A Few Words About A few words about…™ Unforgiven — in 4k UHD Blu-ray (1 Viewer)

[Michel_Hafner]

There are also instances of overdone sharpening according to this poster: http://forum.blu-ray.com/showpost.php?p=13618075&postcount=755
WB should recheck the whole thing. And sharpening for 4K should be outlawed except for very specific and rare problem shots.

 

[Tino]

Finished it. What a terrific film. One of Eastwoods best.

I didn't notice any EE or sharpening on my OLED. Other than the "windmill anomaly" that can't be seen in motion, the transfer is very good. And I briefly compared it to the blu Ray included and the 4K is noticeably better.

I'm glad I purchased it rather than rely on opinions of random posters from another site that is famous for hyperbole ( although I do like their reviewers).

I suggest people see it with their own eyes and decide for themselves. I'm glad I did. A worthy upgrade.

 

[gadgtfreek]

Finished it. What a terrific film. One of Eastwoods best.

I didn't notice any EE or sharpening on my OLED. Other than the "windmill anomaly" that can't be seen in motion, the transfer is very good. And I briefly compared it to the blu Ray included and the 4K is noticeably better.

I'm glad I purchased it rather than rely on opinions of random posters from another site that is famous for hyperbole ( although I do like their reviewers).

I suggest people see it with their own eyes and decide for themselves. I'm glad I did. A worthy upgrade.

I can't wait to watch next weekend!

 

[Michael Osadciw]

By the way, Anyone know how many nits the LG OLED 65e6 has?

The LG B/E/G6 is about 540nits after calibration. It rolls off a bit earlier from the ST2084 curve than this year's models, as well as the new Sony. The new LG models stay close to the required nit level before rolling off faster and appear to have less aggressive ABL (from my memory). It's a brighter panel overall. The Sony BVM-X300 hard clips at 1000 nits but sticks to the rest of the requirements quite precisely. All of measurements are done with the K-M CS-1000A.

From what I'm reading elsewhere, but am awaiting verification, it seems most HDR releases have peaks well under 1000 nits (300-600 nit range). Just because they are on a 1000 or 4000 nit monitor, it doesn't mean the full range is being used.

 

[Tino]

The LG B/E/G6 is about 540nits after calibration. It rolls off a bit earlier from the ST2084 curve than this year's models, as well as the new Sony. The new LG models stay close to the required nit level before rolling off faster and appear to have less aggressive ABL (from my memory). It's a brighter panel overall. The Sony BVM-X300 hard clips at 1000 nits but sticks to the rest of the requirements quite precisely. All of measurements are done with the K-M CS-1000A.

From what I'm reading elsewhere, but am awaiting verification, it seems most HDR releases have peaks well under 1000 nits (300-600 nit range). Just because they are on a 1000 or 4000 nit monitor, it doesn't mean the full range is being used.

Thanks Michael

I just wish I understood it.

 

[gadgtfreek]

FYI, 540 nits is a bit low from calibrations I have seen on 65" E and C models. My E6 65" starts to roll off and I guess tone map in the 720 realm.

Its not uncommon for E6 and C6 models to run 650-720 after cal.

 

[gadgtfreek]

This is my 65 E6, post cal, in HDR Standard.

 

[Michael Osadciw]

Pre-calibration the nits are higher. If one calibrates starting at code 503-512 to ensure a measured target of 93-103nits, then the max you will hit is 540nits peak. If one ignores this step and keeps 503-512 at the 120-130 or so nits that the HDR/Standard mode is preset in, then yes, the top end will be brighter as will the rest of the video range from 65-512 (black at 64). The goal should be to stick to ST2084 as close as possible - not brighter or darker by large amounts - rather than to set it at the greatest achievable peak. I also find that cheaper meters give me brigher readings than what my Konica-Minolta gives me, and I only trust my K-M.

 

[gadgtfreek]

Several well respected US calibrators figure the peak first, and then do the math using the following LG recommendation. They also don't use cheap meters, so not sure what you imply. Following the LG procedure for 540 nits exactly is handicapping the display's calibrated image IMO.

http://www.lg.com/us/support/products/documents/UHDA Calibration Procedure.pdf

None of this has anything to do with Unforgiven, so I shall move on.

 

[Michael Osadciw]

I've deleted my post as I believe it was misinterpreted. Looking forward to good discussion, not for drawing guns in good ol' Unforgiven style.

 

[Robert Harris]

View attachment 38252 I was implying nothing other than a $30K laboratory spectroradiometer will give results with more precision than what can be obtained from many sub $10K meters (most cases). Since the topic of OLEDs was brought up in this thread as discussion of cd/m2, for anyone interested in the OLED results, the OLED will give you a great image when set correctly, especially the 2017 models. The graphs above were taken from a 55B6P I calibrated. Excellent grayscale performance with most x/y within +/-0.004 (raw data and graph on left) and sticks very close to ST2084 (graphs on right). In the table below, you can see how the measured light output (top number) is close to the target light output for the associated code (fourth number down). Stick to the rules, follow the curve, and all of your UHD content will be on its way to being faithfully reproduced as best as the "x"-generation OLED will allow.

