Blu-ray 4K UHD - coming 2015? - Page 35 - AVS | Home Theater Discussions And Reviews

AVS | Home Theater Discussions And Reviews > Display Devices > Digital Hi-End Projectors - $3,000+ USD MSRP > Blu-ray 4K UHD - coming 2015?

Digital Hi-End Projectors - $3,000+ USD MSRP

madshi's Avatar madshi
10:06 AM Liked: 167
post #1021 of 1660
07-18-2014 | Posts: 5,521
Joined: May 2005
So far so good. I don't see any mention of HDR (peak white with higher light output), though, and from what I heard studios would like to have support for that, too. Well, maybe it's only needed for broadcasting, though, because none of the current movies are shot with HDR in mind, I think? I'm not sure...
stanger89's Avatar stanger89
10:13 AM Liked: 207
post #1022 of 1660
07-18-2014 | Posts: 17,775
Joined: Nov 2002
Does that actually require anything to be different in HEVC, or is that all on the input/output processing side?
HockeyoAJB's Avatar HockeyoAJB
10:36 AM Liked: 304
post #1023 of 1660
07-18-2014 | Posts: 948
Joined: Dec 2013
Quote:
Originally Posted by stanger89 View Post
Does that actually require anything to be different in HEVC, or is that all on the input/output processing side?
Good question. Since it seems that HDR information will be delivered as metadata attached to the video, it is possible that it would use its own form of compression, meaning that it would not need to be part of the HEVC spec. Obviously, if it is going to be included with the 4K Blu-Ray format then it would need to be in the BD4K spec., but at least they would not have to revisit the HEVC spec again, beforehand.
Dan Hitchman's Avatar Dan Hitchman
10:59 AM Liked: 657
post #1024 of 1660
07-18-2014 | Posts: 9,689
Joined: Jul 2000
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ron Jones View Post
The executive summary has been released from last week's meeting of ITU-T SG16. The extensions to HEVC have been approved ('consented' in ITU terminology). This removes one technical roadblock for getting the BD UHD spec. completed and allows the manufacturers to move forward with producing the HEVC related hardware/software that will used with BD UHD.
(full text of exec. summary is at: http://www.itu.int/en/ITU-T/studygro...ults-1406.aspx)


Below is extracted directly from that summary:
"Video coding: The 2nd edition of ITU-T H.265 HEVC was Consented It includes three important types of extensions of HEVC coding capabilities, that will increase the quality of compressed video and better user experience:



1. Format range extensions of HEVC, known as RExt, adding improved colour representations. RExt includes support for higher bit-depths and enhanced chroma formats, including the use of full-resolution chroma.

2. Scalable extensions of HEVC, known as SHVC, enabling better performance for dynamic video streaming on networks with varying transmission conditions and other scenarios involving multiple bit-rate services. SHVC adds support for embedded bitstream scalability in which different levels of encoding quality are efficiently supported by adding or removing layered subsets of encoded data.

3. Multiview extensions of HEVC, known as MV-HEVC, as the first native support for 3D video encoding in HEVC. It provides an efficient representation of video content with multiple camera views and optional depth map information, such as for 3D stereoscopic and autostereoscopic video applications.


Conformance testing of image and video coding standards: A pair of new specifications that are used for conformance testing of ITU-T H.265 HEVC video were consented at this meeting:
  • · ITU-T H.265.1 "Conformance specification for ITU-TH.265 high efficiency video coding" (New) [TD 286/Plen]
  • · ITU-T H.265.2 "Reference software for ITU-T H.265 high efficiency video coding" (New) [TD 287/Plen]"
___________________________________----


So among other things the 2nd edition of H.265/HEVC includes support for increased bit depths, up to 4:4:4 chroma, and 3D. The full set of extensions/enhancements will be documented in the actual standards document when it is published and will include such other enhancements as support for higher refresh rates at 4K/UHD resolution.
And now the question remains as to how much of this will actually make its way to premium consumer UHD media. And if it does, too much compression can kill most of the benefits.

