or Connect
AVS › AVS Forum › Blu-ray & HD DVD › Blu-ray Software › AVS Can't-Wait Special—"Mastered in 4K" Blu-Ray Releases
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

AVS Can't-Wait Special—"Mastered in 4K" Blu-Ray Releases - Page 13

post #361 of 824
Anyone else owns a copy of The Karate Kid 4K that can confirm that there's issues with no subtitle translation when the chinese launguage is spoken during the entire movie. The only work around right now is to physically turn english subtitles on. This wasn't the case with the orginal blu ray release as the subtitle comes on as default mad.gif Feels like to me Total Recall all over again which I still own eek.gif I did email to Sony and they're looking into this.
post #362 of 824
Quote:
Originally Posted by R Harkness View Post

To me and many others (especially who inhabit forums like this) a better image for a movie we love is never "pointless."

Sure I'd love real 4K versions of these films, but I'll take any better version when I can. Just as I appreciate any better, even if modest, upgrade in quality when I buy a new piece of gear.

Agreed! Hence my (amongst many other titles) upgrade of T2 from VHS, LD, LD LTX, LD LTX THX, DVD, DVD THX, DVD SE, BD, BD SE. biggrin.gif
post #363 of 824
You get the best transfer of Terminator 2 on HD DVD. wink.gif

EDIT: I went from the VHS to DVD, WMV HD and HD DVD. Now waiting for the new scan.
Edited by Turrican4D - 5/19/13 at 12:25pm
post #364 of 824
Has anyone done a compare of Angels and Demons. I' just watching the 4K version now and thinking, wow, this is very clear, pristine transfer and a lot of vivid colour scenes. I don't recall the original blu rwy being this good.
post #365 of 824
Quote:
Originally Posted by David Susilo View Post

Agreed! Hence my (amongst many other titles) upgrade of T2 from VHS, LD, LD LTX, LD LTX THX, DVD, DVD THX, DVD SE, BD, BD SE. biggrin.gif


Wow that's crazy for a movie that's not 'that' old.. eek.gif
post #366 of 824
Quote:
Originally Posted by Brad Horstkotte View Post

Seems pointless until they're actually spitting out 4K - I'll just stick with the darblet until then
Uhhhh! With the Darbee you disgrace movies, rather than to better the PQ! Why would you use that damn thing?
post #367 of 824
Quote:
Originally Posted by Turrican4D View Post

Uhhhh! With the Darbee you disgrace movies, rather than to better the PQ! Why would you use that damn thing?

Absolutely love the Darbee biggrin.gifcool.gifbiggrin.gif

Many who consider themselves 'videophiles' have also commented that they love the Darbee, and they would never add any other kind of unnecessary processing besides this obviously.. but yeah I can totally see why some would always disagree with adding any type of processing, if not 'needed' in the first place, of course wink.gif
post #368 of 824
Quote:
Originally Posted by Turrican4D View Post

Uhhhh! With the Darbee you disgrace movies, rather than to better the PQ! Why would you use that damn thing?

Because it can produce an image with greater clarity and depth, much like upgrading the lens in the projector. And it doesn't produce ringing like older type sharpness filters.

Why wouldn't you use one?

Are you aware that the Darbee offers fine gradations, so you can dial it into taste? At lower levels it just looks like you've upgraded your
projector. Push it too high and yes you start seeing the processing in action, but that's the case with every single picture control, including the ones you use to calibrate any projector. Used judiciously, the Darbee is a great tool. For instance, dialing up the Darbee watching the UFC last night made for a realism, sharpness and dimensionality that just wouldn't have been available without the Darbee in my system. Also, when I go to my largest CinemaScope images, the Darbee helps dial in some of the image clarity that is lost when blowing up an image really large. A very welcome tool to say the least.
post #369 of 824
Quote:
Originally Posted by eric.exe View Post

Bridge on the River Kwai is an incredibly odd release to associate with a premium picture format. The transfer is wonderfully faithful and accurate to the original film elements but resolvable detail rarely exceeds 720p levels. The faded colors aren't helping anything either.
This is true. I saw a 70mm print of Kwai in ideal circumstances at the Cinerama Dome in Hollywood, and it was kind of thick and chunky in terms of detail and color. It never looked as sharp as Lawrence of Arabia.
post #370 of 824
Quote:
Originally Posted by Turrican4D View Post

Uhhhh! With the Darbee you disgrace movies, rather than to better the PQ! Why would you use that damn thing?
I almost have to agree, but it's like makeup on women. The good looking ones don't need it, and it just makes the bad looking ones look worse. But it can help the so-so ones to look decent!

