4K Blu-ray Confirmed, Coming in

[Dex Robinson]

I once posted that I didn't believe there would be a "consumer level" 4k disc format. If these DRM schemes come to pass (and we don't know for sure if they will), then I will stand by my predicition of no consumer level 4k discs.

In any media-based hobby, there will always be a hardcore group of users who will endure any inconvenience for perfection. That's why there are audiophiles today who buy expensive turnatables and tube amplifiers. But those folks are obviously removed from consumer level music buyers.

For the vast majority of home video consumers (which is the overwhelming majority of people who don't frequent forums), movies are something that they buy on disc or get through the internet. Blu-ray.com users may see that as an oversimplification but I think it accurately describes most people. Guys like me buy discs...I like to own* my movie collection and I like the quality of the presentation. A lot people like the convenience of getting their movies via a streaming service or download.

Trying to convince either group that watching a movie will require both a disc AND an internet connection will be a very hard sell. As a disc buyer, I have no interest in buying items that require me to connect to the 'net for further authorization. And people who already get their movies on the 'net would laugh at the idea of buying a disc and connecting to the net. The idea of a net-authorized physical format is an idea that probably has virtually no appeal to 90% of movie buyers.

But there are the hardcore buyers who will bite. And that's OK. We all have hobbies that we overspend on and make no sense to anybody else. I don't criticize people who buy $3,000 turntables and tube amps...they don't criticize me for (occassionally) spending $50.00 on a cigar. But tube amps, Cohibas, and net-authorized 4K discs will never be consumer level products.



*Yes, I know buying a disc doesn't mean I "own" the movie but we all understand what I'm talking about.

[Penton-Man]

Originally Posted by Wendell R. Breland

...I will say the Sony FDR-AX1 pictures (YouTube shorts) just knocks me off my feet for a $4,500 camera system.

For shooters, there is software coming out in May (a new version of Catalyst Prepare and the first offering of a totally new product - Catalyst Edit )….

New Sony Catalyst Edit Software - YouTube

[Geoff D]

I do like a nice Cohiba though, Dex. I'll be getting UHD BD come what may.

[Wendell R. Breland]

Originally Posted by Penton-Man

For shooters, there is software coming out in May (a new version of Catalyst Prepare and the first offering of a totally new product - Catalyst Edit )….

Will have to follow these and see what happens.

Looks like they should have used Prepare to correct for the camera mis-match between the close ups and the long shots of Bryant .

[AintNoSin]

Originally Posted by Dex Robinson

I once posted that I didn't believe there would be a "consumer level" 4k disc format. If these DRM schemes come to pass (and we don't know for sure if they will), then I will stand by my predicition of no consumer level 4k discs.

The only reason we're talking about these DRM schemes is that the Interweb loves a worst-case-scenario/conspiracy theory. We were having the same conversation ten years ago before BD and HD-DVD dropped and it didn't come to pass then either.

As much as the media companies might love this idea in principle, in reality it would be an absolute nightmare to execute and support out in the real world with customers.

[HeavyHitter]

I agree, I don't think it will happen either.

[Dex Robinson]

Originally Posted by AintNoSin

As much as the media companies might love this idea in principle, in reality it would be an absolute nightmare to execute and support out in the real world with customers.

Actually, I agree.

I really don't see the idea of internet required authorization being a reality.

That would kill UHD BD. Surely, the companies involved couldn't be that stupid.

[rdodolak]

It might not happen but it's already been discussed internally within the BDA.

[bailey1987]

Originally Posted by AintNoSin

The only reason we're talking about these DRM schemes is that the Interweb loves a worst-case-scenario/conspiracy theory. We were having the same conversation ten years ago before BD and HD-DVD dropped and it didn't come to pass then either.

As much as the media companies might love this idea in principle, in reality it would be an absolute nightmare to execute and support out in the real world with customers.

EA's SimCity springs to mind if anyone knows what a farce that was.

[Geoff D]

The leaked Sony documents show that there are two stages of AACS 2.0, a basic level and an enhanced one which requires the one-time authorisation. I could see it being implemented as basic for your run-of-the-mill catalogue title and enhanced for new releases.

And issues of disc 'ownership' aside, it seems to me like a great many people already have their player hooked up to the internet for whatever reasons, so it'll be a seamless process for such folks. Put disc in, it reaches out to the server, key gets downloaded, disc plays thereafter. There is always the question of folks without internet access whatsoever, but I have a hard time believing that hardcore 4K gearheads with no internet connection will number a great many people.

The question of how the managed copy fits in with this is the more pressing issue IMO. As folks have said, you can have a UV (or whatever) copy and once that's redeemed it'll be with you for as long as the movie is supported by the content provider, but how will the digital bridge work once you've migrated your copy across and then decide to sell the disc? Will it keep checking some sort of authentication database that includes your player for that movie? How will it even know that you've sold the disc on, seeing as all pressed discs will surely be identical? Just as digital copies have use-by dates, a sort of reverse situation might apply to the digital bridge: we might need to migrate it on a yearly basis (using the original disc, natch) in order to keep the copy 'active'. But if you have hundreds of the things, then that won't be so practical!

