UHD and HDR in General

Discuss North American DVDs and Blu-rays or other DVD and Blu-ray-related topics.
Post Reply
Message
Author
User avatar
yoloswegmaster
Joined: Tue Nov 01, 2016 3:57 pm

Re: UHD and HDR in General

#101 Post by yoloswegmaster » Fri Jun 25, 2021 4:18 pm

I've seen people elsewhere referring his comments towards Turbine's release of 'An American Werewolf in London'.

User avatar
eerik
Joined: Sun Mar 22, 2009 4:53 pm
Location: Estonia

Re: UHD and HDR in General

#102 Post by eerik » Fri Jun 25, 2021 4:36 pm

yoloswegmaster wrote:
Fri Jun 25, 2021 4:18 pm
I've seen people elsewhere referring his comments towards Turbine's release of 'An American Werewolf in London'.
That would be surprising, considering how much effort they seemingly put into the special edition with packaging, booklet, licensed soundtrack CD, etc., and their excellent work on Crash restoration.

Did some research and it looks like the Nordic releae of Django uses the 4K restoration by Ritrovata which was completed in 2018, so at least it is not that.

User avatar
FrauBlucher
Joined: Mon Jul 15, 2013 8:28 pm
Location: Greenwich Village

Re: UHD and HDR in General

#103 Post by FrauBlucher » Fri Jul 23, 2021 7:35 pm

Anyone know or pay attention to the market numbers of UHD?

User avatar
tenia
Ask Me About My Bassoon
Joined: Wed Apr 29, 2009 11:13 am

Re: UHD and HDR in General

#104 Post by tenia » Sat Jul 24, 2021 3:01 am

I haven't checked for a few months but otherwise I do. Are you looking for something in particular ?

User avatar
FrauBlucher
Joined: Mon Jul 15, 2013 8:28 pm
Location: Greenwich Village

Re: UHD and HDR in General

#105 Post by FrauBlucher » Sat Jul 24, 2021 10:04 am

Nothing specific. I haven't seen numbers for the format. Just wondering what kind of dent it has made in the physical media market. It does seem to me that more and more films of all types and genres are being released in UHD.

User avatar
ShellOilJunior
Joined: Tue Apr 28, 2009 7:17 am

Re: UHD and HDR in General

#106 Post by ShellOilJunior » Sat Jul 24, 2021 10:33 am

Market share:

DVD 63.6%
Blu-ray 22.1 %
UHD 8.4%

Source:https://www.mediaplaynews.com/research/ ... d-7-17-21/

User avatar
tenia
Ask Me About My Bassoon
Joined: Wed Apr 29, 2009 11:13 am

Re: UHD and HDR in General

#107 Post by tenia » Sat Jul 24, 2021 11:07 am

These are the market shares for the top 20 though, which is unlikely to be representative of the overall market. Not all movies get UHD or BD releases, which would lessen the more premium formats shares, but on the other hand, who knows exactly how the indie releases - seemingly rather shifted AFAIK towards more premium formats - are weighing in here... though these aren't shifting the same sales than a big studio release...

This being written, such a top 20 split probably shows how high UHD sales can go overall, as of nowadays.
Which, well, still isn't much.

User avatar
FrauBlucher
Joined: Mon Jul 15, 2013 8:28 pm
Location: Greenwich Village

Re: UHD and HDR in General

#108 Post by FrauBlucher » Wed Jul 28, 2021 6:24 pm

Special Features and Technical Specs:
4K RESTORATION OF THE FILM
-Malcolm McDowell Looks Back
-Audio Commentary by Malcolm McDowell and Historian Nick Redman
-Theatrical Trailer
-Channel Four Documentary Still Tickin': The Return of Clockwork Orange
-Great Bolshy Yarblockos!: Making A Clockwork Orange
-Optional English SDH, Spanish, and French subtitles for the main feature
Image

User avatar
swo17
Bloodthirsty Butcher
Joined: Tue Apr 15, 2008 10:25 am
Location: SLC, UT

