4K Blu-ray Confirmed, Coming in

[bruceames]

According to this March 2015 article, 81 percent of homes have an HDTV player. So if 90 percent of those have a Blu-ray player, than 73% of all U.S. homes have a Blu-ray player. I'm a little skeptical about that.

[octagon]

Originally Posted by bruceames.

According to this March 2015 article, 81 percent of homes have an HDTV player. So if 90 percent of those have a Blu-ray player, than 73% of all U.S. homes have a Blu-ray player. I'm a little skeptical about that.

Yeah, that definitely seems a little exaggerated but it might not be totally off base. As of early 2014 BD household penetration was a little under forty percent. Could it have almost doubled in a year and a half?

Yeah, maybe. It could definitely be up over sixty.

[Mavrick]

Originally Posted by Wendell R. Breland

IIRC, those devices do get counted as a BD player.

At least they do at Amazon, the PS4 was the top selling Blu-ray player in their rankings recently.

http://www.amazon.com/gp/bestsellers...C3RKRV8BG510YV

[raygendreau]

"Consumers transition from disc to digital is impacting adoption of Blu-ray Disc players and along with it their value as a digital distribution platform. This shift in ranking makes TVs a more popular digital distribution platform than Blu-ray Disc Players, although often these devices are built by the same company"

https://www.npd.com/wps/portal/npd/u...ording-to-npd/

So, the adoption rate of BD players is a weak argument for the adoption of UHD BR, since BD and UHD BR players are/will used for streaming and downloading as well as playing DVDs.

[raygendreau]

Home Media Magazine discusses the NPD report:

"There were about 140 million people in the United States who still used a disc player in 2014, with household penetration around 81%, according to Nielsen.

The number of disc player users fell 1.7% year-over-year in the third quarter — and time spent with a disc player declined 2.4% to 5 hours and 16 minutes per month."

http://www.homemediamagazine.com/res...-players-35331

[Paul.R.S]

Originally Posted by MisterXDTV

What an interview!

Everything was "No, we don't know, it's up to the product, Ask the studios"

Just what I expected......

Format doomed before it even comes out.....

No, I just think we (unfortunately) have to keep waiting for studio announcements to answer the many marketing and pricing questions. Sure would be nice if we got some meat--title announcements--at IFA instead of having to wait until CES.

[Penton-Man]

Originally Posted by bailey1987

Here's something: http://thedigitalbits.com/columns/my...ts/072315_1800

Well, hell, I’ll “like” Bill if he’s feeling under-appreciated ….[Editor’s Note: Be sure to like TheDigitalBits.com page on Facebook for breaking news, site updates on the go, discussion with our staff and other readers, giveaways and more!]

[Penton-Man]

Originally Posted by bruceames.

I hope Bill has a 'part 2' today, where he addresses the question we all want to know the answer to; the details of the copy protection to be used. Or maybe that's question not to be asked.

Yes, the Press needs to ask more hard ball questions, for instance -
Is the investment cost for a 100GB replication line still too high to justify anyone other than Sony to offer doing them? - https://forum.blu-ray.com/showthread...b#post10785215

Next-Generation Blu-ray: Let’s Get it Right
p. 10 of https://79de0cd99c7320731ddf-a498bc8...er_2014-15.pdf

[FilmFreakosaurus]

Originally Posted by Penton-Man

Well, hell, I’ll “like” Bill if he’s feeling under-appreciated ….[Editor’s Note: Be sure to like TheDigitalBits.com page on Facebook for breaking news, site updates on the go, discussion with our staff and other readers, giveaways and more!]

Not one person seemed to ask about DRM restrictions like those in the newest AACS standards that talk about keys tethered to the cloud rather being on the disc.

That will be a make or break scenario for me and many others. I do not want an expensive rental disc subject to the whims of the studios.

[Penton-Man]

Originally Posted by FilmFreakosaurus

Not one person seemed to ask about DRM restrictions like those in the newest AACS standards that talk about keys tethered to the cloud rather being on the disc.

