Panasonic UB820/UB9000 4K UHD Blu-ray player

[stmhlm]

Does anyone know if the volume control using the balanced XLR's ever was implemented in an easier accessible manner, rather than from the main menu?

This applies to the DP-UB9000 only.


See Vincent's take on it below, back in 2019, it's at the 1:42 mark.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?t=102&...ature=youtu.be

[Yogi6807]

Originally Posted by stmhlm

Yogi6807, you have DP-UB9000 or DP-UB820? Figured I should add player/s in my disc compatibility issue list, you mentioned Ghost In The Shell '95?

I have an 820 and 420. I don’t own any of the discs that have dv problems. Geoff d had a much more thorough post with all the discs with problems.

[stmhlm]

Originally Posted by Geoff D

Calling All Cars! (written by stmhlm for attention)

Geoff, I was searching these forums for an answer about 23.976/24p support from streaming apps and stumbled upon 1080p24 file playback concerns.
My understanding is that files with a resolution width of 3840 pixels will be rendered at the proper 23.976/24p rate.
But, any file with a resolution width less than that will be forced with 60p playback by the Panasonic players.
Is that still the case up to this very bright and beautiful day, still?

Also, would you happen to know more about the 60p limitation from streaming apps, is that a limitation by the apps themselves, or Panasonic?

Much appreciated.

[Geoff D]

The file playback support is so poor on the Pannysonics that I didn’t know it even had such a limitation on 1080p24 files (and if I did know, I’d clean forgotten it existed because I can’t remember the last time I even attempted to play a file on it). TBH it’s not worth chasing up as Panny don’t feel that file playback is a kosher means of entertainment on their decks, hence no lossless Dolby/DTS support either. Boy, it’s been a while since someone mentioned the latter in this thread

For streaming apps I believe the 60p limitation is 100% at Panasonic's end.

[stmhlm]

https://forum.blu-ray.com/showpost.p...postcount=3054

https://forum.blu-ray.com/showpost.p...postcount=3060

https://forum.blu-ray.com/showpost.p...postcount=3061

https://forum.blu-ray.com/showpost.p...postcount=3062

https://forum.blu-ray.com/showpost.p...postcount=3063

He never reported back, fml.
I have emailed Robert for more confirmation, these all seem like very stupid software limitations by Panasonic.
I can fully understand their part on lossless proprietary audio codecs, could perhaps be a demand from Blu-ray Disc Association or god knows who/whom.
But 60p only streaming and 60p 3:2 pulldown for 1080p24 files is rather stupid, play them, just don't play the audio then, right?

Thanks for your help.

[Wormicide]

He always says he’ll talk to Panasonic but then there’s no update. They’d have done something by now if he has the clout he says he does.

[stmhlm]

Originally Posted by chip75

I'll post some pictures of what I suggested about 4:3, but Panasonic in the past have said, "it is what it is...".

Please post your findings as soon as possible, the sooner the better, I have noted two concerns, 4:3 OSD distortion and triple-layer UHD disc issues.

[chip75]

Originally Posted by stmhlm

Please post your findings as soon as possible, the sooner the better, I have noted two concerns, 4:3 OSD distortion and triple-layer UHD disc issues.

I was hoping that my images that I sent Panasonic were still on my PC, but they're not. I'll take some tonight and post ASAP.

[EddieLarkin]

I can't see mention of it myself, but I assume the DV clipping issue has been brought up? Or was it determined that this was an issue on Dolby's end only?

A feature I would LOVE on any player (or TV for that matter) would be a "matte" addition to the crop and zoom controls. This would add 4:3 black bars to the image being displayed, whilst leaving the underlying image untouched. This way a show like Buffy or X-Files or The Shield could be recropped back to their original 4:3 state, instead of being opened up to 16:9.

[stmhlm]

Originally Posted by EddieLarkin

I can't see mention of it myself, but I assume the DV clipping issue has been brought up? Or was it determined that this was an issue on Dolby's end only?

What exactly do you refer to when you say clipping?

