Joe Kane Explains the Need for a New UHD Video System - AVS Forum
Forum Jump: 
 
Thread Tools
post #1 of 29 Old 07-04-2013, 08:12 PM - Thread Starter
AVS Special Member
 
Scott Wilkinson's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Burbank, CA
Posts: 1,052
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 100 Post(s)
Liked: 711

Joe Kane, preeminent video-industry consultant and author of the Digital Video Essentials: HD Basics setup and test Blu-ray, talks about the opportunity presented by Ultra HD to create an entirely new video system that looks to the future rather than being tied to the past.

 

Stu03 likes this.

Scott Wilkinson
AVS Editor
Scott Wilkinson is online now  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #2 of 29 Old 07-05-2013, 06:05 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Ohlson's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Falun, Sweden
Posts: 5,434
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Would it be smart to have this new system using meta data to set frame rate, primary colors, greyscale, bit depth and how to make best use of the dynamic range for a particular Movie or even a paticular scene?

Mattias Ohlson
Ohlson is offline  
post #3 of 29 Old 07-05-2013, 07:14 AM
AVS Special Member
 
JerryLove's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Tampa, FL
Posts: 1,597
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 76
Assuming he gets his way and the standard is massivly changed: won't this render all the existing sets incompatible (or at least: severely suboptimal?)

Also: if the color, gamma, and grayscale are different, and unless the TVs have a fully-functional compatibility mode, what will happen when I play my existing HD content on the new monitor?

It's always been one of the things that confused me with 4LCD TVs. Since everything is calibrated for 3LCD TVs; aren't any changes, by definition, worse?
JerryLove is offline  
post #4 of 29 Old 07-05-2013, 07:25 AM
Advanced Member
 
dargo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: USA
Posts: 705
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 5 Post(s)
Liked: 42
All the more reason to hold off on 4K or 2160P or whatever you call it till it's done right.
SocialCapital likes this.
dargo is offline  
post #5 of 29 Old 07-05-2013, 07:42 AM
Senior Writer @ AVS
 
imagic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Philadelphia, PA
Posts: 5,169
Mentioned: 6 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 617 Post(s)
Liked: 1667
Quote:
Originally Posted by dargo View Post

All the more reason to hold off on 4K or 2160P or whatever you call it till it's done right.

In my opinion "done right" is what Samsung is offering with the Open Connect feature on its UHD TVs. However there's always the risk that Apple will enter the UHD TV market, and whatever choices it makes—likely in total secrecy—become the accepted standard.

Find out more about Mark Henninger at www.imagicdigital.com
imagic is offline  
post #6 of 29 Old 07-05-2013, 03:39 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
bd2003's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Long Island, NY
Posts: 10,277
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 118 Post(s)
Liked: 1342
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ohlson View Post

Would it be smart to have this new system using meta data to set frame rate, primary colors, greyscale, bit depth and how to make best use of the dynamic range for a particular Movie or even a paticular scene?

I would think that some of those concepts wouldn't even have a place in a completely from the ground up digital system. The concepts of color primaries and greyscale are just holdovers from the analog days. Why not set the color space and luminance to encompass the entirety of the range of human perception? Bit depth could just determine the granularity, but there's no reason it arbitrarily needs to be divided between red green and blue, nor that each pixel even need the same bit depth. A specific value would correspond to an exact value on within our perceptual range, and it's up to the display to interpret and display it correctly. No need for arbitrary frame rates either, it's not like digital displays need to scan lines. There's no reason the signal even needs to come down in a linear pixel by pixel format. While they're at it, they can save a ton of bandwidth by using a more forward looking object oriented method of addressing the display.

Might sound crazy and probably far beyond what he's suggesting, but I figure if they're going to take a step back and reconsider, might as well go all the way.

Steam/PSN/Xbox Live: Darius510
bd2003 is offline  
post #7 of 29 Old 07-05-2013, 04:07 PM
Senior Member
 
Phrehdd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 454
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4 Post(s)
Liked: 93
Interesting video interview. Kane is a good guy but I think the real discussion should have been about what went wrong with today's offerings first, then what does it take to really make a "standard" for playing all sorts of media (resolution, audio, frame rate and more).