Re: UHD and HDR in General

#109 Post by swo17 » Wed Jul 28, 2021 6:34 pm

dwk wrote:
Wed Jul 28, 2021 12:08 pm
I haven't listened to the podcast yet, but Barry Sonnenfeld is on the latest episode of Lee Kline's podcast and the episode description says:
A few months ago, Lee was speaking with filmmaker Barry Sonnenfeld. They were catching up on a few things related to one of the Coen brothers films, and he started to tell me why he didn’t like HDR and why he has a problem with 4k. Intrigued, I continued the conversation. But, while he was ranting I asked him if he would come on the Dead Pixel Podcast and discuss it in detail. He agreed, and we had a very funny and frank discussion about both of those subjects.
This was posted elsewhere but I'm curious what the more technically savvy here think about Sonnenfeld's comments on 4K and HDR (starting about 10 minutes into the podcast). He seems to be specifically referring to new shows shot digitally in these formats, but are there any implications on classic cinema being presented in this way? For instance, is HDR better replicating the original look of the film, or is it going too far in order to be more eye-catching?

User avatar
EddieLarkin
Joined: Sat Sep 08, 2012 10:25 am

Re: UHD and HDR in General

#110 Post by EddieLarkin » Thu Jul 29, 2021 5:54 am

swo17 wrote:
Wed Jul 28, 2021 6:34 pm
dwk wrote:
Wed Jul 28, 2021 12:08 pm
I haven't listened to the podcast yet, but Barry Sonnenfeld is on the latest episode of Lee Kline's podcast and the episode description says:
A few months ago, Lee was speaking with filmmaker Barry Sonnenfeld. They were catching up on a few things related to one of the Coen brothers films, and he started to tell me why he didn’t like HDR and why he has a problem with 4k. Intrigued, I continued the conversation. But, while he was ranting I asked him if he would come on the Dead Pixel Podcast and discuss it in detail. He agreed, and we had a very funny and frank discussion about both of those subjects.
This was posted elsewhere but I'm curious what the more technically savvy here think about Sonnenfeld's comments on 4K and HDR (starting about 10 minutes into the podcast). He seems to be specifically referring to new shows shot digitally in these formats, but are there any implications on classic cinema being presented in this way? For instance, is HDR better replicating the original look of the film, or is it going too far in order to be more eye-catching?
Wow, those are some pretty ignorant comments from Sonnenfeld. He touches on something I've suspected for a while: that a lot of people think HDR is some sort of effect that is applied after the fact, like motion smoothing, to "improve" the image beyond its natural or intended look, which is complete and utter horseshit.

For starters, Sonnenfeld seemingly doesn't even know what HDR is. He immediately starts referring to HDR modes in digital photography, which is NOT what HDR is when we talk about film or TV presentation, they just share the same name. When people talk about HDR on UHD or Netflix or whatever, what they're actually referring to is PQ (perceptual quantizer), which is the transfer function used to turn the electrical signal the TV is receiving into the image it displays.

It is the modern equivalent to gamma, which is the transfer function we've been using to display images since the CRT days. Gamma was developed for CRT television and is based on its limitations, allowing a dynamic range between 0.05 nits and 100 nits. This range has nothing to do with the limits of film, yet we've been stuck with it through all the home video formats up until UHD. Something better than gamma could have been introduced once CRTs were largely abandoned, but at the time it was seemingly decided that the resolution improvements that the new TV technology (LCD, plasma) offered (in tandem with HD/Blu-ray), was enough that gamma could be retained. Once the industry started to move to 4K TV though, I think they quickly came to the realisation that another quadrupling of resolution wasn't going to offer a noticeable improvement, especially at typical seating distances (resolution is subject to a law of diminishing returns, in that the difference is less notable every time you increase by the same factor).

So in 2014 Dolby developed PQ, to replace gamma. In that sense, it is a "gimmick" to sell new TV tech, but not in the way Sonnenfeld seems to believe. Most simply, it extends the dynamic range to between 0.0001 and 10,000 nits. All this means is that when a film is graded, including catalog titles, there is a much wider range the person at the controls can use to represent the intended look, or to represent the information that is on an OCN. There is no negative connotation that can be inferred from this, and you'd have to be crazy to argue that gamma was a "better" range to work within (a range which again, has nothing to do with film). Case in point: Blade Runner 2049. Roger Deakins is also no fan of HDR, which is why the UHD of this title uses a nit range up to around 180 nits max. Or in other words, a very SDR level of range. Deakins had graded it this way for the cinema release and wanted to retain that for the home video releases. My point is, there is no rule for how bright a UHD must be. If the creative intent is to stick to a low nit range, then that option is there when using PQ.