These, aside from DV disc playability issues, and the raised black level on DV disc initialization, are the current Dolby Vision related issues I have:

1) Rec.709/BT.709 chroma upsampling instead of Rec.2020/BT.2020
2) Ignores chroma weight trim pass control in Low Latency Mode, LLDV

Did you mean any of the above?

Originally Posted by EddieLarkin

A feature I would LOVE on any player (or TV for that matter) would be a "matte" addition to the crop and zoom controls. This would add 4:3 black bars to the image being displayed, whilst leaving the underlying image untouched. This way a show like Buffy or X-Files or The Shield could be recropped back to their original 4:3 state, instead of being opened up to 16:9.

Do us all a massive favour, please illustrate what you want/mean, step by step, with pictures, a lot easier for people all over the world to understand.
We all have different mother tongues and what comes across crystal clear in your head might take 10 posts to clear up for someone else.
I'm not saying I'm daft, but pictures tells more than a thousand words, right?

Microsoft Paint would do, remember to label the active image's aspect ratios, paint out letterboxing/pillarboxing.

Thank you.

[chip75]

Originally Posted by EddieLarkin

I can't see mention of it myself, but I assume the DV clipping issue has been brought up? Or was it determined that this was an issue on Dolby's end only?

A feature I would LOVE on any player (or TV for that matter) would be a "matte" addition to the crop and zoom controls. This would add 4:3 black bars to the image being displayed, whilst leaving the underlying image untouched. This way a show like Buffy or X-Files or The Shield could be recropped back to their original 4:3 state, instead of being opened up to 16:9.

This could be added with the disc (remember DisneyView or whatever (I called it Disney Curtains™) it was called on Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs?

It should be standard for anything opened up, whether 4:3 to 16:9 or 1.85:1 to 16:9.

But I've been saying for years it would be a neat feature (along with variable ratios for projector users).

[EddieLarkin]

Originally Posted by stmhlm

What exactly do you refer to when you say clipping?

These, aside from DV disc playability issues, and the raised black level on DV disc initialization, are the current Dolby Vision related issues I have:

1) Rec.709/BT.709 chroma upsampling instead of Rec.2020/BT.2020
2) Ignores chroma weight trim pass control in Low Latency Mode, LLDV

Did you mean any of the above?



Do us all a massive favour, please illustrate what you want/mean, step by step, with pictures, a lot easier for people all over the world to understand.
We all have different mother tongues and what comes across crystal clear in your head might take 10 posts to clear up for someone else.
I'm not saying I'm daft, but pictures tells more than a thousand words, right?

Microsoft Paint would do, remember to label the active image's aspect ratios, paint out letterboxing/pillarboxing.

Thank you.

No problem.

So the DV clipping issue is detailed here:

https://forum.blu-ray.com/showpost.p...postcount=4101

Highlight detail that is visible in HDR10 is clipped out on DV, precisely the opposite of what DV is supposed to be doing. This doesn't happen with other players (apart from Pioneer which have the same problem IIRC).

There was some discussion about this being a problem limited to LG TVs, and/or something to do with player-led only DV, but neither is the case. On my Panny HZ2000, the problem exists in both TV led and player led DV.

As for a matting feature, see below:

Original 16:9 image:



With player generated 4:3 matting:



It's simply a method of correcting aspect ratios. Options for 1.85:1 and 2.35:1 matting would be good too.

[stmhlm]

Originally Posted by EddieLarkin

https://forum.blu-ray.com/showpost.p...postcount=4101

It's simply a method of correcting aspect ratios. Options for 1.85:1 and 2.35:1 matting would be good too.

Thanks for posting that link, I will send it to Panasonic.

About the so called 'matting' (I have never come across the term before) it sounds very similar to what a Source Direct mode would achieve.
Not to confuse or mix up the two, I think they can be uniquely distinguished.

Matting, seem to be about aspect ratios and aspect ratio control, for a correct presentation, staying true to the director's intent.
Source Direct, however, is more tied to resolution, staying true to source resolution, at least that's what I make of it, am I right on that point?
Other members have pointed out more refined A/R controls, one point on my list is a 16:9 WIDE feature, stretching 4:3 horizontally, eliminating pillarboxing.

