Originally Posted by CAVX
Based on what I am seeing from Epson and Optoma UHD projectors, Scaling or more to point, 1:1 pixel mapping is irrelevant with UHD content.
However, the true 21:9 mode for UHD has 2160 vertical pixels and would support 5120 pixels if the studios would encode properly. At this time, they are just catering for a 16:9 market, so everything is maxed out to 3840 wide. Which kind of reminds me of early DVD days when studios were not using the anamorphic enhancement function, so would do 4 x 3 letter boxed transfers instead of 16:9 anamorphic. Why did they do this? Because MOST people owned 4 x 3 TVs.
So it really is a chicken / egg thing. Make the displays to move the population to UW but also give us program to support that. If they were smart, they would be encoding for 21:9 now and the current 16:9 players would not see this, hence reformat for 16:9. Update the player and you already have software. DTS did this on BD where they were already encoding at HDMA, but no one would hear this until HDMI 1.3 came out.
Sounds great, problem is, UHD discs don't have enough room as it is.
25GB single layer
50GB dual layer
50 or 66 GB dual layer (50 would be for something short)
100 GB triple layer
That's both sides multiplied twice, not just double the number of pixels, but 4 times as many pixels as HD, yet, the top capacity discs are only twice as large. Yeah, the H.265/HEVC compression is better, but, there's only room for the content as it is, no extras, we're talking about using more compression or getting more capacity out of the discs somehow.
(21:9 UHD 5120x2160=11,059,200 pixels)
DTS is not a fair comparison as we're talking about a much, much smaller amount of data.
An example of the problem with capacity is glaring with the Stranger Things UHD set. A reviewer on blu-ray.com reviewed both the UHD & BD discs. Netflix wanted to stay with using only 2 discs for the entire season for both the HD BDs and UHD BDs. He said the UHD version (SDR) didn't look better than the BDs. Not only did they (obviously) use more compression for the video to get it to fit on 2 100GB discs, they only have lossy audio. So the increase in capacity for UHD content isn't really enough at this point, for the best quality possible at 3840x2160 as it is, never mind going to 5120.
In a way, I think the disc capacities were a half-arsed attempt, they couldn't have done it without the new HEVC/H.265 compression tech also, but, it's still like trying to stuff "one more thing" into that already full suitcase, sometimes you just need a bigger case...and for 5120x2160 we need higher capacity discs, (or add another disc, which neither side likes.)