4K Movies Releases

[Penton-Man]

Thanks given by: crazyBLUE (Yesterday), reanimator (Yesterday)
Off tomorrow (friday). Gone riding sign goes up.

[Penton-Man]

Meanwhile BLUE , for your listening pleasure…

Gnarls Barkley Crazy 49th Grammy Awards HD 1080i - YouTube

[ronjones]

I have collected UHD Blu-ray information from a number of sources at CES to put together a summary for my blog at http://www.projecctorreviews.com. Below is the basic information:

Based on information provided from a number of sources, including the Panasonic press release for their prototype Ultra HD Blu-ray player, and statements from Victor Matsuda and Dan Schinasi (both representing the Blu-ray Disc Association) it appears that the technical details of the new UHD Blu-ray Disc format are starting to become more clear. Below is a summary of what we have learned, so far (assuming the information from the above sources is correct and does not change as the Ultra HD Blu-ray standard is finalized):

• use dual layer 66 GB discs or triple layer 100 GB discs (compared to HD Blu-ray’s 25 GB and 50GB discs)
  
• support multiple color gamuts up to and including the extremely wide Rec. 2020 (the UHD Blu-ray standand will probably specifically identify Rec. 709, DCI-P3, and Rec. 2020 as valid color gamuts – my opinion)
  
• will use a nominal/minimum bit depth of 10-bit and the standard will allow for up to a 16-bit depth to be used
  
• will support up to 100 Mbps data rate for the recordings
  
• discs will use H.265/HEVC for the encoding (given the above max. allowed characteristics that means version 2 of H.265 standard will be used rather than ver. 1 as used by the 4K streaming services)
  
• will support 3D as an option (basically what we have now with HD Blu-ray players where entry level models are not required to support 3D and discs can support 3D as an option)
  
• will support High Dynamic Range (HDR) recordings
  
• UHD Blu-ray players will be backward compatible in that they will also play HD Blu-ray Discs and DVDs
  
• will use HDMI 2.0 w/HDCP 2.2 for delivery of 4K/UHD content to UHD TVs

The one major technical characteristic that I have not yet been able to confirm is which chroma subsampling schemes will be supported. Current HD Blu-rays use 4:2:0 while many videophiles are hoping that the UHD Blu-ray standard will also support the higher fidelity 4:2:2 and 4:4:4 schemes which provide higher resolution for the color information within the recorded video.

[Penton-Man]

Originally Posted by ronjones

I have collected UHD Blu-ray information from a number of sources at CES to put together a summary for my blog at http://www.projecctorreviews.com. Below is the basic information:...

Nice summary research of public comments from the show.
Ron, you must either be unemployed or retired. A couple comments….

1. I’m still waiting on my fishing spot recommendation from you (https://forum.blu-ray.com/showthread...ng#post9463509), which I never received .

2. Richard and I have been through the HEVC vs H.265 nomenclature thing with you before in the thread linked above, and if for some reason you still desire to persist with the H.265/HEVC phrasing, I think it only fair to give recognition to the MPEG also, e.g. HEVC/H.265/MPEG-H Part 2 ( http://www.mpegla.com/main/Pages/Media.aspx )

[Penton-Man]

Originally Posted by ronjones

The one major technical characteristic that I have not yet been able to confirm is which chroma subsampling schemes will be supported. Current HD Blu-rays use 4:2:0 while many videophiles are hoping that the UHD Blu-ray standard will also support the higher fidelity 4:2:2 and 4:4:4 schemes which provide higher resolution for the color information within the recorded video.

Well until then, other than perhaps static images posted online by video guru celebrities, have you personally seen (even at only 709) 4K/UHD rez imagery at 4:4:4…https://tech.ebu.ch/testsequences/uhd-1_public_form video subsequently encoded with HEVC to determine the actual consumer value of 4:4:4 for the induced bitrate cost ?

Or, on a lower chroma subsampling note, care to venture a guess as to how much more bandwidth it would take to go from 4:2:0 to 4:2:2?... https://forum.blu-ray.com/showthread...c#post10228501 or conversely, how much bitrate savings (in average Mbps) the content deliverer could save by *dropping down* from 4:2:2 to 4:2:0 with current state of the art HEVC encoding of movie content?

