What to do while waiting for Blue ray 4K - Page 5 - 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: 
 
Thread Tools
Old 09-04-2014, 05:39 PM
AVS Special Member
 
sytech's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 1,643
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 547 Post(s)
Liked: 403
LOL. I can't even stream tonight's Green Bay/Seahawk without stuttering at 720p over my 20MB Uverse connection. Good luck with first night of a major 4K movie release from Sony.
sytech is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Old 09-05-2014, 02:07 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
rogo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: Stop making curved screens
Posts: 30,687
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 603 Post(s)
Liked: 882
Quote:
Originally Posted by sytech View Post
LOL. I can't even stream tonight's Green Bay/Seahawk without stuttering at 720p over my 20MB Uverse connection. Good luck with first night of a major 4K movie release from Sony.
U-verse is a joke. That's a well-understood fact. I can stream at a sustained 30+ megabits on my Comcast connection without any difficulty.

There is no difference in HDMI cables. If you can see the picture without visible dropouts or sparklies, the cable is working at 100%. No other cable will display a better version of that picture. You're simply wrong if you think there is a better digital cable than one that is already working. (Oh, and plasma didn't die because of logistics problems, nor does OLED ship in big boxes because it comes from Korea.)
rogo is offline  
Old 09-05-2014, 04:31 AM
Advanced Member
 
Turrican4D's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 956
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 243 Post(s)
Liked: 142
Quote:
Originally Posted by PeterS View Post
The actual quantity of content is certainly not there (watch Joe Kane's speech on how films are made these days).
Nearly every movie is scanned at 4K or 8K these days before its Blu-ray release. Then there are the digital shot and produced 4K-movies - tons of content.
Turrican4D is offline  
Old 09-05-2014, 06:11 AM
Senior Member
 
catonic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 332
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 97 Post(s)
Liked: 98
Woohoo....4k blu-ray has been confirmed.....

http://www.avforums.com/news/4k-blu-...onfirmed.10665

You little beauty.
Rudy1, DavidinCT and Rf13 like this.
catonic is offline  
Old 09-05-2014, 07:38 AM
AVS Special Member
 
sytech's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 1,643
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 547 Post(s)
Liked: 403
Quote:
Originally Posted by rogo View Post
U-verse is a joke. That's a well-understood fact. I can stream at a sustained 30+ megabits on my Comcast connection without any difficulty.
Very true, but they are my only option were I live. In Japan they are using about 40MB minumum to get better quality 4K. I think we can all agree the NetFlix 4K at 20MB is not going to cut it.
sytech is offline  
Old 09-05-2014, 07:54 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Rudy1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Ft. Lauderdale, FL
Posts: 3,322
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 183 Post(s)
Liked: 148
Quote:
Originally Posted by catonic View Post
Woohoo....4k blu-ray has been confirmed.....

http://www.avforums.com/news/4k-blu-...onfirmed.10665

You little beauty.
START SAVING:

http://www.techradar.com/us/news/tel...s-2015-1264317
Rudy1 is offline  
Old 09-05-2014, 11:15 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
NorthSky's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Canada - West Island: Vancouver, South Direction: Go East
Posts: 10,663
Mentioned: 5 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4417 Post(s)
Liked: 1725
...And ten years from now 4K Blu-ray movies will be on those Walmart discount bins; two for five bucks.

* We'll already be in 8K going towards 16K.
NorthSky is offline  
Old 09-05-2014, 01:57 PM
AVS Special Member
 
RWetmore's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Brick, New Jersey
Posts: 3,434
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 174 Post(s)
Liked: 110
Great news, and the right move by the BD association. UHD blu-ray can and should co-exist with streaming.
RWetmore is offline  
Old 09-05-2014, 01:57 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
rogo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: Stop making curved screens
Posts: 30,687
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 603 Post(s)
Liked: 882
Quote:
Originally Posted by sytech View Post
Very true, but they are my only option were I live. In Japan they are using about 40MB minumum to get better quality 4K. I think we can all agree the NetFlix 4K at 20MB is not going to cut it.
Well, here's the problem I see sytech. It will be sold as 4K and people mostly won't care that overall it's not really better than a BluRay. We've been conditioned to convenience over quality.

