HDR Discussion Thread

[Waboman]

Originally Posted by Scottishguy

Pentons probably got a share in Vaule Electronics. Meh, whatever.

[Show spoiler]

I was referring more to the overuse of cryptic links. Got ya hopping all over the internet like a frog on a hot tin roof instead of simply saying it in the post. At least you're getting your frequent flyer miles URLs.

[Penton-Man]

Originally Posted by Scottishguy

Pentons probably got a share in Vaule Electronics.

excuse me, but if it has merit , I spread the happiness around - https://forum.blu-ray.com/showthread...o#post16639864

P.S.
which reminds me, where’s the Brit Agent Kay ?
Kay, here ya go - https://www.mensjournal.com/entertai...rick-and-more/

[Penton-Man]

Originally Posted by Waboman

I was referring more to the overuse of cryptic links.

Otherwise too simplistic and only for those who don’t enjoy thinking, or breaking out of the space of their personal bubble.

Better to be like human vision in regards to luminance, i.e. non-linear. My question to you Wabs is whether you would prefer to see the patrons in TG: M enter the bar during the day (since you do day drinkin), or on a starry night - https://forum.blu-ray.com/showthread...k#post15650436

[Robert Zohn]

Originally Posted by Scottishguy

Pentons probably got a share in Vaule Electronics. Meh, whatever.

The only thing Penton-Man and I share is our industry careers and our love for premium audio and video. We enjoy sharing the good word and helping others get the best performance from there a/v equipment and systems.

Penton-Man, Value Electronics and me are partners at a much higher level than any business relationship could ever have.

[Scottishguy]

Originally Posted by Robert Zohn

The only thing Penton-Man and I share is our industry careers and our love for premium audio and video. We enjoy sharing the good word and helping others get the best performance from there a/v equipment and systems.

Penton-Man, Value Electronics and me are partners at a much higher level than any business relationship could ever have.

So bromantic

[Penton-Man]

Originally Posted by Scottishguy

So bromantic

I keep telling you Scottish, you’ve got to get paid for your services (take initiative and form an ad agency, e.g. https://www.iconictalentagency.com/cinematography ) and sign Vincent T. as your first client. But you’ve got to be worldly well rounded…..what manager in the Premier (English, not Scottish) League could most pass for Tom Cruise’s brother?

[Penton-Man]

Originally Posted by Robert Zohn

The only thing Penton-Man and I share is our industry careers and our love for premium audio and video. We enjoy sharing the good word and helping others get the best performance from there a/v equipment and systems.

Penton-Man, Value Electronics and me are partners at a much higher level than any business relationship could ever have.

Well, in the spirit of being more comprehensive, I think we are also both health-conscious and fortunate enough to live in upscale neighborhoods; otherwise, that description is right on

[Penton-Man]

Originally Posted by Scottishguy

Meh, whatever.

meh on the sparks in the ^ fireplace, scroll down to Sparks for the real deal - https://opencontent.netflix.com/
and hyperlink to the Tech Blog

[Scottishguy]

Originally Posted by Penton-Man

I keep telling you Scottish, you’ve got to get paid for your services (take initiative and form an ad agency, e.g. https://www.iconictalentagency.com/cinematography ) and sign Vincent T. as your first client. But you’ve got to be worldly well rounded…..what manager in the Premier (English, not Scottish) League could most pass for Tom Cruise’s brother?

Dean Smith?

[Geoff D]

Originally Posted by Scottishguy

I'm currently watching Mank. Another Netflix film that makes you scratch your head and wonder how on Earth this has any mainstream appeal.

Why, it's almost as if they're planning to be the Anti-Disnee or something, so that when the Mouse takes over as Streaming's Number One Service and offers nothing but family-friendly pablum there'll be a massive amount of thoughtful, intelligent, well-made content on Netflix for all the growed-ups. Not just movies, but episodic shows too! If you haven't seen stuff like Queen's Gambit or Mindhunter yet then do so, as they're sublime.

[Geoff D]

Originally Posted by Penton-Man

I keep telling you Scottish, you’ve got to get paid for your services (take initiative and form an ad agency, e.g. https://www.iconictalentagency.com/cinematography ) and sign Vincent T. as your first client. But you’ve got to be worldly well rounded…..what manager in the Premier (English, not Scottish) League could most pass for Tom Cruise’s brother?