I have absolutely no faith that material from sites like Amazon and Netflix will be top tier A/V experiences. And even less for broadcast UHD. Just look at the quality we get now. It's garbage.
AV Science Sales 5's Avatar AV Science Sales 5
11:08 AM Liked: 668
post #1025 of 1660
07-18-2014 | Posts: 9,259
Joined: Sep 2011
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dan Hitchman View Post
And now the question remains as to how much of this will actually make its way to premium consumer UHD media. And if it does, too much compression can kill most of the benefits.

I have absolutely no faith that material from sites like Amazon and Netflix will be top tier A/V experiences. And even less for broadcast UHD. Just look at the quality we get now. It's garbage.
Rather than HD Netflix looking like DVD. 4K Netflix will look like a good BD. At least that is what I expect.
madshi's Avatar madshi
11:09 AM Liked: 167
post #1026 of 1660
07-18-2014 | Posts: 5,521
Joined: May 2005
Well, I guess they could just encode HDR content as if it were normal content and then apply a stretch factor to account for the higher peak white. E.g. if a movie studio wants peak white for a specific movie to be twice as bright as it normally is, the stretch factor for every Y (luma) value would simply be 0.5. Doing it like this would allow movie studios to use a different peak white value for every movie.

I do wonder what happens to movies with HDR information if they're displayed on a "normal" display. Are they just extra dim there with all the HDR information still visible? Or is the HDR information cut away so that the movie is normal bright but without any HDR detail? I guess it should be the latter, but will that still look "ok" even with the HDR information clipped away? And how does the Blu-Ray player know if the display supports increased peak white or not? Seems to me that a lot of things still need to be sorted out in that area. Quite possibly a new HDMI version could be necessary, or at least a new EDID extension so that displays can communicate their peak white ability (and current setting) to the 4K Blu-Ray player.

Edit: Probably if the display can't handle the movie's peak white value, instead of just cutting away the HDR information, the 4K Blu-Ray player should condense the HDR information into the near peak white area which the display still can show.
Seegs108's Avatar Seegs108
11:10 AM Liked: 417
post #1027 of 1660
07-18-2014 | Posts: 5,119
Joined: Jul 2007
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dan Hitchman View Post
And now the question remains as to how much of this will actually make its way to premium consumer UHD media. And if it does, too much compression can kill most of the benefits.

I have absolutely no faith that material from sites like Amazon and Netflix will be top tier A/V experiences. And even less for broadcast UHD. Just look at the quality we get now. It's garbage.
I think you mean too little bitrate can kill most of the benefits. The compression HEVC is trying to do will only get better with the more bitrate it gets when doing the compression. More compression is the whole point of HEVC and while it doesn't require as much bitrate as H.264 to get the same result, it still needs enough bitrate to do an adequate job so we have no compression artifacts.
stanger89's Avatar stanger89
11:16 AM Liked: 207
post #1028 of 1660
07-18-2014 | Posts: 17,775
Joined: Nov 2002
Quote:
Originally Posted by madshi View Post
Well, I guess they could just encode HDR content as if it were normal content and then apply a stretch factor to account for the higher peak white. E.g. if a movie studio wants peak white for a specific movie to be twice as bright as it normally is, the stretch factor for every Y (luma) value would simply be 0.5. Doing it like this would allow movie studios to use a different peak white value for every movie.

I do wonder what happens to movies with HDR information if they're displayed on a "normal" display. Are they just extra dim there with all the HDR information still visible? Or is the HDR information cut away so that the movie is normal bright but without any HDR detail? I guess it should be the latter, but will that still look "ok" even with the HDR information clipped away? And how does the Blu-Ray player know if the display supports increased peak white or not? Seems to me that a lot of things still need to be sorted out in that area. Quite possibly a new HDMI version could be necessary, or at least a new EDID extension so that displays can communicate their peak white ability (and current setting) to the 4K Blu-Ray player.

Edit: Probably if the display can't handle the movie's peak white value, instead of just cutting away the HDR information, the 4K Blu-Ray player should condense the HDR information into the near peak white area which the display still can show.
Yeah, what I was wondering was, current H.264/etc are basically transfer function agnostic. As far as I know, there's nothing in H.264 that specifies what the transfer function is supposed to be, there's just data that comes in, is compressed, and sent out. Granted this causes a good deal of confusion today, but still. So the question is, will the compression codec care what the resulting or originating transfer function are supposed to be, or does it just compress some data. Is it more of a metadata/handshaking thing for the player or display to know how to handle the data?
jlanzy's Avatar jlanzy
11:19 AM Liked: 22
post #1029 of 1660
07-18-2014 | Posts: 915
Joined: Nov 2001
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dan Hitchman View Post
And now the question remains as to how much of this will actually make its way to premium consumer UHD media. And if it does, too much compression can kill most of the benefits.

