AVS Forum banner

Lists of fake and real 4K UHD Blu-Rays (2K vs 4K)

91K views 262 replies 84 participants last post by  Brian Conrad 
#1 · (Edited)
Below is a list of 4K UHD Blu-Ray disks available for pre-order on Amazon, along with the actual format the movies were mastered in (from IMDB).

Potentially fake 4K UHD?
  • The Martian: Digital Intermediate (2K) (master format) - Based on the discussion in this thread it seems some part of The Martian might be remastered in 4K, but it's unclear if and how much of it.
  • Kingsman: The Secret Service: Digital Intermediate (2K) (master format)
  • X-Men: Days of Future Past: Digital Intermediate (2K) (master format)
  • Life of Pi: Digital Intermediate (2K) (master format)
  • Exodus: Gods and Kings: Digital Intermediate (2K) (master format)
  • Fantastic Four: Digital Intermediate (2K) (master format)
  • Hitman: Agent 47: Digital Intermediate (2K) (master format)
  • Maze Runner: The Scorch Trials: Digital Intermediate (2K) (master format)
  • Wild: Digital Intermediate (2K) (master format)
  • Ender's Game: Digital Intermediate (2K) (master format)
  • Mad Max: Fury Road: Digital Intermediate (2K) (master format)
  • Pineapple Express: Digital Intermediate (2K) (master format)
  • Concussion: Digital Intermediate (2K) (master format)

Probably real 4K UHD
  • The Maze Runner: Digital Intermediate (4K) (master format) - this one is weird as the source is partially 2K
  • The Amazing Spider-Man 2: Digital Intermediate (4K) (master format)
  • Chappie: Digital Intermediate (4K) (master format)
  • Sicario: Digital Intermediate (4K) (master format)
  • Salt: Digital Intermediate (4K) (master format)
  • Hancock: Digital Intermediate (4K) (master format)
  • The Expendables 3: Digital Intermediate (4K) (master format)
 
See less See more
#2 · (Edited)
So this doesn't take into account the UHD titles that aren't using the Digital Intermediates previously used? Titles like The Martian that will use the existing 5K raw footage to create a new 4K master. Using the 5K raw footage and upscaled special effects to create a new master.

This list assumes that the existing Digital Intermediate will be used. Which is not the case with all UHD titles coming out.

And the list doesn't seem to take into account HDR? The titles will also need to have HDR info added. And unless the original master had this info, work needs to be done to create it.

And if you have to go through the effort of color correcting everything for HDR etc, it certainly makes sense to create a new Master at that time if the footage is there to do it.
 
#3 ·
So this doesn't take into account the UHD titles that aren't using the Digital Intermediates previously used? Titles like The Martian that will use the existing 5K raw footage to create a new 4K master. Using the 5K raw footage and upscaled special effects to create a new master.

This list assumes that the existing Digital Intermediate will be used. Which is not the case with all UHD titles coming out.
Do you have any source stating that the existing Digital Intermediates will not be used?
 
#14 · (Edited)
The DI does not eliminate a 4K master at all. Sony has already made 4k masters from the original sources that were higher then 2k and at first had a 2K DI. The original source is the real limiting factor.

I did not know there is a UHD BD sub-forum on that site already and yet most new posts are about UHD in this sub-forum. Might be time for a UHD BD sub-forum here.

I highly doubt they will invest money to remaster these, especially since the special effects were not done in 4K. Time will tell. Actually, if the special effects were done in 2K I would directly discount these as "fake 4K".
You should of named this thread 'List of VFX done in 4K' since this is the low common denominator you are only interested in. Would of saved people a lot of time.
 
#16 ·
Mastering at 4k does cost a lot more in rendering time and all that - after all, if you're rendering 4 times as many pixels, it's going to take roughly four times as long, and considering the potential market, I don't see how redoing the VFX will be a good return on the money spent. It's not just a case of re rendering the scenes, but someone has to make sure they come out right. Because on a 2d video, shortcuts are taken that you cannot see, and those can easily break down if you just blindly reapply at a higher resolution.

