4K Blu-ray Confirmed, Coming in

[Cactus]

Originally Posted by BozQ

If they even do HFR, it will only be 2D.
The Hobbit was in HFR 3D. 48 frames per second per eye. So in total, it has to deal with 96 frames. Unless it's possible to pull this off in 1080p instead of 2160p.

Which means that if Cameron shoots Avatar 2-4 in 60fps, that's out of the question as well.

[FilmFreakosaurus]

Originally Posted by Cactus

Which means that if Cameron shoots Avatar 2-4 in 60fps, that's out of the question as well.

They can show it in 2D at HFR.

[bailey1987]

Originally Posted by Cactus

Which means that if Cameron shoots Avatar 2-4 in 60fps, that's out of the question as well.

I think by the time he makes Avatar 2 we will all own 8K TV's, it's just been pushed back a year.

And I mean it as well, no joke, these avatar sequels will be a never ending story.

[bailey1987]

Get well soon Geoff D.

[Penton-Man]

Originally Posted by Richard Paul

HDR system:

Well Richard, as to HDR, I admit to having mixed emotions as I feel that one of the greatest challenges in the long term future to Ultra HD Blu-ray (in terms of it being a physical media format, which many of us here support/prefer) will be streaming HDR movies (both new and catalog) because the extended dynamic range content grading of studio vault assets is happening as we speak....by more than one major Hollywood studio.

P.S.
Keeping in mind, I say ‘long term’, because streaming 4K rez titles in HDR will require ~ 8 Mbps in additional streaming bandwidth.

[Penton-Man]

Originally Posted by Geoff D

...lying flat on my back in the Trauma ward at Poole hospital, having shattered my ankle while out walking on Monday, they operated on it yesterday and put lots of plates and screws in.)

You prefer smart independent dog videos…

Black lab takes solo bus ride to dog park stop - YouTube

or cat ….

Puppy attempts to reclaim bed from cat - YouTube

My wife informs me, if given time, she can supply you (through me) with baby kangaroo and giant hippo stuff too, if you like dem wild animals. I figure with the drugs you’re on, the mental acuity is not that great so I’ll lay off on the technological mumbo-jumbo for the time being. I'm quite interested though if any of the fracture lines extended into your joint (tibiotalar) space. Ask the dudes in the white coats.

[dvdmike]

Originally Posted by Cactus

Which means that if Cameron shoots Avatar 2-4 in 60fps, that's out of the question as well.

I think it's more a case of if he makes them then the frame rate.

Originally Posted by Geoff D

And not just this last year but 2013 sets too. Without HDCP 2.2 a 4K TV will not be able to display UHD BD @ UHD res, it's as simple as that. But as long as it's got the right HDCP then you'll still be able to play back the most basic elements of 24fps 4K video, even if the TV isn't equipped with any flavour of HDMI 2.0.

As for the subsampling being at 4:2:0, I called it a while back, and Penton's reply of "I can neither confirm or deny" when I asked him about it was all but a confirmation. (I would search for the relevant posts but I'm sending this from my phone lying flat on my back in the Trauma ward at Poole hospital, having shattered my ankle while out walking on Monday, they operated on it yesterday and put lots of plates and screws in.)

Damn, I have screws in my leg also done at Poole hospital! They taught me how to walk again, so you are in safe hands

[Rocklandsboy]

Originally Posted by bailey1987

I think by the time he makes Avatar 2 we will all own 8K TV's, it's just been pushed back a year.
And I mean it as well, no joke, these avatar sequels will be a never ending story.

He could have made a few cool movies while he's been messing around with this vanity project of his. The original Avatar was one of Cameron's least interesting movies IMHO. I'm in no great rush for another! Now if he gave us another Terminator...!

[jono3000]

Originally Posted by Rocklandsboy

He could have made a few cool movies while he's been messing around with this vanity project of his. The original Avatar was one of Cameron's least interesting movies IMHO. I'm in no great rush for another! Now if he gave us another Terminator...!

I'd be happy with The Abyss on (UHD) Blu-ray.

[Geoff D]

Originally Posted by Tech-UK

Really interesting information on that page. The diagrams explain a lot.

