UHD/4K First Impressions - Page 2 - AVS Forum
Forum Jump: 
 62Likes
Reply
 
Thread Tools
post #31 of 141 Old 08-11-2014, 09:13 AM - Thread Starter
Senior Writer @ AVS
 
imagic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Philadelphia, PA
Posts: 6,408
Mentioned: 30 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1738 Post(s)
Liked: 3072
Quote:
Originally Posted by HockeyoAJB View Post
If I am following you correctly, you are suggesting that the 4K digital copy of the movie would be stored on a traditional BD-ROM and that you would need to transfer it to local storage (e.g. computer hard drive) in order to play it (using iTunes or a similar service) rather than actually playing it from the disc? This seems reasonable given that essentially the same method has been used for SD/HD digital copies on DVD discs, particularly for titles that were released when iTunes digital copies was originally launched. It is also technically possible given that current streaming/download bitrates for 4K content are in the 15-20 Mbps range, which is actually smaller than current 1080p blu-ray bit rates. So, it would fit on a current blu-ray disc without issue. DRM/copy protection is already taken care of by using the same method of activation used for iTunes digital copies.

While this would certainly satisfy the immediate requirement of a physical method of delivery for 4k content, eliminating the need to stream or download large files, there are a couple issues with this approach...

1) How to get the information from the blu-ray disc to local storage for those people who do not own a computer with a built-in Blu-Ray drive. Fewer and fewer computers are being sold with blu-ray drives. In fact, Apple doesn't put them in any of their Macs. Does the industry expect people to purchase external BD-ROM drives or a whole new computer to be able to use this digital copy? Or, will new stand-alone models of blu-ray players be capable of interfacing with your PC/USB/Network storage in order transfer the content on the disc to local storage, using a built-in iTunes/Vudu/Amazon app?

2) Isn't this a bit short sighted as a solution to the delivery problem? Almost everyone who has seen the "low" bit rate 4K content has acknowledged that, with existing HEVC compression ratios, most current consumer 4K content (excluding short demos) is not necessarily an improvement over a good 1080p blu-ray. While you get increased detail in some cases, you get more compression artifacts in others. Most indicate that the 15.6 or 20 Mbps bit rates were a compromise needed to make streaming a viable option for the majority of potential users and/or the providers. And most assume that as improvements in the bandwidth to people's homes are made, the bit rate of 4K streaming could be raised in order to improve quality, since it will take time (and possibly further hardware upgrades on both the provider's and consumers' ends) to reach better compression ratios than what current HEVC provides. In a few years, instead of 15-20 Mbps, we could be looking at 40+ Mbps with slightly improved compression efficiency that could actually deliver a significant PQ improvement over current blu-ray. At that point, a 2-layer 50GB blu-ray disc would no longer be large enough to store the digital copy. Would they then start using two of our current blu-ray discs to store it or would they have to look for a new type of physical media to replace it? Or, do they hope that, by the time digital copies of 4K films exceed 50 GB in size, physical media will no longer be needed?
I was not thinking that you'd need to transfer the file per se. There's no reason a player equipped with HEVC decoding (for 4K Netflix or whatever) couldn't read and decode the data directly off a BD-ROM. It could be more of a stopgap, if a new Blu-ray standard doesn't show up soon enough. My assumption is that the HEVC capability will show up in source devices soon enough, namely Blu-ray players that stream UHD/4K. Perhaps it won't go down like that, but that's what I see as a likely scenario and approach.

Find out more about Mark Henninger at www.imagicdigital.com

Last edited by imagic; 08-11-2014 at 09:35 AM.
imagic is online now  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #32 of 141 Old 08-11-2014, 09:31 AM
AVS Special Member
 
