Skipping 4K and waiting for 8K?

[jurid]

Originally Posted by gkolb

Correction: BD66 are UHD dual layer, BD50’s are HD dual layers.
These are actual BDA spec’s. They just don’t wing it on their own.

Correction to your correction: guess what, 4K spec allows for 50 gb disk

[zetruz]

The problem with 8K is indeed that it eats up a lot of bandwidth for very little improvement. I'd definitely watch 4K 240fps sports over 8K 60fps any day of the week. Of course, 240 Hz panels are a different issue (though should not be too far away), but I'd still easily take just 4K120 over 8K60 without blinking.

Sure, 24fps movies could be slightly improved with 8K over 4K, but the benefit would be hilariously small when compared to better bitrates/compression, better colours, better contrast, etc. The benefit of 8K wouldn't even be a secondary consideration. Sure, in due time, 8K would be nice. But I'd much prefer spending the available bandwidth on higher framerates, and the prevalence of 8K would make that much more difficult. So begone, I say.

[gkolb]

Originally Posted by jurid

Correction to your correction: guess what, 4K spec allows for 50 gb disk

That was interesting, I found the BDA white paper to verify, and see they did allow for 50 Gb discs. Question: I’m not aware of any BD50 4K releases.
Can you list any? I have the faint recollection that no one is doing so.

[VikingHead2000]

WHY? 4K UltraHD Blu-ray will most likely be the last physical format. I would definitely invest in 4K. I really don’t think there’s a difference that the human eye can see. To me 8K is just a waste. As far as streaming is concerned, it’s still a waste.

[jurid]

Originally Posted by gkolb

That was interesting, I found the BDA white paper to verify, and see they did allow for 50 Gb discs. Question: I’m not aware of any BD50 4K releases.
Can you list any? I have the faint recollection that no one is doing so.

I remember reading in one of the forums that people complained about certain disks being 50gb. But can't remember which.

[Jonathan McLeod]

Originally Posted by jurid

I remember reading in one of the forums that people complained about certain disks being 50gb. But can't remember which.

If something is short then I don't see the problem?

StudioCanal put all 3 hours 23 minutes of Apocalypse Now: Redux on a single BD-100, so why shouldn't a 90 minute film use a BD-50?

[Lee A Stewart]

The specification allows for three disc capacities, each with its own data rate: 50 GB at 82 Mbit/s, 66 GB at 108 Mbit/s, and 100 GB at 128 Mbit/s, or, (since 2018) 50 GB at 72 or 92 Mbit/s, and 66 GB and 100 GB at 92 Mbit/s, 123 or 144 Mbit/s.

[Surge92]

This question is kind of off topic, and I apologize for that, but I didn't know where else to post it. I installed my brand new 4k set yesterday, and I think I have the picture settings where I want them, color-wise, at least. However while doing research, I read that just about everyone recommends that sharpness levels be set to 0 for blu-rays, streamed content, etc. Is that what you guys have your sharpness levels set to for everything?

[slimdude]

Originally Posted by Surge92

This question is kind of off topic, and I apologize for that, but I didn't know where else to post it. I installed my brand new 4k set yesterday, and I think I have the picture settings where I want them, color-wise, at least. However while doing research, I read that just about everyone recommends that sharpness levels be set to 0 for blu-rays, streamed content, etc. Is that what you guys have your sharpness levels set to for everything?

I typically don't increase nor decrease the sharpness on my TV, I leave the setting to zero, and watch everything the way they were visually encoded on the disc. A 4K UHD TV with HDR and Dolby Vision, adding more sharpness to the picture is not necessary.

[Surge92]

Originally Posted by slimdude

I typically don't increase nor decrease the sharpness on my TV, I leave the setting to zero, and watch everything the way they were visually encoded on the disc. A 4K UHD TV with HDR and Dolby Vision, adding more sharpness to the picture is not necessary.

Thanks. I set the sharpness to zero all-around, and there's variance. For example, the Amazon series The Boys, streamed in HDR10+ looks amazing, with excellent inherent, organic sharpness. The Netflix series Ratched, streamed in Dolby Vision, on the other hand, is a little softer, but the colors really pop. I guess that's how they were intended to look, though, so I won't mess with them and will leave the sharpness at zero

[Fjodor2000]

Originally Posted by gkolb

That was interesting, I found the BDA white paper to verify, and see they did allow for 50 Gb discs. Question: I’m not aware of any BD50 4K releases.
Can you list any? I have the faint recollection that no one is doing so.

There's the Django 4K UHD Blu-ray which is BD50:
https://www.blu-ray.com/movies/Djang...lu-ray/227578/

[Mierzwiak]

Originally Posted by gkolb

That was interesting, I found the BDA white paper to verify, and see they did allow for 50 Gb discs. Question: I’m not aware of any BD50 4K releases.
Can you list any? I have the faint recollection that no one is doing so.