I never used a Darbee but I suspect it's the same type of sharpening that has been available on HTPC's for years. There is always a tradeoff, there is no completely free sharpening, but some are less susceptible to noticing.
post #371 of 824
Quote:
Originally Posted by Neo_Reloaded View Post

So if they had to make a new master (Ghostbusters, 2002 Spider-Man), yes it should definitely be noticeable. For films that already had 4K masters for their last Blu-ray release (2012 Amazing Spider-Man, Taxi Driver), I can't imagine you'd see much of a difference at all. Don't think of these as having anything to do with 4K TV sets (because they don't) - treat them like Blu-ray re-issues, some of which have had remasters.
The new transfer of "The Amazing Spider-Man" has visible more detail than the old one.
post #372 of 824
Quote:
Originally Posted by R Harkness View Post

Because it can produce an image with greater clarity and depth, much like upgrading the lens in the projector. And it doesn't produce ringing like older type sharpness filters.

Why wouldn't you use one?

Are you aware that the Darbee offers fine gradations, so you can dial it into taste? At lower levels it just looks like you've upgraded your
projector. Push it too high and yes you start seeing the processing in action, but that's the case with every single picture control, including the ones you use to calibrate any projector. Used judiciously, the Darbee is a great tool. For instance, dialing up the Darbee watching the UFC last night made for a realism, sharpness and dimensionality that just wouldn't have been available without the Darbee in my system. Also, when I go to my largest CinemaScope images, the Darbee helps dial in some of the image clarity that is lost when blowing up an image really large. A very welcome tool to say the least.
nope. What it odes for example, is manipulating the original photography, e.g. the tarmaq of a street is made a few notches darker, while the sky is made a few nothches lighter. This is just plain ugly.

If the director would have been aiming for this look, the movie would look so, but obviously he didn't want the movie look darbeed.

Withb the Blu-ray, wh have a very high quality medium at home, that doesn't need to be "enhanced".
post #373 of 824
Quote:
Originally Posted by Blu_One View Post

Wow that's crazy for a movie that's not 'that' old.. eek.gif

I can beat that for T2. biggrin.gif VHS, VHS SE, PAL LD, SE LD, Squeeze LD, original R1 DVD, UE DVD, Extreme DVD (x2), DVHS (x2), French HD DVD (x2), German HD DVD (x2), US Skynet Blu, UK Skynet Blu.

That's what makes me laugh when people get all het up about studios "not doing it right the first time" and/or "gouging us again"; I've been doing this **** for decades and it's simply the way the industry works. As a fan of [whatever] film I want to get the best possible presentation of it. I've never had any problem selling on old editions either, so it's not like I'm still sitting on each of those versions of T2.
Quote:
Originally Posted by batutta View Post

This is true. I saw a 70mm print of Kwai in ideal circumstances at the Cinerama Dome in Hollywood, and it was kind of thick and chunky in terms of detail and color. It never looked as sharp as Lawrence of Arabia.

Well, Kwai was shot on 35mm - and the fledgeling anamorphic format at that - so it would never have looked as sharp as Lawrence. The dupes don't help matters either. In that regard it *is* an odd choice to pre-load on Sony's 4K player, but I guess they needed a few classics to balance out dross like Karate Kid and That's My Boy.
post #374 of 824
Quote:
Originally Posted by eric.exe View Post

I almost have to agree, but it's like makeup on women. The good looking ones don't need it, and it just makes the bad looking ones look worse. But it can help the so-so ones to look decent!

I never used a Darbee but I suspect it's the same type of sharpening that has been available on HTPC's for years. There is always a tradeoff, there is no completely free sharpening, but some are less susceptible to noticing.