[HeavyHitter]

Originally Posted by Geoff D

The leaked Sony documents show that there are two stages of AACS 2.0, a basic level and an enhanced one which requires the one-time authorisation. I could see it being implemented as basic for your run-of-the-mill catalogue title and enhanced for new releases.

And issues of disc 'ownership' aside, it seems to me like a great many people already have their player hooked up to the internet for whatever reasons, so it'll be a seamless process for such folks. Put disc in, it reaches out to the server, key gets downloaded, disc plays thereafter. There is always the question of folks without internet access whatsoever, but I have a hard time believing that hardcore 4K gearheads with no internet connection will number a great many people.

The question of how the managed copy fits in with this is the more pressing issue IMO. As folks have said, you can have a UV (or whatever) copy and once that's redeemed it'll be with you for as long as the movie is supported by the content provider, but how will the digital bridge work once you've migrated your copy across and then decide to sell the disc? Will it keep checking some sort of authentication database that includes your player for that movie? How will it even know that you've sold the disc on, seeing as all pressed discs will surely be identical? Just as digital copies have use-by dates, a sort of reverse situation might apply to the digital bridge: we might need to migrate it on a yearly basis (using the original disc, natch) in order to keep the copy 'active'. But if you have hundreds of the things, then that won't be so practical!

I don't have an internet connection in my theater room as I use it strictly for Blu-ray viewing. If I had to, I could just get a router. But how would this work with multiple players in the house? Taking the disc to a friend's house? And ownership is a big part of a physical format - what is the guarantee the studios are going to support the authentication down the road such as if/when they decide to no longer support the format? Zero. You'll have non functional discs on your shelf.

If this validation thing is required, I will not be supporting UHD BD.

[Geoff D]

The hint is in the "one time" part of the authentication process re: the discs themselves. Once the key is downloaded, then it should remain on that player in perpetuity. You'd need to do that with every other UHD player in the house - a process that could be as painless as putting the disc in and waiting a couple of minutes, and it's not like current discs load lightning quick anyway - but that's what WiFi is for, no?

I see molehills, others see mountains. Such is life.

[FilmFreakosaurus]

Originally Posted by Geoff D

The hint is in the "one time" part of the authentication process re: the discs themselves. Once the key is downloaded, then it should remain on that player in perpetuity. You'd need to do that with every other UHD player in the house - a process that could be as painless as putting the disc in and waiting a couple of minutes, and it's not like current discs load lightning quick anyway - but that's what WiFi is for, no?

I see molehills, others see mountains. Such is life.

You place more trust in the studios than most of us do or ever will.

These authentication servers do not last forever, which is a fact. If you update your player or buy one as a spare and the studio has pulled support for a particular title... you may be screwed.

[Geoff D]

That's as may be, although I don't plan to live forever. Look, folks need to realise that us being entrusted with such high-quality versions (not just pixel res but colour gamut, bit depth etc) of the studio's most prized assets is not going to come without some form of operational compromise on our behalf. Do I like it? Of course not. But the studios have become more and more concerned about protecting their content with every step of the home video journey, and I'm pragmatic enough to realise that UHD BD may come with certain restrictions, restrictions that I can live with in order to get my hands on some UHD goodies.

[FilmFreakosaurus]

Originally Posted by Geoff D

That's as may be, although I don't plan to live forever. Look, folks need to realise that us being entrusted with such high-quality versions (not just pixel res but colour gamut, bit depth etc) of the studio's most prized assets is not going to come without some form of operational compromise on our behalf. Do I like it? Of course not. But the studios have become more and more concerned about protecting their content with every step of the home video journey, and I'm pragmatic enough to realise that UHD BD may come with certain restrictions, restrictions that I can live with in order to get my hands on some UHD goodies.

It will do nothing to stop piracy. Even the studios know this. It will only allow them more control over regular paying customers and their pocket books.

You're too willing to give up a lot to these corporations. They're not your friends and they can't be trusted.

[HeavyHitter]

Originally Posted by Geoff D

That's as may be, although I don't plan to live forever. Look, folks need to realise that us being entrusted with such high-quality versions (not just pixel res but colour gamut, bit depth etc) of the studio's most prized assets is not going to come without some form of operational compromise on our behalf. Do I like it? Of course not. But the studios have become more and more concerned about protecting their content with every step of the home video journey, and I'm pragmatic enough to realise that UHD BD may come with certain restrictions, restrictions that I can live with in order to get my hands on some UHD goodies.

To each his own.

But you may not have to live forever in order for your discs to become nonoperational. If the format falls after a few years (which is very possible even without validation) do you really think they are going to provide validation support your $30-40 movie for years to come?

UHD BD has a huge mountain to climb without this kind of crap; something like this would be a nail in the coffin as it tries to launch. There will be A LOT of resistance.

[Esox50]

Originally Posted by Dex Robinson

I don't criticize people who buy $3,000 turntables and tube amps...they don't criticize me for (occassionally) spending $50.00 on a cigar. But tube amps, Cohibas, and net-authorized 4K discs will never be consumer level products.

