Why no 4K 3D....yet? - Blu-ray Forum

almy · 07-11-2016, 06:47 PM

What was the actual reason given by the BDA
...is it technologically impossible? Also, regular BluRay became available (in 2007) two years before 3D was introduced. Is it possible that 3D 4K may still come out - albeit a few years down the road?

tyrok · 07-11-2016, 07:03 PM

They could always add it to the spec later but as of right now no 4K3D movies exist. Of course a movie not being native 4K doesn't mean it can't be released that way.

Alan A · 07-11-2016, 07:20 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by almy

What was the actual reason given by the BDA
...is it technologically impossible? Also, regular BluRay became available (in 2007) two years before 3D was introduced. Is it possible that 3D 4K may still come out - albeit a few years down the road?

NO, you don't even have 4K 3D in theaters. Never happening. I'm buying all the 3D blu-rays I can betting they will end soon.

BozQ · 07-11-2016, 08:01 PM

Because 4K3D don't exist in cinemas. All 3D is in 2K.
And besides, all the perceived benefits of HDR and WCG would have been lost when you out on the 3D glasses anyway. Also, BDXL 128GB may not be sufficient storage for 4K3D.

There is a possibility of this being revised later, just like what happened with the old Blu-ray. But I think it's unlikely to happen.

Doctorossi · 07-11-2016, 09:11 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BozQ

Because 4K3D don't exist in cinemas. All 3D is in 2K.

Considering 80% of the 2D releases on the format to-date are in 2K as well, I don't see how this is an impediment.

dvdmike · 07-11-2016, 09:15 PM

There is a new thread weekly on this

Doctorossi · 07-11-2016, 09:21 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dvdmike

There is a new thread weekly on this

Well, the Blu-ray Forum should've considered the impact on blu-ray.com server load capacity before they finalized the UHD spec.

GunZenBomZ · 07-11-2016, 09:49 PM

Because 3D was a flop! And anyone sensible doesn't want to muddy the 4K sphere with more gimmicks.

Doctorossi · 07-11-2016, 10:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by GunZenBomZ

Because 3D was a flop! And anyone sensible doesn't want to muddy the 4K sphere with more gimmicks.

If you don't like 3D movies, don't buy them. There's no "mud" nor "gimmicks" here, just compatibility with a common movie technology you are free to ignore if it doesn't pertain to you. Personally, I want my players to be compatible with sound, color, widescreen and 3D. That way, they're functional as media players to properly... play media.

tasker · 07-12-2016, 11:32 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by GunZenBomZ

Because 3D was a flop! And anyone sensible doesn't want to muddy the 4K sphere with more gimmicks.

I consider myself very sensible (and don't appreciate the insult), i too buy all my tv's 3d capable as i have a large collection and will keep buying them.
I would also like to have 3d on a uhd disc.

Jimmy Smith · 07-12-2016, 04:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BozQ

Because 4K3D don't exist in cinemas. All 3D is in 2K.
And besides, all the perceived benefits of HDR and WCG would have been lost when you out on the 3D glasses anyway. Also, BDXL 128GB may not be sufficient storage for 4K3D.

Wrong

3D with dolby vision has been used in theaters and it does have significant benefits through the 3D glasses. All things that effect the quality of 2D video effect 3D video just the same

3D Ultra HD video would require only 50% higher storage than Ultra HD video without it. Since most 3D movies are under 2 hours the vast majority would fit easily on a BD-100. Longer 3D movies would need to be spread over 2 discs but this isn't much of a problem.

PRO-630HD · 07-12-2016, 05:39 PM

We are waiting on 8K TV's for 4K3D to make sense for 2160P per eye and I said it at the beginning they should have included 4 layer discs in the format since the inception being 128gb or 133gb since the technology has been around since 2010.

