To add to my last post:
......
Every time I watch the 4K tv at the Blimpie's I get a similar type of feeling. Last time they were showing Kindergarten Cop which is an old Arnold Schwarzenegger movie. The set looked like a movie set and things didn't look natural at all. I could see the makeup on the actors. Everything looked choreographed in the background with extras walking around. The police station looked too clean. The extra fine detail the 4K tv provides makes the shows paradoxically immersive and not-immersive at the same time. I hope that makes sense. I don't know how else to describe what I'm seeing.
Gigi, That is a perfect description of the resolution of the projection system revealing all the flaws of a world not designed or lit to be seen with that much detail. In addition, the internal image processing is probably adding its own artifacts that make it look 'fake' (edge contrast enhancement, color compression and saturation). And finally, perhaps the budget had very little money for set design after they paid Ahnold's salary. 8-P
-Bill
Yep, that's what it is. The further away the displayed higher (4K) resolution is from the natively filmed resolution, the more 'upscaling' artifacts are introduced. Some of the results can look truly woeful, and you would be better off watching them at SD (DVD) or HD (Blu-ray) quality - whichever is closest to the native resolution.
Some films/shows were captured at higher resolution than the 'printed' copies were released/broadcast at, and quite a few have been remastered for release at higher resolution (usually HD[720p] or Blu-ray[1080p]).
Bill is right about all the flaws being revealed by higher resolution (4K) ...... some of the sets, makeup, and early special FX look rather comical when the picture is sharp enough to show a boil on a blowfly's bum! |
|
Even now, I love watching the old original super-marionation Thunderbird series, and the TV UFO series, which we originally got as 20-odd year old reruns .... Gerry Anderson was a genius! :t:
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gerry_Anderson
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thunderbirds_(TV_series)
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=BfIAKj3Gl1E
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=3HWhEikJmIM
LOL! I loved the class of Lady Penelope and always wanted a real pink 6-wheeled Rolls Royce ..... but could never find one! :cat:
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/UFO_(TV_series)
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=1qDy4OMAkgY
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=8CvURidpkCY
Fantastic stuff!
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=cRAFVSzGhVw
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=VFrvr-VY-q4
Luckily the alien UFO pilot wasn't wearing a seat belt and was thrown clear of the impact explosion lol ! 3
I think a lot of the budgets of "Arnie" films were taken up with the American accent acting lessons! :-O ...... though in fairness he speaks much better Austrian than I could ever hope to .....
P.S. As far as the out of focus backgrounds on photos goes, this is usually a desirable artistic feature used for subject isolation. When it is done the analogue way (even on digital cameras) - ie. by using a large aperture (low numerically) refractive lens of high quality then the results are very pleasing (even if a rather substantial $$$ hit to the wallet!). For example, see this photo of an Eastern Yellow Robin (which from memory was something like ~5-8m away) in my gallery - at f6.3 my budget 600mm lens was wide open, but the background was far enough away from the subject to be completely blurred out nicely.
https://www.birdforum.net/gallery/showphoto.php/photo/510538/ppuser/92780
When these increased bokeh backgrounds are achieved by computational photography such as is emerging with smartphones, then I don't find the results as pleasing or natural ....
P.P.S.
[GiGi] A lot of the photos in my gallery were taken on old school film (which I then photographed with my phone to post in the gallery - losing some detail and nuance, and introducing distortions in the process - I have to find a better way to digitise my old film prints to a higher resolution).
And btw - the whole subject of what makes a 'natural' colour representation even within the broadcast/display industry is an area of much debate and nuance. Much progress has been made over the last two decades though and the differences between manufacturers are not as great as they used to be - there has been somewhat of a convergence towards natural.
Haha! and you lot think there are raging debates here about 'colour cast', saturation, contrast, brightness, and subjectivity! lol o
Chosun :gh: