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

[Peter Apruzzese]

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 don't believe anyone here has advocated that. Still trying to figure out how a movie theater can be "grainy", but the day is early.

 

[Robert Harris]

I don't believe anyone here has advocated that. Still trying to figure out how a movie theater can be "grainy", but the day is early.

It's the image projected through yellow cigarette smoke.

 

[OliverK]

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 didn't know that wanting a higher bitrate bigger color space higher bit depth prerecorded version of LOA will not look better than what can be streamed. Apparently you seem to think that it would even look grainy and sound horrible. No idea how Sony would mess that one up so much? I also saw a 70mm release print by the way of LoA (and many other large format movies for that matter) and thought it had very good sound and very litle grain but apparently I must be mistaken about this...

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.

Maybe you should just check out some 4k releases without HDR when they become available for movies that interest you. There are some around already in Germany and I am sure there are / will be some releases in the US, too.

 

[DavidMiller]

Maybe you should just check out some 4k releases without HDR when they become available for movies that interest you. There are some around already in Germany and I am sure there are / will be some releases in the US, too.

I have lots of 4K releases that are not in HDR what is your point? I will actually be able to do a comparison directly this week as I have bought the Star Trek movies on UHD Disc and I own the 4K non-HDR versions. The 24 UHD Discs I have so far have been very impressed with what HDR brings to the game. I get that I'm in the minority here and I'm fine with that. If I'm paying the big bucks for my equipment I'm looking for movies that will show it off. If you want a 4K non-HDR movie of whatever, cool I hope you get it.

 

[Stephen_J_H]

I have lots of 4K releases that are not in HDR what is your point? I will actually be able to do a comparison directly this week as I have bot of the Star Trek movies in 4K non-HDR. The 24 UHD Discs I have so far have been very impressed with what HDR brings to the game. I get that I'm in the minority here and I'm fine with that. If I'm paying the big bucks for my equipment I'm looking for movies that will show it off. If you want a 4K non-HDR movie of whatever, cool I hope you get it.

No; you have 1080p downconversions of 4K masters which have been optimised to work within the colourspace of current HD standards. They may uprez to 4K nicely, but they are not true 4K releases.

 

[DavidMiller]

No; you have 1080p downconversions of 4K masters which have been optimised to work within the colourspace of current HD standards. They may uprez to 4K nicely, but they are not true 4K releases.

Ah, no I have several 4K versions that came with the two harddrives I bought to store 4K movies. One of those came with the following 4K non-HDR movies: G.I. Joe: Retaliation, World War Z, X-Men Origins: Wolverine, Night at the Museum, The Counselor, Forrest Gump, Star Trek: The Future Begins, Star Trek: Into Darkness, Life of Pi & The Book Thief

So instead of questioning everyone, maybe go into life with assuming positive intent.

 

[Stephen_J_H]

When you make specific reference to the Star Trek movies, my comment is correct. Had you provided complete information, assumption would not be necessary.

 

[DavidMiller]

When you make specific reference to the Star Trek movies, my comment is correct. Had you provided complete information, assumption would not be necessary.

I stated I had 4K version I did not say Blu-ray your the one that assumed I was an idiot and didn't know what I was talking about.

 

[Everett S.]

Well, I don't recall theatres having grainy pictures in the 1960s. First off it's the D.O.P. and Directors choice of how a film will look! Theatres also had carbon arc lamp houses, which gave a bright picture without fading of Xeon bulbs that you have today. Don't fool yourself owners of some theatres don't change them @ 2,000 hrs. as that is the lamp life !. I worked a year at one that never allowed it to be changed. Now without anyone trained to upkeep the projectors ,focus the film,check for sound level,etc.,you take your chances at what the picture and sound will be.

 

[Stephen_J_H]

I also worked in projection from 2003-05 while putting myself through law school. While our theatre changed xenon bulbs regularly, they would underrun the wattage to "save" lamp life.

When people grumble about grainy looking material in theatres, I question the frame of reference, as the worst grain I've seen is usually associated with low light, a transfer from a less than ideal source or an older HD transfer, in which case it's more likely to be video noise than actual film grain.

 

[OliverK]

I have lots of 4K releases that are not in HDR what is your point? I will actually be able to do a comparison directly this week as I have bought the Star Trek movies on UHD Disc and I own the 4K non-HDR versions. The 24 UHD Discs I have so far have been very impressed with what HDR brings to the game. I get that I'm in the minority here and I'm fine with that. If I'm paying the big bucks for my equipment I'm looking for movies that will show it off. If you want a 4K non-HDR movie of whatever, cool I hope you get it.

My point is that you brought up the rather strange argument that not wanting HDR would mean to be happy and Ok with grainy images etc. but clearly that has nothing to do with having or not having HDR with our 4k movies.

I would guess that not too many here share your opinion that a movie should be altered to enable you to show off your audio / video system and the whole argument reminds me a bit of the "I want my screen filled, I paid good money for it" discussions that we had back in the days when people noticed that still a lot of movies were not filling their new 16:9 screens.

