I don't want the filmmaker(s) involved in a process which they don't understand. Let the pros handle it. I could be wrong, but the analogy I'm thinking of is with analog recordings and the role of the mastering engineer. I can say for certain that the likes of Kevin Gray and Steve Hoffman don't need anyone telling them how to get the most from the analog source.

I'm talking about something different here. No different from when a filmmaker is involved in a new film scan guiding how the movie should look in terms of color, shadows, highlights, etc. The filmmaker's vision needs to be conveyed properly and not arbitrarily done by some technician who doesn't have a clue as has happened all too often with DVD and BD. If the filmmaker has passed away or is not available, at least you've got an answer print and other film elements which are typically used (and still used even when they are involved). However, with HDR it just opens up a whole new can of worms on catalogs that can potentially destroy the director's intention of what the movie should look like. Has this happened with the Ghostbuster movies? Film restorer Robert Harris has talked about this quite a bit on another forum. He recently restored My Fair Lady and when asked the question if it should be HDR'd, his firm reply was no.


If the filmmaker is involved and wants to do a revisionist project on an older movie incorporating HDR, I don't have a big problem with it although I still prefer the original look of the movie whenever possible.

At this stage can you turn the pj 'off' without unplugging it?

No. I have to unplug the projector to get the warning indicators to turn off.

I'll pass. I suppose we differ in opinion.

My experience comes from years as an audiophile during the digital era when back catalog tapes by the thousands were transferred to CD or SACD. The tapes tell the tale and that source is all the top mastering engineers need. I want to hear what's captured on that tape. Frankly, I'm owed that. I expressly don't want an artificially "modernized" sound. Musicians should stick to making the music. Likewise, actors, producers, directors, and cinematographers should stay out of the transfer process. Of course, this presumes that there are video transfer pros who are as good at what they do as the top mastering engineers in the music business.

You saw my reply to your PM?

kevin - still working on it, problem is the intense amount of work to set up the ceiling speakers in my setup. Maybe an end of summer project.

did you get the IMAX Journey to space yet? All 3 disks have ATMOS and the 3D is the go-to disk. UHD looked good but so flat in comparison. especially the space walk scenes. No amount of HDR or 10 bit color can trade off the immersive feeling of 3D shot with IMAX film cameras.

Claw - that is how my first RS600 met it's demise. keep an eye on it to make sure it doesn't keep happening. Mine eventually did it every time I fired up the projector, it was not the lamp. Replacement has been excellent and was also a much better sample than the batch 1 projectors I had here (total of 5).

Yes, just did. Don't have the information requested until I get home.

I think we talking about different things. Analog film is more complex as there is a chemical process sometimes involved, but also digital too. The filmmaker has to be involved because there are too many decisions that need to made for how it will look. That doesn't mean he or she is telling the technician what software, what scanner, or "how" to do it - only the "what" or what it should look like. For example, when you go back to the original negative for a scan you're dealing with a black and white image. From there, film elements need to be used come up with "color". There are a lot of ways this can turn out. You're also dealing with things such shadow detail, film grain structure/film grain management, contrast, etc. Since the age of DI's this is really no longer an issue. Digital film has made it much easier, but I'm referring to 35/65mm filmed movies as far as the work that is entailed.

But even with audio, the filmmaker is/should be involved with how he wants the film to sound. It's his or her movie - not the technician. I want to see/hear the filmmaker's intentions - not what some engineer thinks it should be. That would be very arrogant on the engineer's part. The engineer is there to serve the filmmaker by taking his requirements and producing them. This is how it works (or is supposed to). We're also talking art ultimately with film and engineers are not artists (although I am not suggesting many movies today are 'art' as they are crap, but just saying they are an art form if you will).

The ghost buster makers haven't passed on though have they ?

I am not so concerned with old films. There have been lovely restorations of old old flicks. Lawrence of Arabia, sound of music etc. they are best we have ever seen them. These are very old films. Can think of only one film in restoration that was botched ... Patton...