BozQ · 07-12-2016, 09:43 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jimmy Smith

Wrong

3D with dolby vision has been used in theaters and it does have significant benefits through the 3D glasses. All things that effect the quality of 2D video effect 3D video just the same

3D Ultra HD video would require only 50% higher storage than Ultra HD video without it. Since most 3D movies are under 2 hours the vast majority would fit easily on a BD-100. Longer 3D movies would need to be spread over 2 discs but this isn't much of a problem.

But we are talking about UHD BDs here, aren't we? Dolby Vision in 2D is taking a long time to get here, let alone 3D.

And besides, I don't think there is a TV that uses Dolby 3D glasses.

Ultimately, 4K 3D is not a big loss.
I'd love to see HFR 3D, at 1080p or even 720p be implemented.

BrendonW16 · 08-07-2016, 04:24 AM

For me it's not a major issue as I buy a 4K copy and also a 3D copy then put the 3D disc in the case with the 4K and normal disc to make the set I want then on sell the surplus discs

TM2-Megatron · 08-07-2016, 06:13 AM

Personally, I don't really care if they ever add 3-D to the 4K spec. Most 3-D films now are just poor conversions anyway, and whether or not they're done in 2K or 4K won't make the 3-D any less poor. The best native 3-D movies of the 2000s/2010s 3-D revival have already been made, and they were made in 2K. The older 3-D films of the 50s and 80s that were shot on film, as well as the 70mm IMAX 3-D documentaries could all be scanned at 4K, sure, but the likelihood of this ever happening is nil.

I'd much rather the studios just include the 3-D Blu-Ray disc in the UHD set, as Shout Factory has done with their IMAX 4K releases and Paramount is doing for the Amazon-exclusive Star Trek Beyond UHD set. The ball was dropped with other UHD titles like Fury Road, Point Break, and Batman vs. Superman... all these should have included the 3DBD disc. Most high-end 4KTVs are capable of absolutely amazing 2K 3-D, especially LG's OLEDS. Since we aren't going to get 4K 3-D, I just want to make sure we keep getting 3-D in its current form.

GC Riot · 08-07-2016, 11:25 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dvdmike

There is a new thread weekly on this

I was just going to say "Time to start a drinking game..."

Ruined · 08-07-2016, 11:57 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by almy

What was the actual reason given by the BDA
...is it technologically impossible? Also, regular BluRay became available (in 2007) two years before 3D was introduced. Is it possible that 3D 4K may still come out - albeit a few years down the road?

Real reason is actually quite simple:

1. 3DUHDBD hardware SOCs in TVs/Blu-ray players are not yet ready.
2. Larger size UHD discs haven't yet rolled out in scale to support the higher bandwidth of 3D

I imagine they will add 3D eventually, yet another way to get you to rebuy all of your hardware and discs again.

Quote:

Originally Posted by GunZenBomZ

Because 3D was a flop!

I'm not sure what you call UHDBD if 3DBD was a flop, because the 3DBD preorders of Warcraft and Star Trek Beyond are outselling the UHDBD preorders...

Quote:

Originally Posted by GunZenBomZ

And anyone sensible doesn't want to muddy the 4K sphere with more gimmicks.

*cough*hdr*cough*

PRO-630HD · 08-07-2016, 01:54 PM

Hopefully studios will just start releasing 3D UHD combos! That is an option with multiple formats that actually makes sense.

Canada · 08-09-2016, 04:48 AM

I believe it is deficiency in HDMI 2.0 spec that won't allow a 3D and 4K movie at the same time.

Opips3 · 08-09-2016, 06:17 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Canada

I believe it is deficiency in HDMI 2.0 spec that won't allow a 3D and 4K movie at the same time.

07-11-2016, 06:47 PM	#1
almy Active Member Member since:Aug 2007	Why no 4K 3D....yet? What was the actual reason given by the BDA ...is it technologically impossible? Also, regular BluRay became available (in 2007) two years before 3D was introduced. Is it possible that 3D 4K may still come out - albeit a few years down the road? Last edited by Scottie; 06-28-2017 at 08:27 PM.

