Oh noes teh sky is falling!

[Rocklandsboy]

Originally Posted by RealorFake4K

HDR is not a gimmick if implemented properly. It is not like "Potoshop HDR" which is just cartoonifying the picture. The rec.2020/HDR/10/12bit color space is closer to what your eyes see naturally.

What's important is what the CAMERA saw and captured. I don't want the real world, I want the film, that's why we're all here!

[Adrian Wright]

Originally Posted by Rocklandsboy

What's important is what the CAMERA saw and captured. I don't want the real world, I want the film, that's why we're all here!

And do you think what the Camera SAW AND CAPTURED is always what you get theatrically or on home video formats without ANY form of outside intervention?

[Brightstar]

If 4k blu ray has the wow factor then people will upgrade and prices will come down just like normal blu rays did.

[Rocklandsboy]

Originally Posted by Adrian Wright

And do you think what the Camera SAW AND CAPTURED is always what you get theatrically or on home video formats without ANY form of outside intervention?

Of course not. And there is nearly always some kind of grading in post production. But my point is that cinema - and subsequently home video- is not about capturing the real world (unless that was the director's specific intent) - it's about capturing the world that exists inside the movie!

[GunZenBomZ]

..industry paid stooge makes case to sell larger screens...

Will this be happening annually by chance?!?

[Adrian Wright]

Originally Posted by Rocklandsboy

Of course not. And there is nearly always some kind of grading in post production. But my point is that cinema - and subsequently home video- is not about capturing the real world (unless that was the director's specific intent) - it's about capturing the world that exists inside the movie!

And if the world that exists within said movie happens to capture the wider colour range and lighting effect our eyes can see in real life???

Most detractors of new technology fall into one of two brackets, they are either

1) Insecure about the equipment they have and tell themselves 'mine is fine, I do not need this'

or

2) They cannot afford to make the change and revert to number 1.

I have been guilty myself of both of the above so I know how this feels.

This thread is about as useful as the previous one and needs closing... like now

[bruceames]

Originally Posted by JoeDeM

They care about quality, they just don't want to pay for it.

Originally Posted by PenguinMaster

When most people aren't willing to pay a $2 difference to get a Blu-ray instead of a DVD it's fair to say they don't care about quality. Plus plenty of titles have sold better on DVD when the Blu-ray was the same price. Either they don't care about quality or they are totally oblivious of how close in price the two formats are.

It's not that they don't care or wouldn't pay more if they did, but that most people don't see the difference in quality because they're watching a 42" screen from 12 feet away. HDR and WCG are a huge advance in picture quality and with it the barriers of needing to have a large set or sit closer are removed. It's very simple. The lack of wide adoption of Blu-ray has made everyone pessimistic about UHD and I understand that though.

[Geoff D]

That last sentence says it all, Bruce. Even though the irony is that UHD really CAN offer something that's a substantial visual upgrade over HD - whereas SD to HD was basically sold on the resolution alone which was lost on a lot of people - regular everyday folks have sat out the Blu-ray upgrade cycle so it's going to be very tough for UHD media to penetrate that "good enough" mentality.

We Brits don't often take to new technology but when we do we go all in, and I think DVD was almost too successful, as odd as that sounds. People had this new movie format which offered big AV upgrades for the connoisseurs but which also offered a consistent, repeatable and affordable experience to the masses for the first time and that really was a major reason why it became so ubiquitous over here.

Then Blu comes along, it offers the next big upgrade for the true AV enthusiasts but to the average person it wasn't the quantum leap in usability that VHS to DVD was, it didn't offer anything new; hell, some people still see Blu as a step back in that regard because of the longer loading times, the lack of a consistent resume feature, the faffing about with firmware and persistent memory etc. So UHD Blu has a heck of a mountain to climb in the UK.

4K TVs are selling like hot cakes, sure, but that's more because 4K panels have become the default for larger screen sizes, and just as the adoption of HDTV didn't drive the mass adoption of Blu-ray I can see the same scenario with UHD Blu. It'll co-exist as another specialist format alongside DVD and BD like 3D BD is currently doing, but it becoming the driving force in the physical media market (which itself is shrinking, sadly) is wildly optimistic IMO.

[bruceames]

Well it'll be very interesting to see how well it does in the long run. I wouldn't judge it too harshly in the first two years though since that's how long it will take for HDR sets to become the norm (if not longer). I think growth won't accelerate much until then. But hopefully it'll do good enough to encourage the studios to continue to support it for many years to come.

[Blu-Dog]

Originally Posted by Adrian Wright

And if the world that exists within said movie happens to capture the wider colour range and lighting effect our eyes can see in real life???

Most detractors of new technology fall into one of two brackets, they are either

1) Insecure about the equipment they have and tell themselves 'mine is fine, I do not need this'

or

2) They cannot afford to make the change and revert to number 1.

I have been guilty myself of both of the above so I know how this feels.

I'm glad you're speaking for yourself, and not me. I have a 79", non-HDR screen, and eagerly plunged into 4K early on. Of course, I got stung. My set cost $8,000, and moved my Kuro to casual use, and obviously it was a mistake.


This thing is a fad, and needs a serious move to standardization to become mature. It's not about satisfaction with the status quo, or non-affordability.

Originally Posted by Adrian Wright

This thread is about as useful as the previous one and needs closing... like now

I'm glad you're leaving. Don't let the doorknob whack your tailbone on the way out. I've heard enough weeping already.

[Adrian Wright]

Originally Posted by Blu-Dog

I'm glad you're speaking for yourself, and not me. I have a 79", non-HDR screen, and eagerly plunged into 4K early on. Of course, I got stung. My set cost $8,000, and moved my Kuro to casual use, and obviously it was a mistake.