In the case of the Martian, the VFX scenes are basically the scenes you want to see in 4K - all the outside scenes. Heck, the visors on the space suits are entirely VFX added in post, including reflections off the sun visor and off the visor itself. (There's a video showing the VFX applied on YouTube by the VFX company).

In the case of movies, the home video release is a minor source of additional income, so I think it's unlikely they will redo the VFX. Likely what happens is like the IMAX releases - the scenes shot in IMAX will be clearer, so the scenes shot in 4k will be clearer, while the 2k bits will be merely upscaled.

And given dropping physical disc sales, I doubt much investment will be made for UHD Blu-rays specifically. Heck, they probably will be quite expensive limiting the market further.
 
#17 ·
The FOX guy Finn, who released the statement about "the martian", has now gone on record to say that all of the FOX HDR movies are all built the same way as the martian, using the raw files first, and rebuilding the movie basically. dolby vision has also publicly said that they also begin with the raw files. i am going to assume that all studios will be doing it this way as this is the best way to do it and nobody wants be known as "the studio that half-asses it while everyone else does it right".

so basically the DI is thrown out the window and they start over and use whats best for a 4k version. then they do 4k coloring and HDR grading.
 
#26 ·
The FOX guy Finn, who released the statement about "the martian", has now gone on record to say that all of the FOX HDR movies are all built the same way as the martian, using the raw files first, and rebuilding the movie basically. dolby vision has also publicly said that they also begin with the raw files. i am going to assume that all studios will be doing it this way as this is the best way to do it and nobody wants be known as "the studio that half-asses it while everyone else does it right".

so basically the DI is thrown out the window and they start over and use whats best for a 4k version. then they do 4k coloring and HDR grading.
I hope so, because I want to experience it in 4k. I think in about a week or so, we will find out how well it stacks against it's bu-ray counterpart, and a thorough examination will tell us how much of it real 4k.
 
#18 ·
Sorry, but where does it say that they use 4K (or 5K) raw assets for any part of the actual resulting UHD Blu-Ray resolution?

The way I read that statement was that they use the 2K upconverted source material, together with 5K raw assets for color grading the 2K upconverted material. That is, they just change the color range of the upconverted pixels in the image, based on the 5K raw assets color information.

Did I misunderstand how they explained the process?
 
#23 ·
Sorry, but where does it say that they use 4K (or 5K) raw assets for any part of the actual resulting UHD Blu-Ray resolution?

The way I read that statement was that they use the 2K upconverted source material, together with 5K raw assets for color grading the 2K upconverted material. That is, they just change the color range of the upconverted pixels in the image, based on the 5K raw assets color information.

Did I misunderstand how they explained the process?
Agree with your summary in general and read the statement the same way, summarizing my conclusions in a post yesterday. -- John
 
#19 · (Edited)
I made a website where you can easily search between 'real' 'fake' and also for in-between/limited. The site is only 36 hours old so please excuse the odd/missing info on some titles. I am constantly updating before and after my real job.

www.realorfake4k.com

If you see any movies/tv shows listed that have incorrect info please send me a pm and explain or provide a source and I will update it.

--- EDIT September 1st---

The site is going strong as ever! I have over 250 movie and tv titles from UHD discs, Amazon, Netflix, etc. You can easily search by category "Real 4K" "Nearly/Partially 4K" and "Fake 4K" or if you just want a simple list of real/fake I have added that as well. I have been adding a lot of features over the past 6 months and I'll be adding more in the coming days also. Thanks to everyone who has given me support and pointers!
 
#27 ·
The combination of Amazon's poor 4K UHD sorting and Josh's article posted above was the push I needed to create my website to help sort through the mess of releases

On the bright side, special effects that were made on a separate 'layer' can be scanned independently from the film negative and tweaked a bit to offer a better upscale. Fully CG movies should see a great bump in quality as well, even fully 2K movies like The Peanuts Movie (2K CG + 2K DI) and Lego Movie (2K CG + 2.8K Live Shots + 2K DI)
 
#28 · (Edited)
There's a difference of interpretation of Finn's Tweet post apparently. The post link is in post No.16 above.