There is no difference in HDMI cables. If you can see the picture without visible dropouts or sparklies, the cable is working at 100%. No other cable will display a better version of that picture. You're simply wrong if you think there is a better digital cable than one that is already working. (Oh, and plasma didn't die because of logistics problems, nor does OLED ship in big boxes because it comes from Korea.)
rogo is offline  
Old 09-10-2014, 02:04 PM
AVS Special Member
 
tgm1024's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 7,683
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1186 Post(s)
Liked: 1227
Quote:
Originally Posted by rogo View Post
Well, here's the problem I see sytech. It will be sold as 4K and people mostly won't care that overall it's not really better than a BluRay. We've been conditioned to convenience over quality.
The "people" sometimes don't even know what a blu-ray is. I can't speak to what slice of the population this represents, but I've bumped into more than a few that rent DVD's still, even though their tv is 1080p.
rogo likes this.

Using Artificial Life algorithms, I created a bunch of creatures and let them evolve on my system. Over the years they gained intelligence, a society, and quite a few interesting abilities. However, using the rules from their world, they concluded that I did not exist. So I created a special creature meant to spread the Word about Me with amazing magical abilities that only He had. Went well, until they decided to nail the poor Guy to a tree.
tgm1024 is online now  
Old 09-10-2014, 05:30 PM
AVS Special Member
 
barth2k's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Posts: 3,508
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 239 Post(s)
Liked: 201
I think a lot of folks are happy just to have the movie fill their screen 😕
barth2k is offline  
Old 09-10-2014, 05:32 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
NorthSky's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Canada - West Island: Vancouver, South Direction: Go East
Posts: 10,663
Mentioned: 5 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4417 Post(s)
Liked: 1725
... 4:3 TVs?
NorthSky is offline  
Old 09-10-2014, 09:49 PM
Senior Member
 
homerging's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 391
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 30 Post(s)
Liked: 19
The big question is are the new "4k Blu-ray" discs backwards compatible with old 1080p players? If not, the new format isn't really Blu-ray at all.
homerging is offline  
Old 09-11-2014, 07:22 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
Ken Ross's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: N.Y.
Posts: 26,594
Mentioned: 5 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2752 Post(s)
Liked: 2468
Quote:
Originally Posted by homerging View Post
The big question is are the new "4k Blu-ray" discs backwards compatible with old 1080p players? If not, the new format isn't really Blu-ray at all.
Well not much different than back in the 'old days', if you tried to play an S-VHS tape in a VHS-only VCR. It wouldn't play since it wasn't backward compatible, but it was a VHS variant nonetheless. We'll have to see if there is or isn't backward compatibility with 4K Blu-Ray.
Ken Ross is offline  
Old 09-11-2014, 07:46 AM
AVS Special Member
 
tgm1024's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 7,683
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1186 Post(s)
Liked: 1227
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ken Ross View Post
Well not much different than back in the 'old days', if you tried to play an S-VHS tape in a VHS-only VCR. It wouldn't play since it wasn't backward compatible, but it was a VHS variant nonetheless. We'll have to see if there is or isn't backward compatibility with 4K Blu-Ray.
So long as they don't cripple the upcoming format in their attempt at maintaining backward compatibility, then so be it. But I don't see that likely, nor even desirable frankly. More often than not, backward compatibility is a short term win but hangs around your neck like a rotting bird corpse longer term.

BTW, trademarks such as "blu-ray" need not stay static in their definitions. There's nothing wrong with calling something that is new yet isn't remotely backward compatible "blu-ray".

Using Artificial Life algorithms, I created a bunch of creatures and let them evolve on my system. Over the years they gained intelligence, a society, and quite a few interesting abilities. However, using the rules from their world, they concluded that I did not exist. So I created a special creature meant to spread the Word about Me with amazing magical abilities that only He had. Went well, until they decided to nail the poor Guy to a tree.
tgm1024 is online now  
Old 09-11-2014, 06:58 PM
Senior Member
 
homerging's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 391
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 30 Post(s)
Liked: 19
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ken Ross View Post
Well not much different than back in the 'old days', if you tried to play an S-VHS tape in a VHS-only VCR. It wouldn't play since it wasn't backward compatible, but it was a VHS variant nonetheless. We'll have to see if there is or isn't backward compatibility with 4K Blu-Ray.
That status did mean most people have never seen any part of the S-video system except the plug

There is no reason why a 4k Blu-ray disc couldn't be made backwards compatible with old 1080p players. It would just need to be dual layered so there'd be a 25GB layer with legacy compatibility and a high-density layer for new players and the 4k HEVC video stream.

