UHD Review A Few Words About A few words about...™ CITIZEN KANE -- in 4k UHD (1 Viewer)

[JoshZ]

Different encode. Some people think Warner’s is better. There are differences if you’re pixel-peeping. Someone on another site pointed to this example: https://caps-a-holic.com/c.php?a=3&x=740&y=256&d1=16962&d2=16781&s1=185843&s2=182372&l=1&i=5&go=1.
Whether you would see a difference in actual viewing is a different question.

Anyone who'd claim they could see a difference between those two images during playback is a damn liar. Even in still frames, all it looks like is the Warner disc is marginally noisier with no difference in actual picture detail.

 

[ManW_TheUncool]

Anyone who'd claim they could see a difference between those two images during playback is a damn liar. Even in still frames, all it looks like is the Warner disc is marginally noisier with no difference in actual picture detail.

AFAIK, the usual claim is that Criterion's encodes/compression exhibit some blocky patterns that some find noticeable (probably mainly on direct-view flat panels). I don't doubt it's there to some degrees, but doesn't mean I'll normally notice them at all (particularly on my FP setup), except perhaps in the worst cases (like some moments in the old Howards End BD). Also, I suspect it's really more of an issue w/ their BDs than 4K discs (largely because any pixel-level issues will be more hidden at "nominal distance").

It's probably comparable to how some are distracted/annoyed by the slightest bit of EE while the vast majority of us are not -- and yes, the usual complaint about Criterion also includes the use of some bit of EE/sharpening.

_Man_

 

[B-ROLL]

The UK has a 4K/UHD boxed set of 30 Warner Brothers films, celebrating its 100th anniversary. This set is inclusive of Citizen Kane.

Does anyone here know of any differences between the Warner issued 4K/UHD and the Criterion? AND…which one is better?

i have the UK standalone WB 4K

Here's what on the disc (BR is Region ABC):

I spot-checked the 4K against the Criterion & IMHO the WB-UK looked better. But I'm no expert ... YMMV ... do not back up or severe tire result may result ...

 

[Wes Candela]

But here's where 21st century technology rears its head, and I wish it hadn't.

There's a place in the world (especially for newer productions with living filmmakers) for Dolby Vision.

Make no mistake, it's a wonderful imaging process.

But the reality is that it has absolutely nothing to do with 4k UHD releases, even though some industry sources make it appear that it (and HDR in general ) are part of the plan (it isn't), and that they're essential toward proper viewing of 4k product (it isn't).

Amen, Mr. Harris.
This was one of my earliest gripes with this new 4K UHD format when it dropped and during its growth.

HDR.

15 years ago, I had the option of using it for photographs.

Now the entire image could be perfetly exposed by blending three photographs of the same scene taken at three different exposures.

The sky would be perfectly exposed, just like the foreground, and this would resemble more closely, what the naked eye saw

Used it. Appriciated it. Never used it again.

Would rather have the images look as I choose them to look when I’m shooting them

Should be an option to enable or disable this special.visual feature for each film on the disc menu.

Just my opinion.

 

[OliverK]

Should be an option to enable or disable this special.visual feature for each film on the disc menu.

Just my opinion.

When the HDR format was still new it was my hope that HDR would be used VERY sparingly with older movies. Several years and many classic releases later I have to say that sadly this isn't always the case.

 

[JoshZ]

AFAIK, the usual claim is that Criterion's encodes/compression exhibit some blocky patterns that some find noticeable (probably mainly on direct-view flat panels). I don't doubt it's there to some degrees, but doesn't mean I'll normally notice them at all (particularly on my FP setup), except perhaps in the worst cases (like some moments in the old Howards End BD). Also, I suspect it's really more of an issue w/ their BDs than 4K discs (largely because any pixel-level issues will be more hidden at "nominal distance").

I have that Howard's End disc, and I understand the complaints against it. My comment was specifically referring to the Citizen Kane comparison.

I'm not part of the "Criterion can do no wrong" crowd. But nor will I ever side with the "CRITERION HAS THE WORST ENCODING EVER EVER EVER EVER!!!!" nonsense.

