Blu-ray 4K UHD - coming 2015? - Page 67 - AVS | Home Theater Discussions And Reviews
Baselworld is only a few weeks away. Getting the latest news is easy, Click Here for info on how to join the Watchuseek.com newsletter list. Follow our team for updates featuring event coverage, new product unveilings, watch industry news & more!


Forum Jump: 
 364Likes
Reply
 
Thread Tools
post #1981 of 2196 Old 04-17-2015, 06:19 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
Dan Hitchman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Northern Colorado
Posts: 10,367
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1825 Post(s)
Liked: 926
Quote:
Originally Posted by rak306 View Post
FWIW, the top 10 movies at the box office this week were all mastered in 2K.
Oh, yeah... we'll be getting A LOT of upconverts. That's why they're pushing 10 bit, higher color gamuts, and HDR. Oh, and Dolby Atmos and DTS:X audio.

It has to be more than the pixel count because many titles just won't have the extra pixels to give.

Listen up, studios! Just say "NO" to DNR and EE!!
Dan Hitchman is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #1982 of 2196 Old 04-17-2015, 06:19 PM
Member
 
Javs's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: Sydney Australia
Posts: 130
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 92 Post(s)
Liked: 26
Quote:
Originally Posted by rak306 View Post
FWIW, the top 10 movies at the box office this week were all mastered in 2K.
Surprisingly even the yet to be released Avengers: Age of Ultron is mastered in 2K.

I for one welcome significantly higher bitrates though

Current:
Sony 300ES | OZTS Majestic Screen White 120" 16:9 | Denon AVR-791 | Krix KDX L/C/R + Surround | Seismix 3 MK3 Subwoofer | Sony PS4 | Xbox-360
Wish List:
Marantz AV8802 | Elektra Thatron HD | Anti-Mode 8033 II
Javs is offline  
post #1983 of 2196 Old 04-18-2015, 07:41 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
DavidHir's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 11,043
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 485 Post(s)
Liked: 602
I imagine at some point all new movies will be finished at 4K. It will just take some time.

DavidHir is online now  
post #1984 of 2196 Old 04-18-2015, 07:58 AM
wse
AVS Special Member
 
wse's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: USA
Posts: 7,593
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 907 Post(s)
Liked: 491
Quote:
Originally Posted by AV Science Sales 5 View Post
You know that many people said the same thing about VHS when DVD was first talked about. It happened again with DVD, when BD was first talked about. I predict (if they will get the product on the market soon) that the same thing happens with 4K BD. It will not happen over night, but in a few years once 4K BD becomes common place, guys that hang out here and know the difference, will be using or wanting 4K BD.
I agree 100% my great grand mother still watches VHS

Anyway I am looking forward to BD-UHD and bring on 12 bit, higher color gamuts, and HDR, Dolby Atmos and DTS:X audio with 13.2 sound.

I am saving until then 2020 it will be main stream hopefully
wse is online now  
post #1985 of 2196 Old 04-19-2015, 06:10 AM
Advanced Member
 
Michael Osadciw's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Serving GTA & Southern Ontario
Posts: 783
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 39 Post(s)
Liked: 49
According to the leaked document, at this time UHDBD will be 10 bit and 4:2:0, and not 12-bit as many are hoping for.


Interesting that HDR material will be limited to specular highlights of 1000nits. That limit seems appropriate right now, especially relative to the current state of video displays where HDR is just emerging. HDR by Dolby Vision is talking 10 000nit capability within its metadata. The capability will be there as content creators, video displays, and playback material evolve over the years. It's certainly not a snapshot of the present.
David Susilo likes this.
Michael Osadciw is offline  
post #1986 of 2196 Old 04-19-2015, 07:00 AM
AVS Special Member
 
David Susilo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Markham, Canada
Posts: 9,751
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 397 Post(s)
Liked: 452
Quote:
Originally Posted by mark haflich View Post
Do you really think it looks good on a large 4K panel? I would agree it looks better than 2K streamed but I would rate neither as good.

Netflix UHD on a 78" TV, in slow-motion scenes, is very good. Once you move to fast-motion scenes, I'd rather watch an upscaled blu-ray.

follow my A/V tweets @davidsusilo

ISF, THX, CEDIA, Control4 & HAA certified
Reviewer for TED, QAV, AUVI & DownUnder Audio Magazine

my (yet to be completed) BD list
my home theatre

David Susilo is offline  
post #1987 of 2196 Old 04-19-2015, 07:05 AM
AVS Special Member
 
David Susilo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Markham, Canada
Posts: 9,751
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 397 Post(s)
Liked: 452
Quote:
Originally Posted by wse View Post
I agree 100% my great grand mother still watches VHS

Anyway I am looking forward to BD-UHD and bring on 12 bit, higher color gamuts, and HDR, Dolby Atmos and DTS:X audio with 13.2 sound.

