JimRochester

I noticed the film grain is still there. The muted color palette is still there. It is not more colorful. More detail. More vivid reds. More active audio.

mattysemo247

Target has a 25% off coupon for SPR this week

melasnus

Took a look at The Shape of Water tonite.

Not a night and day difference between it and the reference BD...perhaps because it is sourced from the same 2K DI, I don't know.
The real difference isn't so much in greater detail as it is with the HDR on the UHD.
The 4k movie is, overall, darker than the BD.
And, IMO, too dark at times.
Where the BD is often bathed in a yellowish glow, the UHD can be more neutral and warmer.
Look at the scene of Mr. Ed playing on the old tube TV for a comparison.

While I would pick the UHD over the BD everyday of the week, the 1080p disk is no slouch.
This is a movie that doesn't really require ownership of the UHD to enjoy a good HT presentation.
I would recommend the 4K to fans of the film, but for others, save some dough and go with the BD.

JimRochester

I just did an A/B comparison of Jurassic World in two scenes. First where the Indominous escapes and the second where the boys take the gyrosphere ride and find the dinosaurs.

It's hard to improve on the BR quality. I did find the colors more vivid with greater detail however the skin tones seemed more orange compared to the BR which was very neutral. As usual I found the audio track to have more punch than the BR counterpart. As with most of these UHD, unless you are a huge fan of the franchise and insist on owning the very best presentation of the films, the BR are pretty damn great. I had some RZ dollars so I decided to try it. I'm looking forward to checking them out in depth soon.

melasnus

Thanx, Jim.
I've been debating whether to get the newly released 25th Anniversary 4K set.
At this point, I haven't heard whether or not Universal came up with 4K masters for this set or if upconversion was used.
Do you know?

If native 4K was used, I believe the computer work might have to be re-rendered, and that would cost a ton.
It would surprise me if Universal went to the expense...

Adam Tyner

The first two for certain aren't upconverts. They pre-date the digital intermediate era, and all the effects would've been printed out on film. (That doesn't make the resolution of the original VFX work magically be "real 4K", but it's not an upconvert either.) I'm not sure about III.

JimRochester

I'm not sophisticated or educated enough in these matters to know. As a rule I'm not going to bother upgrading any BR to 4K since the difference is so small. I have been upgrading my HD DVD and certainly DVD's with no second thoughts. But I have done a few where the BR wasn't that great or the film is such a favorite I don't mind dropping the coin for the 4K

melasnus

What are the source materials used?
A 4K master cut from the negative or a print?

Same here.
By and large, recent released BDs of newish films look terrific.
The "upgrade" to 4K can be a little underwhelming at times.

Adam Tyner

Prints are very rarely used as a source.

I'm not sure about TLW and III, but Universal reported this for the original Jurassic Park:

dvdjunkie32

Thanks, I'll still with my blus. 4K has just been the most aggravating technology. I'm tired of constantly switching pitch modes and fiddling with the setting and inconsistent results. My first 4K disc was Mad Max which blew me away and I got excited about the format. But then I watched Justice League and it was too dark to make out scenes with HDR on. Then you gotta have the right cable, the right 4K player.

melasnus

Thank you sir, that answers my question.

4K disks are taking exactly the same crooked path BDs did back-in-the-day: confusion, < overwhelming releases, and a certain amount of apathy.
BD was able to overcome these, and other hurdles, by eventually producing a product consumers couldn't ignore at a price they were willing to pay.

The studios seem to be embracing the format reasonably well (at least there isn't a Format War).
These days nearly every big, medium, and even some small films are being released in 4K UHD disk.
The biggest mistake that has been made so far is not using 4K Masters for the transfers.
Many 4K UHD releases have used the same master as the BD version.
Of course this is a cost-cutting measure by the studios, but for potential adopters it has really muddied the waters regarding the format.
Oddly (or not), the very same thing happened at the birth of BD.

