this post was submitted on 08 Mar 2024
53 points (88.4% liked)
Piracy: ꜱᴀɪʟ ᴛʜᴇ ʜɪɢʜ ꜱᴇᴀꜱ
54716 readers
232 users here now
⚓ Dedicated to the discussion of digital piracy, including ethical problems and legal advancements.
Rules • Full Version
1. Posts must be related to the discussion of digital piracy
2. Don't request invites, trade, sell, or self-promote
3. Don't request or link to specific pirated titles, including DMs
4. Don't submit low-quality posts, be entitled, or harass others
Loot, Pillage, & Plunder
📜 c/Piracy Wiki (Community Edition):
💰 Please help cover server costs.
Ko-fi | Liberapay |
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Just because something is shot on film doesn't mean the video files produced have been mastered for UHD/HDR. That's a level of processing that still has to happen before it reaches the consumer.
If a film has already been mastered for DVD, it has to be re-done for Blu-Ray, and re-done again for UHD/HDR.
Not all films are popular enough to justify that repeated processing. "Ah, DVD looks fine..."
Plus, a lot of companies don't bother going back to the film when they do rereleases. A lot can't due to all the post processing and special effects dome digitally. So most upres'd releases make significant compromises in one area or another, to the point where for some you can have better quality just stretching the video and using some shaders.
One classic example being the Babylon 5 TV show... They thought ahead enough to film all the live action in widescreen, but all the CGI was done in 4:3 for expense and rendering time.
Looked fine on TV in the 90s, not so much on DVD/Blu Ray. But short of re-doing all the CGI from scratch, not much else they can do.
I feel like x-files is like that too. It mostly looks great on Blu-ray but the CGI shots don't hold up lol