Twice in the first three paragraphs he states that 2k versions of movies such as "The Martian" are upconverted to 4k. Such upconversions can't deliver the full-4k detail possible by using 4k (or higher) files from cameras such as the Red models used for"The Martian." All files were downconverted to the 2k used for the master digital intermediate. So discussing work done on the "4k Martian productiion," no mattter how often you refer to it as 4k, still means a movie file upconverted from 2k to 4k. (BTW, there's no actual film involved AFAIK with Martian [see IMDB.com full techical specs], only digital cinema files.)

Then saying (last Tweet paragraph) HDR and enhanced color from 4K+ RAW files are used for detail work in the "4k domain" means 2k-to-4k domain, which differs from using all the highest resolution possible from potential true-4k+ RAW camera files. -- John
 
#29 ·
Below is a list of 4K UHD Blu-Ray disks available for pre-order on Amazon, along with the actual format the movies were mastered in (from IMDB).

Potentially fake 4K UHD?
  • The Martian: Digital Intermediate (2K) (master format) - Based on the discussion in this thread it seems some part of The Martian might be remastered in 4K, but it's unclear if and how much of it.
  • Kingsman: The Secret Service: Digital Intermediate (2K) (master format)
  • X-Men: Days of Future Past: Digital Intermediate (2K) (master format)
  • Life of Pi: Digital Intermediate (2K) (master format)
  • Exodus: Gods and Kings: Digital Intermediate (2K) (master format)
  • Fantastic Four: Digital Intermediate (2K) (master format)
  • Hitman: Agent 47: Digital Intermediate (2K) (master format)
  • Maze Runner: The Scorch Trials: Digital Intermediate (2K) (master format)
  • Wild: Digital Intermediate (2K) (master format)
  • Ender's Game: Digital Intermediate (2K) (master format)

Probably real 4K UHD
  • The Maze Runner: Digital Intermediate (4K) (master format) - this one is weird as the source is partially 2K
  • The Amazing Spider-Man 2: Digital Intermediate (4K) (master format)
  • Chappie: Digital Intermediate (4K) (master format)
  • Sicario: Digital Intermediate (4K) (master format)
  • Salt: Digital Intermediate (4K) (master format)
  • Hancock: Digital Intermediate (4K) (master format)
  • The Expendables 3: Digital Intermediate (4K) (master format)
This time I'm staying away from the bleeding edge. Most films have CG effects done at 2K until I see just how jarring it will be to see live action footage at 4K with CG at 2K I'm waiting. The CG in Firefly comes to mind.
 
#30 ·
I'm all in. I have twelve UHD titles on pre-order right now. And I'm sure I'll be buying some more over the next few months. Well as long as I can get them for under $30. I have no desire to pay $35 or $40 per title. $25 would be ideal though.
 
#37 ·
Even if we accept that the vast majority of masters are 2K, given that most of the movies we enjoy are scope, you're talking about a master that is 2048X858. Existing Blu-ray means that's scaled down to 1920X804 ish. All things being equal, that sounds like a slight improvement if it is instead scaled up to UHD scope. Is that enough to get me to replace my existing Blu-rays? Maybe not (although other things like HDR might be). But is it enough to get me to buy UHD Blu going forward? Absolutely.
 
#38 ·
Well I'm over a half hour into the Scorch Trials UHD and watching this on a non-HDR set(Vizio P series 70") and I'm very underwhelmed. In fact when you play the movie it states you should connect to an HDR set for optimal vieiwing. So far there's not really a huge leap from blu-ray for this movie on my NON-HDR TV. I'd like to see tech specs like codec/bitrate but I have yet to figure that out on this Samsung player.
 
