Physical & Digital EST: The Future of Home Video Discussion Thread

[Vilya]

Originally Posted by bhampton

I don't believe most of that.

The future is digital download of a physical master ? ... Nope ... Sorry. Not at all likely.

Kaliedscape does this now and they may or may not survive but most people don't consider them reasonably priced.

Kaleidescape offers downloads that are roughly equivalent in size as to what you will find on a 4K disc; they do NOT offer fully uncompressed downloads that would be in the many terabytes in size each. No one does.

Further, Kaleidsecape is a grossly expensive proprietary system that offers downloads chock full of DRM.

[Steedeel]

Originally Posted by Wendell R. Breland

Recently it has gotten worse on Netflix, UHD's now stream at 11.55 Mbps and HD at 2.76 Mbps. Checked the Netflix server test and the results was 170 Mbps.

I speculated that they may do this a few weeks back when they dropped the bit rates for the U.K. due to the virus. If people are not noticing the difference, why not keep them at that level globally? Not the most demanding of audiences after all.

[bhampton]

Originally Posted by Vilya

Kaleidescape offers downloads that are roughly equivalent in size as to what you will find on a 4K disc; they do NOT offer fully uncompressed downloads that would be in the many terabytes in size each. No one does.

Further, Kaleidsecape is a grossly expensive proprietary system that offers downloads chock full of DRM.

Yeah I know but they offer downloads of what's on the physical disc. I was saying that and the too expensive part.

Professional Athletes and people in the 1% and make 10's of millions or more per year have to be able to buy stuff too including AV crap so it's good Kaliedscape is here for them for now. It want out of business before and I imagine it will again but hopefully not for it's users.

[moreorless]

Originally Posted by Steedeel

I speculated that they may do this a few weeks back when they dropped the bit rates for the U.K. due to the virus. If people are not noticing the difference, why not keep them at that level globally? Not the most demanding of audiences after all.

People tend to view technology as a constant state of improvement but I would argue that a lot of the time "good enough" ends up being the standard, with something like say photography for example 35mm came to dominate rather than medium/large format.

Whats more its not going to make sense for someone like Netflix to offer a premium higher bitrate service since that's going to make the standard service look worse. I can see their being smaller more quality focused services but they might struggle for content where as with physical media exclusivity isn't such an issue.

[Plutotype]

Originally Posted by bhampton

I don't believe most of that.

The future is digital download of a physical master ? ... Nope ... Sorry. Not at all likely.

Kaliedscape does this now and they may or may not survive but most people don't consider them reasonably priced.

That is why I wrote "consumer grade platform"...Kaleidescape is for 0.01% of consumers with big pockets. It works only in major markets, has limited subtitle and label support, does not support Dolby Vision, etc. This is not what we want.

We want all titles and all labels under one legal pay-per-download platform. Labels would bring their titles to consumers and allow them to download the master files in any quality they prefer and are able to purchase ( even higher quality than BD or UHD - no limitations here ).

[Vilya]

Originally Posted by Plutotype

That is why I wrote "consumer grade platform"...Kaleidescape is for 0.01% of consumers with big pockets. It works only in major markets, has limited subtitle and label support, does not support Dolby Vision, etc. This is not what we want.

We want all titles and all labels under one legal pay-per-download platform. Labels would bring their titles to consumers and allow them to download the master files in any quality they prefer and are able to purchase ( even higher quality than BD or UHD - no limitations here ).

Kaleidescape works in tiny rural markets like mine, too. Slower internet just makes a download take longer to complete after all.

Within my tiny village we have access to 1 Gbps download speed internet service, so we can easily download big files. Outside the towns and villages, though, and it is just ADSL or satellite internet.

And yes, plenty of us country bumpkins could afford to buy a Kaleidescape system, but we have too much common sense to do so.

[Lee A Stewart]

Originally Posted by moreorless

People tend to view technology as a constant state of improvement but I would argue that a lot of the time "good enough" ends up being the standard, with something like say photography for example 35mm came to dominate rather than medium/large format.

Hollywood made the choice to standardize on 35mm due to cost considerations. They had to provide the prints to theaters. Back in the 1960s a 35mm print cost about $2000 while a 70mm six track mag print was $12,500. Just like they used 24 fps instead of 30 which would have improved picture quality but at a higher cost per print. The original Todd-AO 65/70mm format was 30 fps. Only two movies were shot and shown in the format before 24 fps became the standard. Hollywood is all about saving money where ever it can.

[JohnAV]

Originally Posted by Plutotype

We want all titles and all labels under one legal pay-per-download platform. Labels would bring their titles to consumers and allow them to download the master files in any quality they prefer and are able to purchase ( even higher quality than BD or UHD - no limitations here ).

The digital theaters chains don't get copies of master files or DI, so why should consumers be able?