You basically want a feature that sets up aspect ratios for your 16:9 container, scaling whatever aspect ratio content that's in there to the set matting?
What I'm trying to say is, for example, you set it to 1.85:1, 'matting' up a 1.85:1 container on the screen (TV) leaving minor letterboxing on top and bottom.
Then, if you were to display 4:3 content, it would fill the available active image area left once the 1.85:1 'matting' has been applied, stretching it horizontally?

TV's are always a bit tricky when it comes to aspect ratio control, because they always choose to fit by width, instead of height as in projection.
Personally I find control of aspect ratios very important, please come back on the issue so we can detail it further to Panasonic, and clear up my confusions.

[Misioon_Odisea]

Originally Posted by Misioon_Odisea

2.- Disc menu navigation is painfully slow on several Disney Blu-rays. It takes about six seconds in average for the player to react to remote control prompts. Movie playback itself works properly otherwise. Once again no such problem exists with my Sony UBP-X700. Example of offending titles? Wreck-it-Ralph, The Emperor's New Groove, The Great Mouse Detective and Tarzan. Must be something relating to Disney's way of software implementation on those discs released during that era.

UPDATE: I checked again to verify that the problem persists, and I found out that Wreck-it-Ralph is not one of the affected discs. I did find out however, that The Hunchback of Notre Dame is another of the Disney discs with slow disc menu navigation. Problem still remains in other mentioned discs. I apologize for the mix-up.

[Show spoiler]

Also wanted to clarify that player Firmware is Version 1.64, which is the original one the device came with. No attempts to exchange or unofficially update the player's firmware has been made.

[stmhlm]

Originally Posted by Misioon_Odisea

UPDATE: I checked again to verify that the problem persists, and I found out that Wreck-it-Ralph is not one of the affected discs. I did find out however, that The Hunchback of Notre Dame is another of the Disney discs with slow disc menu navigation. Problem still remains in other mentioned discs. I apologize for the mix-up.

Also wanted to clarify that player Firmware is Version 1.64, which is the original one the device came with. No attempts to exchange or unofficially update the player's firmware has been made.

Thank you for that information, I will update my document, and thanks for letting me know your firmware version.

EDIT: By the way, are the menus slow on both discs in The Hunchback of Notre Dame I & II?

EDIT: I missed that Emperor's/Kronk's New Groove was a 2-disc set, only issues with Emperor's, nothing on Kronk's?

[Misioon_Odisea]

Originally Posted by stmhlm

Thank you for that information, I will update my document, and thanks for letting me know your firmware version.

EDIT: By the way, are the menus slow on both discs in The Hunchback of Notre Dame / The Hunchback of Notre Dame II?

Yes, Menu navigation is slow on both The Hunchback of Notre Dame and The Hunchback of Notre Dame II (both films come in one disc). Same scenario with The Emperor's New Groove and Kronk's New Groove; Two films with separate menus each on only one Blu-ray disc, and both menus are slow (as is the movie selection screen).

Thank you for taking the time to attend to all of our concerns. I wish a solution can come out but if nothing can be done then alas but at least we did our best at it.

[EddieLarkin]

Originally Posted by stmhlm

Thanks for posting that link, I will send it to Panasonic.

About the so called 'matting' (I have never come across the term before) it sounds very similar to what a Source Direct mode would achieve.
Not to confuse or mix up the two, I think they can be uniquely distinguished.

Matting, seem to be about aspect ratios and aspect ratio control, for a correct presentation, staying true to the director's intent.
Source Direct, however, is more tied to resolution, staying true to source resolution, at least that's what I make of it, am I right on that point?
Other members have pointed out more refined A/R controls, one point on my list is a 16:9 WIDE feature, stretching 4:3 horizontally, eliminating pillarboxing.