Even Netflix, which yes Sonnenfeld is correct that they mandate everything they produce themselves is available in HDR, but they don't mandate a certain usage level of the PQ range. There are many Netflix films/shows that also use a very SDR like range for their HDR grade (Mindhunter for example, and over on Disney The Mandalorian). This is something else Sonnefeld gets wrong, there is no HDR switch on his camera that Netflix are mandating he turn on. Instead they're insisting the shows are available using PQ, not just gamma, which as mentioned in the examples above means NOTHING to how a film/show is presented, it is still entirely up to the creator/man at the controls, they just have a wider range at their disposal. Even the earliest digital cameras from 15-20 years ago captured a dynamic range that gamma's 0.05 to 100 nits could not represent fully, as UHDs of Predators and Zombieland show. Raw images, whether on film or digital, have always exceeded gammas capability, yet somehow PQ is a bad gimmick that should never be used?

Speaking specifically about UHD for catalog titles, the same applies. PQ is simply a tool to better represent what is on the film element. UHD after UHD shows that there is far information available on film elements outside of the 0.05 nits to 100 nits range that gamma allowed, so why shouldn't that information be available for a restoration team to work with? Chris just reviewed The Bird with the Crystal Plumage, and that's all he's seeing there in the HDR grade, what is on the film element. It is not something that has been added on top. I bet you could sit Sonnenfeld in front of the new BwtCP UHD and he wouldn't even know it was HDR, and he'd be impressed in the same way Chris was. Ironically, Men in Black has been released on UHD and this is also a title that is pretty restrained. There's no way Sonnenfeld could look at it and think HDR has ruined it. It has normal SDR like brightness levels, but HDR helps to resolve some nice highlight detail, and the extra resolution makes the grain finer compared to the BD.

And we haven't even got to colour yet. Sonnenfeld will grade his films for the cinema in DCI-P3, yet that's not a gamut that Blu-ray or HDTVs can represent on home video. But UHDs and UHDTVs can. So I say again, his critiscisms and feelings toward HDR and UHD and everything else it seems, is based on his own ignorance and not reality.

User avatar
swo17
Bloodthirsty Butcher
Joined: Tue Apr 15, 2008 10:25 am
Location: SLC, UT

Re: UHD and HDR in General

#111 Post by swo17 » Thu Jul 29, 2021 9:46 am

Fascinating, thanks for going into all that detail!

Are his comments about Netflix requiring that you shoot in 4K at least valid?

User avatar
EddieLarkin
Joined: Sat Sep 08, 2012 10:25 am

Re: UHD and HDR in General

#112 Post by EddieLarkin » Thu Jul 29, 2021 10:03 am

No problem! To answer your question more specifically:
swo17 wrote:
Wed Jul 28, 2021 6:34 pm
For instance, is HDR better replicating the original look of the film, or is it going too far in order to be more eye-catching?
HDR/PQ by definition is better at replicating any look, because it is a wider range. It's really as simple as that. It does of course give the man at the controls the power to go wild, and turn Citizen Kane into a blinding lightshow, but the many results we've seen so far of catalog films on UHD, the opposite is happening: careful and restrained implementation (though admittedly Sony liked to go a bit over the top in the early days on some of their titles). And even when it does happen that someone turns the HDR knob a bit too far, going way beyond revealing more detail, and making parts of the image blaze beyond what was intended, that isn't a fault of HDR, but the man turning the knob. It would be like complaining that Ritrovata's grades are often so yellow and ugly because of the restoration tools they are using, rather than the result of HOW the restoration team is using them.
swo17 wrote:
Thu Jul 29, 2021 9:46 am
Are his comments about Netflix requiring that you shoot in 4K at least valid?
It's certainly true that Netflix mandate this, and if that is limiting the camera and thus aesthetic choices that filmmakers have available to them, it's pretty terrible. But that's on Netflix, and has little to do with 4K/HDR as a technology.

