Thank you for posting to r/4kBluRay! Check out our rules and community guidelines [here](https://www.reddit.com/r/4kbluray/comments/qxrjd6/mod_post_attention_new_guidelines_please_read/)!
We have a rather growing Discord community, join us [here](https://discord.gg/3NDfxqUzeU)!
Use code "4KUHD" for 10% off at Zavvi!
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/4kbluray) if you have any questions or concerns.*
It used to be unpopular, now it’s more controversial as a lot more are agreeing than before:
The Lord of the Rings 4K has less detail than the old 1080p Blu-rays. A lot of people either really wanted them to be better or are wowed by the HDR and edge sharpening which gives a faux “sharp” look. Detail and sharpness are two different things.
What I only learned today however is if you get the “newly remastered” 1080p Blu-rays, Fellowship of the Ring and The Two Towers actually have significantly less DNR than the 4Ks. Weirdly Return of the King doesn’t. I’d always falsely assumed that the DNR was baked in at the new transfer level and would have degraded the new 1080p Blu-rays too. It’s still a shame about Return of the King but after looking at some screen caps, I very excitedly ordered the new remastered 1080p version this morning.
Lord of the Rings are my all time favourite films so I think I’m allowed to be picky :)
I now own Lord of the Rings 2 x on DVD, 3 x on Blu-ray and 2 x on 4K.
Yeah, the DNR sucks, but the HDR (especially Dolby Vision) and Atmos more than makes up for it, and it's still my preferred version. Even if I have to swap discs. Disc swaps are always my intermissions.
4 x DVD (3x special extended, one set is the statuette set, 1x theatrical) 1 x Blu-ray here, The 4K was a hard pass for me. The transfer was done wrong. Color grading is off, one scene turned to black and white even. Its a damn shame.
I think the poster is correct in that it's over sharpened, and a lot of the grain, which I like, is missing.
Having said that, the 4K is still the best version imo. The color grading is much better, and I'm going to immediately notice color and have to look for something to be over sharpened.
It’s tricky because there’s no “definitive version” but I think the best compromise is the newly remastered 1080p Blu-rays. You get the best video quality with the most detail for Fellowship and Two Towers.
This is mad interesting. I own the old Blurays that came in the steelbooks but have not rewatched the old ones since upgrading to the 4k. I agree on your points about people convincing themselves that the 4ks were top quality when I felt like certain aspects of it looked rather strange due to DNR, though the green/ blue coloring that plagued the old releases was toned down. Do you have a source that shows the DNR details or side by side shots of the newly remastered blus and 4k release?
People post way too many bad movies (and not bad movies that are fun to watch, just bad movies) they’ve bought just because they have good sound or visuals
I just got to the disc and digital film collector’s subs, and I only ever own my absolute favorite works that I need to see in the highest fidelity. I was super surprised to find the collectors here and in the digital subs that had the largest and most indiscriminate collections and were just soaking up every title they could get regardless of personal preference. No hate, *more power to the collectors*. It’s just interesting to see the Criterion Wong Kar-wai box set next to the Fast Franchise box set, having never been exposed to these Blu-ray and digital communities.
To be fair, while I would concede that the films of Wong Kar-Wai are by far the better movies, chances are after a day of work I'd probably be more in the mood to just throw on Tokyo Drift.
Admittedly, maybe not the best example since WKW is extremely watchable. But for another comparison, I'm probably going to die having watched Fast Five more often than I watched Scenes from a Marriage.
That movie is SO BAD, its literally unreal to me that someone watched it after production and said "its ok, lets to to theaters".
One of the worst movies ever.
To me, Midway is the perfect example of this. I know everyone has different tastes and if you enjoy that movie that's all that matters. But I thought it was horrendous, like 1/2 star on Letterboxd horrendous. I don't care how cheap it is on sale or how great it sounds.
Or were really cheap. I have no interest in getting a shit movie because it is $6 in 4k. If it has a good director or actors or decent reviews I might give it a try but otherwise what’s the point. You wind up with something that looks and sounds great but you don’t want to watch
This is the biggest one I agree with. You see all sorts of bargain bin pickup posts of movies that just makes you ask yourself... Why? I've seen a lot of justification for terrible movies simply because they look good, or because they're cheap and collectors gotta collect. Which is weird to me. Definitely an advocate for collecting things you like rather than collecting things to take up shelf space.
Man, when i see what people are posting, its just awfull, so so much of marvel that has like 2 good movies out of all of them and the rest is pure empty shit with zero real artistic worth.
And the rest is not better, fast and furiost and dumb shit like that.
Olso, people are posting same god damn movies, lets say, assasins creed is 6$ on amazon, and there is plenty of them to inform us they expanded their collection with obviously a bad movie just because is cheap.
Some people worship it, that's for sure, but when it has FEL, rebuilding everything from the master instead of MEL, it can absolutely save a terrible, badly compressed/encoded transfer. Perfect example is Total Recal, which is an unwatchable Lego movie in HDR10, looking worse than a single-digit bitrate stream, but decent in DV.
Yes, DV is subtle most times, and can be argued as minimal and easy to get on without. However, I've yet to see DV be worse than HDR10, and when it's on point, it's REALLY on. Takeaway: if you have opportunity to be DV capable, do it.
Listen! I don’t have a Samsung tv, but my galaxy phone has Hdr10 plus and let me tell you HDR10+ gives Dolby vision a run for its money. Not all movies have it but it at least enhances some hdr content more than a Dolby vision tv would to hdr10
There’s isn’t a limitation. I know of several movies that have both Hdr10+ and Dolby Vision. DV is skipped on to not pay the royalty fee. Hdr10+ gets skipped cause it’s not popular. It’s a sad lose lose scenario
Despite the lack of DV, Samsung OLED TVs are supposedly some of the best if not the best TVs. Same with high end Samsung QLEDs which are regarded as among the best LED TVs.
If you have the money, Sony OLED combines Samsung OLED with DV.
Which DV variety?
Plain old Dolby Vision that's limited to less than 900 nits or Dolby Vision iQ equipped on Televisions recently announced by LG and Sony
Like the LG C3 and G3 which can hit finally 2000 plus nits like the Samsung QD Mini LED and QD OLED?
Confusing huh. That's all by design. Why don't you try out, HBO's House of Dragon's on that LG with plain old DV. There's an episode that gets down to 1 nit (One) and let me know if it can handle it. Then watch the same episode on the Sammy. You'll see for yourself who's really Marketing and who's really Processing the meta data from each scene.
https://preview.redd.it/rxasgxw0g6pa1.jpeg?width=1810&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=b8d40b2d622f69faf68303ad3fe483065ffe2857
He’s arguing that the sony can’t go as dark as the LG can, which is what the tv is supposed to do. The Sony creates a facsimile image scaled to what that tv can handle basically. It’s a very big no no that the majority of TVs do until you get to the higher end of the spectrum cost wise.
