What's new

A Few Words About A few words about...™ Joy -- in 4k UHD Blu-ray (1 Viewer)

Robert Harris

Archivist
Reviewer
Senior HTF Member
Joined
Feb 8, 1999
Messages
18,310
Real Name
Robert Harris
I viewed David O. Russell's Joy for the first time late last year, and found it to be an interesting bio-pic of an unlikely subject, once you really get into it.

While it may not be a great film, it's a very good one.

My interest in re-viewing it, was to get a true sense of comparison between the Blu-ray and and 4k UHD.

Joy was shot on 35/3, and finished as a 2k DI, so there isn't 4k information to seen. The Blu-ray looks terrific. But while you don't get much of a jump in overall resolution, there is a pop in contrast, and therefore perceived resolution, as the 4k is presented in HDR.

So while the upgrade from the BD to UHD, a player up-rezzed image vs post house, is incremental, the difference between the BD and UHD in terms of HDR is considerable, and obvious.

Interestingly, where other UHD titles didn't necessitate kicking my projector in high lamp mode, this one did, as the image with HDR was quite dim.

Some day, Samsung will work out its differences with Sony projectors, and allow HDR to be viewed properly, in something other than Rec 709, but until then, I'm seeing it in that color space.

My advice continues, as it has been.

Do not purchase the Samsung UHD player, especially if you have anything other than a proper Samsung set, which according to their techs, must be connected with a super high speed Monster (brand) cable.

But do purchase the UHD version of Fox's Joy, as it has a very different appearance from the Blu-ray, which comes along as part of the deal. Once you upgrade...

Rumor has it that for 2018, Jennifer Lawrence, along with Robert De Niro and Bradley Cooper, will be seen n David O. Russell's Harriet, based upon the life of Harriet Tubman.

I'd love to see the makeup and costume tests for that one, as Ms Lawrence is 5'9", and Ms Tubman was 5'0". It worked for T.E. and Peter, although she may have to go the Jose Ferrer route. Probably be an extra on disc.

Image - 5

Audio - 5

4k - 5

Pass / Fail - Pass

Recommended


RAH
 
Last edited:

bruceames

Supporting Actor
Joined
Jan 25, 2007
Messages
777
Real Name
Bruce Ames
I'll have to disagree regarding the advice of not purchasing the Samsung player. It's by far the best launch player ever and the best value too. Loads discs twice as fast as any Blu-ray player on the market, and playback issues have been almost non-existent. Don't let the lightness of the build fool you. Just because it's not a brick doesn't mean it's not a good player.

Besides, how are people going to enjoy the movie that you recommend in your review if they don't buy the only player available in the U.S. market to play it on?
 

PaulDA

Senior HTF Member
Joined
Feb 9, 2004
Messages
2,708
Location
St. Hubert, Quebec, Canada
Real Name
Paul
I must admit to a bit of confusion, Mr. Harris. You appear to recommend the UHD version of this film, in significant part because of HDR, yet in other threads you vehemently oppose re-issuing classic films with HDR "enhancement".

What makes any film release suitable for HDR or unsuitable for HDR? Film vs digital camera? Quality of existing source material for old films? Just curious (I have no stake in the matter as I'm still watching movies on my long in tooth 720p PJ--which still looks quite good to me, in the absence of better display tech for a side by side comparison).
 

DavidMiller

Screenwriter
Joined
Feb 16, 2004
Messages
1,078
Location
Kirkland, Wa
Real Name
David Miller
Yeah, I wish he would focus on the movie... He writes more commentary on his hate of the 4K rollout then the movies he is reviewing.
 

Josh Steinberg

Premium
Reviewer
Senior HTF Member
Joined
Jun 10, 2003
Messages
26,271
Real Name
Josh Steinberg
I must admit to a bit of confusion, Mr. Harris. You appear to recommend the UHD version of this film, in significant part because of HDR, yet in other threads you vehemently oppose re-issuing classic films with HDR "enhancement".