 

[OliverK]

AFAIK, the usual claim is that Criterion's encodes/compression exhibit some blocky patterns that some find noticeable (probably mainly on direct-view flat panels). I don't doubt it's there to some degrees, but doesn't mean I'll normally notice them at all (particularly on my FP setup), except perhaps in the worst cases (like some moments in the old Howards End BD). Also, I suspect it's really more of an issue w/ their BDs than 4K discs (largely because any pixel-level issues will be more hidden at "nominal distance").

It's probably comparable to how some are distracted/annoyed by the slightest bit of EE while the vast majority of us are not -- and yes, the usual complaint about Criterion also includes the use of some bit of EE/sharpening.

_Man_

Even without the magnification the Criterion looks a bit blockier in those caps despite a much higher bitrate but I doubt that this would translate to a difference in picture quality that many can see even if they look for it.

I will certainly not try to find out if I can notice it as in fact I am still happy with my 70th anniversary Blu-ray

 

[Robert Crawford]

Even without the magnification the Criterion looks a bit blockier in those caps despite a much higher bitrate but I doubt that this would translate to a difference in picture quality that many can see even if they look for it.

I will certainly not try to find out if I can notice it as in fact I am still happy with my 70th anniversary Blu-ray

I was happy with that Blu-ray too until I watched the 4KUHD.

 

[Wes Candela]

When the HDR format was still new it was my hope that HDR would be used VERY sparingly with older movies. Several years and many classic releases later I have to say that sadly this isn't always the case.

Yes, agreed.
I have gotten used to it

And I will go as far as to say, I even see the benefits… At times…

But at least you could turn 3-D off or on

The market, HDR, this wonderful feature 4K UHD

I was watching a fish called Wanda the other night 1080 P Blu-ray, and it was so pleasing to see a film without HDR again

I could just shut it off on my TV… However, I don’t so that’s kind of my fault also

 

[OliverK]

I was happy with that Blu-ray too until I watched the 4KUHD.

I compared the Blu-ray to the Criterion on what one would probably call a higher end front projection system and thought the Blu-ray looked better overall. The picture had some added HDR glitz and also film grain was more highly resolved but actual detail was hardly affected for this movie and with that kind of difference between SDR and HDR I prefer to have a proper SDR grade.

 

[OliverK]

Yes, agreed.
I have gotten used to it

And I will go as far as to say, I even see the benefits… At times…

But at least you could turn 3-D off or on

The market, HDR, this wonderful feature 4K UHD

I was watching a fish called Wanda the other night 1080 P Blu-ray, and it was so pleasing to see a film without HDR again

I could just shut it off on my TV… However, I don’t so that’s kind of my fault also

With everything else being the same I would prefer to see SDR for older movies but often other parameters are quite a bit improved with the HDR version and then the task is to make that movie look like more like SDR which I find to be more difficult on TVs and easier on a front projection system with a good tone-mapping solution.

 

[Robert Crawford]

I compared the Blu-ray to the Criterion on what one would probably call a higher end front projection system and thought the Blu-ray looked better overall. The picture had some added HDR glitz and also film grain was more highly resolved but actual detail was hardly affected for this movie and with that kind of difference between SDR and HDR I prefer to have a proper SDR grade.

Well, that's your opinion, but I think the Criterion 4K/UHD looks distinguishably better in 4K/Dolby Vision than the Blu-ray on my OLED and that's watching both of them in their entirety.

 

[OliverK]

Well, that's your opinion, but I think the Criterion 4K/UHD looks distinguishably better in 4K/Dolby Vision than the Blu-ray on my OLED and that's watching both of them in their entirety.

Good for you, in the end it is a matter of preference for me where certain attributes win out over others and if it was mainly about textures and resolving grain then I would have gone with the UHD.

It is a testament to the Blu-ray that it holds up so well when for example for Casablanca the difference in detail compared to the Blu-ray version is much more substantial and therefore I prefer the UHD version.

 

[Wes Candela]

With everything else being the same I would prefer to see SDR for older movies but often other parameters are quite a bit improved with the HDR version and then the task is to make that movie look like more like SDR which I find to be more difficult on TVs and easier on a front projection system with a good tone-mapping solution.

I agree I think we need to take advantage of that turn off HDR setting a little more
It’s like Robert Harris says
Nothing wrong with a little dash here and there


but I’m in agreement with you

 

[Robert Crawford]

Good for you, in the end it is a matter of preference for me where certain attributes win out over others and if it was mainly about textures and resolving grain then I would have gone with the UHD.