I am saving until then 2020 it will be main stream hopefully
It is already confirmed by UHD consortium that the UHD BD will definitely be "only" 10-bit, 4:2:0, P3 colour space and (per title basis, according to Warner and Fox 1,000 Nits HDR.

follow my A/V tweets @davidsusilo

ISF, THX, CEDIA, Control4 & HAA certified
Reviewer for TED, QAV, AUVI & DownUnder Audio Magazine

my (yet to be completed) BD list
my home theatre

David Susilo is offline  
post #1988 of 2196 Old 04-19-2015, 07:09 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Seegs108's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Upstate New York
Posts: 5,927
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1499 Post(s)
Liked: 543
Quote:
Originally Posted by David Susilo View Post
It is already confirmed by UHD consortium that the UHD BD will definitely be "only" 10-bit, 4:2:0, P3 colour space and (per title basis, according to Warner and Fox 1,000 Nits HDR.
Can you post a source for this information?
Seegs108 is online now  
post #1989 of 2196 Old 04-19-2015, 07:16 AM
AVS Special Member
 
David Susilo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Markham, Canada
Posts: 9,751
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 397 Post(s)
Liked: 452
Nothing printed, only from what being mentioned during my various meetings with Vizio, Panasonic, Warner, Dolby, Technicolor and Fox.
Dan Hitchman likes this.

follow my A/V tweets @davidsusilo

ISF, THX, CEDIA, Control4 & HAA certified
Reviewer for TED, QAV, AUVI & DownUnder Audio Magazine

my (yet to be completed) BD list
my home theatre

David Susilo is offline  
post #1990 of 2196 Old 04-19-2015, 07:20 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
mark haflich's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: brookeville, maryland, usa
Posts: 21,061
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1112 Post(s)
Liked: 794
Quote:
Originally Posted by David Susilo View Post
Netflix UHD on a 78" TV, in slow-motion scenes, is very good. Once you move to fast-motion scenes, I'd rather watch an upscaled blu-ray.

Thanks David. I respect your opinion.

Mark Haflich
markhaflich@yahoo.com
call me at: 240 876 2536
mark haflich is offline  
post #1991 of 2196 Old 04-19-2015, 01:06 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
DavidHir's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 11,043
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 485 Post(s)
Liked: 602
Quote:
Originally Posted by David Susilo View Post
It is already confirmed by UHD consortium that the UHD BD will definitely be "only" 10-bit, 4:2:0, P3 colour space and (per title basis, according to Warner and Fox 1,000 Nits HDR.
This is pretty much what I have been expecting for a long time. I'll take it.

DavidHir is online now  
post #1992 of 2196 Old 04-19-2015, 01:16 PM
AVS Special Member
 
wco81's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2001
Posts: 4,726
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 274 Post(s)
Liked: 120
Is it good enough if it's the last packaged media format ever?
wco81 is online now  
post #1993 of 2196 Old 04-19-2015, 01:26 PM
AVS Special Member
 
madshi's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 5,570
Mentioned: 14 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 139 Post(s)
Liked: 209
I would be careful with saying "definitely". We have heard different things, like maybe allowing more bits via extensions and stuff. Maybe it'll just be 10bit max, maybe not. I've not seen or read anything that falls under the "definitely" category yet. The spec is not even final yet. There can always be last minute changes. Remember, Blu-Ray was originally supposed to only support MPEG2. Probably some of you don't remember that, anymore...
madshi is offline  
post #1994 of 2196 Old 04-19-2015, 02:19 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
mark haflich's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: brookeville, maryland, usa
Posts: 21,061
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1112 Post(s)
Liked: 794
A Madshi never forgets!

Mark Haflich
markhaflich@yahoo.com
call me at: 240 876 2536
mark haflich is offline  
post #1995 of 2196 Old 04-19-2015, 02:33 PM
AVS Special Member
 
madshi's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 5,570
Mentioned: 14 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 139 Post(s)
Liked: 209
I forget where I put my keys every day...
madshi is offline  
post #1996 of 2196 Old 04-19-2015, 03:39 PM
Senior Member
 
Lazarus Dark's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 315
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 45 Post(s)
Liked: 85
Quote:
Originally Posted by Michael Osadciw View Post
All Blu-rays have their issues once you get past the artefacts of the video display. There was the initial excitement of Blu-ray, because it looked so much better than DVD. But now, with the critical eye, one can see that it's a far from perfect 1080p playback medium, even on 55" displays.