What makes any film release suitable for HDR or unsuitable for HDR? Film vs digital camera? Quality of existing source material for old films? Just curious (I have no stake in the matter as I'm still watching movies on my long in tooth 720p PJ--which still looks quite good to me, in the absence of better display tech for a side by side comparison).

I think -- and I don't want to put words into anyone's mouth -- the idea is that HDR is another tool for filmmakers to use when finishing their films. I believe Joy is a Fox film, and Fox said starting in 2015 that all of their films would be finished with HDR. Not every release was shown in an HDR capable theater, but the filmmakers did prepare the film to be seen that way. That's what makes it appropriate to have at home.

For older titles, there was no HDR when they were created, so making an HDR version now is changing the filmmakers intent. It also isn't representative of what was onscreen when the movies first premiered. That, as I understand it, is the difference.
 

Robert Harris

Archivist
Reviewer
Senior HTF Member
Joined
Feb 8, 1999
Messages
18,310
Real Name
Robert Harris
I think -- and I don't want to put words into anyone's mouth -- the idea is that HDR is another tool for filmmakers to use when finishing their films. I believe Joy is a Fox film, and Fox said starting in 2015 that all of their films would be finished with HDR. Not every release was shown in an HDR capable theater, but the filmmakers did prepare the film to be seen that way. That's what makes it appropriate to have at home.

For older titles, there was no HDR when they were created, so making an HDR version now is changing the filmmakers intent. It also isn't representative of what was onscreen when the movies first premiered. That, as I understand it, is the difference.

Precisely.

Changing an older film by adding HDR, presuming it can be done, is much like the c 1968 reissue of GWTW in scope.
 

Mike2001

Premium
Joined
Mar 25, 2014
Messages
998
Location
LA South Bay
Real Name
Mike
Changing an older film by cramming it into the limitations of, say, DVD's color space was okay? Changing it by forcing it into REC 709 was okay? Because it had more capability and could better match the source than the DVD color space? Why can't HDR be used as a still more advanced tool to better match the source on older movies? I understand the statement that older movies weren't planned with HDR in mind. Were they planned with REC 709 in mind?
 

Robert Harris

Archivist
Reviewer
Senior HTF Member
Joined
Feb 8, 1999
Messages
18,310
Real Name
Robert Harris
Changing an older film by cramming it into the limitations of, say, DVD's color space was okay? Changing it by forcing it into REC 709 was okay? Because it had more capability and could better match the source than the DVD color space? Why can't HDR be used as a still more advanced tool to better match the source on older movies? I understand the statement that older movies weren't planned with HDR in mind. Were they planned with REC 709 in mind?

Most were planned for the crystalline appearance of nitrate, or properly printed direct positive Eastman Color.

Not hyped chroma, blinding whites, or fiercely orange fire fx.
 

Mike2001

Premium
Joined
Mar 25, 2014
Messages
998
Location
LA South Bay
Real Name
Mike
Are hyped chroma, blinding whites or fiercely orange fire fx a default feature of HDR or are they a feature of modern movies designed to look that way?

In other words, HDR is capable of creating the effects that you mention, so people are maybe going a little crazy playing with their new toy. But isn't it just a tool that could also be used to better replicate the crystalline look of nitrate, etc?
 
Last edited:

Robert Harris

Archivist
Reviewer
Senior HTF Member
Joined
Feb 8, 1999
Messages
18,310
Real Name
Robert Harris
Are hyped chroma, blinding whites or fiercely orange fire fx a default feature of HDR or are they a feature of modern movies designed to look that way?

In other words, HDR is capable of creating the effects that you mention, so people are maybe going a little crazy playing with their new toy. But isn't it just a tool that could also be used to better replicate the crystalline look of nitrate, etc?

I don't believe so, especially in the hands of marketing.

Keep in mind that, above all else, HDR is a marketing anomaly. It's been put in place to help sell 4k displays, mostly to people who have zero interest in cinematography, and view much of their films in Brilliant mode, as they enjoy images of happy clown fish swimming through coral.

