+ Reply to Thread
Results 31 to 60 of 90
^^It also makes macro shots look good. Everyone like to see actors nose and ear hairs.
LOL I see what you did there. Tweezers anyone?
Newbpall, you do realize that "Once Upon a Time in the West" was shot 2-perf to save money, squeezed and blown up for normal CinemaScope projection, and therefore has half the resolution of ordinary 35mm film don't you? 8k is overkill for this exceptionally good movie.
And you can see on the DVD that everyone has disconcertingly good teeth.
The "curmudgeons" are glad to be ignored by newpball.
And how many of these 8k displays have been sold to consumers? None.
And how many of those demo 8k TVs are actually displaying true 8k material, not counting manufacturer demo material? None.
And how much 8k material of any kind is available to consumers? None.
And how much will these units cost, if and when they finally make it to market? $100k+.
You will be older than your celebrated curmudgeons before you could afford one. Talk about pie-in-the-sky, cart-before-the-horse, sour grapes deflection!!
I'm surprised that newpball hasn't already created a poll, asking how many people are ready to take the plunge and buy a 4k television. (or already have bought one)This film is presented in it's original 2.35:1 aspect ratio. The black bars at top and bottom are normal. (it's you that isn't normal)
For TVs, 2160p will gradually oust 1080p, just as 1080p gradually ousted 720p sets (and all the approx 720p native resolutions), for all but the smaller, cheapest TVs. The added incremental cost is derisory, and maintaining duplicate fabs for lesser resolution panels will not be cost effective. So manufacturers will simply run down the tooling and eventually write it off. It's the premium sets that are UHD for now, but that's the direction we're headed. So we'll probably all eventually have UHD TVs.
Standalone UHD Blu-Ray players likely will follow the same path, and (initially very high) prices will fall gradually, relegating plain vanilla BD players to the lower end of the market. Just as pretty much all DVD-only players are cheap now, there being no premium products remaining.
So much for hardware.
UHD Blu-Ray disc is a separate question. BD has not ousted DVD, not by a long shot. Home theater enthusiasts will buy in, but I wonder how much market penetration UHD Blu-Ray disc will achieve overall? (And I don't say that just to be inflammatory).
Many (most?) catalog titles will not benefit much from a UHD rescan/re-encode. Will the only titles available worth buying be those that are newest and produced specifically for UHD...???
Please correct my assessment where I've gotten it wrong.
Last edited by fritzi93; 15th May 2015 at 10:13. Reason: spelling errorPull! Bang! Darn!
I would say that's a good assessment. Hollywood will have to do some serious 65/70mm back catalog remastering as well as optimizing 4k new releases in order for there to be a reasonable launch and promotion of this format.
I expect, like they have in formats past, initial selection will probably only be 20-30 titles, with additional updates arriving ~quarterly, then monthly.
If they don't have the content, they don't get the draw. Sound familiar? (3D)
And if they don't get the draw, they don't make the content...
Last edited by Cornucopia; 15th May 2015 at 16:22.
On the other point, my studied & experienced guess is that you will not, as a consumer, be able to author your own UHD BDs, only as a producer ($$$$).
There is nothing stating these UHD discs are backwards-compatible - in fact, they specifically state that you MUST get a new UHD player for the discs - so it is VERY likely that they will be updating the navigation, and more importantly the copy protection. No ripping allowed (except "digital bridge" which very likely will contain DRM). It took ~4+ years for hackers to crack AACS, and Hollywood has learned hard lessons from that, so they would undoubtedly make this go-round even more difficult = more years to crack.
I can easily see the authoring apps available for this format only allowing mastering to a replicated disc: no burning allowed.
<edit>I'm thinking there is a strong possibility of SACD-style incompatibility with PC disc reader devices, too.</edit>
I've mentioned this before: this is a tiered market idea (both with physical & streamed media).
Rich/Deluxe = UHD
Middle/Standard = HD
Poor/Economy = SD
Personally, I'm not happy about the stratification, but I doubt it will/can be avoided.
Last edited by Cornucopia; 15th May 2015 at 19:32.
It may not be necessary for most people to author UHD Blu-Ray if the players are capable of playing UHD video files burned as data on optical media or stored on USB 3.0 drives.
^ Yes, 1 keychain will be sufficient for newpball to store all his sucky movies and all his fugly pics...
The future will be evil indeed
Problems with USB/flash distributed storage of UHD media vs. disc:
Contrary to some people's wishful thinking, currently 50+GB USB=~$20+, whereas 50GB BD-R=$~2, BD-ROMs even less. (raw media costs alone, not counting content licensing, packaging, etc.)
USB media can be accidentally erased, BD-ROMs & BD-Rs NOPE.
Main benefits of USB for this pupose: More flexible size/bitrate, and speed. But if these media files are being distributed, they'd probably follow similar standards, negating both those points.
<edit>Oh, I might have misread: you were expounding on the benefit of MOVING your (and I suspect you intend our) UHD movie collection to USB for size & portability of storage/playback.
OK, so where does your UHD movie collection come from?
If from physical discs, you are still left with the problem of storage of the sources. And you cannot get rid of/sell/rent/give away your sources or then you are in violation of copyright and essentially "stealing".
What about from streaming/cloud?
