Excellent review, very thorough and echoes some of the same issues I had with the transfer. I was also studying the deep sea shot for banding, got irritated at the lack of detail in the highlights during the scene at breakfast between Cal and Rose...did you also noice that there was something that looked like telecine wobble in the first reel? I thought it was just me, but my setup is pretty good, so glad to know it's the quirks of the transfer. And thanks for taking the time to make an English version, AI voice and all! HD Numerique has some competition!!
Thanks for your comment I do not seek for competition with them. I was pretty amazed by the numbers of similarities between their article and my review who aired way before. I can live with that, it’s part of the RUclips game I guess… I will take a look at the first reel I also recommend you my video about the whole restoration process of Astérix 1h hour on every steps of post production in HDR Enjoy and happy new year
@@LELABODEJAY I was only joking about competition with them, I only mention it because they’re also brilliant and I’m glad to have discovered your channel as well. I’m going through all of your previous vids! Happy New Year to you too!
@@LELABODEJAY Ouï oui j'en reviens mais que ça soit pour l'algorithme et pour le partage avec nos amis anglophones suis venu faire un petit tour ! Je vais me faire un max de vidéos de ta chaîne ce week-end !! Tu me fais penser à Paul Lefebvre (armement) dans le ton et la rigueur... Merci encore!
4K scanned in 2012? I thought they scanned recently, no wonder there’s no difference when I compare the 4K and 2012 Blu-ray, except for the resolution, hope in 2030 they rescan it again for 8K version
The OCN was scanned in 2011 for the 3D conversion and then touched up again for the Dolby Vision re-release in 2017. It's only been scanned three times since 1997. One for the original analog master, again for the 2005 HD scan, and then in 4K for its first digital master. The 4K scan was also used to strike new 35mm prints. One copy of the original release print was given to the Library of Congress in 2017 for preservation. I highly doubt Cameron will scan it again for 8K. We're stuck in a time where some studios will AI upscale an existing transfer and call it a day while passing it off as a new master/restoration. At least Titanic was shot on film and not digitally. It'd be upscaled like Avatar and not truly a 4K image, as the latter was shot at 1080 resolution. There are some instances in Titanic's 4K release that just don't look right. The AI went into overdrive, especially with faces. Billy Zane looks like his forehead is covered in wax, and some closeups make others look like they're littered with overly detailed pores. It's odd. I'd like to see what the 2023 release would've looked like before the AI was applied. To me, the 2012 3D disc is pure reference material and my go to whenever I want to watch it again, which is weekly.
@@natalieportmanfan1817Can you explain to me why an 8k scan is useless on 35mm film? I know that 35mm film records 87 million pixels, while 8k resolution is equivalent to 33,177,600 pixels. So why isn't it possible?
Thanks a lot Yea I know for the voice. I m French it took me so much effort to do this in English for so few views so I was faster and easier to use ai voices even if I ate this
@@LELABODEJAY To be honest, I would be fine with french VO with subs. Dunno if that would help or hurt the channel, but probably would be less work for you.
@@koklusz89 yes but a lot of people do not have the courage of earing French and read subtitles And on a video like Astérix there are a lot of graphics in English you can’t understand it if you are reading subtitles
"Don't expect a profusion of objects, there aren't any." Objects that occupy similar spatial positions have probably been grouped into clusters during the pre-encoding process, which is quite usual. At the domestic level, you observe dynamic objects that do not move, but this doesn't mean the mix hasn't been reconsidered in terms of dynamic objects at a higher level. Also, seeing objects moving in a visualizer is only relevant for complex setups with a much larger number of speakers. In your 5.1.4 channel configuration, as with many home setups, this has no real impact on the listening experience.
I recommend you open a second channel for your English videos. Posting both languages hurts your click through rate and watchtime and penalizes you in the algorithm. Great work though, I love how deep you go in the technicality !