Hollywood's Powers-That-Be need to quit the nonsense, ditch the < 4K cameras and step up to the plate.
THEN the public will see what their fancy new 4K TVs are really about and start buying disks in mass.
I have seen what the format is capable of and I'm sold.

I hear ya.
Unfortunately, it's the price we pay with these early releases.
A common result of using a 2K source.
All you can do right now is fiddle with your display's adjustments.
I have faith the studios will get it right soon.
Again, the birth of BD also had these issues.
Who remembers the first Samsung BD player?

Sonic

Then you got review sites seeing things other reviewers are not seeing. Each review for the same movie is different. These review sites are not doing buyers any favors. One can't tell who is telling the truth or who is lying.

melasnus

You're absolutely right.
I think the big problem is these "reviewers" often have 2nd rate equipment and it makes for inaccurate assessments.
Contrary to what everyone might think, "reviewers" don't necessarily have top-of-the-line AV stuff.
It isn't like the websites they post on hand out thousands of dollars of hardware.
This was ALSO a problem we saw with the BD roll-out....

JimRochester

I always attributed to differing opinions or sometimes verbiage. One guy will call it deeper blacks while the next guy says it's too dark. People can see shades differently, so even two people watching on the same set, will see things slightly different. While I say the skin tone on the 4K is more orange compared to the BR, my wife might say the skin tones are better on the 4K with the BR being washed out or pale.

Admittedly when I do a comparison, I'll pick a couple scenes, something big and outdoors then something more up close and personal. I look closely at skin tone, colors, detail and listen to the sound. I spend maybe 10 minutes. I also have one player hooked up. To do it scientifically, I should have two players and be able to jump back and forth quickly to catch the differences. I swap out discs.

So take anything I say with a grain of salt. I do have a high end OLED TV. But it's set up the way some schlub on the interweb told me too. Looks good to me but you may thinks it sucks, or like it on flamethrower mode right out of the box.

My philosophy has been and will be, that even the though difference may be miniscule in some cases, I don't mind spending the extra $5 or so to have the 4K disc. On older releases the BR might be a $7.99 bargain while the new 4K release is $24.99. That's another story. Unless the movie is an absolute gem and the release reference quality, I'll stick with Blu. I use my BB MC for all my business related charges. I'm Elite status by March. I have so many RZ $$ I don't take much money out of my pocket for these releases. Much easier to be cavalier when it's Monopoly money you're playing with.

rocket1312

Surely the inconsistent brightness levels on some of these releases has more to do with the lack of standards with regards to HDR implementation than it does with resolution. Whether or not the source is true 4k means nothing if the HDR is applied with a peak luminance 10 times greater than what your tv/projector may be able to output.

melasnus

A current 4K master is more than simply greater resolution.
It is also struck with the idea it would be used as source material for HDR releases.
In order for a display to be HDR Certified it has to be capable of peak brightness of over 1000 cd/m2 and a black level less than 0.05 cd/m2 (a contrast ratio of at least 20,000:1) or a peak brightness of over 540 cd/m2 and a black level less than 0.0005 cd/m2 (a contrast ratio of at least 1,080,000:1).
This is the minimal requirements.
HDR is applied with that in mind...

melasnus

The Dark Crystal

This is one of my fav movies...I had to get the UHD.

I have the 2009 BD and it looks pretty poor these days.
It's a grain whore...with big, nasty crap ruining the wonderful production put together by Jim Henson & Crew, so much so it's constantly pulling the viewer out of this dark, imaginative fable.
The Good News is the grain structure is mightily improved with this UHD release.

Oddly, the HDR application is unexpectedly subdued, but more solid than the BD.
I expected much more of a colorfest.
The resolution is noticeably better than the 2K.

The Bad News is this release is another one of those darkish-looking catalog UHDs.
There isn't much one can do except to experiment with Brightness, Gamma, and Contrast settings until the image is as close as possible to being satisfactory to the viewer.
It's a pain in the ass and I hope it is something the studios address very soon.
They can do better than this.

rocket1312

Fine, but there are plenty of perfectly acceptable UHD discs that are derived from 2k DIs. The resolution is not the mitigating factor.

