What to do while waiting for Blue ray 4K - Page 5 - AVS Forum
Forum Jump: 
 31Likes
Reply
 
Thread Tools
post #121 of 139 Old 09-04-2014, 05:39 PM
AVS Special Member
 
sytech's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 1,257
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 253 Post(s)
Liked: 207
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
 
post #122 of 139 Old 09-05-2014, 02:07 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
rogo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: Stop making curved screens
Posts: 30,325
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 270 Post(s)
Liked: 590
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  
post #123 of 139 Old 09-05-2014, 04:31 AM
Advanced Member
 
Turrican4D's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 722
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 86 Post(s)
Liked: 61
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  
post #124 of 139 Old 09-05-2014, 06:11 AM
Senior Member
 
catonic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 257
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 44 Post(s)
Liked: 69
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  
post #125 of 139 Old 09-05-2014, 07:38 AM
AVS Special Member
 
sytech's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 1,257
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 253 Post(s)
Liked: 207
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  
post #126 of 139 Old 09-05-2014, 07:54 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Rudy1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Ft. Lauderdale, FL
Posts: 3,156
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 74 Post(s)
Liked: 107
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  
post #127 of 139 Old 09-05-2014, 11:15 AM
AVS Special Member
 
NorthSky's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Canada - West Island: Vancouver, South Direction: Go East
Posts: 3,686
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1579 Post(s)
Liked: 497
...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  
post #128 of 139 Old 09-05-2014, 01:57 PM
AVS Special Member
 
RWetmore's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Brick, New Jersey
Posts: 3,191
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 51 Post(s)
Liked: 58
Great news, and the right move by the BD association. UHD blu-ray can and should co-exist with streaming.
RWetmore is offline  
post #129 of 139 Old 09-05-2014, 01:57 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
rogo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: Stop making curved screens
Posts: 30,325
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 270 Post(s)
Liked: 590
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  
post #130 of 139 Old 09-10-2014, 02:04 PM
AVS Special Member
 
tgm1024's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 6,599
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 530 Post(s)
Liked: 867
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.

Violence is the last refuge of the incompetent. Unless, of course, it's to keep someone from creating a phone video in portrait mode, in which case it's a pretty good first step. Portrait mooks: KNOCK IT OFF.
tgm1024 is offline  
post #131 of 139 Old 09-10-2014, 05:30 PM
AVS Special Member
 
barth2k's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Posts: 3,271
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 90 Post(s)
Liked: 118
I think a lot of folks are happy just to have the movie fill their screen 😕
barth2k is offline  
post #132 of 139 Old 09-10-2014, 05:32 PM
AVS Special Member
 
NorthSky's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Canada - West Island: Vancouver, South Direction: Go East
Posts: 3,686
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1579 Post(s)
Liked: 497
... 4:3 TVs?
NorthSky is offline  
post #133 of 139 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: 29 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  
post #134 of 139 Old 09-11-2014, 07:22 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
Ken Ross's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: N.Y.
Posts: 24,255
Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1178 Post(s)
Liked: 1328
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  
post #135 of 139 Old 09-11-2014, 07:46 AM
AVS Special Member
 
tgm1024's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 6,599
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 530 Post(s)
Liked: 867
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".

Violence is the last refuge of the incompetent. Unless, of course, it's to keep someone from creating a phone video in portrait mode, in which case it's a pretty good first step. Portrait mooks: KNOCK IT OFF.
tgm1024 is offline  
post #136 of 139 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: 29 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  
post #137 of 139 Old 09-12-2014, 04:46 AM
AVS Special Member
 
tgm1024's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 6,599
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 530 Post(s)
Liked: 867
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.

Violence is the last refuge of the incompetent. Unless, of course, it's to keep someone from creating a phone video in portrait mode, in which case it's a pretty good first step. Portrait mooks: KNOCK IT OFF.

Last edited by tgm1024; 09-12-2014 at 04:50 AM.
tgm1024 is offline  
post #138 of 139 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: 29 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  
post #139 of 139 Old 09-12-2014, 09:38 AM
AVS Special Member
 
tgm1024's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 6,599
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 530 Post(s)
Liked: 867
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 and sippelmc like this.

Violence is the last refuge of the incompetent. Unless, of course, it's to keep someone from creating a phone video in portrait mode, in which case it's a pretty good first step. Portrait mooks: KNOCK IT OFF.
tgm1024 is offline  
Reply OLED Technology and Flat Panels General

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