Quantcast

A Guide to 4K Ultra HD Blu-ray

Drongo

Well-known Member
Agree on the 3D, looks great, best 3D experience, but, the HDR is even better. If you don't see much difference, good for you, as you don't feal the need to buy 4K Blu-rays. I use VUDU too and I see a good PQ uptick from Blu-ray, depending on movie, as not all are great. If you don't see un upgrade on movies like John Wick 2, The Last Knight, Chappy, Miss Peregrine then your wallet will be much happier than mine :))
If a film that I really like is released in 3D and 4K I'll buy both versions; so that's actually costing me more. If it's not what I regard as a top tier release; but I still want to own it; I'll buy the 3D version only. Of course; I may still pick up the 4K version later second hand or in a deal. A few 4K UHD's have been worth buying i.e. Billy Lynn's Long Half Time Walk, Bladerunner and The Fifth Element. Almost every other UHD 4K disc that I have seen is only a marginal improvement over the BD version. I'm not saying they're not better - they usually are. I've put on UHD's and thought this looks really good. But when I put on the BD; I think that it's nearly as good..

I have to wholly disagree about HDR being better than 3D. For me; an immersive a/v experience has three principal elements 1: The Image - which I judge in terms of colour accuracy and detail. 2: Depth/Spatial Accuracy 3: Sound.

HDR enhances image quality; but with UHD that is at the cost of removing one of the fundamental components of the a/v experience - depth. Depth is part of the real world and should be part of any form of realistic replication of the world.

If UHD had come along and offered image detail enhancement over Blu-ray; but at the cost of the image being in black and white or lacking sound; I don't think most people would find that acceptable.

For me depth is as important as colour or sound. I'll take a marginally less detailed image and marginally reduced colour accuracy that also includes depth over UHD any day.

I'm not anti 4K/UHD at all. It's just that the format is rather underwhelming on the whole.

One more thing I forgot to add. HDR movies are intended to be watched in pitch black ambient in order to get the full HDR treatment when it comes to specular highlights. The brighter the ambient, the lower the impact of the HDR.

The HDR effect can make it look more HDR-ish, but, it can't add colors, as in the WCG that comes with native HDR movies.


I agree with you about ambient light being the enemy of critical viewing. Everything (HDR or 3D) is enhanced in pitch black viewing conditions.

Of course; the noise and grain that plagues many UHD discs is even more obvious under such conditions...
 

doug56hl

Distinguished Member
Interesting.

Is 'HDR Effect' a function of your UHD player or TV? If it's the player; which player do you use?

If it's the TV; where is it in E6 menu? I haven't found this function yet on my E6!

Thanks.
It's the 3rd Picture mode from the right if using the settings button and then direction keys for the TV mode icon (just below X at the top of the options).
lots of other modes.......HDR Effect, Expert (Bright Room), Expert (Dark Room)
 
Last edited:

Azreil24

Active Member
If a film that I really like is released in 3D and 4K I'll buy both versions; so that's actually costing me more. If it's not what I regard as a top tier release; but I still want to own it; I'll buy the 3D version only. Of course; I may still pick up the 4K version later second hand or in a deal. A few 4K UHD's have been worth buying i.e. Billy Lynn's Long Half Time Walk, Bladerunner and The Fifth Element. Almost every other UHD 4K disc that I have seen is only a marginal improvement over the BD version. I'm not saying they're not better - they usually are. I've put on UHD's and thought this looks really good. But when I put on the BD; I think that it's nearly as good..

I have to wholly disagree about HDR being better than 3D. For me; an immersive a/v experience has three principal elements 1: The Image - which I judge in terms of colour accuracy and detail. 2: Depth/Spatial Accuracy 3: Sound.

HDR enhances image quality; but with UHD that is at the cost of removing one of the fundamental components of the a/v experience - depth. Depth is part of the real world and should be part of any form of realistic replication of the world.

If UHD had come along and offered image detail enhancement over Blu-ray; but at the cost of the image being in black and white or lacking sound; I don't think most people would find that acceptable.

For me depth is as important as colour or sound. I'll take a marginally less detailed image and marginally reduced colour accuracy that also includes depth over UHD any day.

