Note - some people have picked up on my referring to Super 35 as Super Cine. My apologies if that is incorrect. I've always used the two terms interchangeably. Please do not let this take away from the issues I'm presenting in this video. Thanks!
Super review - great to see that you've taken the time to analyse the frames so carefully. Really appreciated and very interesting. My guess is the picture quality isn't as good as the 4K Star Wars Rise of Skywalker, which was also shot on film... the actual quality of the story, however, is a different issue.
10:20 (ish...) Would the use of DNR make sense in the context of it being a 4k scan of the original film? I.e Getting rid of the extra grainyness that's inherent in the process as you said earlier? Great video by the way 👍 Any clues how long we'll have to wait for the super special box set?
Super35 using 35mm film actually tends to be grainier than anamorphic scope because you are cropping into and blowing up a full frame image to extract a scope ratio.
Would you find it wrong if I disagree with some of your points? As an example, your shot of Helm's Deep look better on the 4K Blu-Ray to my eyes, much better. Same for Legolas.
This is a brilliant review. Don’t apologize for being too detailed or that it may bother people. We come to you because these details ARE important to us and I appreciate all of your research. DNR has been crippling so many tv shows and films.
He's nitpicking, IMHO. Yes, film grain is nice, but the uptake in detail and depth on the 4K discs of LOTR is more than enough to overshadow it. To me, there's about 1 instance per movie where they fuck up: 1. In the Fellowship of the Ring, stunt/body doubles are far more noticeable than ever before, 2. In the Two Towers, there is a smearing effect on Legolas' face when he's talking to Theoden (pointed out by HDTVtest) 3. The ear and the staff in RotK. Do a few fuck ups mean we need to stop enjoying those movies? Is a lack of film grain enough of a reason to bash the super detailed 4K image on these movies?
The grain and warmer color tones is what I actually adored about these movies, it gives them that magical/surreal feeling, with this new 4K treatment they lost that special thing, they look blend for the majority of time, plus all of the effects become more visible, so much they make it hard for me to enjoy the movie, since you can actually see the majority of effects (you can see the difference in color of characters and backgrounds etc). In old version everything was blended so much better. If it is possible they should've just upscale the resolution and leave everything as it is.
@35FootTwinkie From my experience and, in my opinion, the only release that is truly and objectively 'warmer' in color grading are the original Extended DVD Editions. The blu ray versions were mostly blue/neutral depending on which release you're referencing. But the DVDs they released were night and day difference, which I think what was so jarring for reviewer in this video -- because the 4K are night and day difference from both blu rays in terms of color grading.
Fellowship Of the Ring in both DVD versions as well as cinematic version of Blu-ray give Shire and Rivendell a very warm look. It was completely lost in Blu-ray extended and in 4k. Check out this comparison: ua-cam.com/video/iPBP-3-_Beg/v-deo.html
I feel that Peter Jackson's decision to make the 35mm transfers of TLOTR blend seamlessly with the digitally shot Hobbit have ruined the beauty of celluloid film. DNR has absolutely scrubbed away lovely grain, detail and depth. The benefit of these UHD discs over the Blu-ray's is high bit-rate and HDR - but they could have been so much better if the glorious 35mm had been allowed to breathe.
Film enthusiasts who like film grain are similar to audio enthusiasts who like hearing scratches in audio. So regressive and stuck with the times. It’s long past time to move on.
@@mosesking2923 I disagree, with motion picture the medium plays an incredibly integral part. Using DNR to remove detail that is actually there and replace it with interpolated data is almost akin to replacing an oil painting with watercolor.
Agree. Should have been the other way around...make the Hobbit look more like the filmic LOTR. Digitally shot stuff is so....stilted.... inorganic.... It can be ok on the right film but not for these. This is epic cinema and should be organic and grainy and personally I think it ages far better. There's a reason Lawrence of Arabia and Spartacus look absolutely amazing and flawless on 4K and the reason is certainly not DNR and lack of grain!
100% agree with everything said, I will be sticking with my extended edition blu-rays as the more natural, closest to film experience. I don’t mind the black crush here and there cuz it looks like the actual photography. Let me ask you this guys, if viewing art in a museum would you prefer to view the art in it’s original (or closest to) form, or through some instagram filter that plays to a modern audience? HDR, 4K, and the process of remastering should be used as a tool to restore not change, not add or take away. As good as the audio might be watching the video this way with DNR and unnatural HDR effect is took distracting. It’s too shiny and slick, and the Lord of the Rings never looks like that. I should know, I projected them on film myself when they came out.
Depends. I saw a video explaining why seeing the Mona Lisa in person often disappoints and it turns out the painting when new was much more vibrant. Then again, this has nothing to do with a digital image that can't "fade" with time.
Remember that there are the original theatrical blurays, which have the original colours as per the theatrical DVDs, lovely! Those are my default versions to watch. The extended versions were then giving the revised colour grading 'scheme', on purpose. Green, brown and blue respectively (the box art colours give a big clue). Jackson said it was intentional and I dont know why this has been forgotten. It drives me nuts that they keep effing around with colour grading on so many remasters.
Great review. As much as I enjoyed the films in 4k (and it does look much better in motion than in still frames), I also noticed DNR and it bothered me. HOWEVER, my impression is that the quality varies immensely from shot to shot. I suspect that much of the live-action footage was indeed scanned in 4k from the original camera negative with only slight DNR processing applied. However, all shots that include special effects (which might not be noticeable special effects, such as removal of airplane condensation stripes in the sky) were taken from the existing 2k DI and subjected to EE and DNR. Often even within the same scene, some shots look extremely digitally processed, while other shots look much more natural. This is especially noticeable in the aftermath of the Warg battle in TTT (when Legolas and Theoden discuss leaving the dead behind). In contrast to this, look at the detail in Gandalf's face in FOTR when giving encouragement to Frodo in Moria (after Frodo notices Gollum). To me, this does not look like a 2k upsample.
Apparently they added this processing to The Hobbit as well. As for "trying to make it look digital", you just can't do that. It's not actually possible. With film, detail is build FROM grain, so you take grain away, you take detail away. With digital, there's not as much grain, but you don't sacrifice detail to get there. It's just because the way they gather light causes less of a loss of accuracy. Although they often actually just shoot at a higher resolution and supersample it down to achieve the lower noise effect. The Hobbit for example shot on 5K and was edited in 2K.
Personally I'm old school and always prefer old fashioned film. Filmic... With grain... Is best! Organic! I'm not overly thrilled by purely digitally shot stuff. I think filmic stuff ages better than digita as well. Same goes for digital vs practical effects IMHO. And I loathe DNR but so should any real cinephile!
Totally agree with both of you. My standard is Criterion Collection. They could have applied that standard to this release, but the foolish desire to have the two series look the same has now ruined LotR as well. I guess I'll be waiting for the Criterion version in about 20+ years!
@@MichaelPhillipsatGreyOwlStudio unfortunately that's the difference between boutique Blu publishers and the mainstream ones. One appeals to those that appreciate film as an artistic medium and the other is mainly just for bulk consumers of entertainment. Obviously trying to make LOTR look more digital and less filmic is trying to appeal to the latter. That's how it feels anyway.
@@animalanimation5110 I see film grain in the original blu-ray version. It's visible there. I think your perception of lack of grain was due to the ways in which you originally viewed the films. It wouldn't have been visible either in the theater (because projections disguise it) or on DVDs (because it's not particularly visible at that resolution and hidden by compression). You can't avoid film grain in 35 mm film. It's going to be there no matter you do. You can only smear it, which destroys detail.
Lord of the rings are my favourite films of all time, the smoothing and dnr is really disappointing. Fair play for going out of your way to cover it, in that much detail though.
After watching the movies myself i completley agree with you. Even my friends who never watched a 4k-bluray before noticed the lack of filmgrain and how all the CGI-effects (like Gollum) look much worse than on the bluray. Sadly we have a massive problems with LotR: Bluray (Standard Version) from 2011: heavy use of DNR, low contrast, but the color grading was fine Bluray (Extended Version) from 2012: no heavy use of DNR, some edge enhancement but not offensive, great contrast, green tint in the first movie, other two look fine 4k Bluray: heavy use of DNR, loss of detail, edge enhancement, great color grading and impressive HDR-implementation So each version has its own strength and weaknesses. I prefer the Extended Bluray. I can live with the green tint in the first movie. Got used to it :P
There's actually a remastered Blu-ray set that was quietly released in 2021, in conjunction with the 20th anniversary of Fellowship. I absolutely love it. Same as with the older Blu-ray set, the Appendices and Behind the Scenes documentaries are on DVD. I strongly recommend checking that one out. 4K just isn't too appealing to me.
@@sunstyle52 one for each movie. I distinctly remember borrowing the vhs version of the two towers from a friend and it was just one vhs for the cinematic cut. (I did just check, the cinematic cut had one vhs, the extended one two)
Finally someone who point out that this was not just a sunshine story as it seems all other reviews are saying. Thank you sir! I just saw the 4k extended version yesterday, did a whole marathon and I saw alot of the things your telling in the still pictures even without seeing this video first. The staff was one of them 😦
Great review. I feel that far too few have reviewed this release with an actual eye for detail. The more people who talk about destructive film “remastering,” the better. It’s absurd that companies try and pass off poor releases to the public, knowing most people won’t be able to see what they’re doing wrong.
Really appreciate the attention to detain in this review Elliot, I have been tempted by the 4K release for a while, but I'll stick to the Blu-ray versions which I love!
I've watched so many reviews of the 4k release and they were all super positive. I'm thankful for this video for being the only one that's actually noticed these problems. That Shadowfax one was particularly egregious
@@chronodreaming The video speaks for itself dude. Plus, having come back to this comment after a year I know that these kinds of issues are common in 4k upscaling
I keep reading reviews online: some love it, some hate it. But I really appreciate your review here. You go into great detail about how everything works and the costs of getting it "right". As well as providing screencaps to help show your point. Not to mention you have a soothing voice lol. I'm torn between the film grain of the blu-rays, and the HDR and Dolby Atmos of the 4Ks.
This is how a review should be. Talk about the fast stuff first and digg into details further into the vid(if your interested, you will follow) and yes this was so interesting and well put toghether as a reiview. Great vid and great job! I am an audio engineer and cant wait to hear the new atmos track for this 4k version. But im so dissapontied about the DNR and scrubbing of details u mentioned theyv done in this tho:( But a will have to watch it to conclude anything. Maybe this version actually suits a 4k HDR Tv over a bluray verision on a Full HD tv.
Funny I've watched a bunch of reputable youtubers review this and none of them said anything like this. Interesting. But to be fair I've watched all of these 4k releases on my properly calibrated tv and my tv shows better imaging than these screenshots (side by side on the tv) great video
I find it remarkable that, directly compared, the 1080p Bluray shows more detail than the 4k one. They didn't just mildly reduce noise. They completely smeared it. And what is all the "making it look digital" talk about? First of all it clearly harms the source material. And secondly why would you make two trilogies look more alike by using the inferior one as the reference?
This is flat out wrong I have Collectors Edition both normal BD and UHD versions and UHD version just kills the BD version. On OLED there is no competition.UHD is by far the winner.
Youd be suprised that some blu rays destroy a lot of 4k movies released. My ps3 was the best purchase ever for blue rays. With new 4k oled blu rays still stand out and upscaled vs 4k movies. 4k movies only a few are really perfection. Plus most 4k players have serious issues. Wish the PS5 would improve im future for a true 4k player. Anything streamed 4k is really downsized in qualith. I literally tested same movies on 3 tvs side by side.
Because Jackson thinks he had the right idea with the Hobbit trilogy. I don't dislike them, but it's absurd to think that the Hobbit movies look better. Even in the theater a decade ago, I was thinking that these movies looked less real with excessive CGI.
