Last and Next UHD Movie

[gadgtfreek]

Starship Troopers

Once again, best way I have ever seen a flick. Audio was good too, and there are some real good HDR effects around the 25 minute to go mark when the ships break up in space and are on fire.

 

[gadgtfreek]

American Assassin

I enjoyed it. Audio was good, PQ is up and down, many scenes look good, but a few darker scenes dont look so hot.

 

[gadgtfreek]

Bayformers 1

Nice improvement on the 1080p version, audio still rocks.

 

[gadgtfreek]

Just watched Harry Potter 1, been a LONG time since I have seen that. Call me not impressed with the PQ, I mean I have seen several older films in UHD that look much better.

I am going to get and rewatch them all in UHD, but I was expecting more unless it is just the way it was shot.

 

[Bruce]

Just watched Harry Potter 1, been a LONG time since I have seen that. Call me not impressed with the PQ, I mean I have seen several older films in UHD that look much better.

I am going to get and rewatch them all in UHD, but I was expecting more unless it is just the way it was shot.

All but the second movie are up-converts.

 

[gadgtfreek]

First one is not an up-convert either, but that has nothing to do with it. The later movies look better than the first two which are 4K DI's, while the rest are 2K. It comes from how the movies were done, I guess budget I dunno.

From my reading on the set, as you progress through them they continue to get better PQ wise, where 2 is not great but looks better than 1, etc... I never owned it, but it seems the DVD and Blu of HP 1 also did not look very good.

These disc reviewers on other sites need to have a category for how faithful it is to source, AND then how the PQ actually is. Saying HP 1 is a 4 or 4.5 in UHD, and then saying Bayformers The Last Knight is a 5, makes you seem to lack credibility, or insinuate you are blind.

 

[fireponromance]

I ordered Dunkirk UHD, looking forward to it!

 

[Bruce]

First one is not an up-convert either, but that has nothing to do with it. The later movies look better than the first two which are 4K DI's, while the rest are 2K. It comes from how the movies were done, I guess budget I dunno.

From my reading on the set, as you progress through them they continue to get better PQ wise, where 2 is not great but looks better than 1, etc... I never owned it, but it seems the DVD and Blu of HP 1 also did not look very good.

These disc reviewers on other sites need to have a category for how faithful it is to source, AND then how the PQ actually is. Saying HP 1 is a 4 or 4.5 in UHD, and then saying Bayformers The Last Knight is a 5, makes you seem to lack credibility, or insinuate you are blind.

The Digital Bits said the first one was a upconvert but he is wrong, from real/fake 4k-
Films 1+2 are Real. - They are the real deal. Everything was digitally shot in 4K or the original 35/70mm film negative was scanned in 4K and all the mastering/editing was done in 4K.

Films 3-8 are Fake. - They are not real 4K in any material way due to having a final master at 2K. Studios have upscaled the 2K image to 4K and retouched the content for your 4K UHD TV. You should see some visual improvement over a standard 1080p Blu-ray.

 

[king3pj]

First one is not an up-convert either, but that has nothing to do with it. The later movies look better than the first two which are 4K DI's, while the rest are 2K. It comes from how the movies were done, I guess budget I dunno.

From my reading on the set, as you progress through them they continue to get better PQ wise, where 2 is not great but looks better than 1, etc... I never owned it, but it seems the DVD and Blu of HP 1 also did not look very good.

These disc reviewers on other sites need to have a category for how faithful it is to source, AND then how the PQ actually is. Saying HP 1 is a 4 or 4.5 in UHD, and then saying Bayformers The Last Knight is a 5, makes you seem to lack credibility, or insinuate you are blind.

I have the Harry Potter blu-ray 8 movie box set (not UHD). In the 1080p blu-ray version the first two movies don't look great and then things improve later in the series. It doesn't surprise me that much that the UHDs are the same way but I had hoped they would be brought up to the same level of the later movies when they scanned them for 4K.

The other interesting thing about the 1080p blu-rays is that the first 5 movies audio is LPCM 5.1 instead of Dolby TrueHD or DTS-HD MA. I know there are other movies that did this when blu-ray was relatively new but these are in a very small minority of the discs I own. Just like with the picture quality, the first couple movies audio quality isn't as good as the rest of the series. The 6th movie is Dolby TrueHD and the 7th and 8th movies are DTS-HD MA.

My family watches this entire collection every fall so I have a lot of experience with these discs. I wonder if the UHD collection has done anything with the audio quality or if these are just the same tracks re-encoded for DTS:X. I know that in theory LPCM and the lossless formats should be identical but I remember a lot of complaining that the Harry Potter movies were were using 16 bit LPCM while most TrueHD and DTS-HD MA tracks use 24 bit audio.

 

[gadgtfreek]

Dark of the Moon

By far my fav of the bunch. PQ, especially once Sam heads toward Chicago is excellent. Audio was good too. At about 43 mins to go when the wingsuit guys jump out of the Osprey in slo mo, the slow heartbeat was thumping.

 

[gadgtfreek]

Kingsman Golden Circle

Little too long, and not as good as part 1. PQ and AQ were good, final action sequence was real good.

 

[gadgtfreek]

Revenge of the Fallen, looks good, but definitely more like #1 instead of Dark of the Moon. Audio was great and the final battle in Egypt looked great.

 

[teachsac]

Dunkirk

Honestly, wasn't al that impressed. Wasn't horrible, but nowhere near great.

S~

 

[Pepper]

I honestly am wondering if my eyes are just too old.

I finally got a UHD player and sampled the movies I have on my 65-inch set: Passengers, Star Trek Beyond, Guardians of the Galaxy vol 2. I could distinguish no difference in quality between standard and 4KUHD Blu-Rays. All three look better to me in 3D. There are probably some settings to be adjusted but I did verify the TV was displaying 3840x2160.

 

[teachsac]

Those 3 are really nice UHDs. What display are you using? Try both formats back to back. After watching UHD's, regular Blu-ray's color will look washed out because of UHD's expanded color.

S~

 

[gadgtfreek]

Same for me, 1080p blu-rays look flat now without HDR and expanded color.

 

[Pepper]

My display is LG 65UH8500. I thought I had all the proper settings for UHD but I will read the manual again. So y'all are saying the increased quality is more in the color than the sharpness?

 

[gadgtfreek]

How far are you from the 65", you may not notice the resolution as much. And yes, IMO, HDR is a much greater thing that 1080p vs 2160p.

 

[Pepper]

Normally around 10 feet away, I believe. While comparing, I was at one point six inches from the screen, wearing my bifocals, looking for increased clarity which I never saw.

The number which really matters, I suspect, is 53. The number of years I have lived. And probably also the numbers on my eyewear prescription.

Sorry for derailing the thread.

 

[teachsac]

Last: Double feature of Hitman's Bodyguard and Despicable M3

I really enjoyed Hitman's Bodyguard. I wasn't all that impressed with the audio of Despicable M3.

Next: Dark Tower

S~