4K Movies Releases

[raygendreau]

Originally Posted by Steedeel

But that's still dependant on the wifi working that particular night. Downloads give more peace of mind. Movie night is screwed if the connection is screwed. At least with downloads you can plan ahead. Ahhhh, thank goodness for bluray.

Well, the point is that the entire industry, from studios to display manufacturers are working hot and heavy on streaming primarily, and downloads secondarily. I think the 2.0 Blu-ray "extension" talked about by Fox is more of a "plan B" to be pursued with vigor only if the digital model for UHD content delivery isn't embraced by consumers.

[Steedeel]

Originally Posted by raygendreau

Well, the point is that the entire industry, from studios to display manufacturers are working hot and heavy on streaming primarily, and downloads secondarily. I think the 2.0 Blu-ray "extension" talked about by Fox is more of a "plan B" to be pursued with vigor only if the digital model for UHD content delivery isn't embraced by consumers.

Yes, but downloads should be for the purists. Streaming is always reliant on good connection. My connection is great but only when I moved home. I had several years of intermittent connection problems and I was far from alone. As I watch a bluray every Friday night had I been reliant on streaming tech I would have been screwed. I think the online bloggers and so called 'experts' think everyone lives in New York. Real world situations sometimes simply don't support the regular use of HD streaming as a ultra reliable method of embracing movies at home. That is before we move onto compression artefacts etc..

[Penton-Man]

Originally Posted by Esox50

I assume we'll need 10bit panels if/when the Blu-Ray 4K comes out and it has 4:4:4, right?

I can’t address that in the way you’ve worded the question.

What I can say though is, personally, to reiterate something which I’ve noted before somewhere in this thread months ago, namely that there is no real substitute for color bit depth…esp. if you’re talking about 4K/UHD. In this day and age, 8 bit color is a relic which was based upon the capabilities of phosphorous-based display technology…which is archaic.

If folks would like to see a visual depiction of the value of 8-bit panel vs. 10-bit panels and read an easy to understand statement regarding the merit of supporting at least 10-bit bit depth video content from a professional perspective then download for instance the JCTVC-K0109 version 6 document near the bottom of the page -
http://phenix.it-sudparis.eu/jct/doc...nt.php?id=6479 < Open the folder and then open the Word or powerpoint file for reading.

b.t.w., post-CES I’m told the internet blogosphere is abuzz with the new acronym ‘HDR’….well, it sure took them long enough, this from almost a year ago…. https://forum.blu-ray.com/showthread...ed#post7325076

Wonder how long it will take the reporters to discover anything specific about the merits of HFR without talking to commercial interests?

Gotta go, wife is calling me to watch the Globes with her.

[Geoff D]

Originally Posted by Anthony P

No offence but I don't know why people tend to believe such complete garbage. There is no benefit from streaming/DL vs physical media in that way. The media are never the issue, the HW is an issue and it is an issue no matter if the distribution is virtual or physical. Think about it, was the 2006 Samsung BD player I bought not able to add 3D (for example) because the BD physical format could not add 3D or 3Dcould not be added to the BD Disk? or really because the processing power not enough and or the SW not updated. Do you think the streaming stand alone player someone bought last year will magically and automatically be able to decode HEVC 4K when/if Netflix adds it because it can now play Netflix films?

Let me put it this way. Joe buys a brand new UHD BD player, Joe uses it for BDs and Netflix's UHD offering, now people are asking for HDR/HFR/WCG (we will assume it is new to both) why do you think Joes player could and would be SW updated for the Netflix UHD HDR/HFR/WCG but it would be harder for the same for the BD playback (or vice versa)?

Woah there chief, calm it down. I didn't say that streaming would have no technological hurdles to overcome, just that it may be able to handle them more efficiently than the entrenched limitations of a hardware based system of packaged media. Why? Because packaged media has a thousand fathers, all of whom want a piece of the pie, all of whom have to have consensus before moving forward with X change or X revision. Whereas on my PC, if I need a new codec I can just download the blessed thing in seconds and get the bastard working there and then.

See what I'm getting at? If the 4K streamers of the future are based around a more open-ended software approach, then new codecs and compatibility with better colour compression and whatnot could be a simple download away, and increased bitrates won't be hampered by the fixed maximum transfer rate of a physical format (though there is the issue of internet bandwidth to contend with, admittedly).

And besides, the current streaming model has proved that people will gladly pay for competing services, which means even less industry consensus for what the standards could and should be. It seems like everyone and their brother has 4K streaming/download services in the pipeline, and - I've said this before in this thread - the more cluttered that market becomes, the tougher the task becomes for 4K Blu-ray to have any kind of significant impact. It's so much vapourware at the moment.

And I'm saying all this as someone who'd have to have his Blu-ray/DVD/Laserdisc/CD collection prised out of his cold, dead hands before he went streaming/DL only!!! But with another CES in the bag and the same lines being trotted out by the BDA while 4K streaming has stolen the limelight, even I'm starting to worry about the future of the physical 4K format.

