Pre-Order 2001: A Space Odyssey (4k UHD) Available for Preorder (1 Viewer)

[PMF]

Truthfully I dont see why any film no matter how old can’t transition into 4K UHD.

Both were shot on 35mm film and would be native 4K not upscales.

Also imagine classic black and white films in 4K most lovers of classic cinema can tell you that many black and white films look more stunning in HD than something jisy made recently in color.

Add to that a title like Wizard and Gone both have been re-issued to death on all formats so far its only a matter of time before WB transitions them into 4K.

Don't get me wrong, I'm all for the 4K/UHD format;
but better, more qualified people could technically explain why this may or may not be so.
Hope you're right, though.

 

[CarlosMeat]

What year was that ad at the bottom ?

 

[PMF]

What year was that ad at the bottom ?

I'm betting 1969.

 

[Robert Harris]

Truthfully I dont see why any film no matter how old can’t transition into 4K UHD.

Both were shot on 35mm film and would be native 4K not upscales.

Also imagine classic black and white films in 4K most lovers of classic cinema can tell you that many black and white films look more stunning in HD than something jisy made recently in color.

Add to that a title like Wizard and Gone both have been re-issued to death on all formats so far its only a matter of time before WB transitions them into 4K.

Because many, especially 3-strip, never had 4k resolution to begin with, as designed and printed.

4k releases of many early films are a waste of effort.

Think heavily massaged in order to hold an image together.

We don’t want to see GWTW bg plates and mattes in 4k.

 

[Powell&Pressburger]

Because many, especially 3-strip, never had 4k resolution to begin with, as designed and printed.

4k releases of many early films are a waste of effort.

Think heavily massaged in order to hold an image together.

We don’t want to see GWTW bg plates and mattes in 4k.

Ok if they could create a 4K transfer... then how is that different than seeing a film print projected?

Isn't it true that film prints themselves have roughly the resolution at 4K?

At what resolution do you think Wizard or Gone with the Wind hit the screen at?

 

[Robert Harris]

Ok if they could create a 4K transfer... then how is that different than seeing a film print projected?

Isn't it true that film prints themselves have roughly the resolution at 4K?

At what resolution do you think Wizard or Gone with the Wind hit the screen at?

Guessing, but certainly less than 2k. Far less.

4k looks nothing like a 1939 dye transfer print.

 

[Worth]

...Isn't it true that film prints themselves have roughly the resolution at 4K?

A 35mm release print in projection is typically somewhere around 720p, and that's for modern movies just before the transition to digital. The original camera negative has around 3-4K of real image detail, but that's nowhere near to what you would have ever seen in projection.

 

[Brian Kidd]

Ok if they could create a 4K transfer... then how is that different than seeing a film print projected?

AFAIK, there are 4K DCP's available for both films, though I haven't seen them in person and have only found mention of them on the internet. As for whether or not it's overkill, I tend to side with Mr. Harris. You're talking about three strips of film combined to make the final image, which is simply not going to have the same level of detail as a single strip. Also, film grain structure and resolution improved a great deal after the time when these films were shot, so it's doubtful that we'd see the kind of jump in quality in a 4K transfer as you might think.

EDIT: Over on the Film Tech Forum, there is a post from last year that actually lists two available 4K DCP's from different years, so they exist. Whether they were upscaled from 2K or were scanned at 4K, I don't know.

 

[Michel_Hafner]

Because many, especially 3-strip, never had 4k resolution to begin with, as designed and printed.
4k releases of many early films are a waste of effort.
.

Since only UHD currently delivers something covering more or less the gamut of 35mm colour film and 10 bit data it's not a waste even if spatial detail is far below 4K and/or no colour is present. Rec 709 is not sufficient for colour and 8 bit is always compromised concerning optimising shadow and highlight detail at the same time. I'll take a 4K version with 10 bit any day over an 8 bit 1080p version of any film based source.

 

[Michel_Hafner]

Not sure that I buy those frames.

Looks hard to believe, right? It's even worse since this comparison uses the inferior US BD with the baked in chroma fringing. The Italian one does not have this issue.
Some comparisons using the better BD here:
http://forum.blu-ray.com/showpost.php?p=14910114&postcount=537

 

[OliverK]

Since only UHD currently delivers something covering more or less the gamut of 35mm colour film and 10 bit data it's not a waste even if spatial detail is far below 4K and/or no colour is present. Rec 709 is not sufficient for colour and 8 bit is always compromised concerning optimising shadow and highlight detail at the same time. I'll take a 4K version with 10 bit any day over an 8 bit 1080p version of any film based source.

With all things being equal I fully agree, we also get full 1080p chroma resolution. With that being said we will only get so many releases each year and I would rather have releases from movies that also have a certain amount of detail, especially when they are readily available like for example Ben-Hur or How the West was Won.

 

[PMF]

Deleted by PMF

 

[Tino]

Looks hard to believe, right? It's even worse since this comparison uses the inferior US BD with the baked in chroma fringing. The Italian one does not have this issue.
Some comparisons using the better BD here:
http://forum.blu-ray.com/showpost.php?p=14910114&postcount=537

Pretty sure RAH was disagreeing with those caps. Not agreeing.

 

[Patrick*R]

Guessing, but certainly less than 2k. Far less.

4k looks nothing like a 1939 dye transfer print.

Would you please expound on this?

A 35mm release print in projection is typically somewhere around 720p, and that's for modern movies just before the transition to digital. The original camera negative has around 3-4K of real image detail, but that's nowhere near to what you would have ever seen in projection.

Are you saying the dupe print or the projection method is limited in detail?

 

[Worth]

Are you saying the dupe print or the projection method is limited in detail?

Both. There's a fair bit of generation loss going from the negative to IP to IN to release print, then there's also a loss of resolution due to the mechanics of film projection, where the image is never perfectly stable, unlike digital.

 

[Michel_Hafner]

Pretty sure RAH was disagreeing with those caps. Not agreeing.

I'm aware of that but it does not change the facts. These stills are not manipulated, they show what's on the discs.

 

[CarlosMeat]

I'm aware of that but it does not change the facts. These stills are not manipulated, they show what's on the discs.

All I have to say is with the resolution apparently degraded dramatically "where's the beef"?

 

[Jim*Tod]

Went today to see the new MISSION IMPOSSIBLE movie in IMAX. There was a trailer for 2001 in IMAX with a date of August 24th. The trailer looked OK... it flashed by pretty quickly so hard to judge about color values. I assume this is the new 4K restoration. I cannot find anything on the internet about this... does anyone know anything?

 

[CarlosMeat]

Went today to see the new MISSION IMPOSSIBLE movie in IMAX. There was a trailer for 2001 in IMAX with a date of August 24th. The trailer looked OK... it flashed by pretty quickly so hard to judge about color values. I assume this is the new 4K restoration. I cannot find anything on the internet about this... does anyone know anything?

I'm looking for this in a local theater. Two months ahead of the UHD Blu Ray

 

[Osato]

Went today to see the new MISSION IMPOSSIBLE movie in IMAX. There was a trailer for 2001 in IMAX with a date of August 24th. The trailer looked OK... it flashed by pretty quickly so hard to judge about color values. I assume this is the new 4K restoration. I cannot find anything on the internet about this... does anyone know anything?

Thanks for the post about 2001.
It’s been really confusing that dates and locations were never published for this restoration event after it was announced.
The confusion continues to the infinite and beyond...