@@mrtickleuk that’s too kind . In fact I did the Ai version first did not like it. So took an all day to record myself. When i finally played the whole thing back I preferred ai version. All day of work went to rubbish
@@LELABODEJAY Today I received the 4k and I will watch it in the next few days and decide whether to keep it or not. Thanks for the review and for answering me
Every single thing you "noticed" in the new 4k is BS, it was always there. Also, the broom extreme is there. The stick is hard to see due light reflection. And the floor sliding you say is not so clear since the camera is moving. Also, there is a leaving port scene that you can see they have fixed a bad retouch made in the blu-ray, and the same happened with another take to the sea, mr. Murdoch. So, are you kidding? Also, HDR or Dolby Vision applied to a 35 mm film should be banned. Because the original negative is in sdr.
@@RicardoGarcia-xz1rz hi… I never said it wasn’t there before, only it’s sometimes more noticeable. May be some scene have been improved but some green screen are really noticeable. And like I said in most of my videos it’s a assumption or a feeling never said I handle the truth. I try to be nuanced kind of thing that your comment is totally lacking. Original negative is not SDR A negative is a negative It has always been exploited in SDR because that was the way before. But if you scan a negative in Adx 16bits depending on how it was exposed you get a log file or linear file that can reach some very wide range of color and light intensities way bigger than what SDR can reproduce. And for your information you don’t apply HDR or dolby vision It’s not a snapshat filter Regards
![GEEK TIMË [OFFICIAL AUDIO]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/ry-6RvkH880/mqdefault.jpg)
![Gunna - HIM ALL ALONG [Official Visualizer]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/HiCxoDeo0hc/mqdefault.jpg)
By far the most comprehensive and seemingly scientifically accurate test anywhere!
Excellent review, very thorough and echoes some of the same issues I had with the transfer. I was also studying the deep sea shot for banding, got irritated at the lack of detail in the highlights during the scene at breakfast between Cal and Rose...did you also noice that there was something that looked like telecine wobble in the first reel? I thought it was just me, but my setup is pretty good, so glad to know it's the quirks of the transfer.
And thanks for taking the time to make an English version, AI voice and all! HD Numerique has some competition!!
Thanks for your comment
I do not seek for competition with them. I was pretty amazed by the numbers of similarities between their article and my review who aired way before. I can live with that, it’s part of the RUclips game I guess…
I will take a look at the first reel
I also recommend you my video about the whole restoration process of Astérix
1h hour on every steps of post production in HDR
Enjoy and happy new year
@@LELABODEJAY I was only joking about competition with them, I only mention it because they’re also brilliant and I’m glad to have discovered your channel as well. I’m going through all of your previous vids! Happy New Year to you too!
@@passthesalt2000 thanks enjoy
Thank you Robot!
😂
I'm french and i just saw that an english version were avalaible !
Crazy stuff, i'm really impressed and glad to see this !
So deep in explainations !
Merci ! Il y’a aussi la version française 😉
@@LELABODEJAY Ouï oui j'en reviens mais que ça soit pour l'algorithme et pour le partage avec nos amis anglophones suis venu faire un petit tour ! Je vais me faire un max de vidéos de ta chaîne ce week-end !! Tu me fais penser à Paul Lefebvre (armement) dans le ton et la rigueur...
Merci encore!
mad respect for your work !!!
@@MuhamadNazrin-y6b thanks a lot
4K scanned in 2012? I thought they scanned recently, no wonder there’s no difference when I compare the 4K and 2012 Blu-ray, except for the resolution, hope in 2030 they rescan it again for 8K version
The OCN was scanned in 2011 for the 3D conversion and then touched up again for the Dolby Vision re-release in 2017. It's only been scanned three times since 1997. One for the original analog master, again for the 2005 HD scan, and then in 4K for its first digital master. The 4K scan was also used to strike new 35mm prints. One copy of the original release print was given to the Library of Congress in 2017 for preservation.
I highly doubt Cameron will scan it again for 8K. We're stuck in a time where some studios will AI upscale an existing transfer and call it a day while passing it off as a new master/restoration. At least Titanic was shot on film and not digitally. It'd be upscaled like Avatar and not truly a 4K image, as the latter was shot at 1080 resolution.