User avatar
tenia
Ask Me About My Bassoon
Joined: Wed Apr 29, 2009 11:13 am

Re: UHD and HDR in General

#113 Post by tenia » Thu Jul 29, 2021 2:05 pm

I always find these kind of comments like Sonnenfeld's interesting in how even people you'd think are aware a bit of how these things work actually don't.
HDR and WCG's improvement are complicated to visualise because it's not a simple linear bump forward like an increase in resolution, but it's quite easier to understand when put this way : SDR can't reproduce film capacities as well as HDR. So even if you can't understand what HDR can do, you can think it in the other way round and simply see it as something that doesn't have some of the limitations SDR has, thus being able to get closer to what can be on the film.

But blame it on the industry's thinking heads who thought it'd be a good idea to call it High Dynamic Range and have people thinking its only good use is burning your retinas with 10 000 nits while it's actually much more useful when used to widen the range. Also : blame it on people like Vincent Teoh and its excessive use of "fake HDR" everytime HDR is not used in a Light Cannon manner.

The issue also is that indeed, many people are taking it as a purely digital-era related, but "HDR" photography seemingly exists for something like a century. Of course, its digital transposition is more recent, but it doesn't mean its analogue equivalent didn't exist before. We're simply now having the tools to reproduce it more thoroughly on a digital screen.

User avatar
swo17
Bloodthirsty Butcher
Joined: Tue Apr 15, 2008 10:25 am
Location: SLC, UT

Re: UHD and HDR in General

#114 Post by swo17 » Sun Aug 22, 2021 10:47 pm

Pardon my ignorance, but is the Oppo UDP-203 capable of playing all elements of the UHD spec? I see it's equipped to handle Dolby Vision (and was perhaps the first player to offer this) but are there other new technological developments that it's missing out on?

User avatar
EddieLarkin
Joined: Sat Sep 08, 2012 10:25 am

Re: UHD and HDR in General

#115 Post by EddieLarkin » Mon Aug 23, 2021 1:38 pm

swo17 wrote:
Sun Aug 22, 2021 10:47 pm
Pardon my ignorance, but is the Oppo UDP-203 capable of playing all elements of the UHD spec? I see it's equipped to handle Dolby Vision (and was perhaps the first player to offer this) but are there other new technological developments that it's missing out on?
It is still totally up to date, and it and the 205 are still 2 of the top 4 best UHD players available (the others being the Panasonic 820 and 9000).

Before paying crazy money for one though it may be worth waiting for more reviews of the new Reavon players, which use the Oppo 203/205 build, and in theory should be just as good, at a more reasonable price.

User avatar
swo17
Bloodthirsty Butcher
Joined: Tue Apr 15, 2008 10:25 am
Location: SLC, UT

Re: UHD and HDR in General

#116 Post by swo17 » Mon Aug 23, 2021 1:52 pm

Gulp, well I found a new, fully modded Oppo for just over $1,000 from an eBay seller with 100% feedback, which seemed too good a deal to pass up. I figured worst case scenario I could turn it around for a profit if a better option comes around. Thanks for the tip though, that will probably be helpful information for others here!

nitin
Joined: Sat Nov 08, 2014 6:49 am

Re: UHD and HDR in General

#117 Post by nitin » Tue Aug 24, 2021 3:46 am

I am just keeping my modded Oppo 103 for Region A blu rays and digital file playback and have a Panasonic 820 for UHD. The Panasonic is marginally better for upscaling but in all honesty the upscaling done by my Sony TV from the Oppo output is also pretty damn good.

ps Eddie, thanks for that layman explanation re HDR too, very useful!

User avatar
hearthesilence
Joined: Fri Mar 04, 2005 4:22 am
Location: NYC

Re: UHD and HDR in General

#118 Post by hearthesilence » Tue Aug 24, 2021 11:36 am

Re: the Oppo 203, is there basically a plug-in region-free mod and also a mod that requires opening the unit and installing it? If so, is there an advantage of one mod over the other in terms of reliability, durability, etc.?