I have absolutely no faith that material from sites like Amazon and Netflix will be top tier A/V experiences. And even less for broadcast UHD. Just look at the quality we get now. It's garbage.
I doubt many expect top tier experiences from those sources, personally, I do expect it from 4K BR.
mark haflich's Avatar mark haflich
11:34 AM Liked: 687
post #1030 of 1660
07-18-2014 | Posts: 20,619
Joined: Dec 2000
Do you guys actually think we will have 4K bluray players and content before the end of 2015? The risk of going forward with all the changes in production etc for content to make the content something many people want to purchases depends on the displays being able to display the level of content quality. Displays simply can't now. It would be extremely bad business to introduce 4K Bluray at this point in time. When the displays can produce content quality not avaliable, when they aren't the weakest link, the content and content plsybasck devices will catch up.
madshi's Avatar madshi
11:47 AM Liked: 167
post #1031 of 1660
07-18-2014 | Posts: 5,521
Joined: May 2005
Do you really want the chicken-and-egg problem, Mark? Even if display technology gets ahead of content at some point in the future, there'll still be millions of old displays around at that time, which need to be taken into account. The limitations of current display technology shouldn't be an excuse to hold back on content quality. Obviously there need to be algorithms in place that can convert higher quality content in such a way that it still looks alright on less capable displays. But that shouldn't be too hard, it isn't really rocket science. Converting higher bitdepth and resolution down is a piece of cake. Converting a higher gamut and dynamic range down in such a way that it still looks good on old displays might be more difficult, but it should still be doable. Maybe the 4K Blu-Ray spec could even advise on how such algorithms should work...
HockeyoAJB's Avatar HockeyoAJB
12:20 PM Liked: 304
post #1032 of 1660
07-18-2014 | Posts: 948
Joined: Dec 2013
Quote:
Originally Posted by mark haflich View Post
Do you guys actually think we will have 4K bluray players and content before the end of 2015? The risk of going forward with all the changes in production etc for content to make the content something many people want to purchases depends on the displays being able to display the level of content quality. Displays simply can't now. It would be extremely bad business to introduce 4K Bluray at this point in time. When the displays can produce content quality not avalaible, when they aren't the weakest link, the content and content plsybasck devices will catch up.
Displays are not currently the weak link. For years, good displays have been capable of reproducing better image quality and handling higher bit rates than any consumer level content delivery mechanism has provided. So, it is clearly time for the rest of the industry to catch up. The question is, what should the new standard of quality be? Should they adopt a new standard that sets the bar for content to be mastered and delivered at a level of quality that matches what current display technology can reproduce? Or, should they set the bar higher if possible, thereby allowing the same content to "improve" over time as display technology continues to improve.

IMO, if they can master and deliver content that exceeds current display technology's capabilities, but do so in a way that is compatible with current display technology and still manages to be as faithful to the artist's intent as possible, then I am all for it. If you are going to remaster everything now anyways, I see no reason to do it to a lower standard of quality than what could be done, simply because displays might not initially be able to reproduce it to its full quality. That just means that we will hit this same roadblock again in a few years and have to repurchase the same content to get improvements that could have been put in now.
mark haflich's Avatar mark haflich
12:49 PM Liked: 687
post #1033 of 1660
07-18-2014 | Posts: 20,619
Joined: Dec 2000
Displays are they weak link I believe. No wide dynamic range, limited color palettes, I could go on and on. If you accept P3 as a desirable end goal, most projectors need the addition of a yellow filter and the consequent reduction in available light. You can buy a bright DCI projector modified to bring up the contrastup to around 4K, but it will cost you.
mark haflich's Avatar mark haflich
12:51 PM Liked: 687
post #1034 of 1660
07-18-2014 | Posts: 20,619
Joined: Dec 2000
I ask the question for the second time. Will we see 4K Bluray with players and at least some content in 2015?
Dan Hitchman's Avatar Dan Hitchman
12:54 PM Liked: 657
post #1035 of 1660
07-18-2014 | Posts: 9,689
Joined: Jul 2000
Quote:
Originally Posted by mark haflich View Post
I ask the question for the second time. Will we see 4K Bluray with players and at least some content in 2015?
I doubt it. 2016 probably... if ever.