@@SagaciousFrank Not a tech nerd but it blew me away. I think it's amazing looking. Some people are talking about the effect on it. As a huge fantasy buff I think it makes it look more like a fantasy story in a good way. Some small scenes looks like some color look drained. That's it. To answer your question it's not that bad. Infact I think it's amazing.
The audio upgrades on this Dolby Atmos mix are INSANE though if any of you do upgrade. The sound designers literally separated the “objects” into what feels like over a dozen different pieces, at different heights and is probably the most immersive audio I’ve yet heard along with Bladerunner 2049. Ceiling effects just blow you away hour after hour.
But imagine if they did a 4k scan of the original negatives. Then you would be able to tell that it was the stand-in actor because the detail would be so great.
DVD is really bad when it comes to the color palette as the gamut of SD video is very limited in range. Blu-ray is archaic as it is with Rec 709 color. At least 4k HDR can do Cinema P3 and Rec 2020.
Peter Jackson wants Lord of the Rings to fit in with the Hobbit, not the Hobbit to fit with Lord of the Rings. Sad to say I am getting George Lucas vibes from him.
You saved me money with this review. I’ll wait till they address these issues, if they ever do. I don’t know why they’d want to remove the grain anyways, it makes it timeless.
I have the original extended DVD editions of LoTR trilogy and to-be-honest apart from the obvious resolution limitations. I rather watch them then any releases after as there the ones who (in my opinion) are more superior in-terms of colour grading and the intricate details such as the DVD menus and transitioning into other menus then the Blu-ray releases. Also, the countless memories of watching the DVD releases with friends and family, when they first came out add to the enjoyment of viewing them.
I’ve got these versions and had these since they released and they’ve probably been then best movie purchase I’ve ever made. The quality of the packaging, the discs, the appendices and the overall films themselves were amazing. I’ve just purchased the 4K versions as I’d heard so many good things but I will really miss the warm colour tones and the grain if they’re no longer there, they always felt perfectly balanced and applicable for these movies. Pretty disappointed now having watched this review I must admit.
Hey dude great analysis. I appreciate you showing screen shots to illustrate your point. This was the best breakdown of these transfers I have seen yet
Just wanted to say you are completely right in your assessment. I am all for re-scanning and increase detail and some noise reduction can be fine but this is far too much. I see it like this: Noise reduction is okay, as long as you can't make out the noise reduction. If I had to choose between visible noise reduction and visible noise I would choose noise every time. It's actually less distracting too, because it's uniform and randomly distributed.
That was a good Gandalf Staff find. It's a shame tho. I guess I'll just hang on to my Blu-ray for now. Maybe in another few years they'll release a better restoration.
Considering how the previous releases have been handled, probably not. If they do an 8K rescan, let’s hope the film hasn’t degraded too much by then. If they even do it properly, that is.
@TheThingHidingUnderYourBed the tint is horrible, but so is less detail in a 4K release than a 1080p one. The Blu-Ray theatrical cuts have good colours, but are also suffer from DNR use.
@TheThingHidingUnderYourBed I believe they have more detail than the DVDs (though not as much as they should have), and the colours for both are good. The DVDs were excellent for their time, with pretty much no flaws when you take into account the limitations of the format. Every release since has failed to live up to what it should be in some respect. The Extended BDs for Two Towers and Return of the King look excellent though. Overall, just enjoy what you enjoy, but if you don’t have an HDR TV, I’d say the 4K release isn’t worth it for full price.
You saved me money. So weird that they wanted to get LOTR to match the Hobbit movies, but not vice versa. This is some George Lucas level crap. And I understand why, to be fair, the technology changes sure. But to me the bigger issue is that these films were made for the cinema, not the small screen. Things like grain or whatever play different on a massive screen. The cinema does not pause or go in slow motion at the click of a button either. It really is a different medium.
Nice in depth review! Not sure how I feel about the colour timing change. I've seen these each countless times and I feel the change in colour will be destracting. The audio you described sounds epic! Cheers
Your suggestion that visual effects would have to be reapplied following a 4K rescan is incorrect. The visual effects shots were originally rendered out at 2k and then printed to film as individual shots. For this year's remaster these film outs were rescanned. Essentially what they did this year was reconform the film from the original negative and regrade it. Enjoying the channel. Keep up the good work 👍
People keep saying they re-scanned at 4K, but I can't find any source for that. Jackson specifically does NOT say that in his interview. They appear to be 2K upscales.
@@HagbardCeline23 yes and no. The Balrog looks much more amazing compared to the dvd version that is hazey and the highlights are taken down too much/too dim.
@@dan_hitchman007 Yeah, so not as exciting as advertised. I think there were some weasel words used, meaning they DID re-scan the negative in 4k, but only for the 20% or so of FELLOWSHIP that had scenes that were not sourced from a DI. The vast majority of FELLOWSHIP and 100% of the other 2 films were totally DI, with no finished OCN to recan.
I agree with virtually everything you are saying about each screenshot, but when actually watching the movies and not staring at screencaps, I personally like both versions. I could see myself watching the Blu-Rays whenever I want that more authentic, filmic look, and the 4Ks when I'm looking for the amazing audio and crisp picture (too crisp arguably, but still nice to watch for some people). And I think I will almost always go for the 4K when watching the Extended Editions, just because of the awful green-ish tint on the Blu.
My word you're good at this. Never seen someone be so thorough! Things like pointing out Shadowfax and his wandering ear is amazing. I'll stick with my blu rays (tbh I bought those for like £5 each as well, not £75!). You're like the Digital Foundry of movies lol. Top stuff.
@TheThingHidingUnderYourBed are you asking me? I managed to find those 2 disk (so just the film) versions that were released on ebay. Literally nowhere seems to sell them new now and according to HMV staff I chatted with they've stopped manufacturing them. They look amazing but Fellowship is Matrix green in places lol. Apparently there's a blu ray version of this new colour grade coming out later this year..so I might get that if the errors mentioned here are fixed.
So you are going to base your purchase decision on a single youtuber's opinion, without even seeing it yourself? I don't see how a stupid artifact that's visible for less that 3 seconds is more condemnable than the awful tint present on the Blu-Rays? Or is that enough to make the HDR and a new soundtrack pointless?
@@adriannn3720 why so angry? I don't know anyone who's bought the disks to allow me to 'check them out' except via UA-cam lol No one I know is willing to spend that much on something with (your words) a 'stupid artifact' left in by mistake or whatever. The green tint there's a setting on my tv that instantly removes it, and apart from that I regard the blu rays as about as 'perfect' as they need to be. No dust, decent natural look.. I don't want the films to look like The Hobbit or a Marvel movie. There are other flaws which I didn't feel the need to go into detail with, but since you commented I will - the cgi was not really sufficiently upscaled (or whatever you call it) and it really, really does look like many scenes don't gel properly any more in the 4K. It was old green screen anyways, let alone being seen at 4K. The grain reduction doesn't help either. The soundtrack is great on the blu rays, I have the cd's of everything Howard Shore wrote so I don't feel I'm 'missing out' there. If they're reasonably priced (ie not absolutely atrociously overpriced for elitist snobs to gush over) I _may_ buy the new colour treated blu rays if/when they come out and the cgi is ok. What I have an issue with mainly is the tinkering of the films are getting to Star Wars levels of silliness if they release products with 'this fixed but that buggered up'...this better but that worse. So I'm happily sticking with a very decent blu ray trilogy and will gladly see if anything changes my mind.
Fantastic review of the 4K Blu-Ray. Unfortunately I'll have to sit this one out, and enjoy my 1080 version. Shame I won't have the Atmos track, but the visual differences are a deal breaker for me.
I'm keeping my extended Blu Ray set for the special features, because they are very extensive and fascinating! Overall, despite some of the issues mentioned, I still think the 4K looks better overall. The new color grading and HDR looks SO much better than on the Blu Rays IMO! (though the black-and-white change in the "vision" scene is a bit strange)
honestly if you make screens hots it is apparent. But while watching the movie it is no so much. I didn't notice any at all on my 70 inch screen. Of course it could have been better. But super happy for this release. Compared to hobbit there is definitely less detail on faces and hair. But still much better then bluray in my opinion.
The correction to the color timing and Dolby Atmos tracks make me want to grab this, but I can't help but feel disappointed from the 4k transfer as a whole. I'll wait for a price drop before I consider buying it.
@@OWmyDragonballz It may have been delayed or canceled. It has been all quiet on the western front from Warner on the deluxe set. However, you know it will be hugely expensive and will still have the exact same 4k upscaled transfers as the film only releases. Some may not want The Hobbit either.
In the comparisons that I've seen, I think the coloring of the 4K discs looks MUCH better than the Blu Rays. I'm glad they corrected that horrible green tint in Fellowship for instance, although the black and white in the "vision" is a bit strange. I can see the DNR in comparisons though, and that is a major shame and I wish they hadn't done that, but I still think the 4K looks better than the Blu Ray overall from what I see so far. (Admittedly I haven't been able to watch the actual discs myself yet, though, because the person who wants to watch them with me is unavailable for a short while so I have to wait for them)
Yep, Elliot is definitely not a sheep. Plus, he has the empirical evidence to back it up. Thanks to him, I will be investing in other 4K UHD's worth of my money.
Thanks for this video! I watched Lord of the Rings in the theatre multiple times when it was first released. It's absolutely one of my favourite movies so I've been watched so many times on DVD, Blu-ray as well. I was so excited for 4K release and while I was watching it, I just knew that picture was somewhat strange. I didn't know exactly what was wrong, I just noticed it looks like weirdly fake digitally-filmed. Now I know what was really wrong. To me this 4K release removes real nostalgic cinematic feelings for the Lord of the Rings movies. I love the Dolby Atmos sound but I still prefer 1080p Blu-Ray release. It's more original to me. Again, thanks for the video and what an amazing channel!
Just watched the 4K discs over the weekend on my Panasonic player and LG OLED and everything seemed fine to my naked eye. I was purposely looking for strange things to pop up like you referenced in this video - makes me curious what the person who captured the screen shots viewed on.
Interesting. I viewed on an LG OLED with an Oppo 203 and noticed these issues. It might be down to peoples' own view of the films. Some things will stick out to some people and not to others. I'm glad you enjoyed the 4K discs anyway!
Can i ask which panasonic? I ordered the 820K. Bought the Sony x800m2 but would freeze half way. Returned it within 30 days after multiple tests. Heard tje 820K is excellent. Any issues cause it sux my ps3 is best invention for blu rays that have been abused and 4k players today stink. My last hope is the 820K i really wanna enjoy lotr 4k and atmos sound
@@ElliotCoen but if I had the choice between bluray and 4k Version - would you recommend the 4k version or would you say the Blu-ray version caption the (kind of mythic) Lord of the rings feeling better? I have to make a choice and I can’t really decide
@@ElliotCoen I have to agree with CoinOP, I watched it on my LG C9 OLED and didn't notice most of these. (I have the dvd's, blu-ray, and now UHD) It felt closer to the original dvd's then the blu-ray. Overall I felt the detail was better, the picture more clear, and I won't even go into the extra scenes over the original extended edition. There were a few I noticed but they felt like intentional changes in color that were meant to be noticed. Personally I would put the DVD and UHD over the blu-ray (1080p) but that just may be me.