Why shouldn't makers utilise every aspect in their realm to have these older films looking the best They ever have. This is art and I just see it as what's done with old masterpieces eg paintings even if the painter has long gone. They bring out old tones long lost. Restoring lustre and such. Why limit to the color palette or capabilities of our older systems when new allows more ... Bring it on

Harold Ramis, RIP

I'd love to read that Robert Harris statement. Do you have a link?

In general, HDR has the POTENTIAL to better convey the original film presentation, since film presentation has a wider dynamic range than SDR video.

I am NOT talking about increasing the dynamic range in an artificial manner, but just capturing the analog film in a more accurate manner.

In practice, with HDR standards so poorly implemented, I think the risk of error is far greater than the benefit of getting that additional couple stops of dynamic range portrayed in a new transfer.

Will those look better with HDR though ?

OK, so it seems that your problem is different from what I had.

I'm referring to analog films which have been released in the past. Whatever processes that were needed to establish the original look of the film have been decided. Seems to me that the digital transfer should be carried out such that the original analog look is maintained as best as possible. As for sound, I was drawing an analogy to music recordings originally recorded on magnetic tape. The final mix is well established. The mastering engineering uses the best stereo or mono source tapes to transfer to digital. So much can go wrong. Recording engineers and artists have no expertise despite whatever opinions they might come up with 40 years after the original recording. The top mastering engineers should be left to do their work. I'm not sure about film soundtracks, but perfection isn't as necessary (for home theater). My concern is with the 4K/HDR image quality of 20th century films. This is the last chance in our lifetimes, perhaps, to get really close to archive quality.

I read it over at Home Theater Forum where he posts regularly. But if go to the Blu-ray section there and I *think* it was in the My Fair Lady thread. If not, try a Google with: HDR, My Fair Lady, Robert Harris, Home Theater Forum.

Wow. Yeah, let's forget about the 20th century films. Old stuff. Pfft.

So many great Criterion blu-ray releases on sale (40% off) at B&N and combine with various discount codes this month to get great prices yet any random UHD at $30 is the priority. Personal. Preference.

Audio restoration cannot be compared to video in film restoration, although it is one single thread in the process.

As soon as you mess with the colour grade in any way, especially by creating an HDR grade of a film you need to get the film makers involved otherwise you are changing the directors intent.

If the director is alive the HDR conversion if at all should be done completely within their oversight, as that had the potential to significantly alter the character of the film.

You need to give directors more credit than you are, they are the paint brush wielders and they are the professionals when it comes to bringing all the elements together to create the finished product by directing the individuals involved.

The newest Blade Runner Final Cut was done completely within Ridley Scotts oversight and it looks fantastic.

I would not presume to go an start messing around with a restoration of Close Encounters without consulting Spielberg. If you wouldn't dare touch a film like that without consulting the director first then every other film and film maker should certainly be extended the same courtesy. If they are not alive, then the films next of kin should be consulted, cinematographer, producer etc...

A musician only plays an instrument where as a director is more like an orchestral composer, you would not go changing to tune of their instruments and alter the sound of the violins without consulting them as you potentially depart from the original ideals of the piece/film.

I agree that if one is changing the visuals, getting the Director is key, but I think the ideal for HDR is different for catalog titles. It's not about CHANGING the original film. It's simply about preserving it better.

1080p REC709 SDR cannot capture the fill color gamut nor the full dynamic range of 35mm film -- nor all the detail.

REC2020 HDR 2160p can.

So without changing the director's intent, REC2020 HDR can actually capture the director's intent BETTER than REC709 SDR.

Will people succumb to the temptation to fiddle with the original? Probably in some cases. But hopefully that is the exception, after some time.

Rec2020 I agree with, HDR I do not. Thats why it sucks they are exclusive to each other on the new format.

I can only imagine"The Wall/Waters" sounding MINT in Atmos, it sounds awesome in stereo.
They did a really great job on that IMO...I was pretty impressed.
Once I get some more spending $I'm upgrading to Atmos/DTSX(Which doesn't seem to be doing as well...YET!).

The Star Trek Into Darkness UHD disc contains the IMAX version of the film in 2.35:1 aspect ratio with select IMAX scenes included in 1.78:1.

I found the aspect ratio changes to be pretty seamless. It was only when there were several changes in a single scene that I even noticed.