Quote:
Originally Posted by tgm1024 View Post
So long as they don't cripple the upcoming format in their attempt at maintaining backward compatibility, then so be it. But I don't see that likely, nor even desirable frankly. More often than not, backward compatibility is a short term win but hangs around your neck like a rotting bird corpse longer term.

BTW, trademarks such as "blu-ray" need not stay static in their definitions. There's nothing wrong with calling something that is new yet isn't remotely backward compatible "blu-ray".
The average person still can't understand what the difference between Blu-ray and DVD is and sticks with DVDs. After all, if they're both discs that look the same they must be the same right? If they have two incompatible Blu-ray systems it'll confuse at least 90% of the market and retailers will be reluctant to stock the new discs. As it is, some retailers are selling 4k upscaling BD players as "4k players" because they don't understand. If the managers of electronic chains are confused, the average person will be more confused. The average person doesn't know much compared with people on these forums.
homerging is offline  
Old 09-12-2014, 04:46 AM
AVS Special Member
 
tgm1024's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 7,683
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1186 Post(s)
Liked: 1227
Quote:
Originally Posted by homerging View Post
The average person still can't understand what the difference between Blu-ray and DVD is and sticks with DVDs. After all, if they're both discs that look the same they must be the same right? If they have two incompatible Blu-ray systems it'll confuse at least 90% of the market and retailers will be reluctant to stock the new discs. As it is, some retailers are selling 4k upscaling BD players as "4k players" because they don't understand. If the managers of electronic chains are confused, the average person will be more confused. The average person doesn't know much compared with people on these forums.
Actually, you might be making the point for me: it'll not matter in the least. First, though this isn't the issue, any 4KBDP will certainly play 2KBDs by design---it'd be marketing suicide if they didn't default to multi-format players. And for the folks with only 2KBDP's, it'll be the same transition as DVD. Would you seriously recommend that the BD format be backward compatible with DVD players so that the folks with just DVD players could play it? They can't, and it didn't matter. Folks understand that their system works with DVDs, so they get DVDs.

BD players understand DVD because they have added electronics put in specifically to manage it, but older DVD players can't take a BD. And that was a good thing, because hamstringing an upcoming format just to please older hardware is often a losing game that screws up more things than they help.

Using Artificial Life algorithms, I created a bunch of creatures and let them evolve on my system. Over the years they gained intelligence, a society, and quite a few interesting abilities. However, using the rules from their world, they concluded that I did not exist. So I created a special creature meant to spread the Word about Me with amazing magical abilities that only He had. Went well, until they decided to nail the poor Guy to a tree.

Last edited by tgm1024; 09-12-2014 at 04:50 AM.
tgm1024 is online now  
Old 09-12-2014, 07:23 AM
Senior Member
 
homerging's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 391
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 30 Post(s)
Liked: 19
Discs can be multilayered. Making discs backwards compatible doesn't hamstring the format too much. The older BDXL standard allowed 4 32GB layers so if the new format allowed 3 50GB layers and 1 25GB legacy layer that would work well.

The average person has very little understanding of technical matters so making things work seemlessly for them is far more important than some minor boost in bitrate they'd never notice.

I can't think of anybody who owns a Blu-ray player but everyone I know owns a DVD player. So I wouldn't hold too much hope for this format if the titles aren't backwards compatible.
homerging is offline  
Old 09-12-2014, 09:38 AM
AVS Special Member
 
tgm1024's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 7,683
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1186 Post(s)
Liked: 1227
Quote:
Originally Posted by homerging View Post
Discs can be multilayered. Making discs backwards compatible doesn't hamstring the format too much. The older BDXL standard allowed 4 32GB layers so if the new format allowed 3 50GB layers and 1 25GB legacy layer that would work well.

The average person has very little understanding of technical matters so making things work seemlessly for them is far more important than some minor boost in bitrate they'd never notice.

I can't think of anybody who owns a Blu-ray player but everyone I know owns a DVD player. So I wouldn't hold too much hope for this format if the titles aren't backwards compatible.
A DVD used an entirely different wavelength. You can only multi-layer so far before mother nature starts becoming the problem. The higher frequency of blue can inherently carry more information. I wouldn't be against the 4K+ standard using violet, UV, or Xray if they have to. I suppose the argument would then be to not call it "blu-ray".

Here's one of my favorite spoofs on the subject:
fafrd, DavidinCT and sippelmc like this.

