Real 4k disks - what do you think the rollout timeline will be?

[Blu-Dog]

A quick look at the box stores shows they are not trying to re-stock big screens in 1080P format. I've checked a few. Of interest:

• Sharp is not restocking their 80 and 90 inch models
• Sony is blowing out 70 inch models at their outlet stores for around $1700
• LG has still not announced any new models of their "rush to market" 84 inch 4K screen, and no new stock for sizes below that
• 55 , 60, and 65 inch screens are not being restocked for anybody
• Blowout level pricing is going on for Samsung screens in 1080p, with ready stock for 4K

This is from a quick check of two Best Buy, two Fry's, and one Sony Outlet store (Camarillo, CA).

The screens are moving to 4K, everywhere. Sales resistance is strong, because pricing is absurd. This will change.

Everyone knows that what will help is a player standard that isn't the proprietary jokes like Sony's "puck" or the Red player, with no production levels worth talking about. It needs to play legacy Blu-Ray in 1080p, whatever 3-D standard is coming up (no need to worry about legacy 3-D stuff, though it would be nice), and not be priced at goofy levels for media.

It also needs to meet the REC.2020 and new compression standards to mean anything. That's not hard to do, nor is the authoring.

The heat is definitely on. I expect to see something by summer, once 1080p television stock dries up. We'll have something by the Christmas sales season, definitely - probably long before.

[reanimator]

One thing is certain: with Netflix and others stepping towards 4K streaming, the BDA will not sit by and do nothing. Bluray disc is their business. If streaming takes over, BDA will be out of business.

It's very telling that when you read these interviews with Sony, Samsung or BDA, that the conversation is no longer about "if" we will see a 4K spec for bluray, but about "when" the spec will be announced. 4KBD is coming, without question.

With 4K TV sales stronger than expected in 2013, I sense a desire to keep that momentum building. There is no way 2014 will be "4K content silent." The official announcement for 4KBD will be made -- and if we're really lucky, the first wave might be available by year's end.

Hopefully 4KBD will be in our hands fast enough that we can get the titles we want before streaming takes over forever.

[pentatonic]

I agree with all previous comments. But obviously the only marketing done is dl/streaming with some majors supporting.

I haven't really been following the development of UHD BDs as there seems right now they're still just too many factors to clear up, but is there any info on a "real" expected time frame for rollout? One thing that is happening is a very early arrival of UHD sets and by this time next year we should see reasonable prices, enough to get the aficionados interested if they also boast the best PQ of the lot.

[mredman]

Originally Posted by reanimator

One thing is certain: with Netflix and others stepping towards 4K streaming, the BDA will not sit by and do nothing. Bluray disc is their business. If streaming takes over, BDA will be out of business.

It's very telling that when you read these interviews with Sony, Samsung or BDA, that the conversation is no longer about "if" we will see a 4K spec for bluray, but about "when" the spec will be announced. 4KBD is coming, without question.

With 4K TV sales stronger than expected in 2013, I sense a desire to keep that momentum building. There is no way 2014 will be "4K content silent." The official announcement for 4KBD will be made -- and if we're really lucky, the first wave might be available by year's end.

Hopefully 4KBD will be in our hands fast enough that we can get the titles we want before streaming takes over forever.

Streaming will NEVER take over there will always be more money in physical media and blu ray in general for studios because they can charge way more for it and collectors will never go away either. Bottomline there will always be people that want to own stuff and hold in their hands compared to a file on server or harddrive that could cease to exist at any time.

Then there is people wil projector screens. Streaming and digital will never look or sound as good as a 30-45 GB movie on a blu ray disc.

[Suntory_Times]

I think the earliest we will see 4k blu-rays is 2015. Though I wouldn't be shocked to see it moved to even 2016.

[Suntory_Times]

Originally Posted by mredman

Streaming will NEVER take over there will always be more money in physical media and blu ray in general for studios because they can charge way more for it and collectors will never go away either. Bottomline there will always be people that want to own stuff and hold in their hands compared to a file on server or harddrive that could cease to exist at any time.

Then there is people wil projector screens. Streaming and digital will never look or sound as good as a 30-45 GB movie on a blu ray disc.

