4K Movies Releases

[Kris Deering]

Originally Posted by Penton-Man

All is well, thanks for asking.
In fact my wife and I are considering vacation house-hunting (a northern vacation getaway this time) like in the coastal region of Washington state. Do you have any recommendation(s) for a quaint town up there similar to something like the old town area of Annapolis, or if you haven’t been there, something like Victoria in B.C. ?

We don’t require a ‘historical’ town per se, more like seaside living.

I've been to Annapolis but I don't think you'll find something quite as historic as that. Off the top of my head, Gig Harbor, Poulsbo or Port Townsend would all be very nice. These are all on the sound though, not the oceaside, which tends to be cold and dank (along with deserted). If you wanted a coastal town I would recommend Canon Beach area of the Oregon coast. But if you are hunting the Washington recommendations give me a buzz, all of those are a stones throw from me!

[scorpiontail60]

Originally Posted by Wendell R. Breland

What STB and/or tuner card are you using to receive 3840x2160? Software?

I have been using Prof 7301, TSReader and GEOSATpro microHD for PBS (1920x1080) on AMC-21.

You need a PC. Only a PC can support playback of this.

I use MPC-HC. VLC can also play the channel.

TSReader is the software I use to lock onto the channel.

Now the tuner, that's a problem. I have a Prof 7301 as well, and it cannot lock the channel properly. Something is strange about how Hispasat is uplinking this.

It only works with a professional grade tuner that can do 16APSK/32APSK as well, even though it is a 8PSK feed. Weird.

The TBS 6925 is the only card I have that receives this feed properly without errors. The USB version of this card, TBS 5925, can also reportedly receive it fine as well. The cheaper TBS variants that cannot do 32APSK like the TBS 5922 do not work.

[Penton-Man]

Originally Posted by Kris Deering

I've been to Annapolis but I don't think you'll find something quite as historic as that. Off the top of my head, Gig Harbor, Poulsbo or Port Townsend would all be very nice. These are all on the sound though, not the oceaside, which tends to be cold and dank (along with deserted). If you wanted a coastal town I would recommend Canon Beach area of the Oregon coast. But if you are hunting the Washington recommendations give me a buzz, all of those are a stones throw from me!

Thanks, ‘on the sound’ is fine.

[Penton-Man]

Originally Posted by Penton-Man

...Not elucidated yet on imdb Tech spec…http://www.imdb.com/title/tt2209764/...ef_=tt_dt_spec but a 4K digital master was produced.

And the following won't be specified, so here ya go...

Transcendence DCP specs:

Feature Run Time 1:59:06
Image Format: 4K 4096x1716 (scope)
Audio 5.1/7.1
File size for 5.1 = 147GB, add on 11GB for 7.1

P.S.
Note to film projection theater fans (Sap, etc.), WB is running with only 75 film prints….so, choose your local theater carefully.

[Kris Deering]

While I am MORE than happy with film CAPTURE I can't honestly remember the last time I saw something presented on film that trumped a good DCP. I thought the 70mm presentation of The Master was probably the closest. But even The Dark Knight and The Dark Knight Rises in IMAX (film) was a disappointment for the most part. Not that all digital cinemas are great, but I've seen some absolutely amazing digital presentations with projectors from Barco and Christie that look like they were calibrated and focused perfectly. Those images resonated with me far more than any film PLAYBACK I can remember. I am going to see 2001 in 70mm next month so maybe that will be something. But I'm also going to be seeing Close Encounters of the Third Kind from a DCP along with Alien and Aliens. Also attending a Q&A with Trumball after both CETK and 2001.

[Richard Paul]

Originally Posted by saprano

Aren't we in Phase 1 right now?

I think the chart from Harmonic is a bit pessimistic and that we will see elements listed as Phase 2 earlier than 2018. The companies with 4K products shipping this year aren't necessarily objective about the future. They want customers to buy the 4K products they release this year.

Originally Posted by Penton-Man

Just in case you’re interested and you’d prefer to follow the development of open source HDR standards, this is a good place to begin…http://w3.cost.eu/index.php?id=110&action_number=IC1005

The Dolby gamma curve sounds nice on a technical level though I do wonder whether a proprietary standard could replace the traditional gamma curve (I believe that even the licensing terms for the Dolby gamma curve are under NDA).

Originally Posted by Penton-Man

Nearly full coverage is theoretically achievable, but there needs to be improvement from the current state of affairs….https://forum.blu-ray.com/showthread...ed#post8832110

which, as an aside, the BVM-F’s (top of the mastering line) almost completely cover SMPTE RP 431-2-2007 (DCI P3), except for a tiny bit of the chromaticity of the green-red region.

The professional OLED monitor Sony announced probably won't be 100% of the Rec. 2020 color space but to make to worth while it only needs to be noticeably better than DCI P3.

[Kris Deering]

Penton,

I've heard from a few insiders that 2020 doesn't look like it will be in the cards for quite some time due to the hardware limitations. I almost think P3 would be a better fit considering the vast amount of material already mastered for it. The more I think about UHD the more I think we should just adopt the same standard as DCI for the home. UHD should cover BOTH 1080p and 2160p based on what is actually available from the studio for whatever title (like you have in theaters). This provides a bit more reassurance to me that we won't see a bunch of upscales posing as true 4K (too many 4K captured films with 2K DI's to make me think that we'll be getting true end to end 4K). This also helps the studio productions that can't afford 4K (just about ALL of them). Give us P3 gamut, 12-bit 4:4:4 (these of course are regardless of whether we have 1080p or 2160p) and support for higher framerates.

I could live with that. It would match the cinema model a bit more and would probably be WAY easier to implement until eventually they can get all these pipe dreams more fleshed out and viable (REC2020, HDR). They can even add object based audio and the like.

Thoughts??

[Penton-Man]

Originally Posted by Richard Paul

The professional OLED monitor Sony announced probably won't be 100% of the Rec. 2020 color space but to make to worth while it only needs to be noticeably better than DCI P3.

And, if one had to choose, which do people think would be more ‘worthwhile’….namely HDR with P3 color vs. LDR (traditional display) imagery supporting B.T.2020? This also brings us back to our original discussion from months ago where we were teasing apart these different picture quality parameters and I posed the question as to which 4K augmentation parameter will/would come first to consumers…wide color gamut, HDR, or HFR?

With Dolby Vision accumulating diverse partners from the realms of color grading, content provider and consumer electronics companies, I would say to expect seeing HDR movie content (Dolby Vision) on supporting devices in consumers’ homes by the end of this year or early next year.

[Penton-Man]

Originally Posted by Kris Deering

Penton,....
Thoughts??

This morning if my wife is already googling realtors in Gig Harbor (I emailed her your post this a.m.)

Anyway, B.T. 2020 colorimetry has a hard row to hoe. Your proposal to make these enhancements (wide color gamut, HDR, HFR) resolution agnostic is actually what many independent ‘pure’ engineers would like to happen because of the bandwidth savings of 1080p with all of the above vs. 4K with all of the above.

Thing is though, from a business standpoint, the consumer electronics industry has decided that in order to ‘sell’ next gen video (at least initially), stakeholders are going to have to first jump on the back of increased spatial resolution (4K). It doesn’t bother me too much, but I kind of draw the line at 4K with no wish to proceed to 8K because that would be a tremendous bandwidth hog as well as not being very practical for most consumers (they’d have to cut their current 4K viewing distance by about half in order to reap the resolution benefit with 8K, or else purchase much, much larger display devices).