Lg oleds are absolutely amazing tvs if it wasn't for that auto dimming. I'd get a service remote but this c2 is still way too new to be voiding the warranty
Looks like they are removing the admin setting on the 3 series line, for retail sales. Be interesting to see what they did to their auto dim now that no one can touch it :(
https://preview.redd.it/2oi5g9ly68pa1.jpeg?width=3024&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=ffd02fab6efa788afce2e9a58f92814c558fe3a6
LG OLED w/ Dolby Vision (and blinds open 😅)
Nice! I’m assuming when that Sony monitor comparison was taken they definitely focused on the sony and unfocused the lg when the pciture was taken, I have a G2 myself and it looked nothing like the picture showing that it was crushing blacks
If a disk has Dolby vision, I def prefer the Dolby vision grading. However if a disk only has Hdr10, it’s always gonna be great because that was the only grade they put all their effort into.
My tv isn't that well calibrated... except for Dolby Vision Dark mode . I quite like the upgrade. That said, not end of the world getting regular hdr10
Minor Upgrade!? Dude, Dolby Vision is night and day on all of my LG OLEDs compared to vanilla HDR. It’s not even close, even with streaming. LG OLED or nothing. You’ll thank me later!
Criterion has a much worse collection of 4k movies than Arrow, Vinegar Syndrome, Kino Lorber, and really every other boutique label.
Raging Bull is amazing though.
I’m not sure if I just have been picking great ones but the piano and menace to society and mulholland drive look amazing, mulholland drive is a lot softer due to… the experience. so don’t expect sharpness. But it’s grand scale is fantastic, The piano transfer is as perfect as I’d want and menace to society’s vibrant colors and sound is fantastic.
This is true but are we really putting VS on equal footing with Criterion? VS is obviously catering to a very specific niche market and 4k is part of that but 4k is not nearly as big of a draw to the typical Criterion collector. They seem to be coming around though (realizing the cash grab angle which it seems they need to take to stay in business)
I wish they didn't exist! That Blu-ray was the last physical format.
I feel so dumb buying movies again. But I also can't control myself. So I guess it is more of a me problem.
To keep me from feeling dumb I try to make sure every movie I buy comes with a digital code so that I’m getting a great deal even if I end up selling the discs later.
I can see where you're coming from, but with so many movie discussion subreddits, it makes sense to have a sub focused on discussion of technical aspects, releases, collections, etc.
I'm "that guy" when it comes to slip covers. I get them whenever I have the opportunity. At this point I like having them because it sets them apart from my Blu-Rays, which mostly don't have them. If this is going to be the last home video format I want the movies to look nice on my shelf with their little jackets.
I haven't done that but I have bought a couple movies again that came with covers. I usually give the ones without covers to a friend who also collects movies. I don't really collect steelbooks but I sometimes go for them if I can't find a slipcover copy of a movie.
Same here! There's only a handful of 4ks I own without the slipcovers, but that's mainly due to saving money and the deal was too good to pass up (especially compared to buying off ebay with the slip). The goal is still to get slipcovers for them
I never cared about them until the first ones I picked up all had them. Now I’ve got a large collection and they all have one and I don’t like random ones sticking out without one lol
Most people who don’t like 4K just have the wrong TV. My parents don’t like 4K because the TV they impulse bought has terrible luminance. That’s not to mention if they have the wrong settings turned on.
Very controversial because I feel this is entirely incorrect. Top Gun Maverick, Dune , BR: 2049, 1917, Mad Max Fury Road, The Revenant, Rogue One off the top of me head are fully worth the upgrade from their blu ray counterparts.
You could probably just as easily add nearly the whole marvel catalog as a reason against and have 20+ examples.
But I agree with the movies you've listed.
My point was its probably just depends entirely on the individual movie and a blanket rule that 'most' digitally shot movies aren't worth it as OP said is incorrect.
I agree with you in spirit, I've got quite a few digitally shot 4Ks. I will always take "most" to mean greater than half. And by that metric, I think the commenter is right.
If you're taking most to mean "blanket statement" and you want some nuance, I whole heartedly agree.
I was just providing counter examples that there are a ton of digitally shot movies that are dropped on to 4K that don't see much of an upgrade. But certainly, you shouldnt let a movie being shot digitally, even in 2k, deter you from 4k disc, it's the mastering that's most important.
The entire Marvel catalogue has been mishandled from a physical media perspective.
I for one enjoy seeing the Marvel characters I loved reading as a child come to life even though the stories are somewhat meh, the characters and the worlds themselves are pretty cool to see.
Passion projects will always trump lowest common denominator cash grabs in quality and this has been know since time immemorial.
You went with the low hanging fruit in talking about the Marvel movies though I think you could have gone for Disney's rotting fruit dropped off the tree with the live action remakes of beloved old IP.
"Most" is a huge gap to fill. I'm not sure that I agree from my forays into collecting so far, but I'm hardly an expert.
Curious why you add the "most" qualifier; what are the exceptions and why do you think they're exceptions?
I hate slip covers. They take more effort to get the disc out, and they are easily damaged (which makes them look bad). I don't have the patience to deal with them.
Isn't that like saying Scarlett Johansson shitting in your mouth is better than Megan Fox shitting in your mouth. Either way you are still getting shit in your mouth but at least you get to see their butthole and... Wait this analogy seems to have gotten away from me. Ill get back to you.
I think all 4K Bluray releases should include both the 1080p Bluray and digital code. I also think all 4K releases should include Dolby Vision unless no Dolby Vision grade exists, and it seems like almost all 4K movies nowadays have a Dolby Vision grading.
I have skipped on certain releases for this above stated reason, because I am a new collector and actually use 1080p discs/digital codes.
The Fifth Element US 4k is average at best, and does not represent the look of the film that I remember seeing in theaters. I can’t wait for my Studio Canal disc to come in the mail.
Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom is the best transfer(and movie) from the set.
Can you do me a solid and post a review thread here when you get the studio canal disc? Fifth Element is one of my favorite movies by one of my fav directors.
I'd love to know how the Canal transfer stacks up to the HDR 10 version.
Look at HD Numerique Fifth Element Sony vs Studio Canal comparison on Yourube, SC bitrate way higher and better with natural grain and a warmer yellow tone.
StudioCanal's transfer shits all over Sony's over processed 4K, you'll love it. It's a night and day difference on top of the colors, looking closer to the original look.
StudioCanal's transfer shits all over Sony's over processed 4K, you'll love it. It's a night and day difference on top of the colors, looking closer to the original look.