@@radfordrams4909 damn son, even the smaller channels can't keep away from toxic kiddos..... I mean there are things we like to call opinions, I personally like the dude and his opinions 😅😒
Films at home... Jeff... Is good - I personally like his channel. But in his own words he's not technical and he is doing the ear and eye test. His schtick is in the title.... Just regular people who enjoy watching films at home. I have no issues with his opinions but they may or may not always suit mine....same with anyone's.... including Elliot. I have not seen these yet myself in 4k as I'm waiting for the big ultimate combined set next year ... But I am totally against any form of DNR on filmic source elements - unless absolutely necessary due to some damage or other reason where it HAS to be used to improve things - which should be very rare. Otherwise IMHO it's a crime against cinema and artistic vandalism to apply DNR to a non-digital source, even if used minimally. There should be no reason to. IMHO Jackson would have been better off making The Hobbit look more filmic rather than making LOTR look more digital. I get the consistency thing but I always preferred the filmic look of LOTR over the digitally shot Hobbit. This DNR issue and filmic vs organic certainly doesn't seem to be anywhere near the debacle the Star Wars Skywalker saga 4K was handled so although I'd have preferred a slightly different approach they still seem like they look amazing and I still can't wait to see them and the lovely HDR. I've always got my Blu ray deluxe sets to fall back on if I need to as they are nice sets and I plan to keep those.
@@blockedhaat Some reviewers on UA-cam have hyped this 4K set by saying they're the best 4K discs they've ever seen without mentioning any of the issues that are included in this review.
@@blockedhaat I think there's been a misunderstanding. I'm not having a go at US viewers of these films but actual reviews done by just some reviewers.
Man, your voice is so soothing. Like there's not much emotion but maybe that's what makes it so calming. Great review! Now I'm gonna check out some of your other videos
Great review. It's refreshing to hear an honest, and rare, review of this box set and it's many flaws. I'd lost faith in almost all film reviewers, as I'm sure you're aware, many reviews have claimed this to be one of the best 4k transfers ever! I'd love to know what you think about the Akira 4k uhd release, I've returned my copy after having learnt that HDR has been omitted.
I have these and thay looked amazing to me on 4k. But i was only watching them to enjoy not to review so i wasn't pauseing or zooming in the films. Plus this trilogy is about 10 hours long so i wouldn't worry about a few wee things like the top of Gadalfs staff disappearing for a few frames as u wont notice it as your watching the film. Plus its definitely worth buying the 4k LOTR for the new Dolby Atmos soundtrack alone. Omg so much better then the blurays DTS hd soundtrack. i love these films, could be my favourite movie trilogy.
Most people will not notice the loss of detail, mediocre noise reduction, digital artifacts and everything else that got messed up with these transfers. I've seen these with my family already and none of us noticed. Had I not found this video, I probably wouldn't have noticed any of this stuff. And though I am still glad I pre-ordered this and will continue to watch it again and again, it does 'Sting' a bit knowing that I paid top dollar for a sub-par attempt at a 4k transfer. An intentional sub-par attempt, as it seems.
@@tatocientos i wouldnt worry to much as most reviews of the 4k LOTR films have been amazing and positive. it probably looks a bit different on different TVs anyway. but 4K LOTR is still hands down far better looking than the blu-rays (iv both) and remember that sweet Dolby Atmos only available on the 4K discs lol. amazing films ;-)
At the end of the day, I'm still overjoyed with these. Putting my 4k set right next to my old extended editions DVD set almost made me shed a few tears. Besides, this is far from the last time these movies will be re-released and remastered. Even if they're not perfect, it can only keep going up from here
I watched this on my 4k projector. It looked pretty bad. Like a shitty 2k upscale. Not as bad as terminator 2 but this isn't something that should be ignored. I'm glad you can watch it and enjoy and not care about the details and specifics but for those of as that do it is an embarrassing "restoration".
I appreciate your honesty and your research. I do think it is a little nitpicky seeing as how most of what you mentioned would really only be seen if you stopped the movies and watched frame by frame which would never happen in a normal viewing of the films so it will most likely be missed. I don’t yet have a full opinion of LOTR on 4K since I’ve only finished Fellowship but what I saw and especially heard I liked. Something that stood out the most in Fellowship, for me, was the detail on the Balrog. You could see more embers and detail in the fire. Mix that with HDR to further the contrast between the fire and the shadow! However sometimes the HDR can be pretty intense. I noticed that you couldn’t really see the Balrogs hoof as it starts to walk across the bridge because the blacks of the shadow are so intense it covers up the detail on the hoof. Just a very minor nitpick I noticed and in no way hurts the viewing experience. I finished The Hobbit and I was especially impressed with it on 4K. You could really tell Peter Jackson had the 4K experience in mind when filming The Hobbit. The CGI was a lot less distracting on 4K than on the Blu-Ray. The CGI felt a little too smooth on Blu-Ray but they added a bit more detail on the 4K release and it just felt a tad more lifelike but of course that is just my opinion. I noticed a lot more detail on Bolg, the Goblin King, Gollum and especially Smaug. Gollum and Smaug already looked great but the detail on them on 4K, every shot of them was just breathtaking. A lot more colors and detail in Smaug’s scales and eyes and gold coins stuck on him throughout his body which I never noticed on the Blu-Ray!
Peter Jackson didn't even do a 4k scan of the original film negatives. He just used the ancient over 20 years old blu ray masters, applying more digital noise reduction and edge enhancement. You can easily notice the digital noise reduction and edge enhancement watching the 4k blu rays. It's a piss poor transfer of a catalog title. Compare that to Tremors 4k blu ray which was a stellar reference 4k transfer of a catalog title. Peter Jackson has screwed the LOTR fans!
@@C--A You’re unbelievably dramatic! You may not like the 4K release but they undoubtedly sound better than the Blu-Rays! If you prefer the Blu-Rays more power to you, who am I to judge? But to say he “screwed” LOTR fans is just laughably dramatic!
Highly thorough review, and not what I was expecting. I can only recommend one thing when watching these in 4K, considering the things you have now highlighted... drink more beer and the enjoyment will be there.
There's an interview with Peter where he talks about the restoration process, it's indeed a 4K scan. And though I think the new color timing lacks some of the old personality, IMO they have gone for a more timeless palate.
I just watched that interview for the 5th time. In that interview, no where is it mentioned that it is a 4K scan of the original camera negative. All Peter Jackson says is it is 'restored in 4K' and 'converting to 4K' - we've heard those words on 4K releases before and that has not implied a 4K scan of the OCN.
Thanks so much for this. My enthusiasm for the 4k has been almost completely destroyed. About the only good thing that came from it is the removal of the green tint in FOTR.
Dang. Honestly I haven't picked up the set yet. This was a very interesting video and thank you for being honest as well. I am still planning to pick the set up and wait for the big boxset that will come out in 2021. Also I will keep the blu-ray extended edition boxset just because it is very nostalgic for me and it was my first box set I ever own in my collection. take care and have a good one. -Bernardo Cisneros
I really appreciated you taking the time to go into such detail on the DNR and “edge scrubbing”. These films are nearest and dearest to my heart and I’m now 70% convinced from your breakdown that this probably isn’t a 4K rescan like I thought it was as well. Truly I could have watched an hour or more of your analysis! Well done!
Ugh I watched Peter Jackson's piece on these and he very much left me with the impression he had indeed done a 4K Restoration from the film. Glad you've corrected this. This means there's room for yet more versions in the future! It's worth the tens of millions and would make it back I am sure!
This is the first review I’ve seen that actually NOTICES all the stuff I can see in my dedicated home cinema. It’s a huge improvement over the blu-ray in many ways but it is NOT a new 4K scan. I posted some ultra close-up side by sides of the blu-ray versus 4K on AVForums. Detail is identical. If you ever want to HEAR how bad the new sound mix is from an LFE perspective, give me a shout... happy to demo it.
Finally a honest unbiased review 👌🏾 Other reviewers downplaying the digital noise reduction and edge enhancement. Plus digital bits even saying it's a 4k scan of the original film negative. When it was in fact the ancient blu ray master used.
You and Shane Lee were the real ones for going against other so called "reviewers" and calling out Peter Jackson's overuse of digital scrubbing and artificial sharpening on this 4K set. Much respect.
im a big fan of the trilogy. i picked up the steelbook case and watch them on my oled. i see your points, but the colors and sound are awesome. If i wasnt a big fan i would wait 6 months when its on sale for half the price
Great review, bud. what are you rocking for audio currently? I don't have a setup at all and am looking for any recommends on Atmos or even just a surround set up. Cheers!
Loved the review. Honestly, you have one of the best thorough reviews and I appreciate it. Wish it was a little longer. Hope to see your review of the Hobbit trilogy.
I just finished the Fellowship. I loved it in so many ways but I did notice the inconsistency in the faces. There were times that there was a lot of detail in the face and other times I noticed the smoothing. The screen captures you used yes look bad but then at other times the detail is incredible. You can see individual blood vessels, spots and count the various beard hairs. Inconsistent. The sound really is the standout improvement. I marveled at the Rivendale sequences and how much detail there is and I am still on THX.
Films at Home said that this was one of the greatest 4K discs ever, and I haven't been let down by him. I will be picking them up this is definitely the best way the films have looked
Elliot's review is insightful, comprehensive, excellent review of this disc set. I purchased it recently and actually returned it for a refund (it came with a missing disc retainer, so on that basis I was able to return it). My take on the set is harsher, and I don't believe there is good mixed with the bad, I think it's bad all around. The colors are so profoundly "off" based on my perception - the inexplicable green tint throughout the movies, the washed out sepia tones that appear in scenes for no apparent reason, the lack of any warmth whatsoever -- that initially, before I watched Elliot's review, I thought for sure I'd gotten a defective set.
This review has far more detail than the DNR'ed 4K discs. Thanks for going in-depth. I was excited to finally see this series getting a 4K release, but this review is really disappointing. It's a real shame since the original LotR trilogy is such a great and important piece of film history. The 4K release really deserved better.
I would watch them for yourself, ive just finished all three and they were fantastic. Was there some little issues here and there...yes, but imo its still the best its ever looked!
Great video, I like how youre not just jumping on the positive review bandwagon like everyone else atm. However, I disagree with you in some ways: I think you're right in regards to some statements about DNR and the source of the new 4k release. However, I think for the same reason you said that the job of restoring LOTR would be massive and expensive, is the same argument I would make to say that your comments might be too generalised. I think they've probably done a mixture of new scanning and upscaling. As to which scenes/shots and why, I couldnt say definitively, but I think it would have come down to how many elements required to reproduce the shots and the CGI requirements. Using your comments, you mentioned how good the HDR is. In my observation, its very difficult to "fake" a good HDR presentation from old scans. They end up being pretty ineffective. The best 4k remastered movies with an HDR presentation have alwayd been done from a new 4k (or higher) film scan (look at Alien or ET). The more modern techniques used in scanning are able to pull out unseen high dynamic range from old films. I think they even adopt mutipass scanning sometimes to grab more highlights and avoid crushing blacks. As to the DNR and resolution issue, I agree that some scenes look obviously and aggressively noise reduced and/or upscaled. However, in my own experience with film scanning (on 35mm stills), using a higher resolution scanner and/or scanning at a higher DPI doesnt always mean more noticeable grain. It can mean finer grain. This is normally in conjunction with a more precise scan focus. If the original scan was less than ideal in terms of focusing (too high or low off the image plane) this will result in larger blotchier grain.
Wow, good job. My takeaway from this, had ATMOS audio not been added, your final comments might have been to pass on this version. It seems the audio upgrade may have ‘saved’ this 4K release ???
Thank for the reply. I am a LOTR fan so I will make the Extended ver purchase but you provided an excellent commentary. I have a Kaleidescape player (digital download) and I am interested to see how the Extended version downloads - one huge file per movie or will they break it up like the physical disks.
