4K Movies Releases

[Penton-Man]

Originally Posted by Maximus

Related to 4K, Sony just announced the F5 and F55 pro camcorders for 4K. The F55 does 4K RAW at 16Bit, 4:2:2.

Hi Max . I remember you.

And I’ll add to the 4k party favors. Remember this from just about a year ago? -
https://forum.blu-ray.com/showthread...is#post5405008

Well, Curtis ^, your wish has been granted today… http://www.moviemachine.tv/article/s...itor-offers-p/

[saprano]

Max, what are the chances the PS4 will have 4K resolution?

[Mihadis]

Originally Posted by saprano

Max, what are the chances the PS4 will have 4K resolution?

4K playback is guaranteed.

gaming resolutions at 4k? not gonna happen. Upscale? Likely

[Maximus]

Originally Posted by saprano

Max, what are the chances the PS4 will have 4K resolution?

Can't say.

[saprano]

Originally Posted by Maximus

Can't say.

Well it seems like no-brainer to me with sony all about 4K.

[Penton-Man]

^ That’s the plan…but, on the other hand, why listen to me ? I’m only the guy that first announced a few years back, that the 65mm original negative of Lawrence of Arabia was to be scanned at 8K for a new restoration…

obviously culminating in a Blu-ray release, as this motion picture was advertised in trailers way back when Blu-ray first launched, and people were waiting…and waiting ….and un-mercilessly condemning that Blu-ray teaser.

[Maximus]

Originally Posted by saprano

Well it seems like no-brainer to me with sony all about 4K.

No, I can't say. Sorry.

[Brightstar]

Just saw a Samsung ES8000 75inch for £7999 but it was 1080p i was blown away by the size but one can only dream

[Penton-Man]

Originally Posted by starfantasy

Just saw a Samsung ES8000 75inch for £7999 but it was 1080p i was blown away by the size...

Big.
Small..http://www.theverge.com/2012/10/25/3...est-4k-display
1080 or 4K rez.

Some of us know, that, in the end, content rules, as Eve….errr ‘content’ is the ultimate temptress-
http://vimeo.com/51455065

I mean, look what happened to Adam in the garden.

[saprano]

Originally Posted by Maximus

No, I can't say. Sorry.

I knew what you ment.

Originally Posted by starfantasy

Just saw a Samsung ES8000 75inch for £7999 but it was 1080p i was blown away by the size but one can only dream

lol. This made me laugh. Not even 10 years (well consumer 1080p) old yet.

Originally Posted by Penton-Man

Some of us know, that, in the end, content rules, as Eve….errr ‘content’ is the ultimate temptress-
http://vimeo.com/51455065



I mean, look what happened to Adam in the garden.

Some of those comments about the camera test are funny.

[Penton-Man]

Originally Posted by saprano

Some of those comments about the camera test are funny.

Yeah, some great stuff in the comments section . But my favorite comment of the past week regarding this sort of 4K camera thing which Maximus brought up, came on the live Webchat for the F5 and F55 cameras…
https://www.facebook.com/SonySuper35...94915730613062

During which time while reading the Questions and Answers in the Chat, I was nearly falling asleep out of sheer boredom (like I do these days while watching Arsenal play), until, I read this comment from...

Jim Jannard : "When can I pre-order one of these?"



For those unfamiliar with 4K cameras and such, this is Wicky’s entry for Jim –http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_Jannard

Jim,
Personally for me, I will always most remember you for designing and selling out of the trunk of your car the best damn motorcycle grips ever made …http://harperscycling.com/articles/o...wear-pg102.htm

Anyway, as far as the camera shootout results , they be posted here (scroll down to ‘Ruby and Eve’)…http://www.mytherapy.tv/lab/

[Penton-Man]

Originally Posted by starfantasy

I hope so too not forgetting the Hobbit as well

No mention of the spatial resolution (i.e. 4K or 2K) so that remains a question mark, but definitively, those wanting to see The Hobbit in 2D at 48fps are out of luck…
http://regmovies.com/The-Hobbit-48

A pity, for unlike what has been published and insinuated in the mainstream press in the past, as I said months before (maybe even a year ago?) in Club Penton, it’s not because of digital cinemas requiring a projector system upgrade as 2D at 48fps has always been in the DCI specifications (check somewhere back a few pages in this thread or the other 4K thread for the link I gave to the url of DCI and the specs may still be on their website in pdf form).

The reality is that all Series 2 systems can project 2D at 48fps and even most Series 1 projector systems can also perform the task.

[MikeCL]

Originally Posted by (W)KRP

The How-To Geek Guide to Buying an HDTV
1080p Does Matter – Here’s When (Screen Size vs. Viewing Distance vs. Resolution)

The Toshiba ZL2 does 4K, but because it's screen is 55" you'd need to sit 5' from the screen to notice a difference and 3' to get the full benefit. Unless you want to put this monitor in your hall, prepare to move your chair WAY up, I mean WTFU.

The How-To Geek Guide to 3D Monitors and TVs

I'm going to sound stupid but how do you read this the larger the part is better?