HD SDR AVC 8-bit (current Blu-ray), HD SDR HEVC 10-bit, HD HDR HEVC 10-bit, UHD SDR HEVC 10-bit and UHD HDR HEVC 10-bit.



Looks like consumers are going to need to learn a lot more about this new technology on top of existing Blu-ray.

I'm glad that they haven't just ignored HD as part of the expanded spec, because that way we can at least get higher quality versions of the myriad 2K movies that are out there without having to resort to upscaling them to 4K (and the firestorm that would create with the average consumer, though they'll still need to tread carefully with 'expanded' 2K movies). And with the official adoption of 50p and 60p, there is at least hope for a possible HFR Blu-ray. And - not to go all mystic Geoff again - it's no surprise to me that there's no 3D in the UHD BD spec whatsoever. We may see it get added as a revision in the future as per 3D BD (and also interlaced 2D) but for now 4K 3D is dormant.

Penton: according to my discharge summary (for I've already been booted out) I had an "intrarticular fracture of the left distal tibia and fibula", the doc said he had to put a plate on my shin because I'd split it, with a smaller plate on the left and a bunch of pins on the right of my ankle. I haven't seen the pre-op x-rays, but I'm assured that they're "spectacular". I'll try and get some pics at my follow-up in two weeks, although I've got a juicy pic of the main incision on my leg, all stapled up.

[bailey1987]

Originally Posted by Rocklandsboy

He could have made a few cool movies while he's been messing around with this vanity project of his. The original Avatar was one of Cameron's least interesting movies IMHO. I'm in no great rush for another! Now if he gave us another Terminator...!

I hole heatedly agree

[Jimmy Smith]

Originally Posted by Geoff D

I'm glad that they haven't just ignored HD as part of the expanded spec, because that way we can at least get higher quality versions of the myriad 2K movies that are out there without having to resort to upscaling them to 4K (and the firestorm that would create with the average consumer, though they'll still need to tread carefully with 'expanded' 2K movies). And with the official adoption of 50p and 60p, there is at least hope for a possible HFR Blu-ray. And - not to go all mystic Geoff again - it's no surprise to me that there's no 3D in the UHD BD spec whatsoever. We may see it get added as a revision in the future as per 3D BD (and also interlaced 2D) but for now 4K 3D is dormant.

How many 3D movies have had digital effects finished in 4k? From my understanding the vast majority of 3D movies have had only 2k digital intermediates. So even if this format launched with a 3D option it would not have much content to add. Hopefully more future 3D movies will have 4k digital effects work and a 3D extension to the format will be worth it

But since most major movies this year are coming out in 3D that will make this format useless for them at least for me. Even if a full 4k presentation with no upconversion was possible I would still prefer a 1080p 3D version over a 2160p 2D version. I don't think I'm the only one who thinks so. Some don't like 3D but I imagine most of them won't like 4k either since most probably just dislike new technology and have a nostalgia for lower quality video

[Selaboc]

Originally Posted by Jimmy Smith

Some don't like 3D but I imagine most of them won't like 4k either since most probably just dislike new technology and have a nostalgia for lower quality video

That's a sweeping statement that I don't think is reasonable to make. There are many reasons why someone might not like 3D other than a dislike of new technology. While I have no particular problems with 3D one of my friends hates it because of the glasses - In order to see he needs to wear both his regular glasses *and* the 3D glasses, which he doesn't find comfortable at all (this is movie-theatre 3D, but due to his experiences in movie-theatres he's in no hurry to try a 3D TV). For another person I know, the 3D effect rarely works for them so they don't care for it because it literally does nothing for them. Whereas both of those people have no outstanding issues regarding 4k. Indeed most people I've every heard complain about 3D, "dislike [of] new technology" and "nostalgia for lower quality video" has never been a factor.

[Spike M.]