According to TheDigitalBits.com, they did go back to the original camera negatives to do a full 4k scan. In addition, they also went back to the original VFX reels and scanned those in 4K. The only up scaling that occurred were the visual effects because those were originally rendered in 2K. The original camera negatives are natively 4K. They then created a new 4K digital intermediate to create these discs. They’re as close to natively 4K as they’re going to get short of spending the time and money to completely redo the VFX shots. thedigitalbits.com/item/lord-of-the-rings-trilogy-2020-4k-uhd
@@stevebragg4256 Name calling is the only way to stop these self-proclaimed video-ologists or disc-ologicals or whatever they call themselves. They just like the Benjamins to flow from the studios to promote shitty releases like this one.
Thanks, very constructive review. Noise reduction is a tool that should be handled with caution, happens to me when treating photos I took in RAW format. I just hope that the box set they announced for next summer will tackle these issues
I've seen universal praise for the video quality, even from professionals who actually know what their talking about. I respect eliots opinion, but....
I think so too. Many professionals have agreed that this is in fact one of the very best 4K releases of older films ever. That doesn't mean they are flawless, but I think this review (although he kept it very professional) did sink into a very uneven negativity towards the end. I haven't seen anything yet to support the claim that DNR was used, in fact the HD Blu-rays to my knowledge did use filters which were probably removed now. This definitely looks closer to the source material and the theatrical experience, the HD versions always felt a bit too influenced IMO. Some mistakes are probably unavoidable when working with such extensive material, but everything I've heard so far suggests that the works on this trilogy have been far more extensive and resourceful than any project before. I also believe that workers from the project have officially stated it is a new 4K scan, for which other analysts have also found a lot of evidence, and that the CGI was partly remastered in 4K. In the end all that matters is that you enjoy it, and even Elliot didn't deny how much of an improvement this is.
@@ebertsisko5185 You're right. It definitely is an improvement when you factor in the great use of HDR and Atmos. I'm only merely highlighting the negative aspects of this release, and perhaps I just got a little frustrated towards the end of the video! For good reason though, the use of DNR is there on screen, the proof is in the pudding, so to speak. You can't get detail scrubbed out of an image like in the frames of these 4K discs without some digital smoothing. As for universal praise for these 4K discs, I can only share my opinion. These are my thoughts on my multiple viewings of these 4K discs through my own eyes.
@@ElliotCoen Thanks! Again, I don't know enough to say anything for certain, I am just raising assumptions, but I believe that DNR might only be one possible origin for the issues you pointed out. It could very well be that they used DNR on single shots or frames (although I would be surprised if they used it on the entire trilogy), however this doesn't really align with the information that they have been working for over a year on this with a big staff and a lot of resources. It could still be DNR. On Apocalypse Now it has also singularly been assumed that DNR was used because the images of the 4K version mostly had few to no perceivable grain. However as most people didn't believe Francis Ford Coppola would use a technology like that it has been pointed out that certain restoring processes on 35mm films and also certain digital treatments on CGI and HDR can have similar effects to DNR. A lack of film grain can also come from very high quality scans, such as some scenes from Lawrence of Arabia show. I really appreciate the fact that there are people like you going into details like this and I like your channel a lot, I just wanted to leave a new perspective here!
@@ebertsisko5185 Lawrence of Arabia was filmed on 70 mm which is possible to be scanned in 10k. So thats the reason for little grain. 35 mm could be scanned in 5k but that was not done with this trilogy, it was simply upscaled from 2k. Here is a detailed review in german which has the same opinion: blu-ray-rezensionen.net/der-herr-der-ringe-die-rueckkehr-des-koenigs-4k-uhd/
Great review, I currently have the DVD extended edition. From this video I suspect that I'd be better getting the BR version and letting my player upscale to 4k
Disappointed to see another studio with a lesser 4k release. This makes me happy I didn't shell out the money for this. If this is the quality I can express from the 4ks, I'll just wait for a later edition where I can at least get some special features. As of now I don't feel like this is worth the upgrade from BluRay.
What shouldn't be forgotten is that we're still talking about movies that were made 20 years or so ago. It's clear that a later 4K upgrade doesn't hold up to current movies. I watched the 4K UHD of Tenet the other day and it's amazing, the picture is so clear and you see literally every detail possible. But then again, it's a movie from 2020. I haven't got myself the Lord of the Rings trilogy in this 4K edition yet, I think I will at some point, but I don't expect those movies in 4K to look like for example Tenet in 4K. That doesn't seem realistic to me. I totally get the point of not investing the money though, that is basically also what's holding me back so far and I think I'll wait for the Collector's Edition which is due in summer this year which will feature both the LOTR and the Hobbit trilogy in 4K. I guess it will be cheaper than spending two times 60 euros for both sets.
Thank you for this review. I was afraid that this 4K was actually 2K, and I was well aware of issues regarding the DNR. I'm not opposed to a light sprinkling of DNR as it's helped with some restorations in the past when done with more mild algorithms, but they cranked it up to max and it shows here. The edge enhancement? That wouldn't have been needed at all if they'd gone through the work of recapturing from the film at 8K or 16K and then downsampled that to 4K (I suggest doing that so that in the future when they do another transfer they can make an 8K release). Edge enhancement as far as I can tell was done as a "cover" to hide it being a transfer. I'm not personally opposed to a new color grading. The movies should at least match each other in that sense as a trilogy, ignoring the Hobbit of course. I am opposed to that cheesy dream effect tacked on though. All in all, while this isn't anywhere near what happened with the Star Wars movies, some of the choices in this transfer seem more like a director imposing a vision post-hoc rather than being satisfied that he made some of the best movies of all time and making that original trilogy be the best version of itself possible. I'd love to see a new version of this done derived from a proper future-proof 16K digital transfer from the original film, a VERY mild touch of DNR, no edge enhancement, and an approach to color timing that simply made the first movie match up better with the other two without any weird choices like making the dream sequence more stereotypically dreamy.
Sorry I’m late to the show : love the review Elliot. What would say is the best edition of the theatrical and extended cuts of Lots of the Rings Trilogy to purchase ? Is blu ray better in this case ?? I have dvd copies from the original home. Video release period, and had been interested in upgrading to 4K or a newer / better blu ray remaster ?? Thanks
Thanks for the informative review. I am glad I did not spend over $100. for only a marginal and frankly problematic upgrade and no extras or special features.
Its honestly not major, most people will not even notice it. From watching them all in 4k the DNR was not abused and overused like in some movies. It was modestly used here.
It is reference quality, this guy has no clue what he’s talking about. I have seen these films more than any human, and I’ve been burned by horrible remasters in the past. These 4ks look incredible
What would be best version to get at this point? Just finished the books and am wanting to seenthe extended versions for the first time. Any thoughts are greatly appreciated.
Note - some people have picked up on my referring to Super 35 as Super Cine. My apologies if that is incorrect. I've always used the two terms interchangeably. Please do not let this take away from the issues I'm presenting in this video. Thanks!
Super review - great to see that you've taken the time to analyse the frames so carefully. Really appreciated and very interesting. My guess is the picture quality isn't as good as the 4K Star Wars Rise of Skywalker, which was also shot on film... the actual quality of the story, however, is a different issue.
10:20 (ish...)
Would the use of DNR make sense in the context of it being a 4k scan of the original film?
I.e Getting rid of the extra grainyness that's inherent in the process as you said earlier?
Great video by the way 👍
Any clues how long we'll have to wait for the super special box set?
Super35 using 35mm film actually tends to be grainier than anamorphic scope because you are cropping into and blowing up a full frame image to extract a scope ratio.
Can you clarify which film format was used for LOTR?
Would you find it wrong if I disagree with some of your points? As an example, your shot of Helm's Deep look better on the 4K Blu-Ray to my eyes, much better. Same for Legolas.
This is a brilliant review. Don’t apologize for being too detailed or that it may bother people. We come to you because these details ARE important to us and I appreciate all of your research. DNR has been crippling so many tv shows and films.
Thank you so much for the kind words, it means a lot!
He's nitpicking, IMHO. Yes, film grain is nice, but the uptake in detail and depth on the 4K discs of LOTR is more than enough to overshadow it. To me, there's about 1 instance per movie where they fuck up:
1. In the Fellowship of the Ring, stunt/body doubles are far more noticeable than ever before,
2. In the Two Towers, there is a smearing effect on Legolas' face when he's talking to Theoden (pointed out by HDTVtest)
3. The ear and the staff in RotK.
Do a few fuck ups mean we need to stop enjoying those movies?
Is a lack of film grain enough of a reason to bash the super detailed 4K image on these movies?
@@adriannn3720 there is less detail on the 4k disk, bigger numbers don't always mean better.
The grain and warmer color tones is what I actually adored about these movies, it gives them that magical/surreal feeling, with this new 4K treatment they lost that special thing, they look blend for the majority of time, plus all of the effects become more visible, so much they make it hard for me to enjoy the movie, since you can actually see the majority of effects (you can see the difference in color of characters and backgrounds etc). In old version everything was blended so much better. If it is possible they should've just upscale the resolution and leave everything as it is.
@35FootTwinkie From my experience and, in my opinion, the only release that is truly and objectively 'warmer' in color grading are the original Extended DVD Editions. The blu ray versions were mostly blue/neutral depending on which release you're referencing. But the DVDs they released were night and day difference, which I think what was so jarring for reviewer in this video -- because the 4K are night and day difference from both blu rays in terms of color grading.
Just because it's a fantasy movie doesn't mean it need to have a weird tint all over it
Fellowship Of the Ring in both DVD versions as well as cinematic version of Blu-ray give Shire and Rivendell a very warm look. It was completely lost in Blu-ray extended and in 4k. Check out this comparison: ua-cam.com/video/iPBP-3-_Beg/v-deo.html
Im 100% with you man.
I feel that Peter Jackson's decision to make the 35mm transfers of TLOTR blend seamlessly with the digitally shot Hobbit have ruined the beauty of celluloid film. DNR has absolutely scrubbed away lovely grain, detail and depth. The benefit of these UHD discs over the Blu-ray's is high bit-rate and HDR - but they could have been so much better if the glorious 35mm had been allowed to breathe.
Film enthusiasts who like film grain are similar to audio enthusiasts who like hearing scratches in audio. So regressive and stuck with the times. It’s long past time to move on.
@@mosesking2923 I disagree, with motion picture the medium plays an incredibly integral part. Using DNR to remove detail that is actually there and replace it with interpolated data is almost akin to replacing an oil painting with watercolor.
@@mosesking2923 spoken like a true cinematic Philistine!
@@victorgan347 absolutely 100 per cent agree! Well said.
Agree. Should have been the other way around...make the Hobbit look more like the filmic LOTR. Digitally shot stuff is so....stilted.... inorganic.... It can be ok on the right film but not for these. This is epic cinema and should be organic and grainy and personally I think it ages far better. There's a reason Lawrence of Arabia and Spartacus look absolutely amazing and flawless on 4K and the reason is certainly not DNR and lack of grain!
100% agree with everything said, I will be sticking with my extended edition blu-rays as the more natural, closest to film experience. I don’t mind the black crush here and there cuz it looks like the actual photography. Let me ask you this guys, if viewing art in a museum would you prefer to view the art in it’s original (or closest to) form, or through some instagram filter that plays to a modern audience? HDR, 4K, and the process of remastering should be used as a tool to restore not change, not add or take away. As good as the audio might be watching the video this way with DNR and unnatural HDR effect is took distracting. It’s too shiny and slick, and the Lord of the Rings never looks like that. I should know, I projected them on film myself when they came out.
Depends. I saw a video explaining why seeing the Mona Lisa in person often disappoints and it turns out the painting when new was much more vibrant.
Then again, this has nothing to do with a digital image that can't "fade" with time.
Remember that there are the original theatrical blurays, which have the original colours as per the theatrical DVDs, lovely! Those are my default versions to watch. The extended versions were then giving the revised colour grading 'scheme', on purpose. Green, brown and blue respectively (the box art colours give a big clue). Jackson said it was intentional and I dont know why this has been forgotten.
