/showpost.php? ... stcount=99

I see that caps-a-holic has a comparison now, but have also seen the screencaps on blu-ray.com : is there really such a color difference between the remastered BD and the UHD ? It looks at times like the UHD is a bit more "neutral" compared to a more obviously Ritrovata'd remastered BD, which would make little sense.
Texture-wise, I'm amazed at a comparison like this one, and not in a good way. I wonder what is the instant video bitrate on the UHD at this time code, and wouldn't be surprised if it dropped to very low figures à la Total Recall.

The Second Sight BD is definitely better than the Criteiron BD. Encoding, the correct framing and surely also better sound quality. The sound on the Criterion also feels muffled from what I heard when giving the UHD a try.

Regarding U-571: Yes, the UHD is definitely more neutral. As I wrote on the other forum, I started with the BD and switched to the UHD at chapter 2 of the film, the scene where we meet Matthew McConaughey and all the other main characters. The “yellow” look is more subdued here, as is grain. The screenshots (which were not online when I saw the film) show a softer look compared to the BD but in motion, it’s just not the case with the majority of OCN-sourced footage. The explosion you mentioned is another weird example of an apparent bitrate drop. It didn’t strike me as odd during the viewing though. I thought this would be an effects shot. After watching the UHD, I went back to the BD and looked at a few shots for a brief comparison, particularly for the (now-unconvincing) CGI shots and these looked practically the same on BD with a higher bitrate. I couldn’t tell a difference. Other than that, in motion, the UHD looked very good with fine grain, good detail in the faces and background. This release still is an odd case but compared to other disasters of recent months, U-571 is totally acceptable.

therewillbeblus wrote:Thanks for the breakdown, nicolas!

My pleasure! Also, while I’m at it, thank you for your many incredible posts on films you saw. I’ve read your posts before I joined the forum and you’ve given me a new perspective more than once. I’ve already loved Andrew Dominik’s Blonde but I was floored when reading your lengthy appreciation / analysis. Truly wonderful writing!

cdnchris wrote:

nicolas wrote: Sun Oct 01, 2023 6:39 pm

Finch wrote:Is the Walkabout 4k worse looking than the BD from Criterion?

I'd also really appreciate getting a heads-up on the booklet notes. Hopefully Criterion don't stop providing those stats, and the new authoring house get their shit together fast if that's their new permanent gig. Maybe future UHDs will be split between Pixellogic and NexSpec.

I was already more inclined towards the Second Sight edition of Mean Streets and this development seals it for me. With Paramount's seeming reluctance to license to UK labels, I really hope that whoever ends up encoding Days of Heaven for Criterion takes proper care of it.

Regarding the BD, I’d say all in all yes. The inconsistency of the UHD is horrendous. The unaffected portions of the frame are flat-out phenomenal alongside some of the worst possible encoding in skies etc.

I’ve made screenshots of the UHD: https://forum.blu-ray.com/showpost.php? ... stcount=59

I don't know, I still think I'd take the 4K over the dated Blu-ray (though still good for the time), BUT probably with some hesitation. Even in motion the 4K just looks off, and I kept coming back to it on my television and parts of it look pretty great and then other moments had this weird smoothing effect or something (I really didn't know how to describe it) popping up that I guess might look like what your captures there show (though maybe exaggerated a bit). And then I finally got around to doing screen captures and holy fuck, some of them are a mess. I still don't think screen captures are the end-all-be-all but there are some messed up checkerboard, blocky patterns present at times and I'm positive that's leading to the effect I was seeing. Within the same frame, there are quadrants with an impeccable amount of detail and then others completely smoothed over. And as you pointed out it seems to effect the "open" areas more (the sky and such) and not areas that have more details and textures, as much at least.

There were parts of The Princess Bride where I thought things looked a little buzzy in the sky, even with Dolby Vision on, but it looked pretty solid otherwise (playback issues aside). To jump from that to Walkabout gave a serious case of whiplash.

