Click here to go to the first RED TEAM post in this thread.   Thread: Does (a) 4K (transfer) matter?

Reply to Thread
Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 11 to 18 of 18
  1. #11  
    Senior Member Kemalettin Sert's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Turkey
    Posts
    2,160
    this is the same transfer not 2K vs 4K
    on both blu rays they used same master..So you better edit your first post
    Reply With Quote  
     

  2. #12 Misleading marketing? 
    cross-examiner
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Posts
    2,352
    Quote Originally Posted by Kemalettin Sert View Post
    this is the same transfer not 2K vs 4K
    on both blu rays they used same master..So you better edit your first post
    I would... even if you read it twice there's an interrogation mark since the early beginning. But first I must know what's your source? I am all curious now more than before ;-) Once all the sources available have presented this as the result of a new 4K transfer, not yet available. Your input is straight down the opposite. Where have you had a different story?

    AFAIK, there is even an interview (I cannot find the link now) with Kimball (who had worked with Scott in Gladiator) where he speaks about the advantage of 4K over 2K and how 4K had impressed Scott for A Good Year (made a half dozen years after Gladiator). Or Scott's declarations about Blade Runner re-mastered in 4K vs. the BD version. Or yet, our own appreciation on the material, does it count? But well, who knows? Maybe we know nothing. And you seem to be the only to show to have access to something that I'd rather find out. I am all ears, humm eyes *)
    RED ONE @home
    #111
    Emanuel & Co's RED ONE
    #647
    RED ZOOM LENSES
    #156
    #157
    RED 300mm LENS
    #82
    Who am I?

    * LINK *
    ** IMDb **
    Reply With Quote  
     

  3. #13  
    Quote Originally Posted by Kemalettin Sert View Post
    this is the same transfer not 2K vs 4K
    on both blu rays they used same master..So you better edit your first post
    I don't think so. What is your evidence?
    Michel Hafner
    Reply With Quote  
     

  4.   This is the last RED TEAM post in this thread.   #14  
    I've got to say they look like different telecines just down to the different framing / cropping, but there's much more to what we're seeing than just the resolution on the telecine.

    Graeme
    www.red.com - 6k Digital Cinema Camera
    Science enables stories. Stories drive science
    FLUT™, Image Processing, Colour Science and Demosaic Algorithms, REDRAY 4K delivery
    Reply With Quote  
     

  5. #15  
    Senior Member Craig Ryan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    SF Bay Area
    Posts
    701
    I think this new remaster is evidence that studios are listening to home theater enthusiasts who have complained about lackluster releases like Gladiator, and Gangs of New York, which was also remastered recently. It's a great thing that will hopefully lead to a new mastering philosophy that is more faithful to accurately representing the film negative rather than being optimized for smaller screens viewed from too far away (below 50 inches) for those who actually prefer an artificially sharp and grain-free looking image.

    I also agree that we're not simply looking at a resolution comparison here. While there is more resolution in the new version, there are just too many hideous artifacts in the original caused by a poor grading philosophy that hinder it from being a good comparison for resolution only.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  6. #16  
    Not sure if its 2K/4K but lots was done differently in the post production workflow to end with such results. Don't forget what a better compression schema can do for an image. Not all encoders are created equal.
    Michael "Strawberry" Romano
    ICG Local 600 DIT | Honolulu, Hawaii
    Mobile: 239-218-4452
    michael@strawberrycolor.com
    http://www.strawberrycolor.com/
    http://www.sightandsoundhawaii.com/

    **PLEASE USE MY EMAIL, NOT PM's IF YOU NEED TO TALK TO ME**
    Reply With Quote  
     

  7. #17  
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Posts
    148
    Quote Originally Posted by miha View Post
    I don't think so. What is your evidence?
    There's no evidence. Just another troll.
    ________
    Troller ve?culos especiais s/a
    Reply With Quote  
     

  8. #18  
    Senior Member Pietro Impagliazzo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Rio de Janeiro, BR
    Posts
    1,575
    Quote Originally Posted by Graeme Nattress View Post
    The old version has a very different grade, clipped highlights and aggressive edge sharpening. AFAIK aggressive edge sharpening is not something a scanner does, so I don't think this is showing the difference between a 2k scan and a 4k scan but the difference between an old mastering and a new mastering.

    Graeme
    What about resolution?

    You can clearly see that beards and hairs are quite fuzzy in the old one.

    And... Film looks great at 4K! But I wonder how much degraining took place...

    Quote Originally Posted by Michael Romano View Post
    Not sure if its 2K/4K but lots was done differently in the post production workflow to end with such results. Don't forget what a better compression schema can do for an image. Not all encoders are created equal.
    It looks like the first one has heavy edge sharpening.

    And the second one lots of more resolution and mild edge sharpening (if at all).

    Just compare scaled parts of the frames, specially those with fine detail and compare. It's just not compression schema and what not, it's night and day.

    Quote Originally Posted by Graeme Nattress View Post
    I've got to say they look like different telecines just down to the different framing / cropping, but there's much more to what we're seeing than just the resolution on the telecine.

    Graeme
    I see better rendition of highlights. On shot #3, the old man's forehead.

    Yeah, it also looks like scanner generations are different between these.

    And I'm also not quite sure it's the same frame because you can notice in shot #5 that an extra in the background has his hands in another position.
    Acintyah khalu ye bhava na tams tarkena yojayet
    There's no use arguing over that which is inconceivable


    Pietro Impagliazzo
    vimeo.com/impa
    impagliazzo.500px.com
    Reply With Quote  
     

Posting Permissions
  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts