If it was filmed/mastered in 2k, I refuse to watch it in UHD

[TheHutt]

Hello,

This is a counter-thread to the existing "crappy BluRay" one. Fact is, many of the blockbusters from recent years announced now for release in 4K were either shot in 2K, or the Digital Intermediate/post-production pipeline was done in 2K. So in fact, for those titles, 4K offers no higher resolution than the standard BluRay.

Of course, some will reason about how UHD is more than just 4K because of HFR™, HDR™ etc. However, these are but negligible gimmicks. HDR cannot be just retro-fitted on older titles, and HFR is, well, rather controversial. So the baseline of this thread is: If a title is marketed as being in 4K, it should offer native 4K. Period.

Interestingly, older titles shot on film seem to be actually better off, as they can be just scanned in 4K resolution.

[StingingVelvet]

Not sure why I would refuse to watch a nice upscale, but I wouldn't say I was excited about it either. In some cases though, like The Martian, it seems they are going back in and using 4k footage with upscaled effects, which is cool.

Either way the format has to prove it's sticking around for me to buy-in.

[joie]

Can ordinary Blu-ray express the tonal range and color gamut captured by film? Digital? If not, why couldn't HDR be used to get home video closer to what was captured by the film/sensor?

[Jegærn]

Will not buy into the 4k stuff myself. It is nice to watch proper 4k content on a proper solid 4k tv though, but if I want upgrades, I want all the same as 1080p only better! Now that they have removed the posibillity of 4k 3D on the discs, there is simply no way in hell I`m gonna invest in the format. It is a dealbreaker for me. I have invested alot in my own home cinema room, with a 1080p 3D projector and a huge surround sound setup. The 3D on my setup is spectacular. Zero ghosting! Taking away the 3D posibility is just horrible.

[42041]

Well, 1080p is not 2K and quality lost to scaling and compression is not insignificant, but they goofed up on the spec when they didn't allow the unscaled DCP resolutions. The whole format seems ill-conceived to me and I'm not gonna rush out to support it.

[mogwai_macabre]

I love how everyone is swearing one side of the fence or another, without actually having seen a single movie on the new format.

I'll purchase whatever version looks the best for my favorite movies, and consider the cost/quality ratio for others.

[meremortal]

Originally Posted by mogwai_macabre

I love how everyone is swearing one side of the fence or another, without actually having seen a single movie on the new format.

I'll purchase whatever version looks the best for my favorite movies, and consider the cost/quality ratio for others.

Given that this is a movie enthusiast forum, I'm sure a number of folks here will change their tune when they have the audio and video gear to take advantage of the higher-rez discs, title availability has widened, and players have come down in price. Whether or not the general public will do the same is questionable as I don't really see UHD expanding beyond the more committed current blu ray collectors.

[TheHutt]

Originally Posted by 42041

Well, 1080p is not 2K and quality lost to scaling and compression is not insignificant

I suppose the difference between 2048 and 1920 pixels is negligible.

[HarcourtMudd]

Originally Posted by meremortal

Given that this is a movie enthusiast forum, I'm sure a number of folks here will change their tune when they have the audio and video gear to take advantage of the higher-rez discs, title availability has widened, and players have come down in price. Whether or not the general public will do the same is questionable as I don't really see UHD expanding beyond the more committed current blu ray collectors.

For many this will probably be true. For some, however, there are some considerations above simply the glitz of a better picture... like ownership. If the online authorization thing comes to fruition, no matter how you spin it, there will be no true ownership of UHD titles that have this requirement. This is the line in the cement many will not cross, regardless of how pretty the picture might be. While many might be satisfied with a glorified rental, many others will not play that game.... Where there is no ownership, there can be no "collecting" in the literal sense. I consider myself a movie enthusiast, but once I hand over my CC the umbilical cord is cut and cauterized. Once there is any question as to control, my funds go elsewhere. Period.

[PenguinMaster]

It sounds like you will be buying a UHD player and a 4K TV for the native 4K content. But you're not willing to pay an extra $2-$5 per movie for native 2K movies? I understand not wanting to upgrade your existing native 2K movies but not willing to pay a small premium for new releases based primarily on principle sounds a bit ridiculous.

They won't get as big of upgrade as the native 4K content but 2K content will still be improved and if it's only a little more expensive why not go for the best version you could possibly get? I don't expect to replace a lot of my existing Blu-ray titles but I'll stick with UHD for new releases regardless of the resolution it was filmed or mastered in.

[HarcourtMudd]

Not ridiculous at all. I simply refuse to play the "you actually only bought a license to watch the content of the disc, but ultimately we say if you can or not" game... Just because it might be "the best you can get," if I don't have final say and complete control (within the bounds of copyright, of course), I won't go there. I collect to OWN, not rent. It is not a matter of principle. It is a matter of what is more important to me: Ownership trumps "the latest and greatest."