07-11-2016, 07:03 PM	#2
tyrok Blu-ray Ninja Member since:Nov 2014 4K collection:1747 Blu-ray collection:1747	They could always add it to the spec later but as of right now no 4K3D movies exist. Of course a movie not being native 4K doesn't mean it can't be released that way.

07-11-2016, 08:01 PM	#4
BozQ Blu-ray Samurai Member since:Jun 2007 Location:Singapore 4K collection:- Blu-ray collection:-	Because 4K3D don't exist in cinemas. All 3D is in 2K. And besides, all the perceived benefits of HDR and WCG would have been lost when you out on the 3D glasses anyway. Also, BDXL 128GB may not be sufficient storage for 4K3D. There is a possibility of this being revised later, just like what happened with the old Blu-ray. But I think it's unlikely to happen.

07-11-2016, 09:15 PM	#6
dvdmike Banned Member since:Jun 2010 Blu-ray collection:1069	There is a new thread weekly on this

07-11-2016, 09:49 PM	#8
GunZenBomZ Senior Member Member since:Nov 2008 Location:Warwickshire, UK Home Theater Gallery:1 Blu-ray collection:156	Because 3D was a flop! And anyone sensible doesn't want to muddy the 4K sphere with more gimmicks.

07-12-2016, 05:39 PM	#12
PRO-630HD Blu-ray Guru Member since:Oct 2009 Blu-ray reviews: 1	We are waiting on 8K TV's for 4K3D to make sense for 2160P per eye and I said it at the beginning they should have included 4 layer discs in the format since the inception being 128gb or 133gb since the technology has been around since 2010.

08-07-2016, 04:24 AM	#14
BrendonW16 Junior Member Member since:May 2016	For me it's not a major issue as I buy a 4K copy and also a 3D copy then put the 3D disc in the case with the 4K and normal disc to make the set I want then on sell the surplus discs

08-07-2016, 06:13 AM	#15
TM2-Megatron Blu-ray Guru Top contributor Member since:Dec 2009 Location:Toronto, Canada 4K collection:1418 Blu-ray collection:5759 DVD collection:140 Trading Score:2	Personally, I don't really care if they ever add 3-D to the 4K spec. Most 3-D films now are just poor conversions anyway, and whether or not they're done in 2K or 4K won't make the 3-D any less poor. The best native 3-D movies of the 2000s/2010s 3-D revival have already been made, and they were made in 2K. The older 3-D films of the 50s and 80s that were shot on film, as well as the 70mm IMAX 3-D documentaries could all be scanned at 4K, sure, but the likelihood of this ever happening is nil. I'd much rather the studios just include the 3-D Blu-Ray disc in the UHD set, as Shout Factory has done with their IMAX 4K releases and Paramount is doing for the Amazon-exclusive Star Trek Beyond UHD set. The ball was dropped with other UHD titles like Fury Road, Point Break, and Batman vs. Superman... all these should have included the 3DBD disc. Most high-end 4KTVs are capable of absolutely amazing 2K 3-D, especially LG's OLEDS. Since we aren't going to get 4K 3-D, I just want to make sure we keep getting 3-D in its current form.

08-07-2016, 01:54 PM	#18
PRO-630HD Blu-ray Guru Member since:Oct 2009 Blu-ray reviews: 1	Hopefully studios will just start releasing 3D UHD combos! That is an option with multiple formats that actually makes sense.

08-09-2016, 04:48 AM	#19
Canada Blu-ray Archduke Top contributor Member since:Mar 2007 Location:Victoria, BC Home Theater Gallery:17 4K collection:305 Blu-ray collection:1201 DVD collection:37 Blu-ray reviews:42	I believe it is deficiency in HDMI 2.0 spec that won't allow a 3D and 4K movie at the same time.

Best 4K Blu-ray Deals