Today's TVs seem to employ work arounds for various issues including frame rates, audio, and manual adjustments for the video output. Studios seem quite happy to have zero standards for transfer of movies and such to DVD and Blu Ray. I say this because it doesn't take much time to realize that some DVDs look far superior to others and the same with Blu Ray. Granted, that some originals are not that good but it is a known quantity that most films sport better resolution than DVD and Blu Ray. Perhaps in short I believe there should be a standard for transfers or at least a rating system for type of transfer - ranging from a digital "dump" (nothing done just digitized) to corrections for colour, and remastered for digital etc.

Nothing is sadder than getting all this new goodness from a TV and still having to meet the challenges of greedy studios who will not commit to a quality standard for the sake of the consumers. If one goes to say Netflix and rents a DVD, they most often get reasonable DVDs that playback akin to a purchased DVD and then there are some (particularly old movies) that can make one's eyes bleed for just how bad they are. I have seen some that look like they were transferred from video meant for TV. - A particular studio name shows up on the Netflix DVD and is a dead giveaway that it is not worth putting the DVD into one's home player.

Streaming - Today's streaming services barely get by with providing quality 1080p with quality sound. Certainly the audio cannot compare with HD audio of Blu Ray and often the video is just acceptable. How are these 2160p TVs supposed to bring this great image if the delivery mechanism for the movie itself creates such a huge bottleneck? New 2160p TVs might include hardware to upscale but it really doesn't improve the output of these streams.

Until there are some standards put in place for quality the public will be at the mercy of a hit and miss affair with higher definition TVs. Meanwhile, we can enjoy watching Sony doing its beta-cam debacle all over again with its proprietary "4k with provided media in proprietary format."

For those that find my comments a bit harsh or negative - just go look at some of the other forums here including Ralph's terrific reviews on movies and see the various ratings for various movies. Also another person in another forum compares how movies look through various streaming services and whether one agrees with their opinions, there is quite a range of "quality" of both video and audio among them all respectively.

Final - I don't watch 3D movies though my TV is capable of handing them (Panasonic VT50 65") but certainly watch 2D DVD and Blu Ray, stored media, TV via cablecard/TiVo 3 and internet streaming services. I would say that I would happily welcome 2160p if my Blu Rays looked better, if streaming movies suffered less compression issues (have to give up something for that amount of compression) and that HD audio was always available. Until then, I'll remain with my present system and know that we are still getting the short end of the stick mostly due to the studios lack of having standards for transfer of movies (film or original digital) to various formats for home consumption.
Phrehdd is offline  
post #8 of 29 Old 07-05-2013, 05:33 PM
Advanced Member
 
Kascnef82's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 838
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 40
Uhd won't do well
Kascnef82 is offline  
post #9 of 29 Old 07-06-2013, 06:23 AM
Member
 
Ace_of_Sevens's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Posts: 87
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 12
Yes. Frame rates need to be in the metadata. If you have a silent movie that was shot at 16 fps, that's how it should be stored and then the TV can convert directly from that to its native frame rate. No converting to a standard frame rate, then converting again to the frame rate of the TV, which comes out jerky. This would also let you accommodate the new higher frame rates without having to wait and see whether 48 or 60 ends up being the standard.
Ace_of_Sevens is offline  
post #10 of 29 Old 07-06-2013, 07:17 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Ohlson's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Falun, Sweden
Posts: 5,434
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Companies can be too greedy but they do need to make a profit at least as a buffer for a not so great year. Also to some extent you get what you pay for.and one of the points in the interview was that a video system is meant for mass Communication. The eguipment should be the best possible within what is economically viable.

My thinking is that the system should be dynamic to be efficient with bits too optimize frame rate or Another parameter in real time.