If the comments from Fox are anything to go by, it's looking like the studios will be satisfied with a mere extension of the current format, with slightly higher disc capacities and (I'm assuming) similar colour compression. That's all, folks!

[Geoff D]

As an addendum, I just want to say that even if hardware contraints prove to be just as limiting for streaming as for physical, upgrading the hardware itself won't be nearly as painful so long as one doesn't rely on a 'smart TV' to do all the work.

In the UK we have something called a Now TV box which streams catchup TV services, allows on-demand access to the Sky platform for sports, TV shows and movies, and also has apps for Flixster and Spotify, amongst others. The price? £9.99. Nine-****ing-ninety-nine. Let's say they release a 4K version in the near future - people won't be compaining too loudly about replacing a box that cost a tenner!

Contrast that with Blu-ray, which needed several costly hardware revisions to reach the current standard, and although they're fairly cheap now, new disc-based hardware is never cheap to begin with. It'll be a few hundred bucks/quid for the first 4K Blu-ray decks, and more wallet-busting pain will undoubtedly follow if/when they expand the format.

[dobyblue]

I've already drilled holes in my ceiling for the 4 additional ceiling speakers I will install to make my room ready for the Dolby Atmos soundtracks on 4KBD. Bring it on.

[Penton-Man]

Originally Posted by Geoff D

the studios

I can tell you that in regards to more upstream (i.e. the mastering level) endeavors and Hollywood studio consensus….https://forum.blu-ray.com/showthread...os#post8487901

At this point in time, most people are hesitant to speak for the studios-at-large regarding the specifics (motivations, spec) of 4K Blu-ray, like for example even Victor (read to the entire article)…http://www.twice.com/magazine-issue-...ray-way/109597

[Penton-Man]

Originally Posted by Penton-Man

...Gotta go, wife is calling me to watch the Globes with her.

dobyblue, in case you missed it….

Chris Hemsworth and Niki Lauda - Golden Globes 2014 - YouTube

[Esox50]

Originally Posted by Penton-Man

I can’t address that in the way you’ve worded the question.

Let me word it differently then.

If one were to operate under the assumption that Blu-Ray 4K will deliver not only enhanced resolution, but also higher bit color...then am I correct to assume that the spec (copied directly from Sony's website of their 2014 TV lineup) means I'm SOL for getting the max my theoretical Blu-Ray 4K would have to offer?

Direct from Sony's website... :Video Signal : 3840x2160/24p; 3840x2160/25p; 3840x2160/30p; 4096x2160/24p; 3840x2160/60p (YCbCr4:2:0 8bit); 1080/24p (HDMI only); 1080/60i; 1080/60p (HDMI / Component); 480/60i; 480/60p; 720/60p; 1080/30p (HDMI only); 720/30p (HDMI only); 720/24p (HDMI only)"

In other words, I should be looking for something like this (focus on the bolded part ): 3840x2160/24p; 3840x2160/25p; 3840x2160/30p; 4096x2160/24p; 3840x2160/60p (YCbCr4:4:4 10bit)

I know these companies are firming up plans for their TVs around the 2Q/3Q of the prior year, so they may not be able to take into account the future of Blu-ray. But I am of the mind that my next TV needs to 1.)be really big 2.)needs to last me a while because its going to be 3-4 years before OLED is even an option at the 80+" size.

Anyone industry related looking at this, Penton-Man's potential response is in way dissuading me away from a Sony TV in 2014. I am merely trying to educate myself and do not plan to buy a new TV until at least a year's time from now anyway.

[Penton-Man]

Please don’t get me in trouble with any specific electronics company/division. In terms of data, 10 or 12 bits at 4:2:2 would be excellent. In fact I think some would find 10 bit 4:2:0 (as long as its progressive) to be acceptable for coverage of 4K content from 24-60hz native.

[Penton-Man]

Originally Posted by Penton-Man

A typical design process for a Dolby HDR display (with caveats as so noted) is provided in a middle section of this patent description…http://patents.justia.com/patent/20130293596

For those who find patent descriptions ^ a bit tedious ...

Lab notes (ophthalmologists can excuse the depicted iris hypoplasia and/or Wolfflin spots)…
http://blog.dolby.com/2013/12/tv-bright-enough/

[Penton-Man]

Originally Posted by Penton-Man

The following (just published a few weeks ago) is a real time solution proposed by Dolby (i.e. ‘Dolby Vision’) invented to deliver that enhancement data (HDR and WCG of your choice) vis-a-vie multi-layer encoding and decoding, see around [0029] here - http://www.google.com/patents/EP2675162A2?cl=en and concerned citizens can just update that and other relevant paragraphs therein with the embodiment ‘10-bit HEVC for 4K/UHD’’, which is no problemo for Dolby...

