iTunes 8K speculation

[tjritter79]

Originally Posted by Fiffy

That's not how it works. For example, for iTunes the studios typically submit a master file in ProRes HQ, which has an approximate video bitrate of 220 Mbps (HD) or 880 Mbps (4K), which is higher than UHD BD's maximum bitrate. From this master, various lower-bitrate files are encoded. It is absolutely possible for them to offer files that exceed the capabilities of disc if they want to.

That's actually the SAME bit rate as the theater masters, I wonder if all the theaters who use digital files today get the same masters in ProResHQ?

[Alan Gordon]

Just like 4K TVs upconvert HD content to 4K, 8K TVs will upconvert 4K content to 8K. I believe 8K TVs will become fairly standard among big screen TVs.

As for content, I'm more skeptical. Kaleidescape (for instance) might offer a premium service for those with home theater setups, but I don't expect it to go mainstream.

I do believe digital providers, like Apple, will start offering higher 4K bitrates in the future, similar to Sony's BRAVIA CORE service, or Kaleidescape, but with streaming, not downloads.

[Fiffy]

Originally Posted by tjritter79

That's actually the SAME bit rate as the theater masters, I wonder if all the theaters who use digital files today get the same masters in ProResHQ?

Theaters use a different format (DCP). But AFAIK ProRes HQ is a common input format for DCP encoding. It doesn't surprise me that the bitrates are similar, since both formats use intra-frame-only compression (but with different algorithms).

[tjritter79]

Originally Posted by The Watcher 69

As this article points out, hardly any existing content will be able to be upgraded to true 8K: https://www.theverge.com/circuitbrea...k-tv-nhk-japan

Ehh, its limited.
35 mm gives you the same resolution as 4K, so it stands to reason 70 mm gives you the same at 8K. If you scan 35 mm at 8K, then I think the grain becomes an issue with older films. But digital up-conversion is a LOT better going from 4K to 8K, especially when the native source is orig/remastered 4K.
Smaller screens give you additional color range and clarity....as an addendum to my original post....Dell now markets an 32" 8K monitor!
https://www.dell.com/en-us/work/shop...E&gclsrc=aw.ds

[tjritter79]

Originally Posted by Fiffy

Theaters use a different format (DCP). But AFAIK ProRes HQ is a common input format for DCP encoding. It doesn't surprise me that the bitrates are similar, since both formats use intra-frame-only compression (but with different algorithms).

...I'll bet those algorithms have something to do with the motion blur?

[Fiffy]

Originally Posted by tjritter79

...I'll bet those algorithms have something to do with the motion blur?

Uh, no. Why would they? Motion blur happens when the images are captured by the camera.

[tjritter79]

Originally Posted by Fiffy

Uh, no. Why would they? Motion blur happens when the images are captured by the camera.

Even digitally? Because I notice LESS blur with an action scene in the theater then when I watch at home....even on a 120 Hz TV. John Wick Ch 3 to be precise.

[Fiffy]

Originally Posted by tjritter79

Even digitally?

Yes. Digital cameras have a non-zero exposure time just like film cameras. If the camera pans or something in the image moves during that time, you get motion blur.

Because I notice LESS blur with an action scene in the theater then when I watch at home....even on a 120 Hz TV. John Wick Ch 3 to be precise.

That is most likely a limitation of your TV's panel. TVs do all kinds of digital trickery internally (e.g. adapting the input frame rate to the panel's scan rate).

[ps3bd_owner]

8K? I've been expecting that to happen, but if people aren't that too convinced with 4K then 8K won't make much difference either.

Still to this day, I got 1080p TVs and I'm fine with it, to be honest. However, I have noticed that 4K Remasters tend to look far better (vivid, natural, color corrected) than the old Blu-ray remasters so that's something quite interesting.

Also, H266? Damn. H265 is still pretty dang new and a lot still prefer H264 over it.

[tjritter79]

Originally Posted by ps3bd_owner

8K? I've been expecting that to happen, but if people aren't that too convinced with 4K then 8K won't make much difference either.

Still to this day, I got 1080p TVs and I'm fine with it, to be honest. However, I have noticed that 4K Remasters tend to look far better (vivid, natural, color corrected) than the old Blu-ray remasters so that's something quite interesting.