Easy: Scott Parker.

[Scottishguy]

Originally Posted by Geoff D

Why, it's almost as if they're planning to be the Anti-Disnee or something, so that when the Mouse takes over as Streaming's Number One Service and offers nothing but family-friendly pablum there'll be a massive amount of thoughtful, intelligent, well-made content on Netflix for all the growed-ups. Not just movies, but episodic shows too! If you haven't seen stuff like Queen's Gambit or Mindhunter yet then do so, as they're sublime.

Mank, if you haven't seen it, jumps between the early 40s and the mid 30s. There is zero exposition in the film about who these people are, the politics of Hollywood and the general politics of the US at the time.

The film just expects you to know all this implicitly. How many "normal" people are alive today are familar with that when it was popular culture?

So Netflix has essentially bankrolled a film that barely even 100,000 of their subscribers can properly engage with.

[Geoff D]

Originally Posted by Scottishguy

Mank, if you haven't seen it, jumps between the early 40s and the mid 30s. There is zero exposition in the film about who these people are, the politics of Hollywood and the general politics of the US at the time.

The film just expects you to know all this implicitly. How many "normal" people are alive today are familar with that when it was popular culture?

So Netflix has essentially bankrolled a film that barely even 100,000 of their subscribers can properly engage with.

You really are a strange fellow.

[Scottishguy]

Like it also only comes up at the end about Mankiewicz wanting his credit for Kane, which pretty much these days you have to be a film historian to know how big of deal that was.

But it suddenly just drops it in the film, and any poor sod who's probably lost beyond words at this point is really stumped.

They even have Orson at the beginning saying he's doing his Heart Of Darkness screen test, and that's cool. But, again, who the heck knows about the significance of that.

[Scottishguy]

Originally Posted by Geoff D

You really are a strange fellow.

I'll take that as a compliment. Thanks.

[Scottishguy]

And no Netflix aren't trying to become an arthouse streaming service on steroids. They are more than likely trying to build relationships with talent by doing films like Mank that make no commercial sense to try and get them to work on productions that are.

[Geoff D]

Originally Posted by Scottishguy

Like it also only comes up at the end about Mankiewicz wanting his credit for Kane, which pretty much these days you have to be a film historian to know how big of deal that was.

But it suddenly just drops it in the film, and any poor sod who's probably lost beyond words at this point is really stumped.

They even have Orson at the beginning saying he's doing his Heart Of Darkness screen test, and that's cool. But, again, who the heck knows about the significance of that.

I mean, it's not as if Netflix have previously distributed a renowned filmmaker's arty, indulgent, black and white film that harkened back to a forgotten era, making it all but impenetrable to the mainstream and which bored/baffled the average cinematically illiterate viewer in equal measure. And it's not like it gatecrashed the mainstream media by getting nominated for 10 oscars (winning three) and led some to question the very existence of cinema as a theatrical experience, garnering more headlines/advertising for Netflix than what even the best ad agency could conjure up. What? Oh.

Originally Posted by Scottishguy

And no Netflix aren't trying to become an arthouse streaming service on steroids. They are more than likely trying to build relationships with talent by doing films like Mank that make no commercial sense to try and get them to work on productions that are.

I not gonna lie, I had the exact same thought. What they are doing for arthouse/indie/non-mainstream film is akin to god's work right now, it's why filmmakers are flocking to them. If it does metamorphose into getting said filmmakers to make more commercial works, like an army of Nolans, then that's an example of why Netflix aren't as stupid/myopic as you think they are. As a company they've never sat still, always looking to innovate and get ahead of the curve (like with 'choose your own ending' stuff) and I see no indications of them stagnating any time soon.

Will there come a time when they can't innovate any more, short of finding a way to beam content directly into our brains? Sure, but then the same is true of any such successful entertainment business, I think even Disnee are going to feel a backlash - if not backlash, then boredom - with the excessive amount of Star Wars shows coming up because they didn't learn the lesson of what they did with the new Star Wars movies, that if you oversaturate the market then it's just not special any more.