Mattias Ohlson
Ohlson is offline  
post #11 of 29 Old 07-06-2013, 10:03 AM
Advanced Member
 
dargo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: USA
Posts: 705
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 5 Post(s)
Liked: 42
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kascnef82 View Post

Uhd won't do well

Plus considering the amount of DNR and Edge Enhancement we see in Blu-Ray transfers imagine how that would look on a screen four times larger. scary.
dargo is offline  
post #12 of 29 Old 07-06-2013, 12:05 PM
Advanced Member
 
Kascnef82's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 838
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 40
My 42 inch screen can reveal that more than a cinema screen if kept on game mode. That's why I use movie or standard mode on my vizio 3d tv.
Kascnef82 is offline  
post #13 of 29 Old 07-06-2013, 02:34 PM
Senior Writer @ AVS
 
imagic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Philadelphia, PA
Posts: 5,169
Mentioned: 6 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 617 Post(s)
Liked: 1667
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kascnef82 View Post

My 42 inch screen can reveal that more than a cinema screen if kept on game mode. That's why I use movie or standard mode on my vizio 3d tv.

That's what cinema mode is for, watching movies on an uncalibrated TV. An unadjusted standard mode is not likely to be suited for critical Blu-ray viewing. I have a Vizio M3D 550KD, is that the TV you have? The 42" you mention and your 3D Vizio—are those are two different TVs?

I don't agree that DNR and edge enhancement are intrinsic to the Blu-ray. If properly mastered, Blu-ray is practically indistinguishable from a theatrical 2K master. Yes there are badly mastered Blu-rays out there, but those are going to look bad no matter what. The Blu-ray format is excellent, unlike the judgement of some compressionists.

As for screen size, 1080p sets already come in 80+ inch sizes, and folks already project 1080p at much larger sizes. It's all about GIGO.

Have you tried CNETs calibration settings for your Vizio, or perhaps using a setup disc? The default modes and brightness settings are ill-suited for home theater.

Find out more about Mark Henninger at www.imagicdigital.com
imagic is offline  
post #14 of 29 Old 07-06-2013, 02:53 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Toknowshita's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 1,191
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3 Post(s)
Liked: 41
Totally agree with you imagic. 1080p on BD can look fantastic. Anyone who thinks thing like DNR and EE won't be applied to UHD video is being delusional. If the studios get their way the reality is that DNR and EE will be needed even more with streaming and downloaded content.

The industry wants it because they need something new to sell. Sorry JK. I ain't buying into 4K yet.

Toknowshita is offline  
post #15 of 29 Old 07-06-2013, 02:54 PM
Member
 
schnura's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: White Plains, NY
Posts: 180
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 8 Post(s)
Liked: 25
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ace_of_Sevens View Post

Yes. Frame rates need to be in the metadata. If you have a silent movie that was shot at 16 fps, that's how it should be stored and then the TV can convert directly from that to its native frame rate. No converting to a standard frame rate, then converting again to the frame rate of the TV, which comes out jerky. This would also let you accommodate the new higher frame rates without having to wait and see whether 48 or 60 ends up being the standard.

Yes I agree, and further UHD TVs in the near term will need to accept HDMI 2.0 and HEVC 2.65 decoding and hopefully more of this evolving standard that we seem to have settled on calling UHD. So sending META data that tells the display how to show the video will be necessary to integrate on the signal that runs over the HDMI 2.0 or higher connection.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kascnef82 View Post

Uhd won't do well

Sorry to disagree, but UHD will do well. The price barrier and sorting out the transport delivery schemes need to be finalized, but this technology is moving very very rapidly into the main stream. I'm happily surprised to see how many companies jumped into UHD. I was fortunate enough to visit CE Week and UHD TV, accessories, and discussions was a very big portion of the event. UHD will be a big success and enthusiasts and those who want the very best will embrace this emerging technology. Let's not forget that the buzz on UHD is not the pixel count, but the new far more efficient encoding, faster frame rates to stabilize the image for sports and even a bigger color pallet and better audio. UHD is here and it's here to stay and will be perfected in short time to bring far more engaging a/v viewing and enjoyment.

As you can see I love seeing technology advance and this is a great place and time to get an example in action.
Quote:
Originally Posted by dargo View Post

Plus considering the amount of DNR and Edge Enhancement we see in Blu-Ray transfers imagine how that would look on a screen four times larger. scary.

Sorry but I think this is incorrect. I won't argue all of the points, but for the most part BD's are transferred quite well. Of course, like all things man and machine made nothing is consistently perfect, but definitely for the most part BDs are quite good if not exceptional.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kascnef82 View Post

My 42 inch screen can reveal that more than a cinema screen if kept on game mode. That's why I use movie or standard mode on my vizio 3d tv.