It drives me nuts that they keep effing around with colour grading on so many remasters.
I hope that someone makes a despecialized version just like it was done with the og star wars films.
@@kosmas173 There is actually a color corrected version of fellowship, a couple guys made itits soo much better and what it always should have been.
@@pilotoreplicante Got a name or source?
Great review. As much as I enjoyed the films in 4k (and it does look much better in motion than in still frames), I also noticed DNR and it bothered me. HOWEVER, my impression is that the quality varies immensely from shot to shot. I suspect that much of the live-action footage was indeed scanned in 4k from the original camera negative with only slight DNR processing applied. However, all shots that include special effects (which might not be noticeable special effects, such as removal of airplane condensation stripes in the sky) were taken from the existing 2k DI and subjected to EE and DNR. Often even within the same scene, some shots look extremely digitally processed, while other shots look much more natural. This is especially noticeable in the aftermath of the Warg battle in TTT (when Legolas and Theoden discuss leaving the dead behind). In contrast to this, look at the detail in Gandalf's face in FOTR when giving encouragement to Frodo in Moria (after Frodo notices Gollum). To me, this does not look like a 2k upsample.
Apparently they added this processing to The Hobbit as well. As for "trying to make it look digital", you just can't do that. It's not actually possible. With film, detail is build FROM grain, so you take grain away, you take detail away. With digital, there's not as much grain, but you don't sacrifice detail to get there. It's just because the way they gather light causes less of a loss of accuracy. Although they often actually just shoot at a higher resolution and supersample it down to achieve the lower noise effect. The Hobbit for example shot on 5K and was edited in 2K.
Personally I'm old school and always prefer old fashioned film. Filmic... With grain... Is best! Organic! I'm not overly thrilled by purely digitally shot stuff. I think filmic stuff ages better than digita as well. Same goes for digital vs practical effects IMHO. And I loathe DNR but so should any real cinephile!
Totally agree with both of you. My standard is Criterion Collection. They could have applied that standard to this release, but the foolish desire to have the two series look the same has now ruined LotR as well. I guess I'll be waiting for the Criterion version in about 20+ years!
@@MichaelPhillipsatGreyOwlStudio Grain for want of a better word is good.
@@MichaelPhillipsatGreyOwlStudio unfortunately that's the difference between boutique Blu publishers and the mainstream ones. One appeals to those that appreciate film as an artistic medium and the other is mainly just for bulk consumers of entertainment. Obviously trying to make LOTR look more digital and less filmic is trying to appeal to the latter. That's how it feels anyway.
@@animalanimation5110 I see film grain in the original blu-ray version. It's visible there. I think your perception of lack of grain was due to the ways in which you originally viewed the films. It wouldn't have been visible either in the theater (because projections disguise it) or on DVDs (because it's not particularly visible at that resolution and hidden by compression). You can't avoid film grain in 35 mm film. It's going to be there no matter you do. You can only smear it, which destroys detail.
Lord of the rings are my favourite films of all time, the smoothing and dnr is really disappointing.
Fair play for going out of your way to cover it, in that much detail though.
Man they did the same thing on the Hobbit too.I tried the movies on nu oled tv and it looks atrocious on some scenes the image ia washed.
The films aren’t dnrd he’s insane.
@@johnd8744 yes they are, stop being in denial.
There is no grain. How can there not be DNR Lol!
After watching the movies myself i completley agree with you.
Even my friends who never watched a 4k-bluray before noticed the lack of filmgrain and how all the CGI-effects (like Gollum) look much worse than on the bluray.
Sadly we have a massive problems with LotR:
Bluray (Standard Version) from 2011: heavy use of DNR, low contrast, but the color grading was fine
Bluray (Extended Version) from 2012: no heavy use of DNR, some edge enhancement but not offensive, great contrast, green tint in the first movie, other two look fine
4k Bluray: heavy use of DNR, loss of detail, edge enhancement, great color grading and impressive HDR-implementation
So each version has its own strength and weaknesses. I prefer the Extended Bluray. I can live with the green tint in the first movie. Got used to it :P
There's actually a remastered Blu-ray set that was quietly released in 2021, in conjunction with the 20th anniversary of Fellowship. I absolutely love it. Same as with the older Blu-ray set, the Appendices and Behind the Scenes documentaries are on DVD. I strongly recommend checking that one out. 4K just isn't too appealing to me.
My contraversial opinion is that I actually quite like the greener colour grading in Fellowship
@@loganidol did that remastered blu-ray fix the green tint on fellowship?
@@ed00001 seems like it, yeah
Is the 2021 remastered bluray theatrical or extended? I see two versions on Amazon. Do they have DNR?
I remember owning these movies on vhs...how far we have come.
They certainly look better than the VHS! Technology has come a long way indeed. Thanks for watching!
Vhs? Did you have like 8 tapes?
@@sunstyle52 one for each movie. I distinctly remember borrowing the vhs version of the two towers from a friend and it was just one vhs for the cinematic cut.
(I did just check, the cinematic cut had one vhs, the extended one two)
@@sunstyle52 VHS Tapes could go up to 4 hours.
@@iododendron3416 I had the same set. It was the theatrical versions from memory, don't think the extended versions came out until DVD later.
Finally someone who point out that this was not just a sunshine story as it seems all other reviews are saying. Thank you sir! I just saw the 4k extended version yesterday, did a whole marathon and I saw alot of the things your telling in the still pictures even without seeing this video first. The staff was one of them 😦
Great review. I feel that far too few have reviewed this release with an actual eye for detail. The more people who talk about destructive film “remastering,” the better. It’s absurd that companies try and pass off poor releases to the public, knowing most people won’t be able to see what they’re doing wrong.
Really appreciate the attention to detain in this review Elliot, I have been tempted by the 4K release for a while, but I'll stick to the Blu-ray versions which I love!
My pleasure Sam. Cheers!
@@ElliotCoen Will you be bringing some attention to the Hobbits 4K treatment as well?
I've watched so many reviews of the 4k release and they were all super positive. I'm thankful for this video for being the only one that's actually noticed these problems. That Shadowfax one was particularly egregious
If he's the only one making this kind of claims, maybe he's lying. The 4K transfer looks magnificent, far better than the old Blu ray.
@@chronodreaming The video speaks for itself dude. Plus, having come back to this comment after a year I know that these kinds of issues are common in 4k upscaling
@@TheHauntedAngel this is not upscaling. It's a new scan. I did a comparison last week. The 4K version looks much crisper and more detailed
I keep reading reviews online: some love it, some hate it. But I really appreciate your review here. You go into great detail about how everything works and the costs of getting it "right". As well as providing screencaps to help show your point. Not to mention you have a soothing voice lol.
I'm torn between the film grain of the blu-rays, and the HDR and Dolby Atmos of the 4Ks.
This is how a review should be. Talk about the fast stuff first and digg into details further into the vid(if your interested, you will follow) and yes this was so interesting and well put toghether as a reiview.
Great vid and great job!
I am an audio engineer and cant wait to hear the new atmos track for this 4k version. But im so dissapontied about the DNR and scrubbing of details u mentioned theyv done in this tho:( But a will have to watch it to conclude anything. Maybe this version actually suits a 4k HDR Tv over a bluray verision on a Full HD tv.
Can confirm the HDR is pretty great, but the DNR is very apparent sadly
He talk trash, editors completely strip this movie and rebuild back again in 4k technology.
The atmos is incredible, one of the best mixes I've heard
Funny I've watched a bunch of reputable youtubers review this and none of them said anything like this. Interesting. But to be fair I've watched all of these 4k releases on my properly calibrated tv and my tv shows better imaging than these screenshots (side by side on the tv) great video
I find it remarkable that, directly compared, the 1080p Bluray shows more detail than the 4k one. They didn't just mildly reduce noise. They completely smeared it. And what is all the "making it look digital" talk about? First of all it clearly harms the source material. And secondly why would you make two trilogies look more alike by using the inferior one as the reference?
This is flat out wrong I have Collectors Edition both normal BD and UHD versions and UHD version just kills the BD version. On OLED there is no competition.UHD is by far the winner.
@@cenktheangel I agree. On my OLED it was unbelievable. Yes, we can definitely point out DNR, but in aggregate the UHD discs are stunning.
Youd be suprised that some blu rays destroy a lot of 4k movies released. My ps3 was the best purchase ever for blue rays. With new 4k oled blu rays still stand out and upscaled vs 4k movies. 4k movies only a few are really perfection. Plus most 4k players have serious issues. Wish the PS5 would improve im future for a true 4k player. Anything streamed 4k is really downsized in qualith. I literally tested same movies on 3 tvs side by side.
Because Jackson thinks he had the right idea with the Hobbit trilogy. I don't dislike them, but it's absurd to think that the Hobbit movies look better. Even in the theater a decade ago, I was thinking that these movies looked less real with excessive CGI.
Can we get a petition going for a non-DNR version?
Waste of time, it isn't going to happen. It'd cost way too much money to re-release them and it was approved by Peter Jackson.
@@SagaciousFrank What a fool! First he approved the Extended green and black clipping of The Fellowship and now this abomination!
@@turrican4d599 , is it really that bad? Why have there been positive critical reviews then?
@@SagaciousFrank Not a tech nerd but it blew me away. I think it's amazing looking. Some people are talking about the effect on it. As a huge fantasy buff I think it makes it look more like a fantasy story in a good way.
Some small scenes looks like some color look drained. That's it. To answer your question it's not that bad. Infact I think it's amazing.
@@starcraftCS , thanks for opinion!
This is incredibly informative, can't thank you enough!!
My pleasure, David. Thanks for watching!
It's great to find a UK based 4k collector. Great in depth review. Thank you.
Hey, thanks so much!
I got the 2010 Blu-ray versions of these. The picture on them is outstanding
No, only the 2011 extended edition on blu ray looks outstanding.
The audio upgrades on this Dolby Atmos mix are INSANE though if any of you do upgrade. The sound designers literally separated the “objects” into what feels like over a dozen different pieces, at different heights and is probably the most immersive audio I’ve yet heard along with Bladerunner 2049. Ceiling effects just blow you away hour after hour.
same, but this is way better on a 4K tv
@@FrictionalGamer I believe the 2011 extended edition has the altered color timing I believe. 2010 has the original color timing
@@dogpd3 no, the 2011 is the original color timing and it looks great!
"Perhaps this is the best these movies will ever look"
- Elliot Coen
Yes, ultimately we may never see another restoration of these movies come 8K or another format, so this could be the best we ever have :)
...barring all the other "improved" or "enhanced" versions that have been released
@@ElliotCoen so you don't think i made the wrong decision by spending 50 euros on the set?
@@ElliotCoen I think the DVD was better.
That shot of pippin in the distance having less detail kind of defeats the purpose of higher resolution doesn’t it?
But imagine if they did a 4k scan of the original negatives. Then you would be able to tell that it was the stand-in actor because the detail would be so great.
That was probably why they did it. You could even more clearly see a person wearing a mask. They would have to remake many scenes with CGI-faces.
@@gandalfthegay. Or just accept that it is a stand in, laugh it off, and go about watching a movie.
@@jollygoodfellow3957 oh no then you would realize it's a movie! Can't enjoy it if it doesn't hold up to real life!
It's a bad upscaled movie, That's it.
I still miss the color timing of the original DVD I wish they would do the color temperatures of that release but with more subtlety and in 4k uhd
DVD is really bad when it comes to the color palette as the gamut of SD video is very limited in range. Blu-ray is archaic as it is with Rec 709 color. At least 4k HDR can do Cinema P3 and Rec 2020.