If it was coming out next year... wouldn't Dolby have waited to release Atmos on that format instead of 1080p Blu-ray? They know the industry and its inner workings a lot better than we do.
Seegs108's Avatar Seegs108
01:13 PM Liked: 417
post #1036 of 1660
07-18-2014 | Posts: 5,119
Joined: Jul 2007
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dan Hitchman View Post
I doubt it. 2016 probably... if ever.

If it was coming out next year... wouldn't Dolby have waited to release Atmos on that format instead of 1080p Blu-ray? They know the industry and its inner workings a lot better than we do.
I don't see how this is any indication of when 4K BD is to come. We aren't likely to see any new audio formats as we already have lossless to the source formats on 1080p BD. What's the point in waiting to release Atmos. It requires no new interconnect or port to implement unlike 4K BD. I think Dolby releasing Atmos in the home is simply their answer to DTS Neo:X.
Ron Jones's Avatar Ron Jones
01:22 PM Liked: 378
post #1037 of 1660
07-18-2014 | Posts: 6,216
Joined: Jul 2000
Quote:
Originally Posted by mark haflich View Post
I ask the question for the second time. Will we see 4K Bluray with players and at least some content in 2015?

I would say yes for the initial roll out in 2nd half of 2015 with perhaps 25 to 50 movie titles available by year's end. This is a 60/40 positive answer however. I think we will learn more at CES in Jan. 2015. The BDA is certainly keeping info very close to the vest as to what progress has been made by the technical working group that is developing the BD UHD spec. Once the players and software do start to come out I would expect the first year to only see players from two or three manufacturers and only a few movies titles released each month (not unlike the roll out of BD in 2006-2007).
Dan Hitchman's Avatar Dan Hitchman
01:35 PM Liked: 657
post #1038 of 1660
07-18-2014 | Posts: 9,689
Joined: Jul 2000
Quote:
Originally Posted by Seegs108 View Post
I don't see how this is any indication of when 4K BD is to come. We aren't likely to see any new audio formats as we already have lossless to the source formats on 1080p BD. What's the point in waiting to release Atmos. It requires no new interconnect or port to implement unlike 4K BD. I think Dolby releasing Atmos in the home is simply their answer to DTS Neo:X.

Neo:X is matrix post-processing. Dolby Atmos is a different animal and a direct salvo at DTS/Barco's MDA object format... which use discrete audio data.
Dan Hitchman's Avatar Dan Hitchman
01:39 PM Liked: 657
post #1039 of 1660
07-18-2014 | Posts: 9,689
Joined: Jul 2000
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ron Jones View Post
I would say yes for the initial roll out in 2nd half of 2015 with perhaps 25 to 50 movie titles available by year's end. This is a 60/40 positive answer however. I think we will learn more at CES in Jan. 2015. The BDA is certainly keeping info very close to the vest as to what progress has been made by the technical working group that is developing the BD UHD spec. Once the players and software do start to come out I would expect the first year to only see players from two or three manufacturers and only a few movies titles released each month (not unlike the roll out of BD in 2006-2007).
But the approval and ratification of some of these key items for UHD and potentially 8K are happening RIGHT NOW and not months ago or even a year ago. They have to have the encoding and mastering software and consumer hardware and decoding chips ready to go practically yesterday in order for movies to be mastered, discs to be pressed, and players to be designed and manufactured for a Holiday 2015 roll out.

