4K Blu-ray Confirmed, Coming in

[Penton-Man]

Originally Posted by dvdmike

Herafud and watch out for the coffee cup

So you’re not just a pretty face who posts on Blu-ray.com and makes YouTube videos...you do watch movies from time to time.
For your reward, a colorfully constant pic not of….da brain, but….De eye (googlers shant find this pic on the internet) –



P.S. There’s cones in dar ^ .

[Penton-Man]

Originally Posted by Penton-Man

...We viewed the dress photo again this morning on not just any calibrated display, but one calibrated (not by me) with a Photo Research spectroradiometer, latest CalMAN software, test pattern generators, i.e. the whole 9 yards.

(as an aside, a plug for those locals in need of calibration(s) –
http://www.solvengineering.com/

Anyway, today’s observation yielded the same mixed results as seen at home last night with me and my better half as sole ‘study’ participants viewing on our more crudely calibrated desktop monitor running Windows. She still sees gold and white, whereas, I see her gold as black and her white as blue.

So, given perfect conditions, or the *perfect storm* if you will, it is not unusual for people to perceive colors differently with certain content. In fact, research regarding the concept of the diversity of human perception of color was recently presented to a Study group at a recent SMPTE standards meeting as previously noted about 30 pages back -

I guess I should add to the above ^ discourse, for the sake of completeness that the photo of the dress was viewed precisely not at 1% but rather 2% room lighting, so a little less subdued compared to last year.

[Penton-Man]

Where’s mike? Wake up, no sleeping on the job! Since HDR will naturally enhance the inherent grain and sensor noise, be it celluloid or digital source, are you fearful of a little bit of DNR applied to dem HDR remasters of upcoming Ultra HD Blu-ray catalog titles? I think I recall you liking your grain completely unmolested.

Do you think any induced grain/noise management will prove a problem for critical viewers with the HDR iterations?

[dvdmike]

Originally Posted by Penton-Man

Where’s mike? Wake up, no sleeping on the job! Since HDR will naturally enhance the inherent grain and sensor noise, be it celluloid or digital source, are you fearful of a little bit of DNR applied to dem HDR remasters of upcoming Ultra HD Blu-ray catalog titles? I think I recall you liking your grain completely unmolested.

Do you think any induced grain/noise management will prove a problem for critical viewers with the HDR iterations?

Hdr is all round a problem for me, and yes that will be a huge issue for me.
Do I like dnr? Nope do I understand why it is used? Yep totally, on a show shot on film that is.
Now what is crazy is when the morons at Disney dnr a digital animated movie, or worse this where they dnr digital noise from an all digital production?
Yeah no, hdr is the emperors new clothes

[Penton-Man]

Originally Posted by dvdmike

Hdr is all round a problem for me, and yes that will be a huge issue for me.
Do I like dnr? Nope do I understand why it is used? Yep totally, on a show shot on film that is.
Now what is crazy is when the morons at Disney dnr a digital animated movie, or worse this where they dnr digital noise from an all digital production?
Yeah no, hdr is the emperors new clothes

I don’t think you’re being open-minded enough about what HDR has to offer…perhaps a bit sensitized by excessively dnr-ed Blu-ray movies by some content providers in the past? I never got to watch your grain YouTube clip of the past…I was just informed about it by someone over at Technicolor.

The quality gained by granting more contrast (HDR) to the movie content, be it film or digital acquisition, should easily be a fair tradeoff for removing a little grain or noise that is over emphasized by the process to begin with.

You’re a tough nut to crack mike. It might take Quentin Tarantino someday doing an HDR grade of Hateful Eight to convince you of the merits of the process.

[Penton-Man]

Originally Posted by dvdmike

Disney...animated movie...

On a side note, John Lasseter is one of the best bosses there is . After Big Hero 6 was completed, he gave many members of the team a long sabbatical off from the job. I don't believe that fact was reported in the news media or any internet forum.

[Penton-Man]

Originally Posted by Penton-Man

I asked my wife today to keep me up to speed with any social media news on "the dress", so she sent me this – http://www.nbcnews.com/politics/poli...r-says-n316281

Today I receive this -

Ellen DeGeneres Settles the Great Dress Debate Once and For All! - YouTube

[FilmFreakosaurus]

Originally Posted by Penton-Man

Today I receive this -

Ellen DeGeneres Settles the Great Dress Debate Once and For All! - YouTube

My life is complete now.

[Richard Paul]

Originally Posted by NuJazz

May somebody confirm this information?

The information released about Ultra HD Blu-ray indicates that it won't support 3D video, the 3D HEVC standard that was released last month only supports 8-bit video, and it will be at least two years before see 10-bit 3D HEVC decoders. So 3D won't be in the initial Ultra HD Blu-ray standard but will most likely be added as an optional extension a few years from now.

Originally Posted by dvdmike

Yeah no, hdr is the emperors new clothes

I think that HDR has a good chance though its long term future is murky since we don't know which HDR method will be used (absolute luminance or relative luminance), which HDR systems will be used, which bit depth will be needed to get rid of banding, and which percentage of movies will use HDR well.

[dvdmike]

Originally Posted by Penton-Man

I don’t think you’re being open-minded enough about what HDR has to offer…perhaps a bit sensitized by excessively dnr-ed Blu-ray movies by some content providers in the past? I never got to watch your grain YouTube clip of the past…I was just informed about it by someone over at Technicolor.

