Today I had an intuition, à la House M.D.!



Why not producing a "better" version of Titanic? As an image worth more than thousand words... top BD 3D, bottom UAR:









Further comparisons:

http://www.framecompare.com/image-compar...n/D6LDLNNX

http://www.framecompare.com/image-compar...n/JMBJJNNU



UAR pros:

• 2006 master - pre-2012 with no digital corrections
  
• "original" image - no 3D postproduction at all
  
• better colors - closer to theatrical one, and no teal&orange palette
  
• bigger frame size in open matte shots - usually on three sides
  
• bigger frame size in widescreen or UAR shots - where BD 3D open matte is cropped
  

UAR cons:

• lower resolution (even if image seems crispier somehow)
  
• slight magenta blanket (easily solvable)
  
• few shots must be replaced with regraded BD 3D ones, due to fades in/out placed for TV spots
  
• blown highlights
  
• faint TV logo (1 HD) remains on top right (if another open matte version would be spotted, it could be fixed)
  

of course, it will get also quite some audio tracks included!



I think pros outweigh the cons... and you?



Test clip [short] (available until Sunday 20th 2019, so hurry up!):

https://fex.net/s/lvoenkp

Test clip [long, first 23m] (available until Xmas 2019):

https://fex.net/s/zbp8cde

both download and streaming available.



For the long test clip, I applied mild noise reduction, sharpening and halo removal, plus the Aliens grainplate.

Alignment is 99% perfect, with two or three instances in open matte and others in the widescreen, all easily solvable.

Feedbacks are needed!



EDIT: color grading comparison - top BD, bottom HDTV (UAR will be mostly open matte, with few shots in widescreen)





http://www.framecompare.com/image-compar...n/D6LGLNNX

Much prefer the colours on that UAR version.

since I don't have a 3DTV anymore I can't watch my 3D version so an open matte version would be a nice addition

Added test clip to first post.

You know there is an open matte of the very first master (the 1999 DVD one) that is on the russian site the colors are way better than the 2006 remaster that Cameron effed up again (this guy is king of destroying his legacy), maybe restoring this one would be closer to the original film?

I'm using both open matte and widescreen HDTV - I guess they use the 2006 master, but not sure...

Sorry if this is a stupid question, but what is UAR?

Whatever it is I much prefer the colours of the UAR.

(2019-12-16, 11:50 PM)HippieDalek Wrote: Sorry if this is a stupid question, but what is UAR?

https://fanrestore.com/thread-20.html

I have web dl from a Russian online cinema, it is the same version as 3D but does not have digital interferences, there is also a web dl with the old master, without a logo, but the quality is poor.

(2019-12-17, 08:39 AM)maksnew Wrote: ...there is also a web dl with the old master, without a logo, but the quality is poor.

Would be useful to get rid of the logo remains, though!

I'm all for it! Although I would say a little manual cleanup on the picture might be warranted.