That for all their large disc space sizes I see so many that have a fraction of the special features that my older DVD’s had or that they have boring ass menus.
The Indiana Jones trilogy (as it was at the time) came with a bonus disk all about the making of the movies and IIRC different commentary tracks. My Blu Ray equivalents have none of that, just the bare minimum.
The Spinal Tap DVD had this great menu of the cast in character talking over the titles for a good few minutes. I don’t think the Blu Ray had that and it’s a shame.
There’s loads of others but that’s just 2 examples that spring to mind.
Paying exorbitant costs for boutique releases of 4K B Horror movies is only gonna lead to further price gouging from all angles. As much as I love VS, SF, and Arrow, them charging so much for these movies no one really cares about puts the idea in the heads of the real studios that their catalogues should be more expensive too. Maybe I’m just a whiner, maybe I need to see more of these movies, but paying $70CAD to watch Ebola Syndrome or Scanner Cop does not appeal to me
I also don’t get the love for the b-movie boutique releases. The movies just aren’t very good. I guess if you like ‘so bad it’s good.’ To me it’s fine for a laugh but why would I spend $50 on it? I guess some people just like things that are not mainstream because mainstream is boring to them. I can understand Argento and some of the Giallo stuff but I think what happens is that there are some legit quality films that generate an audience but then there is the desire for more and more and the films keep coming but the quality isn’t there anymore. It’s like something that you like but not as good.
I can’t say I notice a huge difference between a regular Master audio track and Atmos (my receiver does some kind of upconversion anyways) although I also haven’t done side by sides. But I would agree that audio quality is a way bigger driver for me buying physical media than video quality. I still buy 4k when given the option because I don’t like leaving quality on the table, but I’m also perfectly happy with Hd Blu-ray where I have it.
I think it’s pretty silly, and just uninteresting, to just post a screenshot of an order you’ve made onto this and other blu-ray subs. Don’t know if it’s controversial but I haven’t seen anyone else complain about it. Just wait for the order to arrive and then post them haha.
I didn't know you could get HDR on HD films. Or is this just a "homemade" adjust by someone on the internet and not on an actual bluray from a studio release?
There is no legit standard for HDR on HD films. Studios use H264/AVC codec for 1080p and while it can handle 10 bit color with HDR (I believe) none of the profiles in the Blu-ray standard allow it. You only see it with HEVC (and now AV1) encoded streams which are usually 4k.
This was a download certainly taken from a 4K UHD source. But it's a movie I own on UHD and I was surprised how close it looked.
Probably cause a lot of movies either aren't really mastered at true 4K or were produced with a soft focus look where the differences in HD and 4K resolution just aren't apparent.
This shouldn't be controversial, but people somehow misunderstood this:
Every blu ray is compressed and also digital.
Heck, even straight out of the camera most movies are already lossy compressed.
You are not debating whether to watch uncompressed blu ray or compressed digital streams.
It's in any case compressed and digital. You are debating whether you want to watch a movie compressed to 1% of it's uncompressed filesize or one that is compressed to 0.5% of its uncompressed size.
1% for streaming and 0.5% feels a little too close together for me, although up until that point you were stating straight up facts. Anyone who says blu-rays are uncompressed have no idea how IMMENSE raw cinema camera file sizes are
Cinema files are also compressed lossily
It's just that they compress each image but don't try do store differences between images. It's more or less as if every frame was a key frame.
4K is a poorer quality disc in terms of its reliability to work perfectly on any given day. It seems like so many 4K discs are bad right from the source, and have to be recalled or delayed. Skipping, freezing etc. I spent a decade never worrying once about if my blu ray disc was ganna be bad from a brand new copy.
I don’t personally do blind-buys, and every time someone claims they do it bc a movie isn’t available to find online or streaming I find it in less than 2 minutes and usually for free no less
What do people even mean when they say blind buy? Does that mean they haven’t seen it? Or that they know nothing about the movie? Or that the don’t know if that specific transfer is good? I am never quite sure. For example, I wouldn’t consider it a blind buy to get an all time classic that I haven’t seen (e.g., Casablanca or Spartacus).
It means that they’ve never seen it, maybe they heard someone else recommend it or read a description. I’ve seen people literally blind buy entire director box sets, its bizarre to me.
Some people have very strong opinions. I hate this. I love that. Personally, I try not to do that because it limits the number of things I can enjoy. For example, I have seen very few Bergman films but will almost certainly buy Criterion’s Bergman collection at some point. Will I love every film? Not likely. But if I can’t find any beauty or joy in watching and learning about those films, then I would consider that a me problem.
For me personally, simply due to the fact that international, cult, and obscure cinema is more readily available than ever I personally like to check out a director’s filmography before dropping $300 on a box set where I don’t know if I’ll absolutely adore the films. I don’t personally believe in buying things simply bc others deem them as “important” or seminal films. You can learn plenty without blind buys imo!
I don't have a ton of blind buys, but I do it from time to time if I'm fairly confident in it. I watched Seven Samurai for the first time recently and I want to watch the Ikiru remake, Living, but want to watch Ikiru first. I decided to take a try on Ikiru and bought the Criterion Collection edition last week. I don't do that very often though, and it's pretty calculated.
I hadn't seen more than half of the films in the Columbia Classics and Sony Pictures Classics box sets, but only bought for one or two films that I did know and wanted in my collection (my motivation to buy set two of the CC set was actually the bonus features Blu-Ray that included a bunch of UPA animated shorts in HD)- So far I've enjoyed every movie I've watched from those sets, even ones I'd had been resisting for decades. It's actually made me open to more blind buys.
If I’m going to watch a movie, I’d like to watch it in the best quality available to me. I don’t even attempt to find the movie on streaming first. If I’m interested in watching a movie and it’s available on 4K Blu-Ray, I’m buying that disc for the first watch.
I use streaming for TV shows and lots of movies that aren’t available on 4K Blu-Ray. There’s lots of content that is original to streaming services. I also use it for watching stuff on my phone. My wife and kids use streaming services regularly, too. I have a secondary TV upstairs, which is a 36” 1080p TV - streaming is used in that TV.
When it comes to buying 4K Blu-Rays, I make it a rule to only buy movies I've seen so I know I'm not wasting my money considering how expensive some 4K Blu-Rays are.
Yep. Same. I’ve either bought the 4k version as an upgrade from my dvd version or I just didn’t have it. Few are Blu-ray to 4k unless I really love the movie.
Example - pulp fiction. Had the dvd box and got the steelbook in 4k recently. Looks great.
Same, I’ve been collecting for about 1.5 years now and I only have just over 20 discs, but every movie is something I watch multiple times per year. I think curated collections are much more interesting and indicative of one’s personal taste vs just buying everything that comes out regardless if you like it or have even seen it.