That will be a make or break scenario for me and many others. I do not want an expensive rental disc subject to the whims of the studios.

There’s a real lack of hard charging reporters in the AV world, ala someone like Mike Wallace (http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articl...ter-dies-at-93) with many of these *interviews* you see posted online being little more than infomercials….not to mention, the *cat toying with the mouse* practice of Stay tuned for Part 2……and Part 3, etc.

[MisterXDTV]

House penetration doesn't mean anything....

A Blu-ray player is also a streaming player and a DVD Player.

Blu-ray software sales are still poor today compared to DVD.

Same will be true for 4K: a huge number of 4K TVs sold, doesn't mean that people are gonna buy 4K discs. They can still use current players with no problem to watch DVD, Blu-ray and VOD services.

Just a tiny percentage will feel the need to buy a new expensive player just for these discs

[Geoff D]

Originally Posted by bruceames.

90 percent does seem a little high. What's the percentage of homes that have HDTV? I guess it would have to be quite high also, at least by now. If so, then it's obvious that a lot of people who own Blu-ray players aren't buying Blu-rays to feed them.

I hope Bill has a 'part 2' today, where he addresses the question we all want to know the answer to; the details of the copy protection to be used. Or maybe that's question not to be asked.

Edit: Just thought that they must be including the XB1 and PS3/PS4s in that 90%. Still seems high though...

Hunt's been so down on 4K BD's prospects I'm surprised he hasn't leapt at the chance to ask questions like that so he can take the answer and turn it into the sort of doom-laden reportage he's normally putting out.

[film11]

Originally Posted by MisterXDTV

House penetration doesn't mean anything....

A Blu-ray player is also a streaming player and a DVD Player.

Blu-ray software sales are still poor today compared to DVD.

Same will be true for 4K: a huge number of 4K TVs sold, doesn't mean that people are gonna buy 4K discs. They can still use current players with no problem to watch DVD, Blu-ray and VOD services.

Just a tiny percentage will feel the need to buy a new expensive player just for these discs

Agreed. 4K BD will be a smaller market than 3D or laserdisc. Heck, after a couple years, there's still barely any content for it. Not to mention that 8K is also being worked on. That being the case, I call 4K a stop-gap between BD and 8K, just as DVD was between laserdisc and HD. Knowing that HD was coming (and even already existed on overseas laserdiscs). I skipped over DVD except for rentals. I'll most likely be doing the same with 4K discs. (And that's assuming I even bother getting an expensive player that doesn't even support 3D.).)

[bluearth]

Originally Posted by film11

Agreed. 4K BD will be a smaller market than 3D or laserdisc. Heck, after a couple years, there's still barely any content for it. Not to mention that 8K is also being worked on. That being the case, I call 4K a stop-gap between BD and 8K, just as DVD was between laserdisc and HD. Knowing that HD was coming (and even already existed on overseas laserdiscs). I skipped over DVD except for rentals. I'll most likely be doing the same with 4K discs. (And that's assuming I even bother getting an expensive player that doesn't even support 3D.).)

8K is overkill. Believe me I love progress in technology and want to support new things, but for applications in the home it is 100% useless overkill. I have a hard time imaging 8K being useful on anything other then 100"+ projectors. I have a 70" 4K TV and the pixels seem just as small as my 24" 1080p monitor. I can stand inches away from a 4K video on my TV and not notice any noteworthy loss in quality. I may be wrong, but after experiencing 4K, 8K seems like pointless overkill for home applications.

But lets say your right and 4K is a stop gap between 1080 and 8K like DVD was from VHS to 1080. Are you telling me you're fine with sticking with 1080p for the next 10 years? Because thats how long its going to be before 8K will even sniff the light of day. And even then, if you thought 4K has little content, especially quality content, wait until you see the crumbs 8K has to offer.

IMO the future of home display technology is not 8k, rather a full transfer over to 2.40:1 sets and broadcasts, OLED as standard, quality 3D without glasses, 1/2" thick panels, etc etc.