fjerina's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Albuquerque, NM, USA
Posts: 1,452
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Liked: 12
I agree with viewing digital photos on the UHD TVs. I brought a USB flash drive to a local store to view my photography on their sets (Sony unit in this case) and it was very pleasing. I am looking forward to the Visio line coming out later this year where there will be very affordable 4K TVs. I just hope the quality of these units are top notch. If so, then the other manufacturers will have to start dropping their prices even more. I read that it doesn't cost that much more to produce a 4K set versus a 1080p set.
fjerina is offline  
post #33 of 141 Old 08-11-2014, 09:39 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
Ken Ross's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: N.Y.
Posts: 24,651
Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1425 Post(s)
Liked: 1539
Quote:
Originally Posted by imagic View Post
I was absolutely sure there would be a PlayStation 4 based UHD movie store in 2014. It's clear now that I misjudged Sony's strategy, the PS4 is doing well but it's being developed as a game machine, not a multimedia powerhouse. I think that's a shame, it could do for UHD/4K what the PS3 did for Blu-ray.
I too was disappointed and surprised by that. It was such a logical, evolutionary step for Sony and, in the process, could have been one of the biggest incentives to delve in to a Sony UHD TV.
Ken Ross is offline  
post #34 of 141 Old 08-11-2014, 09:40 AM
Senior Member
 
Exist_To_Resist's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Canada
Posts: 357
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 31 Post(s)
Liked: 41
To all of those waiting on a UHD (4K is a different resolution than UHD and is used for different purposes) physical format, this might not happen. Sony has been losing faith in the physical format.
http://www.techradar.com/news/video/...-water-1246497

Having said this you might have to look to digital distribution for UHD content.
But we'll see, supposedly the release date for the physical UHD format is supposed to happen at the end of this year.

Exist_To_Resist is offline  
post #35 of 141 Old 08-11-2014, 10:25 AM
Advanced Member
 
Rf13's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2013
Location: Florida
Posts: 598
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 212 Post(s)
Liked: 72
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ken Ross View Post
I too was disappointed and surprised by that. It was such a logical, evolutionary step for Sony and, in the process, could have been one of the biggest incentives to delve in to a Sony UHD TV.
The thing that could be holding them back is it could canalized sales of its media player. Honestly they should've just included it in the ps4 it's already a proven interface ready to go with only one limitation. Which at this point for movies and picture I don't believe matters if it's only hdmi 1.4. The funny thing is they just recently adds 3d it. A lot of features are still missing from this console lets hope sony gets it together. 4k playback would definitely boost it's sales.
Rf13 is offline  
post #36 of 141 Old 08-11-2014, 10:35 AM
Advanced Member
 
HockeyoAJB's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Posts: 753
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 220 Post(s)
Liked: 242
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hans Gruber View Post
...Does anybody know the resolution of the living world around us?
The resolution of the living world is practically infinite. With the proper equipment, we can see matter that is smaller than an electron. Theoretically, with a camera capable of infinite resolution and infinite storage capacity, you could place the camera on the edge of the universe, take a picture that encompasses the entire universe and, even at that scale, the camera would capture every detail of every partical in the universe, such that we could then zoom in on any region of the photograph we want and see the atomic structure of an object on the opposite end of the universe. Of course, since the speed of light is not infinite, the object you are looking at would actually have existed nearly an eternity ago.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Hans Gruber View Post
At what point will high end SLR camera's exceed the resolution of the real world the human eye sees?
They already exceed unaided human vision. Ever taken a picture, pulled that picture up on your camera's display, and then zoomed in on a small part of it? You will see details that could not be seen by the naked eye at the time you took the picture.

That said, neither of the above really address the question of what the practical limit for display resolution should be.

Try this test...Place your hand in front of your face and slowly move it towards and away from your eye. If you are like most people, you will notice that you can actually resolve more detail in your hand when it is 6" from your eye than when it is 1" away from your eye. Human eyes have a limited focal range. Once you get inside of that focal range, your ability to resolve detail is actually diminished the same as if it were too far away. This is important to note, because it means that there is a limit in how close you can get to a display and still be able to focus on the image being displayed. Now, assuming you get as close as you can to a display without the image going out of focus, you can test to see at what point the number of pixels per inch exceeds your ability to resolve an individual pixel. Bear in mind that display resolution alone does not determine the number of pixels per inch. The size of the display is also a factor. The larger the display, the greater the display resolution must be in order to maintain the same number of pixels per inch. For small displays, such as smartphone screens, 4K already exceeds the limits of what the human eye can see at a viewing distance of 6". However, for a 65" display, you can easily make out the individual pixels at that close of a viewing distance. Then again, you can't really focus on the entire image being displayed on a 65" screen when it is only 6" away from you. For a 65" screen, if you want to be able to focus on the entire image at once, while still being as close as possible for the desired immersion, you should be at least 4 feet away from the screen. Unless you actually intend to focus on only a small portion of the display at one time then, not only are the size of the display and number of pixels per inch factors in what the display resolution should be, but ideal viewing distance also comes into play.
rconn2 likes this.
HockeyoAJB is online now  
post #37 of 141 Old 08-11-2014, 10:44 AM
Member
 