Using Artificial Life algorithms, I created a bunch of creatures and let them evolve on my system. Over the years they gained intelligence, a society, and quite a few interesting abilities. However, using the rules from their world, they concluded that I did not exist. So I created a special creature meant to spread the Word about Me with amazing magical abilities that only He had. Went well, until they decided to nail the poor Guy to a tree.
tgm1024 is online now  
Old 11-04-2014, 12:05 PM
Advanced Member
 
DavidinCT's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Someplace in CT
Posts: 626
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 119 Post(s)
Liked: 37
Quote:
Originally Posted by homerging View Post
Discs can be multilayered. Making discs backwards compatible doesn't hamstring the format too much. The older BDXL standard allowed 4 32GB layers so if the new format allowed 3 50GB layers and 1 25GB legacy layer that would work well.

The average person has very little understanding of technical matters so making things work seemlessly for them is far more important than some minor boost in bitrate they'd never notice.

I can't think of anybody who owns a Blu-ray player but everyone I know owns a DVD player. So I wouldn't hold too much hope for this format if the titles aren't backwards compatible.
Or they can do (think is the best option at least for the first year of the format), Make dual sided Blu-ray discs....One with 1080p and the other with 4K... Didn't they do this with some Blu-ray/DVD discs for a while ?


One would think this is the way for better acceptance for a new video format. People who buy Blu-ray movies would buy a disc with both formats on it, then in a year or so when the content question comes up, this person already has a bunch of Blu-ray discs with 4K copies of the movie on the other side...


People would buy a TV on a new format, if they already have content to take advantage of the new tech....

-Dave

MCSE 2003
Windows Media Center specialist

Avid gamer and home theater junkie..
DavidinCT is offline  
Old 11-04-2014, 01:08 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Joe Bloggs's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: UK
Posts: 2,782
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 267 Post(s)
Liked: 88
Quote:
Originally Posted by DavidinCT View Post
Or they can do (think is the best option at least for the first year of the format), Make dual sided Blu-ray discs....One with 1080p and the other with 4K... Didn't they do this with some Blu-ray/DVD discs for a while ?


One would think this is the way for better acceptance for a new video format. People who buy Blu-ray movies would buy a disc with both formats on it, then in a year or so when the content question comes up, this person already has a bunch of Blu-ray discs with 4K copies of the movie on the other side...
More likely that one side will get damaged. Also no place for the cover art and less easy to tell which side to put in. There were reasons why they stopped being used. The best option is to just press another disc for the UHD version.
Joe Bloggs is offline  
Old 11-04-2014, 04:49 PM
AVS Special Member
 
tgm1024's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 7,683
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1186 Post(s)
Liked: 1227
Quote:
Originally Posted by Joe Bloggs View Post
More likely that one side will get damaged. Also no place for the cover art and less easy to tell which side to put in. There were reasons why they stopped being used. The best option is to just press another disc for the UHD version.
They were called "Blu-ray/DVD flipper discs", and they've always been a pain in the arse, even back in the dvd full vs. wide screen days. Nothing like a movie where you have to squint at the 3pt. type written on the hub to figure out what it even is. Not to mention the other ones just like it in your DVD "wallet" case.

Using Artificial Life algorithms, I created a bunch of creatures and let them evolve on my system. Over the years they gained intelligence, a society, and quite a few interesting abilities. However, using the rules from their world, they concluded that I did not exist. So I created a special creature meant to spread the Word about Me with amazing magical abilities that only He had. Went well, until they decided to nail the poor Guy to a tree.
tgm1024 is online now  
Old 11-06-2014, 01:49 PM
Senior Member
 
worth's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 221
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 20 Post(s)
Liked: 17
Quote:
Originally Posted by Maltby View Post
So we have all the movies made in the last ten years already in 4K.
There's very little stuff that's actually completed at 4K. The vast majority of films are still finished at 2K, and that includes both low-budget indies and huge blockbusters like The Avengers and The Hobbit films.

Sony is slowly transferring their film library to 4K, but for anything shot on 35mm film prior to about the mid-90s, you're not going to see much of a difference.

Even if every single title with a 4K master were released at once, you'd probably only be looking at around a hundred titles.

Don't tug on that, you never know what it might be attached to...
worth is offline  
Old 11-06-2014, 04:31 PM
Advanced Member
 
Maltby's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Seattle
Posts: 742
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 60 Post(s)
Liked: 32
Quote:
Originally Posted by worth View Post
There's very little stuff that's actually completed at 4K. The vast majority of films are still finished at 2K, and that includes both low-budget indies and huge blockbusters like The Avengers and The Hobbit films.
So they capture the footage at 4K and edit and finish it at 2K?