Darbee is very different, unseen before, the Darbee is special biggrin.giftongue.gif
post #375 of 824
Quote:
Originally Posted by Turrican4D View Post

nope. What it odes for example, is manipulating the original photography, e.g. the tarmaq of a street is made a few notches darker, while the sky is made a few nothches lighter. This is just plain ugly.

If the director would have been aiming for this look, the movie would look so, but obviously he didn't want the movie look darbeed.

Withb the Blu-ray, wh have a very high quality medium at home, that doesn't need to be "enhanced".

Uhm...those very aspects of the image a different from projector to projector, and between many flat screens, and from any flat screen to a projector. The contrast differences, MTF and ANSI differences render changes just like you are talking about - darker dark areas, brighter bright areas. The type of differences one can dial in *judiciously* with a Darbee-type device are swamped by the differences in display. In all likelihood the differences between what the director had in his head, saw in the rushes, mixing theaters and mastering suites, compared to whatever you are watching on.

Not that you therefore need to use one; just that you seem to assume a level of purity and accuracy in terms of what you are seeing you your set up that is most likely not there. The slight additions of a Darblet (again, used judiciously) are likely a drop in the bucket. I work in film post production and my JVC RS55 is calibrated by a very highly regarded pro. I see film in various stages, including in the DI/Grading suites etc, and the differences I see in each set up swamps anything I add via a Darbee.

(I do hate the look of a Darbee dialed up very high, just as I hate the look of any image control cranked up, but that would hardly be a reason not to use it within certain parameters).
Edited by R Harkness - 5/19/13 at 2:20pm
post #376 of 824
I thought XV color wasn't possible in the Blu Ray spec?
Is Sony just lying about the XV color encoding???
post #377 of 824
Quote:
Originally Posted by PlayNice View Post

I wonder how these will compare to Baraka and Samsara? Both is those were mastered in 8K for 1080p not 4K. If you do not have those disk I highly recommend them as reference material. Audio and video nirvana.
Nirvana? Yes, if you meant it that way, that Baraka is way off to be reference material! Yes, they scanned it in 8K, but ruined it afterwards with EE and DNR! So they threw all the detail into Nirvana.
post #378 of 824
Quote:
Originally Posted by R Harkness View Post

Uhm...those very aspects of the image a different from projector to projector, and between many flat screens, and from any flat screen to a projector. The contrast differences, MTF and ANSI differences render changes just like you are talking about - darker dark areas, brighter bright areas. The type of differences one can dial in *judiciously* with a Darbee-type device are swamped by the differences in display. In all likelihood the differences between what the director had in his head, saw in the rushes, mixing theaters and mastering suites, compared to whatever you are watching on. (...)
ANSI determines the difference between white abd black at the same time-> contrast performance of a given display.

If I use my old LG-plasma, which has lame ANSI and VT60 and calibrate them to a gamma of 2.4, these scene with the street and the sky look identical in termes of difference between the sky and the street. The tarmaq is still IRE60. Of course, the very dark parts of the scene or dark scenes in general will look washed out with the LG-plasma, but that's not the point and the Darbee cannot better the mll of any display/panel/projector. If I make the street darker and the sky brighter, the picture is wrong.
post #379 of 824
Quote:
Originally Posted by RicsterG View Post

Has anyone done a compare of Angels and Demons. I' just watching the 4K version now and thinking, wow, this is very clear, pristine transfer and a lot of vivid colour scenes. I don't recall the original blu rwy being this good.

I found them to be extremely close. There were a few shots that I think benefit in the 4k mastered version. For example, one of the chapters begins with a fly-over of St. Peter's square and it looks like the cobblestone pavement resolves better in the 4k mastered. I noticed the same thing in various rooftops (tile, etc) in some shots.

Certain sequences are notably darker in the 4k mastered -- particularly the helicopter sequence in the finale.
post #380 of 824
Quote:
Originally Posted by reanimator View Post

I found them to be extremely close. There were a few shots that I think benefit in the 4k mastered version. For example, one of the chapters begins with a fly-over of St. Peter's square and it looks like the cobblestone pavement resolves better in the 4k mastered. I noticed the same thing in various rooftops (tile, etc) in some shots.