I have to disagree with the last part of this. It is more then feasible that in the future streaming will be able to provide the same quality as physical media.

[mredman]

Originally Posted by Suntory_Times

I have to disagree with the last part of this. It is more then feasible that in the future streaming will be able to provide the same quality as physical media.

That will never happen because internet can go out just as you watch a movie. Internet goes out when there is big storms to. It did it while we watched netflix and that will never go away. There will ALWAYS come a time where the internet goes out at one point

Digital download might when the filesize is about 30-40 GB. But then again collectors want to own their stuff and most people do not feel they own their favorites by a digital download or on a server that is not theirs that could go down at any time.

[Suntory_Times]

Originally Posted by mredman

That will never happen because internet can go out just as you watch a movie. Internet goes out when there is big storms to. It did it while we watched netflix and that will never go away. There will ALWAYS come a time where the internet goes out at one point

Digital download might when the filesize is about 30-40 GB. But then again collectors want to own their stuff and most people do not feel they own their favorites by a digital download or on a server that is not theirs that could go down at any time.

I didn't disagree regarding collectors. In fact I didn't comment on it. All I said is that in the future it is feasible that streaming could offer the same quality as physical media. The internet going out is a rather moot point to me but I'm sure many will disagree. The bigger point I would say is having the internet with the bandwidth neaded as a necessity to access your films. A product (films) relying on one having another product (internet) could cause some issues especially when we are not talking about renting.

Personally for films I have no interest in moving away from physical but the option for digital is fantastic. As long as it is only one option along with physical media. Far to many films are essentially forgotten by studios and I don't like the idea of loosing access to films as they are forgotten by studios or as studios go bunkrupt. Which would be a huge hurdle for ownership via streaming that I fell will remain an issue that can not be overcome.

[Wendell R. Breland]

A little real world perspective, about 2 years ago VUDU made a big deal of the fact they were going to have Dolby Digital Plus 7.1 titles. As of now they are showing about 16 titles (they show 18 but I believe 1 or 2 of those is demo’s). I think most believe VUDU to be the premier site for streaming audio and video quality. Lossless audio is part of the CFF but I do not know of a SINGLE title available with it.

Folks really need to get their heads around the fact that streaming is not about ultimate quality audio and video. The streamers (Netflix, VUDU, Amazon, etc.) will make some HD and UHD noise simply because they do not want to be perceived as being behind the technology curve. But just how many phone, pad, PC, small TV users care about 5.1 sound, I wager not very many and that is the main users of streaming.

[Anthony P]

Originally Posted by Suntory_Times

I have to disagree with the last part of this. It is more then feasible that in the future streaming will be able to provide the same quality as physical media.

But it is just as easy to say it is more than feasible that I will one day be at the top of Forbes richest people.

The issue I have with this idea of feasible is

1) The nature of the internet means that what ever is streaming to gave the same quality you would need 1.5x the BW compared to physical media (latency, possible routing issues, header overhead....)

2) it is not enough to have enough BW. For example sometimes I don't want to watch what my GF wants to watch and vice versa, so we both watch different things at the same time, sometimes something is DL/UL on my PC, console or tablet at the same time as I am watching a film..... so what ever we get in #1 you would need to multiply it by a reasonable # (obviously for some it will be smaller, but for others it can be larger) so let's assume a simple family, two parents and one kid so we will go with 4x (don't forget possible other tasks)

so that means that for something like 2D BD quality that has been available on physical media since 2006 to be easy to do at home you would need a 250-300 mbps connection at home

3) do you assume physical media will stay fixed? when BD launched it was 48mbps, with 3D it got bumped a bit higher and now (since it is the 4k thread) we would need to assume it will be bumped even higher. How long before 250-300 mbps links are common and cheap and how do you know where physical media will be at that point in time?

[Clark Kent]

Streaming is certainly not for videophiles. Even the best HDX streams on VUDU don't hold up very well with mediocre Blu-rays for picture quality.

[Steedeel]

Originally Posted by Clark Kent

Streaming is certainly not for videophiles. Even the best HDX streams on VUDU don't hold up very well with mediocre Blu-rays for picture quality.

