A Few Words About A few words about...™ HDR -- in 4k UHD Blu-ray (1 Viewer)

[DavidMiller]

HDR if done right is an improvement (better color space and contrast). I guess I understand all you purists out there. It will be interesting to see what these and the other titles that are on there way look like with HDR applied. I would say some of the old 4K movies I have watched have looked pretty darn good but they where non-HDR.

 

[OliverK]

We wouldn't have this discussion if one could just have all movies in an SDR version with the added HDR info being separate from the original movie timing for normal SDR cinema and how it is supposed to look. That would give everybody a choice similar to how 3D sound is added to the normal Dolby TrueHD track instead of replacing it.

 

[Robert Harris]

We wouldn't have this discussion if one could just have all movies in an SDR version with the added HDR info being separate from the original movie timing for normal SDR cinema and how it is supposed to look. That would give everybody a choice similar to how 3D sound is added to the normal Dolby TrueHD track instead of replacing it.

With a shorter film this is possible. See Shout Factory's Journey to Space, which includes two versions with separate data streams.

 

[DavidMiller]

With a shorter film this is possible. See Shout Factory's Journey to Space, which includes two versions with separate data streams.

I watch this last night and was thrown by the pop up... I guess that is what you can do with a movie that is just over an hour long. Fantastic 4K HDR presentation though I was wowed by this movie.

 

[OliverK]

With a shorter film this is possible. See Shout Factory's Journey to Space, which includes two versions with separate data streams.

I would like to see this with every movie with the data that constitutes the additional HDR information tacked onto the stream with the standard version. It would be a shame to have two versions of Journey to Space on UHD but only an HDR version of Lawrence or Ben-Hur.

 

[DavidMiller]

I would like to see this with every movie with the data that constitutes the additional HDR information tacked onto the stream with the standard version. It would be a shame to have two versions of Journey to Space on UHD but only an HDR version of Lawrence or Ben-Hur.

You can always just stream them if that is what you want Lawrence has been available for awhile in 4K STD.

 

[OliverK]

You can always just stream them if that is what you want Lawrence has been available for awhile in 4K STD.

Why would I have to resort to streaming with inferior audio and video quality in order to see a movie the way it can be seen theatrically?
There are a 4k DCP of a lot of older movies and they could be put on a 4k UHD disc in almost the exact same quality and look, some say even better due to more advanced compression algorythms.

Instead we only get the movies in some kind of reinvented version, the first one being Ghostbusters.

Was Titanic not available anymore in 2D when th 3D version came out? No, there was also a 2D version that looked very good and that is the way it is supposed to be. The studios have got that one wrong as there are people who do not want the picture of a 30 or 50 year old movie to pop out like never before or show superbright highlights or flames.

 

[DanH1972]

I shudder at the thought of The Godfather with HDR applied.

I read that Coppola is revisiting his films with new HDR grading... and he seems to like it.

 

[Stephen_J_H]

*shudder*

 

[DanH1972]

*shudder*

HDR will work if the original elements have enough usable dynamic range and TLC is applied.

Unfortunately, I would imagine the only films being selected for UHD Blu-ray are those that the studios feel will be a showcase for HDR. If you have a film that would only look good in 4k, WCG, and 10 or 12 bit and not HDR, it may not get selected... ever.

 

[Stephen_J_H]

When applying HDR to films produced prior to the digital era, more than TLC is needed. Since it appears that the Ultra HD Premium standard lumps wide colour gamut, 10 or 12 bit and HDR under the HDR umbrella, what's needed is a case by case analysis of which elements of HDR are helpful, and which are not. After that evaluation is completed, then TLC comes into the mix. I think it can be successfully argued that The Godfather films will gain no appreciable benefit from HDR as a whole, and we've already heard from RAH with regards to Lawrence of Arabia and My Fair Lady. However, it is possible (however unlikely) that newer films originated in large format, due to advances in emulsion technology, may benefit from WCG, but not the brightness range component.

 

[DavidMiller]

Why would I have to resort to streaming with inferior audio and video quality in order to see a movie the way it can be seen theatrically?

Really? Did not most of these "older" movies just have 2 channel audio? Isn't "enhancing" one element just as bad as the other? You purists are so fickle it just cracks me up. I'm happy with whatever they decide as long as it has an amazing picture. HDR has many benefits and I'm fine with them being applied it in moderation if it gives me an amazing picture. I didn't see those original movies in the theater and I don't need to see them in there original picture if I can have better. I have watched part of Lawerence streaming and it was amazing.

 

[Peter Apruzzese]

Really? Did not most of these "older" movies just have 2 channel audio?

No.

 

[OliverK]

Really? Did not most of these "older" movies just have 2 channel audio? Isn't "enhancing" one element just as bad as the other? You purists are so fickle it just cracks me up. I'm happy with whatever they decide as long as it has an amazing picture. HDR has many benefits and I'm fine with them being applied it in moderation if it gives me an amazing picture. I didn't see those original movies in the theater and I don't need to see them in there original picture if I can have better. I have watched part of Lawerence streaming and it was amazing.