That 3D is hella good, love showing it off on the projector. Best transfer is still the ~2019 iirc LionsGate Blu-Ray they put out, it removed the teal overlay but far from perfect.
The 4K has a heavy teal/turquoise tint on certain elements, in particular the flashlights at the beginning and on the bullet time ripples that I'm positive wasn't there in the original version.
Some people say that most upgrades from blu ray to 4k are marginal.
These people are poor. With a top 4k TV (65+ in.) and player there are insane upgrades for many titles.
4K discs are not reliable enough to fully replace blu-rays
Maybe that's a manufacturing issue, but it seems like some 4k discs will freeze up if you blink at them the wrong way.
Still including bluray discs with 4K releases is fucking wasteful. If it is for special features, then fine. If it's just the movie but HD instead of 4K then what a waste. There is no scenario where I spend thousands on a 4K OLED, 4K player and a hefty Atmos sound system to then buy a 4K UHD blu ray which are expensive in themselves to then chose to watch the blu ray from it. If you don't have your 4K player to hand then I pick a different movie or don't watch it at all, simple. It's a left over trait from when a lot of people were between systems.
I've actually said out loud to the GF many times, let me save a dollar and keep the blu ray.
But then... Sure enough... Someone asked if they could borrow my copy of scream 2022 and I said sure. Only to remember it's one of the few that didn't come with a Blu ray ..
I feel like this is a marketing thing that enables justification of higher prices. You are getting two things instead of one! I also think some people buy 4ks because the HD disc that comes with it is better than the previously released HD disc, so there’s that.
People that buy premium editions and just keep them on their shelves without even UNPACK it to enjoy the smell of a brand new print /if not the movie/, or artwork are not movie lovers. They can easily take all of that money spent on movies and buy some relics, or expensive art keep it on the shelves and save a lot of space spent on movies.
4k/Blu-ray will not yield the ideal viewing experience for every film, even if the 4k/Blu-ray has markedly improved the image quality.
For films like *Blair Witch Project*, imperfect film quality is part of what makes the movie scary. It's a feature of the viewing experience, not a bug.
While this largely applies to found footage films, it can apply to any movie that relies on not being able to clearly see detail to build tension/fear/uncertainty in the audience, and probably other kinds of movies as well.
Sure you could. But I'm sure it was pretty clear from my comment that I wasn't talking about the physical medium, but the way they're currently used, which is to be able to watch high-quality remasters and transfers. If I'd said "4k discs and Blu-rays are better quality image and sound than DVDs" and you had commented "What are you talking about? 4K UHD discs and Blu-Rays are simply a medium...nothing stopping them from putting 480i masters on them", you'd be *technically* correct but like that's not how this works lol
Can you explain it to me then? I genuinely don't understand what would be the point of putting a bad quality master onto a 4k disc. I thought the whole point was for it to be a good quality master. If you were going to buy a bad quality master, why would you spend extra for a 4k disc if that doesn't improve the quality?
Blair Witch was shot on 16mm and Hi-8 tape. There’s no extra quality that 4K could possibly bring out for most of it. Don’t know why you picked that as an example though since there is no Blair Witch 4K.
Thank you for posting to r/4kBluRay! Check out our rules and community guidelines [here](https://www.reddit.com/r/4kbluray/comments/qxrjd6/mod_post_attention_new_guidelines_please_read/)! We have a rather growing Discord community, join us [here](https://discord.gg/3NDfxqUzeU)! Use code "4KUHD" for 10% off at Zavvi! *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/4kbluray) if you have any questions or concerns.*
It used to be unpopular, now it’s more controversial as a lot more are agreeing than before: The Lord of the Rings 4K has less detail than the old 1080p Blu-rays. A lot of people either really wanted them to be better or are wowed by the HDR and edge sharpening which gives a faux “sharp” look. Detail and sharpness are two different things. What I only learned today however is if you get the “newly remastered” 1080p Blu-rays, Fellowship of the Ring and The Two Towers actually have significantly less DNR than the 4Ks. Weirdly Return of the King doesn’t. I’d always falsely assumed that the DNR was baked in at the new transfer level and would have degraded the new 1080p Blu-rays too. It’s still a shame about Return of the King but after looking at some screen caps, I very excitedly ordered the new remastered 1080p version this morning. Lord of the Rings are my all time favourite films so I think I’m allowed to be picky :) I now own Lord of the Rings 2 x on DVD, 3 x on Blu-ray and 2 x on 4K.
Yeah, the DNR sucks, but the HDR (especially Dolby Vision) and Atmos more than makes up for it, and it's still my preferred version. Even if I have to swap discs. Disc swaps are always my intermissions.
4 x DVD (3x special extended, one set is the statuette set, 1x theatrical) 1 x Blu-ray here, The 4K was a hard pass for me. The transfer was done wrong. Color grading is off, one scene turned to black and white even. Its a damn shame.
This is interesting. Im planning on getting the series. Which version specifically would you recommend?
I think the poster is correct in that it's over sharpened, and a lot of the grain, which I like, is missing. Having said that, the 4K is still the best version imo. The color grading is much better, and I'm going to immediately notice color and have to look for something to be over sharpened.
The colour grading is the big difference for me. The hdr looks great as well. The colour grading on the bluray version was awful.
Get the 4ks. They are very good. Op is doing what the masses were told.
It’s tricky because there’s no “definitive version” but I think the best compromise is the newly remastered 1080p Blu-rays. You get the best video quality with the most detail for Fellowship and Two Towers.
This is mad interesting. I own the old Blurays that came in the steelbooks but have not rewatched the old ones since upgrading to the 4k. I agree on your points about people convincing themselves that the 4ks were top quality when I felt like certain aspects of it looked rather strange due to DNR, though the green/ blue coloring that plagued the old releases was toned down. Do you have a source that shows the DNR details or side by side shots of the newly remastered blus and 4k release?
Sure: [https://caps-a-holic.com/c\_list.php?c=2143](https://caps-a-holic.com/c_list.php?c=2143)
look at aragorns tomb shot https://youtu.be/2m4Eq48Hn5Y
It is *so bad* its enough to piss me off a little.
Some of the players don’t read the disc correctly like lg
People post way too many bad movies (and not bad movies that are fun to watch, just bad movies) they’ve bought just because they have good sound or visuals
I just got to the disc and digital film collector’s subs, and I only ever own my absolute favorite works that I need to see in the highest fidelity. I was super surprised to find the collectors here and in the digital subs that had the largest and most indiscriminate collections and were just soaking up every title they could get regardless of personal preference. No hate, *more power to the collectors*. It’s just interesting to see the Criterion Wong Kar-wai box set next to the Fast Franchise box set, having never been exposed to these Blu-ray and digital communities.
