A Few Words About A few words about...™ Guardians of the Galaxy: Vol. 2 -- in 4k UHD Blu-ray (1 Viewer)

[Robert Harris]

A few things have changed in motion picture technology since James Gunn's original Guardians of the Galaxy was released, all those many years ago.

One has been the use of larger sensors, enabling 4k (and higher) acquisition resolutions.

While the film was finished for distribution in 2k, Disney's new 4k UHD / HDR release is a poster child for the new format, and may be one of those films that push those who remain indecisive about the format, over the edge.

Like the first feature installment, Vol. 2, is non-stop effects, mayhem, and humor, with another visit to songs of the past century.

What's newsworthy here, is that Guardians 2 is the premiere 4k release from Disney, and as such may open the door to a certain 1959 Technirama animated classic, that would look almost otherworldly in 4k.

One interesting change from the first to the second installment was the move from the UK to Georgia.

A terrific piece of entertainment, and a major and welcome move by Disney.

One point regarding Dolby Atmos, which opens up one's home theater beautifully with this release, is that the description on the packaging is misleading. It is stated as English 7.1.4 Dolby Atmos, while it would more properly simply be described as Dolby Atmos, which, as I understand it, will fill out whatever area is given to its use.

Image - 5

Audio - 5 (Dolby Atmos)

4k - 5

Pass / Fail - Pass

Recommended

RAH

 

[Osato]

Thanks Robert!!!

 

[DavidMiller]

Good News!! Very Excited.

 

[Michel_Hafner]

8K originals, 2K DI. I hate SFX...

 

[OliverK]

8K originals, 2K DI. I hate SFX...

The story of 70mm vs 35mm repeating itself with 4k vs 2k - 2k is good enough and so much cheaper and besides, people don't see the difference...

SFX are an issue but do we actually have examples where 4k is mixed with 2k SFX and it is really obvious? If it isn't I would strongly prefer to upscale the SFX and not dumb down the non-SFX shots.

 

[OliverK]

What's newsworthy here, is that Guardians 2 is the premiere 4k release from Disney, and as such may open the door to a certain 1959 Technirama animated classic, that would look almost otherworldly in 4k.

All Disney large format films will be welcome additions to my UHD collection and as with the previous format this may very well be the first one to be added - IF it comes from a 4k source.

In any case great to finally have Disney on board!

 

[Sam Posten]

Mine has shipped (BB Steel). We are getting ready!

17-4th-3827 by Sam Posten III, on Flickr

 

[Tino]

The story of 70mm vs 35mm repeating itself with 4k vs 2k - 2k is good enough and so much cheaper and besides, people don't see the difference...

SFX are an issue but do we actually have examples where 4k is mixed with 2k SFX and it is really obvious? If it isn't I would strongly prefer to upscale the SFX and not dumb down the non-SFX shots.

What do you mean people don't see the difference?

 

[Josh Steinberg]

SFX are an issue but do we actually have examples where 4k is mixed with 2k SFX and it is really obvious? If it isn't I would strongly prefer to upscale the SFX and not dumb down the non-SFX shots.

I haven't seen it on UHD firsthand to verify, but The Amazing Spider-Man 2 is sourced from one of those hybrid DIs. The movie was shot on film, which was then scanned and edited at 4K. However, all of the effects work was done at 2K to save time, so whenever the film cuts from a shot without special effects to one with them, it drops down from 4K to 2K resolution. I recall someone saying it was noticeable but not distracting when it was made available on that exclusive Sony 4K streaming device a couple years ago.

 

[OliverK]

What do you mean people don't see the difference?

That is one of the arguments for not having 4k both in cinemas and at home.

It was the same for 70mm vs 35mm - 35mm was cheaper and was quickly considered good enough by the studio bean counters and if a production was considered big enough it was shown as a BlowUp to 70mm that never looked like the real thing but could be sold as 70mm just the same.

 

[OliverK]

I haven't seen it on UHD firsthand to verify, but The Amazing Spider-Man 2 is sourced from one of those hybrid DIs. The movie was shot on film, which was then scanned and edited at 4K. However, all of the effects work was done at 2K to save time, so whenever the film cuts from a shot without special effects to one with them, it drops down from 4K to 2K resolution. I recall someone saying it was noticeable but not distracting when it was made available on that exclusive Sony 4K streaming device a couple years ago.

This is also my experience so far so in the absence of evidence to the contrary I would suggest to stop downscaling high resolution images and start upscaling the lower resolution effects.

