Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Blu-ray and UHD' started by Robert Harris, Nov 2, 2018.
Madness! Madness! that would make a great line for the end of a movie
At the time of the release I was in the US and saw it at the Chinese Theater in 70mm.
I heard that the Warner Theater only ran it in 35mm, because of something to do with not wanting to run a 70 print on platters. Is that true?
I only know the Warner and ABC Shaftsbury Ave only used 35mm Dolby Stereo prints and l heard they used a mixture of UK and USA prints
because of a late finish.
I don't like the HDR on Superman 4K UHD, but I know others do. It's subjective of course. Even if it's not used a lot, sometimes it's out of place for me. On the 2001 4K it isn't out of place to me (but maybe to others). So it varies, and is subjective as I said.
I was just reading Bill Hunt's review of this disc, where he said, "Colors are more accurate, richly saturated, and nuanced than ever before." To me, that's also so very subjective, because again, no consumer display in existence can reproduce the REC.2020 color gamut. P3 remember is not for home cinema/displays. 4K UHDs are mastered to P3 gamut, but wrapped in a REC.2020 container in order for consumer displays to understand it. But since you can't calibrate the REC.2020 primaries on any consumer display device, the colors are not only not accurate (which is why such reviews I quoted are funny to me), but will look different on every display, depending on how each display deals with it.
So, while you are correct that the physical disc is most probably correct, and the best there is, we don't yet have the devices to display it properly. That's why I wanted a new Blu-ray from the new ON 4K master.
I haven't seen this disc yet (arriving today, but I doubt I will get to it tonight).
But so long as your P3 dE color errors (within the 2020 container) are under 3, I don't see how that's much of an issue? I think with animation where you reach 100% saturation it can be a bigger issue, but below that more displays are able to reach closer. I agree things can look different depending on the display EOTF and tone mapping, but several calibrated displays I've looked at with certain discs look pretty similar in many regards.
I've also noticed how the wider color gamut just looks more nuanced and pleasing - naturally with all of the UHD BD discs I've looked at (40ish). Where as with rec 709 on BD, there's almost a bit more of an over-saturated look a times that seems less natural looking. UHD BD just has more pleasing, natural color to my eyes.
When the 8k release has the original 6-track audio presented losslessly.
Or when pigs fly instead of men.
How can the 5.1 be the original theatrical (and I presume you mean 70mm) track? In the 70mm Dolby Baby Boom format before Apocalypse Now, the surrounds were mono and there were two LFE tracks (channels 2 and 4). Now in a 5.1, they can send the LFE tracks to the .1 and the surrounds can be mono, but then it's not really the original theatrical presentation and it's not really 5.1, is it? And by the way, split surround was used experimentally on a few 70mm prints on one reel, so there actually can be stereo surrounds for that one segment if they were able to find those original tracks.
P3 dE errors are measured @ below 100nits. The complete gamut is mapped by a display (from the mastered 1000/1100 or 4000 nits), and any change in the PQ curve naturally affects color also. Plus as I was saying, you cannot calibrate colors in HDR. You may TRY to calibrate the displays' CMS, but those 6 points will usually create even more problems and are best left at their defaults. I tried all this (and still mess around to try new things every other day) on my LG OLED, and it's just not a good thing. On a projector it will be worse.
Another thing I was going to mention, is that while HDR is a subjective thing some may or may not like on a particular disc, the display technology also plays a large part in that. On a projector you aren't really getting much of an effect, as the light output is not suitable for HDR. So it's doing heavy tone mapping. On an OLED or LED LCD, the same disc's HDR effects will look more pronounced. So it's really impossible to compare and totally subjective.
At the end of the day, if you like it, that's all that matters. If WB released an SDR Blu-ray along the 4K, it would be really easy to compare and see the differences. Comparing with a seven year old Blu-ray is not apples to apples. Or 4k apples to 2k apples
Check out this article: https://www.in70mm.com/news/2012/format_43/index.htm
Watched the 4K Superman this afternoon. It is, easily, the best this film has ever looked on home video. I watched the opening titles with both the ATMOS track and the DD 5.1 track. As mentioned earlier, I actually prefer the boosted LFE and swooshes (in the titles) so I watched the entire film in ATMOS. The DD 5.1 sounds fine, it just lacks the punch of the boosted effects.
