Sony "Mastered in 4K" Blu-ray Titles May 14 and July 16

[Kryptonic]

Originally Posted by IndyMLVC

So you're saying that laserdisc, a format (albeit niche) that lasted for about 17 years, was a miserable failure?

Really, really silly.

It lasted a long time, but it never achieved mass appeal and was the very definition of a niche format.

[42041]

Originally Posted by rickah88

I believe it's shot interlaced, not progressive scan. I don't know of a lot of TV shows shot in progressive scan, actually none off the top of my head.

I don't believe that's true... most of these scripted dramas are shooting progressive 24fps. GoT is shot on the Arri Alexa (the digital movie camera du jour, used on movies like Skyfall), I think Mad Men is now shot on it too. It's a 2.8K camera, I'm not sure what the resolution of the finished show is, however. But yes, most digitally photographed TV could never be true 4K, aside from the handful of shows using the Red camera.

[IndyMLVC]

Originally Posted by Kryptonic

It lasted a long time, but it never achieved mass appeal and was the very definition of a niche format.

I never said it wasn't. It was anything BUT a failure, which is what you said.

[rickah88]

Originally Posted by 42041

I don't believe that's true... most of these scripted dramas are shooting progressive 24fps. GoT is shot on the Arri Alexa (the digital movie camera du jour, used on movies like Skyfall), I think Mad Men is now shot on it too. It's a 2.8K camera, I'm not sure what the resolution of the finished show is, however. But yes, most digitally photographed TV could never be true 4K, aside from the handful of shows using the Red camera.

Just going by wiki, at least fot GoT, it says 1080i. Not sure if that's reliable or not?

Edit: Wiki could be referring to broadcast?

[42041]

Originally Posted by rickah88

Just going by wiki, at least fot GoT, it says 1080i. Not sure if that's reliable or not?

1080i60 is the broadcast format, since American TV and cable networks don't use 1080p24, as far as I know. From what I know, the actual masters are usually 1080p24 HDCAM-SR tape (which is what's on the blu-rays).
Upon further reading, seems like newer shows like GoT are moving away from tape, and using more movie-like workflows.

[Geoff D]

Heh. For what it's worth, Sony have sent out some internal info about the 2013 line-up which confirms that these discs are Superbit mkII: "This [Mastered in 4K line is] a similar strategy to the DVD Superbit discs released prior to Blu-ray’s launch which aided early HD displays".

[Kryptonic]

Originally Posted by IndyMLVC

I never said it wasn't. It was anything BUT a failure, which is what you said.

It was a failure. Of those 17 years that it was officially a format, it was never popular and never really viable. They were too cumbersome and expensive.

[Aragorn the Elfstone]

I remember watching laserdiscs in school. My aunt and uncle also had a big screen tv with a laserdisc player that I used to watch stuff on all the time when I went over to their house as a kid. For me, that all constitutes a success.

[TLOE]

Originally Posted by Geoff D

Heh. For what it's worth, Sony have sent out some internal info about the 2013 line-up which confirms that these discs are Superbit mkII: "This [Mastered in 4K line is] a similar strategy to the DVD Superbit discs released prior to Blu-ray’s launch which aided early HD displays".

To me, that makes sense. I imagine 4k discs will eventually be an addition to blu-ray's title catalog, not a replacement for it. Studios will likely market it as a super-premium version of a title, rather than re-release all their current titles. My question is this: What will happen to poor old DVD format? My guess it will be relegated to old SD TV shows mastered from tapes and small label manufacturers eventually.

[AngelGraves13]

Originally Posted by rickah88

I believe it's shot interlaced, not progressive scan. I don't know of a lot of TV shows shot in progressive scan, actually none off the top of my head.

Game of Thrones is not shot at 1080p or interlaced. It's shot with the Arri Alexa, which has a sensor that captures the image at 2880 x 2160.

X-Men: Days of Future Past is also being shot with the Alexa, so no 4K there either unless they want to master it at 4K.