This thread has now made me want to pick up Unforgiven. The topic of how it looks on projectors and panels has got me very interested. So the studio just got a sale, which I believe is the whole point of these threads.

Actually, the point of the threads is to honestly make consumers aware of the quality or problems of releases, before they purchase.

And to explain problems, whenever possible, when they are found to exist.

 

[Tino]

From the Cannes film festival;

CANNES, France Clint Eastwood does not rule out making another Western, he said on Saturday as he presented a 25th anniversary restored copy of "Unforgiven" at the Cannes Film Festival.

"When I read the ("Unforgiven") script 25 years ago, I always thought that this would be a good last Western for me to do," said the 86-year-old actor-director.

"And it was the last Western, because I have never read one that worked as well as this one since that.

"But who knows, maybe something will come up in the future," said Eastwood, who made his name in the TV series "Rawhide" and the so-called spaghetti Westerns of the 1960s, now considered classics.

"Unforgiven" won four Oscars including Best Picture and Best Director for Eastwood who also starred.

 

[Michael Osadciw]

Actually, the point of the threads is to honestly make consumers aware of the quality or problems of releases, before they purchase. And to explain problems, whenever possible, when they are found to exist.

Yes, Robert, I agree and that's very true. After all, that's why I reviewed DVDs and Blu-rays on this website from 2003-2011. It's been a while since I've visited. It's good to be back Hi!

 

[Robert Harris]

Yes, Robert, I agree and that's very true. After all, that's why I reviewed DVDs and Blu-rays on this website from 2003-2011. It's been a while since I've visited. It's good to be back Hi!

Thought I'd not seen you 'round these parts lately.

Please check your weapons with the mod. They'll be retuned when you leave town.

The .32, also please...

 

[Tino]

What about the Schofield?

 

[stevenHa]

Robert, can you discuss what your smoothing/blur settings are when reviewing both old and new films (do you have different settings for each) ? It seems to me when I watch films on my OLED B6 that they seem to have some sped up smoothing motion and look more like video than film (I don't see too many new movies in the theater so I don't know if that is what they should like, but what about older movies) ?
Thanks.

 

[Alan Tully]

Blimey, 4K UHD does get technical (& even more so over at blu-ray.com), remember the good old days when you just loaded in the DVD & enjoyed the movie.

 

[Michael Osadciw]

Thought I'd not seen you 'round these parts lately.

Please check your weapons with the mod. They'll be retuned when you leave town.

The .32, also please...

Hi Robert - I've deleted my post (can you edit out my quote in your post?). I didn't intend at all to come across brash but thought I was being helpful to those who'd be interested. I've handed over my .32 to you in your end of town. I'm not interested in any showdown with any member here. Just passing through. Ain't looking for trouble in this wild west.

Back to the title of this thread, you wrote:

"What we do know, is that every bit of information, regardless of actual resolution, has been harvested, and finalized in pure 4k"

I was a bit confused with this because at the beginning of your review who said that it could have been inferred that the original negative was severely damaged. But this disc has come from a scan of the negative which has been in good order? Or from a different print?

 

[Robert Harris]

Hi Robert - I've deleted my post (can you edit out my quote in your post?). I didn't intend at all to come across brash but thought I was being helpful to those who'd be interested. I've handed over my .32 to you in your end of town. I'm not interested in any showdown with any member here. Just passing through. Ain't looking for trouble in this wild west.

Back to the title of this thread, you wrote:

"What we do know, is that every bit of information, regardless of actual resolution, has been harvested, and finalized in pure 4k"

I was a bit confused with this because at the beginning of your review who said that it could have been inferred that the original negative was severely damaged. But this disc has come from a scan of the negative which has been in good order? Or from a different print?

I have absolutely no problems with your posts.

Actually a pleasant surprise to have you here. Stick around.

Our community "request" pertains to all, inclusive of Schofields, Remingtons, Smiths, as well as them little deringer knock-offs.

Should you desire to carry the real thing, with a double rr, not a problem, as we're in the rainy season, and you're powder will be wet.

 

[Robert Harris]

Hi Robert - I've deleted my post (can you edit out my quote in your post?). I didn't intend at all to come across brash but thought I was being helpful to those who'd be interested. I've handed over my .32 to you in your end of town. I'm not interested in any showdown with any member here. Just passing through. Ain't looking for trouble in this wild west.

Back to the title of this thread, you wrote:

"What we do know, is that every bit of information, regardless of actual resolution, has been harvested, and finalized in pure 4k"

I was a bit confused with this because at the beginning of your review who said that it could have been inferred that the original negative was severely damaged. But this disc has come from a scan of the negative which has been in good order? Or from a different print?

Sorry for the confusion. You've been away so long, you've forgotten my odd humor. No damage. WB publicized the fact that for 2011, the film was "restored." They attach different meanings to the word than I. At least they did in that case.

I find it odd when a film is noted as restored, without a mention of cause.

A bit like The Little Mermaid, which was "restored" for its special laser disc release.

I have no problem with a bit of marketing sizzle, the misuse of that particular term makes me cranky.

Ever notice how olives are sold by size, and there's never a small? They seem to run from large to Colossal.

Just sayin'