Glad you are using the Movie mode and I would guess that would be the best mode on your TV. And I don't know if your 3D LCD VIZIO TV has been calibrated or set-up to perform best with Blu-ray disc, but I suggest it's more likely the display's ability to display a proper image than any issue with the Blu-ray compression or edge enhancement that was authored into the disc.
schnura is offline  
post #16 of 29 Old 07-06-2013, 03:01 PM
Member
 
schnura's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: White Plains, NY
Posts: 180
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 8 Post(s)
Liked: 25
And just to add one more thought, the UHD trend will lead to people viewing their TVs at even closer distances. HD did it very successfully and people are buying larger TVs as every year passes. This trend of larger screen sizes was born with HD and we'll see it jump to much larger screens with UHD purchases. I'm actually thinking of buying a 55" UHD TV for personal and two person TV watching at about 4' away and as a gaming and PC monitor. What a great use of UHD. I even love the new 55" curved OLEDs that just launched in Korea and I assume we'll see here some day I hope not too far away.
schnura is offline  
post #17 of 29 Old 07-07-2013, 08:10 AM
Advanced Member
 
dargo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: USA
Posts: 705
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 5 Post(s)
Liked: 42
Quote:
Originally Posted by schnura View Post

Yes I agree, and further UHD TVs in the near term will need to accept HDMI 2.0 and HEVC 2.65 decoding and hopefully more of this evolving standard that we seem to have settled on calling UHD. So sending META data that tells the display how to show the video will be necessary to integrate on the signal that runs over the HDMI 2.0 or higher connection.
Sorry to disagree, but UHD will do well. The price barrier and sorting out the transport delivery schemes need to be finalized, but this technology is moving very very rapidly into the main stream. I'm happily surprised to see how many companies jumped into UHD. I was fortunate enough to visit CE Week and UHD TV, accessories, and discussions was a very big portion of the event. UHD will be a big success and enthusiasts and those who want the very best will embrace this emerging technology. Let's not forget that the buzz on UHD is not the pixel count, but the new far more efficient encoding, faster frame rates to stabilize the image for sports and even a bigger color pallet and better audio. UHD is here and it's here to stay and will be perfected in short time to bring far more engaging a/v viewing and enjoyment.

As you can see I love seeing technology advance and this is a great place and time to get an example in action.
Sorry but I think this is incorrect. I won't argue all of the points, but for the most part BD's are transferred quite well. Of course, like all things man and machine made nothing is consistently perfect, but definitely for the most part BDs are quite good if not exceptional.
Glad you are using the Movie mode and I would guess that would be the best mode on your TV. And I don't know if your 3D LCD VIZIO TV has been calibrated or set-up to perform best with Blu-ray disc, but I suggest it's more likely the display's ability to display a proper image than any issue with the Blu-ray compression or edge enhancement that was authored into the disc.

wow BD's are transferred quite well? what forums have you been reading cause what I've read is about 90% have flaws ranging from excessive DNR, edge enhancement and bad color timing. Many are mastered from 1080i masters used for DVD's
only about 10% are considered by forum members (Blu-Ray.com AVSforum.com Hometheaterforum.com) to be "quite well" Star Wars comes from a 2K master made in 9 years ago, Lord of the rings has a green tint applied to it. only recent films made from digital masters like the great and powerful oz have been given a "quite well" rating by forum members. reviewers get free copies and are not reliable information as they would not like to see those free movies dry up. I trust reviews from people who pay for their movies.
dargo is offline  
post #18 of 29 Old 07-07-2013, 08:32 AM
Senior Writer @ AVS
 
imagic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Philadelphia, PA
Posts: 5,169
Mentioned: 6 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 617 Post(s)
Liked: 1667
Quote:
Originally Posted by dargo View Post

wow BD's are transferred quite well? what forums have you been reading cause what I've read is about 90% have flaws ranging from excessive DNR, edge enhancement and bad color timing. Many are mastered from 1080i masters used for DVD's
only about 10% are considered by forum members (Blu-Ray.com AVSforum.com Hometheaterforum.com) to be "quite well" Star Wars comes from a 2K master made in 9 years ago, Lord of the rings has a green tint applied to it. only recent films made from digital masters like the great and powerful oz have been given a "quite well" rating by forum members. reviewers get free copies and are not reliable information as they would not like to see those free movies dry up. I trust reviews from people who pay for their movies.