I'm not anti 4K/UHD at all. It's just that the format is rather underwhelming on the whole.





I agree with you about ambient light being the enemy of critical viewing. Everything (HDR or 3D) is enhanced in pitch black viewing conditions.

Of course; the noise and grain that plagues many UHD discs is even more obvious under such conditions...
It's harder to compare SDR and HDR on an OLED, as due to their inherently high contrast ratio they make even SDR look a but HDR-ish. If you, with an OLED, don't see depth... First time I've seen an OLED it was running a space scene from Star Wars, an Imperial Star Destroyer hovering through the stars. I could swear it was 3D, although I didn't have any 3D glasses. I love the 3D, the HDR and the depth the OLED can produce and I see the differences between SDR and HDR, dependant on titles. I can see the difference in Dynamic Range and colors the HDR can produce. I can see the difference in specular highlights and tone mapping. I see the differences between HDR10 and Dolby Vision. So yeah. Let's agree to disagree.

Cheers.
 
Last edited:

rob72

Active Member
If a film that I really like is released in 3D and 4K I'll buy both versions; so that's actually costing me more. If it's not what I regard as a top tier release; but I still want to own it; I'll buy the 3D version only. Of course; I may still pick up the 4K version later second hand or in a deal. A few 4K UHD's have been worth buying i.e. Billy Lynn's Long Half Time Walk, Bladerunner and The Fifth Element. Almost every other UHD 4K disc that I have seen is only a marginal improvement over the BD version. I'm not saying they're not better - they usually are. I've put on UHD's and thought this looks really good. But when I put on the BD; I think that it's nearly as good..

I have to wholly disagree about HDR being better than 3D. For me; an immersive a/v experience has three principal elements 1: The Image - which I judge in terms of colour accuracy and detail. 2: Depth/Spatial Accuracy 3: Sound.

HDR enhances image quality; but with UHD that is at the cost of removing one of the fundamental components of the a/v experience - depth. Depth is part of the real world and should be part of any form of realistic replication of the world.

If UHD had come along and offered image detail enhancement over Blu-ray; but at the cost of the image being in black and white or lacking sound; I don't think most people would find that acceptable.

For me depth is as important as colour or sound. I'll take a marginally less detailed image and marginally reduced colour accuracy that also includes depth over UHD any day.

I'm not anti 4K/UHD at all. It's just that the format is rather underwhelming on the whole.





I agree with you about ambient light being the enemy of critical viewing. Everything (HDR or 3D) is enhanced in pitch black viewing conditions.

Of course; the noise and grain that plagues many UHD discs is even more obvious under such conditions...
3d does not produce true depth, it merely tricks your eyes. HDR is a far more true and accurate replication of how our eyes view the real world.
 

Drongo

Well-known Member
3d does not produce true depth, it merely tricks your eyes. HDR is a far more true and accurate replication of how our eyes view the real world.
I've never read a post more wrong.

ALL reproduced moving images; whether celluloid at 24fps, interlaced video composed of frames in turn composed of fields, or HiDef or 4K are trickery using persistence of vision to create the illusion of movement. Yes; 3D uses high speed switching of left eye and right eye images to create an illusion of depth. In much the same way that when you watch a film you believe you're watching continuous movement; which you are not. It is all trickery. Without trickery this hobby would not exist.

To conflate 3D with HDR is bizarre. It is a different aspect of image reproduction altogether. Used correctly (and that's a subject of another debate...) HDR does improve image reproduction.

It's a bit like saying that I want the image as sharp and as detailed as possible but colour is not important to me. EVERY element is important in reproducing moving images to create a convincing facsimile of the real world. Detail, Colour and Depth as well as sound.

I would suggest that you watch some of David Attenborough's nature documentaries in 3D, or some other documentaries such Ghosts of Abyss or Cave of Forgotten Dreams to see how realistic the world in which we live is reproduced to see just how truly wonderful 3D is.

Of course if you could give me the option of 3D and HDR I would be very happy.

It's not about one or the other but (ideally) having both.
 

rob72

Active Member
I've never read a post more wrong.

