The Shining UHD

[beardmoen]

Watched this last night and after watching this video, https://youtu.be/5sk2hDSwQFU the sound is pretty disappointing. I decided to purchase the laserdisc myself to rip the audio and match it up. Can't wait.

[captainsolo]

SK would have preferred to match display ratios of 1.78 as he hated matte bars on home screens. But he likely would have overseen much better technical specifications-and certainly not let the audio remixing go on as it has.

Then again they finally gave us 2001's original audio back after nearly 20 years so it's possible...someday!
Transfer wise this is a massive improvement but of course the new 1080p disc is screwy-thanks WB!

EWS needs a proper transfer most of all. And would be so vivid and grainy most will think their TVs are broken.

[Weird Ed]

Anybody else disappointed with the 1080p bluray included in the UHD set? It's the only one I can watch (still don't have a 4k media player), and they screwed up the color timing!

My guess is that they just resized the UHD version, and HDR caused some problems. Colors in the 1080p bluray are dark, with very low contrast, and whites aren't white at all, more like beige. Screenshots in caps-a-holic confirmed it wasn't my projector's fault, it's very noticeable - and it basically makes this new remaster dull and unwatchable in the regular bluray version.

[captainsolo]

Welcome to the world of Warner doesn't seem to give a darn. Every WB new 1080p disc in a 4K set has issues. This new Shining disc is better than the old one in terms of overall color but is still very lacking when compared to the 4K version. It has some of the same issues but thankfully not quite as bad as their 1080p new discs of The Matrix and Batman 89.

[Weird Ed]

Welcome to the world of Warner doesn't seem to give a darn. Every WB new 1080p disc in a 4K set has issues. This new Shining disc is better than the old one in terms of overall color but is still very lacking when compared to the 4K version. It has some of the same issues but thankfully not quite as bad as their 1080p new discs of The Matrix and Batman 89.

That explains why I was also underwhelmed by the Batman '89 remastered bluray. It's really quite absurd... have we really gone that far into the "UHD age" that 1080p bluray editions can be considered an aftertought? I mean, there are lots of masterpieces that didn't even get a bluray release yet, and now, all of a sudden, we should switch to 4K, or else.

[Stamper]

The reason they mess those up is probably they spend too much time on the 4K, and the conversion is done by another team or even better an underpaid staffer on the fast. There is no other explanation.

[Weird Ed]

The reason they mess those up is probably they spend too much time on the 4K, and the conversion is done by another team or even better an underpaid staffer on the fast. There is no other explanation.

Yep, that's probably the main reason. Well, it could also be a dirty trick to push the new format ("see how bad it looks without HDR? Look at those muted colors!"). And I'm only half-joking... I wouldn't be too surprised if that was the case. Can't fool us, of course, but the regular Joe that's still on the fence about 4K? That's an easy target.

[SilverWook]

In the waning days of Laserdisc, Dolby Digital tracks got dropped for then recent films that clearly had them in theaters, so I wouldn't put anything past the studios.

[deleted user]

The reason they mess those up is probably they spend too much time on the 4K, and the conversion is done by another team or even better an underpaid staffer on the fast. There is no other explanation.

Yep, that's probably the main reason. Well, it could also be a dirty trick to push the new format ("see how bad it looks without HDR? Look at those muted colors!"). And I'm only half-joking... I wouldn't be too surprised if that was the case. Can't fool us, of course, but the regular Joe that's still on the fence about 4K? That's an easy target.

I don't think you're too far off on that at all. It would be similar to how "cheap cameras" (under 200-300 bucks) tend to have image processing that looks absolutely awful (blown out highlights, crushed blacks, excessive contrast and denoising, etc.) and lack any manual exposure functionality (which even a cheap model of an analog camera back in the day would have) and RAW shooting to force you to buy the expensive models. Yet funny enough, when you upload a hacked firmware to them to restore more functionality, even allowing you to shoot RAW files, you can get really beautiful images out of them when previously you could not.

Or when "cheaper" video camera models (under 1000 bucks or so) lack any sort of log-color or at least a useful flat image profile with higher dynamic range. It's incredibly easy to implement, but they just won't do it, because they want to squeeze every last penny out of you.

Or how the cheaper 4K HDR TVs in the store tend to be running some 5Mbit 720p broadcast of a football match (which looks worse than a DVD most of the time) with heavy image processing "enhancements" like denoising and interpolation while the high end models are running really beautiful high-bitrate HDR 4K tech demos that look nothing short of beautiful.

[Weird Ed]

Your Laserdisc and camera examples are very interesting... and yes, I was also thinkin' about blatant store tricks to push new products (or a particular brand). "Can't really show that a Panasonic Viera VT30 destroys any other TV in the store when properly calibrated... plasma is a dead technology! So let's push the contrast to absurd levels on the LCD models, and give a horrible lo-res feed to the Panasonic".
In a way, it's like planned obsolescence.