Backgrounds tend to break up into blocking a lot. That is the big issue for videophiles I feel.

[Suntory_Times]

Originally Posted by Anthony P

But it is just as easy to say it is more than feasible that I will one day be at the top of Forbes richest people.

The issue I have with this idea of feasible is

1) The nature of the internet means that what ever is streaming to gave the same quality you would need 1.5x the BW compared to physical media (latency, possible routing issues, header overhead....)

2) it is not enough to have enough BW. For example sometimes I don't want to watch what my GF wants to watch and vice versa, so we both watch different things at the same time, sometimes something is DL/UL on my PC, console or tablet at the same time as I am watching a film..... so what ever we get in #1 you would need to multiply it by a reasonable # (obviously for some it will be smaller, but for others it can be larger) so let's assume a simple family, two parents and one kid so we will go with 4x (don't forget possible other tasks)

so that means that for something like 2D BD quality that has been available on physical media since 2006 to be easy to do at home you would need a 250-300 mbps connection at home

3) do you assume physical media will stay fixed? when BD launched it was 48mbps, with 3D it got bumped a bit higher and now (since it is the 4k thread) we would need to assume it will be bumped even higher. How long before 250-300 mbps links are common and cheap and how do you know where physical media will be at that point in time?

We do not now what compression advancements will be made to start. Which make much of what you said irrelevant. Jump back 10 years ago and look at the compression tools we had then vs now. Is there something I am missing or is this not expected to continue. Furthermore this thread specifies simply future without any sense of time frame. Streaming will eventually match physical goods in terms of quality if that is the way to maximize profits. Nothing you mention is in obstacle that would be impossible to overcome. The one factor that I fell is a bigger question is whether people will demand higher quality. I'm not so sure that most do. The majority do not watch films at home in the best quality available and dvds still outsell blu - ray qround 3 to 1 last I heard. So it is possible I concede that a niche premium physical market could exist with higher quality one pays a premium for. But once again is there something that would stop that quality bieng achievable via streaming? I can't think of one in terms of technical problems that couldn't possibly be solved.

I never made mention of physical media remaining fixed or not. I do think we will eventually reach that point as I fell consumers by and large would prefer one set format for films like cds have had for quite some time.

[posthaste]

Originally Posted by Suntory_Times

But once again is there something that would stop that quality bieng achievable via streaming? I can't think of one in terms of technical problems that couldn't possibly be solved.

Do you have bandwidth caps in Australia? Comcast, the largest ISP in the U.S. (and now set to become even bigger taking over Time Warner) has 300 GB per month limit. $10 per 50 gigabyte overages after that. That cap isn't being enforced across all their markets YET, but the writing is on the wall.

How many 4K / UHD movies can you stream a month with a 300GB limit?

It's a political problem here, not technical.

[pro-bassoonist]

Originally Posted by Blu-Dog

A quick look at the box stores shows they are not trying to re-stock big screens in 1080P format. I've checked a few.

The screens are moving to 4K, everywhere. Sales resistance is strong, because pricing is absurd. This will change.

This is actually not entirely true. Consumer interest in the 4K sets, and especially sales, have been academic at best. Outside of Best Buy where you could see some larger 4K sets on display -- and actually the big 4K sets are only in select prime locations -- you would have to go to specialty vendors to see demo material, etc.

Currently, Target, for example, isn't planning to carry UHD sets:

http://www.homemediamagazine.com/ret...d-target-32509

At least for now, mass merchant Target — the second-largest U.S. retailer, according to Fortune 500 rankings (behind No. 1 Walmart, which does sell UHD sets) — won’t be among them.

“Target does not carry 4K TVs, and we do not have information to share regarding future assortment plans or vendor conversations,” a Target spokeswoman said.

Walmart carries the units in select markets.

As I said earlier, there has been a push from the industry to create the impression that there is some rising interest in the technology, but the reality is different. The "interest" is touted by a few big players (SONY being one of them) in order to please some investors who have been quite concerned with recent developments on the market.