I was having a discussion with colleagues about software and how the timing was "off" for the mass market software model.


Before HDTVs, we had our square SDTVs. VHS was the software for the masses for almost 20 years, as Laserdisc was for the film collector and performance based systems.


Then in 1997 DVD was introduced as a format. During the HD transition, people could use DVDs on their SDTVs and wide HDTVs. It was the best SD software available offering a significant improvement over VHS and Laserdisc.


But did DVD come too late? It came to market as SDTVs were beginning their phase-out over a period of a few years. Many people buying HDTVs were misled or expected 1080i/p from their DVDs and didn't understand that it was only 480i/p upconverted to 540p/1080i depending on the CRT, or to some other fixed pixel resolution of the panel at the time (and often at a loss of resolution). People didn't want DVDs, they wanted HD images off of a disc. But large collections were still built up to replace the worn and inconvenient VHS tapes.


But after a long wait...years of high definition widescreen HD projectors, CRTs, flat panels, in 2006 Blu-ray may have came too late to wet the appetite, even though full 1080p TVs were just becoming mainstream. Blame it on the late-arrival of the DVD? And for those of us who did replace our favourite DVDs with Blu-rays, here we go again with UHDBD.


VHS - 20 years
DVD - 9 years
BD - 9 years
UHDBD - this year?


Nine years passes quickly. And here we are with UHDBD. Three disc formats will exist because DVDs still sell almost as well as BDs, unless there's an announcement to cease DVD production, which I don't think will happen because it's likely those people won't transition to HD/UHD disc buying. Streaming will be "good enough" for those people...


I'm not saying stop the technology progress. I'm think I'm just saying that DVD came too late and messed up the market's purchasing of the right format at the right time.
Actually, the DVD scenario was even more complicated by "fullscreen" and "widescreen" versions being released. My stepfather kept buying tons of fullscreen dvd's and I told him he would regret it. I bought widescreen dvd's and he thought I was crazy because why would I buy moves that didn't fill up our 36" Sony CRT. He thought the black bars were stupid and he wanted fullscreen. Well, sure enough, only a couple years later he got an hdtv and now he had stacks and stacks of fullscreen dvd's that looked worse than my widescreen dvd's and boy did he regret it.
I had seen this coming miles away, and not only that I also understood that dvd was just a stopgap format, unlike most seemed to. DVD's came out at the same time that HDTV was coming out and I knew that before long there would be a HD disc format to replace DVD, so I never bought very many dvd's. I knew it was not an archival format and was destined for the library donation bin. I just have still not been able to fathom why it was so hard to make people understand that dvd's were NOT HD just because you played them on an HDTV. My eyesight isn't even that good but I want to vomit when I see a dvd being played on a 40"+ screen. How do people stand it?

So I never bought many dvd's and when bluray came out, there was only maybe ten movies I had to double dip and replace the dvd with a bluray. It helped that as soon as HD-DVD and bluray were announced to even start working on a spec, I stopped buying dvd's so I didn't end up having to replace more than necessary. I think I didn't buy a single dvd for three years, until Bluray officially won the war and I went right out and got a bluray drive for my htpc.

Now history repeats itself. As soon as they announced that they were starting work on a UHD bluray spec, I stopped buying Blurays, I now have a list going of films released in the last 2 years that I wanted to buy that I hope will come to UHD bluray very soon. The only bluray's I have purchased in the last year are older/niche films that I found on significant sale and do not expect a UHD version to come out or that I feel would not likely look much better on UHD-BD due to the age of the film or the quality of the bluray release (If the BD already looks rough, I doubt a UHD version will look much better. Or if the film is niche, I don't expect anyone to go back and rescan it at 4k+ resolution).
sarahb75 likes this.
Lazarus Dark is offline  
post #1997 of 2196 Old 04-19-2015, 03:55 PM
Senior Member
 
Lazarus Dark's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 315
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 45 Post(s)
Liked: 85
Quote:
Originally Posted by Javs View Post
Surprisingly even the yet to be released Avengers: Age of Ultron is mastered in 2K.

