James Bond on Blu-ray/4K

17374767879105

Comments

  • MakeshiftPythonMakeshiftPython “Baja?!”
    edited September 2019 Posts: 8,000
    I just did this quickly. At first glance it doesn’t look at too different, but upon closer examination there’s definitely an upgrade from the blu-ray, especially noticeable in motion and the frame is slightly opened up. And no more DNR mess.

    Again, this is all just 1080p captures. In its native resolution on a large screen it would look more like a revelation.

    2012 FOX BD
    large_blu-ray_goldeneye02.jpg

    iTunes 4K
    ge2.png
  • Creasy47Creasy47 In Cuba with Natalya.Moderator
    Posts: 40,372
    Absolutely - seeing the native product will look even better, no doubt. That blu-ray transfer for GE was appreciated but overall horrendous. Those previously shared clips of the 4K version from Apple are stunning.
  • ShardlakeShardlake Leeds, West Yorkshire, England
    Posts: 4,043
    I got my first taste of proper 4K last night, I bought a new 4K player a few weeks back but finally got my first disc.

    Alien in 4K, WOW! Just blown away, the sharpness and the blacks look incredible, just the format for such a film.

    I'm about to pop Blade Runner 2049 in and feast my eyes on that, snagged it on Ebay £9.02, bargain.

    I've got The Mummy (Brendan Fraser) & The Prestige coming, going to be treating myself to more at the weekend from the winnings of selling my multi region player and quite a few region A Criterion titles I can no longer play.

    Can't wait to see the DC Bonds in 4K.

    I wouldn't replace the whole series, Bond 50 will do me fine for the majority. OHMSS is a definite being my favourite and I'll see how the other earlier ones look, DN, FRWL & GF looked some of the best of the bunch so might just stick with my Blu-ray's for that.

  • NS_writingsNS_writings Buenos Aires
    Posts: 544
    I just did this quickly. At first glance it doesn’t look at too different, but upon closer examination there’s definitely an upgrade from the blu-ray, especially noticeable in motion and the frame is slightly opened up. And no more DNR mess.

    Again, this is all just 1080p captures. In its native resolution on a large screen it would look more like a revelation.

    2012 FOX BD
    large_blu-ray_goldeneye02.jpg

    iTunes 4K
    ge2.png

    For the screencaps I've been sent, I must say I'm extremely happy that the DNR is gone from GE. I hate the BD for that. Plus, I got the feeling the image from the BD is a bit desaturated. People who have watched the film on the big screen tell me it's on but the skin tones look a bit pink and some bits look to grey to my taste.
  • I'm just curious, what sound codec is on the iTunes 4k versions?
  • Fire_and_Ice_ReturnsFire_and_Ice_Returns I am trying to get away from this mountan!
    Posts: 23,105
    Shardlake wrote: »
    I got my first taste of proper 4K last night, I bought a new 4K player a few weeks back but finally got my first disc.

    Alien in 4K, WOW! Just blown away, the sharpness and the blacks look incredible, just the format for such a film.

    I'm about to pop Blade Runner 2049 in and feast my eyes on that, snagged it on Ebay £9.02, bargain.

    I've got The Mummy (Brendan Fraser) & The Prestige coming, going to be treating myself to more at the weekend from the winnings of selling my multi region player and quite a few region A Criterion titles I can no longer play.

    Can't wait to see the DC Bonds in 4K.

    I wouldn't replace the whole series, Bond 50 will do me fine for the majority. OHMSS is a definite being my favourite and I'll see how the other earlier ones look, DN, FRWL & GF looked some of the best of the bunch so might just stick with my Blu-ray's for that.

    Blade Runner 2049 good film to start with I have both films in 4K, though the Blurays you already have the upscale will impress
  • Samuel001Samuel001 Moderator
    Posts: 13,350
    Samuel001 wrote: »
    Are the ‘added in for BD only’ scratches and film marks from Thunderball in the 4K release? A dodgy scan must have been used for that back in the day.

    I forget where these marks were, could you point them out in which scenes?

    Mind you, I’ve yet to actually sit through an entire viewing of the 4Ks. So far it’s just been a few sampling’s to see how they look in motion, and taking screencaps.