There could be some perceivable interest before or around the World Cup in Brazil, but its impact on the market is difficult to predict at the moment. A lot of people are still hurting and the economy most definitely has not rebounded.

Bottom line is this: there is tension amongst the manufacturers and little interest amongst the consumers.

Pro-B

[Suntory_Times]

Originally Posted by posthaste

Do you have bandwidth caps in Australia? Comcast, the largest ISP in the U.S. (and now set to become even bigger taking over Time Warner) has 300 GB per month limit. $10 per 50 gigabyte overages after that. That cap isn't being enforced across all their markets YET, but the writing is on the wall.

How many 4K / UHD movies can you stream a month with a 300GB limit?

It's a political problem here, not technical.

Yes, but do you know for a fact that in the future that will remain the case? Also technically zero films are available to stream in 4k at the moment in Australia. I actually prefer physical but I see it as more then plausible that the difference would not be quality at some stage in the future. If we defined what we meant by future (next five years for example) my opinion would be different.

[Canada]

Apparently if the 4K disks don't have more accurate colour like 12 bit 4:4:4, we won't notice much difference between 1080p and 4K on TV's being the size they are now, apparently you have to have about a 10ft image before you can notice what's in a 1080p image.

[Suntory_Times]

Originally Posted by Canada

Apparently if the 4K disks don't have more accurate colour like 12 bit 4:4:4, we won't notice much difference between 1080p and 4K on TV's being the size they are now, apparently you have to have about a 10ft image before you can notice what's in a 1080p image.

It is quite possible HDR and similar will also be part of the spec. On top of that the viewing distance and screen size (and eye sight) has to be known to say whether you will benefit from 4k. So saying you need a 10 foot screen to be able to see the advantages of 4k is simply wrong. For example from the viewing distance from my computer monitor I can see above 4k. From recommended viewing distances (using both THX and SMPTE reference viewing positions) there is a clear benefit to 4k over 1080p.

Also if we are going to have 12 bit color at 4:4:4 then we are almost certainly going to have to have a new hdmi spec as 2.0 doesn't look like it would be able to cut it.

Personally I am more exited about the extra color space and things like HDR then I am resolution. Though I am only exited for HDR if it becomes something the film makers edit/color grade for. I don't want it to be something just added for home release separate to what the film makers made and I could see it being like dbox. Still I think this push for 4k is to soon. We really needed to see new release films in cinemas having 4k releases for a few years before we started having 4k tvs (at least in my opinion). As it is very few films are actually made in 4k, and as far as I know every new wide release film is distributed in 2k currently. This is the real hurdle for 4k, there simply is little content currently available and for over a decade more or less every film has used a 2k DI. This essentially means in terms of newer releases at the very least there is actually more content available in 3d then there will be in 4k for quite some time and one of the common complaints excluding glasses about 3d seems to be the lack of content.

[pentatonic]

I think what people fail to realize, 4K from now on will be the high end, and very soon the mid-range, so for the ones, like us, who want to best panel possible it will probably have to be 4K, unless Samsung keeps on producing plasmas or OLEDS come down in price. Right now 4K projectors are still somewhat expensive, but that also will become the norm for mid to high end.

I also hope that they don't push 4K Blu-ray without upgrading the specs, though
with MovieLabs' recommendations, it would be awesome and a plenty good reason to upgrade.

[Steedeel]

Originally Posted by pentatonic

I think what people fail to realize, 4K from now on will be the high end, and very soon the mid-range, so for the ones, like us, who want to best panel possible it will probably have to be 4K, unless Samsung keeps on producing plasmas or OLEDS come down in price. Right now 4K projectors are still somewhat expensive, but that also will become the norm for mid to high end.

I also hope that they don't push 4K Blu-ray without upgrading the specs, though
with MovieLabs' recommendations, it would be awesome and a plenty good reason to upgrade.

Yes I agree. People like to think they have a future-proof set even if they are not that bothered about quality. I know several people from work who bought 3D tv because they didn't want to get left behind but haven't even watched 3D yet! (I know, I know) it was the same with HD. So to summarise, even braindead, non techies buy into something if they think they will be left with a dud. From then on, it's a slow drip feed until eventually they are exposed to the better quality.