With the number of aspect ration changes in this disc, I would think it would be distracting with a 2:35 screen.

Al I got both Star Treks that are arriving today for $29.99 from Amazon, they discounted them back on the pre-order.


Kev, I was comparing to the titles on the FMP-X10 titles, not the Min4K ones. That's why it was a really accurate comparison of 4K SDR and 4K HDR remastered titles. To me I thumbs down to both X10 versions and disc version of both dynamic ranges. Unfortunately not all remasters come up looking the goods. Glad GBI and II were local purchases not ordered in.

I just sent my rs600 in for repair for this very same problem. Hope I have the same successful resolution that you did...

That's why we have the nice masking function on the JVC. I tried it with The Dark Knight and in worked great.

I had great service from the JVC Factory Service Center (Long Beach CA). I don't think they had the unit more than 2 or 3 days before getting in on the way back to me. Hope it works out well for you.

The Wall is incredible. The video quality and Atmos soundtrack are both outstanding. I can never watch it "for a few minutes". I always get sucked in.

Thanks. Jvc had me send mine to mendtronix in san diego. Hope they are as quick...

Hello

After many problems with HDR BT.2020 signals I moved from Sony VPL-VW320ES to JVC X7000B projector. HDR 4:4:4 from Samsung UBD-K8500 (1.05 firmware) or Panasonic DMP-UB900 now works fine (I’ll try both this players) and contrast is impressive.

But after one week of use I have a questions about JVC X7000B – may I ask for help?

First – I need best calibration settings. I use Stewart FireHawk G3 100’ screen and completely darken room. I set 074 number of screen on projector setting regarding JVC site screens specification table.
For 1080p signals I use THX settings and set brightness to -2 and set diaphragm to Auto1. Use Panasonic player (1.5 firmware) or Apple TV last generation.
For 4K signals I set output of Panasonic to full Auto (it set 4:4:4) and try BT.2020 and Gamma D profile on projector (latest firmware u83.2 and BT.2020 color profile) and Auto 1 diaphragm. Lamp High. Picture is too bright and I lower the brightness to -2 and that’s all. MPC level – all off, only reality set to 5.
I see many video of calibrating HDR on JVC X7000B and reviewers sets contrast to +21 and brightness to -15 (diaphragm is set to Manual and fully open) – try this settings and get completely destroyed black shadow detail and white shadow detail (check on Mad Max Fury Road or The Revenant). And I if I set Input to Enhanced it destroys black colors – but on video reviewers recommend force it.
What calibration settings is fine for You?

Second question – I use Denon AVR-X6200 reciever (latest firmware with Auro 3D support) on my home cinema. If I connect Panasonic, Samsung or Apple TV directly to JVC X7000B all works fine. But if I use connection via Denon AVR-X6200 reciever mostly of time all works fine – but sometimes I give freezing screen with many static color bars – and cannot resume watching movie without full off and full on my system (power off projector and receiver). It hapens only if system changed resolution - if I'll stops UHD 4K 24HZ playback and returning on player menu 4K 60 Hz - and screen freezing. Or calling Denon Setup menu on playback 4K 24Hz, etc.
So, I completely turn off Denon video scaler – but it nothing changed. I use Audioquest Carbon HDMI cable from receiver to projector - length is 10 meters. So, now I order Monster Cable 27 Gps HDMI 10 m – may it helps from this problem? If this problem persists only on 4K signals – I didn’t worry and simple waiting Monster Cable order. But, sometimes it happens on powering on Apple TV via Denon receiver! On 1080p signal and completely off Denon video scaler. Thats what I'm worring about. Try set of HDMI on JVC from A to B – nothing changes. Maybe somebody use Denon X-200 recievers with JVC? All works fine? Maybe I need special settings?

Many thanks for help

On your second question: have you set up the JVC Input Signal section for Auto on both or either Input Level and Color Space? If so, is that also something available on the Denon? I'm suggesting that this has to do with the EDID communication between the Denon and JVC. When an input device changes the Denon is either not correcting or passing along the necessary information to the JVC. I'm thinking that the sources would not have such functional control of EDID, but that's another thing to check. If it seems to occur with only one of the sources, that may be a problem in its setup.