4K(2160P) Blu-ray movies

[DarknessBDJM]

Originally Posted by DiscoDan

is 35mm lower quality than 4k?

That depends upon the quality of the film source. if it's a clean 35mm negative it has a higher quality. 6K is the resolution that digital film is roughly equivalent to full Academy frame 35mm scanned at the same resolution, so basically it's where digital film cathes up to film scanned digitally. Capturing every last detail of 35mm film would be closer to 14,000x7,000 if the digital film system had the full rgb capabilities of film, which they do not, so they cannot truly resolve their full numbered resolution.

[Sean B.]

I think i might of just found out that 4K(20160P) might be out sooner then we had thought! . Check this out from the Sony website in this link here ! > http://store.sony.com/c/S_4KTV/en/c/...#fourKenhances . There is no release date listed for the 4K(2160P) Ultra HDTV's and 4K (2160P) hdmi cables shown on the website, as if they are already out now! . Now all Sony has to do if release information about their BD players that support 4K (2160P). I'm sure other HDTV companies will soon release information about their Ultra HDTV's as well. Then they likely release information about their Ultra HD BD players next! .

[keb33509]

Sean, you are a little behind on your information. The TVs went up for pre-order today and are available May 18th. This has been known for a month or more. High speed HDMI cables have supported 4K since their release, but only at 24/30p. There is no known information about possible REAL 4K blu-rays. As of right now, all talks are on the red ray streaming box and Sony's. It appears as if you are paying no attention at all to all of the other responses in your own thread.

[Sean B.]

Originally Posted by keb33509

Sean, you are a little behind on your information. The TVs went up for pre-order today and are available May 18th. This has been known for a month or more. High speed HDMI cables have supported 4K since their release, but only at 24/30p. There is no known information about possible REAL 4K blu-rays. As of right now, all talks are on the red ray streaming box and Sony's. It appears as if you are paying no attention at all to all of the other responses in your own thread.

Did you get that information from that webpage on sony.com that i had posted a link to before, that the Ultra HDTVs went up for pre-order today and are available on May 18th ? I bet they will also have Ultra HD Blu-ray players that will go up for pre-order soon as well. There's also already HDMI Cable that support 2160P (4K) as well that are shown on there.

[Drewbee87]

Don't they already have a 4K Media Player that is supposed to come pre-loaded with full 4K resolution movies?

[HD Goofnut]

Originally Posted by Drewbee87

Don't they already have a 4K Media Player that is supposed to come pre-loaded with full 4K resolution movies?

Sony does. It's $800 I believe. Who knows how the quality compares to a physical format though.

[tylergfoster]

Originally Posted by HD Goofnut

They are mastered in 4K instead of 2K like many films. For example, the present release of Ghostbusters utilized a 2K master that was used for the remastered DVD release from several years ago. The new release of Ghostbusters next month will come from a new 4K master, which is equivalent to the film's native 35mm resolution. Will there more than a marginal difference between it and the original BD release? Probably not.

I still think this is a crazy thing to say about a new from-the-negative transfer at 4K. It seems to me that a brand-new scan at twice the resolution with six years of technological advances in between is undoubtedly going to look a lot better than something prepped for DVD and may not be a from-negative transfer, even before the various issues that plague the existing Ghostbusters Blu-Ray.

[Retroj23]

Originally Posted by tylergfoster

I still think this is a crazy thing to say about a new from-the-negative transfer at 4K. It seems to me that a brand-new scan at twice the resolution with six years of technological advances in between is undoubtedly going to look a lot better than something prepped for DVD and may not be a from-negative transfer, even before the various issues that plague the existing Ghostbusters Blu-Ray.

So lets say a studio, like Universal, scans a film negative at 4K and adds EE and DNR to it, would that defeat the purpose of the higher resolution? In other words can a studio still bungle up the video quality even in 4K or even 8K?

[HD Goofnut]

Originally Posted by tylergfoster

I still think this is a crazy thing to say about a new from-the-negative transfer at 4K. It seems to me that a brand-new scan at twice the resolution with six years of technological advances in between is undoubtedly going to look a lot better than something prepped for DVD and may not be a from-negative transfer, even before the various issues that plague the existing Ghostbusters Blu-Ray.

You think The Amazing Spider-Man or Battle: Los Angeles are going to look more than marginally better? You already know the answer to that.

