Uncompressed Video?

[Erman_94]

Is it at all possible with BD?

[stockstar1138]

Originally Posted by Erman_94

Is it at all possible with BD?

i believe we determined one day that it was theoretically possible with a 500GB disc spinning really, really fast for a 90 min. movie or something.

will we ever see this, no.

[Erman_94]

Originally Posted by stockstar1138

i believe we determined one day that it was theoretically possible with a 500GB disc spinning really, really fast for a 90 min. movie or something.

will we ever see this, no.

so whats the closest we'll get? 1080p?

[Kryptron]

Originally Posted by Erman_94

so whats the closest we'll get? 1080p?

1080p is a video size "1920×1080" progressive. It doesn't mean the video is uncompressed.

[Erman_94]

Originally Posted by Kryptron

1080p is a video size "1920×1080" progressive. It doesn't mean the video is uncompressed.

i see...so will there be a better progressive picture in the near future? or is 1920x1080 good enough considering the tv sizes in homes and the actual visuals the human eye can see?

[theknub]

the answer is no, uncompressed video takes on the level of terrabytes. RAH said that for Godfather there was something like 9 terrabytes of raw data for one movie...

i may be wrong though about Godfather

[stockstar1138]

Originally Posted by Erman_94

i see...so will there be a better progressive picture in the near future? or is 1920x1080 good enough considering the tv sizes in homes and the actual visuals the human eye can see?

1080p is going to be the standard for a long time.

[dadkins]

Originally Posted by Erman_94

Is it at all possible with BD?

https://forum.blu-ray.com/showpost.p...7&postcount=12

... roughly 248mbps for 44 seconds from a 10.3GB file with uncompressed 1080p video.
Brought my laptop to it's knees.

http://www.hdgreetings.com/ecard/video-1080p.aspx

"Factory" video.

From a Blu-ray? Not for a while at least and it will need a few layers.

[Kryptron]

Originally Posted by Erman_94

i see...so will there be a better progressive picture in the near future? or is 1920x1080 good enough considering the tv sizes in homes and the actual visuals the human eye can see?

I don't see the need for anything uncompressed anytime soon. The current codecs "mpeg4 avc/VC1 provide a great picture without showing compression artifacts with a good bitrate even on big home projector screens.

[Canada]

There is no need for uncompressed video at home yet. I think you would need a screen size to be about as big as in one of the multiplexes to take advantage of that much resolution, plus you would need a massive dedicated home theater room!

[Musashi]

AVC and VC-1 are, strictly speaking, lossy video codecs. Lossless picture takes more data than we're gonna have access to for an awfully long time.

BD gives as a good a bitrate capacity for picture as can be practically done right now.

[Bobby Henderson]

Consumer level electronics and computing hardware does not have the power to move uncompressed HD bit streams. We're talking over 1.4 billion bits per second. That's roughly 28 times the maximum data bandwidth limit of Blu-ray. You need HD-SDI connections and professional quality RAID systems to store and move that kind of data.

Even the JPEG2000 "virtual prints" for digital cinema are beyond the capability of consumer electronics. You still need a good RAID setup to sustain bit rates up to 250 million bits per second and the HD-SDI connections are also necessary too.

[dialog_gvf]

Originally Posted by Erman_94

Is it at all possible with BD?

1920*1080 pixels/frame * 3 bytes/pixel * 24 frames/second =

149,299,200 bytes per second
~1.2Gbps uncompressed

The maximum BD disc reads speed possible is probably 12x or 12*36Mbps = 432Mbps.

Now, let's assume there was a lossless video codec that was 400Mbps. If we had 200GB (1600Gbit discs), that would mean 4000 seconds or 67 minutes of video.

Gary

[Kryptron]

Originally Posted by dialog_gvf

1920*1080 pixels/frame * 3 bytes/pixel * 24 frames/second =

149,299,200 bytes per second
~1.2Gbps uncompressed

The maximum BD disc reads speed possible is probably 12x or 12*36Mbps = 432Mbps.

Now, let's assume there was a lossless video codec that was 400Mbps. If we had 200GB (1600Gbit discs), that would mean 4000 seconds or 67 minutes of video.

Gary

Don't forget you need an ultra high speed monster cable for that

[Jayromy]

Originally Posted by Kryptron

Don't forget you need an ultra high speed monster cable for that

LOL. Hey, do you work at Circuit City?

[tron3]

I first heard of HDTV about 1985. Everyone wonders why it took over 15 years to get off the ground. Firstly, the FCC wasn't about to allow that kind of bandwidth over the air waves to accomodate all the local channels.

The problem was they needed to compress the signal. The hardware and codecs simply did not exist and needed to be fully developed. Ever see a 1024 x 768 .GIF image display on screen using a 386 computer? It took a few seconds to render. .Jpeg even more so. While PC's and TV's are mutally exclusive devices, the pc is still a measureable standard in which to gage TV technology. The hardware shortcomings remained the same for each.

In short, compression gave us MP3, CD and DVD. Compression gives us HDTV. Compression even gave us HD DVD and (gasp) blu-ray. Without compression, NONE of this would exist because of space. Today, even HD audio is still compressed, it is just "lossless" compression because the space pool is larger.

When we go to all digital transmission on 2/17/09 the bandwidth allotted to HDTV is actually LESS than the analog terrestrial equivilent. The FCC gave HDTV LESS bandwidth. We get more channels because of compression. Compression will be with us a LONG time. Compression is our friend.

[Anthony P]

the answer is no and that we will never have that at home. Like others have said the numbers are incredibly hih, you also cannot have compressed lossless since that helps with capacity but not BW (i.e. if every pixel is slightly different for that frame you would need each pixel to be represented). You could have something with much higher max BW and more capacity (so allow for higher average BW) and that should improve the pic, but for lossless or ncompressed, that is just a joke.

PS, for the guy with the monster joke, your player already sends out over the cable each pixel, that is why HDMI 1.3 is speced at 340 MHz (10.2 Gbps)

[hardcorefrokid]

Originally Posted by stockstar1138

1080p is going to be the standard for a long time.

Check this out.

[dialog_gvf]

Originally Posted by hardcorefrokid

Check this out.

That is certainly what we all should be hoping digital cinema becomes. I find the current offerings to be rather poor.

My local AMC is 100% 2K DLP, on huge screens, but I much prefer the PQ on my Kuro.

UHDV is 7.5K. Even 4K for the home is probably overkill. The next step would be 1440p constant height (varying width) and boosting the colour depth to 36-bit and resolution to 4:4:4, for the encodings.

Gary