The suggestion that 90% of Blu-ray releases are significantly flawed runs directly counter to my experience. Nobody sends me any free discs, or gives me any free download credits for movies, or pays me in any way for my Blu-ray vs. streaming comparisons. It's all out-of-pocket, and I have not seen what you claim. Even when I shop the bargain bin, it's relatively uncommon to run into one of those old-school 1080i transfers.

Internet forums are full of bold, unsubstantiated claims that turn out to be inaccurate; the notion that 90% of Blu-ray releases are intrinsically flawed due to bad mastering is one of those.

Please read the addendum from the AVS Blu-ray PQ tier thread:

"Some, but not all, of the Blu-rays ranked in the various tiers look as good as they possibly can on Blu-ray given limitations in the original photography and the director's intended visuals. We recognize films and videos are not all created with the same intent and quality, and this is why certain titles can never achieve a tier zero or tier one ranking for example, even given a perfect transfer from the best possible source. Rankings as low as tier four can still constitute a worthy Blu-ray release, as long as the Blu-ray is visually transparent to the best available source for a particular title. This last point is beyond the scope of the tier system and should be investigated on a title-to-title basis on your own."

Find out more about Mark Henninger at www.imagicdigital.com
imagic is offline  
post #19 of 29 Old 07-07-2013, 01:12 PM
Senior Member
 
Phrehdd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 454
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4 Post(s)
Liked: 93
Quote:
Originally Posted by imagic View Post

The suggestion that 90% of Blu-ray releases are significantly flawed runs directly counter to my experience. Nobody sends me any free discs, or gives me any free download credits for movies, or pays me in any way for my Blu-ray vs. streaming comparisons. It's all out-of-pocket, and I have not seen what you claim. Even when I shop the bargain bin, it's relatively uncommon to run into one of those old-school 1080i transfers.

Internet forums are full of bold, unsubstantiated claims that turn out to be inaccurate; the notion that 90% of Blu-ray releases are intrinsically flawed due to bad mastering is one of those.

Please read the addendum from the AVS Blu-ray PQ tier thread:

"Some, but not all, of the Blu-rays ranked in the various tiers look as good as they possibly can on Blu-ray given limitations in the original photography and the director's intended visuals. We recognize films and videos are not all created with the same intent and quality, and this is why certain titles can never achieve a tier zero or tier one ranking for example, even given a perfect transfer from the best possible source. Rankings as low as tier four can still constitute a worthy Blu-ray release, as long as the Blu-ray is visually transparent to the best available source for a particular title. This last point is beyond the scope of the tier system and should be investigated on a title-to-title basis on your own."

There is truth that not all blu ray (or DVD for that matter) discs are created equal. Then again, original sources for the transfers are not either and then again not all film is equal or how they are used. What can be said is there are no standards at all for transfer to blu ray medium. In this there is a huge problem. At least there should be some kind of rating system of quality. Studios were very quick and hungry to put a stranglehold on TVs, cables and the like to keep us from "stealing" from them yet they are quite happy to rip us off with not even providing a minimal standard of product.

Some of the other comments here are on the money with just how varied the quality of blu rays can be. As I used to say there are transfers that are "dumps" (no real effort) to the digital media and then everything inbetween all the way up to high quality mastering. What might prove interesting is that it may very well be that the worse the transfer is the more noticeable it will be on UHD. Meanwhile, Sony is at it again with its beta video type mentality of a proprietary medium for UHD playback. Sorry Sony - some of us ain't playing that game.
dargo likes this.
Phrehdd is offline  
post #20 of 29 Old 07-10-2013, 11:47 AM
Newbie
 
Robin McDonald's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Posts: 6
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
We just got the 50 and 65 in versions of the Sony at the Fry's Burbank store.

Regardless of why, it was clear they looked superior to every other set in the store regardless of size or price.* What I saw was a new paradigm.
One of the things I learned later was the wider color gamut. When describing the set on my favorite forum I said it appeared there were twice as many blues
and four times as many reds. Interestingly enough when I looked at the chart for the color gamut improvement, that was pretty accurate. What I was looking at did
look clearer and sharper. I was standing fairly close to the 65 inch. Maybe such a set invites walking up close to see the detail.