[Penton-Man]

Originally Posted by Richard Paul

I just read ITU/MPEG documents/websites, online articles, and internet forums.

Well, you do very well for yourself (and us) in regards to filtering the massive amount of noise, as I find those later sources (outside of the solid contributors in the Tech forum of Blu-ray.com) to tend toward mostly fluff with very little substance and to be dominated by bloggers speaking beyond their expertise and active experience the moment they deviate from strict reporting, and even then, the strict reporting is sometimes inaccurate because they either get it wrong from the horse’s mouth or, they simply churn out what the marketers or those with special financial interests feed them….which has a high hype coefficient.

If you’re not an ITU member or member of an active SMPTE project (https://kws.smpte.org/kws/public/pro...project_id=277 ), then a good resource to add to your collection would be to try to join some Linkedin professional Private groups (must request to be considered for membership) relevant to your personal interests (color, 4K, etc.), as they generally consist of posters having little desire to feed their self egos by or are on some mission to accumulate website viewer hits for advertising dollars, gain public exposure to pick up consultation work, etc. The material and opinion often presented in such Private groups is evidence-based and reproducible by other members working independently in different labs or entities….not those out to sell you TVs, cameras, proprietary solutions, etc.

Personal emails also sometimes work….http://www.its.bldrdoc.gov/vqeg/projects/hdr/hdr.aspx

[singhcr]

Penton, Ron: thank you for compiling this information for us. I am very excited for 4KBD!

[dvdmike]

[Penton-Man]

^ Mike, one of my concerns with HDR…https://forum.blu-ray.com/showthread...g#post10250245

And there has been little discussion at CES 2015 of the hows and wherefores of filmmaker involvement with the HDR remastering of past motion pictures.

[Penton-Man]

Originally Posted by singhcr

Penton, Ron: thank you for compiling this information for us. I am very excited for 4KBD!

Whenever something significant occurs with our Blu-ray hobby, I feel it’s always a good idea to take a brief moment for reflection, so as not to forget to be appreciative of what we have with our eyesight, as others are far less fortunate and such calamities can happen to you, I or anyone, e.g. one day fine, the next day, quality of life takes a nose dive.

After reading the academic spiel, which btw, seems a never ending struggle to properly educate hobbyists about vision - https://forum.blu-ray.com/showthread...s#post10255526 ….run the Keck YouTube clip and I think you may be even more grateful of your future home theater experiences with Ultra HD BLU-RAY when you eventually purchase your 4K projector or TV.

[singhcr]

You are right, it is good to stop and be thankful for what you have.

All of my pursuits that give me happiness and allow me to express myself require the precise use of my eyes: drawing, painting, photography, sports, and shooting/hunting. You don't appreciate what you have until you've lost it.

For a good 5 years I had severe sprains in both of my wrists. I could barely write or lift a jug of milk, much less shoot or play goalkeeper. It was very depressing. I couldn't type and I was ending my college days so I was honestly not sure if I could work in my field (mechanical engineering) that I had spent 7 years studying for to get my undergraduate and graduate degrees. I was strongly considering the reality that I may have to go on disability to support myself. Now, I have arrived at a solution that allows for nearly pain-free use of my hands and I can shoot again, although I still cannot be a keeper. So when I am drawing or especially shooting (lots of recoil is not good for sprains), I am very grateful to do what so many do without a second of appreciation.

[Penton-Man]

Originally Posted by singhcr

...I am very grateful to do what so many do without a second of appreciation.

[Geoff D]

Originally Posted by Penton-Man

^ Mike, one of my concerns with HDR…https://forum.blu-ray.com/showthread...g#post10250245

And there has been little discussion at CES 2015 of the hows and wherefores of filmmaker involvement with the HDR remastering of past motion pictures.

That is a fair point Penton but it's no more pertinent a problem (IMO) with HDR than if a "regular" new transfer is done without the filmmaker's involvement; look at all the dirt kicked up by the new edition of TGTBATU. As you regularly point out, execs aren't above having a chat with a cinematographer on the phone then timing a new release and calling it "cinematographer approved", so a HDR grade is simply yet another addition to the list of things open for tweakery when performing a new transfer.

Still, directors and DPs should be conscious more than ever of how their work will be represented in the home when UHD BD (see? it's not difficult to contract into an acronym ) hits the streets, so fingers crossed we'll get more involvement from the filmmakers from here on out.