    The scene where Bond and Domino emerge from the beach and are spotted by Felix before having lunch springs to mind. In the bottom right hand corner. Not there for any DVD release but in the BD likely due to a different print being used.
  • MakeshiftPythonMakeshiftPython “Baja?!”
    Posts: 8,000
    Samuel001 wrote: »
    Samuel001 wrote: »
    Are the ‘added in for BD only’ scratches and film marks from Thunderball in the 4K release? A dodgy scan must have been used for that back in the day.

    I forget where these marks were, could you point them out in which scenes?

    Mind you, I’ve yet to actually sit through an entire viewing of the 4Ks. So far it’s just been a few sampling’s to see how they look in motion, and taking screencaps.

    The scene where Bond and Domino emerge from the beach and are spotted by Felix before having lunch springs to mind. In the bottom right hand corner. Not there for any DVD release but in the BD likely due to a different print being used.

    I just checked. I didn't notice any print damage, however I do notice something on the right side of the frame that doesn't look like print damage but more like something caught in the camera lens. Was that what you referring to? This is where I wish I had the UE DVD to do more comparisons. The UE caps I used in a previous post was provided via DVD Beaver.

    Anyway, I've just done more screencap comparisons, this time for DR. NO.


    This is gonna be a doozy. The colors look better than the blu-ray, again losing that magenta push, but the black levels are noticeably darker in the new 4K transfer to the point that details can get lost (look at Connery's suit when sitting with Taro).


    1991 Criterion LD
    01DNLD.png

    2000 SE DVD
    01DNDVD.png

    2008 FOX BD
    01DNBD.jpg

    2017 iTunes 4K
    01DN4K.png


    1991 Criterion LD
    02DNLD.png

    2000 SE DVD
    02DNDVD.png

    2008 FOX BD
    02DNBD.jpg

    2017 iTunes 4K
    02DN4K.png


    1991 Criterion LD
    03DNLD.png

    2000 SE DVD
    03DNDVD.png

    2008 FOX BD
    03DNBD.jpg

    2017 iTunes 4K
    03DN4K.png


    1991 Criterion LD
    04DNLD.png

    2000 SE DVD
    04DNDVD.png

    2008 FOX BD
    04DNBD.jpg

    2017 iTunes 4K
    04DN4K.png


    1991 Criterion LD
    05DNLD.png

    2000 SE DVD
    05DNDVD.png

    2008 FOX BD
    05DNBD.jpg

    2017 iTunes 4K
    05DN4K.png


    1991 Criterion LD
    06DNLD.png

    2000 SE DVD
    06DNDVD.jpg

    2008 FOX BD
    06DNBD.jpg

    2017 iTunes 4K
    06DN4K.png


    1991 Criterion LD
    07DNLD.png

    2000 SE DVD
    07DNDVD.jpg

    2008 FOX BD
    07DNBD.jpg

    2017 iTunes 4K
    07DN4K.png


    1991 Criterion LD
    08DNLD.png

    2000 SE DVD
    08DNDVD.png

    2008 FOX BD
    08DNBD.jpg

    2017 iTunes 4K
    08DN4K.png


    1991 Criterion LD
    09DNLD.png

    2000 SE DVD
    09DNDVD.png

    2008 FOX BD
    09DNBD.jpg

    2017 iTunes 4K
    09DN4K.png


    1991 Criterion LD
    10DNLD.png

    2000 SE DVD
    10DNDVD.png

    2008 FOX BD
    10DNBD.jpg

    2017 iTunes 4K
    10DN4K.png
  • Fire_and_Ice_ReturnsFire_and_Ice_Returns I am trying to get away from this mountan!
    Posts: 23,105
    DN really does look amazing @MakeshiftPython
  • Posts: 17,241
    DN sure look particularly impressive based on those 2017 iTunes 4K screenshots!
  • Samuel001Samuel001 Moderator
    Posts: 13,350
    Samuel001 wrote: »
    Samuel001 wrote: »
    Are the ‘added in for BD only’ scratches and film marks from Thunderball in the 4K release? A dodgy scan must have been used for that back in the day.

    I forget where these marks were, could you point them out in which scenes?