I have no intention of buying anything to do with UHD... not a player, and only a 4k display when my 1080p plasma dies (and then only when they solve the motion artifacts, blackness level, and image retention problems).

[ThatOneGuy]

Originally Posted by HarcourtMudd

For many this will probably be true. For some, however, there are some considerations above simply the glitz of a better picture... like ownership. If the online authorization thing comes to fruition, no matter how you spin it, there will be no true ownership of UHD titles that have this requirement. This is the line in the cement many will not cross, regardless of how pretty the picture might be. While many might be satisfied with a glorified rental, many others will not play that game.... Where there is no ownership, there can be no "collecting" in the literal sense. I consider myself a movie enthusiast, but once I hand over my CC the umbilical cord is cut and cauterized. Once there is any question as to control, my funds go elsewhere. Period.

Wait, we are going to require authorizing the disk to be able to use it?

[PenguinMaster]

Originally Posted by HarcourtMudd

Not ridiculous at all. I simply refuse to play the "you actually only bought a license to watch the content of the disc, but ultimately we say if you can or not" game... Just because it might be "the best you can get,", if I don't have final say and complete control (within the bounds of copyright, of course), I won't go there. I collect to OWN, not rent. It is not a matter of principle. It is a matter of what is more important to me: Ownership trumps "the latest and greatest."

I have no intention of buying anything to do with UHD... not a player, and only a 4k display when my 1080p plasma dies (and then only when they solve the motion artifacts, blackness level, and image retention problems).

Sorry if I was unclear, but I was responding to the OP's point.

About your stance: I would never buy anything with online activation but I'm not going to avoid the format because it may have online activation on future titles. I'll just avoid the titles that have online activation. But none of that has anything to do with this thread and it doesn't need to be brought up in every thread about UHD.

[HarcourtMudd]

^^ Ahhhh, then we are on the same page...

Originally Posted by John Klein

Wait, we are going to require authorizing the disk to be able to use it?

Potentially. At this point, no-one knows for sure, but I would say it's a fair bet (the capability is in the specs)...

[PenguinMaster]

Originally Posted by HarcourtMudd

Potentially. At this point, no-one knows for sure, but I would say it's a fair bet (the capability is in the specs)...

It's a fair bet that there will be some titles that have online authentication, but if they sell worse than the titles that don't have online authentication then it will never become common.

[#Darren]

Originally Posted by mogwai_macabre

I love how everyone is swearing one side of the fence or another, without actually having seen a single movie on the new format.

I'll purchase whatever version looks the best for my favorite movies, and consider the cost/quality ratio for others.

Yes of course, and I'm sure we all would, if we had bags of money to spare...

[Canada]

Originally Posted by TheHutt

I suppose the difference between 2048 and 1920 pixels is negligible.

In less you have a huge projector or sit really close to your 2160p TV yes the resolution is not really all that noticeable. You will most likely notice a bigger difference with your TV if you have high dynamic range (HDR) and a wider colour gamut say P3.

[I KEEL YOU]

Originally Posted by joie

Can ordinary Blu-ray express the tonal range and color gamut captured by film? Digital? If not, why couldn't HDR be used to get home video closer to what was captured by the film/sensor?

I watched The Hateful Eight on 70mm a couple of weeks ago, took a long trip to get the 70mm experience. It was the first time I've watched a theatrical film presentation in a long time. I have to say that I certainly didn't experience a whole new world of colors I'm not used to when I watch blu rays at home. Looked to me that a blu ray could do a pretty good job of replicating the colors.

But I definitely did notice better contrast than I experience at home when candles and other sharp sources of light were shown. I don't know how much of that is to my TV not being good enough.

[noirjunkie]

Originally Posted by PenguinMaster

It's a fair bet that there will be some titles that have online authentication, but if they sell worse than the titles that don't have online authentication then it will never become common.

Microsoft tried something similar to this (but not exactly the same) with XBox One games, and we all know how that turned out. I don't see this being a viable business model for a format that already has high introductory price points and upgrade fatigue working against it.

[Ggould1975]

Well who knows what is bluray folks will be saying a few years? Or 5 years? Whatever. I think 4K ultra hd is a lot of hype I don't think it will catch on. I think it all comes down to they can try and try and try but it's just not going to work for the vast majority of people, I can see stores barely carrying it. For me, when it comes catalog titles for bluray especially is to just order them online. But everyone has there own opinion but I think it's nothing but just because it's a new fancy thing omg this is the best ever right? Like a Cash Grab 😀
However down the road if it works and becomes the new thing and it's doing well then I might get into it, and 5 years or so down the road I could change my mind just like anybody else and also think differently at that point.