Going back and really zooming in on The Trial (also done by NexSpec) I see something similar but far milder (though those are still my ones with the messed up black levels), and I still don't see a similar effect on the TV. NexSpec also did Moonage Daydream and I don't see the same effect in any of the grabs I took (after fixing the black levels), so maybe it's not entirely a sign of things to come...?

I’m glad you noticed the issue before writing your review as more people, even just casual readers should be made aware of the horrifying things Criterion’s authoring house(s) commit to these classic films. The Walkabout issue is so distracting that I can’t watch the film properly. I’ll have to get the Second Sight BD in case they don’t follow-up with a 4K.

I’m sure you’re right about The Trial - even the SC UK version has issues in the highlights. I presume it isn’t as massive on the CC as you’d have likely seen it in motion and detailed in your review.

Moonage Daydream looking alright at the very least is a very good sign although at this point I wouldn’t trust anything coming from Criterion in the near future.

nicolas wrote: Mon Oct 02, 2023 9:41 amThe Second Sight BD is definitely better than the Criterion BD.

I was wondering not about the SS BD vs the old Criterion BD, something I already compared when the SS BD was released, but the SS BD vs the Criterion UHD.
(but maybe it's a typo and you did mean the Criterion UHD ?)

tenia wrote:

nicolas wrote: Mon Oct 02, 2023 9:41 amThe Second Sight BD is definitely better than the Criterion BD.

I was wondering not about the SS BD vs the old Criterion BD, something I already compared when the SS BD was released, but the SS BD vs the Criterion UHD.
(but maybe it's a typo and you did mean the Criterion UHD ?)

It’s better than both
The severe encoding issues on the UHD eclipse the stunning other portions of the image.

Thanks for the precision !

Is the Walkabout encode worse than say SC’s Contempt UHD? The “bad” sections of Contempt look like a ‘meh’ 1080p encode whereas the “bad” sections of SC’s Breathless disc are barely DVD quality. Which category is Walkabout in?

rrenault wrote:Is the Walkabout encode worse than say SC’s Contempt UHD?

Difficult to compare as that disc’s bad encode is generally due to extremely low bitrates during the entirety of second-gen-sourced shots. Walkabout has consistently high bitrates I suppose. Haven’t seen the entire film but even the frames with mainly horrible image portions have high bitrates. I guess the best option to get a grasp of the look would be my screenshots on BR.com.

Caps-a-holic for The Pianist

1. That looks overall better than any previous presentation of the film in terms of colour and fine detail
2. Their does however seem to be some grain-management going on, it looks unnaturally clean
3. The effects shots have straight up been redone (look at captures 11 and 18) so if you care about a revisionist presentation that's something to flag, and capture 16 is a complete mess, I have no idea what happened there and what that could mean for other points in the film

Apperson wrote:Caps-a-holic for The Pianist

1. That looks overall better than any previous presentation of the film in terms of colour and fine detail
2. Their does however seem to be some grain-management going on, it looks unnaturally clean
3. The effects shots have straight up been redone (look at captures 11 and 18) so if you care about a revisionist presentation that's something to flag, and capture 16 is a complete mess, I have no idea what happened there and what that could mean for other points in the film

I’ve given the disc a thorough look at the other forum which probably answers your raised points / questions: https://forum.blu-ray.com/showpost.php? ... tcount=100

Despite the general “okay” look of the CAH caps, in motion the DNR-feel never went away for me as the grain management presents more anomalies caps can’t show, meaning in darker scenes for example, the fake grain bends around people walking or tilting their head. You can observe this on many grain-managed Paramount UHD transfers.

very positive early reaction to Arrow's The House By The Cemetery 4k

Apperson wrote: Tue Oct 03, 2023 1:49 pm Caps-a-holic for The Pianist

1. That looks overall better than any previous presentation of the film in terms of colour and fine detail
2. Their does however seem to be some grain-management going on, it looks unnaturally clean
3. The effects shots have straight up been redone (look at captures 11 and 18) so if you care about a revisionist presentation that's something to flag, and capture 16 is a complete mess, I have no idea what happened there and what that could mean for other points in the film

Wow, that capture no. 16 is on another level. And I thought Kino's Eternal Sunshine was bad enough...