The song on the kid's car radio is 'Rock Around The Clock', as it should be.
Blacks looks terrific. The star fields during the opening titles and other parts of the film are excellent. Space is nice and black and the stars are nice and bright. The glowing white Krypton clothing looked terrific too. It looked quite luminous on my setup but you could still see detail. Colors are awesome and Superman's suit stayed blue throughout, I don't recall a shift to teal anywhere. 99% of everything about this release is outstanding.
Now, my quibble... Playing it on my Panasonic UB900 (which lacks Dolby Vision) to my Sony 940E I felt the image was a bit too washed out at times. I feel Warner Bros went a little bit too far in dialing back the contrast (compared to earlier versions). Fortunately, it's not in every scene. Only the daylight outdoor scenes. It almost felt like there was a haze over the image (at times) that shouldn't be there. I don't mean softness, I mean a haze in the sense of how the sun would reflect off of a light fog and give a hazy look.
I am very curious to see how it will look in Dolby Vision when I get my UB9000 player. More important, how it will look in HDR10 with the UB9000's dynamic HDR adjustment set for the brightness of my 940E.
The lack of contrast didn't prevent me from enjoying the film. In fact, by the middle of the film I stopped thinking about it. But I certainly did notice it. It's been too long ago for me to remember if the original film was projected this way.
Still waiting for my disc to ship, but I just noticed the iTunes file has switched over to 4K, which is especially great because the previous version was cropped to 1.78.
That was only ever changed on the television version. No other release of the movie (theatrical mix/2001 re-mix) has had the WIlliams source cue. "Rock Around the Clock" has always, always, always been there.
Well this is what I thought and why I questioned it even being brought up. Still don’t know why it was ever brought up.
I've been curious for some time if the boom tracks (for any movie) actually ever contained discrete LFE info, or if they were always both duplicates containing the same LFE info. The block diagram in your referenced article suggests that both boom tracks originated from a single source and would therefore be identical. Either way it made sense to have the boom info on both tracks 2 and 4 for compatibility with pre-Dolby (Todd-AO) 6-track playback, but particularly with the original specs of the boom tracks being low passed at 250Hz it seems it might have been reasonable for them to have provided directional bass information.
I got the 4k disc at Target today, and thoroughly enjoyed listening to the entire 5.1 DD track this evening. Although I have an Oppo UDP-203 to play the disc, I'm still watching on a vintage 2008 1080p SDR display, so I won't comment on the picture. I also saw this as an opportunity to get the theatrical version on Blu-ray, which I didn't have before.
See my post above. I've been wondering if the boom tracks (2 & 4) were identical or not. The other issue could be if the boom tracks contained audio information above the 120hz brick wall limit on the LFE (.1) channel of our current home audio codecs. That higher frequency bass would be lost if it wasn't somehow moved to the tracks for the front (LCR) channels.
I've always been under the assumption that the boom tracks were just duplicates of each other owing to the fact that the left and right center channels didn't have enough oomph to output those LFE effects on their own. Proper subwoofers didn't become a thing with Dolby Baby Boom until THX standards came along.
^ Tomlison Holman's book "5.1 Surround Sound: Up and Running" states: "Just six months after "Star Wars," "Close Encounters of the Third Kind" was the first picture to use dedicated subwoofers, installed just for the purpose of playing the Baby Boom channel." In my area (to the best of my memory) there never were any theaters that combined THX certification with 70mm Dolby 6-track. I honestly don't know if my favorite 70mm house (the Glenwood Theatre of Overland Park, Kansas) ever added subwoofers to their Altec-Lansing A2-Xs.
So now there’s something called a boom track on this movie?
The image is just so soft. HDR is used well on the Krypton explosions(Crypt-Un as Marlon Brando pronounces it).
Maybe if I an Atmos setup I'd be a lot more impressed.