Aliens, The Abyss, True Lies and Titanic finally get digital and 4K Blu-Ray release dates

Soldato
Joined
31 Jul 2008
Posts
7,849
Location
N/A
When you say remaster do you mean new scan?

I don't believe Aliens got a new scan from lightstorm unlike True lies and Abyss. They used the scan from the old release.


I meant master in terms of what was on iTunes before - what's there now is clearly better.
 
Associate
Joined
25 Jan 2008
Posts
2,014
The Aliens SE is 4k Hdr , believe it was updated on Prime US but not Itunes for whatever reason ( might have since changed ).

I watched the SE over the weekend and personally I thought it looked fantastic, however the grain removal is going to be rather devisive.

Aliens was shot on 35 mm photochemical film (specifically Eastman 400T 5294 and 5295) by cinematographer Adrian Biddle (The Princess Bride, 1492, V for Vendetta) using Arriflex 35-III and Moviecam SuperAmerica cameras with Canon K35 spherical lenses, and it was finished on film at the 1.85 flat aspect ratio for theaters. For its release on Ultra HD, Lightstorm, working with Park Road Post, appears to have utilized the best-available scan of the original camera negative (possibly new and 4K, but it’s also possible that the previous 2K Blu-ray scan was used; I haven’t been able to confirm that with Lightstorm yet in this particular case)—“optimized” by Park Road’s proprietary deep-learning algorithms—to create a new 4K Digital Intermediate. Photochemical grain has been greatly reduced, though not eliminated entirely, and it should be noted that this isn’t the usual Digital Noise Reduction with which people have long been familiar (a dreaded and blunt instrument). Unlike an image scrubbed with DNR, this process hasn’t removed all of the fine image detail. Not only does that detail remain, it too has been “enhanced” algorithmically. The image has then been graded for high dynamic range, with both Dolby Vision and HDR10 available.

 
Associate
Joined
21 Feb 2010
Posts
935
Location
Aberdare, Wales
You know what, I read your comment and then tried to watch it knowing this. I had to turn it off as it drove me crazy lol

I've done a fair bit of messing about with Topaz AI and some bits of True Lies "4k" looks like just stuck it through one of the old Artemis' presets.

Tempted to get that Spanish bootleg bd-ray source and see if I can get better results with Proteus fine tune or even the incredibly slow Gaia preset.(does produce good results)
 
Suspended
Joined
30 Jul 2013
Posts
28,960
Aliens getting some poor reviews sadly. Seems its just a NR version of the 2010 Bluray that has been AI upgraded to 4k and the HDR version has peak brightness of 208 cd/m2. Disappointed
Wasn't it the same with Terminator 2? I remember watching it on 4k Blu-ray and there was no notable HDR at all, plus the actual 4k image was nothing special either.

Jim Cameron says he likes to oversee the transfers himself but I think we would all be better off if he didn't to be honest.
 
Last edited:
Soldato
Joined
12 Oct 2006
Posts
10,373
Location
Tatooine
Wasn't it the same with Terminator 2? I remember watching it on 4k Blu-ray and there was no notable HDR at all, plus the actual 4k image was nothing special either.

Jim Cameron says he likes to oversee the transfers himself but I think we would all be better off if he didn't to be honest.
the question you should be asking is what they dint **** up.

DNR/Color tinting/over sharpness
 
Last edited:
Soldato
Joined
22 Dec 2006
Posts
8,711
Location
Around Town
:cry:
hor.png
 
Associate
Joined
25 Jan 2008
Posts
2,014

The remastering of those gems is a project on which the filmmaker and producer Jon Landau have been working for four years.


"Looking back and seeing we hadn't done 4K transfers of all these and, of course, the fans have been banging on about this for ages. it was like, 'When are we going to get around to this?'" Cameron recalled. "I think what people don't appreciate is that it is basically a week of my time to do a proper transfer, updating it every day as they go off and do color and power windows and all that sort of thing."