I really think that 2016 is more realistic.
Seegs108's Avatar Seegs108
01:41 PM Liked: 417
post #1040 of 1660
07-18-2014 | Posts: 5,119
Joined: Jul 2007
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dan Hitchman View Post
Neo:X is matrix post-processing. Dolby Atmos is a different animal and a direct salvo at DTS/Barco's MDA object format... which use discrete audio data.
I never said the two formats were the same. I'm simply saying Dolby released it because of Neo:X.
Dan Hitchman's Avatar Dan Hitchman
01:44 PM Liked: 657
post #1041 of 1660
07-18-2014 | Posts: 9,689
Joined: Jul 2000
Quote:
Originally Posted by Seegs108 View Post
I never said the two formats were the same. I'm simply saying Dolby released it because of Neo:X.
I don't think they released it due to an inferior product. Two separate issues and instead Dolby wants to stay relevant as a company and ahead of the game in the commercial and consumer markets. The A/V manufacturers, which are slumping profit-wise, are desperate for any new thing to sell more equipment. 3D belly flopped hard, so they have to have the next new tech marvel. UHD isn't ready yet.

Answer: ATMOS
HockeyoAJB's Avatar HockeyoAJB
01:50 PM Liked: 304
post #1042 of 1660
07-18-2014 | Posts: 948
Joined: Dec 2013
Quote:
Originally Posted by mark haflich View Post
Displays are they weak link I believe. No wide dynamic range, limited color palettes, I could go on and on. If you accept P3 as a desirable end goal, most projectors need the addition of a yellow filter and the consequent reduction in available light. You can buy a bright DCI projector modified to bring up the contrastup to around 4K, but it will cost you.
You're comparing displays to what the proposed new standards for content could be, not to what current content actually provides. Current displays can go well beyond the 100 nit standard that current content is graded for. Current displays can also go well beyond the Rec. 709 color space using 8-bits per color, and 4:2:0 color sub-sampling used for current content. The content currently available to consumers is clearly the weak link.

What is at question is whether we should improve consumer content to be equal to what current displays can do or if we should take it a step further and then allow displays to catch up and pass it before starting the whole cycle over again. I.e. should display capabilities dictate content capabilities and vice versa, or should we allow them to play leap frog, limited only by their own capabilities, so long as we can guarantee compatibility.

I vote for leap frog. New TV's come out every year with technology that is usually an improvement upon what came before. New and improved content formats only come out once every 10 years or so. If the next generation of content is only improved to equal what current displays can reproduce in full then, in 2 years, you will be able to buy TV's that are better than the content you put on them, again, and you will have to wait another 8 years for the next content format to take advantage of the new display's capabilities. On the other hand, if the next generation of content can be created in such a way that it takes 10 years for display technology to be able to eek every last bit of quality out of it then we will continue to see improvements in quality every year for the next 10 years.
Seegs108's Avatar Seegs108
01:53 PM Liked: 417
post #1043 of 1660
07-18-2014 | Posts: 5,119
Joined: Jul 2007
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dan Hitchman View Post
I don't think they released it due to an inferior product. Two separate issues and instead Dolby wants to stay relevant as a company and ahead of the game in the commercial and consumer markets. The A/V manufacturers, which are slumping profit-wise, are desperate for any new thing to sell more equipment. 3D belly flopped hard, so they have to have the next new tech marvel. UHD isn't ready yet.