If your streaming is supposed to come from legit means, you won't have the speed/bitrate, and thus the quality, that you would enjoy with physical sources (and that would be ironic for someone who is such a stickler for quality). You would also have to deal with DRM issues (limiting that valued portability). And selection may also be a problem.
If your streaming is supposed to come from other means (p2p/torrents, etc), not only is that illegal (and for UHD, probably be vigorously hounded by H'wood), but would be extremely unlikely if not impossible until UHD copy protection is cracked.
Last edited by Cornucopia; 15th May 2015 at 19:28.
any links to 8k movies???'Do I look absolutely divine and regal, and yet at the same time very pretty and rather accessible?' - Queenie
8k+ stuff is like "concept car" - rarely (or only slowly) makes it off the drawing board.
BTW, here is a link that explains in a little more detail (but still quite loose) the announcement of the spec: http://hdguru.com/ultra-hd-blu-ray-spec-released/
A couple of items of note there: HFS not higher than 60p, currently no plans for 3D 4k, many HDR options though they will only be good with SL discs, 4:2:0 only, not decided on new CP or Watermarks...
Last edited by Cornucopia; 15th May 2015 at 16:46.
This has gone in so many different directions that the only thing I can conclude is: if it doesn't fit one person's bespoke needs, it doesn't fit anyone's needs. GET OFF MY LAWN!!!
I am not even sure why we are discussing 8K video. I guess I have troll-like skillz.
But back to the discussion at hand. Yes, I am very excited about UHD for BD. Does that make me argumentative? Fine, I haven't lost sleep. I am not just excited for the UHD titles that will eventually and inexorably show up at my local Redbox to rent. But, I also have a phone that shoots in 4K (let the trolls begin, apparently I am not allowed to shoot 4K video with my phone according to this forum). However, I am in the market for a 4K camcorder. I expect by 2016 that I will be taking the plunge (do I have permission?). Then suddenly I will have hours of 4K footage of my baby taking a dump. You should see those little dingleberries, cute does not fully describe. I don't want to miss those moments. I'll be sure to post back here with some screenshots.
Now what? Let the footage sit on my hdd? We are talking about terabytes here. My SD video collection alone is nearly a TB and one hour of FHD footage takes up 60 GB. hdd's crash, corrupt, can't be put in cold storage, etc. No thanks. ssd/flash? please, no way I am using that for archiving. Burn it to BD-R. Why not? I already back up my movie collection to dual layer BD-R data discs. Will I be able to author a movie with whiz bang menus, pop ups, captions, sneak peaks, director's cuts and so on? Don't know and don't care. I will settle for plain jane UHD BD-R. She may not be the hottest date at the dance but she knows how to dance and that is all that counts. Then after the dance, off to cold storage for my ancestors in 50 or 100 years.
Once I take the plunge I won't look back. SD is already dead to me. HD is next. Now seriously, am I the only one that is excited about 4K?
Unfortunately it seems that quite a few frequently posting members on this forum are rather new tech unfriendly.
When some poster has some old VHS he wants capture and view on some 40 year old Zenith TV he gets a hero's welcome, as a contrast, try to post a topic about ultra-wide screens and I am telling you, some will get snappy at you.
Perhaps they see you as some kind invader, a bringer of bad tidings, one who only tries to make their old sacred non-debatable technology look bad.
Old tends to be good and golden while new is bad, unrealistic, pie in the sky and more of that. One actually wonders why some of those die-hard "old-fashionistas" actually use the internet and not instead read handwritten ancient manuscripts by candlelight.
Last edited by newpball; 16th May 2015 at 14:55.
Redbox still does not buy all the movies it carries in Blu-Ray format (assuming Blu-Ray is available), only the most popular, and Redbox carries very few 3D Blu-Ray titles. 3D TVs failed to become mainstream partly on account of the added cost of the technology.
Redbox removed 500 kiosks last year. Although Redbox blamed the downturn in its business on a dearth of good movies, don't count on Redbox still being around in your area in a few years if the residents don't keep using the kiosks enough for the operation to remain profitable.
I personally do not invest in new technologies until they become popular and the price drops to reasonably sane levels.
Last edited by usually_quiet; 16th May 2015 at 16:56.
Pointed this many times that from practical perspective Windows 2000 was more than average customer need - all you need to do (Microsoft) is fix problems and don't add new ones.
Automagically Windows 2000 was able to work satisfactory with 64MB RAM, XP require 512MB at least (so what was added or fixed that require 8x more memory), but OK - let assume that XP brings new quality so it was worth to be memory hog, but what so important brings Vista or Win7 (don't mention 8.x or 10) that you need to have not 512MB RAM but at least 4GB or more (talking about 32 bit software version more than fine for most average consumers).
Btw CRT will give you flexibility that not exist on directly addressed displays - try to use PDP or LCD out of native resolution or with extremely high refresh rates (like real hundreds of FPS).
And you doesn't need to deinterlace video to be displayed on CRT.
I'm always amazed with people demanding new functionality that cost GB and it is used perhaps once or more probably not at all.
And yes i know - now to display "Hello World" developer need CPU with at least 2 cores and at least 4GB of RAM and app to display Hello World with installer will occupy at least 50 - 200MB.
And im technology friendly but as a engineer i see that technology slowly achieved some limits and at least now there is no signs of progress.