@@dan_hitchman007 Bigger number more better!!!
Peter Jackson wants Lord of the Rings to fit in with the Hobbit, not the Hobbit to fit with Lord of the Rings. Sad to say I am getting George Lucas vibes from him.
MAJOR George Lucas vibes.
You saved me money with this review. I’ll wait till they address these issues, if they ever do. I don’t know why they’d want to remove the grain anyways, it makes it timeless.
Jackson likes the smooth look of digital, so these will never look like film as long as he is alive.
Film grain is awful
@@gomezwardulus4192 You're right, so why not ruin the movie's look so no one can appreciate it?
I have the original extended DVD editions of LoTR trilogy and to-be-honest apart from the obvious resolution limitations. I rather watch them then any releases after as there the ones who (in my opinion) are more superior in-terms of colour grading and the intricate details such as the DVD menus and transitioning into other menus then the Blu-ray releases. Also, the countless memories of watching the DVD releases with friends and family, when they first came out add to the enjoyment of viewing them.
I was so sad when the Blu-rays didn't have the "page flip" that exists on the DVDs.
I’ve got these versions and had these since they released and they’ve probably been then best movie purchase I’ve ever made. The quality of the packaging, the discs, the appendices and the overall films themselves were amazing. I’ve just purchased the 4K versions as I’d heard so many good things but I will really miss the warm colour tones and the grain if they’re no longer there, they always felt perfectly balanced and applicable for these movies.
Pretty disappointed now having watched this review I must admit.
Hey dude great analysis. I appreciate you showing screen shots to illustrate your point. This was the best breakdown of these transfers I have seen yet
Thanks so much, Troy. That means a lot to me!
Just wanted to say you are completely right in your assessment. I am all for re-scanning and increase detail and some noise reduction can be fine but this is far too much. I see it like this: Noise reduction is okay, as long as you can't make out the noise reduction. If I had to choose between visible noise reduction and visible noise I would choose noise every time. It's actually less distracting too, because it's uniform and randomly distributed.
That was a good Gandalf Staff find. It's a shame tho. I guess I'll just hang on to my Blu-ray for now. Maybe in another few years they'll release a better restoration.
Considering how the previous releases have been handled, probably not. If they do an 8K rescan, let’s hope the film hasn’t degraded too much by then. If they even do it properly, that is.
@TheThingHidingUnderYourBed the tint is horrible, but so is less detail in a 4K release than a 1080p one. The Blu-Ray theatrical cuts have good colours, but are also suffer from DNR use.
@TheThingHidingUnderYourBed I believe they have more detail than the DVDs (though not as much as they should have), and the colours for both are good. The DVDs were excellent for their time, with pretty much no flaws when you take into account the limitations of the format.
Every release since has failed to live up to what it should be in some respect. The Extended BDs for Two Towers and Return of the King look excellent though.
Overall, just enjoy what you enjoy, but if you don’t have an HDR TV, I’d say the 4K release isn’t worth it for full price.
So, I would need to buy FHD and UHD versions, rip both, an combine FHD image with UHD sound. Nice!
Yo send me that haha
You saved me money. So weird that they wanted to get LOTR to match the Hobbit movies, but not vice versa. This is some George Lucas level crap. And I understand why, to be fair, the technology changes sure. But to me the bigger issue is that these films were made for the cinema, not the small screen. Things like grain or whatever play different on a massive screen. The cinema does not pause or go in slow motion at the click of a button either. It really is a different medium.
Your critique of this 4K conversion seems to be utterly genuine and spot-on .. Great stuff.
Nice in depth review! Not sure how I feel about the colour timing change. I've seen these each countless times and I feel the change in colour will be destracting. The audio you described sounds epic! Cheers
Your suggestion that visual effects would have to be reapplied following a 4K rescan is incorrect. The visual effects shots were originally rendered out at 2k and then printed to film as individual shots. For this year's remaster these film outs were rescanned.
Essentially what they did this year was reconform the film from the original negative and regrade it.
Enjoying the channel. Keep up the good work 👍
People keep saying they re-scanned at 4K, but I can't find any source for that. Jackson specifically does NOT say that in his interview. They appear to be 2K upscales.
Still looks crap though. The FX shots are the biggest disappointment with these new UHDs.
@@HagbardCeline23 yes and no. The Balrog looks much more amazing compared to the dvd version that is hazey and the highlights are taken down too much/too dim.
@@BobbyD262 They are upscaled from the 2k DI's and re-color timed with an HDR pass with DNR tinkering.
@@dan_hitchman007 Yeah, so not as exciting as advertised. I think there were some weasel words used, meaning they DID re-scan the negative in 4k, but only for the 20% or so of FELLOWSHIP that had scenes that were not sourced from a DI. The vast majority of FELLOWSHIP and 100% of the other 2 films were totally DI, with no finished OCN to recan.
I agree with virtually everything you are saying about each screenshot, but when actually watching the movies and not staring at screencaps, I personally like both versions. I could see myself watching the Blu-Rays whenever I want that more authentic, filmic look, and the 4Ks when I'm looking for the amazing audio and crisp picture (too crisp arguably, but still nice to watch for some people). And I think I will almost always go for the 4K when watching the Extended Editions, just because of the awful green-ish tint on the Blu.
So glad to see this video doing well, keep up the good work, man!
Thanks so much!
My word you're good at this. Never seen someone be so thorough! Things like pointing out Shadowfax and his wandering ear is amazing. I'll stick with my blu rays (tbh I bought those for like £5 each as well, not £75!).
You're like the Digital Foundry of movies lol.
Top stuff.
Hey, thank you! I'm glad I could be of some help.
@TheThingHidingUnderYourBed are you asking me? I managed to find those 2 disk (so just the film) versions that were released on ebay. Literally nowhere seems to sell them new now and according to HMV staff I chatted with they've stopped manufacturing them. They look amazing but Fellowship is Matrix green in places lol.
Apparently there's a blu ray version of this new colour grade coming out later this year..so I might get that if the errors mentioned here are fixed.
So you are going to base your purchase decision on a single youtuber's opinion, without even seeing it yourself?
I don't see how a stupid artifact that's visible for less that 3 seconds is more condemnable than the awful tint present on the Blu-Rays? Or is that enough to make the HDR and a new soundtrack pointless?
@@adriannn3720 why so angry? I don't know anyone who's bought the disks to allow me to 'check them out' except via UA-cam lol
No one I know is willing to spend that much on something with (your words) a 'stupid artifact' left in by mistake or whatever.
The green tint there's a setting on my tv that instantly removes it, and apart from that I regard the blu rays as about as 'perfect' as they need to be. No dust, decent natural look.. I don't want the films to look like The Hobbit or a Marvel movie.
There are other flaws which I didn't feel the need to go into detail with, but since you commented I will - the cgi was not really sufficiently upscaled (or whatever you call it) and it really, really does look like many scenes don't gel properly any more in the 4K. It was old green screen anyways, let alone being seen at 4K. The grain reduction doesn't help either.
The soundtrack is great on the blu rays, I have the cd's of everything Howard Shore wrote so I don't feel I'm 'missing out' there.
If they're reasonably priced (ie not absolutely atrociously overpriced for elitist snobs to gush over) I _may_ buy the new colour treated blu rays if/when they come out and the cgi is ok.
What I have an issue with mainly is the tinkering of the films are getting to Star Wars levels of silliness if they release products with 'this fixed but that buggered up'...this better but that worse. So I'm happily sticking with a very decent blu ray trilogy and will gladly see if anything changes my mind.
I wish they made the 4K version with the look of the 2010 release.
Fellowship's global green tint was atrocious. At least the 4k upscale version fixes that.
Awesome review. First I've seen that was honest
Thanks so much for watching :)
Thanks for the review! Finally somebody is addressing the flaws these UHDs have!
Hey, no problem! I'm glad to help out.
Fantastic review of the 4K Blu-Ray. Unfortunately I'll have to sit this one out, and enjoy my 1080 version. Shame I won't have the Atmos track, but the visual differences are a deal breaker for me.
there are auditory differences too, some lines have been redubbed/different takes used. no thank you from me, sticking with the oldies but goodies
Thank you for your time spend on this! Much appreciated.
Will never sell my extended blurays :D
Enjoy that green tinted Fellowship.
I will probably buy this collection too, just so i can watch a color corrected version of fellowship with horrible dnr every once in a while
I'm keeping my extended Blu Ray set for the special features, because they are very extensive and fascinating! Overall, despite some of the issues mentioned, I still think the 4K looks better overall. The new color grading and HDR looks SO much better than on the Blu Rays IMO! (though the black-and-white change in the "vision" scene is a bit strange)
@@SamLovesMovies25 cool, glad you like it :)
honestly if you make screens hots it is apparent. But while watching the movie it is no so much. I didn't notice any at all on my 70 inch screen. Of course it could have been better. But super happy for this release. Compared to hobbit there is definitely less detail on faces and hair. But still much better then bluray in my opinion.
The correction to the color timing and Dolby Atmos tracks make me want to grab this, but I can't help but feel disappointed from the 4k transfer as a whole. I'll wait for a price drop before I consider buying it.
Or wait for the 20th anniversary collection.
@@OWmyDragonballz It may have been delayed or canceled. It has been all quiet on the western front from Warner on the deluxe set. However, you know it will be hugely expensive and will still have the exact same 4k upscaled transfers as the film only releases. Some may not want The Hobbit either.
In the comparisons that I've seen, I think the coloring of the 4K discs looks MUCH better than the Blu Rays. I'm glad they corrected that horrible green tint in Fellowship for instance, although the black and white in the "vision" is a bit strange. I can see the DNR in comparisons though, and that is a major shame and I wish they hadn't done that, but I still think the 4K looks better than the Blu Ray overall from what I see so far. (Admittedly I haven't been able to watch the actual discs myself yet, though, because the person who wants to watch them with me is unavailable for a short while so I have to wait for them)
In any case, I'm going to be keeping my extended edition Blu Ray set anyway because I really love the multitude of fascinating special features on it.
This is the reason why I returned my 4K trilogy and kept the bluray. So much better.
Which bluray is it, extended or theatrical? Year?
I totally agree with Elliot with basically everything he said about this 4K release.
Hey, thank you!
Yep, Elliot is definitely not a sheep. Plus, he has the empirical evidence to back it up. Thanks to him, I will be investing in other 4K UHD's worth of my money.
Thanks for this video! I watched Lord of the Rings in the theatre multiple times when it was first released. It's absolutely one of my favourite movies so I've been watched so many times on DVD, Blu-ray as well. I was so excited for 4K release and while I was watching it, I just knew that picture was somewhat strange. I didn't know exactly what was wrong, I just noticed it looks like weirdly fake digitally-filmed. Now I know what was really wrong. To me this 4K release removes real nostalgic cinematic feelings for the Lord of the Rings movies. I love the Dolby Atmos sound but I still prefer 1080p Blu-Ray release. It's more original to me. Again, thanks for the video and what an amazing channel!
Subscribed. Glad I discovered this channel :)
Great video. :)
Thank you!
Just watched the 4K discs over the weekend on my Panasonic player and LG OLED and everything seemed fine to my naked eye. I was purposely looking for strange things to pop up like you referenced in this video - makes me curious what the person who captured the screen shots viewed on.
Interesting. I viewed on an LG OLED with an Oppo 203 and noticed these issues. It might be down to peoples' own view of the films. Some things will stick out to some people and not to others. I'm glad you enjoyed the 4K discs anyway!
Can i ask which panasonic? I ordered the 820K. Bought the Sony x800m2 but would freeze half way. Returned it within 30 days after multiple tests. Heard tje 820K is excellent. Any issues cause it sux my ps3 is best invention for blu rays that have been abused and 4k players today stink. My last hope is the 820K i really wanna enjoy lotr 4k and atmos sound
@@billm3210 I used to have an LG but sold it and bought the Panasonic DP-UB820-K which has been excellent - have had it for about 3 months.
