James Bond in 4K

Discussion in 'Visual Arts' started by Vidiot, May 27, 2016.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. SamS

    SamS Forum Legend

    Location:
    Texas
    These 4K restorations are available to own/watch in 4K, via iTunes.
     
    ex_mixer and longdist01 like this.
  2. ex_mixer

    ex_mixer Senior Member

    Location:
    New Jersey
    I paid 10 bucks for the BLU-RAY of "From Russia With Love" based on the review here;

    From Russia with Love Blu-ray

    Demo quality disc on my 65" Sharp and Oppo player. A knockout of a presentation!
     
    SandAndGlass likes this.
  3. djkim

    djkim Member

    Location:
    Germany
    Thank you for sharing.
     
  4. chacha

    chacha Forum Resident In Memoriam

    Location:
    mill valley CA USA
    It’s beautiful. I don’t see how 4K could be better.
     
    ex_mixer likes this.
  5. rob macd

    rob macd The sunshine bores the daylights out of me

    Location:
    boston ma
    I have Hulu and the bond films only show hd not 4K
    I have 4K Apple TV and 4K tv
    Amazon has spectre in 4K
     
  6. Vidiot

    Vidiot Now in 4K HDR! Thread Starter

    Location:
    Hollywood, USA
    When I worked for Kodak from 2002-2004, they told me they believed that the peak resolution available from then-current 35mm negative was "about 6K." I think they were talking contemporary 5219 with Zeiss Master Primes, about as sharp as film can get. The problem is, by the time you went through a traditional IP -> IN -> Release Print stage, the projected print in the theater was down below 2K. There's always a lot of inherent loss in copying films, even through contact prints.

    But because of the relative softness of lenses and emulsions made prior to 1980, I'm not convinced there's anything above 2K on the negative itself in films of that era. I have done 4K versions of 1950s and 1960s films, but it's kind of nebulous... like taking an LP and arguing the difference of playing it through a 44.1kHz A/D or 48kHz or 96kHz or 192kHz. There just ain't that much there; the extra resolution is wasted. Throughout the 1980s, both the negative and the lenses got a lot better; I think by the time the Kodak Vision film stocks came out in the 1990s, you could see a very real improvement in sharpness, and it did finally go beyond 2K. The Vision 3 emulsions and new lenses of the early 2000s represented the sharpest, most-color-accurate films ever made. No digital camera can reproduce this kind of image quality (yet), but it's good to have something to aspire to.

    I think the bit-depth is a much more important problem, and anything over 10 bits is good. A lot of restoration work is being done at 12-bit these days, and 16-bit formats exist. This basically equates to "how many colors and shades of gray are in the picture," and that's a function outside of sheer resolution per se. More bits is a good thing.
     
    MDW, Dan C, SandAndGlass and 5 others like this.
  7. Vidiot

    Vidiot Now in 4K HDR! Thread Starter

    Location:
    Hollywood, USA
    I think the Visio TV is OK but not great.
     
    Heavy Music likes this.
  8. captainsolo

    captainsolo Forum Resident

    Location:
    Murfreesboro, TN
    The series is actually much more complicated when discussing the 4k restorations and Lowry work done. Not all were fully restored and many were merely reprocessed from video masters.
    Only 9 had 4K negative scans; Dr. No, FRWL, Goldfinger, Thunderball, YOLT, OHMSS, DAF, LALD, TMWTGG, Moonraker. The rest were all sourced from video masters and aside from TSWLM and Goldeneye were bumped up to 1080p for their Blu-ray releases.
    I too have seen theatrical versions of some of the Lowry restored versions up against vintage 35mm presentations and there is no contest. The originals looked better. I don't know if it is due to being early 4K work or if they weren't fully finished at 4K. In many instances the color timing on those nine and even some of the video ones is not correct. Some have been reverted to different scans for their blu-ray release such as Thunderball, and others had problems addressed for their Blu-ray release such as LALD having the contrast fixed on the main titles. Others such as OHMSS have brightness issues, and all of the 60's films have none of that Technicolor brilliance in them. I've seen a dye transfer print of Dr. No and it obliterates the Lowry version which I have also seen in 35mm.

    It also should be mentioned that the Lowry versions first came out in Region 2 and had color issues which were fixed for the Region 1 DVD releases which themselves were problematic.

