4K Blu-ray Confirmed, Coming in

[ray0414]

http://www.forbes.com/forbes/welcome/ hands on review with a uhd player.

John archer has 20 years experience of reviewing tvs.

He doesn't get this excited unless it's the real deal.

I'd like to see anybody looking down at the 2k masters watch these in action tell me it's not thr best thing you've ever seen.mad Max is 2k

[Paul.R.S]

I had to Google search the site to find Archer's pieces and then it's the first one listed. Entitled "CES 2016: Hands On With Panasonic's DX900 'Honeycomb' TV And UB900 UHD Blu-ray Player."

[m3racer123]

Yep, here's the actual link to the article: forbes.com/sites/johnarcher/2016/01/07/ces-2016-hands-on-with-panasonics-dx900-honeycomb-tv-and-ub900-uhd-blu-ray-player/

For some reason this site doesn't allow hyperlinks to Forbes articles - it changes them to this: http://www.forbes.com/forbes/welcome/. That's stupid. You'll just have to copy and paste the above bold link into your search bar, or highlight, right click and click 'Go to...'.

[kristoffer]

So everyone and their mother are jumping on HDR, but I have to wonder if a film was not shot in HDR won't the presentation be less accurate compared to a non HDR version?

[MisterXDTV]

Originally Posted by kristoffer

So everyone and their mother are jumping on HDR, but I have to wonder if a film was not shot in HDR won't the presentation be less accurate compared to a non HDR version?

That's my opinion too, the question is not "how it was shot" that's not relevant but how "it was intended to be seen"

I'm really worried about this to be honest.

But this CES confirmed that at least 50% of the Ultra HD experience is based on HDR....

[m3racer123]

Originally Posted by kristoffer

So everyone and their mother are jumping on HDR, but I have to wonder if a film was not shot in HDR won't the presentation be less accurate compared to a non HDR version?

I think pretty much all films are capable of HDR. Pretty sure both 35mm film and modern digital cameras exceed the HDR specification, so the HDR version may be closer to the original source.

[elwaylite]

I thought camera's used to film movies were already outside of the range of what displays could do. These new displays (wider color and brightness) that are HDR capable offer the user to experience a greater range of the image.

Meaning the data is already there in the image and was unable to be shown, it's not that it has be shot on HDR like shot in 3D.

[elwaylite]

Originally Posted by m3racer123

I think pretty much all films are capable of HDR. Pretty sure both 35mm film and modern digital cameras exceed the HDR specification, so the HDR version may be closer to the original source.

This...

[MisterXDTV]

Originally Posted by elwaylite

I thought camera's used to film movies were already outside of the range of what displays could do. These new displays that are HDR capable offer the user to experience a greater range of the image.

Meaning the data is already there in the image, it's not that it has be show on HDR like shot in 3D.

Wider Color gamut/color space is not the same thing as HDR.

[Dreamliner330]

Originally Posted by ray0414

http://www.forbes.com/forbes/welcome/ hands on review with a uhd player.

John archer has 20 years experience of reviewing tvs.

He doesn't get this excited unless it's the real deal.

I'd like to see anybody looking down at the 2k masters watch these in action tell me it's not thr best thing you've ever seen.mad Max is 2k

Originally Posted by m3racer123

Yep, here's the actual link to the article: forbes.com/sites/johnarcher/2016/01/07/ces-2016-hands-on-with-panasonics-dx900-honeycomb-tv-and-ub900-uhd-blu-ray-player/

For some reason this site doesn't allow hyperlinks to Forbes articles - it changes them to this: http://www.forbes.com/forbes/welcome/. That's stupid. You'll just have to copy and paste the above bold link into your search bar, or highlight, right click and click 'Go to...'.

It sounds like he likes the Panasonic setup better than Samsung. Hmm...

[elwaylite]

Originally Posted by MisterXDTV

Wider Color gamut/color space is not the same thing as HDR.

HDR displays have a greater range from dark to light, showing more shades of gray in between, and which will affect the way colors look. While it isn't the same as the larger color gamut (DCIP3), it will affect them.