I for one welcome significantly higher bitrates though
http://screenrant.com/captain-americ...er-story-imax/
I'm hoping they change that for Phase 3 films. Starting with Captain America 3, they are using Imax's digital 4k cameras for some of the film, so that is a start at least. Personally, I don't understand why they haven't gone full 4k end-to-end yet. They are making billions of dollars, so they can afford to update their process and buy new equipment. Plus, they are now working with Sony for Spiderman and Sony has pioneered 4k end-to-end. And Marvel fans are more likely to want to see and buy the highest quality, as shown by the fact that Marvel films are some of the few that consistently sell more Bluray than dvd. So it stands to reason that Marvel fans (or I guess just fans of blockbuster spectacle in general) are more likely to want to buy the films in UHD-BD when available and Marvel should be thinking ahead in that regard (especially for a studio that thinks further ahead than anyone else and has films planned out to 2028 or more!).

(side note: all action movies should be using high frame rate already. I am so sick and tired of action so fast and blurry and choppy that I can't tell what's going on. The Hobbit films in HFR eliminated this problem for me, I was able to focus on every battle scene in BotFA. That said, I am in favor of variable frame rate, using high frame rate for fast motion and panning scenes and low frame rate (24fps) for normal static and slow scenes. Then just double the frames of the 24p scenes and output the whole thing as a 48 fps file. I can almost guarantee that this would make people like and accept HFR more.)
GoCaboNow likes this.
Lazarus Dark is offline  
post #1998 of 2196 Old 04-19-2015, 03:59 PM
Member
 
Javs's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: Sydney Australia
Posts: 130
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 92 Post(s)
Liked: 26
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lazarus Dark View Post
http://screenrant.com/captain-americ...er-story-imax/
I'm hoping they change that for Phase 3 films. Starting with Captain America 3, they are using Imax's digital 4k cameras for some of the film, so that is a start at least. Personally, I don't understand why they haven't gone full 4k end-to-end yet. They are making billions of dollars, so they can afford to update their process and buy new equipment. Plus, they are now working with Sony for Spiderman and Sony has pioneered 4k end-to-end. And Marvel fans are more likely to want to see and buy the highest quality, as shown by the fact that Marvel films are some of the few that consistently sell more Bluray than dvd. So it stands to reason that Marvel fans (or I guess just fans of blockbuster spectacle in general) are more likely to want to buy the films in UHD-BD when available and Marvel should be thinking ahead in that regard (especially for a studio that thinks further ahead than anyone else and has films planned out to 2028 or more!).

(side note: all action movies should be using high frame rate already. I am so sick and tired of action so fast and blurry and choppy that I can't tell what's going on. The Hobbit films in HFR eliminated this problem for me, I was able to focus on every battle scene in BotFA. That said, I am in favor of variable frame rate, using high frame rate for fast motion and panning scenes and low frame rate (24fps) for normal static and slow scenes. Then just double the frames of the 24p scenes and output the whole thing as a 48 fps file. I can almost guarantee that this would make people like and accept HFR more.)

I cant stand HFR, it just looks like either video in fast forward when actors are involved or a video game when action is involved, completely looses the 'Film' aesthetic and pulls me out of the movie repeatedly. I found it quite honestly jarring.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
rak306 likes this.

Current:
Sony 300ES | OZTS Majestic Screen White 120" 16:9 | Denon AVR-791 | Krix KDX L/C/R + Surround | Seismix 3 MK3 Subwoofer | Sony PS4 | Xbox-360
Wish List:
Marantz AV8802 | Elektra Thatron HD | Anti-Mode 8033 II
Javs is offline  
post #1999 of 2196 Old 04-19-2015, 04:59 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
mark haflich's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: brookeville, maryland, usa
Posts: 21,061
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1112 Post(s)
Liked: 794
There is nothing of particular merit to a film rate of 24 fps. That standard was forced by the economics of film long ago which forced using a frame rate where the vast majority of subjects viewers would not see flicker. Some are just use to it and going to a higher rate to solve many of the flaws associate with a low rate disappear. Do you now miss the excitement of having an operator connect you with another party or for those younger using your finger to rotate a dial? The excitement of asking for the long distance or over seas operator? Do you miss 480i and black and white? Prop planes instead of jets? Steam engines instead of diesel or electric? Some things that some liked are missing from these technological advancements but much is gained. To me, the benefits of higher frame rates significantly outweigh the benefits lost and variable frame rates depending on the scene maximizes everything including film costs and less and less film is available and les and less is being shot on film.
stevenjw and Frank714 like this.