[Lee A Stewart]

Originally Posted by JohnAV

The digital theaters chains don't get copies of master files or DI, so why should consumers be able?

Hey - give him the JPEG 2000 300GB file that the theaters get - what's he going to do with it?

[Wendell R. Breland]

Originally Posted by Plutotype

We want all titles and all labels under one legal pay-per-download platform. Labels would bring their titles to consumers and allow them to download the master files in any quality they prefer and are able to purchase ( even higher quality than BD or UHD - no limitations here ).

Not going to happen. Many millions quite content with low data rate content, proof here (scroll down and mouse over area of interest).

In the early days of Vudu it was a download service to Vudu's hardware, did not fly and was sold to Walmart. Next up was Sony with the FMP-X1 then the FMP-X10 with UHD content. Did not fly and the Sony video software store closed. Last I heard the players no longer worked so folks lost their purchased movies. I had the X10 but sold it before it all went south.

[bhampton]

For the record what I want is more UHD BD.

I don't want pay per view download anything. I don't want streaming to have the disc version ... that's what the disc is for.



For me what works already happens to exist.

[JohnAV]

Someone on AVS said with their cable 200+ Mbps connection it took 35 minutes to download the 4K UHD of Deadpool from Kaleidoscope store. Just seem like a big waste of resources and time, instead of just buying it and permanently having it available to stick in a UHD BD player. Usually at the same time you acquire a digital version of the film you can redeem to play on a variety of devices. Where's the real advantage? Certainly not from a economics perspective.

Added. File Transfer Time Calculator

The above equates to 50 GB file at approx 200 Mbps.

[Steedeel]

Originally Posted by moreorless

People tend to view technology as a constant state of improvement but I would argue that a lot of the time "good enough" ends up being the standard, with something like say photography for example 35mm came to dominate rather than medium/large format.

Whats more its not going to make sense for someone like Netflix to offer a premium higher bitrate service since that's going to make the standard service look worse. I can see their being smaller more quality focused services but they might struggle for content where as with physical media exclusivity isn't such an issue.

Yep, I share your views in regards to picture quality. It feels like quality lovers are fighting the tide sometimes.

[Plutotype]

Originally Posted by JohnAV

The digital theaters chains don't get copies of master files or DI, so why should consumers be able?

I didn´t mean DI´s or DCP´s. BD and UHD format are fine, but still...in a digital domain, they could create whatever master/format they want if the consumers would pay for it ( higher res, 4:4:4 sampling, higher bitrate, higher bitdepth, better compression...).

[cheez avenger]

I watched Mad Max Fury Road on 4K disc and it was phenomenal. I can say it's one of my favorite 4K discs in my collection. Also, don't let the 4K selections in my collection decieve you -- I have more that I have not catalogued yet. I get lazy sometimes.

[JohnAV]

Originally Posted by Plutotype

I didn´t mean DI´s or DCP´s. BD and UHD format are fine, but still...in a digital domain, they could create whatever master/format they want if the consumers would pay for it ( higher res, 4:4:4 sampling, higher bitrate, higher bitdepth, better compression...).

The whole point of streaming is that it takes up no space. People that stream are also interested with a diverse amount of available content. When you start insisting on a DRM protected system like Kaleidoscope with large downloads to parallel what you easily can find with BD or UHD BD media, you have ran counter to what attracts people to streaming in the first place. Therefore what you suggesting will never appear until the film industry has a even more valuable standard then presently. It took many years to evolve from SD to HD to UHD. If 8K becomes mainstream perhaps things might become more diverse with what standards exist. But none of this comes quickly, only very slowly.

[Lee A Stewart]

Originally Posted by Plutotype

I didn´t mean DI´s or DCP´s. BD and UHD format are fine, but still...in a digital domain, they could create whatever master/format they want if the consumers would pay for it ( higher res, 4:4:4 sampling, higher bitrate, higher bitdepth, better compression...).

Hollywood likes the idea of two different grades of video: consumer and professional. What you are suggesting goes against that. Forget it - it will never happen. Go to a movie if you want to see all that.

[Steedeel]

Originally Posted by cheez avenger

I watched Mad Max Fury Road on 4K disc and it was phenomenal. I can say it's one of my favorite 4K discs in my collection. Also, don't let the 4K selections in my collection decieve you -- I have more that I have not catalogued yet. I get lazy sometimes.

Same here, I need to update.

I own Mad Max: Fury Road in 3D and it’s superb.

[Boccaccio]

Originally Posted by Steedeel

Same here, I need to update.

I own Mad Max: Fury Road in 3D and it’s superb.

Have you seen the B/W version ? I've heard some say it's pretty good.
I have my doubts. That movie just screams for color.

[Steedeel]

Originally Posted by Boccaccio

Have you seen the B/W version ? I've heard some say it's pretty good.
I have my doubts. That movie just screams for color.

I didn’t bother with it.