You basically want a feature that sets up aspect ratios for your 16:9 container, scaling whatever aspect ratio content that's in there to the set matting?
What I'm trying to say is, for example, you set it to 1.85:1, 'matting' up a 1.85:1 container on the screen (TV) leaving minor letterboxing on top and bottom.
Then, if you were to display 4:3 content, it would fill the available active image area left once the 1.85:1 'matting' has been applied, stretching it horizontally?

TV's are always a bit tricky when it comes to aspect ratio control, because they always choose to fit by width, instead of height as in projection.
Personally I find control of aspect ratios very important, please come back on the issue so we can detail it further to Panasonic, and clear up my confusions.

No not quite, there would no need for scaling or stretching of the image at all. The underlying image would be untouched, all the player is required to do is to generate black bars in the chosen aspect ratio, to cover over the native image on the disc. If you look at the X-Files example again, you'll see the geometry of the image has not been changed, all that has been achieved is the sides of the image have been hidden. This is all that is needed and it is something one would only need to use with full 16:9 content.

The term matte is the same as mask for the purposes of this discussion:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Matte_...screen_filming

[EddieLarkin]

To put it another way, standard AR controls are usually used to REMOVE black bars that are on a disc, i.e. stretching 4:3 to 16:9 or zooming 2.35:1 to 16:9.

This feature would ADD black bars to 16:9 content, that's all.

[stmhlm]

Originally Posted by EddieLarkin

To put it another way, standard AR controls are usually used to REMOVE black bars that are on a disc, i.e. stretching 4:3 to 16:9 or zooming 2.35:1 to 16:9.

This feature would ADD black bars to 16:9 content, that's all.

I'm still not quite there with you, I apologize.

16:9 content to me is 16:9, i.e. 1.78:1, filling the complete 16:9 container on the blu-ray disc and your TV/most projectors.

1.85:1 content is 1.85:1, not 16:9 and/or 1.78.1, but the container is still 16:9 as all discs are mastered within a 16:9 container.

A disc that has an active image area of 2.40:1 is actually 16:9, but actual video footage is 2.40:1 causing letterboxing if you're on a 16:9 display/projector.

To me, if you ADD black bars to 16:9 content, something will be masked and cropped away.

I'm sorry for not understanding, I'm mostly coming from the projector side of things in this discussion, where we usually mask and COVER parts of the image.

COVER to me is the same as masking, and you tell me masking is similar or the same thing as matting.

Why would you want to cover/mask/matting parts of the active image area?


I probably got it all wrong, but I need to explain to you my thinking for us to both understand what you're trying to tell.

Thanks for your patience.

[EddieLarkin]

Originally Posted by stmhlm

I'm still not quite there with you, I apologize.

16:9 content to me is 16:9, i.e. 1.78:1, filling the complete 16:9 container on the blu-ray disc and your TV/most projectors.

1.85:1 content is 1.85:1, not 16:9 and/or 1.78.1, but the container is still 16:9 as all discs are mastered within a 16:9 container.

A disc that has an active image area of 2.40:1 is actually 16:9, but actual video footage is 2.40:1 causing letterboxing if you're on a 16:9 display/projector.

To me, if you ADD black bars to 16:9 content, something will be masked and cropped away.

I'm sorry for not understanding, I'm mostly coming from the projector side of things in this discussion, where we usually mask and COVER parts of the image.

COVER to me is the same as masking, and you tell me masking is similar or the same thing as matting.

Why would you want to cover/mask/matting parts of the active image area?


I probably got it all wrong, but I need to explain to you my thinking for us to both understand what you're trying to tell.

Thanks for your patience.

No, you understand completely now. Cover/mask/matting all mean the same thing in this context, we are indeed trying to mask parts of the active image area. Why? Because some shows were shot on 3 perf Super35, which has a native aspect ratio of around 16:9, BUT the shows at the time were composed for the inner 4:3 ratio.

When it comes to HD mastering, studios are taking the full image area so they can produce 16:9 masters for release. But it results in things like this:



Even though the cameras captured a 16:9 area, the creators did not always protect the far ends of the image, because they expected they would always be shown in 4:3.

A feature on a player would allow one to add those black bars back in, and hide the crew members that are obviously not supposed to be seen.