I wonder how wrestling keeps on going, I tuned out about 10 years ago when I could telegraph all the heel/face turns well in advance and it became a bit too safe and sanitised, but people keep watching it in droves because they like the characters and soap-opera storylines as much as the action.

And all the while Netflix' subscriber numbers continue to soar during the pandemic, sinking their claws into ever more people who'll find it difficult to tear themselves away from the tellybox when/if normality ever returns, not to mention the generation of kids growing up in a post-theatrical world. You talk about cultural shifts but fail to see the one that's taking place in front of your very eyes.

[tvine2000]

Originally Posted by avs commenter

yeah, in a perfect world, all equipment would support all formats. but in this case, it's clear samsung is basically on an island with Hdr10+. doesnt seem like good business sense to me

If you put DV and HDR10+ SIDE BY SIDE you see no difference. Besides DV without a 12 bit panel is a dummy down version of DV. According to Dolby's own specs. Now that I said that watch the Dolby fanboys come out of the woodwork to defend Dolby who could care less along as long as they get your money.

[tvine2000]

Originally Posted by PeterTHX

Actually we don't.



Not to mention it really doesn't offer any benefit over the competition. It's really Samsung's attempt to avoid licensing costs at the same time collecting their own licensing (the "free" isn't true) and having their competitors share IP - which is a huge reason why Sony and LG will never support it.
And it's doubly ironic they're trying to build off of HDR10 - which Dolby released as an open standard.

What standard? you have 3 HDR formats how's that a standard? If your talking about Dolby's own specs then sure. I would think the step in TV tech would be 12 bit panels, but no ,nothing.

[Scottishguy]

Originally Posted by Geoff D

I mean, it's not as if Netflix have previously distributed a renowned filmmaker's arty, indulgent, black and white film that harkened back to a forgotten era, making it all but impenetrable to the mainstream and which bored/baffled the average cinematically illiterate viewer in equal measure. And it's not like it gatecrashed the mainstream media by getting nominated for 10 oscars (winning three) and led some to question the very existence of cinema as a theatrical experience, garnering more headlines/advertising for Netflix than what even the best ad agency could conjure up. What? Oh.


I not gonna lie, I had the exact same thought. What they are doing for arthouse/indie/non-mainstream film is akin to god's work right now, it's why filmmakers are flocking to them. If it does metamorphose into getting said filmmakers to make more commercial works, like an army of Nolans, then that's an example of why Netflix aren't as stupid/myopic as you think they are. As a company they've never sat still, always looking to innovate and get ahead of the curve (like with 'choose your own ending' stuff) and I see no indications of them stagnating any time soon.

Will there come a time when they can't innovate any more, short of finding a way to beam content directly into our brains? Sure, but then the same is true of any such successful entertainment business, I think even Disnee are going to feel a backlash - if not backlash, then boredom - with the excessive amount of Star Wars shows coming up because they didn't learn the lesson of what they did with the new Star Wars movies, that if you oversaturate the market then it's just not special any more.

I wonder how wrestling keeps on going, I tuned out about 10 years ago when I could telegraph all the heel/face turns well in advance and it became a bit too safe and sanitised, but people keep watching it in droves because they like the characters and soap-opera storylines as much as the action.

And all the while Netflix' subscriber numbers continue to soar during the pandemic, sinking their claws into ever more people who'll find it difficult to tear themselves away from the tellybox when/if normality ever returns, not to mention the generation of kids growing up in a post-theatrical world. You talk about cultural shifts but fail to see the one that's taking place in front of your very eyes.

If someone is throwing cash around, then of course filmmakers will flock. The problem is there's no guarantee scratching their backs will get a Netflix a scratch back.

I don't think Netflix is anywhere near stupid, or short sighted. They are high on innovation, but are just always going to be trapped by lack of diversification. They've prospered and grew in a market where they were the market, but now the multimedia giants are really setting up shop, that lack of diversification i feel will inevitably prove to be their undoing.

You don't seem to get the majority of their subscribers have no emotion attachment to Netflix. It is what it is because they, at present, are the main thing people associated with convince in popular consciousness. Once that association is broken, and people start to talk about other services, it's game over.

I ultimately think the fate Netflix is as a marquee name in TV show productions for some multimedia.