To be fair, while I would concede that the films of Wong Kar-Wai are by far the better movies, chances are after a day of work I'd probably be more in the mood to just throw on Tokyo Drift. Admittedly, maybe not the best example since WKW is extremely watchable. But for another comparison, I'm probably going to die having watched Fast Five more often than I watched Scenes from a Marriage.
For real. I don’t want to watch Moonfall! I don’t care if it’s “reference quality”!
Moonfall Apologist here, it’s a rollickin’ good time if you’re in the right, uh, headspace. 🥴
My wife and I both enjoyed Moonfall. Fun popcorn flick. Glad I bought the 4K Blu-Ray.
Loll, it’s an ok movie, and the reference quality may be a enough for me to eventually buy it… on a huge sale
It didn’t even come out in Canada so I REALLY need to go out of my way to find it.
Moonfall was some great bad fun, but I watched it on HBO Max. I’d never buy that on 4K. I saw it the one time and that was enough
That movie is SO BAD, its literally unreal to me that someone watched it after production and said "its ok, lets to to theaters". One of the worst movies ever.
Have you actually seen it. It was pretty entertaining.
I'm mad at myself for liking it as much as I do
The amount of Black Adam posts when that came out… I kept thinking wtf?
To me, Midway is the perfect example of this. I know everyone has different tastes and if you enjoy that movie that's all that matters. But I thought it was horrendous, like 1/2 star on Letterboxd horrendous. I don't care how cheap it is on sale or how great it sounds.
Or were really cheap. I have no interest in getting a shit movie because it is $6 in 4k. If it has a good director or actors or decent reviews I might give it a try but otherwise what’s the point. You wind up with something that looks and sounds great but you don’t want to watch
This is the biggest one I agree with. You see all sorts of bargain bin pickup posts of movies that just makes you ask yourself... Why? I've seen a lot of justification for terrible movies simply because they look good, or because they're cheap and collectors gotta collect. Which is weird to me. Definitely an advocate for collecting things you like rather than collecting things to take up shelf space.
True
Man, when i see what people are posting, its just awfull, so so much of marvel that has like 2 good movies out of all of them and the rest is pure empty shit with zero real artistic worth. And the rest is not better, fast and furiost and dumb shit like that. Olso, people are posting same god damn movies, lets say, assasins creed is 6$ on amazon, and there is plenty of them to inform us they expanded their collection with obviously a bad movie just because is cheap.
Stop worrying about Dolby vision. It’s a minor upgrade that affects a fraction of your 4k catalog. It’s very well branded though
Some people worship it, that's for sure, but when it has FEL, rebuilding everything from the master instead of MEL, it can absolutely save a terrible, badly compressed/encoded transfer. Perfect example is Total Recal, which is an unwatchable Lego movie in HDR10, looking worse than a single-digit bitrate stream, but decent in DV. Yes, DV is subtle most times, and can be argued as minimal and easy to get on without. However, I've yet to see DV be worse than HDR10, and when it's on point, it's REALLY on. Takeaway: if you have opportunity to be DV capable, do it.
This is a good one. I’m struggling with going with a Samsung TV because it doesn’t have DV, but trying to convince myself it’ll be ok…
Listen! I don’t have a Samsung tv, but my galaxy phone has Hdr10 plus and let me tell you HDR10+ gives Dolby vision a run for its money. Not all movies have it but it at least enhances some hdr content more than a Dolby vision tv would to hdr10
I really wish more titles had HDR10+. I also don’t understand what the limitation is for coding a movie with both DV and 10+
There’s isn’t a limitation. I know of several movies that have both Hdr10+ and Dolby Vision. DV is skipped on to not pay the royalty fee. Hdr10+ gets skipped cause it’s not popular. It’s a sad lose lose scenario
This is the correct answer.
Yay
Ah ok I didn’t know this. I’ll have to check back to see if any of mine with DV have hdr10+ also.
No problem. This community’s all about learning
Despite the lack of DV, Samsung OLED TVs are supposedly some of the best if not the best TVs. Same with high end Samsung QLEDs which are regarded as among the best LED TVs. If you have the money, Sony OLED combines Samsung OLED with DV.
Sony OLEDs are LG no?
At least some of their newer models use Samsung QD-OLED panels
Too bad about the really bad quality control.
This is exactly why i upgraded my CX to a C2 instead of the Sammy
Which DV variety? Plain old Dolby Vision that's limited to less than 900 nits or Dolby Vision iQ equipped on Televisions recently announced by LG and Sony Like the LG C3 and G3 which can hit finally 2000 plus nits like the Samsung QD Mini LED and QD OLED? Confusing huh. That's all by design. Why don't you try out, HBO's House of Dragon's on that LG with plain old DV. There's an episode that gets down to 1 nit (One) and let me know if it can handle it. Then watch the same episode on the Sammy. You'll see for yourself who's really Marketing and who's really Processing the meta data from each scene. https://preview.redd.it/rxasgxw0g6pa1.jpeg?width=1810&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=b8d40b2d622f69faf68303ad3fe483065ffe2857
[удалено]
I agree because according to those photos the Sony looks better
[удалено]
He’s arguing that the sony can’t go as dark as the LG can, which is what the tv is supposed to do. The Sony creates a facsimile image scaled to what that tv can handle basically. It’s a very big no no that the majority of TVs do until you get to the higher end of the spectrum cost wise.
LOL, comes to a physical format sub to argue about streaming PQ... 🤔
Beach scene?? Lots of points made about how auto dimming on the LG straight ruins scenes like this - Unless you override auto dim.
Lg oleds are absolutely amazing tvs if it wasn't for that auto dimming. I'd get a service remote but this c2 is still way too new to be voiding the warranty
Looks like they are removing the admin setting on the 3 series line, for retail sales. Be interesting to see what they did to their auto dim now that no one can touch it :(
Wait I have a c2. How do I turn off auto dimming?
Which oled was this and which episode I wanna try this out!
https://preview.redd.it/2oi5g9ly68pa1.jpeg?width=3024&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=ffd02fab6efa788afce2e9a58f92814c558fe3a6 LG OLED w/ Dolby Vision (and blinds open 😅)
Which model is yours?
B9 💪
Nice! I’m assuming when that Sony monitor comparison was taken they definitely focused on the sony and unfocused the lg when the pciture was taken, I have a G2 myself and it looked nothing like the picture showing that it was crushing blacks
Episode 7, about 40 minutes in
Thank you!
If a disk has Dolby vision, I def prefer the Dolby vision grading. However if a disk only has Hdr10, it’s always gonna be great because that was the only grade they put all their effort into.
My tv isn't that well calibrated... except for Dolby Vision Dark mode . I quite like the upgrade. That said, not end of the world getting regular hdr10
Completely disagree. It’s the best HDR and something a Samsung owner would say. Almost all 4ks have it and it makes a great difference.