Quote:
Originally Posted by worth View Post
Even if every single title with a 4K master were released at once, you'd probably only be looking at around a hundred titles.
At $40 bucks a pop or so, it's probably just as well.

The films of De Sica, of Welles, of Michael Powell and Emeric Pressburger made little money and endure as spiritual delights.
--David Mamet
Maltby is offline  
Old 11-06-2014, 08:45 PM
Senior Member
 
RDHolmes's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Arcadia, CA
Posts: 276
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 25 Post(s)
Liked: 26
Quote:
Originally Posted by worth View Post
There's very little stuff that's actually completed at 4K. The vast majority of films are still finished at 2K, and that includes both low-budget indies and huge blockbusters like The Avengers and The Hobbit films.

Sony is slowly transferring their film library to 4K, but for anything shot on 35mm film prior to about the mid-90s, you're not going to see much of a difference.

Even if every single title with a 4K master were released at once, you'd probably only be looking at around a hundred titles.
Remember that all the Studios have a large back catalog of titles that were shot on film. Under ideal conditions a 35mm frame has information equivalent to more than 80 million pixels. A 4K scan is roughly 10 percent of that.

There are thousands of titles that are candidates for true 4K releases.

I fearlessly predict that we will have more true 4K releases than we will have time to watch or money to buy.

Bob Holmes
Curmudgeon
RDHolmes is offline  
Old 11-07-2014, 04:56 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
Stereodude's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Detroit Metro Area
Posts: 10,934
Mentioned: 7 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1154 Post(s)
Liked: 821
Quote:
Originally Posted by RDHolmes View Post
Under ideal conditions a 35mm frame has information equivalent to more than 80 million pixels.
Do you have a source for that or are you just making stuff up?

Also, please explain how a 35mm print is even close to "ideal conditions".
Stereodude is offline  
Old 11-07-2014, 06:41 AM
Senior Member
 
worth's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 221
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 20 Post(s)
Liked: 17
Quote:
Originally Posted by RDHolmes View Post

Remember that all the Studios have a large back catalog of titles that were shot on film. Under ideal conditions a 35mm frame has information equivalent to more than 80 million pixels. A 4K scan is roughly 10 percent of that.

There are thousands of titles that are candidates for true 4K releases.

I fearlessly predict that we will have more true 4K releases than we will have time to watch or money to buy.
Even Kodak doesn't claim film has that much resolution.

Quote:
QUESTION: Some digital camera manufacturers are claiming that 4K matches the resolution of 35 mm film. What is the actual resolution of 35 mm film?

EINHAUS: I am often asked how many pixels there are on a frame of 35 mm color negative film. The answer is none because film isn’t a sampled system. Although it is an imperfect measure, one way to compare the two systems is to convert film to digital data through scanning and to determine at what scanning resolutions film continues to provide additional image information. For instance, we can clearly see differences when 35 mm film is scanned at a full 4K versus 3K or 2K resolution. Although there are diminishing returns, even more information can actually be extracted at 6K. If you scan a frame of 35 mm color negative film at 4K resolution, you are going to generate about 50 megabytes of data. In comparison, today’s 4K digital cameras, which share the 4K pixels between red, green and blue, generate about 10 megabytes of data per image. That doesn’t necessarily mean that 35 mm film systems create images that are five times better to the observer, but it does give you a sense of the differences in information content. In addition, film has the advantage that even higher fidelity can be obtained by simply using a larger film format, e.g. 65 mm. This is more difficult and expensive to do with electronic image sensors.
http://motion.kodak.com/motion/HUB/V3/geinhaus.htm

And many cinematographers argue that 4K is overkill. From American Cinematographer:

Quote:
Although the visual-effects work and final filmout were done at 2K, Spider-Man 3 was scanned at 4K for the DI. Pope notes he was very excited to do a 4K scan for Spider-Man 2 (see AC June ’02), but he would have preferred to work in 2K on its sequel. “I’ve found that I actually like 2K scans better. There’s a certain softness to 2K, in addition to softening filters that are not yet available in 4K, that hides a lot of flaws. 4K is so brutally sharp and clear there’s nowhere to hide. Every blemish, every wrinkle, every hour of work into a late night or a long week shows up on the actor’s face, and that’s not what I want to see — especially not in a movie like this, which is set in a made-up wonderland. It’s just too much to fight later on.