    Mind you, I’ve yet to actually sit through an entire viewing of the 4Ks. So far it’s just been a few sampling’s to see how they look in motion, and taking screencaps.

    The scene where Bond and Domino emerge from the beach and are spotted by Felix before having lunch springs to mind. In the bottom right hand corner. Not there for any DVD release but in the BD likely due to a different print being used.

    I just checked. I didn't notice any print damage, however I do notice something on the right side of the frame that doesn't look like print damage but more like something caught in the camera lens. Was that what you referring to? This is where I wish I had the UE DVD to do more comparisons. The UE caps I used in a previous post was provided via DVD Beaver.

    Yes, that's right, almost like flickering scratches. Some scenes when the bomber is being hijacked and can be seen flown in full view also have vertical lines funning down the screen.

    For Dr.No, some of the bottom of the image has been cropped! Why/how does this even happen? A team of people just not committed the project like hardcore fans would be?
  • MakeshiftPythonMakeshiftPython “Baja?!”
    Posts: 8,000
    Samuel001 wrote: »
    Samuel001 wrote: »
    Samuel001 wrote: »
    Are the ‘added in for BD only’ scratches and film marks from Thunderball in the 4K release? A dodgy scan must have been used for that back in the day.

    I forget where these marks were, could you point them out in which scenes?

    Mind you, I’ve yet to actually sit through an entire viewing of the 4Ks. So far it’s just been a few sampling’s to see how they look in motion, and taking screencaps.

    The scene where Bond and Domino emerge from the beach and are spotted by Felix before having lunch springs to mind. In the bottom right hand corner. Not there for any DVD release but in the BD likely due to a different print being used.

    I just checked. I didn't notice any print damage, however I do notice something on the right side of the frame that doesn't look like print damage but more like something caught in the camera lens. Was that what you referring to? This is where I wish I had the UE DVD to do more comparisons. The UE caps I used in a previous post was provided via DVD Beaver.

    Yes, that's right, almost like flickering scratches. Some scenes when the bomber is being hijacked and can be seen flown in full view also have vertical lines funning down the screen.

    Yeah, if the artifact caught in the camera lens was erased in the UE, I'll assume the same print damage is present in the 4K. Never sat through it all to view if the all the print damage is there yet.
    For Dr.No, some of the bottom of the image has been cropped! Why/how does this even happen? A team of people just not committed the project like hardcore fans would be?

    Early DVDs back in the day did this kind of thing with movies with 1:66 aspect ratio, so not to have black bars on the sides of the 16:9 television screens. That or they would just make them non-anamorphic, so you'd get the whole image with black bars on all four sides. Thankfully since the UE DVDs the aspect ratio has been corrected ever since.
  • Wow, these 4K masters need to be printed to disk asap. Amazing difference.
  • MakeshiftPythonMakeshiftPython “Baja?!”
    Posts: 8,000
    Keep in mind these new 4Ks have existed for awhile, it's just MGM is sitting on them until NTTD comes out. They did the same thing with some of the films not coming out on blu-ray until SF was around the corner.

    Had the upcoming film still been scheduled for a November 2019 release, we'd probably be seeing a full set release in October.
  • Posts: 15,785
    I should imagine along with the 4K releases, the Bond's would be re-released yet again on Blu-ray for NTTD. I would certainly hope they's use the transfers that were mastered for 4K. So far these look quite amazing, especially the DR NO caps.
  • M_BaljeM_Balje Amsterdam, Netherlands
    edited September 2019 Posts: 4,416
    Till 2008 i own 4:3 tv and i see black bars with 1:66:1. With HD ready tv (Till 2013) i see even more and don't seen difrence with 1:33:1, 1:78:1 and 1:85:1 because of the subtitels function. With my 2013 tv you can see 1:85:1 again because subtitels are smaller made by BD or TV in case of dvd. With tv programs's you don't see them any more. Fact is that with HD Tv or 4:3 tv 2:35:1/2:40:1 have been a bit of problem, not any more. Problem now is the forced 1:33:1 on BD or tv programs, created by the fact some people wil use the 4:3 function and that not be good for your tv. It have been better it have been forced 1:77:1/1:78:1 without losing original in mind, there did with tv programs and that is not problem for your tv. I don't understand why some 1:33:1 on dvd are made in 1:78:1 as it is not needed. The tv doing the work and looks better then it be automatic on disc. This is why i sugest remove forced 4:3 on BD and archief footage on tv programs.