Skyfall also won't be getting a 4K release as it was shot with the Alexa.

Iron Man 3 was also shot with it...

Some cinematographers prefer latitude over resolution. A better image over a larger one.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arri_Alexa

[Trekkie313]

Originally Posted by Kryptonic

If/when they create a new 4k format, it will fail miserably, akin to what Laserdisc was to VHS.

Don't you dare talk trash about LD! Without it, shitty DVHS might've actually caught on and we'd have little in the way of extras. Also it was around for 25 years in the marketplace.

[IndyMLVC]

Originally Posted by Kryptonic

It was a failure. Of those 17 years that it was officially a format, it was never popular and never really viable. They were too cumbersome and expensive.

Once again, you show how little you know about it.

Laserdisc was cheaper than VHS.

Something that's a failure doesn't last 17 years.

You should probably read a little more about it before you embarrass yourself further.

[Geoff D]

Originally Posted by AngelGraves13

Game of Thrones is not shot at 1080p or interlaced. It's shot with the Arri Alexa, which has a sensor that captures the image at 2880 x 2160.

X-Men: Days of Future Past is also being shot with the Alexa, so no 4K there either unless they want to master it at 4K.

Skyfall also won't be getting a 4K release as it was shot with the Alexa.

Iron Man 3 was also shot with it...

Some cinematographers prefer latitude over resolution. A better image over a larger one.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arri_Alexa

Skyfall *was* finished at 4K though, in spite of the Alexa's 2.8K image. It's not the first Sony upscale either, the effects shots in Spider-Man 3 were done at 2K and uprezzed for the final 4K DI.

[42041]

Originally Posted by IndyMLVC

Something that's a failure doesn't last 17 years.

Limping along for a long time a success does not make. SACD has been around for 14 years but no sane person would say it's been commercially successful.

[tylergfoster]

Originally Posted by HD Goofnut

It will probably be a marginal upgrade to the present BD release in terms of contrast levels and grain resolution.

Don't you think a new from-negative scan will reveal more of an improvement than that?

Originally Posted by Rinzler

(Though this has already been addressed) I wonder why Angels & Demons and not The Da Vinci Code?

I might guess that Angels and Demons has a 4K DI and The Da Vinci Code does not.

[42041]

Originally Posted by tylergfoster

Don't you think a new from-negative scan will reveal more of an improvement than that?

I might guess that Angels and Demons has a 4K DI and The Da Vinci Code does not.

Both of those films had 4K DIs, from what I recall perusing ASC magazine backissues.

Ghostbusters, between being optical-heavy, shot on anamorphic lenses and first generation high-speed film, is unlikely to ever give Avatar a run for its money, but for my taste, the room for improvement is more than "marginal".

[HD Goofnut]

Originally Posted by tylergfoster

Don't you think a new from-negative scan will reveal more of an improvement than that?

In the words of Conan, "We shall see."

[Maggot]

Originally Posted by rickah88

"These “Mastered in 4K” Blu-ray titles—paired with the native 4K titles for Sony’s 4K video distribution service, which is planned to be launched in summer 2013 in the US"

So does that.

No 4k physical media player format out there at this time? Simple.....NO SALE

[HD Goofnut]

Originally Posted by Maggot

No 4k physical media player format out there at this time? Simple.....NO SALE

It's coming. The studios know they will make more money if they develop a physical outlet on top of the digital one for 4K.

[Maggot]

Originally Posted by HD Goofnut

It's coming. The studios know they will make more money if they develop a physical outlet on top of the digital one for 4K.

But quit calling it Blu-ray and just say it's a new format, cause it is. We need a physical media disc/solution that can handle the increased resolution and file sizes, we need a player to read that and possibly to output via a new type of connector/cable. That's the only way this can be done right. The Ghostbusters disc shows it's on a 50GB Blu-ray disc. WTF. More compression? Like so many have said, this smacks of nothing more than marketing BS.