I'm also unsure about capture 1, which looked severely EEd (on top of the layer of grain that looks already fake-enough on static caps so I can't imagine how it looks in motion, though I guess it's not dissimilar to Hanging Rock and please lord stop the people asking for this look and labs actually accepting to be accomplices of such infamy).

Looks not good in some shots. But much superior in stuff like the rooftops here.

ford wrote: Tue Oct 03, 2023 8:05 pm Looks not good in some shots. But much superior in stuff like the rooftops here.

Wait a minute - it looks like they ADDED buildings in one of those caps but not the other. What's going on there? Someone use the wrong master?

Some of the VFX were redone / reshot, so I guess that's one of them.
(Shout isn't the new master but the older one)

andyli wrote: Tue Oct 03, 2023 2:24 pm

Apperson wrote: Tue Oct 03, 2023 1:49 pm Caps-a-holic for The Pianist

capture 16 is a complete mess, I have no idea what happened there and what that could mean for other points in the film[/list]

Wow, that capture no. 16 is on another level. And I thought Kino's Eternal Sunshine was bad enough...

I must be blind. Can you explain?

patreig wrote: Wed Oct 04, 2023 10:30 amI must be blind. Can you explain?

just open that image in full res to see the glorious street lamps.

patreig wrote: Wed Oct 04, 2023 10:30 amI must be blind. Can you explain?

It overall looks like an upscaled DVD, and the street lamps look waterpainted.
Also, not sure how it looks in DV and/or if it's a downconversion issue on the capture, but the encode looks rubbish, with chroma issues on top of likely Edge Enhancement : https://caps-a-holic.com/c.php?a=2&x=36 ... &i=15&go=1

tenia wrote:

patreig wrote: Wed Oct 04, 2023 10:30 amI must be blind. Can you explain?

It overall looks like an upscaled DVD, and the street lamps look waterpainted.
Also, not sure how it looks in DV and/or if it's a downconversion issue on the capture, but the encode looks rubbish, with chroma issues on top of likely Edge Enhancement : https://caps-a-holic.com/c.php?a=2&x=36 ... &i=15&go=1

I hope I remember correctly from my viewing experience but this shot was probably taken from the original HD DI, upscaled and DNR’d. There are more examples like this on my BR.com screenshots. Normally these shots would have needed a re-do like others but for whatever reason they left them alone.

An example: https://ibb.co/bWqsWFR

This is why studios (rightly) basically never try to present something in "trooo 4Kay" when they're dealing with a film that was put together digitally at 2K (or lower in this case). It costs a lot and the results can be terrible anyway, and revisionist to boot. It would have been a far better service to this film to simply go back to the DI and present it warts and all, gaining some small benefit from the superior formats that UHD offers.

I think the issue isn't per se that the results were bound not to be that good because of the original resolution, but that it has been on top of that way too much tinkered with. I'm quite certain a more hands-off approach would have yielded a better result, even if still obviously limited in some places.

EddieLarkin wrote: Wed Oct 04, 2023 12:40 pm This is why studios (rightly) basically never try to present something in "trooo 4Kay" when they're dealing with a film that was put together digitally at 2K (or lower in this case). It costs a lot and the results can be terrible anyway, and revisionist to boot. It would have been a far better service to this film to simply go back to the DI and present it warts and all, gaining some small benefit from the superior formats that UHD offers.

I dunno maybe I’ll eat my words after watching the 4k disc, but I’m happy to have this weird little “restoration” and frankly prefer it to what I imagine is a pretty mediocre DI. Then again, I never saw this theatrically, just the DVD and (terrible) Blu-ray’s. But I also don’t remember too many effects shots in the film so hopefully the “weird 2020s recreated stuff” is few and far between.