    Iam very happy that it not be needed any more using my tv remote moost of time for subtitels, so i don't going to use 4:3 fuction when i put 1:33:1 series in my Bd player.If earlier Bond movies have been 1:33:1 i have done same and i have got another reasen for not buying it on BD. I have some BD of this kind from Disney, video image is good and special blackbar function can help. With 21:9 mabey problem in future even bigger and mabey also can a reasen why so much people watch things on there PC.

    Not fan of TDKR switch between 1:78:1 and 2:40:1. In my opnion there can have better release movie in 1:85:1 or other way around: Action in 2:40:1 (Where it first place be made for) and drama in 1:78:1. But iam afraid NTTD wil stil be action in 1:78:1. In the cinema wil not see difrence. (Fact is that i wil not go to Imax version, because i don't whant to pay extra for movie partly in 1:78:1 and that switch in formats who i don't notice in the cinema and only on BD).
  • Posts: 1,879
    I think I will now dismiss myself from this thread. To view any more screencaps of 4K images will make me start pursuing thoughts of converting to it and I don't have a TV, player, discs or space to start over again. Yet.

  • GertGettlerGertGettler Laptop Barcelona
    Posts: 431
    I don't like the artifical color saturation (higher) of the 4K iTunes version when compared to the Fox BluRay release.
  • Posts: 725
    They aren't artificial. They are what the films are supposed to look like and did in the original theatrical releases. Rather, the previous additions are 'artificially' duller. Due to their limitations.
  • MinionMinion Don't Hassle the Bond
    Posts: 1,165
    I just finished rewatching the 4K PTS of each film, and its astounding how beautiful even the cheapest or oldest 007 movie is. Well worth the price.
  • Posts: 6,665
    07DN4K.png

    Worth it.

  • Minion wrote: »
    I just finished rewatching the 4K PTS of each film, and its astounding how beautiful even the cheapest or oldest 007 movie is. Well worth the price.

    What sound do the 4k iTunes versions have? Is it lossless DTS-HD MA in 5.1?
  • MakeshiftPythonMakeshiftPython “Baja?!”
    Posts: 8,000
    I don’t know any streaming service that has that. It’s Dolby Digital 5.1
  • Posts: 17,241
    Watched my UE copy of AVTAK last night and all the way through I couldn't help but think how the Moore era films look like in 4K. But at almost £18 for each film, I'm not going to upgrade my DVD's anytime soon. Nor do I have a 4K TV / 4K Apple TV (only 4th gen HD).
  • Posts: 5,767
    I don't like the artifical color saturation (higher) of the 4K iTunes version when compared to the Fox BluRay release.
    They aren't artificial. They are what the films are supposed to look like and did in the original theatrical releases. Rather, the previous additions are 'artificially' duller. Due to their limitations.
    I tend to agree that, intentional or not, some of the 4K examples look a bit artificial to me too. But while those screenshots give a comparison between the different formats, they are not necessarily exactly what the film is going to look like on your home tv. I popped in my DN BR for a comparison, and both on my tv set and on my laptop the colours were somewhere in between those screenshots posted in this thread. Not as intense as the 4K examples, but also by far not as grey as on the BR examples, while at the same time the skin tones weren´t as pink/red as in the BR examples posted here.
    Modern tv sets don´t have a usable default setting they come with, as did old tube tv sets. So in order to enjoy any content, you first have to adjust the colours and brightness and all kinds of other stuff on your tv set first. And then I guess it very much depends on what you prefer to watch. Then it depends on what you use as reference for adjusting the tv, old tv channels, new tv channels, or any type of disc. I get rather different picture qualities depending on wether I watch a disc or stream from Amazon/Netflix. I´m sure there would be perfect settings for each of them. Since I usually watch DVD or BR, I don´t bother finding an adjustment when I stream onto the tv set.
  • GertGettlerGertGettler Laptop Barcelona
    Posts: 431
    They aren't artificial. They are what the films are supposed to look like and did in the original theatrical releases. Rather, the previous additions are 'artificially' duller. Due to their limitations.