docevil's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Ontario, Canada
Posts: 34
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Liked: 17
Mark, I am not surprised to see that you are disappointed with upscaled 1080p when you are comparing a UHD LCD panel with LED edge lighting with one of the last great 1080 plasma panels. Heck, if the F8500 was only 720p and the X800U was 8k I would still take the plasma hands down, it's a rigged game. Since I can't think of a UHD plasma model (if any exist, soon 1080 plasmas will be gone too), comparing the upscaled 1080 picture on Sony's 4k projector with your F8500 would be more of a level playing field.

And as far as the streaming versus physical media debate goes, I have to agree with DRaven72. In all of Mark's comparisons of various streaming services with blu-ray, blu-ray always wins both in picture and sound quality not to mention all of the special features included on the blu-ray disc that you don't get with the streaming services. How will streaming compare as physical media moves from rec709 8bit colour, 4:2:0 subsampling with 5.1 sound at 24fps to rec2020 12/16bit colour with 4:2:2/4:4:4 subsampling with Dolby Atmos sound at 60 fps? HEVC will only be able to do so much for streaming.

Breadth of content is also a big knock against streaming. You could subscribe to EVERY streaming service (at great cost) and you still wouldn't have access to all the content available on physical media. Heck, even content created exclusively for individual streaming services make it to bluray. I'd be interested to see a quality comparison between House of Cards on Blu-ray vs House of Cards on Netflix, I wouldn't be surprised in the least if blu-ray was to win.

And what happens if the streaming service doesn't make it? I mean scenarios like walmart decides vudu isn't making them enough money so they shutter the service or Hulu finds itself in a position where it can't compete with the likes of apple, netflix etc and folds or even more simply, your streaming service decides to not renew its rights to your favourite movie or the studio gives exclusive rights to another streaming service. Universal Pictures could go completely out of business but I'll still have my copy of Jaws for decades to come.

And other scenarios too, streaming services will be suceptible to price hikes or possibly paying premium rates to get higher quality streams especially if a couple of streaming providers start to get knocked out of the running. What happens if your job takes you somewhere remote or you want to move to the outskirts of town and suddenly find yourself with lackluster internet speeds? As the higher quality streams start rolling out how much will you have to pay for larger and larger data limits with your isp? Will you eventually find yourself having to pay a premium to get adequate bandwidth during peak times? Geez, the more I think about it the more negatives I can think of and they only get worse as more people move to streaming services and more people expect higher quality!

Last edited by docevil; 08-11-2014 at 10:50 AM.
docevil is offline  
post #38 of 141 Old 08-11-2014, 11:27 AM
AVS Special Member
 
KidHorn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Derwood, Maryland
Posts: 2,965
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 225 Post(s)
Liked: 240
Netflix and Amazon are great for watching older content. Streaming recently released movies costs more than renting blu-ray.

Blu-ray storage is far less expensive than local hard drive, cloud or USB storage.

Here's 50 GB of storage for $3/disk
http://www.amazon.com/dp/B008HV6MSI/...SIN=B008HV6MSI

There will always be a need for inexpensive portable storage.

I seriously doubt optical storage is going to stop where it is now. I don't know the exact path that will be taken, but I would guess that one way or another UHD movies will be available on optical disc. It's by far the least expensive way to store large amounts of content.
rconn2 likes this.
KidHorn is offline  
post #39 of 141 Old 08-11-2014, 12:04 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Woobieizer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Good Ole' Copper Fan
Posts: 1,043
Mentioned: 8 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 250 Post(s)
Liked: 81
@Mark
Felt like a sermon written just for me. Reading of Display port and Aeon visualizer, just made me grin. I have neither! Yet the fact that DP is off the drawing table and into a UHD/4K is great to read. Non knowing of Aeon visualizer, yet having experienced Milkdrop in OTS Lab, Winamp, and the app formally know as XBMC (Kodi)....

