What are BD's limits?

[No1Mugster]

I was wondering what would happen in 15-20 years time and we started to go higher than 1080p. Is it just a case of more resolution the more space needed on a disk? Or is there more to it than that? And could BD's handle improvements in sound and vision?

[Anthony P]

Originally Posted by No1Mugster

I was wondering what would happen in 15-20 years time and we started to go higher than 1080p. Is it just a case of more resolution the more space needed on a disk? Or is there more to it than that? And could BD's handle improvements in sound and vision?

yes and no. Obviously more resolution should mean more space, but these are compressed and so in theory one can start with more resolution, cal it higher resolution and yet use less space because it is more compressed. But it gets more complicated.
1)if we look at DVD vs BD, DVD was MPEG-2 while most BDs are MPEG-4 so there is always the possibility of new CODECS (rules of compression) and the player needs to have the good CODECS, You can also look at movies like Terminator2 extreme edition that came out on WMP-DVDs so even though the disk was physically a DVD , the data was a different codec and different DRM so they played on PCs with windows media player but not normal DVD players
2)you need to be able to process the data, it takes a lot more work to process a 1080p then a 720p or 480i like DVD so the processor in a BD player needs to be more powerful then a DVD player (even if it is MPEG-2) .
3)you need to be able to get the info from disk to processor in a timely fashion. For example if we say there is 4x the resolution or better yet the size of the movie is 4x larger when compressed then you need to bring the info from disk to processor 4x faster.
4) lastly there is the capacity issue. LOTR EE will be split on two BDs, imagine if you had a bump in resolution and size of files.
5) marketing, not only do you have what I mentioned above, but even if things work (take BD 3D for example) studios will still want to differentiate between a premium product and the old one.


So in the end, will a BD disk be the basis for a next format? I don’t know, but it most likely means a new name and players. But it all depends on the improvements.

[img eL]

Originally Posted by Anthony P

So in the end, will a BD disk be the basis for a next format? I don’t know, but it most likely means a new name and players. But it all depends on the improvements.

The ability to playback BDXL discs should (its currently not) be in the Blu ray spec for all Blu ray players built in 2011. There are consumer Blu ray players with BDXL support in Japan as far back as summer 2010.

[4K2K]

Originally Posted by img eL

The ability to playback BDXL discs should (its currently not) be in the Blu ray spec for all Blu ray players built in 2011. There are consumer Blu ray players with BDXL support in Japan as far back as summer 2010.

But they are very unlikely to be used by studios for film distribution to consumers on Blu-ray, and the video formats supported by the players for commercial discs will still be the same as for 50 GB discs - unless a new standard/format was announced (which would most likely be incompatible with current players - particularly if it was a big change - eg. to 4K or SHV).

[img eL]

Originally Posted by 4K2K

But they are very unlikely to be used by studios for film distribution to consumers on Blu-ray, and the video formats supported by the players for commercial discs will still be the same as for 50 GB discs - unless a new standard/format was announced (which would most likely be incompatible with current players - particularly if it was a big change - eg. to 4K or SHV).

BDXL will not be a big change to 4K, BDXL max space is 100-128GB. Has the codecs are currently 128GB is not even close for the space needed for 4K. BDXL will be for higher quaility 1080p, ability to spread long 1080p movies over 1 disc, fit extras on to fewer disc's etc.

A quote from Vinpower Digital CEO:

“Blu-ray as a format has already opened the doors to greater storage capability for all aspects of digital storage, yet innovations in fields such as 3-D video content and archival storage have created a need for even higher capacity," explains Vinpower Digital C.E.O., Calvin Chang. "So, the introduction of the BDXL media opens the door to greater creativity and development across all content creation, especially in the field of filmmaking. That’s why it was critical that Vinpower offer duplication equipment with the Pioneer BDR-206MBK drive, which is capable of reliably copying this new higher capacity media format.”

http://www.pr.com/press-release/310434

[Tok]

I just don't see 4k for the home environment anytime soon. The viewer either needs a large display 100" @ <8ft or they need to be sitting on top of their 40-50ish inch TVs.