[dvdmike]

Originally Posted by Geoff D

That is a fair point Penton but it's no more pertinent a problem (IMO) with HDR than if a "regular" new transfer is done without the filmmaker's involvement; look at all the dirt kicked up by the new edition of TGTBATU. As you regularly point out, execs aren't above having a chat with a cinematographer on the phone then timing a new release and calling it "cinematographer approved", so a HDR grade is simply yet another addition to the list of things open for tweakery when performing a new transfer.

Still, directors and DPs should be conscious more than ever of how their work will be represented in the home when UHD BD (see? it's not difficult to contract into an acronym ) hits the streets, so fingers crossed we'll get more involvement from the filmmakers from here on out.

I don't want to see older films remastered, shot with hdr in mind or not

[Selaboc]

Originally Posted by dvdmike

I don't want to see older films remastered, shot with hdr in mind or not

Why not? don't you like any old films? do you not want to see an old film that you like looking it's best?

[Geoff D]

Originally Posted by dvdmike

I don't want to see older films remastered, shot with hdr in mind or not

I know you don't, but thankfully technology doesn't stand still. As you noted previously, the providers of both the hardware and software know that they can't keep trotting out the same stuff to keep people interested, and transfers of old prints just won't cut it I'm afraid.

[Penton-Man]

Originally Posted by Geoff D

That is a fair point Penton but it's no more pertinent a problem (IMO) with HDR than if a "regular" new transfer is done without the filmmaker's involvement;....

I’m not really concerned about new motion pictures ('new', as in those yet-to-be shot or finished) as much, because the HDR grade will be the hero grade (or original grade , if you will) and Directors (or their proxies) are intimately involved in the color grading process of most new feature films from the get-go (LUTs, etc.)

In time, things like an ACES workflow and ST 2086 should aid in facilitating properly mastered and delivered home media incarnations for which direct filmmaker involvement may be more difficult.

But, with the remastering of 'old' movies in HDR, there really is no accurate *template* for the colorist to follow, except the creative vision in the Director’s mind. which mandates his active eyes-on participation in the process. One potential thing I see possibly happening is that for some studios, just in order to get a *Director Approved* stamp on the HDR home version is for the colorist to do all the work on the regrade and send the Director or DP a test disc or draft copy of the nearly completed work. I mean really, at the point, do you really think that the filmmaker is going to throw a monkey wrench in the whole process and advise to do some parts, or the whole thing all over again because the contrast enhanced imagery in some frames isn’t what he was looking for when he shot the film, even if that is how he truly feels in his heart?

^ P.S. I'm using he generically. Consider it he/she, his/hers.

[Penton-Man]

Originally Posted by Geoff D

...when UHD BD (see? it's not difficult to contract into an acronym ) hits the streets,

Thank you . If anyone b*tches when I use that…then I’ll just refer them to you or call in a 'mulligan' like in golf.

[Penton-Man]

Originally Posted by dvdmike

I don't want to see older films remastered, shot with hdr in mind or not

Personally, I’m for it, as long has the filmmaker would have liked that look from the get-go, because it can add a lot, quoting from one year ago exactly….

Originally Posted by Penton-Man

The great value of HDR for imagery comes as no surprise to colorists who have worked with Dolby’s LCD reference color grading monitor, the PRM 4200 or 4220, which some post houses use in their mastering and whose colorists have ever experimented with Dolby’s HDR ACES output display transform to allow movie content to be viewed in HDR and P3 color space while in the DYN operational mode (maximum luminance of 600 nits).

Then, afterwards, when flipping back to traditional non-HDR mode, it’s amazing how much RAW imagery (be it from the Alexa, RED, Sony--whatever high end camera be your acquisition device) is clipped at 100 nits.

but at the time *the system* just couldn’t deliver it to theatrical audiences because of limitations in post production and presentation technology.

[Penton-Man]

Originally Posted by Selaboc

Why not? don't you like any old films? do you not want to see an old film that you like looking it's best?

I think that Mike is taking the long held traditional position of some historically minded cinephiles (a philosophy which has also been argued pertaining to some digital restorations of old analog films) in that…the original version (despite its shortcomings or mistakes) is what audiences should only see, in essence to respect the film’s original look.