Search results

Blown out highlights.

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.

Criterion curates extras for a release, they’re generally the best of the best - ferreting materials from around the globe, getting top industry people to speak, et al. Kane is a wonderful example of their curating abilities.

I detected a similar problem, at what was perceived as a layer change.

As would most people currently between upgrades, and running 4k to an HD display.

Question. What proportion of those who currently view only Blu-ray, would consider paying an additional $5 to be future-proofed?

Cost-effectiveness.

Again, Robert, unless I’m misunderstanding the release strategy, there are two different sets - a 3-disc and a 4-disc. They both include the Blu-ray of the film. The 4k is the fourth disc found only in the 4k / 4-disc set, which has different packaging. How would late or non-4k upgraders be...

From a marketing, packaging and distribution perspective, with many people still upgrading to 4k - to create two totally different packages, which at street price there’s a $10 savings, for abstaining from future-proofing. The savings in releasing only a 4-disc set should almost make up the...

Interesting, that there’s a 3-disc, Blu-ray only release. I’m now confused as to why there are two different set, with one only lacking the 4k.

There seems to be continuing confusion, as the Blu-ray and 4k sets are totally different. I'm unaware of any combined set. It seems to be either a Blu-ray 3-disc set or a 4k, but not both.

Yes

These are not “restoration labs,” they’re post facilities, and generally outside vendors have the QC responsibility.

I can confirm the problem, which only affects the Blu-ray. It has little to do with Criterion, and is mostly a final QC authoring error, handled by outside vendors. I’m certain there will be replacents. This in no way affects the 4k release.

I’m seeing writing on the manuscript page in the WB release. In distinct, but absolutely there. It’s blown out on the 4k. Both have the screening room shots timed too bright.

I doubt that there's 2k, which is not to say that Criterion should not honor it with a full-out 4k release, regardless.

Referencing older transfers, or prints produced in the past 40 years or so is a exercise with no end game. If original timing cards survived, they would only apply to the OCN, which does not. The closest that I recall seeing this film to original was a 16mm Dupont print, produced in the early...

If they are from the new scan, and I presume they will be, it will be interesting to see if my perceived problems are replicated on the Blu, or are different. The first noted may come down to timing, and the second could go either way.

Jealous

Known elements on Kong are nowhere near 2k resolution.

Everyone's faces are visible in one shot, including Erskine Sanford.

It's all about doing the tiniest bit of research, and / or actually watching the film. Day for night syndrome.

If you're referring to the latest JVC, I've not. I don't feel competent to deal with whatever changes occur, and will leave it to Kevin Miller, who handles my video gear.

Yes. I don’t believe the film benefitted from the technology, especially since it’s all second and fourth generation.

Via projection was running HDR. I can check out DV via OLED. Checked via OLED. Same or brighter. The shot in question is difficult as it’s the A side of a dissolve, going into a BCU of verbiage, seemingly properly exposed.

I’m unable to comment on the Blu.

Same great film. Totally new image harvest.

Legend has it that Orson Welles' Citizen Kane was one of the early Criterion releases back in laserdisc days, so it's only fitting that it should appear in the first batch of their 21st century releases in 4k UHD, and WB has made the correct move in licensing the product to Criterion. An...