 

[OliverK]

Ah, no I have several 4K versions that came with the two harddrives I bought to store 4K movies. One of those came with the following 4K non-HDR movies: G.I. Joe: Retaliation, World War Z, X-Men Origins: Wolverine, Night at the Museum, The Counselor, Forrest Gump, Star Trek: The Future Begins, Star Trek: Into Darkness, Life of Pi & The Book Thief

Unfortunately I have a front projection system and cannot check these out but I will try to compare a few of the Sony HDR versions against the non-HDR versions available on their movie servers. Sony had a nice thing going there with the downloads, too bad that general customer / executive opinion seems to be that downloading is to be discontinued in favor of inherently inferior but instant streaming, they got that one wrong.

 

[Mike2001]

I upgraded my DIRECTV equipment to get their 4K channels over the weekend. Their pay-per-view movie channel will be a good source of non-HDR 4K material. Unfortunately, at the moment, they want $12.99 to watch a movie once, so I probably won't be taking advantage of that very often. The other two channels are one with a rotating crop of IMAX documentaries (which look very nice), music videos and interview shows, plus an event channel which seems to be for sporting events (for instance, they will be showing a Cubs game soon). Reminds me of the early days of High Def on TV.

 

[Robert Harris]

Please keep in mind when discussing 4k, that discs and streaming yield very different final results. 4k is not always 4k, even though it may be sold as 4k.

 

[PMF]

Well, I don't recall theatres having grainy pictures in the 1960s. [...]

I, for one, recall many rainy pictures from the 1960's, as we often chanced the Drive-In under overcast skies.
But seriously...how would this process fare with the 70mm films that were made between1955 and 1970?

 

[Robert Harris]

I, for one, recall many rainy pictures from the 1960's, as we often chanced the Drive-In under overcast skies.
But seriously...how would this process fare with the 70mm films that were made between1955 and 1970?

Not well. At least with the extremes that currently represent HDR.

With a quality,i.e. MOF (Mit out fade) film element, and an extremely knowledgable, gentle and adept hand, possibly.

 

[PaulDA]

Not well. At least with the extremes that currently represent HDR.

With a quality,i.e. MOF (Mit out fade) film element, and an extremely knowledgable, gentle and adept hand, possibly.

Thus, if I understand correctly, your objection to HDR on "classic films" (for lack of a better catch-all term) lies not in the technology itself, but in the unlikelihood of favourable conditions re: source elements for an appropriate application of HDR to such films?

 

[DavidMiller]

Please keep in mind when discussing 4k, that discs and streaming yield very different final results. 4k is not always 4k, even though it may be sold as 4k.

Too be clear I was referring to downloaded copies that are played from a harddrive attached with a USB 3.0 cable. Quality of transmission should be very close to the same as playing the disc and the files are greater then 50GB so picture quality should be solid 4K. However, they only include 5.1 sound tracks.

-----
On the rest of my statements please ignore them as many of you seemed to miss the point I was trying to humbly make. Instead focused on the words chosen.

Here is a revised statement. I believe there has not been a single film that has been moved to digital (laserdisc on) that hasn't been modified from the original 35mm,70mm, etc film in some fashion. This could be edge enhancement, sharping, colorization, blah, blah and I would bet most of them were not coordinated with the creator of the movie... HDR will be one more of those things that people will be unhappy or happy with. So the real question is does it mater? The studios are going to do what is in their interest which is to sell media (discs or streaming). I don't think it will make since for the studios to build two versions of every movie for a few people that care. Throw out there that HDR+ now lets you simulate HDR on all content on 2016 Samsung TVs seems like HDR is here to stay.

Anyway I just wanted to correct my perspective, I don't want to see a bunch of you used this word, blah, blah... In fact zero comments would be fine with me. Continue the originally scheduled conversation.

 

[Robert Harris]

Too be clear I was referring to downloaded copies that are played from a harddrive attached with a USB 3.0 cable. Quality of transmission should be very close to the same as playing the disc and the files are greater then 50GB so picture quality should be solid 4K. However, they only include 5.1 sound tracks.

-----
On the rest of my statements please ignore them as many of you seemed to miss the point I was trying to humbly make. Instead focused on the words chosen.

Here is a revised statement. I believe there has not been a single film that has been moved to digital (laserdisc on) that hasn't been modified from the original 35mm,70mm, etc film in some fashion. This could be edge enhancement, sharping, colorization, blah, blah and I would bet most of them were not coordinated with the creator of the movie... HDR will be one more of those things that people will be unhappy or happy with. So the real question is does it mater? The studios are going to do what is in their interest which is to sell media (discs or streaming). I don't think it will make since for the studios to build two versions of every movie for a few people that care. Throw out there that HDR+ now lets you simulate HDR on all content on 2016 Samsung TVs seems like HDR is here to stay.

Anyway I just wanted to correct my perspective, I don't want to see a bunch of you used this word, blah, blah... In fact zero comments would be fine with me. Continue the originally scheduled conversation.

Your belief would be totally incorrect.

RAH

 

[DavidMiller]

Your belief would be totally incorrect.

RAH

What part?