#39 ·
In order for digital films to even match 35mm quality, they'll have to be released in 5k media formats for the 5k Apple display, even then that's still shy of 6.5k (24MP) that real 35mm represents. That's over double the resolution of 4k! In order to eliminate this fact altogether, we shoot strait to 8k, and NHK is taking us there. First native 8k movie is being shot this year, along with Super Bowl 50 and the next Olympics. Broadcasting seems to be wanting to skip 4k altogether, and is preparing the infrastructure for the arrival of 8k.
 
#40 ·
I guess there's probably no way to make true digital screenshots of UHD BD right now?? I'd be really interested to see side by side shots of the same movie from various sources like people have been doing for streaming vs. BD, etc...

My guess is the initial releases will show a very modest (if any) improvement in resolution.
 
#41 · (Edited)
Please read this and share as much as possible!

UHD Blu ray is a scam at the moment!

I wanted to do a definitive test to show how much more resolution the new 4K/UHD Blu ray discs have than regular Blu ray discs. I compared both visually from a normal sitting position and I swore up and down the 4K/UHD Blu ray looked better. Not leaps and bounds better but I was convinced it was better for resolution and detail.

So I got out my trusty GH4 camera and shot still images of my Vizio M80 screen with the regular Martian Blu ray and also the UHD Blu ray. I used the exact same settings in the player and in the TV for both tests. The only difference was the media in the Samsung K8500 player.

Now the color differences are obvious in these photos. The grading is definitely different. The compression differences are also obvious. However, much to my dismay the detail and resolution is literally identical. Now going into this everyone had said the Martian was not rendered in 4K so I guess I should of known. But seriously I wasn't expecting them to be literally the exact same resolution with no detail improvement whatsoever.

Honestly, I think the color differences and differences in the encoding even with a non HDR TV are an improvement. However, the resolution with the discs that are not shot and rendered in 4K or greater is very disappointing. I really feel like we have all been duped here. Please share this post with as many people as possible. This isn't right. They shouldn't literally have the exact same resolution.

Just in case anyone is questioning whether my TV or Reciever was causing it down rez to 1080p and then up rez back up to UHD I tested it several different ways. First I tested the UHD Blu ray connected through my receiver and it did indeed say that my receiver was not HDCP 2.2 compliant. It said it would down rez to 1080p but it still played the movie at UHD/4K. Then I tested the same disc connected directly from the K8500 to my TV and I removed all other HDMI connections from the TV. I also powered off and then back on the K8500 Blu ray player just in case it was remembering the handshake from before. This time it didn't give me the HDCP 2.2 warning and it played the FOX logo in UHD/4K this time instead of 1080p like it did with the HDCP warning.

I am absolutely positive now that the UHD Blu rays that are not sourced from 4K or better have zero increase in detail over the regular Blu rays. Therefore, I can't in good conscious recommend buying the non 4K sourced Blu rays. The HDR aspects may be a huge benefit for some so maybe it is worth it for that. However, the whole detail and resolution aspect seems like a hoax at the moment. Take a look at the pictures below and tell me what you think. Please do this test yourself with a good interchangeable lens camera if you still are not convinced by these images.

1080p Blu ray Disc


UHD Blu ray Disc same settings connected through the receiver with up scaling turned off. Gives the HDCP warning but still plays in UHD.


UHD Blu ray Disc same settings connected directly to the TV with no other HDMI connections. Does not give the HDCP warning.
 

Attachments

#46 ·
The HDR aspects may be a huge benefit for some so maybe it is worth it for that. However, the whole detail and resolution aspect seems like a hoax at the moment.
Isn't HDR one of THE BIG features distinguishing UHD BD from its predecessor and a big reason for upgrading? Also, while I'm not at all prepared to dispute your opinion, before declaring the current state of the new format a fraud, you might want to include additional facts about your panel that might influence its ability to accurately display detail and resolution such as whether it was professionally calibrated and the like.
 
#42 ·
Below is a list of 4K UHD Blu-Ray disks available for pre-order on Amazon, along with the actual format the movies were mastered in (from IMDB).