The big reason for the change to a HD format was because we had a new television standard. I don't see the TV standard changing significantly in the next 30years. How much resolution is enough for most content? I think we are already there. I watch 1080p on a 100" screen from 12ft away. I have seen some bad BDs but the best mastered titles don't leave me thinking how much better 4k would be even at that size and viewing distance. 4k is for commercial theaters with 25' or larger screens. 2k cinema was not a good replacement for film based projection, 4k is getting much closer to replacing film.

[Anthony P]

Originally Posted by img eL

BDXL will not be a big change to 4K, BDXL max space is 100-128GB. Has the codecs are currently 128GB is not even close for the space needed for 4K. BDXL will be for higher quaility 1080p, ability to spread long 1080p movies over 1 disc, fit extras on to fewer disc's etc.

A quote from Vinpower Digital CEO:

“Blu-ray as a format has already opened the doors to greater storage capability for all aspects of digital storage, yet innovations in fields such as 3-D video content and archival storage have created a need for even higher capacity," explains Vinpower Digital C.E.O., Calvin Chang. "So, the introduction of the BDXL media opens the door to greater creativity and development across all content creation, especially in the field of filmmaking. That’s why it was critical that Vinpower offer duplication equipment with the Pioneer BDR-206MBK drive, which is capable of reliably copying this new higher capacity media format.”

http://www.pr.com/press-release/310434

but that is COPYING and not REPLICATING. The first is an extremely expensive process while the other is cheap and is what is used for mass marketed films. Until BDXL can be replicated with low rejects, it won't be used for commercial films. If you need 100 or 1000 copies or some small number like that copying can be done, but when you need hundreds of thousand and millions it does not.

[alehel]

MPEG and VCEG are already working on the h.265 standard and they have apparently come quite far. They have had many claims as to its efficiency compared to h.264, but I wont believe them untill we start seeing some proper comparisons. They claim they should achieve 40% improvement in compression efficiency which I'm sure would be very welcome for streaming rentals. I'll see if I can find some links for those claims.

The downside with physical media such as blu-ray is that it is a much longer process to take advantage of new technology. Streaming rentals only have to introduce new software for their website and they can start using things like h.265. Blu-ray on the other hand can't make that kind of switch as easily.

[img eL]

Originally Posted by Anthony P

but that is COPYING and not REPLICATING. The first is an extremely expensive process while the other is cheap and is what is used for mass marketed films. Until BDXL can be replicated with low rejects, it won't be used for commercial films. If you need 100 or 1000 copies or some small number like that copying can be done, but when you need hundreds of thousand and millions it does not.

Yes that article I linked to is BDXL Duplication, I would perfer Replicating for Films. BDXL testing pdf http://www.media-tech.net/fileadmin/..._Horiguchi.pdf

[img eL]

Originally Posted by alehel

The downside with physical media such as blu-ray is that it is a much longer process to take advantage of new technology. Streaming rentals only have to introduce new software for their website and they can start using things like h.265. Blu-ray on the other hand can't make that kind of switch as easily.

You could update firmware in some Blu ray players to play new codecs as well. Will the new h.265 need stronger CPU's?, Be of lesser of quailty?

[Anthony P]

Originally Posted by alehel

MPEG and VCEG are already working on the h.265 standard and they have apparently come quite far. They have had many claims as to its efficiency compared to h.264, but I wont believe them untill we start seeing some proper comparisons. They claim they should achieve 40% improvement in compression efficiency which I'm sure would be very welcome for streaming rentals. I'll see if I can find some links for those claims.

The issue with compression is that it is not about quality but efficiency. What I mean is at 20mbps there is more difference in quality between mpeg4 and mpeg2 then at 40mbps or 100mbps. On the flip side they both look better at 100mbps then 40mbps or 20mbps.

The downside with physical media such as blu-ray is that it is a much longer process to take advantage of new technology. Streaming rentals only have to introduce new software for their website and they can start using things like h.265. Blu-ray on the other hand can't make that kind of switch as easily.

yes and no. If one assumes they are computers then the processing power might be there. But if one takes a more reasonable assumption where they are players then the limits are the same. If someone uses a PS3/360/wii or one of those Netflix BD players, why do you think a new CODEC can be more easily used for Netflix playback then BD playback?

On the flip side it has been years that HTPCs have been possible and the % of pop that uses them is extremely small. And all the DL/streaming solutions have been associating themselves with CEs for "set-top" box scenarios because it is the only way for public acceptence.