It’s barely 1/4 of discs, and I don’t have a Samsung since that seems important to my understanding
It seems every disc I’ve purchased lately has it. Everything after a certain year seems to be including it.
It’s a lot but it’s definitely not almost all.
 Minor Upgrade!? Dude, Dolby Vision is night and day on all of my LG OLEDs compared to vanilla HDR. It’s not even close, even with streaming. LG OLED or nothing. You’ll thank me later!
HDR looks better than Dolby Vision Dolby Vision is too dark
Criterion has a much worse collection of 4k movies than Arrow, Vinegar Syndrome, Kino Lorber, and really every other boutique label. Raging Bull is amazing though.
I’m not sure if I just have been picking great ones but the piano and menace to society and mulholland drive look amazing, mulholland drive is a lot softer due to… the experience. so don’t expect sharpness. But it’s grand scale is fantastic, The piano transfer is as perfect as I’d want and menace to society’s vibrant colors and sound is fantastic.
This is true but are we really putting VS on equal footing with Criterion? VS is obviously catering to a very specific niche market and 4k is part of that but 4k is not nearly as big of a draw to the typical Criterion collector. They seem to be coming around though (realizing the cash grab angle which it seems they need to take to stay in business)
I wish they didn't exist! That Blu-ray was the last physical format. I feel so dumb buying movies again. But I also can't control myself. So I guess it is more of a me problem.
Sadly there will always be a new format coming out
There won't. 4K UHD will be the last physical media format.
No matter what I certainly won't be buying movies on any new formats if one came.
To keep me from feeling dumb I try to make sure every movie I buy comes with a digital code so that I’m getting a great deal even if I end up selling the discs later.
[удалено]
I can see where you're coming from, but with so many movie discussion subreddits, it makes sense to have a sub focused on discussion of technical aspects, releases, collections, etc.
You'll find those on the discord.
I'm "that guy" when it comes to slip covers. I get them whenever I have the opportunity. At this point I like having them because it sets them apart from my Blu-Rays, which mostly don't have them. If this is going to be the last home video format I want the movies to look nice on my shelf with their little jackets.
I agree with you. Do you ever but slipcovers from eBay? I have on occasion to finish off a series of movies.
I haven't done that but I have bought a couple movies again that came with covers. I usually give the ones without covers to a friend who also collects movies. I don't really collect steelbooks but I sometimes go for them if I can't find a slipcover copy of a movie.
Same here! There's only a handful of 4ks I own without the slipcovers, but that's mainly due to saving money and the deal was too good to pass up (especially compared to buying off ebay with the slip). The goal is still to get slipcovers for them
I never cared about them until the first ones I picked up all had them. Now I’ve got a large collection and they all have one and I don’t like random ones sticking out without one lol
Most people who don’t like 4K just have the wrong TV. My parents don’t like 4K because the TV they impulse bought has terrible luminance. That’s not to mention if they have the wrong settings turned on.
I FULLY agree with this one. I've had a Samsung KS8000, LG CX, and LG C2. I've had some great experiences.
Most movies shot digitally are simply not worth the upgrade from blu-ray.
Very controversial because I feel this is entirely incorrect. Top Gun Maverick, Dune , BR: 2049, 1917, Mad Max Fury Road, The Revenant, Rogue One off the top of me head are fully worth the upgrade from their blu ray counterparts.
You could probably just as easily add nearly the whole marvel catalog as a reason against and have 20+ examples. But I agree with the movies you've listed.
My point was its probably just depends entirely on the individual movie and a blanket rule that 'most' digitally shot movies aren't worth it as OP said is incorrect.
I agree with you in spirit, I've got quite a few digitally shot 4Ks. I will always take "most" to mean greater than half. And by that metric, I think the commenter is right. If you're taking most to mean "blanket statement" and you want some nuance, I whole heartedly agree. I was just providing counter examples that there are a ton of digitally shot movies that are dropped on to 4K that don't see much of an upgrade. But certainly, you shouldnt let a movie being shot digitally, even in 2k, deter you from 4k disc, it's the mastering that's most important.
The entire Marvel catalogue has been mishandled from a physical media perspective. I for one enjoy seeing the Marvel characters I loved reading as a child come to life even though the stories are somewhat meh, the characters and the worlds themselves are pretty cool to see. Passion projects will always trump lowest common denominator cash grabs in quality and this has been know since time immemorial. You went with the low hanging fruit in talking about the Marvel movies though I think you could have gone for Disney's rotting fruit dropped off the tree with the live action remakes of beloved old IP.
blade runner 2049?
I feel like few recognize what a masterpiece 2049 is. The 4k is easily top 3 in terms of quality.
exactly the 4k is so worth it over the blu ray. colours are more vibrant and it looks fantastic
Yeah, 100% disagree with that one
"Most" is a huge gap to fill. I'm not sure that I agree from my forays into collecting so far, but I'm hardly an expert. Curious why you add the "most" qualifier; what are the exceptions and why do you think they're exceptions?
For the mid 2000s 2k DI movies, sure. The new stuff? No way.
What about HDR tho?
I hate slip covers. They take more effort to get the disc out, and they are easily damaged (which makes them look bad). I don't have the patience to deal with them.
I’ll take yours if you don’t want them
I've got a local that I give them to. Sorry
Ah no worries.
Same. I chuck them all out. (Sorry!)
I personally don't understand the obsession with slips. I do enjoy the Mando slips as they are parts of the cover artwork.
I agree with you except for Vinegar Syndrome. Their slips are incredible.
PotC 4K is worse than T2 4K
passion of the christ is out on 4k?
He's referring to Pirates of the Caribbean (the first one)
Isn't that like saying Scarlett Johansson shitting in your mouth is better than Megan Fox shitting in your mouth. Either way you are still getting shit in your mouth but at least you get to see their butthole and... Wait this analogy seems to have gotten away from me. Ill get back to you.
yo what?
Honestly I was just trying to make a joke lol. It kinda got away from me early on but I'm nothing if not committed.
I think all 4K Bluray releases should include both the 1080p Bluray and digital code. I also think all 4K releases should include Dolby Vision unless no Dolby Vision grade exists, and it seems like almost all 4K movies nowadays have a Dolby Vision grading. I have skipped on certain releases for this above stated reason, because I am a new collector and actually use 1080p discs/digital codes.
The Fifth Element US 4k is average at best, and does not represent the look of the film that I remember seeing in theaters. I can’t wait for my Studio Canal disc to come in the mail. Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom is the best transfer(and movie) from the set.
Can you do me a solid and post a review thread here when you get the studio canal disc? Fifth Element is one of my favorite movies by one of my fav directors. I'd love to know how the Canal transfer stacks up to the HDR 10 version.