...It's like having a dream where you wake up sensing you've been enlightened by some subconscious miracle of understanding, or in this case reading.
Woobieizer is offline  
post #40 of 141 Old 08-11-2014, 12:15 PM
AVS Special Member
 
drewTT's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Anaheim Hills, CA
Posts: 1,934
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 63 Post(s)
Liked: 98
I was at Best Buy the other day and the 4K demo content they have running on couple of the Sony and Samsung sets is stunning. I can't understand how someone can say that it looks like 1080p...LOL...

I did notice, that the really dramatic scenes were slow pans. The detail was just unbelievable. I am hoping 4K movies have the same effect.
Ken Ross, KidHorn and rconn2 like this.
drewTT is online now  
post #41 of 141 Old 08-11-2014, 12:22 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Glimmie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Posts: 8,018
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 182 Post(s)
Liked: 252
Quote:
Originally Posted by GregLee View Post
Did you mean to write DirecTV instead of Dish?
Well if DirecTV does 4K Dish will surely follow. Remember Dish is run by an entrepreneur, Charlie Ergen. Nobody gets the up on him for very long!

Glimmie's HT Page
Being redone - comming soon!

Glimmie is online now  
post #42 of 141 Old 08-11-2014, 12:23 PM
Advanced Member
 
DreamWarrior's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 725
Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 62 Post(s)
Liked: 48
Quote:
Originally Posted by KidHorn View Post
Netflix and Amazon are great for watching older content. Streaming recently released movies costs more than renting blu-ray.

Blu-ray storage is far less expensive than local hard drive, cloud or USB storage.

Here's 50 GB of storage for $3/disk
http://www.amazon.com/dp/B008HV6MSI/...SIN=B008HV6MSI

There will always be a need for inexpensive portable storage.
Ummm... $3/50GB -- 2.0TB = 40 discs * $3 = $120. 2TB internal WD green harddrive is under $100. And it'll take a lot less time to transfer data to that harddrive than burn all those discs.

That said, there are other pros/cons to harddrive vs. physical disc backup or storage. But, cost alone...it seems you may be wrong.
DreamWarrior is offline  
post #43 of 141 Old 08-11-2014, 02:20 PM
AVS Special Member
 
mo949's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 3,413
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 586
Quote:
Originally Posted by drewTT View Post
I was at Best Buy the other day and the 4K demo content they have running on couple of the Sony and Samsung sets is stunning. I can't understand how someone can say that it looks like 1080p...LOL...

I did notice, that the really dramatic scenes were slow pans. The detail was just unbelievable. I am hoping 4K movies have the same effect.
motion/motion resolution is definitely something they need to improve. The still shot comparisons for streaming vs physical media quality evaluation also miss this same point . "Moving Pictures" need to be evaluated while moving.
mo949 is offline  
post #44 of 141 Old 08-11-2014, 03:12 PM
Senior Member
 
speavler's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Danville, CA
Posts: 267
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Liked: 20
Quote:
Originally Posted by drewTT View Post
I was at Best Buy the other day and the 4K demo content they have running on couple of the Sony and Samsung sets is stunning. I can't understand how someone can say that it looks like 1080p...LOL...

