Ultra-HD Blu-ray revealed by replication manufacturer

[DJ Mike]

I generally find that many of the old Star Trek films look superior on their previous DVD incarnations than the Blu-rays (but that's because Paramount baked in excessive amounts of digital noise reduction into the BR transfer).

[Dogg Thang]

Yep, Star Trek VI Blu-ray is shockingly poor. They aren't all like that of course but they illustrate my point that resolution is just one factor and, in this particular jump, a factor that is much less relevant than before, IMO.

[DJ Mike]

Yep, Star Trek VI Blu-ray is shockingly poor. They aren't all like that of course but they illustrate my point that resolution is just one factor and, in this particular jump, a factor that is much less relevant than before, IMO.

Star Trek IV is equally dreadful. Paramount has this aversion to grain because they spend too much time listening to a noisy minority of consumers who scream and shout because their 'perfect picture' TVs are showing films with noise in them. Universal are just as bad.

[DJ Mike]

Sorry, accidental double post - ignore this one.

[Lyris]

Most of the studios have seen sense and have realised that films should look like films.

For example, in the not so distant past, it was common practice to run the output of the telecine into a noise reduction device, with NR being baked into the master. That's no longer done. In the days where the telecine itself added noise, that actually made some sense. Now the industry has move to effectively noise-free CCD and CMOS scanners, there's no noise in the picture any more.

That's one of the most common reasons for NR'd crap being served up on Blu-ray: old transfers that were done on CRT telecines which themselves had video noise in the picture, sitting on top of the film grain. That often gets slathered in NR to try and make the picture look somewhat palatable (Universal's Alfred Hitchcock box set is full of these).

If those Star Trek box sets had been new transfers instead of repurposed old ones, they'd probably look like film.

['Press Start']

4K is so yesterday!

[DJ Mike]

If those Star Trek box sets had been new transfers instead of repurposed old ones, they'd probably look like film.

Around what time did they switch to better, noise-free scanning? That certainly makes a degree of sense where the Star Trek films are concerned - ST2 received an all-new transfer and looks far, far better as a result. It and Nemesis (which presumably being much newer was given a better scan by default) are the only two genuinely good-looking transfers out of the 10 films!

[Neon Ignition]

Interesting to see this come up as a milestone but in consumer circles it'll go nowhere. Bluray home release sales are still growing and the curve to that point has been slow and steady. The market is simply years away from a replacement being a viable marketing move. 4K, 8K, hell even a 16K will all never be standard as by the time the market is ready to move on the technological goalposts will have moved past them.

[Lyris]

Around what time did they switch to better, noise-free scanning? That certainly makes a degree of sense where the Star Trek films are concerned - ST2 received an all-new transfer and looks far, far better as a result. It and Nemesis (which presumably being much newer was given a better scan by default) are the only two genuinely good-looking transfers out of the 10 films!

It was a slow process. The original Spirit Datacine appeared in the late 1990s and it was the first time a CCD-based telecine become dominant. A lot of colorists originally didn't like it and claimed that CRT telecine had "more natural" pictures.

There are still CRT machines in use today but the industry embraced CCD and CMOS because of the longevity and repeatability (the tube in CRT machines needed swapped out every couple of thousand hours since it degraded and the image would become noisier over time).

[dataDave]

I love a good old CRT running RGB. It's too bad the new consoles won't support it, I'd love to see some of this new stuff running over RGB.

I really don't care much for 1080p TVs, compared to a PC monitor the quality is wap. Even when running VGA from a PC source.

Why is that? Why are the edges so **** and contrasted?

[CMcK]

You need your TV calibrated. And your monitor. Everything looks so much better if your TV is performing to the best of its abilities. Turn off any sharpness settings on your TV and sources for a start.

I was watching the Scotland game the other night on my old calibrated CRT and the colour and contrast looked tremendous. But walking back through to the living and watching the same game on my calibrated LCD TV showed just how much detail is lost with SD.

[Lyris]

I really don't care much for 1080p TVs, compared to a PC monitor the quality is wap. Even when running VGA from a PC source.

Why is that? Why are the edges so **** and contrasted?

Video "enhancement" guff that needs shut off.

[wakka]

It's too bad the new consoles won't support it, I'd love to see some of this new stuff running over RGB.

Eh? What and lose an unbelievable amount of detail?

If your TV looks like **** it's down to your TV and/or the way that it's set up.