Regardless, the way you two are looking at "being shot in HDR" is not accurate.

The image was captured in a wider range than blu-ray and older displays could handle. HDR displays allow for a wider range to be shown (that was already there).

[Mr.Poindexter]

Originally Posted by spectre08

I still don't understand who is interested in digital bridge. What is the use-case scenario for this?

The only way I see anybody caring about digital bridge is if they prefer to rip all of their media into hard drives and play from there for convenience?

But how many people actually do this?

I don't use digital bridge, but I do rip all my media to hard drives and play from there. I have been doing this since 2004. Every Kaleidescape system plays the content off hard drives. With their system offering bit for bit quality though, it eats up a lot of drive space. I have 60TB right now and I am almost out of space. It will be even more space intensive with 4k.

[bailey1987]

Originally Posted by Dreamliner330

It sounds like he likes the Panasonic setup better than Samsung. Hmm...

It's to be hoped so as well considering that the Panasonic player is the only player announced for the UK and for that matter it's exclusive for a while.

[elwaylite]

Originally Posted by bailey1987

It's to be hoped so as well considering that the Panasonic player is the only player announced for the UK and for that matter it's exclusive for a while.

The players will have so much less to do with it vs display tech.

[Dreamliner330]

Originally Posted by bailey1987

It's to be hoped so as well considering that the Panasonic player is the only player announced for the UK and for that matter it's exclusive for a while.

Bias I wonder?

I'm probably going to end up with that Sammy. Hope it's good...

[MisterXDTV]

Originally Posted by elwaylite

HDR displays have a greater range from dark to light, showing more shades of gray in between, and which will affect the way colors look. While it isn't the same as the larger color gamut (DCIP3), it will affect them.

Regardless, the way you two are looking at "being shot in HDR" is not accurate.

The image was captured in a wider range than blu-ray and older displays could handle. HDR displays allow for a wider range to be shown (that was already there).

HDR is about the Dynamic Range of the picture, that means how bright and dark the TV can get.

Movies are meant for theaters and HDR is not part of the DCI specs of the theatrical releases worldwide, TODAY...

So a different "HDR master" has to be created. For older movies before DI, HDR doesn't even make sense, because you couldn't change the Dynamic Range of 35mm film with a computer...

So in a way you are "modifying the movie" if you re-master them for HDR....

[Mr.Poindexter]

Originally Posted by Geoff D

But what else could they really have done? Make the cases hexagonal or something? I'm being snarky, yes, but you get my point.

I would have liked to see the Battlestar Galacatica series cases have clipped corners to make the case octagonal, fitting with much of the design of the series.

[elwaylite]

Originally Posted by MisterXDTV

HDR is about the Dynamic Range of the picture, that means how bright and dark the TV can get.

Not sure why you keep repeating this (since we all know it) and overlooking that it WILL affect the color side. It doesnt just work on whites and blacks...

Since this will keep being a circle jerk, Im moving on because I am not going to agree with you entirely.

[Pieter V]

Originally Posted by m3racer123

If you look closely, you can see the Dolby Atmos logo as well. The disc just includes both Atmos and DTS-HD MA audio tracks.

DTS-HD Master Audio should not belong there, as Peter said.

Blu-ray got: Dolby TrueHD 7.1 & Dolby Atmos
UHD Blu-ray will have Dolby Atmos as well.

So why DTS-HD Master Audio? I think we are dealing here an early mock up.

When Warner Bros announce Dolby Atmos for their Blu-rays, the backcover sometimes also contains the DTS-HD Master logo and Dolby Atmos logos. But once released that is corrected.

An error that's I all can think about now.

[MisterXDTV]

Originally Posted by elwaylite

Not sure why you keep repeating this (since we all know it) and overlooking that it WILL affect the color side. It doesnt just work on whites and blacks...

Since this will keep being a circle jerk, Im moving on because I am not going to agree with you entirely.

Can you at least agree that HDR is not a part of the DCI specs of worldwide movie theaters? That's not debatable.

Hell, a year ago we didn't even know that HDR existed for movies! HDR was just a photo recording mode on my iPhone....