Also, H266? Damn. H265 is still pretty dang new and a lot still prefer H264 over it.

Well, I'm of the belief that generational leaps are a minimum of 20 years from each other....or at least in the ballpark.
In the mid-50's TV's. Mid 70's recording TV shows with beta/VHS. 1997-DVD technology changing how we watch movies.

4K didn't/hasn't caught on as intended, I think 8K will.

H266 has two issues. One, its NOT free, it requires a royalty for its use. Second, its application doesn't address the quality of audio issue.

Both these issues are solved with the AV1 codec developed by IBM with a number of partners in the streaming field. See Alliance for Open Media.
Yes, the "battle" for competing codecs is a fierce one.

[tjritter79]

Originally Posted by Fiffy

Yes. Digital cameras have a non-zero exposure time just like film cameras. If the camera pans or something in the image moves during that time, you get motion blur.
That is most likely a limitation of your TV's panel. TVs do all kinds of digital trickery internally (e.g. adapting the input frame rate to the panel's scan rate).

OK, that would explain it Fif, thanks!

[Bugg]

Originally Posted by Poya

DVD is still good enough for most people.

I'm not as certain of this as I once was. I think there are a lot of people that don't collect physical media or obsess over image detail, but they have become accustomed to HD. I was surprised how many sports fans expressed finding old games recorded in SD, to be difficult to watch when ESPN started re-airing a lot of the classic stuff during the height of covid lockdowns.

[ps3bd_owner]

Originally Posted by Poya

DVD is still good enough for most people.

I used to agree with this sentiment, but I don't anymore. I just finished watching a movie only available on DVD as far as I'm aware ("Another Day in Paradise" from 1998) and the SD quality showed its age.

Despite that, I'd still take DVD over a streaming of SD content.

[flyry]

Originally Posted by Poya

DVD is still good enough for most people.

Yet their TV and streaming has all been HD or higher for a decade + . they go with the cheaper option because studios never forced them to upgrade as they should have.

[Lee A Stewart]

Originally Posted by flyry

Yet their TV and streaming has all been HD or higher for a decade + . they go with the cheaper option because studios never forced them to upgrade as they should have.

The best answer is to offer options. Let the people chose which option they want: Good, Better & Best. Forcing people just alienates your target consumers.

The only reason why you can no longer buy new large HDTV TVs is that OEM TV manufacturers work on an economies of scale for production: cheaper to make one resolution panel than it is two (for the masses)

[lgans316]

Personally I am happy with 4K for now. AV1 could serve as a catalyst for 8K streaming. Time will tell.

[cmcclure16]

Unless they start finishing films and TV in 8K, I see zero point.

[Fiffy]

Originally Posted by lgans316

Personally I am happy with 4K for now. AV1 could serve as a catalyst for 8K streaming. Time will tell.

In practice AV1 is not that much better than H.265 when it comes to coding efficiency. The big advantage (and reason why some streamers are adopting it) is that it's royalty free. The next major efficiency improvement could potentially come with H.266, but it will take a while to mature (not only the codec, but also the quality of its implementations is important).

[flyry]

Originally Posted by Lee A Stewart

The best answer is to offer options. Let the people chose which option they want: Good, Better & Best. Forcing people just alienates your target consumers.

The only reason why you can no longer buy new large HDTV TVs is that OEM TV manufacturers work on an economies of scale for production: cheaper to make one resolution panel than it is two (for the masses)

DVD came out in the playstation/N64 days. console makers have moved on. why can't the studios?

[tjritter79]

Originally Posted by Lee A Stewart

The best answer is to offer options. Let the people chose which option they want: Good, Better & Best. Forcing people just alienates your target consumers.

The only reason why you can no longer buy new large HDTV TVs is that OEM TV manufacturers work on an economies of scale for production: cheaper to make one resolution panel than it is two (for the masses)

What happened Lee is that production of 4K panels at the larger size were just as inexpensive as the HD size. So the decision BECAME the consumers. In the settings they can set (for most models I'm aware of) the output at 1080 if they choose to on 4K sets. Now my 4K set is 6 yrs (900B) old of course it still has this option. The kids' TV's (800D) have this as well (2017). Newer sets I assume have similar settings.