For those who find patent descriptions ^ and specific numerical scientific results (https://forum.blu-ray.com/showthread...ts#post8498218) tedious, an easy watching video –

http://www.dolby.com/us/en/professio...y-vision.html#

[Penton-Man]

Originally Posted by Penton-Man

Please don’t get me in trouble with any specific electronics company/division.

The wife and eyes favorite commercial (which actually debuted) during the Golden Globes broadcast….

JOIN TOGETHER - YouTube

[stevo4264]

Originally Posted by Geoff D

Woah there chief, calm it down.

Originally Posted by dobyblue

I've already drilled holes in my ceiling for the 4 additional ceiling speakers I will install to make my room ready for the Dolby Atmos soundtracks on 4KBD. Bring it on.

Yeah Calm down, you are way ahead of yourself, me on the other hand, all I have done is purchase the drill bits in anticipation of Dolby Atmos

oh and the extra 42 feet of speaker cable for the extra 25 speakers

[Geoff D]

Originally Posted by Esox50

Let me word it differently then.

If one were to operate under the assumption that Blu-Ray 4K will deliver not only enhanced resolution, but also higher bit color...then am I correct to assume that the spec (copied directly from Sony's website of their 2014 TV lineup) means I'm SOL for getting the max my theoretical Blu-Ray 4K would have to offer?

Direct from Sony's website... :Video Signal : 3840x2160/24p; 3840x2160/25p; 3840x2160/30p; 4096x2160/24p; 3840x2160/60p (YCbCr4:2:0 8bit); 1080/24p (HDMI only); 1080/60i; 1080/60p (HDMI / Component); 480/60i; 480/60p; 720/60p; 1080/30p (HDMI only); 720/30p (HDMI only); 720/24p (HDMI only)"

In other words, I should be looking for something like this (focus on the bolded part ): 3840x2160/24p; 3840x2160/25p; 3840x2160/30p; 4096x2160/24p; 3840x2160/60p (YCbCr4:4:4 10bit)

I know these companies are firming up plans for their TVs around the 2Q/3Q of the prior year, so they may not be able to take into account the future of Blu-ray. But I am of the mind that my next TV needs to 1.)be really big 2.)needs to last me a while because its going to be 3-4 years before OLED is even an option at the 80+" size.

Anyone industry related looking at this, Penton-Man's potential response is in way dissuading me away from a Sony TV in 2014. I am merely trying to educate myself and do not plan to buy a new TV until at least a year's time from now anyway.

Wow....I think you've stumbled onto something big there. Unless they've just copied and pasted specs from the 2013 range, the lack of higher bit depth/colour sampling for 2160p60 points to the 'HDMI 2.0' connections on the 2014 TVs actually being Sony's firmware-tweaked HDMI 1.4 chipsets! BUT there's still enough bandwidth so the sets could cope with, say, 10-bit 4:2:2 @ 2160p24, which would be fine for convential movie viewing on 4K Blu-ray. It's just the HFR aspect which will be left behind...

Originally Posted by Penton-Man

I can tell you that in regards to more upstream (i.e. the mastering level) endeavors and Hollywood studio consensus….https://forum.blu-ray.com/showthread...os#post8487901

At this point in time, most people are hesitant to speak for the studios-at-large regarding the specifics (motivations, spec) of 4K Blu-ray, like for example even Victor (read to the entire article)…http://www.twice.com/magazine-issue-...ray-way/109597

It's heartening to read a little more info from the horse's mouth, so to speak, but it's still essentially the same things which have been said for the last 18 months or so. I guess I'm getting a little antsy at the apparent lack of progress...

[Steedeel]

HFR holds zero interest for me. Saw it once and have no desire to see it again.

[PeterTHX]

Originally Posted by Steedeel

HFR holds zero interest for me. Saw it once and have no desire to see it again.

Because brand new technologies and techniques are PERFECT the very first time around, in all situations...

[Steedeel]

Originally Posted by PeterTHX

Because brand new technologies and techniques are PERFECT the very first time around, in all situations...

I am referring to the effect it creates. I don't like it. I like the natural look blur included. It's a preference, get over it.

[Toptube]

Variable frame rate could be cool. High frame rate for action/chase scenes. 24 or 30 for low key/dramatic scenes. Sort of like how some directors have used variable aspect ratios to frame parts of their movies differently.


But a lot of mid range and even a few high end TVs STILL do not handle 24p material without image quality issues. Variable framerates could be a relative headache to get TVs to handle well.

[PeterTHX]

Originally Posted by Steedeel

I am referring to the effect it creates. I don't like it. I like the natural look blur included. It's a preference, get over it.

Your limited vision (literally) keeps you from wanting to try it in other situations. Other filmmakers might have different types of movies where it could come in handy. What about a sports film, like a soccer/football one? It just might keep audiences from sleeping. The racing scenes in a film like Rush could benefit from it. Animated films. Documentaries. Endless possibilities.

I just don't base a preference on a single experience when it comes to new technology. The curse of being open minded I guess.