What's new

4K UHD discs of movies shot on film are being created from the 2K digital intermediate? (1 Viewer)

Wes Candela

Visual Storytelling Enthusiast
Premium
Joined
Nov 2, 2012
Messages
477
Location
New York, NY
Real Name
Wes Candela
Hi.
OK, I’m very disturbed to learn this and I feel foolish at the same time because this may have been common knowledge to everybody here except myself.

I grabbed the Best Buy copy of "Warrior" 2011, Nick Nolte, Tom Hardy and Joel Edgerton in a Gavin O'Connor powerhouse film.

Wes Candela-1.jpeg

I went online and found that it was a 4K disc created from the 2K digital intermediate

blu-ray.com said it was upscaled

but as I continued with my research, I found it out that it was shot on FILM

I was extremely confused, I realized this must be tactic used by movie studios that don't want to go through the process of remastering films from the original camera negative… So they simply take the digital intermediate and make the 4K UHD discs from that source

I don't know if this is normal as I just found out about this two hours ago and it highly disturbed me

Does anybody know if this is common practice?
Mr. Harris can you comment? @Robert Harris

Any explanation would help me understand this.

it must be financial I’m thinking because why in the world would you make a 4K UHD physical disc of FILM shot on celluloid using a subpar 2K digital intermediate.

As a Cinephil, I’m bothered now.
How often is this happening?

my research is below

Bluray.com stating it has been upscaled:

Wes Candela-1.jpeg

Google search confirming it was shot on film.

Wes Candela-1.jpeg

Confirmation from the website shotonwhat.com

Wes Candela-1.jpeg
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: PMF

Josh Steinberg

Premium
Reviewer
Senior HTF Member
Joined
Jun 10, 2003
Messages
26,329
Real Name
Josh Steinberg
It’s fairly common.

That’s because the film negative is not the final product - the 2K DI is. Film is merely the capture medium used but is not intended to be viewed as a finished movie. Until fairly recently, film was a cheaper and more accessible capture medium than digital cameras were. Even today, digital cameras are used far more frequently, often shooting at resolutions much higher than the final DI is. When a movie like Guardians Of The Galaxy 2 is shot using 8K cameras, it’s not because there’s any expectation that it will be an 8K movie. It’s because the filmmakers liked the look that camera achieved when they did preproduction camera tests.

There is at least a decade’s worth of movies that had 2K DIs as the final master format, and it continues to this day in many cases. This is the format that the filmmakers have chosen as their medium. It’s not a scam or some effort to deceive customers.

A reasonable argument can be made that if 2K DIs were sufficient for IMAX to display these movies on the world’s largest screens, surely it’s sufficient for home viewers.

Bottom line: for any movie that went through postproduction as a 2K DI, the resolution of the acquisition format is entirely irrelevant to what the final product is meant to be. A piece of film negative is no more a final product than a cup of flour is a loaf of bread.
 

Worth

Senior HTF Member
Joined
Jul 17, 2009
Messages
5,241
Real Name
Nick Dobbs
I was extremely confused, I realized this must be tactic used by movie studios that don't want to go through the process of remastering films from the original camera negative… So they simply take the digital intermediate and make the 4K UHD discs from that source...
The finished film only exists as a digital intermediate. There may be a negative, but it would be a film out of the 2K DI. In order to create a new 4K master, the entire post production process would need to be redone.
 

Worth

Senior HTF Member
Joined
Jul 17, 2009
Messages
5,241
Real Name
Nick Dobbs
When a movie like Guardians Of The Galaxy 2 is shot using 8K cameras, it’s not because there’s any expectation that it will be an 8K movie. It’s because the filmmakers liked the look that camera achieved when they did preproduction camera tests...
It also gives them room to play with - you can turn a wide shot into a medium, or a medium into a close up without any loss of detail.
 

Josh Steinberg

Premium
Reviewer
Senior HTF Member
Joined
Jun 10, 2003
Messages
26,329
Real Name
Josh Steinberg
The finished film only exists as a digital intermediate. There may be a negative, but it would be a film out of the 2K DI. In order to create a new 4K master, the entire post production process would need to be redone.

And then you’re not talking about presenting the finished film as the filmmakers intended on a disc, you’re talking about altering their already completed work to satisfy the whims of consumer hobbyists.
 

Lord Dalek

Senior HTF Member
Joined
Apr 4, 2005
Messages
7,100
Real Name
Joel Henderson
You're going to find that a good 80-90% of movies made in the last 25 years were finished in 2k. Either because of budget, visual effects, or because they were shot in 1080 in the first place.
 

OliverK

Senior HTF Member
Joined
Feb 1, 2000
Messages
5,742
And then you’re not talking about presenting the finished film as the filmmakers intended on a disc, you’re talking about altering their already completed work to satisfy the whims of consumer hobbyists.

"whims of consumer hobbyists" - that is such a nice and non-judgemental way of putting it...

In many cases the director and camera man would probably have preferred a product finished in 4K but because of budget and time constraints this often is not possible.

So it is not like 4k origination in a 4K format would not make sense, it is mainly a matter of time and money that we do not get more of it.
 