ALL reproduced moving images; whether celluloid at 24fps, interlaced video composed of frames in turn composed of fields, or HiDef or 4K are trickery using persistence of vision to create the illusion of movement. Yes; 3D uses high speed switching of left eye and right eye images to create an illusion of depth. In much the same way that when you watch a film you believe you're watching continuous movement; which you are not. It is all trickery. Without trickery this hobby would not exist.

To conflate 3D with HDR is bizarre. It is a different aspect of image reproduction altogether. Used correctly (and that's a subject of another debate...) HDR does improve image reproduction.

It's a bit like saying that I want the image as sharp and as detailed as possible but colour is not important to me. EVERY element is important in reproducing moving images to create a convincing facsimile of the real world. Detail, Colour and Depth as well as sound.

I would suggest that you watch some of David Attenborough's nature documentaries in 3D, or some other documentaries such Ghosts of Abyss or Cave of Forgotten Dreams to see how realistic the world in which we live is reproduced to see just how truly wonderful 3D is.

Of course if you could give me the option of 3D and HDR I would be very happy.

It's not about one or the other but (ideally) having both.
You said you value depth and replication of the real world. 3d in no way produces that. It is in no way bizarre to conflate 3d and hdr. Hdr is all about producing a more 3d image.
 

Drongo

Well-known Member
You said you value depth and replication of the real world. 3d in no way produces that. It is in no way bizarre to conflate 3d and hdr. Hdr is all about producing a more 3d image.
With greatest of respect; you're wrong. Very wrong.

Have you actually watched any of the titles I mentioned?

What is your basis for saying that 3D Blu-ray in no way reproduces the depth of the real world?

HDR is a (when used accurately) a good thing. Yes; the more realistic the image the more 3D it appears. But even the most 'realistic' flat 2D image does not convince anyone that we are truly watching a real world experience with all the depth elements that the real world contains.

But watch any of the the titles I mentioned (and many others) and you will see a far more realistic image than any I have ever seen from any 'flat' 2D image including those from UHD discs.

I'm not saying that Blu-ray 3D is perfect; but it certainly the most convincing reproduction of reality that I have ever seen in my many years as an film and AV enthusiast.
 

200p

Active Member
You said you value depth and replication of the real world. 3d in no way produces that. It is in no way bizarre to conflate 3d and hdr. Hdr is all about producing a more 3d image.
Stereoscopic 3D (as in Blu-ray 3D) does, in a way, sort of (very roughly) produce, if shot and produced correctly, what the 2 human eyes would see, based on the fact that the human eyes are, on average, a certain distance apart. HDR alone makes no attempt to give us the depth info that our eyes spaced a particular distance apart gives us. Admittedly it's not perfect (eg. some films can use depth of field so some parts are not in focus even though in real life we could make our eyes focus on those parts of the frame), and it could be advantageous to have the ability to view 3D without glasses and where you could see different viewpoints and sometimes the 3D can be created so that the depth or the scale isn't the same as in real life, but the current form of stereoscopic 3D may be the closest we have so far to how the 2 human eyes together see in real life (excluding things like VR maybe).
 

simsini

Well-known Member
I'm looking to buy my very first UHD 4K Blu-Ray!
Is there a good "demo disc" to show off the 4k?
The Revenant, Spider-Man Homecoming and Planet Earth II are good starting points.
 

INXS

Active Member
I'm looking to buy my very first UHD 4K Blu-Ray!
Is there a good "demo disc" to show off the 4k?
My first will be The Matrix - all down to the review off this very site!
 

Tim2049

Well-known Member
If a film that I really like is released in 3D and 4K I'll buy both versions; so that's actually costing me more. If it's not what I regard as a top tier release; but I still want to own it; I'll buy the 3D version only. Of course; I may still pick up the 4K version later second hand or in a deal. A few 4K UHD's have been worth buying i.e. Billy Lynn's Long Half Time Walk, Bladerunner and The Fifth Element. Almost every other UHD 4K disc that I have seen is only a marginal improvement over the BD version. I'm not saying they're not better - they usually are. I've put on UHD's and thought this looks really good. But when I put on the BD; I think that it's nearly as good..