This thing is a fad, and needs a serious move to standardization to become mature. It's not about satisfaction with the status quo, or non-affordability.




I'm glad you're leaving. Don't let the doorknob whack your tailbone on the way out. I've heard enough weeping already.

And you fall squarely into category 1, without a doubt. And hold that door, I will follow you out... ladies first.

[SixSpeedSamurai]

It won't catch on. Streaming is the future whether we like it or not, the masses have spoken. We're the vinyl snobs of of the video market.

[I KEEL YOU]

Originally Posted by SixSpeedSamurai

It won't catch on. Streaming is the future whether we like it or not, the masses have spoken. We're the vinyl snobs of of the video market.

As long as they keep making ordinary blu rays and release the 10-20 movies I'm waiting on on blu ray and upgrade some of the poor early blu ray releases, I'm all good.

Just read in the home sales thread that UHD has a 0.10% market share of the physical media market since its launch.

I know that there will be some major attempts at excuses and explanations if anyone replies to this post: That it's only just been released, that there aren't that many movies on the format yet, etc. But let's face it, if that figure is true, then 0.10% is outrageously low. If there was any interest in the technology, it would've done significantly better. Like the people who live in tents outside of the store a week early to get the newest iPhone or the fact that there weren't enough PlayStation 4s to go around when it was first released and people had to wait for months for it to get back in stock. And BTW, there were even fewer games on the PS4 when it was first released than there are UHD releases now.

[applemac]

Originally Posted by SixSpeedSamurai

It won't catch on. Streaming is the future whether we like it or not, the masses have spoken. We're the vinyl snobs of of the video market.

Because millions of sales of BD definitely means there is no future for disc formats

[bruceames]

Originally Posted by I KEEL YOU

As long as they keep making ordinary blu rays and release the 10-20 movies I'm waiting on on blu ray and upgrade some of the poor early blu ray releases, I'm all good.

Just read in the home sales thread that UHD has a 0.10% market share of the physical media market since its launch.

I know that there will be some major attempts at excuses and explanations if anyone replies to this post: That it's only just been released, that there aren't that many movies on the format yet, etc. But let's face it, if that figure is true, then 0.10% is outrageously low. If there was any interest in the technology, it would've done significantly better. Like the people who live in tents outside of the store a week early to get the newest iPhone or the fact that there weren't enough PlayStation 4s to go around when it was first released and people had to wait for months for it to get back in stock. And BTW, there were even fewer games on the PS4 when it was first released than there are UHD releases now.

What do you expect at launch, 10%?

There's only a few thousand players out there and a small handful of titles. This is exactly what I was referring regarding not judging the format so early. Blu-ray only had a 5% share after nearly two years. These new formats tend to start out at a tiny market share.

[jibucha]

i disagree :: entirely :: come back and post in another year; things are simply in the early (very much so) stage, and it's absurd to make judgements at this point in time

compare :: equally, in the same time frame (DVD & Blu-ray)

go figure? :: how many are aware of UltraHD displays, players, content?

so :: was is the point of such information at this (early) time?

be fair :: be reasonable

Originally Posted by I KEEL YOU

As long as they keep making ordinary blu rays and release the 10-20 movies I'm waiting on on blu ray and upgrade some of the poor early blu ray releases, I'm all good.

Just read in the home sales thread that UHD has a 0.10% market share of the physical media market since its launch.

I know that there will be some major attempts at excuses and explanations if anyone replies to this post: That it's only just been released, that there aren't that many movies on the format yet, etc. But let's face it, if that figure is true, then 0.10% is outrageously low. If there was any interest in the technology, it would've done significantly better. Like the people who live in tents outside of the store a week early to get the newest iPhone or the fact that there weren't enough PlayStation 4s to go around when it was first released and people had to wait for months for it to get back in stock. And BTW, there were even fewer games on the PS4 when it was first released than there are UHD releases now.

[42041]

Originally Posted by jibucha

compare :: equally, in the same time frame (DVD & Blu-ray)

go figure? :: how many are aware of UltraHD displays, players, content?

so :: was is the point of such information at this (early) time?

I feel like there was a lot more buzz about blu-ray and DVD when they first launched. To be honest, the only place I hear about UHD is on this forum. Even tech sites don't talk about it.

[HeavyHitter]

Originally Posted by bruceames.

Well it'll be very interesting to see how well it does in the long run. I wouldn't judge it too harshly in the first two years though since that's how long it will take for HDR sets to become the norm (if not longer). I think growth won't accelerate much until then. But hopefully it'll do good enough to encourage the studios to continue to support it for many years to come.

I think the margin of success or waiting time is going to be a lot smaller for UHD BD. In other words, if sales are not up to par (whatever that low barrier may be), I think we could see the plug pulled. If sales are still just a spec after the next two years, I think the format will be in serious danger of going extinct.

[HeavyHitter]

Originally Posted by 42041

I feel like there was a lot more buzz about blu-ray and DVD when they first launched. To be honest, the only place I hear about UHD is on this forum. Even tech sites don't talk about it.

Agreed. It's odd really and it seems almost no one gives it much relevance.

[HeavyHitter]

Originally Posted by dvdmike

But what version of HDR do you want two copies of the upscaled Mad Max as you want the newly re-released Dolby vision version because you have a Dolby vision set and want to justify its purchace?
The format is a mess of standards and half steps.

Yeah, the stage was not set for the format to succeed. It had big enough obstacles with the market shifting towards streaming - everything else had to line up perfectly for the format to have a fighting chance and it just doesn't look good. I'm disappointed so far as I wanted (and still want) to see the format at least become a strong niche, but I have serious doubts now.