Actually those old movies had mostly mono, 4-channel or 6-channel sound mixes and no, I did never ask for those channels to be somehow mixed to a 5.1 or 7.1 output.

What you are missing here is that many of us would like to have a choice of watching a movie looking very close to how the DoP and the director intended it to look when it was released, not some 25 year old colorists version of what it would take to make the movie look "amazing" today when blown up to HDR. A choice does not mean that you do not get your beloved HDR versions of every movie ever made if this is what makes them sell well, The idea is to be able to have both.

 

[DavidMiller]

No.

You didn't answer the question and per everyones favorite... Mono(35 mm prints) (original version) |4-Track Stereo (magnetic prints) (35 mm) (original version)... Just saying 5.1 dates back to 1976 when Dolby Labs modified the track usage of the six analogue magnetic soundtracks where modified. So if you want to be a purist on how it was originally presented then you would only have a 2 or 3 channel track. So back to my original question shouldn't they only deliver the movie in stereo to meet your purist standard?

 

[DavidMiller]

Actually those old movies had mostly mono, 4-channel or 6-channel sound mixes and no, I did never ask for those channels to be somehow mixed to a 5.1 or 7.1 output.

What you are missing here is that many of us would like to have a choice of watching a movie looking very close to how the DoP and the director intended it to look when it was released, not some 25 year old colorists version of what it would take to make the movie look "amazing" today when blown up to HDR. A choice does not mean that you do not get your beloved HDR versions of every movie ever made if this is what makes them sell well, The idea is to be able to have both.

I'm fine if they provide both. If they actually release Lawerence it is going to have to be 4 disks for both versions I'm guessing. It will be one expensive release that will only be bought buy maybe 10% of the disk buyers at best. This is why I don't think you would get that option and have to settle with steaming which is very good by the way if you have a good internet connection.

 

[Peter Apruzzese]

You didn't answer the question and per everyones favorite... Mono(35 mm prints) (original version) |4-Track Stereo (magnetic prints) (35 mm) (original version)... Just saying 5.1 dates back to 1976 when Dolby Labs modified the track usage of the six analogue magnetic soundtracks where modified. So if you want to be a purist on how it was originally presented then you would only have a 2 or 3 channel track. So back to my original question shouldn't they only deliver the movie in stereo to meet your purist standard?

No movies were made to be played back in 2-channel (L-R) stereo theatrically. In general you would have the film in mono (single channel) and/or 3-channel (L-C-R), 4-channel, 6-channel, etc. And, yes, for many of these films I would like to have the original mix (obviously, 5 screen channels on a video would be impractical) in addition to any re-mixes.

 

[Stephen_J_H]

You didn't answer the question and per everyones favorite... Mono(35 mm prints) (original version) |4-Track Stereo (magnetic prints) (35 mm) (original version)... Just saying 5.1 dates back to 1976 when Dolby Labs modified the track usage of the six analogue magnetic soundtracks where modified. So if you want to be a purist on how it was originally presented then you would only have a 2 or 3 channel track. So back to my original question shouldn't they only deliver the movie in stereo to meet your purist standard?

Um, no. When Dolby Labs modified 6-track 70mm initially to include LFE, we got a 4.2 mix (the baby boom era) which used the previous centre left and centre right channels to carry the LFE information. The surround channel remained mono with a handful of exceptions (split surrounds on 70mm prints of Apocalypse Now come to mind). Even Cinema Digital Sound was 4.0 or 4.1. It wasn't until DTS and Dolby Digital came along that 5.1 tracks became widespread, and SDDS attempted to resurrect the 5 screen channel format with its 8 channel configuration.

But I digress. The goal should always be to recreate the original theatrical experience as accurately as possible. I have no problem with experimentation per se, but an accurate theatrical presentation should be the primary goal and always made available alongside any new, flashy HDR presentation. This is why I'm excited that Scream Factory's new BD of The Thing will include the 70mm 4.1 mix as well as a 5.1 version. Carpenter did the same thing with Big Trouble in Little China.

 

[DavidMiller]

I guess my point is that if you want the crappy grainy horrible sounding movie theaters from the 60s,70s all well and good but I can skip it myself.

I hope you all get what you want.. I won't be buying them and most of the main stream consumers won't either. Which is why they will spruce them up to make it a new experience for the modern audience that has come to expect it.

 

[Robert Harris]

I guess my point is that if you want the crappy grainy horrible sounding movie theaters from the 60s,70s all well and good but I can skip it myself.

I hope you all get what you want.. I won't be buying them and most of the main stream consumers won't either. Which is why they will spruce them up to make it a new experience for the modern audience that has come to expect it.

Any studio that takes its library seriously will not changing the original experience, which I don't recall as being grainy and horrible sounding.

The home theater experience is meant to, as you say, "spruce up" the older productions. But change them? Not so much, unless the filmmakers are involved, and with to re-visit and re-envision.

I'll stop at sprucing up.