Originally Posted by Barry C
I really am lukewarm, at best, on the whole 4K fad.
That's your problem right there. 4K is not a fad, it is the future. 3D is the fad, which is unfortunate, because we all love this fad and we don't want it to be a fad. We want it to survive.
3D is truly doomed if it doesn't get taken along for the ride with 4K. 4K is the format of the future and that is why it is vital that 3D gets attached to it.
UHD Blu-ray leaving out support for 3D is a death blow.
Originally Posted by tomtastic
I wasn't aware active screens allowed 2160p per eye, even at half resolution (half width). Is there any place you can point to these specs?
Just look at my YouTube video. You can clearly see it is 2160p resolution in side-by-side mode. How would I have recorded that if my display didn't support it?
Go here, and select User manual on the left:
It is on Page 221, "Supported Resolutions for 3D Modes"
The Samsung HU8550 and HU9000 series 4K TVs support 3D at 4K resolution in side-by-side mode (1920x2160 per eye), and their 2015 successors should too. Samsung is committed to active 3D technology. With a firmware update they should be able to support frame-packed 3D at 4k/30 Hz too, and with Samsung's One Connect boxes they have pledged to release for several more years they should be able to upgrade all their 2013 and newer model 4K TVs to support 3D functionality if it was included in UHD Blu-ray format's specifications.
Originally Posted by tomtastic
To me if there aren't any displays right now that can display full 2160p per eye, why would they release it in the 4k spec? When/if those displays arrive, they can upgrade it for 4k 3D, but it will likely require a new 3D player. The other specs they included make sense, there are already displays out there that are capable of utilizing the full potential. The difference between now and when 3D BD was released, they had full 1080p per eye tvs and passive screens then that could play back the native content. How are they even supposed to test 4k3D if it will work? I'm pretty sure with 4k2d they've done extensive testing on various displays with native 4k content. If 3D is niche right now, 4k3d would be a niche within a niche.
There is not a single display out there that can achieve 10 bit and Rec. 2020 right now, and there's not even any planned for 2015, either. But they are including these features in the Blu-ray 4K specifications anyway. When you say that there are already displays out there that are capable of utilizing 4K Blu-ray's full potential, you are just wrong. So why are they including 10 bit / Rec. 2020 support? Because it is called future-proofing. An "if you build it, they will come" sort of thing.
If they don't build it, they will never come. The only reason 1080p 3D TVs were built was because of the Blu-ray 3D format. 4K 3D TVs that support MVC will never be built if it is not included in the Blu-ray 4K format.
It is pants-on-head retarded to have to potentially repeat the whole Blu-ray 3D format all over again and once again split the market and make it even more niche when this time the technology is available to implement on the 4K Blu-ray format from day one. 3D was not available to be implemented on Blu-ray back in 2006 when it launched so that is why a separate Blu-ray 3D format had to be created a few years later, splitting the market potential of 3D Blu-rays. The story is different this time around, 3D is well developed now and it can be included on Blu-ray's successor format on day one.
They are building this 4K Blu-ray format to be future-proofed with Rec. 2020 support from day one despite no display being able to support that on day one so that they don't have to release a revision in a couple more years that require all new players like they had to with Blu-ray 3D. They are doing this so they don't have to release a 'UHD Blu-ray Rec. 2020' format in the future when we finally do have Rec. 2020 displays. So it is disgusting that they are leaving out 3D from the specs.
Originally Posted by JWhip
I am more concerned about the fact that there is only 4:2:0 subsampling.
Yeah well you can thank the HDMI Mafia for that one, their constant pushing of the garbage HDMI standard over DisplayPort has resulted in constant crippling of HDTVs and now 4K TVs for the last decade. 4:4:4 chroma is just another casualty of HDMI always being inferior to DisplayPort.
HDMI 2.0, while an improvement over HDMI 1.4, is still pathetic in comparison to the latest DisplayPort standard. Its inferior bandwidth means it cannot support 4K, 60 Hz, 4:4:4 chroma, and 10 bit all at the same time, whereas DisplayPort 1.3 easily could. The insistence on including HDCP 2.2 further hampers HDMI 2.0's bandwidth even though we all saw how well earlier versions of HDCP worked at stopping piracy of HD content, Hollywood is still dumb enough to think that if they keep repeating what failed to work in the past that 'maybe it'll actually work this time!'
So since we can't have it all at once thanks to the garbage HDMI 2.0 standard, the UHD Blu-ray specs have had to pick either 10 bit or 4:4:4, and they decided 10 bit was more important than 4:4:4.