I did notice, that the really dramatic scenes were slow pans. The detail was just unbelievable. I am hoping 4K movies have the same effect.
I'll echo this observation. the Samsung demo i saw at a Sears had me stop in my tracks.
rconn2 likes this.
speavler is offline  
post #45 of 141 Old 08-11-2014, 03:41 PM
AVS Special Member
 
BiggAW's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 1,328
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 167 Post(s)
Liked: 57
The market is moving somewhat to the streaming/rental model, as opposed to the disc/own market, but there is still a place in the market for the disc/own model. People, at least in the US, like to own things, and like to collect things, so that plays well into disc ownership. Bandwidth isn't really a limitation, as most of the US has access to 50-100mbps internet, and those people who are stuck in 2005 with their 3mbps DSL connection aren't going to rush out an buy a 4K TV, so the self-selection takes care of the bandwidth. For the small minority who can't get decent broadband, unfortunately, they aren't a large enough market in and of themselves to drive a disc-based format. However, even with bandwidth not being an issue, I think the studios are going to adopt a disc-based format so that they can continue to get sales of discs, where the big margins are. They don't want to lose their blu-ray market to streaming 4K if they don't offer a 4K-based disc format.
BiggAW is offline  
post #46 of 141 Old 08-11-2014, 04:10 PM
Member
 
boguspomp's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Las Vegas
Posts: 100
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 24 Post(s)
Liked: 44
Thanks for the report Mark.

Simple question from my side. What video card did you get for full 4K resolution? I am checking amazon all the time and still didn't find one that seemed to be right. Have this 300gb 4K video sitting on my HD but can't play it more than 5 secs, before the player crashes.

thx for the info

FL
boguspomp is offline  
post #47 of 141 Old 08-11-2014, 04:17 PM
Advanced Member
 
DreamWarrior's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 725
Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 62 Post(s)
Liked: 48
Quote:
Originally Posted by BiggAW View Post
*snip*
Bandwidth isn't really a limitation, as most of the US has access to 50-100mbps internet, and those people who are stuck in 2005 with their 3mbps DSL connection aren't going to rush out an buy a 4K TV, so the self-selection takes care of the bandwidth.
*snip
People really need to start taking a look at the wider picture before spouting this stuff. Go here and then say the same thing. Bump the minimum speed up to 50mbps and tell me how much of that map looks filled. If you ask me, it looks pretty sparse. I'm lucky enough to have fast internet, apparently you are too, but seriously, don't take it for granted -- many people are not so fortunate. Heck, just a few miles from me we have friends that are stuck with slow DSL or spotty 3G with its bandwidth caps. But, their 3G is so spotty they'll never reach their caps, because most the time they can't get service.

I think that if the studios think 4k will proliferate through streaming alone, then they best rethink. Of course, I'd bet that once streaming seriously catches on Comcast and the like will be charging through the nose for their services. Likely everyone will put monthly caps on bandwidth and overage charges, etc. That is if they don't try to force studios/streaming providers like Netflix to pay for it.... Hell, they'll probably do both.

On the bright side, maybe they'll put some of mass profit into their infrastructure to get it to the people that lack it now.... Well, whatever doesn't go up the noses of their board that is .

P.S. if you can't tell I *despise* Comcast.
cajieboy likes this.
DreamWarrior is offline  
post #48 of 141 Old 08-11-2014, 04:32 PM
Advanced Member
 
HockeyoAJB's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Posts: 753
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 220 Post(s)
Liked: 242
Quote:
Originally Posted by BiggAW View Post
The market is moving somewhat to the streaming/rental model, as opposed to the disc/own market, but there is still a place in the market for the disc/own model. People, at least in the US, like to own things, and like to collect things, so that plays well into disc ownership. Bandwidth isn't really a limitation, as most of the US has access to 50-100mbps internet, and those people who are stuck in 2005 with their 3mbps DSL connection aren't going to rush out an buy a 4K TV, so the self-selection takes care of the bandwidth. For the small minority who can't get decent broadband, unfortunately, they aren't a large enough market in and of themselves to drive a disc-based format. However, even with bandwidth not being an issue, I think the studios are going to adopt a disc-based format so that they can continue to get sales of discs, where the big margins are. They don't want to lose their blu-ray market to streaming 4K if they don't offer a 4K-based disc format.
I think you would be surprised to learn the amount of money spent on physical media by wealthy people who live in rural areas with 3 Mbps or slower internet connections. And there are probably a lot more folks than you realize who would pay for top notch picture quality (especially since UHDTV prices have come down considerably and are not that much more expensive than a decent 1080p model), who are not willing to pay the monthly premium for 25+ Mbps internet, let alone 100 Mbps. That said, the whole bandwidth topic has been beaten to death in other threads. The fact remains that even those with the required bandwidth sometimes have issues getting a steady stream from one of the providers. And this doesn't even address the people who would simply prefer to own a physical copy than stream a movie, regardless of differences in PQ and SQ.