“In many ways, cinematography is about deciding what you don’t want to see, and if you don’t have the tools to erase what you don’t want to see later on, you tend to walk away from that tool the next time. Right now we’re doing 2K projection and 2K effects, so why bother to scan at 4K when it’s just too sharp? Honestly, if I’d thought about it more carefully, I would have shot all the actors through a light [Tiffen] Pro-Mist filter or something similar, just to take some of that sharp curse off the back end. I used a little filtration in the shooting, but not nearly enough.”
And check out this video:

http://nofilmschool.com/2014/09/thre...reat-4k-debate

And this is also interesting:

https://library.creativecow.net/galt...About_Pixels/1

Don't tug on that, you never know what it might be attached to...

Last edited by worth; 11-07-2014 at 06:46 AM.
worth is offline  
Old 11-07-2014, 06:51 AM
AVS Special Member
 
tgm1024's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 7,683
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1186 Post(s)
Liked: 1227
Quote:
Originally Posted by RDHolmes View Post
Remember that all the Studios have a large back catalog of titles that were shot on film. Under ideal conditions a 35mm frame has information equivalent to more than 80 million pixels.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Stereodude View Post
Do you have a source for that or are you just making stuff up?

I had a similar discussion some time ago with an imaging scientist friend of mine. There was some talk about the theoretical resolution of film based upon the crystal size. But this isn't 1. addressable, nor 2. remotely practical.

[Analog] film isn't my bailiwick so I'll have to comment only briefly on this and leave it to the old-timer pros here, but by the time 35mm actually becomes practically usable (not in negative form, but as a positive), it's purportedly roughly 3.5K (resolution).

Add to this vagaries with how the image was actually captured (think "lens quality", "focus ability", and "camera tolerances"), the effective resolution could be much less.

Using Artificial Life algorithms, I created a bunch of creatures and let them evolve on my system. Over the years they gained intelligence, a society, and quite a few interesting abilities. However, using the rules from their world, they concluded that I did not exist. So I created a special creature meant to spread the Word about Me with amazing magical abilities that only He had. Went well, until they decided to nail the poor Guy to a tree.
tgm1024 is online now  
Old 11-07-2014, 07:08 AM
Senior Member
 
worth's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 221
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 20 Post(s)
Liked: 17
Quote:
Originally Posted by Turrican4D View Post
Nearly every movie is scanned at 4K or 8K these days before its Blu-ray release. Then there are the digital shot and produced 4K-movies - tons of content.
If you look at the top 10 films 2012-2014, here's how it actually breaks down:

Guardians of the Galaxy - (2K)
Captain America: The Winter Soldier (2K)
The Lego Movie (2K)
Transformers: Age of Extinction (4K)
Maleficent (2K)
X-Men: Days of Future Past (2K)
Dawn of the Planet of the Apes (2K)
The Amazing Spider Man 2 (4K)
Godzilla (2K)
22 Jump Street (2K)
The Hunger Games - Catching Fire (4K)
Iron Man 3 (2K)
Frozen (2K)
Despicable Me 2 (2K)
Man of Steel (2K)
Gravity (2K)
Monsters University (2K)
The Hobbit: The Desolation of Smaug (2K)
Fast and Furious 6 (2K)
Oz the Great and Powerful (2K)
The Avengers (2K)
The Dark Knight Rises (2K DI but finished on film - could be upgraded to 4K)
The Hunger Games (2K)
Skyfall (4K DI but limited to 2.8K because it was shot with Arri Alexa)
The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey (2K)
Twilight - Breaking Dawn Part 2 (2K)
The Amazing Spider Man (4K)
Brave (2K)
Ted (2K)
Madacascar 3: Europe's Most Wanted (2K)

Don't tug on that, you never know what it might be attached to...
worth is offline  
Old 11-07-2014, 08:18 AM
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2014
Posts: 299
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 205 Post(s)
Liked: 271
Quote:
Originally Posted by worth View Post
Even Kodak doesn't claim film has that much resolution.



http://motion.kodak.com/motion/HUB/V3/geinhaus.htm

And many cinematographers argue that 4K is overkill. From American Cinematographer:



And check out this video:

http://nofilmschool.com/2014/09/thre...reat-4k-debate

And this is also interesting:

https://library.creativecow.net/galt...About_Pixels/1

I agree with all this. 4K is really quite horrible for filming people. Seeing actors skin pores is not nice. Anyone that has shot someone on RED knows what lengths we go into softening the image.

The areas I think 4K will really shine is nature documentary and sport.
fullybob is offline  
 
Thread Tools


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