Mark Haflich
markhaflich@yahoo.com
call me at: 240 876 2536
mark haflich is offline  
post #2000 of 2196 Old 04-19-2015, 05:28 PM
Member
 
Javs's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: Sydney Australia
Posts: 130
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 92 Post(s)
Liked: 26
Quote:
Originally Posted by mark haflich View Post
There is nothing of particular merit to a film rate of 24 fps. That standard was forced by the economics of film long ago which forced using a frame rate where the vast majority of subjects viewers would not see flicker. Some are just use to it and going to a higher rate to solve many of the flaws associate with a low rate disappear. Do you now miss the excitement of having an operator connect you with another party or for those younger using your finger to rotate a dial? The excitement of asking for the long distance or over seas operator? Do you miss 480i and black and white? Prop planes instead of jets? Steam engines instead of diesel or electric? Some things that some liked are missing from these technological advancements but much is gained. To me, the benefits of higher frame rates significantly outweigh the benefits lost and variable frame rates depending on the scene maximizes everything including film costs and less and less film is available and les and less is being shot on film.

Mark you can sugar coat it all you like. I understand the history of film and how 24fps came about. I work in the film industry myself and I, and many of my colleagues, directors and cinematographers alike have grown to love the aesthetic and motion of 24fps and thats all there is to it. The same way an artist likes to use certain paints and brushes to get a certain effect most people in the industry hate HFR myself included.

I dread the day when all films are shot in HFR as It doesn't look like cinema anymore. It just doesn't, I'm sorry but you will never convince me otherwise.

Forget about film negatives I am not referring to that, I am talking about the motion and visual aesthetic of cinema motion pictures.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Current:
Sony 300ES | OZTS Majestic Screen White 120" 16:9 | Denon AVR-791 | Krix KDX L/C/R + Surround | Seismix 3 MK3 Subwoofer | Sony PS4 | Xbox-360
Wish List:
Marantz AV8802 | Elektra Thatron HD | Anti-Mode 8033 II
Javs is offline  
post #2001 of 2196 Old 04-19-2015, 05:37 PM
Member
 
EvLee's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 125
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 62 Post(s)
Liked: 81
Quote:
Originally Posted by Javs View Post
Mark you can sugar coat it all you like. I understand the history of film and how 24fps came about. I work in the film industry myself and I, and many of my colleagues, directors and cinematographers alike have grown to love the aesthetic and motion of 24fps and thats all there is to it. The same way an artist likes to use certain paints and brushes to get a certain effect most people in the industry hate HFR myself included.

I dread the day when all films are shot in HFR as It doesn't look like cinema anymore. It just doesn't, I'm sorry but you will never convince me otherwise.

Forget about film negatives I am not referring to that, I am talking about the motion and visual aesthetic of cinema motion pictures.
John Erland from the Pickfair Institute gave an interesting presentation at NAB this year about variable frame rate and how to adjust motion blur to make it feel like standard 24fps, or really any frame rate for that matter. Essentially boils down to a synthesized shutter angle that can integrate light over a longer time than the actual duration of a single frame. From the examples I saw I don't think the technique is 100% refined yet, but you may be interested in some of what he has to say. http://www.pickfairinstitute.org

Last edited by EvLee; 04-19-2015 at 05:41 PM.
EvLee is offline  
post #2002 of 2196 Old 04-19-2015, 05:51 PM
Advanced Member
 
sstephen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Edmonton, Alberta
Posts: 556
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 8 Post(s)
Liked: 23
yeah! 24 fps forever! And BW! And 4:3! and subtitles only accompanied by someone playing a piano! Time to go see a movie. Where's my horse?
stevenjw, JaguarCRO and Javs like this.

Scott Stephens
sstephen is offline  
post #2003 of 2196 Old 04-19-2015, 06:26 PM
Advanced Member
 
sstephen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Edmonton, Alberta
Posts: 556
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 8 Post(s)
Liked: 23
I understand a bit of the feeling of nostalgia for things like 24 fps, but I tend to agree with Mark that it was a limitation of the time, and since we are used to it, we kind of like it. I feel much the same about film grain. I don't want it artificially removed; if it was in there originally, then leave it alone. OTOH, if directors had been given the option from the very beginning, when creating their movies, to have had no film grain, I doubt very few would have chosen to put it in. That is not the same as a modern director saying he prefers film to digital. Grain isn't the only difference. If they had to give up NOTHING and could do away with film grain, I bet guys like Felini and Bergman would have been all over it. And the same goes with frame rate. If they could have gotten 120 fps and given up no other conveniences, I'll bet they'd have been all over that as well. That is NOT to say that I want to see frame interpolation used with a 24 fps film. I don't. But I'd be quite happy if films could be shot with no film grain (or noise when shooting digital) at high frame rates. And I know a lot of people think that that looks to "Nature channel" or whatever, but I don't think it would take long to get used to it, and then start to appreciate the extra detail.