[L'armée des ombres]

Although 4k is coming in the near future i have a big doubt that the studios have any intensions of releasing their titles in near master quality.

[saprano]

Originally Posted by maggimagg

Although 4k is coming in the near future i have a big doubt that the studios have any intensions of releasing their titles in near master quality.

Thats already happening now with bluray. As you know, alot of films are still being shot at 2K. And pretty much all old films are 2K. Bluray is basically 2K resolution. The numbers are pretty close. Films that come out on bluray end up looking better sometimes anyway.

But whether BD is 2K, 4K, or 8K, it will never be 100% master quality because of compression.

Unless the BDA comes up with terabytes of storage for the next BD spec.

[saprano]

Originally Posted by MikeCL

I'm going to sound stupid but how do you read this the larger the part is better?

Look the TV size then move up to how far you sit.

For example i have a 60" TV and i sit about 7' to 8' away. So im seeing the full benefit of 1080p. Or just about. For 4K i would need to sit 3, 4' away for the full benefit. For me to start noticing a difference i need to sit a little over 5'.

Thats how i read it. I might be a little off. I don't fully trust that chart anyway.

[L'armée des ombres]

Originally Posted by saprano

Thats already happening now with bluray. As you know, alot of films are still being shot at 2K. And pretty much all old films are 2K. Bluray is basically 2K resolution. The numbers are pretty close. Films that come out on bluray end up looking better sometimes anyway.

But whether BD is 2K, 4K, or 8K, it will never be 100% master quality because of compression.

Unless the BDA comes up with terabytes of storage for the next BD spec.

Most movies have been shot on film so the resolution is wayyyyy much more than 2K.
You have to check your facts before you post something lika that.

[Anthony P]

Originally Posted by MikeCL

I'm going to sound stupid but how do you read this the larger the part is better?

no, it is not stupid to ask, but the simple answer is that I don't read it. most of it does not make sense (what does starts to become noticeable and full benefit even mean?). since viewing distance is not linear it does not make sense to have straight lines, there is no mention of any actual research done on this.....

that being said a larger wedge does not mean anything. It is just a simple chart that wants to pigeonhole you. So if you watch a 30" image from 30' you cross those two lines and it tells you that you are way too far away and no amount of resolution can help you, Now if you sit 10' from a 50" display you are on the green line and so you get the full benefit of 720p and if you sit 5' from an 80" 7you get the full benefit of 4k. In reality the size of the wedge has more to do with the numbers they used than anything else, if instead of using 45' for the farthest for seating, it was changed to 100' the blue wedge would be much larger (and everything added would be blue. On the other hand if they used 20' (since who would actually sit 45' away from a 20"screen) as the farthest then the blue wedge gets much smaller. The same with screen size if they decide to say " let's start at 40" the blue wedge would get smaller and if they went beyond 140" that would make the purple wedge bigger.

[Penton-Man]

Originally Posted by maggimagg

Most movies have been shot on film so the resolution is wayyyyy much more than 2K.
You have to check your facts before you post something lika that.

Sap helps you out with interpreting the graph and you reward him with this ^ type of tone? Sheesh maggs . As to the graph usage, keep the following in mind because few people (Anthony aside) are aware of its limitations.

That traditional graph has long been posted by numerous videophile websites as some sort of viewing standards biblical Commandant, with the distances/image size intersections representing inflexible limits. When in fact, it should be considered just a guideline. Some of my smarter colleagues (no, not some insecure Hollywood movie executives, but rather, professional imaging scientists) would even call it a conservative guideline or estimation and certainly not to be set in stone, see… https://forum.blu-ray.com/showthread...te#post5922985

It reminds me a little of the way the Snellen chart - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Snellen_chart is used as a gold standard by optometrists and ophthalmologists to assess for visual acuity, when in fact, the limitation of the Snellen chart led to the development of ‘logMAR’ (logarithm of the minimum angle of resolution) charts.

Unfortunately, despite their superiority, logMAR charts have not replaced Snellen charts in eye docs offices and the traditional graph which you’ve quoted above, is also not likely to be revised/updated, (or clarified as to terminology as Anthony points out) for awhile despite enlightening research like that coming out of NHK (in the link I provided) exposing its inaccuracy with regards to resolutions higher than HD.

[Penton-Man]

Originally Posted by maggimagg

Most movies have been shot on film so the resolution is wayyyyy much more than 2K.
You have to check your facts before you post something lika that.

Since I'm feeling sorry for Sap....

I checked what I previously posted in the past and it remains accurate, see…
https://forum.blu-ray.com/showthread...iso#post569579

And I think that David Mullen, ASC is even being a little kind in saying that “Many tests of 35mm movie film show something like 3.5K measurable resolution” because as you can see from my linked post, the rez comes in even lower depending on the ISO of the film stock.

You still have doubts? Go over to the RED forum (which announced the REDRAY players today) and ask Jim (Jannard) for confirmation.

Jim aka ‘I’ll take your XAVC cameras and raise you a REDRAY’.