Saul Pincus

Auditioning
Joined
Jul 20, 2023
Messages
14
Real Name
Saul Pincus
I was involved in features at the crossover point when we went from finishing on film to finishing a film via a 2K DI. Because it was an overlap, for a few years there, the lab timers still had their jobs and rather than color time shot-to-shot, were now in charge of printing according to the specs of the image scientists who managed the pipeline in the DI suite. I remember the lab timers – old school and crusty like seamen, but really great at their craft – being grumpy all the time and rather unsatisfied with the color spectrum achievable at that juncture. Their jobs would be largely phased out within a few years, and to the last, they were bitterly dissatisfied with the resolution of the new medium they had been forced to midwife.

The landscape now is very different, and much of it is due to Netflix insisting on UHD deliverables for the past decade or so. It's had the effect of forcing the entire industry to normalize the 4K pipeline (which UHD very nearly is) as more achievable on smaller budgets. And we can now reliably realize even smaller projects in a 4K pipeline using off-the-shelf home computers (providing you invest a bit in proper monitoring.)
 
Last edited:

Wes Candela

Visual Storytelling Enthusiast
Premium
Joined
Nov 2, 2012
Messages
477
Location
New York, NY
Real Name
Wes Candela
That’s because the film negative is not the final product - the 2K DI is. Film is merely the capture medium used but is not intended to be viewed as a finished movie. Until fairly recently, film was a cheaper and more accessible capture medium than digital cameras were. Even today, digital cameras are used far more frequently, often shooting at resolutions much higher than the final DI is. When a movie like Guardians Of The Galaxy 2 is shot using 8K cameras, it’s not because there’s any expectation that it will be an 8K movie. It’s because the filmmakers liked the look that camera achieved when they did preproduction camera tests.

There is at least a decade’s worth of movies that had 2K DIs as the final master format, and it continues to this day in many cases. This is the format that the filmmakers have chosen as their medium. It’s not a scam or some effort to deceive customers.

A reasonable argument can be made that if 2K DIs were sufficient for IMAX to display these movies on the world’s largest screens, surely it’s sufficient for home viewers.

Bottom line: for any movie that went through postproduction as a 2K DI, the resolution of the acquisition format is entirely irrelevant to what the final product is meant to be. A piece of film negative is no more a final product than a cup of flour is a loaf of bread.

highly disturbing
 

Wes Candela

Visual Storytelling Enthusiast
Premium
Joined
Nov 2, 2012
Messages
477
Location
New York, NY
Real Name
Wes Candela
The finished film only exists as a digital intermediate. There may be a negative, but it would be a film out of the 2K DI. In order to create a new 4K master, the entire post production process would need to be redone.
We are losing so much because of this
 

Wes Candela

Visual Storytelling Enthusiast
Premium
Joined
Nov 2, 2012
Messages
477
Location
New York, NY
Real Name
Wes Candela
It also gives them room to play with - you can turn a wide shot into a medium, or a medium into a close up without any loss of detail.
Well, it's much easier to edit film digitally. This is the problem.
If it shot digitally and it's Digital intermediate is only 2K, not 4K or 8K

Then we the consumers are losing
 

Wes Candela

Visual Storytelling Enthusiast
Premium
Joined
Nov 2, 2012
Messages
477
Location
New York, NY
Real Name
Wes Candela
And then you’re not talking about presenting the finished film as the filmmakers intended on a disc, you’re talking about altering their already completed work to satisfy the whims of consumer hobbyists.
I'm going to use a comparison

This is like taking a film negative of a picture

Editing it digitally and printing it


The loss of detail is tremendous
 

Wes Candela

Visual Storytelling Enthusiast
Premium
Joined
Nov 2, 2012
Messages
477
Location
New York, NY
Real Name
Wes Candela
Please keep in mind that while many 2k productions were film-based, they were not cut negative based, which means there is no easy element to which to return for 4k.
I'm just realizing all of this as of today and I feel a bit silly that I didn't come to this realization earlier.



I find it sad that even if a movie was captured on film, it was edited digitally therefore, the 4K end product we receive at home is based on an inferior digital intermediate compared to celluloid


ugh
 

Neil S. Bulk

Senior HTF Member
Joined
Sep 13, 1999
Messages
3,373
Real Name
Neil S. Bulk
I find it sad that even if a movie was captured on film, it was edited digitally therefore, the 4K end product we receive at home is based on an inferior digital intermediate compared to celluloid
I hope you're not a fan of Star Trek: Deep Space Nine. If you are you're bound to be unhappy.
 

Dave H

Senior HTF Member
Joined
Aug 13, 2000
Messages
6,161
Some of the most stunning UHD BDs stem from 2K DIs.

4K native can be more detailed, depending on the source and how it was filmed, but HDR, wider color gamut, 10 bit, and potentially better compression (vs BD) are the bigger factors of the format by a long shot. Don't sweat it.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Sign up for our newsletter

and receive essential news, curated deals, and much more







You will only receive emails from us. We will never sell or distribute your email address to third party companies at any time.

Latest Articles

Forum statistics

Threads
356,951
Messages
5,126,950
Members
144,214
Latest member
filmfan101
Recent bookmarks
0
Top