    But do we know that for sure? Do we have Original base prints from those days that show off that color? I think it's quite hard to make that assumption no? Especially when all previous prints in various formats (VHS, Betamax, Video2000, LaserDisc, Cd-i, DVD-HD, BluRay……..all had this mostly 'duller' color).
  • GertGettlerGertGettler Laptop Barcelona
    Posts: 431
    boldfinger wrote: »
    I don't like the artifical color saturation (higher) of the 4K iTunes version when compared to the Fox BluRay release.
    They aren't artificial. They are what the films are supposed to look like and did in the original theatrical releases. Rather, the previous additions are 'artificially' duller. Due to their limitations.
    I tend to agree that, intentional or not, some of the 4K examples look a bit artificial to me too. But while those screenshots give a comparison between the different formats, they are not necessarily exactly what the film is going to look like on your home tv. I popped in my DN BR for a comparison, and both on my tv set and on my laptop the colours were somewhere in between those screenshots posted in this thread. Not as intense as the 4K examples, but also by far not as grey as on the BR examples, while at the same time the skin tones weren´t as pink/red as in the BR examples posted here.
    Modern tv sets don´t have a usable default setting they come with, as did old tube tv sets. So in order to enjoy any content, you first have to adjust the colours and brightness and all kinds of other stuff on your tv set first. And then I guess it very much depends on what you prefer to watch. Then it depends on what you use as reference for adjusting the tv, old tv channels, new tv channels, or any type of disc. I get rather different picture qualities depending on wether I watch a disc or stream from Amazon/Netflix. I´m sure there would be perfect settings for each of them. Since I usually watch DVD or BR, I don´t bother finding an adjustment when I stream onto the tv set.

    Exactly @Boldfinger. Moreover, I think sometimes we slightly exagerate these 'better versions' when the human eye in itself perhaps doesn't see the difference. Also, we hype things up a bit too much by comparing everything in such great detail. And indeed, your TV can do wonders too. But 4K might be more of a thing if you live in a 75 m2 living room inside an expensive villa. In my surroundings…….it's a bitttt unnnecessary all this 4K stuff :-).
  • Posts: 5,767
    In the end the most important thing is that you have fun looking at the images. If the image is "as intended in the original" but somehow looks artificial, or otherwise doesn´t capture the magic like some other version does, then it won´t be as much fun to look at it.
  • GertGettlerGertGettler Laptop Barcelona
    Posts: 431
    boldfinger wrote: »
    In the end the most important thing is that you have fun looking at the images. If the image is "as intended in the original" but somehow looks artificial, or otherwise doesn´t capture the magic like some other version does, then it won´t be as much fun to look at it.

    There you have it guys! Completely agree @Boldfinger :-).
  • ShardlakeShardlake Leeds, West Yorkshire, England
    edited September 2019 Posts: 4,043
    Well I watched The Prestige in 4K last night and the difference between that and the Blu-ray was night and day.

    Same goes for The Mummy (1999) left the BR standing.

    On a more related noted I pre-ordered the DC 4K set today.

    Quite possibly these films (not so much the Bond's aren't getting the best treatment when originally released in the format so the 4K versions are looking a big leap.

    I popped in my BR 2049 and it looked incredible, also Big Lebowski a revelation as was The Dark Crystal.

    Possibly at the time when released they felt like such an upgrade from DVD but now another format is exploiting the ability even more, it seems that the earlier films shot on film are the ones proving to be the biggest difference.

    I've got Close Encounters on its way, can't wait to see how that looks. First Blood which from screen shots is a considerable upgrade.

    Like I said before I won't be looking to upgrade my 200+ collection just select ones.

    I don't imagine them doing the different actor sets again like they did before the Bond 50 came out so likely it will be a full box set that costs the earth and then follow with individual releases.

    I don't imagine me being bothered about having most of the Moore's in 4K apart from SWLM as its in my top 10, the Bond 50 set will do fine for that.

    I will be interested to see how the DC films do upgrade, the BR's were no slouches though but BR 2049 and Alien looked great in my eyes in HD but I wasn't quite prepared for their treatment on 4K UHD.
Sign In or Register to comment.