Potentially fake 4K UHD?
  • The Martian: Digital Intermediate (2K) (master format) - Based on the discussion in this thread it seems some part of The Martian might be remastered in 4K, but it's unclear if and how much of it.
Can anyone tell me any parts of the Martian that should be true 4K? I couldn't seem to find any.
 
#43 ·
Any shot with CGI in it is going to be 2k. So that rules out pretty much anything where you see Mars. (You know, the parts of the movie that people might actually want to be visually impressed by.)

Close-ups of Matt Damon's face, maybe? But not when he's wearing the space suit, because the visor was CGI.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Frank714
#47 · (Edited)
UHD 4k displays have such high resolution, and upconversion algorithms have become
so good, that it is sometimes difficult to see by eye if a particular video is pristine full
resolution or if some upconversion has occurred in the preparation of the content.
That's from a recent tech paper, "Practical Methods to Validate Ultra 4K Content," by Arris' Sean McCarthy. Here's a recent avsforum overview post of that pdf whitepaper.

McCarthy's software approach analyzes 4k video, displaying the level of 4k content as oval-shaped patterns on screens (see overview and his paper for photos and graphs). Suggested building such analysis capabilities into high-end displays. Or perhaps upcoming UHD test Blu-rays could license the software for home PC use.

Interested to see if mpgxsvcd's excellent approach above, comparing "The Martian" 1080p Blu-ray to the 2k-to-4k UHD disc, produces a better (more apparent) on-screen difference comparing discs when a 4k DI (not 2k DI) is the starting point. Several examples appear in the original post here, although doubt a movie such as "The Tree of Life" (TOL), which had a 4k DI captured from 35mm, likely with little CGI, will soon appear as UHD. I used TOL in 2014 to compare its finer details (width-wise) with 1080p multiburst test patterns . -- John
 
#51 ·
but SHOULD they be on the list?

according to imdb.com, concussion was filmed using the arri alexa XT plus, which shoots at 3.4k, but the film is listed to have a 2k DI. even if the film got a 4k DI, the camera shoots at 3.4k so can you technically call it a "true 4k film"?

I personally dont care either way :) the arri alexa produces great footage despite "only" being 3.4k.
 
#60 ·
I thought Chappie, Salt, and Hancock were also other titles with 4K masters? I currently have them all on pre-order except for Sicario. Which I will probably order soon.

I just know I have been very impressed with the Fox titles. When coimparing them to their BD couterparts the UHD BD is much better. And if those really don't have a 4K master, I can't wait to see what a title with a real 4K master looks like.
 
#75 · (Edited)
For those worried about the movies with 2K masters, this reviewer is starting to believe that issue has been way overblown.

With reviewing kingsman, it beats the blu ray in every area including resolution /sharpness, I did comparisons last night and I agree with his assessment. He puts both martian uhd and kingsman uhd on his highly recommended list.

http://ultrahd.highdefdigest.com/30659/themartian4kultrahdbluray.html

Heres is also the martian uhd review, again he notes the picture is sharper and has more detail. He does site a couple of noisey scenes where they used inferior cameras and then upscaled it, but the positives FAR outweigh the minor negatives.


http://ultrahd.highdefdigest.com/30659/themartian4kultrahdbluray.html
 
#78 ·
For those worried about the movies with 2K masters, this reviewer is starting to believe that issue has been way overblown. With reviewing kingsman, it beats the blu ray in every area including resolution /sharpness, I did comparisons last night and I agree with his assessment. He puts both martian uhd and kingsman uhd on his highly recommended list.
I do not think there is any debate that UHD Blu Ray disks are superior. Here are a few reasons:
  1. 2K resolution is slightly better than 1080p
  2. Even if resolution is somewhat similar, bitrate is much higher because it is derived from the DCI which has even higher bitrate
  3. UHD disks have HDR grading
  4. It is possible the disks contain a version which was upscaled to UHD using good algorithms

So yes UHD disks are better. But that is not my point. My point is the resolution is not real UHD/4K. They are selling a souped up version of normal Blu-Rays.
 
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top