You do make a good point concerning the tendency of streaming to be used for rentals of VoD rather than purchase, though. It seems that the profit margin scale (per unit) goes: purchased digital copies, followed purchased physical media, followed by rented digital copies/VoD, followed by rented physical media. From the studio's perspective, in a perfect world, everybody would transition from physical media to purchased digital copies. The problem is that people who stream are more likely to rent than buy. They want people to pay something in the $20 to $30 dollar range for a movie (and then pay another $20 to $30 for the same movie when it comes out in a better format) rather than just pay $5 or even $9 to watch it one time.
HockeyoAJB is online now  
post #49 of 141 Old 08-11-2014, 04:36 PM
AVS Special Member
 
westa6969's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: From Michigan now Retired to Naples, FL
Posts: 7,036
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 232 Post(s)
Liked: 220
BTW Folks - The concept that we own hardware media and software is an illusion - the vast majority of what we're paying for is a "Licensed Use" not full ownership. Most consumers "think" they are buying ownership but most of the time your buying licensed use with restrictions.

Samsung 65F8000, 60D8000, 40HU6350, Panasonic 50E60 LCD's
westa6969 is offline  
post #50 of 141 Old 08-11-2014, 04:45 PM
Advanced Member
 
brwsaw's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 725
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 147 Post(s)
Liked: 96
Quote:
Originally Posted by imagic View Post
I was absolutely sure there would be a PlayStation 4 based UHD movie store in 2014. It's clear now that I misjudged Sony's strategy, the PS4 is doing well but it's being developed as a game machine, not a multimedia powerhouse. I think that's a shame, it could do for UHD/4K what the PS3 did for Blu-ray.
The years not over yet.
brwsaw is offline  
post #51 of 141 Old 08-11-2014, 04:49 PM
Advanced Member
 
DreamWarrior's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 725
Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 62 Post(s)
Liked: 48
Quote:
Originally Posted by westa6969 View Post
BTW Folks - The concept that we own hardware media and software is an illusion - the vast majority of what we're paying for is a "Licensed Use" not full ownership. Most consumers "think" they are buying ownership but most of the time your buying licensed use with restrictions.
Even if the license for streamed / downloaded media was identical to that of physical media (and I'm not sure it is), the fact would still remain that if it's physically in my possession and I've a player able to read it, I can play it anytime I want. For many reasons, this is not the case with streaming media and may not necessarily be the case with downloaded media depending on how the cryptography works.

Heck, I just had a rude awakening with DirecTV -- my DVR died and I had a whole series recorded to it. Since the content is tied to that particular box, I couldn't transfer it to a new working machine. I wouldn't bet that any "downloading" solution wouldn't similarly tie your downloads to the machine that downloaded them. If that machine dies, oops....better download again, assuming the download content is still available in the "cloud".

Point is, lacking a physical disc containing the content, "cloud based" content (download or otherwise) is completely under the control of the cloud's owner. I hate beating this dead horse, but...a license doesn't mean jack if the content goes away (studio goes under/decides it can't host lower quality stuff with higher quality stuff coming out/etc). I'd pay real close attention to the "license" you get with download/stream based stuff....I'm sure it allows them to weasel out of allowing you to download/stream it for any reason up to and including "they just don't want to".

edit: for example, think years down the road when 8K comes out -- all those 4k movies that are hosted in the cloud taking up space...well, the studio just can't justify keeping them around -- I mean, they need room for the new 8k versions. So, they remove them. If you downloaded them, you can still access them. But, let's say the machine you downloaded them to dies...movie is gone, no longer hosted, you lost it. Oh well, guess that's just like breaking your BD and needing to buy a new one, right? Well, not quite, though, because I can protect my disc...but electronic gadgets dying is a lot more likely than me breaking my disc I'd say. Then you no longer have what you bought.... But hey, I'm sure they'll gladly let you upgrade to the 8k version for a "reasonable cost" -- maybe.
wlelandj likes this.