The quality gained by granting more contrast (HDR) to the movie content, be it film or digital acquisition, should easily be a fair tradeoff for removing a little grain or noise that is over emphasized by the process to begin with.

You’re a tough nut to crack mike. It might take Quentin Tarantino someday doing an HDR grade of Hateful Eight to convince you of the merits of the process.

I do not like the look hdr produces, too contrasty and not at all very realistic.

[Penton-Man]

Originally Posted by dvdmike

I do not like the look hdr produces, too contrasty and not at all very realistic.

Now I think I understand your mindset.
The fundamental issue may not so much be related to increasing the traditionally delivered dynamic range of the source, but rather, you enjoy the aesthetic of film (celluloid) far more than that of digital acquisition, in the first place. And what you’ve seen of professionally graded HDR content at trade shows and such has all been derived from digital acquisition.

Skip thru The Blacklist and Annie, did you look at the HDR v.SDR illustrative pics of The Amazing Spider-man 2 in the CineAlta article which I linked on page 90 of this thread? Do you truly find the SDR images more pleasing to the eye?

[dvdmike]

Originally Posted by Penton-Man

Now I think I understand your mindset.
The fundamental issue may not so much be related to increasing the traditionally delivered dynamic range of the source, but rather, you enjoy the aesthetic of film (celluloid) far more than that of digital acquisition, in the first place. And what you’ve seen of professionally graded HDR content at trade shows and such has all been derived from digital acquisition.

Skip thru The Blacklist and Annie, did you look at the HDR v.SDR illustrative pics of The Amazing Spider-man 2 in the CineAlta article which I linked on page 90 of this thread? Do you truly find the SDR images more pleasing to the eye?

I may be gone in the head, but all the SDR images looked way better to me, and like film.
Why on earth would you want film to look digital?
And I am far from a digital hater

[AintNoSin]

Originally Posted by dvdmike

I do not like the look hdr produces, too contrasty and not at all very realistic.

Don't base your opinion on photographs that are obviously HDR. HDR that calls attention to itself is mostly bad HDR. In that way, HDR is a lot like CGI.

Trust me, you've seen plenty of HDR photos that you liked. You just didn't know they were HDR because it was subtly done and didn't call attention to itself...

[dvdmike]

Originally Posted by AintNoSin

Don't base your opinion on photographs that are obviously HDR. HDR that calls attention to itself is mostly bad HDR. In that way, HDR is a lot like CGI.

Trust me, you've seen plenty of HDR photos that you liked. You just didn't know they were HDR because it was subtly done and didn't call attention to itself...

I have used HDR on photos and video, and that is a presumptuous thing to say

[AintNoSin]

Originally Posted by dvdmike

I do not like the look hdr produces, too contrasty and not at all very realistic.

Originally Posted by dvdmike

I have used HDR on photos and video, and that is a presumptuous thing to say

What I said about HDR is true. It can be done subtly and without calling attention to itself.

[singhcr]

Originally Posted by Penton-Man

Now I think I understand your mindset.
The fundamental issue may not so much be related to increasing the traditionally delivered dynamic range of the source, but rather, you enjoy the aesthetic of film (celluloid) far more than that of digital acquisition, in the first place. And what you’ve seen of professionally graded HDR content at trade shows and such has all been derived from digital acquisition.

Skip thru The Blacklist and Annie, did you look at the HDR v.SDR illustrative pics of The Amazing Spider-man 2 in the CineAlta article which I linked on page 90 of this thread? Do you truly find the SDR images more pleasing to the eye?

I find the HDR digital images to be more pleasing to look at. While I still highly prefer film as an acquisition and distribution method, the HDR images provide more depth, shadow detail, and more nuances; exactly the things I value with film. Remember, true use of HDR just brings out details that were originally captured in the first place.

[dvdmike]

Originally Posted by AintNoSin

What I said about HDR is true. It can be done subtly and without calling attention to itself.

You presumed I have seen images not knowing that they had HDR, that is a reach and a very elitist statement

[Richard Paul]

For the HDR video what bit depth was used, what transfer function was used, and what display was used to view it? That would give us a better understanding of why you expect HDR to look bad when it is eventually used in consumer video.

[Penton-Man]

Originally Posted by AintNoSin

Trust me...

Lake Forest Man Welcome.

Don’t know if you’re aware but Oakley Headquarters is just a tad north of you in Foothill Ranch and imo worth a visit, some reviews – http://www.yelp.com/biz/oakley-o-store-foothill-ranch

I say this because your location sparked a synaptic association…since we’re talking here about dynamic range (which, for practical purposes, starts with the camera), Oakley was founded by the same guy (Jim J.) who founded Red Digital Cinema Camera Co., see the linked vimeo clip - https://forum.blu-ray.com/showthread...ey#post8008604

[Penton-Man]

Originally Posted by dvdmike

I have used HDR on photos and video

Mike, do you have any video files, even just samples of your work to share with us or at least of a pic of your equipment so we can see where you’re coming from? If not, how ‘bout a more detailed description of the materials and methods (workflow) used, e.g. camera(s) (recording format), especially the media encoder and player?

You’re not out of that group from Coventry are you? I ask this because I notice from your signature, you speak to compression. So with regards to your HDR usage on video, are you talking about compressing 32 bits per color channel using video shot with off-the-shelf cameras?