Originally Posted by Selaboc

That's a sweeping statement that I don't think is reasonable to make. There are many reasons why someone might not like 3D other than a dislike of new technology. While I have no particular problems with 3D one of my friends hates it because of the glasses - In order to see he needs to wear both his regular glasses *and* the 3D glasses, which he doesn't find comfortable at all (this is movie-theatre 3D, but due to his experiences in movie-theatres he's in no hurry to try a 3D TV). For another person I know, the 3D effect rarely works for them so they don't care for it because it literally does nothing for them. Whereas both of those people have no outstanding issues regarding 4k. Indeed most people I've every heard complain about 3D, "dislike [of] new technology" and "nostalgia for lower quality video" has never been a factor.

Yeah. 3D lowers overall picture quality as well, so it's fairly incomparable.

[Geoff D]

Originally Posted by Jimmy Smith

How many 3D movies have had digital effects finished in 4k? From my understanding the vast majority of 3D movies have had only 2k digital intermediates. So even if this format launched with a 3D option it would not have much content to add. Hopefully more future 3D movies will have 4k digital effects work and a 3D extension to the format will be worth it

But since most major movies this year are coming out in 3D that will make this format useless for them at least for me. Even if a full 4k presentation with no upconversion was possible I would still prefer a 1080p 3D version over a 2160p 2D version. I don't think I'm the only one who thinks so. Some don't like 3D but I imagine most of them won't like 4k either since most probably just dislike new technology and have a nostalgia for lower quality video

Dude, we know that 4K 3D basically doesn't exist as a standardised format (for neither home nor theater) and that 2K finishes are still the preferred res of choice (ironically enough because of stuff like 3D which already adds enough to the post-production cost) but it seemed like a fair few people were under the assumption that 3D would still be part of the 4K BD spec. That's a negatory.

I dunno about people as a whole having this 'nostalgic' love for low quality video and old tech though, I think your views are being strongly influenced by select BRDC members who are forthright with their opinions but hardly the majority, even in this small community. And 3D is well over 60 years old in movie terms, it was hardly this new thing to be feared.

As for enjoying 2K 3D and 4K as separate entities, I love both but if given a choice (which seems unlikely unless it's a Sony production) I'd go for the 4K flat version every time because 4K at its best has an almost 3D-like sense of depth and dimension regardless, and that's just for what I've seen encoded at .709 8-bit.

[Penton-Man]

Originally Posted by Geoff D

Penton: according to my discharge summary (for I've already been booted out) I had an "intrarticular fracture of the left distal tibia and fibula"...

How the hell did you do that while just out walking? Did you slip on something like ice or snow? Anyway, despite the injury and post-op meds, it seems like mental acuity isn't a problem so I can cease with the easy-watching animal videos, so to elaborate a bit more on this previous post….

Originally Posted by Penton-Man

Well Richard, as to HDR, I admit to having mixed emotions as I feel that one of the greatest challenges in the long term future to Ultra HD Blu-ray (in terms of it being a physical media format, which many of us here support/prefer) will be streaming HDR movies (both new and catalog) because the extended dynamic range content grading of studio vault assets is happening as we speak....by more than one major Hollywood studio.

P.S.
Keeping in mind, I say ‘long term’, because streaming 4K rez titles in HDR will require ~ 8 Mbps in additional streaming bandwidth.

Now with more than a couple color grading systems supporting HDR finishing (Resolve 11, Baselight, Mistika) as well as different brand HDR-capable mastering monitors eventually becoming more widely available in Hollywood this year, if the studio (or other content provider) has the original picture data of the feature film from the DI process (log DPX files), it’s going to be way quicker and cheaper to pump out these HDR remasters than for something like a 4K restoration…or even just a 2K restoration.

To do the remaster, you’re looking at a couple weeks (or less), all at the same facility (for instance, no sending to outside companies to do elite dirt and scratch removal, etc.) and the HDR material can look noticeably good (much value added) over current SDR



as evidenced by the scientific HDR testing of unbiased observers in independent (no financial incentive) labs (at least for short viewing periods)….as well as now embraced, at least with a Samsung SUHD tv showing the content, by those CES roving reporter types hailing from around your neck of the woods (across the pond)...

