UHD Review A Few Words About A few words about...™ Dune (2021) -- in 4k UHD (1 Viewer)

[TJPC]

Best of luck. I did my redemption on my "fruit-based" device with no difficulty.

Just entered the new code and immediately got my digital copy.

 

[Michel_Hafner]

Watching the 3D blu- ray I just received from Amazon and it is EXCELLENT. Like watching a different film compared to the 2D- the conversion is excellent- bright, sharp and really makes it more engaging. Eventually I will buy the 4K- like next Black Friday.

The 3D is sharper than the UHD. I don't like the DAD master much. I wish they would release the DDD UHD.

 

[Chewbabka]

If I'm not mistaken, the movie was shot digitally, output to film, and then rescanned back to digital for esoteric reasons about wanting it to look more "analog" or something (which, apparently, shooting on film in the first place wasn't good enough to accomplish).

I haven't seen the disc version, but the movie didn't look particularly great on HBO Max when it premiered there.

Just watched the 4K, and I think the process employed looks stunning. It suits the locations very well. The sound was big and I loved it.

I did not notice this look during my first viewing in 4k on HBO Max during the initial run. Presumably the encode couldn’t keep up with the texture. But who needs theaters when you can stream at home, amiright?

 

[Malcolm R]

I watched this in 3D a few days ago. 3D is not essential, but it adds some nice depth. I enjoyed the film (my first exposure to anything "Dune"), though I'm still not sure I understand all the politics and mystical mumbo-jumbo. Maybe a little bit more explanation would have been helpful. I also think they should have done a better job explaining the shields. I had to look in Wikipedia to figure out why everyone bothered to wear a shield that didn't seem to offer much protection in battle.

 

[JoshZ]

Just watched the 4K, and I think the process employed looks stunning. It suits the locations very well. The sound was big and I loved it.

I did not notice this look during my first viewing in 4k on HBO Max during the initial run. Presumably the encode couldn’t keep up with the texture. But who needs theaters when you can stream at home, amiright?

Yes, I agree that the UHD disc does look better than the 4K stream on HBO Max. It's still a little soft by 4K standards and quite grainy, however.

 

[ManW_TheUncool]

Re: the film-out and people suggesting they should have filmed out to 65mm instead-

The film-out was done to an extremely fine-grain, extremely slow (1 ASA!) Kodak intermediate film stock. The intention was to emulate the grain structure of having shot the entire film on IMAX negative stocks (which for most productions would often mean 500 ASA filmstock being used for many scenes, and I believe the slowest Kodak camera negative stock is 50 ASA sunlight-balanced), and after extensive tests, they found that outputting to that 1 ASA intermediate stock in 35mm and rescanning it in 4K gave it that "IMAX grain structure" look. Given how insanely slow and fine-grained that 1 ASA stock is, I doubt anything would have been gained by doing a film out to a larger version of that stock.

Thanks for that interesting info... and the following as well...

Re: the IMAX versions, some of the effects shots are actually *wider* in the 'Scope version. The IMAX versions of those shots are "cropped" left/right. Now, these shots were *composed* so that the main, important picture info would fit in the 1.44:1 center, but they were rendered out at a full 'Scope aspect ratio with "extra image" at the sides, basically the opposite of what usually happens with IMAX presentations ("opened up" left/right here as opposed to top and bottom).

Pretty sure I read your post when you made it, but don't recall this bit about how the VAR was achieved.

Is there a good/reliable list of all the SFX shots/scenes that were done this way since you said "some", not all? OR was that done for all SFX shots/scenes, but not all 1.43:1 shots/scenes actually had CG SFX?

Eventually I will buy the 4K- like next Black Friday.

I wasn't expecting to get it so soon, but the recent Target B2G1 deal combined w/ it dropping to just ~$13 was just too compelling to pass up -- basically BF pricing coming 5 months earlier... Also ended up getting No Time to Die 4K for essentially same net/bargain pricing because of that sale...

_Man_

 

[Chewbabka]

Yes, I agree that the UHD disc does look better than the 4K stream on HBO Max. It's still a little soft by 4K standards and quite grainy, however.

That’s what I mean by “this look”. I think it works here. I know there are different tastes, but “tack sharp” needn’t be the only way to photograph a film, imo.

 

[ManW_TheUncool]

That’s what I mean by “this look”. I think it works here. I know there are different tastes, but “tack sharp” needn’t be the only way to photograph a film, imo.

I haven't seen the actual disc yet, but if it's a bit sharper than the HBO Max stream, then it's probably just about right for home viewing (even on a big-ish FP setup).

However, it definitely did look/feel a tad too soft at least some of the time on the giant IMAX screen at the Lincoln Square AMC in NYC -- the look definitely suits the more dreamy/vision sequences and also at least some of the outdoor shots and/or ones filled w/ spice in the air, but some shots could probably use higher rez and sharper details OTOH.

_Man_

 

[JoshZ]

That’s what I mean by “this look”. I think it works here. I know there are different tastes, but “tack sharp” needn’t be the only way to photograph a film, imo.

I think the UHD disc looks fine, but it didn't compress well for streaming during the movie's premiere on HBO Max. That left me with a rather negative first impression of the photography. I probably wouldn't have questioned it had I watched the disc first.

 

[OliverK]

The 3D is sharper than the UHD. I don't like the DAD master much. I wish they would release the DDD UHD.

Obviously it is his artistic vision but it is a shame when he ends up with the 4K version looking less detailed than the 3D Blu-ray.
Is it known if the film-out was only for 2D or is there another reason why the 1080p 3D version is sharper?

 

[Malcolm R]

From Wikipedia:

The film was shot for the IMAX format with an IMAX-certified Arri Alexa LF camera and an IMAX-certified Alexa Mini LF prototype, equipped with Panavision's large-format lenses in the Ultra Vista and H-series lineup, with select scenes seeing the aspect ratio opened up to 1.90:1 on all IMAX screens, and to 1.43:1 on select IMAX screens outfitted with IMAX's dual-laser projection system. The finished footage was transferred to 35mm film stock, then scanned back to 4K, in order to achieve a more film-like look.

Don't know if that explains any difference between 3D and 4K, but it would seem to explain why the overall film appears a bit "softer" than some expect. It sounds like the final film is basically sourced from a 35mm print, rather than from original footage shot by the cameras.

 

[Michel_Hafner]

Obviously it is his artistic vision but it is a shame when he ends up with the 4K version looking less detailed than the 3D Blu-ray.
Is it known if the film-out was only for 2D or is there another reason why the 1080p 3D version is sharper?

Only for 2D. I compared a still from both versions and the 1080p 3D with some sharpening was a sharp as the 4K from one eye. With both eyes it looked sharper to me.

 

[OliverK]

Only for 2D. I compared a still from both versions and the 1080p 3D with some sharpening was a sharp as the 4K from one eye. With both eyes it looked sharper to me.

Should be interesting to watch the 3D version in 2D to get an idea. I would expect that the 2D version would have better MTF as it did not have to go through the DAD but weren't there scenes where there is detail that goes beyond 2k even though it is found to be at a lower amplitude?
Probably not to such a high degree as there would be losses both in going from D to A and again going from A to D and in both cases there would not be any benefit of oversampling as both processes would have been 4K and analog and not native resolution / 8K and analog.

 

[KeithDA]

a variable aspect ratio presentation that switched between 2.40:1 and 1.90:1 in some locations, and 2:40:1 and 1.44:1 in other locations. This aided tremendously in the film’s presentation and should have been preserved in some fashion for the home release.

There's a rumour on AV Forums that Dune part 1 is going to be re-released on disc with the IMAX ratio footage included.....