Answer: ATMOS
And you honetly think people who only needed to buy one thing (a 3D capable TV) are now going to completely renovate a room to install a whole slew of extra speakers to take advantage of Atmos in the home? If Dolby thinks average consumers are going to do this then they are naive and don't know the average consumer very well. If anything, "Atmos" is just a marketing catch phrase to get people to buy a new receiver even though 99% of them will never take advantage of the technology. 7.1 is still ultra rare what makes you think more channels is the answer to the slump in profits? Atmos is anything but the answer. We need something more easily obtainable. Higher bit depth, larger color spaces, larger screens, higher contrast/dynamic range, and higher resolution is the answer. The sum of those parts are visibly better than what we have now. It isn't something gimmicky like Atmos will be in the home.
AV Science Sales 5's Avatar AV Science Sales 5
01:59 PM Liked: 668
post #1044 of 1660
07-18-2014 | Posts: 9,259
Joined: Sep 2011
Quote:
Originally Posted by mark haflich View Post
I ask the question for the second time. Will we see 4K Bluray with players and at least some content in 2015?
I am hopefully optimistic that we will see 4K BD in 2015. I think the odds are in favor of it. I don't think there will be much available, but I think there will be something out there.
AV Science Sales 5's Avatar AV Science Sales 5
02:05 PM Liked: 668
post #1045 of 1660
07-18-2014 | Posts: 9,259
Joined: Sep 2011
Quote:
Originally Posted by Seegs108 View Post
And you honetly think people who only needed to buy one thing (a 3D capable TV) are now going to completely renovate a room to install a whole slew of extra speakers to take advantage of Atmos in the home? If Dolby thinks average consumers are going to do this then they are naive and don't know the average consumer very well. If anything, "Atmos" is just a marketing catch phrase to get people to buy a new receiver even though 99% of them will never take advantage of the technology. 7.1 is still ultra rare what makes you think more channels is the answer to the slump in profits? Atmos is anything but the answer. We need something more easily obtainable. Higher bit depth, larger color spaces, larger screens, higher contrast/dynamic range, and higher resolution is the answer. The sum of those parts are visibly better than what we have now. It isn't something gimmicky like Atmos will be in the home.
After CEDIA, many of us should know if this is a gimmick or if it is something that will be desirable. I am thinking it will be desirable in my HT, but will not know for sure, until I get to experience it.
Seegs108's Avatar Seegs108
02:09 PM Liked: 417
post #1046 of 1660
07-18-2014 | Posts: 5,119
Joined: Jul 2007
Quote:
Originally Posted by AV Science Sales 5 View Post
After CEDIA, many of us should know if this is a gimmick or if it is something that will be desirable. I am thinking it will be desirable in my HT, but will not know for sure, until I get to experience it.
Mike, you are definitely in that 1% that will take the necessary steps to actually install a system needed to make Atmos worthwhile. Wouldn't you agree that the vast majority of people aren't going to install a system like that? There are a lot of people on this forum that are in that 1%, but outside this forum...
Dan Hitchman's Avatar Dan Hitchman
02:09 PM Liked: 657
post #1047 of 1660
07-18-2014 | Posts: 9,689
Joined: Jul 2000
Quote:
Originally Posted by Seegs108 View Post
And you honetly think people who only needed to buy one thing (a 3D capable TV) are now going to completely renovate a room to install a whole slew of extra speakers to take advantage of Atmos in the home? If Dolby thinks average consumers are going to do this then they are naive and don't know the average consumer very well. If anything, "Atmos" is just a marketing catch phrase to get people to buy a new receiver even though 99% of them will never take advantage of the technology. 7.1 is still ultra rare what makes you think more channels is the answer to the slump in profits? Atmos is anything but the answer. We need something more easily obtainable. Higher bit depth, larger color spaces, larger screens, higher contrast/dynamic range, and higher resolution is the answer. The sum of those parts are visibly better than what we have now. It isn't something gimmicky like Atmos will be in the home.
Did you read kbarnes write up on his trip to Dolby Labs? Doesn't sound like a gimmick. And I'm going to CEDIA to check it out for myself.

Speaker companies are releasing new models that are either modified regular speakers (to more closely align to object surround's needs of monopoles with wider dispersal patterns... not dipoles) or all-in-one "Atmos enabled" solutions for those who don't want a huge speaker footprint or can't or won't put speakers in or on their ceiling.

We're getting a leap forward in home audio, now we need the video side to play catch up.
Ron Jones's Avatar Ron Jones
02:14 PM Liked: 378
post #1048 of 1660
07-18-2014 | Posts: 6,216
Joined: Jul 2000
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dan Hitchman View Post
But the approval and ratification of some of these key items for UHD and potentially 8K are happening RIGHT NOW and not months ago or even a year ago. They have to have the encoding and mastering software and consumer hardware and decoding chips ready to go practically yesterday in order for movies to be mastered, discs to be pressed, and players to be designed and manufactured for a Holiday 2015 roll out.

I really think that 2016 is more realistic.

I really think the BDA will draw a "line in the sand" for what's included, or not, in this major Blu-ray update (i.e., no spec. for 8K). While it took about 1.5 years from the original BD spec. to having the first consumer products (fall of 2004 to spring of 2006), that development & production cycle can probably be shrunk for the introduction of UHD as it is build upon an existing technology and development work appears to be moving forward parallel with the spec. development. However, if the spec. is not completed by 1st quarter of 2015, at the latest, then 2016 becomes more likely for seeing first BD UHD products. Just like was the situation when BD was introduced in 2006, the first generation players and discs may not support the most advanced features defined by the BD UHD standard. Remember the first 6 months of BD releases in 2006 were limited to MPEG 2 encoding and a single layer. I would hope we will see the initial BD UHD movies released using 4:2:2 and 10 or 12-bit depth since this is already supported by the film industry. The HEVC 2nd edition encoders need not be real time and can be implemented in software rather than requiring custom chips to be developed.