Last edited by DreamWarrior; 08-11-2014 at 04:55 PM.
DreamWarrior is offline  
post #52 of 141 Old 08-11-2014, 05:03 PM
Member
 
krismate's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Posts: 24
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 5 Post(s)
Liked: 16
There's still enough money to be made from physical media. Also, there are still a lot of places that simply don't have fast internet connections or if they do, they cost more than people are willing to pay. Bandwidth caps are still an issue. I would be very surprised if they don't get a 4K disc format out. Although, I think it will be reserved for newer movies and some remasters of big classics (The Godfather, Star Wars etc.). Sony (in association with Philips?) talked about their "Archival disc" a while back and I don't see why they can't base a 4K disc off of that.

However, having said all that, you can't argue with the value and convenience of streaming services like netflix. Sure, people value good picture quality but they certainly value their money more. If they do come out with a 4K disc format, I feel it will be the last, unfortunately.
krismate is online now  
post #53 of 141 Old 08-11-2014, 05:39 PM
Advanced Member
 
mightyhuhn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2013
Posts: 720
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 317 Post(s)
Liked: 117
Quote:
Originally Posted by krismate View Post
There's still enough money to be made from physical media. Also, there are still a lot of places that simply don't have fast internet connections or if they do, they cost more than people are willing to pay. Bandwidth caps are still an issue. I would be very surprised if they don't get a 4K disc format out. Although, I think it will be reserved for newer movies and some remasters of big classics (The Godfather, Star Wars etc.). Sony (in association with Philips?) talked about their "Archival disc" a while back and I don't see why they can't base a 4K disc off of that.

However, having said all that, you can't argue with the value and convenience of streaming services like netflix. Sure, people value good picture quality but they certainly value their money more. If they do come out with a 4K disc format, I feel it will be the last, unfortunately.
I think a disc is just the wrong medium.
something like a read only "usb" stick should be more flexible. and they can make sure that this "usb" stick can go up to 500 or more GB and every device that can use this "usb" stick should support this even through it's not possible to produce big stick like this right now.
no need for a laser. and moving things in that new device and things like this.
mightyhuhn is offline  
post #54 of 141 Old 08-11-2014, 06:13 PM
AVS Special Member
 
p5browne's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Sudbury, Ontario, CANADA
Posts: 4,014
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 183 Post(s)
Liked: 204
Us versus Them

3% Video addicts, versus the 97% that are `just give me any kind of video as long as it looks OK!'
Sony Beta, Toshiba HD, Fully Back Lit, all gone to cheaper, I want it cheaper! Unbelievable after watching BDs, people will still buy the DVD because it's $2 cheaper! The 97% control the market.
p5browne is online now  
post #55 of 141 Old 08-11-2014, 06:22 PM
AVS Special Member
 
cajieboy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Space Coast, Florida
Posts: 4,433
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 76 Post(s)
Liked: 57
Quote:
Originally Posted by p5browne View Post
3% Video addicts, versus the 97% that are `just give me any kind of video as long as it looks OK!'
Sony Beta, Toshiba HD, Fully Back Lit, all gone to cheaper, I want it cheaper! Unbelievable after watching BDs, people will still buy the DVD because it's $2 cheaper! The 97% control the market.
At Red Box, it's only about a 0.30 cents difference between the BD's & DVD's.
cajieboy is offline  
post #56 of 141 Old 08-11-2014, 06:55 PM
AVS Special Member
 
turnne1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 3,995
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 696 Post(s)
Liked: 148
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ken Ross View Post
Sony has an extensive library (relatively speaking) of 4K movies. I would think they would be the best source for content. The only problem is that, as of now, you need a Sony UHD TV to take advantage. The question will be when and if Sony decides that there's more money in a universal 4K player that's compatible with any UHD TV than trying to tempt people to buy their UHD TVs to gain access to Sony content.