The last movie I saw in 3d was in Vancouver at an Expo in the 80's. It was the first time I'd seen it done fairly well. I think it was polarized lenses in the glasses, it certainly wasn't blue/red lenses. Even though I don't bother with them, if I could have my movies in 3d, done well, and not find the glasses such a pain, I'd easily take that.

So I say bring on 4k UHD with higher frame rate, and more bits per pixel and wider colour space and I'll hope the movies in the near future are mastered to take advantage of those things. I may not warm up to the look right away, but I'll get used to it and be happy about it in short order.

Scott Stephens
sstephen is offline  
post #2004 of 2196 Old 04-19-2015, 06:38 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
DavidHir's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 11,043
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 485 Post(s)
Liked: 602
Quote:
Originally Posted by sstephen View Post
I understand a bit of the feeling of nostalgia for things like 24 fps, but I tend to agree with Mark that it was a limitation of the time, and since we are used to it, we kind of like it. I feel much the same about film grain. I don't want it artificially removed; if it was in there originally, then leave it alone. OTOH, if directors had been given the option from the very beginning, when creating their movies, to have had no film grain, I doubt very few would have chosen to put it in. That is not the same as a modern director saying he prefers film to digital. G
Agreed, it's become an aesthetic thing. A number of directors add grain to digitally filmed movies.

I still prefer the "look" of analog/35mm film over anything digital today, but there are very few theaters in my area that offer it anymore except for some art house theaters. I would love to see some of the epic movies that were filmed on 65mm.

DavidHir is online now  
post #2005 of 2196 Old 04-19-2015, 06:44 PM
Member
 
EvLee's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 125
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 62 Post(s)
Liked: 81
I think grain is actually one of those things that can be nice to have in a picture. This may not sound intuitive, but grain with the right size increases the perceived sharpness of fine details (acutance) even though it introduces noise into the image.
EvLee is offline  
post #2006 of 2196 Old 04-19-2015, 07:01 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
mark haflich's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: brookeville, maryland, usa
Posts: 21,061
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1112 Post(s)
Liked: 794
Quote:
Originally Posted by Javs View Post
Mark you can sugar coat it all you like.
I don't understand how you think I am sugar coating anything. Besides, I am an insulin shooting diabetic. I don't sugar coat anything.


I recognize that with higher frame rates we would be giving up some desirable attributes of film at 24 fps. The cinematic effect which almost all would agree with and others which would be pluses or minuses depending on the perspective of the particular viewer. Tto me the positives of variable frame rates outweigh the loses.

Mark Haflich
markhaflich@yahoo.com
call me at: 240 876 2536
mark haflich is offline  
post #2007 of 2196 Old 04-19-2015, 07:55 PM - Thread Starter
AVS Special Member
 
Ron Jones's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Florida and West Virginia, USA
Posts: 6,339
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 459 Post(s)
Liked: 437
Quote:
Originally Posted by David Susilo View Post
It is already confirmed by UHD consortium that the UHD BD will definitely be "only" 10-bit, 4:2:0, P3 colour space and (per title basis, according to Warner and Fox 1,000 Nits HDR.

Note however the Ultra HD Blu-ray spec. is expected to have:

  • Baseline mandatory requirements that all players must support (ie., a baseline profile). The initial UHD Blu-ray plerys are expected to require support for 10-bit, 4:2:0 encoded UHD discs and include support for colors spaces up to 2020 (including specific support for Rec 709 and DCI P3) as well as HDR signaling as per the SMPTE HDR standard are expected. UHD discs will most like required to support 10-bit, 4:2:0 and Rec. 709 as the minimum.
  • Options defined in the spec. are expected to include support for both the Dolby and Philip versions of HDR, support for 1080p 3D, and UHD discs can, as an option, use the wider DCI-P3 or even Rec. 2020 color space.
  • Extensibility provisions will be included in the initial spec. to allow addition capabilities to be added in the future while maintaining backward compatibility such that future UHD discs using these new features will be compatible with players built to the earlier profile (but obviously not supporting the new features added in later profiles).