"We recompose, shot by shot, going through the film, and I'm pretty serious about this. I don't just let somebody else go through it because I have such a vivid memory of what the color was and what we fought for on the set and in post, maybe all the way back to when the color was done with photochemical film, which is when I rode my Stegosaurus to the studio. These restorations have been on top of our day job, which is called Avatar. Those movies are quite good."

The pair, who have been collaborating for 30 years, consider the 4K versions to be the definitive versions of the classic titles.


"It was important to get it just right because, theoretically, we shouldn't have to do it again," Cameron mused. "4K is sufficiently above the innate resolution of the photochemistry of that period. Are we going to do 8K? 12K? You're going to see the grain more clearly. I think this is it, so we wanted to do it and do it right, and that's taken some time."
 
Last edited:
Associate
Joined
25 Jan 2008
Posts
2,014
Doesn't really chime with reality though.

I didnt watch it frame by frame / comparing to previous versions, but it was certainly very clean, very little grain, very bright and looked great.

I could see pores / skin imperfections in close ups, cant say how it compares to previous, didnt come across as waxy to me, but I really wasnt looking at it like that, just enjoying the film.
 
Last edited:
Soldato
Joined
12 Oct 2006
Posts
10,373
Location
Tatooine
you got two sides of the coin here and that depends what you like better.

Do you like the clean ultra modern look?

or

Do you rate preservation more?
 
Associate
Joined
25 Jan 2008
Posts
2,014
you got two sides of the coin here and that depends what you like better.

Do you like the clean ultra modern look?

or

Do you rate preservation more?

Besides the arguments over waxyness, the grain removal probably shows the model work up a little more , which isnt ideal.

Theres also plenty of scope to go further and sharpen up / add depth to the obvious back projection bits that dont quite blend with the foreground. But thats the full George Lucas and then you'll never stop fiddling.
 
Caporegime
Joined
28 Oct 2003
Posts
31,954
Location
Chestershire
Besides the arguments over waxyness, the grain removal probably shows the model work up a little more , which isnt ideal.

Theres also plenty of scope to go further and sharpen up / add depth to the obvious back projection bits that dont quite blend with the foreground. But thats the full George Lucas and then you'll never stop fiddling.

Oh, I hate those bits. It's so jarring when you see the dropship crashing behind them and know it's on a big screen.
 
Suspended
Joined
30 Jul 2013
Posts
28,960
I like the clean ultra modern look on movies that were filmed on decent digital cameras.

I don't like it on movies that were captured on film.
 
Last edited:
Caporegime
Joined
20 Jan 2005
Posts
45,723
Location
Co Durham
Definitely seems to be the itunes digital version which looks this bad. People are saying the digital version streamed on lossless suppliers looks fine. And like with titantic, I expect the disc versions will be a step above.
 
Associate
Joined
25 Jan 2008
Posts
2,014
This is what mine looks like, its not the exact same frame ( not sure which one theyve got due to the crop etc ) , but all the bits with Burke sat in Ripleys room look the same to my eye from a lighting / resolution point of view .

Presume the screeny wont show any HDR ness as seen on the telly, but i'm looking at the TV right now and its virtually the same. (LG C9 Oled).

So either theres a very bad version on one of the streaming services / combined with that persons equipment. Or they are being a bit naughty and playing it up for clicks , but surely people wouldnt do that on social media..

 
Last edited:
Associate
Joined
25 Jan 2008
Posts
2,014
Definitely seems to be the itunes digital version which looks this bad. People are saying the digital version streamed on lossless suppliers looks fine. And like with titantic, I expect the disc versions will be a step above.

If its Itunes then thats disapointing, I was going to buy it on there ( if it ever came available ) as all their TV stuff seems very high bitrate. Have never purchased anything digitally and was going to make an exception for this until the UHD Disc comes out. Oh well.
 
Soldato
Joined
12 Oct 2006
Posts
10,373
Location
Tatooine
If its Itunes then thats disapointing, I was going to buy it on there ( if it ever came available ) as all their TV stuff seems very high bitrate. Have never purchased anything digitally and was going to make an exception for this until the UHD Disc comes out. Oh well.
Digital gives me the hibbie jibbies!!

You don't own it as well as the other factors
 
Back
Top Bottom