If a film has been designed to be seen in HDR mode, it is very rare to find a panel that can reproduce it properly - with or without the Samsung directed High speed Monster cables.

The Godfather(s), Lawrence, My Fair Lady, Oklahoma!, The Wizard of Oz, in HDR?

I don't think so. And for reasons that most will fail to understand.

Mad Max, Joy, The Revenant?

I'm fine with that.
 

Mike2001

Premium
Joined
Mar 25, 2014
Messages
998
Location
LA South Bay
Real Name
Mike
I guess I fall into the most who fail to understand camp, but thank you for the reply. Is it the fundamental characteristics of HDR as a tool that cause the trouble or is it how people would be forced to use the tool?
 

Robert Harris

Archivist
Reviewer
Senior HTF Member
Joined
Feb 8, 1999
Messages
18,310
Real Name
Robert Harris
It's
I guess I fall into the most who fail to understand camp, but thank you for the reply. Is it the fundamental characteristics of HDR as a tool that cause the trouble or is it how people would be forced to use the tool?

It's far more complex than that.

Film is an organic entity, which constantly changes over time.

While Joy may adapt perfectly well to HDR, once the organic nature of the emulsion begins to change, all bets are off.

I'll offer an example.

Those who viewed the latest Blu-ray, or theatrical exhibitions of My Fair Lady or Spartacus, were not seeing anything akin to what actual film elements look like.

It's all totally created and artificial, with multiple layers of elements, sharpening, softening, contrast control, and a myriad of digital trickery, inclusive of color correction, with dissolves at the head and tail of single shots, as well as frame by frame color correction and densities and color modified across the width of frames.

Let's add the complication of HDR, once a digital image takes on the apparent look of the original, and the floodgates known as Pandora's box begins to open.
 
Last edited:

Mike2001

Premium
Joined
Mar 25, 2014
Messages
998
Location
LA South Bay
Real Name
Mike
Okay. I think I am getting it.

In restoring a classic movie, you and your team go through a lot of steps to get the look you want, many of which are digital (and for which, by the way, much respect). These steps ARE designed to work with REC 709 (and, perhaps, the digital cinema reference projector color space?) because with its consistency, stability and, dare I say it, maturity, you can be confident that the apparent look of the original that you have achieved will also be seen by end users on their display (if they care to calibrate to well established standards).

HDR, on the other hand, is still the wild west, without even a fully agreed upon method for how to bring the capabilities to an end panel and little consistency between said panels in how they present the result. It will be interesting to see what happens in a few years when the west is tamed and there is a Starbucks in every neighborhood.
 

Robert Harris

Archivist
Reviewer
Senior HTF Member
Joined
Feb 8, 1999
Messages
18,310
Real Name
Robert Harris
Okay. I think I am getting it.

In restoring a classic movie, you and your team go through a lot of steps to get the look you want, many of which are digital (and for which, by the way, much respect). These steps ARE designed to work with REC 709 (and, perhaps, the digital cinema reference projector color space?) because with its consistency, stability and, dare I say it, maturity, you can be confident that the apparent look of the original that you have achieved will also be seen by end users on their display (if they care to calibrate to well established standards).

HDR, on the other hand, is still the wild west, without even a fully agreed upon method for how to bring the capabilities to an end panel and little consistency between said panels in how they present the result. It will be interesting to see what happens in a few years when the west is tamed and there is a Starbucks in every neighborhood.

Or P3. For earlier digital restorations, unique LUTs were created, to aid in achieving the proper result in recording back to an analogue intermediate.
 

DanH1972

Second Unit
Joined
Apr 26, 2014
Messages
427
Location
Colorado
Real Name
Dan
If a film has been designed to be seen in HDR mode, it is very rare to find a panel that can reproduce it properly - with or without the Samsung directed High speed Monster cables.