For me when you see it, its no longer an argument about whether in theory 4K should look better than 1080. It does look better. Better apparently than everything out there you can buy.
Seeing it you don't think...is this worth doing? Of course its worth doing. Take away all the intellectual arguments people will see this and want this. Then its about getting the
source material distributed and overcoming all the obstacles.. It seems to me Verizon FIOS could deliver 4k files in a reasonable amount of time. This is just a first generation set. I don't go to CES shows so I dont' know what the Samsung looks like or 8k. 1080 sets all looked washed out and grey in comparison. Emphasis on ALL. So a new bar has been set. That's the important thing.

If it makes people strive to make 1080 look that good fantastic. But something I read cause me to think 4k made it possible to widen the color gamut. I saw more detail but I think it was the vibrant and subtle colors along with the detail that impressed me.

I'm not attached to Sony winning this horse race but kudos to them for continuing to strive for improvements in home entertainment when their electronics division loses money every year.



*Since half the sets were turned away from me I can't say it was better than every set. I am making an assumption based on what I could see.
Robin McDonald is offline  
post #21 of 29 Old 07-10-2013, 09:56 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Dan Hitchman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Northern Colorado
Posts: 8,206
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 266 Post(s)
Liked: 272
Kane think high speed downloads can give us the UHD content he's envisioning? He must not have Comcast as the majority in the U.S. do...

The ISP's are the fly in the ointment. It's taking companies like Google and their new residential fiber lines to reinvent the totally defunct infrastructure we have now, but at the rate they're going this will take more than a decade. Even then many communities will be left in the dust. And there has to be profit in it. It's not about national pride like in some developed countries, it's about money, money, money.

They better come out with a viable physical UHD medium for the foreseeable future, or they're being totally foolish.

And it won't just be better video standards that hook people. The studios will need to provide state-of-the-art object based lossless audio as good or better than the commercial theater.

Listen up, studios! Just say "NO" to DNR and EE!!
Dan Hitchman is online now  
post #22 of 29 Old 07-11-2013, 03:30 AM
Senior Writer @ AVS
 
imagic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Philadelphia, PA
Posts: 5,169
Mentioned: 6 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 617 Post(s)
Liked: 1667
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dan Hitchman View Post

Kane think high speed downloads can give us the UHD content he's envisioning? He must not have Comcast as the majority in the U.S. do...

The ISP's are the fly in the ointment. It's taking companies like Google and their new residential fiber lines to reinvent the totally defunct infrastructure we have now, but at the rate they're going this will take more than a decade. Even then many communities will be left in the dust. And there has to be profit in it. It's not about national pride like in some developed countries, it's about money, money, money.

They better come out with a viable physical UHD medium for the foreseeable future, or they're being totally foolish.

And it won't just be better video standards that hook people. The studios will need to provide state-of-the-art object based lossless audio as good or better than the commercial theater.

I have Comcast. Here's a speed test I ran just for this post. biggrin.gif



For many folks, the sound found at movie theaters is already too loud. The soundtracks currently found on Blu-ray is far beyond the capabilities of most systems. It's hard to see how a new sound format is going to make any difference—especially since at home object-oriented formats would still have to render the sounds to individual speakers, and for most folks that's going to be a soundbar, or perhaps a 5.1 or 7.1 system.

Find out more about Mark Henninger at www.imagicdigital.com
imagic is offline  
post #23 of 29 Old 07-11-2013, 01:15 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Dan Hitchman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Northern Colorado
Posts: 8,206
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 266 Post(s)
Liked: 272
Quote:
Originally Posted by imagic View Post

I have Comcast. Here's a speed test I ran just for this post. biggrin.gif



For many folks, the sound found at movie theaters is already too loud. The soundtracks currently found on Blu-ray is far beyond the capabilities of most systems. It's hard to see how a new sound format is going to make any difference—especially since at home object-oriented formats would still have to render the sounds to individual speakers, and for most folks that's going to be a soundbar, or perhaps a 5.1 or 7.1 system.