[4K2K]

Originally Posted by Anthony P

The issue with compression is that it is not about quality but efficiency. What I mean is at 20mbps there is more difference in quality between mpeg4 and mpeg2 then at 40mbps or 100mbps. On the flip side they both look better at 100mbps then 40mbps or 20mbps.

It's about both. If they're going to increase the spatial resolution eg. to 4K/60p or higher like SHv@>=60p, they're probably going to want to use a more efficient codec than mpeg4/H264 otherwise the picture quality is going to look worse than it could even at 100-200 mbps (for SHV)

[Anthony P]

Originally Posted by 4K2K

It's about both. If they're going to increase the spatial resolution eg. to 4K/60p or higher like SHv@>=60p, they're probably going to want to use a more efficient codec than mpeg4/H264 otherwise the picture quality is going to look worse than it could even at 100-200 mbps (for SHV)

yes being offered much more is a good thing. But that was not the discussion. And then I would rather have both (higher bitrate and offered more) right, why limit yourself to 100-200mbps 4k/60p?

[Petra_Kalbrain]

There is no point to increasing resolution any longer for home theatre entertainment. Unless EVERY HOME has a commercial sized theatre room in it, the difference in image quality will be so negligible that it won't be worth spending another several thousand dollars on equipment upgrades.

[Ronk]

Can Blu-ray be burned at 1920x1080p 60fps? I have been unsuccessful finding software that will not dumb down my 1080p 60fps input to either 1080i or to 30fps when burning to Blu-ray.

[Steedeel]

I am just waiting for the download brigade to turn up and start talking about streaming! No guys, ultra hi def is not the future, the future is watching films via streams that look like pirated films. The future is watching a film with pauses every now and then while the buffering sorts itself out. The future is watching films like Wall-e and Up and not being able to spot all that fine detail and stunning clarity because they are hidden behind a ugly block of pixels.


looooooooooooong live Bluray!

(just thought i would get in first)

[Dwayne]

Originally Posted by Steedeel

I am just waiting for the download brigade to turn up and start talking about streaming! No guys, ultra hi def is not the future, the future is watching films via streams that look like pirated films. The future is watching a film with pauses every now and then while the buffering sorts itself out. The future is watching films like Wall-e and Up and not being able to spot all that fine detail and stunning clarity because they are hidden behind a ugly block of pixels.


looooooooooooong live Bluray!

(just thought i would get in first)

Im glad you did or I would have. I agree with you 100%. No streaming video fan here. PHYSICAL MEDIA IS THE ONLY WAY!!!!! Blu-ray of course, but I will still take DVD over streaming ANYDAY.

[Steedeel]

agreed. There are some absolute idiots claiming that streaming is HD quality. That is what i find amusing!

[U4K61]

Originally Posted by No1Mugster

I was wondering what would happen in 15-20 years time and we started to go higher than 1080p. Is it just a case of more resolution the more space needed on a disk? Or is there more to it than that? And could BD's handle improvements in sound and vision?

I remember when it was said that the 50Mhz 486 w/40 meg hard drive was all computer power/storage one would ever need. What could you type in that needed so much space? Now 1TB is hardly enouf for a sizable collection HD videos. Always a need for a bigger bit bucket.

I'll bet that I can see 4K on a 32" set close up. I will keep upgrading my TV if my eyes keep telling me the new set has better PQ. But I also believe in the law of diminishing returns, and figure there will be a much longer turnaound time to 4K then there was when we went from DVD to HD.

[Ascended_Saiyan]

Originally Posted by Dwayne

Im glad you did or I would have. I agree with you 100%. No streaming video fan here. PHYSICAL MEDIA IS THE ONLY WAY!!!!! Blu-ray of course, but I will still take DVD over streaming ANYDAY.

That part is a little outlandish. DVD still uses MPEG-2 at around 7Mbps. Streaming, usually, uses H.264 at around 2 Mbps. H.264 is often superior to DVD at those bitrates. Now, DTS audio from these discs is a different story. DD+ is now a reality even with 1080p streaming, so DVD wouldn't be an issue. Streaming as a substitute for Blu-ray? Hell no! Streaming as a substitute for DVD? Acceptable.