I will still get this movie as there are obviously many other benefits to be had from the UHD version but the overwhelming minority of UHD discs that come from more than a 2k source is really sobering.

 

[Josh Steinberg]

This is also my experience so far so in the absence of evidence to the contrary I would suggest to stop downscaling high resolution images and start upscaling the lower resolution effects.

I think it may be a matter of both processing power and bandwidth/size of the data. Raw 4K imagery just takes up so much more hard drive space than 2K, and then the entire infrastructure needs to be able to support that. Over time, the processing power increases while the cost of storage goes down, so I think we'll start getting there, but it's gonna take some more time until everyone's workflow is fully there.

 

[Tino]

Respectfully anyone that says they see no difference between 4K discs and 2K discs need to have their eyes checked.

Sometimes the difference is subtle but it's always there.

 

[Edwin-S]

Respectfully anyone that says they see no difference between 4K discs and 2K discs need to have their eyes checked.

Sometimes the difference is subtle but it's always there.

Respectfully, I disagree. I sit about 9 to 10 feet from my 65" 4K set. On most 4K discs of movies it is difficult to see any difference in the 4K image vs the upscaled 1080p BD image as far as resolution improvements go. However, a natively shot 4K image such as Planet Earth 2 does look noticeably better. Colour is where the 4K discs seem to shine compared to 1080p Blu.

To see any real difference in a 4K vs upscaled 1080p Blue, I believe I would have to sit somewhere around six feet from the set which would put my couch in the middle of my living room. I live alone, but even I don't want my couch in the middle of the room.

 

[Robert Crawford]

Respectfully, I disagree. I sit about 9 to 10 feet from my 65" 4K set. On most 4K discs of movies it is difficult to see any difference in the 4K image vs the upscaled 1080p BD image as far as resolution improvements go. However, a natively shot 4K image such as Planet Earth 2 does look noticeably better. Colour is where the 4K discs seem to shine compared to 1080p Blu.

To see any real difference in a 4K vs upscaled 1080p Blue, I believe I would have to sit somewhere around six feet from the set which would put my couch in the middle of my living room. I live alone, but even I don't want my couch in the middle of the room.

Well, I respectively disagree with you and i sit about the same distance from my OLED. For the most part, I can see a major difference in detail and more vibrant colors.

 

[Edwin-S]

Well, I decided to compare my 4K of TFE to the blu-ray. I figured that film would be good for comparison since Sony has been pretty good with the quality of their transfers. It probably wasn't the best choice to make, because the two images are completely different as far as colour goes

The yellowish tinge on the BD has been considerably reduced in the 4K version. Skin tones on the 4K look a lot more natural and the picture seems a lot more pleasing to the eye. The picture is darker and the the harsh lighting on the BD is noticeably reduced on the 4K.

I'm not sure that I noticed any remarkable increase in resolution from where I was sitting, but I couldn't help but notice the difference in colour and the difference in lighting on faces between the two versions. To tell the truth, I'm not sure if the 4K colour palette is a true representation of the film's original colour palette, but it certainly is a lot easier on the eyes.

So I guess I have to admit that there is a noticeable difference between the two versions of that particular film from my normal viewing distance.

 

[Tino]

I don't think anyone has ever stated there's a "remarkable" increase in detail with 4K discs.

As I said,usually its subtle. Sometimes more. But it's always there.

 

[Edwin-S]

See post 15.

The difference in colour and brightness between the 4K and 1080p versions of TFE really is an eye opener. I don't know if it is solely due to the HDR pass but it is noticeable. It also looks like they have digitally erased the weakened glass, where she punches through to get to the General, which could be clearly seen on the earlier BD release.

 

[Robert Crawford]

I don't think anyone has ever stated there's a "remarkable" increase in detail with 4K discs.

As I said,usually its subtle. Sometimes more. But it's always there.

I generally see a definite increase in detail, it might not be "remarkable", but it is enough for me to take notice.

 

[Edwin-S]

I'm feeling more than a bit of agro right now. The 4k+3D Best Buy exclusive is sold out in Canada and the US arm of Best Buy will only ship to a US Post Office Box or address. You know, for a format that nobody supposedly gave two shits for, it is amazing how the 4K+3D versions are now being used as limited edition exclusives for the benefit of scalpers. I feel like stopping the purchase of any discs as long as these fucking companies continue to screw customers with these bullshit marketing practices.