Object based audio is flexible and scalable and more capable of a precise 3D surround presentation, which is not always true of traditional channel based formats. You could add as many speakers as you could afford and they all then become individual, addressable "channels" (all the info necessary for rendering all this is right there in one audio file). This would benefit all, not just a few.

There are fewer residential and rural areas of the country that can get the kinds of speeds you're getting than you think. And the cost for this kind of bandwidth is astronomical when you're lucky. My bill for Comcast internet at approx. 50 Megabits/sec down and about 7 Mbps up is over $100!! Plus... there are still data usage caps to deal with and packet loss, shared IP addresses (the more homes online in one neighborhood at a time, the slower you go), and other noise garbage that drops the usable data stream.

We're not even close to ready for a download only future.

Listen up, studios! Just say "NO" to DNR and EE!!
Dan Hitchman is online now  
post #24 of 29 Old 07-11-2013, 01:35 PM
Senior Writer @ AVS
 
imagic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Philadelphia, PA
Posts: 5,169
Mentioned: 6 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 617 Post(s)
Liked: 1667
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dan Hitchman View Post

Object based audio is flexible and scalable and more capable of a precise 3D surround presentation, which is not always true of traditional channel based formats. You could add as many speakers as you could afford and they all then become individual, addressable "channels" (all the info necessary for rendering all this is right there in one audio file). This would benefit all, not just a few.

There are fewer residential and rural areas of the country that can get the kinds of speeds you're getting than you think. And the cost for this kind of bandwidth is astronomical when you're lucky. My bill for Comcast internet at approx. 50 Megabits/sec down and about 7 Mbps up is over $100!! Plus... there are still data usage caps to deal with and packet loss, shared IP addresses (the more homes online in one neighborhood at a time, the slower you go), and other noise garbage that drops the usable data stream.

We're not even close to ready for a download only future.

Perhaps you forget that the market for home theater is a relatively exclusive one. Most of the folks who would invest in a premium format and premium A/V gear will also invest in an internet connection with sufficient bandwidth to enjoy that system. To this day, 50% of the money spent on big-screen TVs comes from millionaires.

Find out more about Mark Henninger at www.imagicdigital.com
imagic is offline  
post #25 of 29 Old 07-11-2013, 02:30 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Dan Hitchman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Northern Colorado
Posts: 8,206
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 266 Post(s)
Liked: 272
Quote:
Originally Posted by imagic View Post

Perhaps you forget that the market for home theater is a relatively exclusive one. Most of the folks who would invest in a premium format and premium A/V gear will also invest in an internet connection with sufficient bandwidth to enjoy that system. To this day, 50% of the money spent on big-screen TVs comes from millionaires.

That, in and of itself, is a very sad statement about this country.

Listen up, studios! Just say "NO" to DNR and EE!!
Dan Hitchman is online now  
post #26 of 29 Old 07-13-2013, 04:47 PM
Senior Member
 
CRGINC's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Thousand Oaks, CA
Posts: 299
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Let's improve the distribution of BD (2K) material first before jumping into the 4K format. The internet service across the country is of varying quality with some areas only serviced by satellite or one Cable Company. I was disappointed by the failure of movie studios backing an economical distribution of BD video and audio quality VIA satellite using a video server. We need to work on the delivery problem before bumping up the resolution beyond what we have now. There is also a point of diminishing returns for the average viewer. We all don't have 20' wide screens in our homes. Personally I have a 9' cinemascope screen in my home theater. BD looks and sounds spectacular. Well authored DVD's are very watchable at 24 fps using a SDI modified DVD player in conjunction with a video processor.
CRGINC is offline  
post #27 of 29 Old 07-13-2013, 08:27 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Dan Hitchman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Northern Colorado
Posts: 8,206
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 266 Post(s)
Liked: 272
Quote:
Originally Posted by CRGINC View Post

Let's improve the distribution of BD (2K) material first before jumping into the 4K format. The internet service across the country is of varying quality with some areas only serviced by satellite or one Cable Company. I was disappointed by the failure of movie studios backing an economical distribution of BD video and audio quality VIA satellite using a video server. We need to work on the delivery problem before bumping up the resolution beyond what we have now. There is also a point of diminishing returns for the average viewer. We all don't have 20' wide screens in our homes. Personally I have a 9' cinemascope screen in my home theater. BD looks and sounds spectacular. Well authored DVD's are very watchable at 24 fps using a SDI modified DVD player in conjunction with a video processor.

