|
|
![]() |
||||||||||||||||||||
|
Best Blu-ray Movie Deals
|
Best Blu-ray Movie Deals, See All the Deals » |
Top deals |
New deals
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
![]() $49.99 9 hrs ago
| ![]() $34.96 11 hrs ago
| ![]() $36.69 1 day ago
| ![]() $19.99 1 hr ago
| ![]() $31.99 1 day ago
| ![]() $80.68 1 day ago
| ![]() $39.99 1 day ago
| ![]() $32.99 1 day ago
| ![]() $32.99 1 day ago
| ![]() $37.99 1 day ago
| ![]() $72.99 1 day ago
| ![]() $32.99 |
![]() |
#463 | |
Blu-ray Count
Jul 2007
Montreal, Canada
|
![]() Quote:
|
|
![]() |
![]() |
#464 | |||
Blu-ray Count
Jul 2007
Montreal, Canada
|
![]() Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
|
|||
![]() |
![]() |
#465 |
Member
Jul 2010
-
|
![]()
It sounds like you're talking about pixel density, i.e. pixel count / screen size. So, a 50" 3840x2160 (aka 4k) screen will have 2x the pixel density (in pixels per inch or PPI) of a 50" 1920x1080 screen.
(Another way of looking at it: a grid of 2x2 pixels on a 3840x2160 display will occupy the same physical space as 1 pixel on the same-sized 1920x1080 display.) Last edited by jamesslater; 02-18-2012 at 07:28 PM. |
![]() |
![]() |
#466 |
Banned
|
![]()
4K is going to be niche and new release.
There is no way troll 2 is going to be released in 4k. There is no way theres something about mary is going to be released in 4k. Hell, there is no way Memento is going to be released in 4k. On the other hand, ben hur, taxi driver, Godfather, Gladiator, Star wars, titanic, indiana jones and new release movies filmed in 4k cameras could be shipped easily. Only the most bankable movies will be considered for early era 4k. This theory is for if 4k is coming within a few years - sitting along side mainstream 1080p releases. And you are naiive if you think that with blu-ray 1080p being the "norm" that 4k won't be charged up the bum in the realms of 3D currently. Expect to pay 25-40$ for 4k blu Last edited by riverbelow; 02-18-2012 at 08:30 PM. |
![]() |
![]() |
#467 |
Retired Hollywood Insider
Apr 2007
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#468 | |
Retired Hollywood Insider
Apr 2007
|
![]() Quote:
‘Uncompressed’ to me, means the captured raw data, the 1920x1080 example of which I already posted above, trying to point out that raw high definition video is BIG, i.e. about 670 GB/hr or 1.48 Gbps serial data. Therefore we have video… ‘compression’….which exploits the limitations of the human visual system. The way I think and speak about the terms and interaction of video ‘compression’, ‘lossless’ and ‘lossy’ is that there are two classes of imagery compression, i.e. lossless and lossy. In the medical and computer worlds, the compression systems must be lossless. As to how that relates to the medical domain, most people here probably don’t care or appreciate much about that. The compression systems for computer data also have to be lossless otherwise you can’t recover the computer data perfectly…as far as I know. In the cinematic or television exhibition world, which is governed by bandwidth and storage economies, lossy compression is used for data. In the category of ‘lossy compression’, in essence there are two subclasses, you have what engineers refer to as ‘visually lossless’ (i.e. characterized by low compression factors) and lossy compression of variable PQ (i.e. characterized by medium to high compression factors). |
|
![]() |
![]() |
#469 |
Blu-ray Samurai
|
![]()
Sorry to chime in.