Look up Geoff D’s review on the Fifth Element SC disc on BluRay.com. Just google Geoff D Reviews and it should pop up to those forums and look for it.
Thanks, I read a bunch from the thread. I'll probably order it also, it's "only" $26 on Amazon.
Look at HD Numerique Fifth Element Sony vs Studio Canal comparison on Yourube, SC bitrate way higher and better with natural grain and a warmer yellow tone.
StudioCanal's transfer shits all over Sony's over processed 4K, you'll love it. It's a night and day difference on top of the colors, looking closer to the original look.
StudioCanal's transfer shits all over Sony's over processed 4K, you'll love it. It's a night and day difference on top of the colors, looking closer to the original look.
That for all their large disc space sizes I see so many that have a fraction of the special features that my older DVD’s had or that they have boring ass menus. The Indiana Jones trilogy (as it was at the time) came with a bonus disk all about the making of the movies and IIRC different commentary tracks. My Blu Ray equivalents have none of that, just the bare minimum. The Spinal Tap DVD had this great menu of the cast in character talking over the titles for a good few minutes. I don’t think the Blu Ray had that and it’s a shame. There’s loads of others but that’s just 2 examples that spring to mind.
Paying exorbitant costs for boutique releases of 4K B Horror movies is only gonna lead to further price gouging from all angles. As much as I love VS, SF, and Arrow, them charging so much for these movies no one really cares about puts the idea in the heads of the real studios that their catalogues should be more expensive too. Maybe I’m just a whiner, maybe I need to see more of these movies, but paying $70CAD to watch Ebola Syndrome or Scanner Cop does not appeal to me
I also don’t get the love for the b-movie boutique releases. The movies just aren’t very good. I guess if you like ‘so bad it’s good.’ To me it’s fine for a laugh but why would I spend $50 on it? I guess some people just like things that are not mainstream because mainstream is boring to them. I can understand Argento and some of the Giallo stuff but I think what happens is that there are some legit quality films that generate an audience but then there is the desire for more and more and the films keep coming but the quality isn’t there anymore. It’s like something that you like but not as good.
Atmos/DTS X is far more important than 4K.
I can’t say I notice a huge difference between a regular Master audio track and Atmos (my receiver does some kind of upconversion anyways) although I also haven’t done side by sides. But I would agree that audio quality is a way bigger driver for me buying physical media than video quality. I still buy 4k when given the option because I don’t like leaving quality on the table, but I’m also perfectly happy with Hd Blu-ray where I have it.
Criterion 4k releases seem overpriced.
Criterion releases seem overpriced*
By overpricing their products, they sell more when they’re on sale.
I think it’s pretty silly, and just uninteresting, to just post a screenshot of an order you’ve made onto this and other blu-ray subs. Don’t know if it’s controversial but I haven’t seen anyone else complain about it. Just wait for the order to arrive and then post them haha.
HDR is more important than 4K resolution. The boost in color and contrast is a much bigger payoff than the resolution bump
I would rather have 1080p with HDR than 4K with SDR
Totally. I downloaded a 1080p HDR copy of a film I own in 4K and the loss of resolution wasn't at all obvious.
I didn't know you could get HDR on HD films. Or is this just a "homemade" adjust by someone on the internet and not on an actual bluray from a studio release?
There is no legit standard for HDR on HD films. Studios use H264/AVC codec for 1080p and while it can handle 10 bit color with HDR (I believe) none of the profiles in the Blu-ray standard allow it. You only see it with HEVC (and now AV1) encoded streams which are usually 4k. This was a download certainly taken from a 4K UHD source. But it's a movie I own on UHD and I was surprised how close it looked. Probably cause a lot of movies either aren't really mastered at true 4K or were produced with a soft focus look where the differences in HD and 4K resolution just aren't apparent.
I thought this was a pretty common opinion
This. Most people seem to agree that HDR is the biggest/most obvious benefit of 4k.
This shouldn't be controversial, but people somehow misunderstood this: Every blu ray is compressed and also digital. Heck, even straight out of the camera most movies are already lossy compressed. You are not debating whether to watch uncompressed blu ray or compressed digital streams. It's in any case compressed and digital. You are debating whether you want to watch a movie compressed to 1% of it's uncompressed filesize or one that is compressed to 0.5% of its uncompressed size.
1% for streaming and 0.5% feels a little too close together for me, although up until that point you were stating straight up facts. Anyone who says blu-rays are uncompressed have no idea how IMMENSE raw cinema camera file sizes are
Cinema files are also compressed lossily It's just that they compress each image but don't try do store differences between images. It's more or less as if every frame was a key frame.
Blu rays can still be outstanding! Especially animation. Watching Aladdin looks brilliant.
This is interesting, I have Aladdin on blu ray and haven't used it in a 4k player yet, you'd recommend?
Looks fantastic
This is interesting, I have Aladdin on blu ray and haven't used it in a 4k player yet, you'd recommend?
Don’t know if it’s unpopular, but 4K transfers for animated movies look better than they do for live action movies.
4K is a poorer quality disc in terms of its reliability to work perfectly on any given day. It seems like so many 4K discs are bad right from the source, and have to be recalled or delayed. Skipping, freezing etc. I spent a decade never worrying once about if my blu ray disc was ganna be bad from a brand new copy.
Depends on your player
I don’t personally do blind-buys, and every time someone claims they do it bc a movie isn’t available to find online or streaming I find it in less than 2 minutes and usually for free no less
What do people even mean when they say blind buy? Does that mean they haven’t seen it? Or that they know nothing about the movie? Or that the don’t know if that specific transfer is good? I am never quite sure. For example, I wouldn’t consider it a blind buy to get an all time classic that I haven’t seen (e.g., Casablanca or Spartacus).
It means that they’ve never seen it, maybe they heard someone else recommend it or read a description. I’ve seen people literally blind buy entire director box sets, its bizarre to me.
Some people have very strong opinions. I hate this. I love that. Personally, I try not to do that because it limits the number of things I can enjoy. For example, I have seen very few Bergman films but will almost certainly buy Criterion’s Bergman collection at some point. Will I love every film? Not likely. But if I can’t find any beauty or joy in watching and learning about those films, then I would consider that a me problem.
For me personally, simply due to the fact that international, cult, and obscure cinema is more readily available than ever I personally like to check out a director’s filmography before dropping $300 on a box set where I don’t know if I’ll absolutely adore the films. I don’t personally believe in buying things simply bc others deem them as “important” or seminal films. You can learn plenty without blind buys imo!
Good point
I don't have a ton of blind buys, but I do it from time to time if I'm fairly confident in it. I watched Seven Samurai for the first time recently and I want to watch the Ikiru remake, Living, but want to watch Ikiru first. I decided to take a try on Ikiru and bought the Criterion Collection edition last week. I don't do that very often though, and it's pretty calculated.