    As for TSWLM they used the old crummy video master for the new DVD and it looked terrible. Fox did a new scan for the Blu-ray release and it is not only beautiful but the best transfer of the 20 film original series. It is reputed that the handful of 4K DCP screenings of various films are all new scans. Goldeneye was done by Lowry for DVD but they received a cropped version and thus MGM released a prior master on Blu-ray that was uncropped but was sadly very outdated and full of DNR.
    And don't get me started on the awful 5.1 remixes of the earlier films. Even Norman Wanstall, who won the Oscar for his sound work on Goldfinger, decried the stupidity of them.

    I'm not trying to be nitpicky or anything but it took me years of research and collecting to find out all of the information above. These various issues and the lack of original audio on many drove me (along with Star Wars) to get into Laserdisc, which is where things get really interesting. Many of the lossy original tracks even on the Blu-Rays are just plain bad when directly compared to their LD counterparts, plus while not always having top of the line transfers, the Laserdisc letterboxed versions are very accurate for the most part. (With a number of them providing the source master for the first Bond DVD releases.) The Criterion CAV recalled versions of the first three are all seemingly from Technicolor prints as opposed to studio materials as they are totally different to the MGM editions, except that Dr. No is the same print on both Criterion and MGM releases and both are the closest home version I've seen to matching what the dye transfer print looked like.

    I truly hope that definitive 4K releases are in the works as the constant reissues of this series have never addressed many problems. I have been buying Bond releases since I was five years old and still haven't stopped.
     
    PH416156, MDW, Dan C and 3 others like this.
  9. Rubber65

    Rubber65 Forum Resident

    Phenomenal. We've had no issues whatsoever. For a good first 4k tv, it's affordable. I think we got it at COSCO for $2050 Canadian.
     
    alexpop likes this.
  10. alexpop

    alexpop Power pop + other bad habits....

    That's a good price,reasonable for 2018.
     
  11. Rubber65

    Rubber65 Forum Resident

    We actually got it if I remember correctly early 2017. We were' looking to upgrade. We didn't want a tv capable of 3d but we wanted a smart tv. We stumbled on Visio read some good reviews and got it. It just so happens that I got an xbox one S which is capable of playing 4k movies so it was a sin sin all around.
     
  12. SamS

    SamS Forum Legend

    Location:
    Texas
    So you're saying some of the new 4K digital versions from iTunes are sourced from <1080p transfers? I find that a bit hard to believe.
     
  13. captainsolo

    captainsolo Forum Resident

    Location:
    Murfreesboro, TN
    I was referring to everything prior to these new 4k digital releases on iTunes which I haven’t seen yet.
     
  14. Vidiot

    Vidiot Now in 4K HDR! Thread Starter

    Location:
    Hollywood, USA
    I was told that Lowry scanned everything at 4K (on the Imagica scanners they had in their building on Ontario Street near the Burbank Airport), and it was mostly from camera negative. The exception were cases where the negative was damaged and they had to drop in occasional shots or scenes from a vintage IP. The films scanned went all the way from Dr. No through Goldeneye. However, from The World Is Not Enough (1999) on, the studio had their own 2K files of everything and took care of the remasters on their end. Since 90% of the VFX were done at 2K, anything in 4K would just be an uprez. I think in some cases, Lowry may have done some fixes in terms of NR, dirt removal, and enhancement, but that's about it.

    I'm not 100% happy with all the color decisions on the Bond films either, but they were all done before I began working at Lowry. I was assured that the MGM/UA execs supervised everything and got exactly what they asked for. Lowry had the ability to actually run a 35mm print on a Kinoton projector in the same room doing the digital work, so they could actually compare any of their projects to the original theatrical release. The reality is that a lot of release prints are faded and look bad, so getting a sense of what (say) a 1966 film looked like in 2006 is more problematic than you might think. Also bear in mind that theatrical prints are meant to be projected at 48 nits of brightness and a 5400° color temperature, and normal video monitors are at 100 nits with a 6500° color temperature. The SMPTE spec is what it is because it's the nature of film. Comparing the two images directly is vague and ephemeral, and even though I've done it, the reality is that we only got a "sense" of what the original filmmakers were going for. And again, the chances of getting a really great, unfaded, pristine 35mm print for anything made prior to the 1980s is slim to none.

    My objection to several of the Bond films is I actually think they're a little bright, but I think the color and detail are generally fine. But it is a standard thing in home video and in television to lean towards going a little brighter than a little darker.
     