I do believe getting the spec. for the 2nd edition of HEVC approved is a major stepping stone toward BD UHD since it will probably take the better part of year to get the 2nd generation HEVC decoder chips into production and these will be needed for the BD UHD players.
Seegs108's Avatar Seegs108
02:16 PM Liked: 417
post #1049 of 1660
07-18-2014 | Posts: 5,119
Joined: Jul 2007
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dan Hitchman View Post
Did you read kbarnes write up on his trip to Dolby Labs? Doesn't sound like a gimmick. And I'm going to CEDIA to check it out for myself.

Speaker companies are releasing new models that are either modified regular speakers (to more closely align to object surround's needs of monopoles with wider dispersal patterns... not dipoles) or all-in-one "Atmos enabled" solutions for those who don't want a huge speaker footprint or can't or won't put speakers in or on their ceiling.

We're getting a leap forward in home audio, now we need the video side to play catch up.
"all-in-one "Atmos enabled"" means simulated surround sound, correct? It's gimmicky because companies will use that moniker as a selling point of their products even though it isn't obtainable for most people. I realize there are people, on this forum for example, that will take advantage of what Atmos has to fully offer. But those setup will be few and far between. Dolby knows this, just like they know most people are still using their TV's speakers for audio. Like I said, this isn't a game changer like 4K BD could be. 4K BD is far more obtainable to the average consumer. Atmos is an upgrade in audio formats and can be worthwhile ONLY if you take necessary steps to make it so. There aren't many people out there willing to go those extra steps is all I'm saying. Just because it's better doesn't mean it will catch on. This is also one of the main drawbacks to 4K BD. Streaming is much easier for the average consumer. 4K BD needs to give the average consumer something that's both easily obtainable and worthwhile to spend money on. Streaming could very well mean the end of disc based media as we know it. 2014 average consumers demand convenience and don't care about absolute quality.
Dan Hitchman's Avatar Dan Hitchman
02:27 PM Liked: 657
post #1050 of 1660
07-18-2014 | Posts: 9,689
Joined: Jul 2000
Quote:
Originally Posted by Seegs108 View Post
"all-in-one "Atmos enabled"" means simulated surround sound, correct? It's gimmicky because companies will use that moniker as a selling point of their products even though it isn't obtainable for most people. I realize there are people, on this forum for example, that will take advantage of what Atmos has to fully offer. But those setup will be few and far between. Dolby knows this, just like they know most people are still using their TV's speakers for audio. Like I said, this isn't a game changer like 4K BD could be. 4K BD is far more obtainable to the average consumer. Atmos is an upgrade in audio formats and can be worthwhile ONLY if you take necessary steps to make it so. There aren't many people out there willing to go those extra steps is all I'm saying.
Most people who bought an HDTV are still playing SD content through them. They have no clue about HD nor do they even care about 4k. Technology moves forward irrespective of Joe and Jane Sixpack. These are the people you could try to educate, but who will just stare at you with a blank look and go back to watching DVD's or VHS tapes.

What we need to do is start educating those consumers who are a bit more tech aware that they could be getting so much more with HD or 4k or even Dolby Atmos. The industry has fallen down on the job in that regard.

And with fewer places to actually educate and demo the products for consumers than ever before...it will be an uphill battle to be sure. But that shouldn't freeze progress.

These Atmos enabled speakers have discrete inputs for separate upward firing drivers. They get the separate ceiling speaker information from the Atmos renderer. Yes, I agree that these will not replace properly placed, timbre matched ceiling speakers. But Keith said they still sounded great and might be better than nothing for those not wanting to go the extra mile for a total Atmos speaker package.

Reply Digital Hi-End Projectors - $3,000+ USD MSRP

Subscribe to this Thread

Powered by vBadvanced CMPS v3.2.3