I think 4K will be the end of the line in terms of the resolution race for a very long time.

Its going to be nearly impossible for 4K UHD bluray to be smaller then 3D. In 4-5 years the only TV available to buy at the stores will be 4K UHD. Thats far different then 3D which only a few models support.

[raygendreau]

8K/16K Virtual Reality. On the way to the Holodeck.

http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/beh...ing-use-789370

[film11]

Originally Posted by bluearth

8K is overkill. Believe me I love progress in technology and want to support new things, but for applications in the home it is 100% useless overkill. I have a hard time imaging 8K being useful on anything other then 100"+ projectors. I have a 70" 4K TV and the pixels seem just as small as my 24" 1080p monitor. I can stand inches away from a 4K video on my TV and not notice any noteworthy loss in quality. I may be wrong, but after experiencing 4K, 8K seems like pointless overkill for home applications.

But lets say your right and 4K is a stop gap between 1080 and 8K like DVD was from VHS to 1080. Are you telling me you're fine with sticking with 1080p for the next 10 years? Because thats how long its going to be before 8K will even sniff the light of day. And even then, if you thought 4K has little content, especially quality content, wait until you see the crumbs 8K has to offer.

IMO the future of home display technology is not 8k, rather a full transfer over to 2.40:1 sets and broadcasts, OLED as standard, quality 3D without glasses, 1/2" thick panels, etc etc.

I think 4K will be the end of the line in terms of the resolution race for a very long time.

Its going to be nearly impossible for 4K UHD bluray to be smaller then 3D. In 4-5 years the only TV available to buy at the stores will be 4K UHD. Thats far different then 3D which only a few models support.

One can also say that 4K would only be useful on TVs 55" or larger. I know someone with a 47" 4K set and he sees no difference in what he views. Nor did I.

As for sticking with 1080p...hell, broadcasters are still using 1080i!! So 4K will have a very small footprint. Most likely my next purchase will be a 3D projector. Aside from there being tons of content (with more coming out nearly every month) along with the depth that 4K doesn't provide (as far as I have seen), 3D provides more "bang for the buck" recreating the theater experience.

And for 8K, I agree that it may indeed be overkill...but no one was screaming for 4K either. Yet it's here anyway. And on larger sets, it does provide a very clean image...so don't get me wrong; I'm not knocking it. It's just not a game changer. It's not like it's akin to the difference between VHS and DVD. It may be 10 years before 8K, it may be 6...no one can say. But considering its use with VR (and anyone who complains about the lightweight 3D glasses but has no problem with those headsets should shut up! :-) ), they may be surprise us.

I do hope you're right about 2:40 sets...but I don't see the industry changing the ratio in any large-scale way.

Glasses-free 3D? I've seen it (UltraD)...not impressed. Better viewing from angles but when it comes to "pop-outs/extensions", it's not even close to the effect with glasses.

As for only a few TV models supporting 3D, looking at the Best Buy website, there are about 53 4K 3D models listed. Samsung alone has eight of ten 65 inch and seven of ten 55 inch models with 3D. I do know that whenever the time comes for me to get a new stand-alone set, it will be a 4K one (because it exists...I just won't be buying 4K BDs) that also includes 3D. I do know that 4K sets certainly enhance 3D content more than it does with other sources. 3D does look better on a 4K set than a standard one (even if it doesn't approach the "you-are-there" immersion offered by a projector.) Plus, maybe by then, there might actually be some 4K content to watch (but most likely still only a pittance). Going forward, I'll never buy another set that wasn't 3D-capable in any format.

[FilmFreakosaurus]

Originally Posted by film11

One can also say that 4K would only be useful on TVs 55" or larger. I know someone with a 47" 4K set and he sees no difference in what he views. Nor did I.

As for sticking with 1080p...hell, broadcasters are still using 1080i!! So 4K will have a very small footprint. Most likely my next purchase will be a 3D projector. Aside from there being tons of content (with more coming out nearly every month) along with the depth that 4K doesn't provide (as far as I have seen), 3D provides more "bang for the buck" recreating the theater experience.