They are definitely getting the cart before the horse in their rush to get rid of the retail middleman and have the audience open their wallets directly to the studios with little to no competition. That's why individual studios are starting their own download and streaming services. All it will do is fragment and confuse the internet market before it even gets started.

You're absolutely right about the internet infrastructure problems. They can't even deliver Blu-ray quality (which is less than 2k with lossless, 24 bit, and up to 7.1 audio) let alone think that UHD with possibly greater video bit depth, a variety of frame rates, wider color gamut, etc. can be pulled off easily. I keep bringing up the data usage caps... that right there is a HUGE impediment to content delivery directly via the web. I haven't even started on costs to get ultra high speeds via these greedy ISP's.

Listen up, studios! Just say "NO" to DNR and EE!!
Dan Hitchman is online now  
post #28 of 29 Old 07-18-2013, 02:53 PM
Senior Member
 
jam88's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Montreal
Posts: 413
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3 Post(s)
Liked: 20
I found that this interview unfortunately missed one important mark. No one mentioned the issue of screen size versus seating distance and the fact that as you increase the resolution as you do with UHD or 4K, you then have to sit much closer to the TV for your eyes to be able to resolve the added detail brought by the increase in resolution. I've spent a fair amount of time observing the native UHD demos on Sony's $25k 84-inch UHD XBR-84X900 and the optimum viewing distance to my eyes was about 5.5 feet, which agrees with the known and well established science of the human visual apparatus for 20/20 vision. So until the industry can dramatically decrease the prices for very large UHD flat panels and projectors, your money won't be we'll spent buying the crop of coming UHD TVs. We went through this same phase when relatively small 1080P HDTVs were coming onto the market and were exorbitantly more expensive that 720P TVs.
jam88 is offline  
post #29 of 29 Old 07-19-2013, 12:16 AM
Senior Writer @ AVS
 
imagic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Philadelphia, PA
Posts: 5,169
Mentioned: 6 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 617 Post(s)
Liked: 1667
Quote:
Originally Posted by jam88 View Post

I found that this interview unfortunately missed one important mark. No one mentioned the issue of screen size versus seating distance and the fact that as you increase the resolution as you do with UHD or 4K, you then have to sit much closer to the TV for your eyes to be able to resolve the added detail brought by the increase in resolution. I've spent a fair amount of time observing the native UHD demos on Sony's $25k 84-inch UHD XBR-84X900 and the optimum viewing distance to my eyes was about 5.5 feet, which agrees with the known and well established science of the human visual apparatus for 20/20 vision. So until the industry can dramatically decrease the prices for very large UHD flat panels and projectors, your money won't be we'll spent buying the crop of coming UHD TVs. We went through this same phase when relatively small 1080P HDTVs were coming onto the market and were exorbitantly more expensive that 720P TVs.

The benefit of 2160p vs. 1080p starts to become evident to someone with 20/20 vision at approximately 11 feet, and reaches its peak (no additional benefit) at 5.5 feet. However, almost nobody has exactly 20/20 vision, and even among individuals there are tendencies towards near and far-sightedness that affect their measured visual acuity.

20/20 vision represents the average, not the ideal—it's what ophthalmologists try to correct to when prescribing glasses or contacts. A fair number of people can see better than 20/20. 20/15 vision results in 7 feet for maximum benefit and 14 feet for some UHD benefit to be noticeable.

Very few TV viewers have precisely 20/20 vision—the same way so few people are precisely average in height and weight— so discussing the topic using absolute measurements fails to take into account people's individual needs. I've seen people discuss the viewing habits of their grandparents—folks for whom a giant 1080p unit will always be sufficient. Then there's the video gamer who likes to sit 5 feet from a 50" HDTV.

I did the same thing you did, with both an 84" and a 65" UHDTV. I saw benefits to the added resolution at significantly greater distances than you describe.

Find out more about Mark Henninger at www.imagicdigital.com
imagic is offline  
Reply Latest Industry News

User Tag List

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