Now the real question becomes: will support for at least some of the potential enhancements such as 12-bit depth, 4:2:2 and 4:4:4, etc. be addressed as options for which the requirements are already defined in the initial spec. release, but for which support is not mandatory -OR- will they be added in a future update to the spec. using the extensibility provisions that are included in the initial spec. release. We do know some potential future enhancements will depend on other standards bodies, such as ITU releasing an updated version the HEVC spec. that adds support for such things as 3D 4K coding.
stevenjw likes this.

Ron Jones
Blog + Reviews + Articles: projectorreviews.com

Last edited by Ron Jones; 04-19-2015 at 08:01 PM.
Ron Jones is offline  
post #2008 of 2196 Old 04-19-2015, 10:26 PM
Member
 
Javs's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: Sydney Australia
Posts: 130
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 92 Post(s)
Liked: 26
Quote:
Originally Posted by DavidHir View Post
Agreed, it's become an aesthetic thing. A number of directors add grain to digitally filmed movies.

I still prefer the "look" of analog/35mm film over anything digital today, but there are very few theaters in my area that offer it anymore except for some art house theaters. I would love to see some of the epic movies that were filmed on 65mm.
Quote:
Originally Posted by EvLee View Post
I think grain is actually one of those things that can be nice to have in a picture. This may not sound intuitive, but grain with the right size increases the perceived sharpness of fine details (acutance) even though it introduces noise into the image.
I agree with both of you, though I don't like analogue film projection anymore. I think the best of both worlds is capturing on film and then immediately moving to a digital workflow from that point on right through to digital projection. That in my mind is the most visually pleasing image I have seen. Forget digital sensors, your MTF stats, 4K, 5K & 6K for a minute and just concentrate on the image you see on the screen. I cant tell you how damned excited I was to hear that the latest Star Wars movie was being shot on film, I literally called up some of my friends who appreciate such things and we nerded out on how awesome of a decision that was... The LOOK of film and traditional cinema cant be denied. Modern digital post techniques have brought film into a new world of clarity, we no longer have to worry about the prints being mishandled and degrading over time but we get all the aesthetic benefits of it. You wont see directors like Nolan, Spielberg, Tarantino or Paul Thomas Anderson using digital capture unless they are absolutely forced to for those reasons.

Quote:
Originally Posted by mark haflich View Post
I don't understand how you think I am sugar coating anything. Besides, I am an insulin shooting diabetic. I don't sugar coat anything.

I recognize that with higher frame rates we would be giving up some desirable attributes of film at 24 fps. The cinematic effect which almost all would agree with and others which would be pluses or minuses depending on the perspective of the particular viewer. To me the positives of variable frame rates outweigh the loses.
The problem is your analogies are for things which are not comparable to the subjective nature of film frame rates. Its actually very difficult to come up with an analogy for film frame rates and what 'defines' classic cinema. I sat here for 5 minutes tying to come up with one that really puts it in perspective but I realized its an intangible subjective feeling I have which many people subconsciously share without really being able to put a finger on what it is that makes cinema cinema... Look at how many scathing reviews came out when Jackson showed 10 minutes of The Hobbit at HFR... and from people who are not even technically minded but knew inherently that 'something was off' 'it doesn't look like a movie anymore' 'it looks like a cheap tv soap opera' 'the sets and costumes looked ****'.. There are real issues, for me, and a great deal of others get totally pulled out of the suspension of disbelief you need to have to invest in the story on screen and instead cant focus on the story...

Variable presentation frame rate as opposed to variable capture frame rate (Which they already do)? I don't think they will ever do that... Your screen will flicker every time the frame rate changes so it can sync with the display properly... It will either be a certain frame rate for the whole film or it wont. Purely from a post production and content encoding point of view that would be an utter nightmare and to put it finely a 'dirty' way to do it.

In the last 10 years of digital capture formats we have been chasing the tail of celluloid trying to replicate its stronger dynamic range and resolving power and have mostly failed... Only now I think we have a camera which can replicate the incredible look of film and it is the Super 35 Arri Alexa. The Arri Alexa is the only camera to date which could possibly look better than film and still retains that classic aesthetic while at the same time having a very clean sensor with very good low light capabilities. The Arri Alexa 65 is a very exciting camera, 3 times larger than the sensor in the Super 35 Arri Alexa and hopefully will be used to shoot some films soon... Forget all about the Red Dragon 6K.