    Dan C, captainsolo, ex_mixer and 2 others like this.
  15. captainsolo

    captainsolo Forum Resident

    Location:
    Murfreesboro, TN
    Lowry is credited with all 20 through Die Another Day on video releases but if you scrutinize the credits and look at both the transfer and what was made available theatrically, it was only the nine I mentioned that were scanned from negative. The rest were all done from studio provided materials and it is unknown as to what sources were provided. Of course it is possible more were done and only select 4K scans were released though it would make little sense to only showcase nine instead of all of them. And for some reason The Spy Who Loved Me only had a video master tweaked. (At the time it was the only one seen as a definite downgrade from the previous issue.)

    The Lowry masters have appeared in three varieties:
    The Region 2 Ultimate Edition DVDs which had color issues.
    The Region 1 UE DVDs which had some issues fixed from the R2 earlier releases.
    The Blu-rays that still use the same master materials.

    You're spot on with some being too bright, as the last ones to be released on Blu-ray in the original waves all have this problem to a larger degree-OHMSS worst of all. The first time around on DVD there were multitudes of color issues and bad timing choices with the most obvious being the predawn teaser for OHMSS being wrecked. These and others were fixed for Blu-ray but I don't know if the DVD problems were from Lowry or MGM making further changes at the time. Some Blu-rays have reverted to other if not older scans for no known reason. Thunderball is a different or less cleaned up master on Blu-ray as there are vertical lines and color differences not present on the Lowry DVD. On Goldeneye they were provided with a cropped master that resulted in a number of complaints on the DVD release so MGM reverted to another outdated master for the Blu-ray. I have seen HD airings of the Lowry Goldeneye and it looks more detailed but still has the heavy cropping on all four sides.

    It was only a year or two ago that the handful of 4K DCP theatrical screenings (so far: Goldfinger, For Your Eyes Only and Goldeneye that I know of were shown in 4K in the UK) of Bond titles began happening and it was always my understanding that these were brand new 4K scans of the entire series for an eventual 4K release. I then presumed that the new Fox scan of TSWLM that was put on Blu-ray was likely the first of these to be physically released in some form.

    I drool over what these could look like in 4K. I also agree on your point on how difficult it is to reflect vintage print materials to exact degrees and how each transfer must have some leeway in regards to the current format standards and materials available. Unfortunately I have only managed to see Dr. No in dye transfer and of course that process isn't gospel either due to variations in the prints themselves and how the process can affect differences compared to the original negative.

    I do hope someone takes a peek on the audio side because the original tracks shouldn't be so neglected. While it is nice to have them all included in lossy 2.0 on the Blu-rays when they weren't all present on the DVDs-none of them sound as good as previous copies and some are laughably noise reduced and muffled in comparison. It is as if you put a bad record club copy of an album next to the original first pressing.
     
  16. SamS

    SamS Forum Legend

    Location:
    Texas
    You can watch/own any (all) of them tonight, in 4K, for $15 each.
     
  17. JAuz

    JAuz Forum Resident

    Location:
    US
    I see that these are available, and plenty of websites stating that. Not many reviews though. Is there enough detail to warrant an upgrade over the Blu-rays? I'm mostly interested in the Connery/Moore films and I think those look great in HD.
     
  18. SamS

    SamS Forum Legend

    Location:
    Texas
    I have all the Bond films on Blu-ray and digitally via VUDU, they don't "port" to iTunes. So, I haven't double-dipped yet on a 4K version purchased via iTunes. Maybe I should pick a title that might show the biggest improvement. Any ideas or suggestions?
     
  19. captainsolo

    captainsolo Forum Resident

    Location:
    Murfreesboro, TN
    I too have wondered just what these are and if they’re worth anything. I don’t normally do any digital versions.

    If you were to choose one perhaps try one that previously wasn’t restored from negative or had issues. Perhaps try Goldeneye. That should be a clincher as the Lowry version was jettisoned in favor of the old master on blu-ray. A new 4k version should be pretty obviously superior looking.
     
  20. SamS

    SamS Forum Legend

    Location:
    Texas

    Well here ya go, I'm watching GoldenEye in real 4K :) Quite nice! I compared it to the Blu-ray and streaming 1080p from VUDU. The 4K has a wonderful light film grain, which is mostly absent from the BD/VUDU. The colors are richer, and it does have a "less waxy" look. I can't imagine it looking any better!
    [​IMG][​IMG]
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page

molar-endocrine