There are some instances in Titanic's 4K release that just don't look right. The AI went into overdrive, especially with faces. Billy Zane looks like his forehead is covered in wax, and some closeups make others look like they're littered with overly detailed pores. It's odd.
I'd like to see what the 2023 release would've looked like before the AI was applied. To me, the 2012 3D disc is pure reference material and my go to whenever I want to watch it again, which is weekly.
An 8K scan is useless on 35mm film.
Thank you.
@@natalieportmanfan1817Can you explain to me why an 8k scan is useless on 35mm film? I know that 35mm film records 87 million pixels, while 8k resolution is equivalent to 33,177,600 pixels. So why isn't it possible?
The best review ive seen of thus version, i just cant be dealing with the robotic voice, but i guess that's just my problem
Thanks a lot
Yea I know for the voice. I m French it took me so much effort to do this in English for so few views so I was faster and easier to use ai voices even if I ate this
@@LELABODEJAY To be honest, I would be fine with french VO with subs. Dunno if that would help or hurt the channel, but probably would be less work for you.
@@koklusz89 yes but a lot of people do not have the courage of earing French and read subtitles
And on a video like Astérix there are a lot of graphics in English you can’t understand it if you are reading subtitles
How can I buy the 4K download version? Not available in my area. I am from Georgia. Please help me.
@@mirzadavitadze8862 you can find it on Amazon or mercari or eBay I think
Face off is now on sale in 4k ultra hd, please leave a review🙏
That's a proper remaster. Kino Lorber
"Don't expect a profusion of objects, there aren't any." Objects that occupy similar spatial positions have probably been grouped into clusters during the pre-encoding process, which is quite usual. At the domestic level, you observe dynamic objects that do not move, but this doesn't mean the mix hasn't been reconsidered in terms of dynamic objects at a higher level. Also, seeing objects moving in a visualizer is only relevant for complex setups with a much larger number of speakers. In your 5.1.4 channel configuration, as with many home setups, this has no real impact on the listening experience.
Totally agree and I’am lucky to have 5.1.4 most people have sound bars
There’s nothing pejorative in my review.
I recommend you open a second channel for your English videos. Posting both languages hurts your click through rate and watchtime and penalizes you in the algorithm. Great work though, I love how deep you go in the technicality !
Thanks a lot. You properly right but this took me too much time and work for only one channel. Can’t handle two.
@@LELABODEJAYI really miss hearing your lovely accent speaking English! I understand if you prefer this way though :(
@@mrtickleuk that’s too kind . In fact I did the Ai version first did not like it. So took an all day to record myself. When i finally played the whole thing back I preferred ai version. All day of work went to rubbish
What is the best version in your opinion?
@@marcobonura. hard to tell honestly. The 4k is not that bad and atmos is quite good
@@LELABODEJAY Today I received the 4k and I will watch it in the next few days and decide whether to keep it or not. Thanks for the review and for answering me
@@marcobonura. you re welcome and enjoy
Every single thing you "noticed" in the new 4k is BS, it was always there. Also, the broom extreme is there. The stick is hard to see due light reflection. And the floor sliding you say is not so clear since the camera is moving.
Also, there is a leaving port scene that you can see they have fixed a bad retouch made in the blu-ray, and the same happened with another take to the sea, mr. Murdoch.
So, are you kidding? Also, HDR or Dolby Vision applied to a 35 mm film should be banned. Because the original negative is in sdr.
@@RicardoGarcia-xz1rz hi… I never said it wasn’t there before, only it’s sometimes more noticeable. May be some scene have been improved but some green screen are really noticeable. And like I said in most of my videos it’s a assumption or a feeling never said I handle the truth.
I try to be nuanced kind of thing that your comment is totally lacking.
Original negative is not SDR
A negative is a negative
It has always been exploited in SDR because that was the way before. But if you scan a negative in Adx 16bits depending on how it was exposed you get a log file or linear file that can reach some very wide range of color and light intensities way bigger than what SDR can reproduce. And for your information you don’t apply HDR or dolby vision
It’s not a snapshat filter
Regards