Don't even get me started on HDR... In Photography it is one of the most widely used techniques which is CONTINUOUSLY used to the wrong effect and completely wrong. Do you guys know the human eye can only see about 14 max stops of dynamic range? That's even worse than HFR, once we start capturing images with 20+ stops of Dynamic range is just going to be a joke, nothing will look real anymore, we will be beyond the realm of human realistic vision and that's going to make films look even worse. Film (Celluloid) is 14 stops of dynamic capture range... perfect, notice how thats almost exactly what the eye can see? Any more and we cant see it in real life so its useless in my opinion.

Can current displays accurately display 14 stops of DR? I don't know, maybe, I am sure the Dolby HDR will take whats there and widen it so it looks more spectacular to us, it will POP more, but there will be a point where this is all moot, when it becomes beyond what the human eye would realistically see in said scene or situation so I for one don't think that's necessarily better. I think 2020 colour is a far more exciting prospect than HDR.
rak306 likes this.

Current:
Sony 300ES | OZTS Majestic Screen White 120" 16:9 | Denon AVR-791 | Krix KDX L/C/R + Surround | Seismix 3 MK3 Subwoofer | Sony PS4 | Xbox-360
Wish List:
Marantz AV8802 | Elektra Thatron HD | Anti-Mode 8033 II
Javs is offline  
post #2009 of 2196 Old 04-19-2015, 10:59 PM
Member
 
EvLee's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 125
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 62 Post(s)
Liked: 81
The range our eyes can adapt to is more than 14 stops. 14 stops is just an estimate of simultaneous range. If you walk from a dark environment out into the daylight you very quickly adapt to a much larger change than 14 stops.
EvLee is offline  
post #2010 of 2196 Old 04-20-2015, 12:00 AM
Member
 
Javs's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: Sydney Australia
Posts: 130
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 92 Post(s)
Liked: 26
Quote:
Originally Posted by EvLee View Post
The range our eyes can adapt to is more than 14 stops. 14 stops is just an estimate of simultaneous range. If you walk from a dark environment out into the daylight you very quickly adapt to a much larger change than 14 stops.
What you are saying is still not dynamic range of any sort its the iris in your eyes readjusting to a different range but still 14 stops or so wide. Clamped down if you will, or lower exposure if you will, but still 14 stops approx.

The wider range our eyes may be able to adapt to doesn't translate onto the screen, what you see on screen is always a simultaneous range is it not? If you have content on a screen which our eyes cannot adapt to, say, in the shadow details for eg because there is such bright content in the sky in the same frame whats the point of having it there, its lost, your pupils will not dilate because they are overpowered by the brighter content. The camera is there to simulate our eyes and as such exposure is used for that. If you capture 20+ Stops of dynamic range it just gets squashed down into the 14 or so your eyes can make out, its graded that way, if you were to display the full blown brightness and darkness of 20+ stops we would not be able to focus on all of the captured detail depending on weather or not its brightness or darkness which are more prominent in the image.

For eg, If I stand on my balcony in the direct bright sunlight (The prominent information in my vision being overly bright my eyes are adjusted to this), I look across from my balcony I can see other apartments with windows... I can not clearly see what is inside the other apartment windows because I am standing outside in the direct sun and my pupils are constricted to adjust to the sunlight and not the dim shadow detail of the apartment across the way even though I may be looking at the shadow detail my pupils wont dilate to see it as the brightness is the overpowering factor in my vision at the time. As the sun sets however and my pupils dilate and the brightness and darkness begin to come closer together in overall brightness suddenly I can see very clearly through the apartment window.

The argument for contrast ratio is actually identical, it is said we can only make out about 16,000:1 contrast at any one time, yet we can eventually adjust to over 1,000,000:1 after some time, but at the end of the day at any one point in time we can only really see 16,000:1. I have a feeling if this were converted to projector or display talk it would be 16,000:1 ANSI not ON/OFF contrast.

I hope this makes sense, its just the first analogy that comes to mind.
George Kouzev likes this.

Current:
Sony 300ES | OZTS Majestic Screen White 120" 16:9 | Denon AVR-791 | Krix KDX L/C/R + Surround | Seismix 3 MK3 Subwoofer | Sony PS4 | Xbox-360
Wish List:
Marantz AV8802 | Elektra Thatron HD | Anti-Mode 8033 II
Javs is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Reply Digital Hi-End Projectors - $3,000+ USD MSRP

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page


Forum Jump: 

Posting Rules  
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off