Mr. Harris,

You don't need a hyper inflated Monster HDMI cable to get a UHD Blu-ray player to work, and I hope you didn't waste your money on one. Blue Jeans Cable's 18 Gbps Certified HDMI cables work like a champ and are reasonably priced, and even some cheap Amazon Basic and Monoprice HDMI cables with 18 Gbps designations have been shown to work as well.

I thought HDR, especially 12 bit Dolby Vision grading (coming soon to UHD Blu-ray if rumors are correct), in the proper hands, allowed for a dynamic range closer to the original source material, whether it be film or digital.

Is that not correct?
 

Robert Harris

Archivist
Reviewer
Senior HTF Member
Joined
Feb 8, 1999
Messages
18,310
Real Name
Robert Harris
Mr. Harris,

You don't need a hyper inflated Monster HDMI cable to get a UHD Blu-ray player to work, and I hope you didn't waste your money on one. Blue Jeans Cable's 18 Gbps Certified HDMI cables work like a champ and are reasonably priced, and even some cheap Amazon Basic and Monoprice HDMI cables with 18 Gbps designations have been shown to work as well.

I thought HDR, especially 12 bit Dolby Vision grading (coming soon to UHD Blu-ray if rumors are correct), in the proper hands, allowed for a dynamic range closer to the original source material, whether it be film or digital.

Is that not correct?

The Necessity for a Monster cable comes from Samsung tech support. Not my idea. Presume they have a deal with Monster.

10 bit, 12 bit..

Some films aren't even finished in 12 bit.

There's no necessity for it re home theater.

While I love the look of Dolby Vision, how many current devices can reproduce it?

Vizio? Seriously?

It's nice, for that small population of home theater enthusiasts who take things seriously, but it's all leading to the necessity of monthly visits from one's tech.

The more complex things become, the more income for the industry, and the greater the frustration levels for those who desire quality, but on a plug and play basis.

Most people don't have HDR running properly, or P3, and 2020?
 

DavidMiller

Screenwriter
Joined
Feb 16, 2004
Messages
1,078
Location
Kirkland, Wa
Real Name
David Miller
TMost people don't have HDR running properly, or P3, and 2020?

and this is based on the fact you have issues with this?

I do agree that there is issues with the cable standard as I think this is where for the first time cables matter. Also it looks like in my research that there is confusion what a certified 18Gbps cable even means. On top of that it appears at least reading the fine print that all "certified" 18Gbps cables have to be less the 50ft. Monoprice for example states that in their fine print.

I think those with TVs are going to have very few issues short runs where cables mater less... Although unless they have calibration done they are probably not getting the best picture possible. I know in my case I had to use to separate inputs because when HDMI color turned it crushed the standard calibration. I assumed it is most because I'm running a 2014 TV with the 2015 Evolution Box. Not a big deal really I just take advantage of the dual HDMI that the Samsung supplies.
 

Robert Harris

Archivist
Reviewer
Senior HTF Member
Joined
Feb 8, 1999
Messages
18,310
Real Name
Robert Harris
and this is based on the fact you have issues with this?

I do agree that there is issues with the cable standard as I think this is where for the first time cables matter. Also it looks like in my research that there is confusion what a certified 18Gbps cable even means. On top of that it appears at least reading the fine print that all "certified" 18Gbps cables have to be less the 50ft. Monoprice for example states that in their fine print.

I think those with TVs are going to have very few issues short runs where cables mater less... Although unless they have calibration done they are probably not getting the best picture possible. I know in my case I had to use to separate inputs because when HDMI color turned it crushed the standard calibration. I assumed it is most because I'm running a 2014 TV with the 2015 Evolution Box. Not a big deal really I just take advantage of the dual HDMI that the Samsung supplies.

You may have misunderstood my post.

Samsung is blaming any problems on improper cables. I don't buy that. Their player is buggy, and although upgrades have come along, none thus far have solved the most agretious problems.

As I've said previously, this entire rollout should have occurred in October or beyond.

RAH
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Latest Articles

Forum statistics

Threads
356,808
Messages
5,123,525
Members
144,184
Latest member
H-508
Recent bookmarks
0
Top