I have to wholly disagree about HDR being better than 3D. For me; an immersive a/v experience has three principal elements 1: The Image - which I judge in terms of colour accuracy and detail. 2: Depth/Spatial Accuracy 3: Sound.

HDR enhances image quality; but with UHD that is at the cost of removing one of the fundamental components of the a/v experience - depth. Depth is part of the real world and should be part of any form of realistic replication of the world.

If UHD had come along and offered image detail enhancement over Blu-ray; but at the cost of the image being in black and white or lacking sound; I don't think most people would find that acceptable.

For me depth is as important as colour or sound. I'll take a marginally less detailed image and marginally reduced colour accuracy that also includes depth over UHD any day.

I'm not anti 4K/UHD at all. It's just that the format is rather underwhelming on the whole.





I agree with you about ambient light being the enemy of critical viewing. Everything (HDR or 3D) is enhanced in pitch black viewing conditions.

Of course; the noise and grain that plagues many UHD discs is even more obvious under such conditions...
Is The Fifth Element really nice? I've gone back n forth so many times in terms of buying it. I've read a few reports saying it's quite 'soft' and not really worth the upgrade. Then...several other folk saying it's great.

The Leon the Professional UHD is a stunner & I feel almost guilty not buying Besson's follow up...
 

Drongo

Well-known Member
Is The Fifth Element really nice? I've gone back n forth so many times in terms of buying it. I've read a few reports saying it's quite 'soft' and not really worth the upgrade. Then...several other folk saying it's great.

The Leon the Professional UHD is a stunner & I feel almost guilty not buying Besson's follow up...
I'm pretty underwhelmed by 4K/UHD in general.

I read reviews and posts that say 'Wow! This film looks incredible in 4K'. I'll then buy the UHD and whilst the 4K version usually looks very nice, when I put in the Blu-ray to compare, I find that any improvement is usually very modest. Sometimes I have to switch between the two versions before I see a difference.

That said; I could immediately see an improvement between the UHD of The Fifth Element and the Blu-ray release. And no; I did use the remastered Blu-ray and not the crappy original Blu-ray release.

Whether the UHD could be regarded as 'really nice' is up to you; but I think it's fine. I own just over 50 UHD's and it's among the three or four I regard as a reasonable step up from the Blu-ray versions.

But obviously; for the very best visual experience I will always choose the 3D versions when they are available. Now they are a very significant step up from the 'flat' versions whether on Blu-ray or UHD.
 

Tim2049

Well-known Member
I'm pretty underwhelmed by 4K/UHD in general.

I read reviews and posts that say 'Wow! This film looks incredible in 4K'. I'll then buy the UHD and whilst the 4K version usually looks very nice, when I put in the Blu-ray to compare, I find that any improvement is usually very modest. Sometimes I have to switch between the two versions before I see a difference.

That said; I could immediately see an improvement between the UHD of The Fifth Element and the Blu-ray release. And no; I did use the remastered Blu-ray and not the crappy original Blu-ray release.

Whether the UHD could be regarded as 'really nice' is up to you; but I think it's fine. I own just over 50 UHD's and it's among the three or four I regard as a reasonable step up from the Blu-ray versions.

But obviously; for the very best visual experience I will always choose the 3D versions when they are available. Now they are a very significant step up from the 'flat' versions whether on Blu-ray or UHD.
- Great, cheers for that Drongo. I think I'll take the plunge after all...
 

filmofil

Active Member
Hi all
Im looking for best quality 4k blu-ray of old movies - Western movies, Epic warrior movies or war movies. What movies you recomend based on best picture quality. Looking for epic scenes (for example such as Normandy in Ryan or Hobbit trilogy epic battles) i need best quality color wise to test my new tv and blu-ray player.
 

Tim2049

Well-known Member
Hi all
Im looking for best quality 4k blu-ray of old movies - Western movies, Epic warrior movies or war movies. What movies you recomend based on best picture quality. Looking for epic scenes (for example such as Normandy in Ryan or Hobbit trilogy epic battles) i need best quality color wise to test my new tv and blu-ray player.
River Kwai looks very good, all things considered. The quality varies, but for the most part it's a really solid picture & the colours are really quite vibrant.