[saprano]

Originally Posted by Kris Deering

While I am MORE than happy with film CAPTURE I can't honestly remember the last time I saw something presented on film that trumped a good DCP. I thought the 70mm presentation of The Master was probably the closest. But even The Dark Knight and The Dark Knight Rises in IMAX (film) was a disappointment for the most part. Not that all digital cinemas are great, but I've seen some absolutely amazing digital presentations with projectors from Barco and Christie that look like they were calibrated and focused perfectly. Those images resonated with me far more than any film PLAYBACK I can remember. I am going to see 2001 in 70mm next month so maybe that will be something. But I'm also going to be seeing Close Encounters of the Third Kind from a DCP along with Alien and Aliens. Also attending a Q&A with Trumball after both CETK and 2001.

I disagree. Film always looks better than digital imo. 70mm is another story. I have yet to see a digital camera amaze me the same way i was when i first saw TDK back in July 2008.

Speaking of IMAX. What's going with the laser projectors that's suppose to equal 70mm? These current 2 2K nonsense ain't cutting it. It's still not going to be enough though.

[Kris Deering]

Originally Posted by saprano

I disagree. Film always looks better than digital imo. 70mm is another story. I have yet to see a digital camera amaze me the same way i was when i first saw TDK back in July 2008.

Speaking of IMAX. What's going with the laser projectors that's suppose to equal 70mm? These current 2 2K nonsense ain't cutting it. It's still not going to be enough though.

So you're saying that a film showing of a movie looks better than a digital one? I'm not talking about capturing the movie, I'm talking about the showing of the film at a theater. Even at the Arclight with "good" prints I don't think it holds a candle to a well setup digital projector, 2K or 4K. IMAX 70mm looks great for bright scenes but the contrast is WRETCHED and makes anything dark look so washed out. I thought TDKR was painful to watch in IMAX 70mm. The Master looked a lot better but it is a bright movie most of the time. Film always has too many knicks and cuts and unsteady image that looks soft, even with a fairly new print.

[singhcr]

Originally Posted by Kris Deering

So you're saying that a film showing of a movie looks better than a digital one? I'm not talking about capturing the movie, I'm talking about the showing of the film at a theater. Even at the Arclight with "good" prints I don't think it holds a candle to a well setup digital projector, 2K or 4K. IMAX 70mm looks great for bright scenes but the contrast is WRETCHED and makes anything dark look so washed out. I thought TDKR was painful to watch in IMAX 70mm. The Master looked a lot better but it is a bright movie most of the time. Film always has too many knicks and cuts and unsteady image that looks soft, even with a fairly new print.

If you have a good projector and projectionist, film prints can look much better than digital showings.

I recently saw Stray Dog and High and Low in 35mm at a very small theater (20 seats) in Minneapolis. The prints had a number of scratches on them but I saw a level of overall detail, sharpness, and a pleasing organic smoothness to the image that I have not seen in some time. Compared to a DCP, a film print is much more natural looking with richer color. To me it is like comparing vinyl to a CD. The analog sound is smooth, nuanced and detailed without the harshness you get with digital sound.

While I can see excellent DCPs of movies, film is my favorite way to see a movie. I don't know why, but I get much more involved in a movie when it's projected on film. I saw Lawrence of Arabia in 4K and while I was very impressed with the image, it just didn't have the same color richness as the 70mm print I saw. Don't even get me started on the sound downgrade from the 70mm magnetic 6-track sound to the PCM sound on the DCP.

As for TDKR, are you talking about the 35mm sequences, or the IMAX ones? The 35mm shots can look bad due to the digital DMR process, but the dynamic range of IMAX is far beyond any digital color space system. 2D IMAX is the most detailed image system to date.

[saprano]

Originally Posted by Kris Deering

So you're saying that a film showing of a movie looks better than a digital one? I'm not talking about capturing the movie, I'm talking about the showing of the film at a theater. Even at the Arclight with "good" prints I don't think it holds a candle to a well setup digital projector, 2K or 4K. IMAX 70mm looks great for bright scenes but the contrast is WRETCHED and makes anything dark look so washed out. I thought TDKR was painful to watch in IMAX 70mm. The Master looked a lot better but it is a bright movie most of the time. Film always has too many knicks and cuts and unsteady image that looks soft, even with a fairly new print.