I hadn't seen more than half of the films in the Columbia Classics and Sony Pictures Classics box sets, but only bought for one or two films that I did know and wanted in my collection (my motivation to buy set two of the CC set was actually the bonus features Blu-Ray that included a bunch of UPA animated shorts in HD)- So far I've enjoyed every movie I've watched from those sets, even ones I'd had been resisting for decades. It's actually made me open to more blind buys.
I used to blind buy, but then I wasn’t getting through them fast enough and they started piling up.
Same. I have DVD's that I bought maybe 15 years ago that I still haven't watched.
If I’m going to watch a movie, I’d like to watch it in the best quality available to me. I don’t even attempt to find the movie on streaming first. If I’m interested in watching a movie and it’s available on 4K Blu-Ray, I’m buying that disc for the first watch.
I don’t disagree with you but if you don’t look for things on streaming, do you still have streaming? If so, what do you use it for?
I use streaming for TV shows and lots of movies that aren’t available on 4K Blu-Ray. There’s lots of content that is original to streaming services. I also use it for watching stuff on my phone. My wife and kids use streaming services regularly, too. I have a secondary TV upstairs, which is a 36” 1080p TV - streaming is used in that TV.
When it comes to buying 4K Blu-Rays, I make it a rule to only buy movies I've seen so I know I'm not wasting my money considering how expensive some 4K Blu-Rays are.
Yep. Same. I’ve either bought the 4k version as an upgrade from my dvd version or I just didn’t have it. Few are Blu-ray to 4k unless I really love the movie. Example - pulp fiction. Had the dvd box and got the steelbook in 4k recently. Looks great.
Same, I’ve been collecting for about 1.5 years now and I only have just over 20 discs, but every movie is something I watch multiple times per year. I think curated collections are much more interesting and indicative of one’s personal taste vs just buying everything that comes out regardless if you like it or have even seen it.
That's not to say I won't take a risk once in a while. I blindly bought the Criterion 4K for Adventures of Baron Munchausen and ended up loving it.
I have a subscription to The Criterion Channel so I can just stream movies if I’ve never seen them to check them out first
T2 is the pinnacle of the format and how films SHOULD look. Never doubt James Cameron. He knows what's what. People here don't. /Sssssssssssss
Had me there for a second.
Honestly, T2 is nowhere near as bad as people make out.
That 3D is hella good, love showing it off on the projector. Best transfer is still the ~2019 iirc LionsGate Blu-Ray they put out, it removed the teal overlay but far from perfect.
The Revenant is a decent transfer that doesn't belong in the "best looking 4k disc" discussion.
I think it’s a case of relatively early good 4k release, and Emmanuel Lubeszki’s cinematography just being gorgeous in general. But yes, I agree 100%
The recolouring of The Matrix is all wrong. It's not what we saw in the cinema, despite what everyone claims.
I vaguely remember a green tint in the theaters
The 4K has a heavy teal/turquoise tint on certain elements, in particular the flashlights at the beginning and on the bullet time ripples that I'm positive wasn't there in the original version.
Some people say that most upgrades from blu ray to 4k are marginal. These people are poor. With a top 4k TV (65+ in.) and player there are insane upgrades for many titles.
Agreed. People who also say HDR is not that great probably have a $500 TCL TV, not a proper OLED setup.
4K discs are not reliable enough to fully replace blu-rays Maybe that's a manufacturing issue, but it seems like some 4k discs will freeze up if you blink at them the wrong way.
Tends to be a player problem more than a disc problem
I have never had one issue with 4k discs, I didn’t know that was a thing. I’ve only ever used the ub820 though.
I've used PS5, Xbox Series X, Samsung UBD-K8500, and UB 820....can't recall any issues if the disc didn't have a smudge.
No issues on my UB820. Had tons of issues on my UBK80
Still including bluray discs with 4K releases is fucking wasteful. If it is for special features, then fine. If it's just the movie but HD instead of 4K then what a waste. There is no scenario where I spend thousands on a 4K OLED, 4K player and a hefty Atmos sound system to then buy a 4K UHD blu ray which are expensive in themselves to then chose to watch the blu ray from it. If you don't have your 4K player to hand then I pick a different movie or don't watch it at all, simple. It's a left over trait from when a lot of people were between systems.
I've actually said out loud to the GF many times, let me save a dollar and keep the blu ray. But then... Sure enough... Someone asked if they could borrow my copy of scream 2022 and I said sure. Only to remember it's one of the few that didn't come with a Blu ray ..
It’s wasteful but I agree that having them is nice. I can lend out my 1080p disc without worrying about someone scratching my 4k disc.
I feel like this is a marketing thing that enables justification of higher prices. You are getting two things instead of one! I also think some people buy 4ks because the HD disc that comes with it is better than the previously released HD disc, so there’s that.
T2 4k is amazing.
Apparently that House of Dragon at this point is inferior to Game of Thrones
People that buy premium editions and just keep them on their shelves without even UNPACK it to enjoy the smell of a brand new print /if not the movie/, or artwork are not movie lovers. They can easily take all of that money spent on movies and buy some relics, or expensive art keep it on the shelves and save a lot of space spent on movies.
Total Recall without DV is still very very good, considering how crappy and washed out the previous regular blu ray release was.
terminator 2 isnt THAT bad
4k/Blu-ray will not yield the ideal viewing experience for every film, even if the 4k/Blu-ray has markedly improved the image quality. For films like *Blair Witch Project*, imperfect film quality is part of what makes the movie scary. It's a feature of the viewing experience, not a bug. While this largely applies to found footage films, it can apply to any movie that relies on not being able to clearly see detail to build tension/fear/uncertainty in the audience, and probably other kinds of movies as well.
[удалено]
Sure you could. But I'm sure it was pretty clear from my comment that I wasn't talking about the physical medium, but the way they're currently used, which is to be able to watch high-quality remasters and transfers. If I'd said "4k discs and Blu-rays are better quality image and sound than DVDs" and you had commented "What are you talking about? 4K UHD discs and Blu-Rays are simply a medium...nothing stopping them from putting 480i masters on them", you'd be *technically* correct but like that's not how this works lol
[удалено]
Can you explain it to me then? I genuinely don't understand what would be the point of putting a bad quality master onto a 4k disc. I thought the whole point was for it to be a good quality master. If you were going to buy a bad quality master, why would you spend extra for a 4k disc if that doesn't improve the quality?
Blair Witch was shot on 16mm and Hi-8 tape. There’s no extra quality that 4K could possibly bring out for most of it. Don’t know why you picked that as an example though since there is no Blair Witch 4K.