@@ElliotCoen but if I had the choice between bluray and 4k Version - would you recommend the 4k version or would you say the Blu-ray version caption the (kind of mythic) Lord of the rings feeling better?
I have to make a choice and I can’t really decide
@@ElliotCoen I have to agree with CoinOP, I watched it on my LG C9 OLED and didn't notice most of these. (I have the dvd's, blu-ray, and now UHD) It felt closer to the original dvd's then the blu-ray. Overall I felt the detail was better, the picture more clear, and I won't even go into the extra scenes over the original extended edition. There were a few I noticed but they felt like intentional changes in color that were meant to be noticed.
Personally I would put the DVD and UHD over the blu-ray (1080p) but that just may be me.
Well... that's quite a different take than Films at Home had.
I like Jeff but his 4k reviews sometimes are unreliable
I don’t like Geoff because his 4K reviews are regularly unreliable.
@@mclovin7326 “Film at Home” is a Big Fake & Scam! 💩 Incredible he has over 50k subscribers! 😳
@@radfordrams4909 damn son, even the smaller channels can't keep away from toxic kiddos..... I mean there are things we like to call opinions, I personally like the dude and his opinions 😅😒
Films at home... Jeff... Is good - I personally like his channel. But in his own words he's not technical and he is doing the ear and eye test. His schtick is in the title.... Just regular people who enjoy watching films at home. I have no issues with his opinions but they may or may not always suit mine....same with anyone's.... including Elliot. I have not seen these yet myself in 4k as I'm waiting for the big ultimate combined set next year ... But I am totally against any form of DNR on filmic source elements - unless absolutely necessary due to some damage or other reason where it HAS to be used to improve things - which should be very rare. Otherwise IMHO it's a crime against cinema and artistic vandalism to apply DNR to a non-digital source, even if used minimally. There should be no reason to. IMHO Jackson would have been better off making The Hobbit look more filmic rather than making LOTR look more digital. I get the consistency thing but I always preferred the filmic look of LOTR over the digitally shot Hobbit. This DNR issue and filmic vs organic certainly doesn't seem to be anywhere near the debacle the Star Wars Skywalker saga 4K was handled so although I'd have preferred a slightly different approach they still seem like they look amazing and I still can't wait to see them and the lovely HDR. I've always got my Blu ray deluxe sets to fall back on if I need to as they are nice sets and I plan to keep those.
Really appreciate your honesty. Some U.S. reviewers have hyped this up.
What does us viewers have to do with anything?
@@blockedhaat Some reviewers on UA-cam have hyped this 4K set by saying they're the best 4K discs they've ever seen without mentioning any of the issues that are included in this review.
@@satanstherapist6401 still has nothing to do with us viewers, that's quite that generalization.
@@blockedhaat I think there's been a misunderstanding. I'm not having a go at US viewers of these films but actual reviews done by just some reviewers.
@@satanstherapist6401 gotcha. lmao just ball bustin dunkno
Interesting analysis. Would have been good to also show examples of where the 4k is better than the 1080p
I saw a lot of images where the 4k definitely looked much better. It seems a hit and miss situation.
@@pietroscarpa2384 Now that I own the 4k I know it much better than the bluray.
@@snowpuppy77 I will buy the 4K version eventually because I have never owned the blu rays.
Man, your voice is so soothing. Like there's not much emotion but maybe that's what makes it so calming. Great review! Now I'm gonna check out some of your other videos
Thank you so much!
Great review. It's refreshing to hear an honest, and rare, review of this box set and it's many flaws. I'd lost faith in almost all film reviewers, as I'm sure you're aware, many reviews have claimed this to be one of the best 4k transfers ever!
I'd love to know what you think about the Akira 4k uhd release, I've returned my copy after having learnt that HDR has been omitted.
I have these and thay looked amazing to me on 4k. But i was only watching them to enjoy not to review so i wasn't pauseing or zooming in the films. Plus this trilogy is about 10 hours long so i wouldn't worry about a few wee things like the top of Gadalfs staff disappearing for a few frames as u wont notice it as your watching the film. Plus its definitely worth buying the 4k LOTR for the new Dolby Atmos soundtrack alone. Omg so much better then the blurays DTS hd soundtrack. i love these films, could be my favourite movie trilogy.
Most people will not notice the loss of detail, mediocre noise reduction, digital artifacts and everything else that got messed up with these transfers. I've seen these with my family already and none of us noticed. Had I not found this video, I probably wouldn't have noticed any of this stuff. And though I am still glad I pre-ordered this and will continue to watch it again and again, it does 'Sting' a bit knowing that I paid top dollar for a sub-par attempt at a 4k transfer. An intentional sub-par attempt, as it seems.
@@tatocientos i wouldnt worry to much as most reviews of the 4k LOTR films have been amazing and positive. it probably looks a bit different on different TVs anyway. but 4K LOTR is still hands down far better looking than the blu-rays (iv both) and remember that sweet Dolby Atmos only available on the 4K discs lol. amazing films ;-)
At the end of the day, I'm still overjoyed with these. Putting my 4k set right next to my old extended editions DVD set almost made me shed a few tears. Besides, this is far from the last time these movies will be re-released and remastered. Even if they're not perfect, it can only keep going up from here
It depends on the size of your screen. I’m watching on 100+ projector screen and it looks bad. 7/10 at best for picture quality
I watched this on my 4k projector. It looked pretty bad. Like a shitty 2k upscale. Not as bad as terminator 2 but this isn't something that should be ignored. I'm glad you can watch it and enjoy and not care about the details and specifics but for those of as that do it is an embarrassing "restoration".
Thanks for the information, Elliot. Glad I am waiting on these. Such a shame they didn't make them better.
My pleasure, Doug! Thanks for watching.
I appreciate your honesty and your research. I do think it is a little nitpicky seeing as how most of what you mentioned would really only be seen if you stopped the movies and watched frame by frame which would never happen in a normal viewing of the films so it will most likely be missed. I don’t yet have a full opinion of LOTR on 4K since I’ve only finished Fellowship but what I saw and especially heard I liked. Something that stood out the most in Fellowship, for me, was the detail on the Balrog. You could see more embers and detail in the fire. Mix that with HDR to further the contrast between the fire and the shadow! However sometimes the HDR can be pretty intense. I noticed that you couldn’t really see the Balrogs hoof as it starts to walk across the bridge because the blacks of the shadow are so intense it covers up the detail on the hoof. Just a very minor nitpick I noticed and in no way hurts the viewing experience. I finished The Hobbit and I was especially impressed with it on 4K. You could really tell Peter Jackson had the 4K experience in mind when filming The Hobbit. The CGI was a lot less distracting on 4K than on the Blu-Ray. The CGI felt a little too smooth on Blu-Ray but they added a bit more detail on the 4K release and it just felt a tad more lifelike but of course that is just my opinion. I noticed a lot more detail on Bolg, the Goblin King, Gollum and especially Smaug. Gollum and Smaug already looked great but the detail on them on 4K, every shot of them was just breathtaking. A lot more colors and detail in Smaug’s scales and eyes and gold coins stuck on him throughout his body which I never noticed on the Blu-Ray!
Peter Jackson didn't even do a 4k scan of the original film negatives. He just used the ancient over 20 years old blu ray masters, applying more digital noise reduction and edge enhancement.
You can easily notice the digital noise reduction and edge enhancement watching the 4k blu rays. It's a piss poor transfer of a catalog title.
Compare that to Tremors 4k blu ray which was a stellar reference 4k transfer of a catalog title. Peter Jackson has screwed the LOTR fans!
@@C--A You’re unbelievably dramatic! You may not like the 4K release but they undoubtedly sound better than the Blu-Rays! If you prefer the Blu-Rays more power to you, who am I to judge? But to say he “screwed” LOTR fans is just laughably dramatic!
this is so in-depth. That part where Gandalf loses his staff also shows part of the horse's ear before it turns its head.
Highly thorough review, and not what I was expecting. I can only recommend one thing when watching these in 4K, considering the things you have now highlighted... drink more beer and the enjoyment will be there.
There's an interview with Peter where he talks about the restoration process, it's indeed a 4K scan. And though I think the new color timing lacks some of the old personality, IMO they have gone for a more timeless palate.
Christopher Liddell when does Jackson mention the 4K scans?
@@Slask7 Interview on Warner Brothers Channel
this needs to be up higher haha.
@@Slask7 The Lord of the Rings was shot on 35mm as stated in that Peter Jackson video, the Hobbit was shot at 4K.
I just watched that interview for the 5th time. In that interview, no where is it mentioned that it is a 4K scan of the original camera negative. All Peter Jackson says is it is 'restored in 4K' and 'converting to 4K' - we've heard those words on 4K releases before and that has not implied a 4K scan of the OCN.
Thanks so much for this. My enthusiasm for the 4k has been almost completely destroyed. About the only good thing that came from it is the removal of the green tint in FOTR.
Dang. Honestly I haven't picked up the set yet. This was a very interesting video and thank you for being honest as well. I am still planning to pick the set up and wait for the big boxset that will come out in 2021. Also I will keep the blu-ray extended edition boxset just because it is very nostalgic for me and it was my first box set I ever own in my collection. take care and have a good one.
-Bernardo Cisneros
I really appreciated you taking the time to go into such detail on the DNR and “edge scrubbing”. These films are nearest and dearest to my heart and I’m now 70% convinced from your breakdown that this probably isn’t a 4K rescan like I thought it was as well. Truly I could have watched an hour or more of your analysis! Well done!
It *is* a 4K scan of the negatives. The VFX shots are a 4K scan of 2K film prints though. See blu-ray.com and thedigitalbits reviews.
Ugh I watched Peter Jackson's piece on these and he very much left me with the impression he had indeed done a 4K Restoration from the film. Glad you've corrected this.
This means there's room for yet more versions in the future! It's worth the tens of millions and would make it back I am sure!
Don't listen to the man who made the movies, who owns the best film restoration company in the world, listen to some youtuber enthusiast.
@@JarrettOriginal Epic comment.
This is the first review I’ve seen that actually NOTICES all the stuff I can see in my dedicated home cinema. It’s a huge improvement over the blu-ray in many ways but it is NOT a new 4K scan. I posted some ultra close-up side by sides of the blu-ray versus 4K on AVForums. Detail is identical. If you ever want to HEAR how bad the new sound mix is from an LFE perspective, give me a shout... happy to demo it.
Finally a honest unbiased review 👌🏾
Other reviewers downplaying the digital noise reduction and edge enhancement.
Plus digital bits even saying it's a 4k scan of the original film negative. When it was in fact the ancient blu ray master used.
You and Shane Lee were the real ones for going against other so called "reviewers" and calling out Peter Jackson's overuse of digital scrubbing and artificial sharpening on this 4K set. Much respect.
im a big fan of the trilogy. i picked up the steelbook case and watch them on my oled. i see your points, but the colors and sound are awesome. If i wasnt a big fan i would wait 6 months when its on sale for half the price
Great review, bud. what are you rocking for audio currently? I don't have a setup at all and am looking for any recommends on Atmos or even just a surround set up. Cheers!
Thank you for saving me £70. Will pick these up when they're much cheaper.
Subscribed to your channel.
Loved the review. Honestly, you have one of the best thorough reviews and I appreciate it. Wish it was a little longer. Hope to see your review of the Hobbit trilogy.
I just finished the Fellowship.