Certain sequences are notably darker in the 4k mastered -- particularly the helicopter sequence in the finale.

The first Blu Ray was also from the 4K master.
Same with Amazing Spider-Man, The Other Guys, Battle: L.A., Total Recall 2012, Taxi Driver, and Karate Kid 2012.



Only Spider-Man, Ghostbusters, and Glory would be different in any actual way.
post #381 of 824
In most cases, the differences are due to the bitrate being used, not because of the 4K master.
post #382 of 824
Also contrast tweaks and edge subtle enhancement.

The Bitrates shouldn't be really different as each movie has around movie sizes are more or less the same GB amount as their "normal" counterparts.
post #383 of 824
On ghostbusters and total recall, the bitrates almost double. On spiderman, the old encoder was not as effective as the new one so although the bitrate is similar, the quality is close to doubling the bitrate of the same generation of encoder.
post #384 of 824
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fanboyz View Post

The first Blu Ray was also from the 4K master.
Same with Amazing Spider-Man, The Other Guys, Battle: L.A., Total Recall 2012, Taxi Driver, and Karate Kid 2012.
Only Spider-Man, Ghostbusters, and Glory would be different in any actual way.

Quote:
Originally Posted by David Susilo View Post

On ghostbusters and total recall, the bitrates almost double. On spiderman, the old encoder was not as effective as the new one so although the bitrate is similar, the quality is close to doubling the bitrate of the same generation of encoder.


David - Any assessment on Battle: L.A. ?

Obviously the audio on the Battle: LA BD is amazing biggrin.gifcool.gif

But I'm wondering if this new mastered in 4k BD release provides any noticeable PQ improvement ? (not that I have a problem with the PQ from the regular BD, but it's just not as good as the audio is wink.gif )

Thx !
post #385 of 824
Unfortunàtely I dislike the movie, so I don't own neither the original BD nor the new one.
post #386 of 824
Quote:
Originally Posted by Blu_One View Post


David - Any assessment on Battle: L.A. ?

Obviously the audio on the Battle: LA BD is amazing biggrin.gifcool.gif

But I'm wondering if this new mastered in 4k BD release provides any noticeable PQ improvement ? (not that I have a problem with the PQ from the regular BD, but it's just not as good as the audio is wink.gif )

Thx !

I thought the Mastered in 4K version of Battle LA looked great when I watched it Friday night. I did watch the previous one and don't recall it looking so detailed. But when I watched the previous version I think it was also before I had my Darblets in use too.
post #387 of 824
Quote:
Originally Posted by David Susilo View Post

Unfortunàtely I dislike the movie, so I don't own neither the original BD nor the new one.

Ok no worries thx. I'm not a big fan at all of this type of movies, but the audio on this one is just WoW biggrin.gif. Especially that scene where they're coming into the city on the choppers.. cool.gif

Quote:
Originally Posted by aaronwt View Post

I thought the Mastered in 4K version of Battle LA looked great when I watched it Friday night. I did watch the previous one and don't recall it looking so detailed. But when I watched the previous version I think it was also before I had my Darblets in use too.

Great thx !

Yeah you're right on that, the Darbee could make any 1080p BD look like it was mastered in 4k wink.gif. But feeding a 4k mastered BD to a Darbee before the display... that must be pretty sweet !
post #388 of 824
the promise of 4k for the home enthusiast doesn't look... well... promising.
post #389 of 824
Sony's original AVC encodings on Blu-ray were mushy, for lack of a better term. The hardware encoders have gotten much better these days and the 4K discs aren't being starved of bits. There basically isn't a single video encode made before 2009/2010 that couldn't be improved upon today on Bllu-ray.
post #390 of 824
Quote:
Originally Posted by eric.exe View Post

I never used a Darbee but I suspect...

That's as far as you needed to go with that sentence.

100% of the time, the most vocal Darbee haters are people who have never used one. This is not a coincidence.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Blu-ray Software
AVS › AVS Forum › Blu-ray & HD DVD › Blu-ray Software › AVS Can't-Wait Special—"Mastered in 4K" Blu-Ray Releases