It is a testament to the Blu-ray that it holds up so well when for example for Casablanca the difference in detail compared to the Blu-ray version is much more substantial and therefore I prefer the UHD version.

As I stated beforehand in other threads, I don't think this 4K/UHD format is for film purists that insist what they're watching looks like film.

 

[Wes Candela]

As I stated beforehand in other threads, I don't think this 4K/UHD format is for film purists that insist what they're watching looks like film.

Agreed. .

As I stated beforehand in other threads, I don't think this 4K/UHD format is for film purists that insist what they're watching looks like film.

It doesn’t seem to be no.
And I’m not going to get crazy about KANE not matching the theatrical release to the tee. Because I’ve never seen it theatrically

However, when I read that the HDR is causing details to be lost
And causing other details to be seen that we’re not meant to be

you know…in my mind…that’s an issue.

 

[Kyle_D]

I agree that HDR is unnecessary for most classic titles, but I still see a lot of confusion out there about what HDR actually is and how it is used. A title that is encoded in HDR Rec 2020 doesn't necessarily use the specification's full dynamic range or color gamut. Kane is a perfect example. Although the Criterion UHD encoded in HDR Rec. 2020 with Dolby Vision, it is, effectively, close to an SDR grade in terms of actual dynamic range used. The max content light level is only 169 nits, and max frame average light level is only 118 nits:

Format :	HEVC
Format/Info :	High Efficiency Video Coding
Format profile :	Main [email protected]@High
HDR format :	Dolby Vision, Version 1.0, dvhe.07.06, BL+EL+RPU, Blu-ray compatible / SMPTE ST 2086, HDR10 compatible
Codec ID :	V_MPEGH/ISO/HEVC
Duration :	1 h 59 min
Bit rate :	85.8 Mb/s
Width :	3 840 pixels
Height :	2 160 pixels
Display aspect ratio :	16:9
Frame rate mode :	Constant
Frame rate :	23.976 (24000/1001) FPS
Color space :	YUV
Chroma subsampling :	4:2:0 (Type 2)
Bit depth :	10 bits
Bits/(Pixel*Frame) :	0.432
Stream size :	71.7 GiB (98%)
Language :	English
Default :	No
Forced :	No
Color range :	Limited
Color primaries :	BT.2020
Transfer characteristics :	PQ
Matrix coefficients :	BT.2020 non-constant
Mastering display color primaries :	BT.2020
Mastering display luminance :	min: 0.0001 cd/m2, max: 1000 cd/m2
Maximum Content Light Level :	169 cd/m2
Maximum Frame-Average Light Level :	118 cd/m2

Those brightness figures are close to what most average people have their TVs set to in SDR mode in a normal living room. It's also just barely beyond the capabilities of most home projectors with an optimally sized screen, which typically max out at around 140-150 effective nits (though some combos can exceed 200). So, given that the grade effectively only uses standard dynamic range, I would attribute any exposure errors to human or source error rather than a mandate to max out capabilities of the HDR specification.

 

[ManW_TheUncool]

Even without the magnification the Criterion looks a bit blockier in those caps despite a much higher bitrate but I doubt that this would translate to a difference in picture quality that many can see even if they look for it.

I will certainly not try to find out if I can notice it as in fact I am still happy with my 70th anniversary Blu-ray

So far, I haven't been tempted enough to upgrade either. But as you also later mentioned, I did upgrade to Casablanca 4K after/despite buying it on BD 2x (as well as Maltese Falcon 4K), especially w/ the holiday sales making that a no-brainer (even though I also separately already bought the 4K digitals for those, LOL).

_Man_

 

[B-ROLL]

So far, I haven't been tempted enough to upgrade either. But as you also later mentioned, I did upgrade to Casablanca 4K after/despite buying it on BD 2x (as well as Maltese Falcon 4K), especially w/ the holiday sales making that a no-brainer (even though I also separately already bought the 4K digitals for those, LOL).

_Man_

I'm no good at being noble, but it doesn't take much to see that the problems of three little people don't amount to a hill of beans in this crazy world.

....

 

[Robert Harris]

One cannot simply turn off HDR, and have SDR. After spending some time with this disc, my opinion is that the film was damaged by HDR.