I loved it in so many ways but I did notice the inconsistency in the faces. There were times that there was a lot of detail in the face and other times I noticed the smoothing. The screen captures you used yes look bad but then at other times the detail is incredible. You can see individual blood vessels, spots and count the various beard hairs. Inconsistent.
The sound really is the standout improvement. I marveled at the Rivendale sequences and how much detail there is and I am still on THX.
Films at Home said that this was one of the greatest 4K discs ever, and I haven't been let down by him. I will be picking them up this is definitely the best way the films have looked
He's a moron. If all you're looking to get is "it looked to me" then he's fine.
Elliot's review is insightful, comprehensive, excellent review of this disc set. I purchased it recently and actually returned it for a refund (it came with a missing disc retainer, so on that basis I was able to return it). My take on the set is harsher, and I don't believe there is good mixed with the bad, I think it's bad all around. The colors are so profoundly "off" based on my perception - the inexplicable green tint throughout the movies, the washed out sepia tones that appear in scenes for no apparent reason, the lack of any warmth whatsoever -- that initially, before I watched Elliot's review, I thought for sure I'd gotten a defective set.
It's the best 4k presentation I've seen on disc. . And the sound is mind blowing with an Atmos set up.
I prefer the colours from the blu ray...you are right in the 4k they look waxy. I sold mine and kept the bluray instead
This review has far more detail than the DNR'ed 4K discs.
Thanks for going in-depth. I was excited to finally see this series getting a 4K release, but this review is really disappointing. It's a real shame since the original LotR trilogy is such a great and important piece of film history. The 4K release really deserved better.
I would watch them for yourself, ive just finished all three and they were fantastic. Was there some little issues here and there...yes, but imo its still the best its ever looked!
Maybe for the 30th anniversary edition we get the real one
So the best would be if someone took the 1080p video and fuses the dolby atmos track on top? gotcha.
Great video, I like how youre not just jumping on the positive review bandwagon like everyone else atm. However, I disagree with you in some ways:
I think you're right in regards to some statements about DNR and the source of the new 4k release. However, I think for the same reason you said that the job of restoring LOTR would be massive and expensive, is the same argument I would make to say that your comments might be too generalised.
I think they've probably done a mixture of new scanning and upscaling. As to which scenes/shots and why, I couldnt say definitively, but I think it would have come down to how many elements required to reproduce the shots and the CGI requirements.
Using your comments, you mentioned how good the HDR is. In my observation, its very difficult to "fake" a good HDR presentation from old scans. They end up being pretty ineffective. The best 4k remastered movies with an HDR presentation have alwayd been done from a new 4k (or higher) film scan (look at Alien or ET). The more modern techniques used in scanning are able to pull out unseen high dynamic range from old films. I think they even adopt mutipass scanning sometimes to grab more highlights and avoid crushing blacks.
As to the DNR and resolution issue, I agree that some scenes look obviously and aggressively noise reduced and/or upscaled. However, in my own experience with film scanning (on 35mm stills), using a higher resolution scanner and/or scanning at a higher DPI doesnt always mean more noticeable grain. It can mean finer grain. This is normally in conjunction with a more precise scan focus. If the original scan was less than ideal in terms of focusing (too high or low off the image plane) this will result in larger blotchier grain.
Wow, good job. My takeaway from this, had ATMOS audio not been added, your final comments might have been to pass on this version. It seems the audio upgrade may have ‘saved’ this 4K release ???
Hi Chris. Yes, but not just the audio. The HDR Dolby Vision grade is worth the pick up too!
Thank for the reply. I am a LOTR fan so I will make the Extended ver purchase but you provided an excellent commentary. I have a Kaleidescape player (digital download) and I am interested to see how the Extended version downloads - one huge file per movie or will they break it up like the physical disks.
According to TheDigitalBits.com, they did go back to the original camera negatives to do a full 4k scan. In addition, they also went back to the original VFX reels and scanned those in 4K. The only up scaling that occurred were the visual effects because those were originally rendered in 2K. The original camera negatives are natively 4K. They then created a new 4K digital intermediate to create these discs. They’re as close to natively 4K as they’re going to get short of spending the time and money to completely redo the VFX shots.
thedigitalbits.com/item/lord-of-the-rings-trilogy-2020-4k-uhd
ua-cam.com/video/yn21u6j6Ywc/v-deo.html
Bill Hunt is a sell-out bitch.
@@sauronbaggins1833 either it is true or it isn't. Name calling is not helpful.
@@stevebragg4256 Name calling is the only way to stop these self-proclaimed video-ologists or disc-ologicals or whatever they call themselves. They just like the Benjamins to flow from the studios to promote shitty releases like this one.
I doubt it's true. Just look at caps a holic. There's no new detail. Just DNR and oversharpening.
Thanks, very constructive review. Noise reduction is a tool that should be handled with caution, happens to me when treating photos I took in RAW format. I just hope that the box set they announced for next summer will tackle these issues
Jeff at “Films at Home” said “Lord of the Ring Trilogy” 4K is the best & greatest picture quality ever! 😖
I've seen universal praise for the video quality, even from professionals who actually know what their talking about. I respect eliots opinion, but....
I think so too. Many professionals have agreed that this is in fact one of the very best 4K releases of older films ever. That doesn't mean they are flawless, but I think this review (although he kept it very professional) did sink into a very uneven negativity towards the end. I haven't seen anything yet to support the claim that DNR was used, in fact the HD Blu-rays to my knowledge did use filters which were probably removed now. This definitely looks closer to the source material and the theatrical experience, the HD versions always felt a bit too influenced IMO. Some mistakes are probably unavoidable when working with such extensive material, but everything I've heard so far suggests that the works on this trilogy have been far more extensive and resourceful than any project before. I also believe that workers from the project have officially stated it is a new 4K scan, for which other analysts have also found a lot of evidence, and that the CGI was partly remastered in 4K. In the end all that matters is that you enjoy it, and even Elliot didn't deny how much of an improvement this is.
@@ebertsisko5185 You're right. It definitely is an improvement when you factor in the great use of HDR and Atmos. I'm only merely highlighting the negative aspects of this release, and perhaps I just got a little frustrated towards the end of the video! For good reason though, the use of DNR is there on screen, the proof is in the pudding, so to speak. You can't get detail scrubbed out of an image like in the frames of these 4K discs without some digital smoothing. As for universal praise for these 4K discs, I can only share my opinion. These are my thoughts on my multiple viewings of these 4K discs through my own eyes.
@@ElliotCoen Thanks! Again, I don't know enough to say anything for certain, I am just raising assumptions, but I believe that DNR might only be one possible origin for the issues you pointed out. It could very well be that they used DNR on single shots or frames (although I would be surprised if they used it on the entire trilogy), however this doesn't really align with the information that they have been working for over a year on this with a big staff and a lot of resources. It could still be DNR. On Apocalypse Now it has also singularly been assumed that DNR was used because the images of the 4K version mostly had few to no perceivable grain. However as most people didn't believe Francis Ford Coppola would use a technology like that it has been pointed out that certain restoring processes on 35mm films and also certain digital treatments on CGI and HDR can have similar effects to DNR. A lack of film grain can also come from very high quality scans, such as some scenes from Lawrence of Arabia show.
I really appreciate the fact that there are people like you going into details like this and I like your channel a lot, I just wanted to leave a new perspective here!
@@ebertsisko5185 Lawrence of Arabia was filmed on 70 mm which is possible to be scanned in 10k. So thats the reason for little grain. 35 mm could be scanned in 5k but that was not done with this trilogy, it was simply upscaled from 2k. Here is a detailed review in german which has the same opinion: blu-ray-rezensionen.net/der-herr-der-ringe-die-rueckkehr-des-koenigs-4k-uhd/
Great review, I currently have the DVD extended edition. From this video I suspect that I'd be better getting the BR version and letting my player upscale to 4k
Disappointed to see another studio with a lesser 4k release. This makes me happy I didn't shell out the money for this. If this is the quality I can express from the 4ks, I'll just wait for a later edition where I can at least get some special features. As of now I don't feel like this is worth the upgrade from BluRay.
I don`t think that They do this again... it is too expensive!
Unless they go back and re-shoot all of the digital VFX in 4K., this is the best it is going to look.
What shouldn't be forgotten is that we're still talking about movies that were made 20 years or so ago. It's clear that a later 4K upgrade doesn't hold up to current movies. I watched the 4K UHD of Tenet the other day and it's amazing, the picture is so clear and you see literally every detail possible. But then again, it's a movie from 2020. I haven't got myself the Lord of the Rings trilogy in this 4K edition yet, I think I will at some point, but I don't expect those movies in 4K to look like for example Tenet in 4K. That doesn't seem realistic to me. I totally get the point of not investing the money though, that is basically also what's holding me back so far and I think I'll wait for the Collector's Edition which is due in summer this year which will feature both the LOTR and the Hobbit trilogy in 4K. I guess it will be cheaper than spending two times 60 euros for both sets.
Thank you for this review. I was afraid that this 4K was actually 2K, and I was well aware of issues regarding the DNR. I'm not opposed to a light sprinkling of DNR as it's helped with some restorations in the past when done with more mild algorithms, but they cranked it up to max and it shows here. The edge enhancement? That wouldn't have been needed at all if they'd gone through the work of recapturing from the film at 8K or 16K and then downsampled that to 4K (I suggest doing that so that in the future when they do another transfer they can make an 8K release). Edge enhancement as far as I can tell was done as a "cover" to hide it being a transfer.
I'm not personally opposed to a new color grading. The movies should at least match each other in that sense as a trilogy, ignoring the Hobbit of course. I am opposed to that cheesy dream effect tacked on though.
All in all, while this isn't anywhere near what happened with the Star Wars movies, some of the choices in this transfer seem more like a director imposing a vision post-hoc rather than being satisfied that he made some of the best movies of all time and making that original trilogy be the best version of itself possible.
I'd love to see a new version of this done derived from a proper future-proof 16K digital transfer from the original film, a VERY mild touch of DNR, no edge enhancement, and an approach to color timing that simply made the first movie match up better with the other two without any weird choices like making the dream sequence more stereotypically dreamy.
If anything the hobbit should have been made to look like the lord of the rings
Sorry I’m late to the show : love the review Elliot. What would say is the best edition of the theatrical and extended cuts of Lots of the Rings Trilogy to purchase ? Is blu ray better in this case ?? I have dvd copies from the original home. Video release period, and had been interested in upgrading to 4K or a newer / better blu ray remaster ?? Thanks
I actually hate DNR and love film grain. 🎥 🎞
Thanks for the informative review. I am glad I did not spend over $100. for only a marginal and frankly problematic upgrade and no extras or special features.
This is a disgrace. The fact that reputable reviewers are praising this release as reference quality is mind boggling.
Its honestly not major, most people will not even notice it. From watching them all in 4k the DNR was not abused and overused like in some movies. It was modestly used here.
@@32lilbruce There should be an uptick in resolution and detail. There isn't sadly.
@@linusfotograf yeah I can agree with you there
I get the impression PJ just phones this in. I think he's had enough Tolkien.
It is reference quality, this guy has no clue what he’s talking about. I have seen these films more than any human, and I’ve been burned by horrible remasters in the past. These 4ks look incredible
So which version is worth buying now? I bought the extended blu rays for christmas, is it better to buy the 4k or can i stick to my purchase?
Weird how at first glance the 4K discs look grainy to me in my Samsung Q80T (HDR10)
Thanks for your very informative thoughts!! I’ll be definitely sticking with my old blu-ray set!!👍
Some youtube reviewers are putting in more effort and time to make a video like this than a billionare company did to LOTR.
What would be best version to get at this point? Just finished the books and am wanting to seenthe extended versions for the first time. Any thoughts are greatly appreciated.
The extended edition blu rayset is your best bet. You also get the appendices which are some of the best special features ever