Of course my Sony AX100 produces as much content as I'm in the mood to produce...and these camcorders can produce utterly stunning 4K imagery.
they need to do something
LOL..how long has it been since they made a profit on their TV business..7-8 years or more?

they need something to help them "turn the corner"

Warren

Rm 1 Samsung 64F8500 Onkyo 5509 prepro Sherbourn 5/1500A amp B&W CM10s..CM2 center...CM5's.rears
Rm 2 LG 47LE8500 Denon 4520 Celestion 305 speaker system
Rm 3 Samsung 51E8000 Yamaha A2010 Kef 2005.2 speaker system
Rm 4 Panasonic 50ST50 906 Mirage Omni sat speaker system
turnne1 is offline  
post #57 of 141 Old 08-11-2014, 07:00 PM
AVS Special Member
 
turnne1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 3,995
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 696 Post(s)
Liked: 148
Quote:
Originally Posted by cajieboy View Post
At Red Box, it's only about a 0.30 cents difference between the BD's & DVD's.
and Red Box is starting to downsize its outlets...as well as downsizing employees

time are changing...as profits don't meet expectations

http://news.filehippo.com/2014/05/re...ng-500-kiosks/


Warren

Rm 1 Samsung 64F8500 Onkyo 5509 prepro Sherbourn 5/1500A amp B&W CM10s..CM2 center...CM5's.rears
Rm 2 LG 47LE8500 Denon 4520 Celestion 305 speaker system
Rm 3 Samsung 51E8000 Yamaha A2010 Kef 2005.2 speaker system
Rm 4 Panasonic 50ST50 906 Mirage Omni sat speaker system
turnne1 is offline  
post #58 of 141 Old 08-11-2014, 07:03 PM
AVS Special Member
 
turnne1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 3,995
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 696 Post(s)
Liked: 148
Quote:
Originally Posted by HockeyoAJB View Post
I think you would be surprised to learn the amount of money spent on physical media by wealthy people who live in rural areas with 3 Mbps or slower internet connections..
huh?

you are talking about a VERY small sampling of people
The overwhelming majority of wealthy people live in the large metro areas
A sampling of wealthy people in a rural environment would be a small percentage and not enough to be statistically significant

Warren
fafrd and cajieboy like this.

Rm 1 Samsung 64F8500 Onkyo 5509 prepro Sherbourn 5/1500A amp B&W CM10s..CM2 center...CM5's.rears
Rm 2 LG 47LE8500 Denon 4520 Celestion 305 speaker system
Rm 3 Samsung 51E8000 Yamaha A2010 Kef 2005.2 speaker system
Rm 4 Panasonic 50ST50 906 Mirage Omni sat speaker system
turnne1 is offline  
post #59 of 141 Old 08-11-2014, 08:09 PM
Advanced Member
 
brwsaw's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 725
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 147 Post(s)
Liked: 96
Quote:
Originally Posted by cajieboy View Post
At Red Box, it's only about a 0.30 cents difference between the BD's & DVD's.

$1 difference here.

I do like the price points I've seen recently for "physical" purchases.

Gravity with 3 disc's (3D BR, BR, DVD) and ultra violet for $20. I hope other movies follow suit and soon.

Too bad 3 of 4 are going to waste at the moment.

Last edited by brwsaw; 08-11-2014 at 08:22 PM.
brwsaw is offline  
post #60 of 141 Old 08-11-2014, 08:15 PM
Advanced Member
 
HockeyoAJB's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Posts: 753
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 220 Post(s)
Liked: 242
Quote:
Originally Posted by turnne1 View Post
huh?

you are talking about a VERY small sampling of people
The overwhelming majority of wealthy people live in the large metro areas
A sampling of wealthy people in a rural environment would be a small percentage and not enough to be statistically significant

Warren
I'm talking about the truly wealthy. The ones that have homes both in the city and in the countryside (typically within 40 miles of an urban area, but far enough out that there isn't a decent internet connection available unless they personally paid the ISP to run lines out to them). And, usually the larger home where they get the most time to unwind and watch movies is the one in the countryside. These people don't tend to stream because the potential for a dropout, pause to buffer, or simply bad PQ is unacceptable to them. And they spend more on movies and other forms of entertainment than most of the rest of us combined.
HockeyoAJB is online now  
Reply OLED Technology and Flat Panels General

Tags
frontpage

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