AVForums Opinion: Samsung impress with HDR SUHD TVs for 2015 - YouTube

And apart from remastering per se, we’ve already covered how easy it is to do an HDR grade from the get-go with new motion pictures in post production….https://forum.blu-ray.com/showthread...o#post10119354

[KRW1]

Originally Posted by Jimmy Smith

I don't think I'm the only one who thinks so. Some don't like 3D but I imagine most of them won't like 4k either since most probably just dislike new technology and have a nostalgia for lower quality video

No, I'll buy any old crap but didn't fall for 3D. Simple reason, I don't like what it does to films. Someone poking a stick at the screen takes you right out of it. Before you say '3D is better than that now', everyone raved about Life of Pi, which included a scene in which someone literally poked a stick at the screen. The 2D version was much more immersive.

4k on the other hand, looks as though it'll be able to give me something close to the experience of showing a 35mm film in my own home, the very reason I got into home cinema in the first place.

[RedIsNotBlue]

Originally Posted by KRW1

No, I'll buy any old crap but didn't fall for 3D. Simple reason, I don't like what it does to films. Someone poking a stick at the screen takes you right out of it. Before you say '3D is better than that now', everyone raved about Life of Pi, which included a scene in which someone literally poked a stick at the screen. The 2D version was much more immersive.

4k on the other hand, looks as though it'll be able to give me something close to the experience of showing a 35mm film in my own home, the very reason I got into home cinema in the first place.

I couldn't disagree more. It always makes me chuckle when people who hate 3D focus on the gimmicky stuff. The DEPTH a 3D film can give you is amazing. Life of Pi was one of the best overall 3D viewings I have had and a great example of how to shoot a 3D film without going to overboard with the gimmicky poking stuff out of the screen stuff. It sounds like you just hate 3D regardless so there is not debating with someone like you though. Some people just hate it...which is fine you are entitled to your own opinion.

In regards to your last statement. If you have the money to shell out for a 4K projector....yes it sounds like that will be the best option to replicate a 35mm film experience in your own home. But how many people are even going to have enough money for that anytime soon? A very small percentage. Most people getting into the 4K game anytime soon are going to be buying TV's and that is where things are going to be up in the air.

[Geoff D]

Originally Posted by Penton-Man

How the hell did you do that while just out walking? Did you slip on something like ice or snow? Anyway, despite the injury and post-op meds, it seems like mental acuity isn't a problem so I can cease with the easy-watching animal videos, so to elaborate a bit more on this previous post….

Thanks for the vids mr P, I'm a cat man myself (although I had to have one of my beloved moggies put down two days before Christmas) and the meds aren't too extreme, I swore off the morphine pretty quick because it made me feel sick so I've been sticking to regular paracetamol and ibuprofen, with just a dash of codeine. I'm on da blood thinners too because I can't put any weight on the leg for a minimum of two weeks.

And yes, I slipped on a steep slope slick with rain, my left peg caught underneath me and as I came down I heard a loud 'CROKK' as the leg snapped. As I pulled the leg out I could see that my foot was flopping around at a funny angle and I knew I was ****ed. The doctor was very impressed with my high pain threshold.

[KRW1]

Originally Posted by RedIsNotBlue

I couldn't disagree more. It always makes me chuckle when people who hate 3D focus on the gimmicky stuff. The DEPTH a 3D film can give you is amazing. Life of Pi was one of the best overall 3D viewings I have had and a great example of how to shoot a 3D film without going to overboard with the gimmicky poking stuff out of the screen stuff. It sounds like you just hate 3D regardless so there is not debating with someone like you though. Some people just hate it...which is fine you are entitled to your own opinion.

In regards to your last statement. If you have the money to shell out for a 4K projector....yes it sounds like that will be the best option to replicate a 35mm film experience in your own home. But how many people are even going to have enough money for that anytime soon? A very small percentage. Most people getting into the 4K game anytime soon are going to be buying TV's and that is where things are going to be up in the air.

Yeah, we can agree to disagree on 3D, if you like, but don't tarnish all new tech with the same brush. It's a completely different vibe I'm getting from it. At the very least, you won't have to wear glasses to watch it. I'm reading a lot more enthusiasm for 4k than I ever did for 3D.

Geoff, mate, sorry to read these last few pages. Hope you'll be on the mend properly soon.