I thought compression helped with disc size capacity but increased processing load. If the processor coped the results would be identical. eg. By having zero compression you would need a much bigger disc, but the processing load would be decreased since the processor wouldn't need to de-compress the numbers, it would just run it through a decoder. Similar to red book audio. So by that logic 4k would need a better processor if you required to fit it on 50gb discs. But a processor like the PS3's should handle it still. |
![]() |
![]() |
#470 |
Member
|
![]()
It's about time to see 4k digital content in cinemas. But I doubt there are many home theaters that will benefit from 4k bd content. I assume that some 30% of home users do not sit close enough to their screens to tell the difference between 720p and 1080p content, and even more don't have screens large enough to benefit.
|
![]() |
![]() |
#471 | |||
Blu-ray Count
Jul 2007
Montreal, Canada
|
![]() Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
|
|||
![]() |
![]() |
#472 | |
Active Member
Aug 2008
|
![]()
I wonder if you guys realize that lossless video is NOT the exact same thing as saying uncompressed video. Lossless compression techniques can usually reduce uncompressed video by 2x or 3x. The problem is you won't ever know how exactly how much smaller a lossless encode will end up.
Quote:
Ben Hur (70mm Ultra-Panavision) would be a perfect candidate. For all the other movies you listed, I would have to see it to believe there's anything to be gained by going over 2k. With all the Star Was fanboys out there though it will probably be released at 4k one day (maybe as the "Special Commemorative 100th Home Video Release Edition"). Last edited by lobosrul; 02-20-2012 at 03:04 PM. |
|
![]() |
![]() |
#473 |
Power Member
|
![]()
I really hope 8K makes its way in to the commercial cinema world. If IMAX is scrapping the 70mm film projectors and is serious about putting digital in those massive traditional IMAX theaters; then 8K coupled with the Kodak laser projection technology seems like the only adequate replacement.
|
![]() |
![]() |
#474 | |
Retired Hollywood Insider
Apr 2007
|
![]()
No, it is not a ‘con job’.
It is just a descriptor used by professionals in advanced imaging technology in order to communicate the quality of the compression as it relates to the uncompressed source, for example ‘visually lossless’ as opposed to ‘high quality’ compression as opposed to ‘good quality’ compression as opposed to ‘poor’ compression. If it makes you feel any better, think of it as extremely high quality compression in order to maintain no motion artifacts or other pictorial artifacts with that compressed data. For instance, in the uncompressed 1920x1080 world as described on the prior page (4:4:4 RGB 10 bit 23.98 fps), a real world example of extremely high quality compression (‘visually lossless’, ‘almost transparent’, whatever) would be that of viewing footage compressed by MPEG4 SStp codec at 880 Mbps via an HDCAM SR tape. That, by the way, would still need about 400 GB/hr of space. Quote:
http://www.trustedreviews.com/panaso...reen_TV_review As an aside, all the links in the 4K chain are nicely coming together ![]() http://3droundabout.com/2012/02/6193...es-system.html Anthony, I don’t want to engage in a ‘debate’ with you ![]() Last edited by Penton-Man; 02-20-2012 at 07:48 PM. Reason: typo |
|
![]() |
![]() |
#475 | |
Blu-ray Champion
|
![]() Quote:
Doesn't matter anyway. By the time they complete a 4K BD spec, and have actual 4K movies, im probably going to have a new hobby. I would rather have native 4K than upscaling our movies. But i see the oncoming 4K displays being like 3D displays. People who don't care for them (me) are going to eventually have one in their homes because when the time comes to pick up a new TV thats the only choice they're going to have. Unless manufacturers continue releasing 2K displays long after. I see no need to change my current TV until i can buy a 70" OLED. Preferably made by pioneer. Last edited by saprano; 02-20-2012 at 11:15 PM. |
|
![]() |
![]() |
#479 | |
Retired Hollywood Insider
Apr 2007
|
![]() Quote:
have multiple industry-influencing projects on their plate all at the same time, for instance having contributed to a best practice and procedure guide for other aspects of the industry….. http://3net.com/news/view/23/for-dow...uction-guide/1 The spec for 4kBD will get completed and approved in due course ![]() |
|
![]() |
![]() |
#480 | |
Retired Hollywood Insider
Apr 2007
|
![]() Quote:
|
|
![]() |
|
|
![]() |
![]() |
|
|