In Poland 1917 was released by local distributor on BD50, it has only HDR10 and the bitrate is lower than in the UK / US release.

[Geoff D]

Originally Posted by Lee A Stewart

The specification allows for three disc capacities, each with its own data rate: 50 GB at 82 Mbit/s, 66 GB at 108 Mbit/s, and 100 GB at 128 Mbit/s, or, (since 2018) 50 GB at 72 or 92 Mbit/s, and 66 GB and 100 GB at 92 Mbit/s, 123 or 144 Mbit/s.

No, not since 2018. I see someone's been hitting up wikipedia again. I've got a white paper of the BD spec here from 2015 which says that LTR/HTR zoned discs (which use 108 Mb/s for the inner 8% and 128 Mb/s for the outer 92%) have been part of the spec for at least that long, how the myth of UHD66's being limited to 108 Mb/s endured for so long I have no idea. It's the 33GB layers that make the difference, not how many of them are being used.

[Geoff D]

Originally Posted by dorian

Spartacus was filmed in Technirama so has the advantage of using much more of the negative per frame. Vertigo was filmed in Vistavision and looks truly stunning on 4k.

Er....both movies were shot on 8-perf 35mm. Spartacus had a 1.5x anamorphic squeeze to turn the native 1.50-ish VV negative aspect into 2.25, while Vertigo was shot flat. Spartacus used a bit more of the negative than Vertigo, but only fractions.

Originally Posted by jurid

So what are the best encodes according to you?

As I said, anything by David M. It may just look like he's cramming it full of bitrate (though that's much more easily done when you've got a UHD100 to play with and don't have to fill it with 17 extra audio language tracks) but he's a maestro whether it's BD, UHD, whatever.

Originally Posted by jurid

Most 4K BDs are BD-66, some even BD-50

There's never been a BD50 used for a commercial studio UHD release AFAIK, just those weird local ones like that Scandi Django which was actually a BD-R at that! Not everything fills a UHD66 of course and could technically fit onto a UHD50, but they use the 66's so they can still take advantage of the higher data rates as outlined in the table above. Maximum transport stream bitrate on a UHD50 is 82 Mb/s (yes I'm rounding these off, no need to be that pedantic about this) while a 66 can go as high as 128 Mb/s, that's a hell of a difference.

And the "most 4Ks are 66" is nonsense, there's a lot of them to be sure but there are also a hell of a lot of 100GB discs out there now too, Lionsgate and Universal in particular are very fond of them although Disnee avoid them like the plague, granted.

Have you just arrived from 2016 or something? Seems to be a lot of that going on lately, with all the outrage over fake this and fake that. Just like old times

[jurid]

Originally Posted by Geoff D

And the "most 4Ks are 66" is nonsense, there's a lot of them to be sure but there are also a hell of a lot of 100GB discs out there now too, Lionsgate and Universal in particular are very fond of them although Disnee avoid them like the plague, granted.

Why sound so angry? There is a list of BD100 titles currently updated on this forum. It lists somewhat over 200 titles only. It's definitely a minority of 4K titles. BD50 is part of the standard, and those titles do exist if only a few...

[Farerb]

Why would a 90 minute film need a 100GB disc?

[Lee A Stewart]

4K Ultra HD: Into the Vaults — Prepping Films for 4K Ultra HD is a Journey of Discovery

https://www.mediaplaynews.com/4k-ult...to-the-vaults/

[Fjodor2000]

Originally Posted by farerb

Why would a 90 minute film need a 100GB disc?

Why not? For example if there is lots of movement in the video, and also noise that should be preserved it could be beneficial. All else equal, higher bitrate means better video quality, even if there are diminishing returns.

[evoof]

Originally Posted by Geoff D

As I said, anything by David M. It may just look like he's cramming it full of bitrate (though that's much more easily done when you've got a UHD100 to play with and don't have to fill it with 17 extra audio language tracks) but he's a maestro whether it's BD, UHD, whatever.

How can you actually check who encoded specific BD discs? The Pirates of the Caribbean trilogy are the best BD encodes I've ever seen and they came out in 2007 and all had relatively low bitrates.

[Fjodor2000]

Originally Posted by farerb

Why would a 90 minute film need a 100GB disc?

One more thing: Let's say we have these two movies:

A) 2.5 hours: Shot using modern high quality digital camera, nearly no noise, little movement, 2.35:1 aspect ratio.

B) 1.5 hours: Shot using old film negative, lots of noise (that should be preserved), lots of movement, 16:9 aspect ratio (most possible effective pixels for 4K BD).

Which movie do you think would benefit most from a 100 GB disc?