User avatar
skilar
Joined: Sat Jul 20, 2019 11:45 pm

Re: UHD and HDR in General

#119 Post by skilar » Tue Aug 24, 2021 9:49 pm

The mod I have for my 203 requires you to open the case, but it plugs directly into an easily accessible port. It was painless. I got mine from bluraychip.dk, which I think isn’t around anymore. I don’t know if it’s the same as the one 220 Electronics is selling, but the two sound very similar.

I don’t know anything about any other kind of mod for the 203, but I like that this one is hidden inside, away from anything that might break it. It has been very reliable, works for every disc I’ve tried.

User avatar
denti alligator
Joined: Wed Nov 03, 2004 9:36 pm
Location: "born in heaven, raised in hell"

Re: UHD and HDR in General

#120 Post by denti alligator » Wed Aug 25, 2021 10:35 am

EddieLarkin wrote:
Mon Aug 23, 2021 1:38 pm
the top 4 best UHD players available (the others being the Panasonic 820 and 9000).
What’s the difference between these two? Price is almost double. Also, the 420 is half the price of the 820, and the only difference I see there is that the 820 can output analog audio. I assume this means that if I don’t have a receiver capable of converting Atmos, etc. the player will do it for me?

User avatar
greggster59
Joined: Mon Sep 25, 2006 1:37 pm

Re: UHD and HDR in General

#121 Post by greggster59 » Wed Aug 25, 2021 10:49 am

The 420 is a good entry level player. The biggest caveat is that it does not currently support DolbyVision.
The 820, in addition to the analog audio outputs, supports DolbyVision and has a superior 32 Bit DAC for higher sound quality.

User avatar
EddieLarkin
Joined: Sat Sep 08, 2012 10:25 am

Re: UHD and HDR in General

#122 Post by EddieLarkin » Wed Aug 25, 2021 11:02 am

Yeah no need to get the 205 or 9000, the choice would be between the 203 or the 820. As above, there is no Dolby Vision on the 420.

As for Atmos over analog, this isn't possible. No UHD/BD player can decode Atmos or recognise it as an Atmos track, instead Atmos metadata travels with the TrueHD core for a receiver to decode (for the same reason, the player must be set to bitstream and not PCM for Atmos to work).

User avatar
denti alligator
Joined: Wed Nov 03, 2004 9:36 pm
Location: "born in heaven, raised in hell"

Re: UHD and HDR in General

#123 Post by denti alligator » Wed Aug 25, 2021 1:44 pm

EddieLarkin wrote:
Wed Aug 25, 2021 11:02 am
Yeah no need to get the 205 or 9000, the choice would be between the 203 or the 820. As above, there is no Dolby Vision on the 420.

As for Atmos over analog, this isn't possible. No UHD/BD player can decode Atmos or recognise it as an Atmos track, instead Atmos metadata travels with the TrueHD core for a receiver to decode (for the same reason, the player must be set to bitstream and not PCM for Atmos to work).
So I guess I’ll need a new receiver either way. Can’t get Dolby Vision on my projector anyway, so might as well go with the 420. But then there’s the 270, which is even cheaper.

User avatar
EddieLarkin
Joined: Sat Sep 08, 2012 10:25 am

Re: UHD and HDR in General

#124 Post by EddieLarkin » Wed Aug 25, 2021 1:53 pm

The 270 is a BD player I think? But yeah 420 should suit your purposes, and is probably better than the Oppo 203 as it has Panasonic's HDR Optimiser which has a projector setting designed to remap HDR to the low nit range of projectors.

User avatar
denti alligator
Joined: Wed Nov 03, 2004 9:36 pm
Location: "born in heaven, raised in hell"

Re: UHD and HDR in General

#125 Post by denti alligator » Wed Aug 25, 2021 2:03 pm

EddieLarkin wrote:
Wed Aug 25, 2021 1:53 pm
The 270 is a BD player I think? But yeah 420 should suit your purposes, and is probably better than the Oppo 203 as it has Panasonic's HDR Optimiser which has a projector setting designed to remap HDR to the low nit range of projectors.
Thanks, man! Now to find a suitable receiver. Had mine for almost 20 years. Guess it’s about time to upgrade.

Post Reply