A properly setup projector should yeild a superior presentation. Digital projectors preserve their quality, but there's something special about watching film. Even with all the flaws you mentioned.

[Penton-Man]

4K pricing and availability announced today…https://blog.sony.com/press/28213/
Along with that ^ theme…http://advanced-television.com/2014/...-fold-in-2014/

Anticipation ….

Carly Simon - Anticipation - YouTube

[saprano]

Originally Posted by singhcr

If you have a good projector and projectionist, film prints can look much better than digital showings.

I recently saw Stray Dog and High and Low in 35mm at a very small theater (20 seats) in Minneapolis. The prints had a number of scratches on them but I saw a level of overall detail, sharpness, and a pleasing organic smoothness to the image that I have not seen in some time. Compared to a DCP, a film print is much more natural looking with richer color. To me it is like comparing vinyl to a CD. The analog sound is smooth, nuanced and detailed without the harshness you get with digital sound.

While I can see excellent DCPs of movies, film is my favorite way to see a movie. I don't know why, but I get much more involved in a movie when it's projected on film. I saw Lawrence of Arabia in 4K and while I was very impressed with the image, it just didn't have the same color richness as the 70mm print I saw. Don't even get me started on the sound downgrade from the 70mm magnetic 6-track sound to the PCM sound on the DCP.

As for TDKR, are you talking about the 35mm sequences, or the IMAX ones? The 35mm shots can look bad due to the digital DMR process, but the dynamic range of IMAX is far beyond any digital color space system. 2D IMAX is the most detailed image system to date.

Keira Knightley about vinyl records - YouTube

[Richard Paul]

Originally Posted by Kris Deering

I've heard from a few insiders that 2020 doesn't look like it will be in the cards for quite some time due to the hardware limitations. I almost think P3 would be a better fit considering the vast amount of material already mastered for it. The more I think about UHD the more I think we should just adopt the same standard as DCI for the home.

OLED can do much better than the DCI P3 color space and current RGB laser projectors can do 100% of the Rec. 2020 color space. I think the major studios dislike the Rec. 2020 color space simply because it will lead to the awkward position that TV shows might have better color than movies or that movies shown at home might have better color than movies shown in movie theaters. We might not see consumer displays that support the Rec. 2020 color space until 2016 but I expect the ATSC 3.0 standard, which will be finished in late 2015, to support it.

Originally Posted by Penton-Man

And, if one had to choose, which do people think would be more ‘worthwhile’….namely HDR with P3 color vs. LDR (traditional display) imagery supporting B.T.2020?

I don't know what people would prefer though I personally am more interested in better color. Dolby is heavily promoting HDR so more people know about it and more news articles have been released about it.

[saprano]

think the major studios dislike the Rec. 2020 color space simply because it will lead to the awkward position that TV shows might have better color than movies or that movies shown at home might have better color than movies shown in movie theaters.

Heh.

[Steedeel]

Originally Posted by Penton-Man

4K pricing and availability announced today…https://blog.sony.com/press/28213/
Along with that ^ theme…http://advanced-television.com/2014/...-fold-in-2014/

Anticipation ….

Carly Simon - Anticipation - YouTube

'Let the games begin'

[img eL]

Originally Posted by Steedeel

'Let the games begin'

The games will not begin until next month when all the new Sony UHDTV's are scheduled to be released. Me I'm waiting for the new UHDTV's Vizio's who knows when those will be released

[Steedeel]

Originally Posted by img eL

The games will not begin until next month when all the new Sony UHDTV's are scheduled to be released. Me I'm waiting for the new UHDTV's Vizio's who knows when those will be released

I just wanted an excuse to talk in that strange voice and quote Bane. Very geekish I know!