In fact, they should criticize people who spend <$5 on a cigar, also referred to as a "dog rocket".

Are Cohibas really $50 these days? Wow, I guess maybe in the UK and Canada where they have the "sin tax" that doubles the price. I'm still finishing off my aged 2002 Siglo II & Robustos. Habanos SA has been out of control with the prices the last 10 years though...so maybe they are $50 a stick now. There are lot of standard production Habanos that are up there with Cohibas. Specifically Saint Luis Rey uses tobacco from the same three plots in pinar del rio, but post production of the raw materials is a little different. You also cannot beat a good Punch Punch (super duper for aging) or H. Upmann Mag 46.

Anyway, back on topic. I have never had my blu-ray player connected to the internet. Could I? Sure, but I just don't see the point. I plug in a hard wired connection when i need a firmware update. I don't trust these companies, and I have zero use for BD-Live content. If I had to have a connection for watch UHD Blu, I guess I would have no choice since i expect the experience to be better than the theater. I want a 80"+ TV when I go 4K. My sound system is just about 2nd to none. So, with the UHD BD, why bother going to the theater? I can smoke ribs, smoke a cigar, and not have to deal with people talking, face booking, texting, etc...and get a better experience overall in my home.

[Dex Robinson]

Originally Posted by Esox50

Are Cohibas really $50 these days?

Yeah...I have a Maduro 5 Genios that retails for about 59.99 here in Canada. I've got ONE that I'm saving for a warm summer day.

Here I am smoking a slightly smaller Maduro 5 last year (perhaps a Secretos?)

[Show spoiler]

Back on topic...I could hook my player to the 'net but I've also avoided doing so. Fact is that I have had issues with my home network over the years (my ISP once did a system upgrade that bricked my router). In simple terms, it's just a layer of complication that I don't want to deal with. I've had various problems over the years with other forms of net based authorization. I once "authorized" a new cable box online and got a screen saying "Congratulations. Authorization was successful"...and I had no TV for the next three days!

I don't need anything else between me and my movie. As far as I concerned, the long history of physical media from wax cylinder music to cassettes and Blu-ray has worked fine: buy the media, put it in player, enjoy.

[Geoff D]

Originally Posted by FilmFreakosaurus

It will do nothing to stop piracy. Even the studios know this. It will only allow them more control over regular paying customers and their pocket books.

You're too willing to give up a lot to these corporations. They're not your friends and they can't be trusted.

You keep talking to me as if I'm just lying there spreadeagled, beckoning the corporations to control all aspects of my life 24/7, but search for some of my posts with the word Sony in, you'll see I'm no "friend" of theirs. I don't watch much TV and I'm not on facebook or twitter either, so perhaps I'm more immune to the beguiling charms of the corporate machine than most? And you'll forgive me if I think you doth protest too much about the big bad businesses, seeing as you're the biggest cheerleader for Dolby Atmos on this forum.

We've got a choice coming up: it's either UHD on disc with a few inconvenient (but hardly 'end of the world') restrictions, or UHD on physical media will fold and we'll get streaming/DL UHD content only, whereby all of these noble eulogies about 'owning' something goes out of the window regardless. I don't know about y'all but my internet is absolutely shit (and I'm in no position to start paying silly money every month for a faster service) so UHD streaming is out of the question.

It's UHD disc or bust which is why I'm willing to accept certain restrictions, but it's a pragmatic choice, not a way of life.

[FilmFreakosaurus]

Originally Posted by Geoff D

You keep talking to me as if I'm just lying there spreadeagled, beckoning the corporations to control all aspects of my life 24/7, but search for some of my posts with the word Sony in, you'll see I'm no "friend" of theirs. I don't watch much TV and I'm not on facebook or twitter either, so perhaps I'm more immune to the beguiling charms of the corporate machine than most? And you'll forgive me if I think you doth protest too much about the big bad businesses, seeing as you're the biggest cheerleader for Dolby Atmos on this forum.

We've got a choice coming up: it's either UHD on disc with a few inconvenient (but hardly 'end of the world') restrictions, or UHD on physical media will fold and we'll get streaming/DL UHD content only, whereby all of these noble eulogies about 'owning' something goes out of the window regardless. I don't know about y'all but my internet is absolutely shit (and I'm in no position to start paying silly money every month for a faster service) so UHD streaming is out of the question.

It's UHD disc or bust which is why I'm willing to accept certain restrictions, but it's a pragmatic choice, not a way of life.

I extoll Dolby Atmos and DTS:X only because I've experienced them both personally and they're great products that truly advance surround technology to the next stage. If they were just a bunch of marketing B.S. there's no way I would be so "up" on them.

However, Dolby and DTS are not asking me to chain myself to a server that may or may not continue to operate in order to listen to their "proprietarily" encoded 3D soundtracks. The studios may be doing so this time around, which would make physical discs no better than the internet download version with restrictive DRM.

You may not think so, but there is a difference.