[Falaskan]

I would personally prefer 21:9 tvs to become more mainstream than 4k. I mainly just watch movies on my tv, and hate those black bars!

[Indiana Jones]

Originally Posted by HD Goofnut

You think The Amazing Spider-Man or Battle: Los Angeles are going to look more than marginally better? You already know the answer to that.

I think he was just referring to Ghostbusters which I also think will show a decent improvement over the current BD but films like Battle LA and Amazing Spidermam will no doubt be almost identical to the current BDs.

[HD Goofnut]

Originally Posted by Falaskan

I would personally prefer 21:9 tvs to become more mainstream than 4k. I mainly just watch movies on my tv, and hate those black bars!

I guess you don't realize that it would be pointless. With 21:9 displays everything narrower than 2.40:1 is going to going to be pillar-boxed. Then everything wider than 2.40:1 is still going to have black bars on the top and bottom.

[Sean B.]

According to bestbuy.com 2160P 3D ultra hdtv's, 2160P Blu-ray player upconverters, and HDMI Cables with High Speed and 3D and 1080P and 2160P are all out http://www.bestbuy.com/site/Sony+-+5...160P&cp=1&lp=2 and also http://www.bestbuy.com/site/Sony+-+B...ayer&cp=1&lp=1 and also http://www.bestbuy.com/site/eForCity...160P&cp=1&lp=1 . I wonder when regular 2160P Blu-ray players will be released, instead of 2160P Blu-ray player upconverters ?

[Indiana Jones]

Going to be a while yet, like others have said the spec hasn't been finalised and they aren't just going to suddenly release brand new players and a completely new home video format overnight.

[JoeDeM]

Originally Posted by Retroj23

So lets say a studio, like Universal, scans a film negative at 4K and adds EE and DNR to it, would that defeat the purpose of the higher resolution? In other words can a studio still bungle up the video quality even in 4K or even 8K?

Generally EE and DNR are applied in the blu-ray mastering phase, so they should have an EE/DNR free 4k/8k master.

[Canada]

Originally Posted by HD Goofnut

No, I mean 4K upconversion players. There are no native 4K players yet. It's mainly because there is no 4K content as of yet.

There are 4K up-conversion players now, native 4k players are not available yet, but they soon will be, although they won't be disk based, not yet anyway.

[Falaskan]

Originally Posted by HD Goofnut

I guess you don't realize that it would be pointless. With 21:9 displays everything narrower than 2.40:1 is going to going to be pillar-boxed. Then everything wider than 2.40:1 is still going to have black bars on the top and bottom.

Still dont think its pointless. Movies wider than 2.40.1 will still have minimal black bars on top and bottom.

Most television is in widescreen now a days and althougth it is framed for 16:9, tv shows would be able to be justified for 21:9 like fullscreen tv shows are justified to fit a 16:9 screen. And like I said, since I don't watch much tv, I don't car about the select few times there would be bars on both sides of the screen.

[Drewbee87]

Originally Posted by Falaskan

Still dont think its pointless. Movies wider than 2.40.1 will still have minimal black bars on top and bottom.

Most television is in widescreen now a days and althougth it is framed for 16:9, tv shows would be able to be justified for 21:9 like fullscreen tv shows are justified to fit a 16:9 screen. And like I said, since I don't watch much tv, I don't car about the select few times there would be bars on both sides of the screen.

Why do you want them to become more popular though? Is it so more company's will make them? IMO, black bars on the sides are worse than having them at the top & bottom...

[Falaskan]

Originally Posted by Drewbee87

Why do you want them to become more popular though? Is it so more company's will make them? IMO, black bars on the sides are worse than having them at the top & bottom...

Because the main company I can find that makes them right now is Vizio, but it's still expensive and sold online. I haven't seen any in stores so I'd prefer more companies get behind the model which would bring the price down as well. And I still think the amount of full frame shows is so small, black bars on the sides would be just as minimal. Tv shows framed at 1:85:1 would easily be able to be justified to fit a 21:9 framed tv.

[HD Goofnut]

Originally Posted by Canada

There are 4K up-conversion players now, native 4k players are not available yet, but they soon will be, although they won't be disk based, not yet anyway.

I guess you didn't read the first couple pages of this thread where I said all of this.