Then of course there is The Deer Hunter, recently released. I've not seen it on 4k but I'm probably safe in saying that should look impressive...
 

Johno0885

Active Member
Not that Ive read all on this Post about 4k but ...
What I think should be on every cover is a easy to SEE logo
Mastered in 4k as a standard symbol or other.
Just like Music CD's example AAD Analog Analog Digital or DDD Digital Digital Digital.
What do people think about that .
I have seen a few Titles that say Mastered in 4k but to have a new easy to see Logo ?
 

Azreil24

Active Member
Not that Ive read all on this Post about 4k but ...
What I think should be on every cover is a easy to SEE logo
Mastered in 4k as a standard symbol or other.
Just like Music CD's example AAD Analog Analog Digital or DDD Digital Digital Digital.
What do people think about that .
I have seen a few Titles that say Mastered in 4k but to have a new easy to see Logo ?
And how would that help? Even if the movie has a 4K master, it doesn't mean it will be refference quality. In fact there are many movies with 2K mastering that look better than some with 4K DI.
 

A4K

Novice Member
I'm sorry if this has been asked before. I would like to know whether different 4K releases worldwide of the same movie are of the same picture quality. Besides the mastering, are they all transferred at the same bit rates? E.g. Blu-rays of same movie have different bit rates and the ones exceeding 30 mbps are far superior in picture quality.
 

Stridsvognen

Well-known Member
I'm sorry if this has been asked before. I would like to know whether different 4K releases worldwide of the same movie are of the same picture quality. Besides the mastering, are they all transferred at the same bit rates? E.g. Blu-rays of same movie have different bit rates and the ones exceeding 30 mbps are far superior in picture quality.
Could you link to some examples, then ill like to buy and test that, wich player and displays have you used to evaluate on.?
 

samdavies

Distinguished Member
I'm sorry if this has been asked before. I would like to know whether different 4K releases worldwide of the same movie are of the same picture quality. Besides the mastering, are they all transferred at the same bit rates? E.g. Blu-rays of same movie have different bit rates and the ones exceeding 30 mbps are far superior in picture quality.
Short answer is no, they're universally the same. Its not quite like it was with with blurays as it is with uhds now. They don't vary so dramatically as say a highly encoded mpg4 master to a 20mg vc1 master etc..

Since region coding is universal for uhds its very rare a different master will be used, and the disc is exactly the same everywhere. This even stands for releases like T2, arrival, braveheart, 5th element, rambo trilogy and gladiator where the US/AU and EU/UK distributors differ.

You will find very few differences to this. Off hand i can only think of 3...

The German (concorde) Iron Mans vs the Disney ones
Hotel Artimis German vs ROW (German included HDR).
Cliffhanger US vs EU, Sony US has Atmos & Much cleaner transfer with HDR rather than DV for EU.

There may be a few other instances were on region has DV and another has HDR10, but i can't recall off the top of my head. Basically if you stay away from German releases, you are usually guaranteed it'll be the same everywhere.

This is just referring to the image quality and English lossless track though. As you move about by region (especially france and Germany) you'll find some discs may also have additional lossless language tracks.
 

samdavies

Distinguished Member
Could you link to some examples, then ill like to buy and test that, wich player and displays have you used to evaluate on.?
Think you may have misread the question there. OP is asking if UHDs are primarily universal masters or if they vary in quality when purchased from different regions, not stating that its a fact. It is well known that standard 1080p blurays can differ in quality varing by region and distribution studio for may legacy discs. There will be 1000s of example of this, however not really the place to ask given this is the UHD forum. Give it a google, positive there are threads across numerous forums with comprehensive lists if you want to go chasing after old blurays :thumbsup:
 

Similar threads

Trending threads

Latest News

LG 48-inch OLED TV now available in UK
  • By Andy Bassett
  • Published
Sky HDR launch rumoured for 27th of May
  • By Andy Bassett
  • Published
LG launches Gram laptops for 2020
  • By Andy Bassett
  • Published
Hisense U8QF TV heads UK 2020 range
  • By Andy Bassett
  • Published
Top Bottom