Maybe it's applied with that in mind, but there are still no real standards for HDR application. And so far at least, these studios seem to still be finding a balance between what works in a highly controlled work environment and what works in the real world with all of the variables that come with it. Don't get me wrong, I don't believe that the people mastering these things should have to play to the lowest common denominator, but home theater gear still has yet to totally catch up to the format. With issues like a lack of 4k calibration standards, inconsistent tone mapping, and a format war not likely to end soon, HDR and its implementation has been by far the biggest stumbling block for UHD, despite how spectacular it is when everything works as it should.

Matthew Chmiel

I wouldn't be surprised if the UHD used the same 4K master Universal made years ago to convert the film into 3D.

JimRochester

JP 1 in 4K - I did not do an A/B comparison but I know this film well. I've owned it on VHS, LD, DVD, BR and now 4K. The color palette in HDR is a little more intense and takes some getting used to. The detail was amazing. The first appearance of the dinosaur was astounding. The sun reflecting off the dinos skin had detail I've never seen. Likewise the T-rex in the rain. It was almost like you could feel the scales and texture of their leathery hides. The audio DTS-HD was superior to what I remember from the BR version.

I'm satisfied with the upgrade but will admit that the BR was pretty damn stellar already.

JimRochester

Jurassic Park - Lost World

Typical sequel in that it fails to deliver the excitement of the original but still has plenty of dinos, carnage and come-upance for the greedy InGen President. I watched this movie in 4K then put in the BR to watch a few scenes for comparison. The color pallette was very close. The detail on the 4K is simply stunning compared to the BR. I focused on several of the dino scenes and the skin textures are off the charts on the 4K disc.

Michael Corvin

Damnit Jim! I had decided on not getting the 4K but now you're making me want to! SHIT!

JimRochester

Tough call my friend. There is no way you can watch a BR presentation of these movies and think they are lacking in any way. All I can do is report what my eyes see. Side by side there is a difference.

The Digital Bits finally posted their review of the set. He certainly will be looking at it with a more critical eye than I do. My eyes glazed over reading about the visual effects of the 90's.The Digital Bits

JimRochester

Finished up my unplanned JP marathon with JP III and Jurassic World on UHD last night. For JP III I didn't hate it as much as many but the ending was anti-climactic. As far as the UHD quality, I'll have to agree with The Digital Bits that is was somewhat lackluster. However popping in the BR, that was the least impressive of the four films as well. So if you are a JP III fan, I guess you'll never see a great physical media release.

Jurassic World I've watched several times recently on BR and really like the UHD. After watching the whole movie, all I can say is Holy Cow. The arrival scene on the boat really blew my mind. The blue water and green landscape just jumped off the screen. Masrani's suit and Claire's white clothing excelled in showing color and texture. BDH's red hair glistened. The colors and the detail really stand out with repeat viewings.

The audio on both I found an improvement with the 4K release but I've found that on every 4K so far. It really fills the room.

To recap: For 2 and 4 I agree with Digital Bits and give them a solid A+ in both video and audio. For 1 I was a little more impressed than he was. I still give it a solid B+ to an A. There is color and detail not in the BR. The audio is an A for sure. For III, I was also underwhelmed. I just didn't see the fine detail or texture in the dinos skin or people clothes I saw in the others.

I used RZ$$ so the $50 was Monopoly money for me. Plus anything I upgrade I pass the BR along to my son for his collection. If it were my $50, I guess I would still drop the coin just because of 1 and 4. These are both high on my list of favorite movies. If cash is tight, if you insist on all 4 being stellar upgrades, or hate any the films then the UHD upgrade probably isn't for you.

melasnus

Sonuvabitch, now I HAVE to buy it!

(Thanx, Jim )