And for 8K, I agree that it may indeed be overkill...but no one was screaming for 4K either. Yet it's here anyway. And on larger sets, it does provide a very clean image...so don't get me wrong; I'm not knocking it. It's just not a game changer. It's not like it's akin to the difference between VHS and DVD. It may be 10 years before 8K, it may be 6...no one can say. But considering its use with VR (and anyone who complains about the lightweight 3D glasses but has no problem with those headsets should shut up! :-) ), they may be surprise us.

I do hope you're right about 2:40 sets...but I don't see the industry changing the ratio in any large-scale way.

Glasses-free 3D? I've seen it (UltraD)...not impressed. Better viewing from angles but when it comes to "pop-outs/extensions", it's not even close to the effect with glasses.

As for only a few TV models supporting 3D, looking at the Best Buy website, there are about 53 4K 3D models listed. I do know that whenever the time comes for me to get a new stand-alone set, it will be a 4K one (because it exists...I just won't be buying 4K BDs) that also includes 3D. I do know that 4K sets certainly enhance 3D content more than it does with other sources. 3D does look better on a 4K set than a standard one (even if it doesn't approach the "you-are-there" immersion offered by a projector.) Plus, maybe by then, there might actually be some 4K content to watch (but most likely still only a pittance). Going forward, I'll never buy another set that wasn't 3D-capable in any format.

The 3D capable 4k sets are only really for 1080p Blu-ray 3D content. It's for backwards, not forwards compatibility.

[lippil]

Originally Posted by raygendreau

Home Media Magazine discusses the NPD report:

"There were about 140 million people in the United States who still used a disc player in 2014, with household penetration around 81%, according to Nielsen.

The number of disc player users fell 1.7% year-over-year in the third quarter — and time spent with a disc player declined 2.4% to 5 hours and 16 minutes per month."

homemediamagazine com research/npd-connected-tv-ownership-tops-blu-ray-disc-players-35331

IF these numbers are accurate it is not from surveys, but from illegal spying through bdlive, power-line date collection

also could just be completely made up numbers to control and make people think what they want them to think, regardless of facts

[bailey1987]

Bills posted a follow up:

http://thedigitalbits.com/columns/my...ts/072415_1345

He doesn't say much and its all just an assumption.

"Also today, I wanted to post a quick follow-up on our Ultra HD Blu-ray post from yesterday. There’s been a lot of speculation to suggest that 3D is being somehow abandoned in the 4K space, but that’s not the right read of the Q&A. Essentially, the BDA is making sure to get the base layer of the spec right, and then any add-ons like 1080p BD3D or 4K 3D support will be added later, probably a decision driven by the individual player and display manufacturers. My personal guess is that many of the early 4K Ultra HD Blu-ray players will include backwards support for Blu-ray 3D and all the other stuff (DVD, CD, SACD, DVD-Audio, etc). Then as those manufacturers begin getting into the true 4K 3D display business (right now any 4K displays that do 3D do so in 1080p), that feature will get added to players. And I suspect the next big push for that will happen when autostereoscopic displays are ready. Anyway, the point is, don’t assume that current Blu-ray 3D is going to simply be abandoned by the manufacturers, or that future 4K 3D isn’t still possible at some point."

[bailey1987]

My main gripe with 3D not being included with the initial spec is that Ultra HD was supposed to be the quick fix to a bad situation. I had just spent £2999 on a Pioneer Kuro the year before 3D came along, I refused to buy a new TV so I just decided to wait it out as 4K had been mentioned to be on the horizon as early as when the 3D Blu-ray spec came along. As such 3D won't be included in the spec which doesn't fix my current situation it will only adds to the problem. As such I won't be buying a new TV until they are Ultra HD 3D, and I mean Full Ultra HD 3D not 1080p 3D on a Ultra HD BD.

I will get a player though and enjoy 2D content, unless the price is astronomical.