UHD Blu-Rays - Report Your FIRST IMPRESSIONS Here! - Page 4 - AVS Forum | Home Theater Discussions And Reviews
Forum Jump: 
 164Likes
Reply
 
Thread Tools
post #91 of 345 Old 02-17-2016, 06:42 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
mpgxsvcd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Cary, NC
Posts: 8,898
Mentioned: 57 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2958 Post(s)
Liked: 2617
Red face

Quote:
Originally Posted by rcheng View Post
FWIW, here is another comparison. To my eyes, UHD has better detail, contrast and color. But I am really impressed how great this player up converts BD. Very happy with my purchase so far~!



Top: BD




Bottom: UHD HDR

The only difference I can see between these two images is a MASSIVE green push for the 1080p Blu ray. Otherwise the pictures are identical. What TV were you using?
mpgxsvcd is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #92 of 345 Old 02-17-2016, 07:27 AM
Member
 
rcheng's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2000
Location: Belleville, IL
Posts: 107
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 17 Post(s)
Liked: 19
Quote:
Originally Posted by mpgxsvcd View Post
The only difference I can see between these two images is a MASSIVE green push for the 1080p Blu ray. Otherwise the pictures are identical. What TV were you using?
65" Samsung JS9000

Viewing the screen at my sitting distance, I can definitely see a difference in regards to better contrast, detail, and color. The UHD HDR image just has more pop. But I have to say this player does a heck of a job with BD also.
rcheng is offline  
post #93 of 345 Old 02-17-2016, 07:45 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
cdnscg's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Canada
Posts: 1,708
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 602 Post(s)
Liked: 123
Quote:
Originally Posted by rcheng View Post
65" Samsung JS9000

Viewing the screen at my sitting distance, I can definitely see a difference in regards to better contrast, detail, and color. The UHD HDR image just has more pop. But I have to say this player does a heck of a job with BD also.
Are you using a BD disc for both images, or a BD and 4K disc?
cdnscg is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #94 of 345 Old 02-17-2016, 07:56 AM
Member
 
rcheng's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2000
Location: Belleville, IL
Posts: 107
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 17 Post(s)
Liked: 19
Quote:
Originally Posted by cdnscg View Post
Are you using a BD disc for both images, or a BD and 4K disc?
top: BD bottom: 4k UHD
rcheng is offline  
post #95 of 345 Old 02-17-2016, 10:28 AM - Thread Starter
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
R Harkness's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Toronto, Ontario, Canada
Posts: 15,176
Mentioned: 18 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2805 Post(s)
Liked: 2726
Quote:
Originally Posted by ray0414 View Post
You see, you are going off "theory" and opinion.
Your responses suggest you aren't approaching this with a very "scientific" mindset, which means that perhaps this is a fruitless conversation. But one more go....

No, I'm not simply going of "theory" and "opinion." I'm going off the basis of how display technology actually works, facts you can look up yourself, and which you can test yourself, and which are routinely tested by professionals.

You are aware of the importance of black levels always being touted by AV professionals and reviewers, and educated AVSmembers, right? This is why the contrast ratio and black level measurements - the deepest black a display is capable of, so often features in the tests of displays going back decades. Now...before UHD came along, what would be the point of measuring the very deepest black a display is capable of...if it wasn't relevant to the black levels the display could produce with existing DVD/Blu-Rays? Of course it's relevant. Reviewers don't like seeing high black level measurements on displays because it tells you about the black levels you will see with actual content! It tells you what black level you will get when some portion of the image on DVD or Blu-Ray is putting out 0 IRE, or "no" light.
That's why you can use EXISTING Blu-Ray test discs to MEASURE the black levels of your display! Blu-Ray can already produce the "blackest blacks" your display is capable of.

If Blu-Ray can already reach the limits of black level that a display is even capable of...how is it you suggest that UHD can produce "even darker" black levels?

If your idea made sense, all the technical calibrating done to displays, based on how the technology is understood to work, has never made sense. You are operating under a different paradigm than the actual people who build our displays, and who calibrate displays.

Can you not see the problem there?


Quote:
Originally Posted by ray0414 View Post

Im going off real world testimony, and other DOZENS of people who have this real world testimony that agree that the black levels are better with HDR.
And have any of these been supported by measurements of the black level, showing it has actually deepened?

Do you not understand how easily our eyes are tricked in regards to contrast and light levels? Ever see any of the many
contrast effects on our vision?

The classic, wouldn't your eyes "tell you" that the A square is darker than the B square (even though it's not)?



Don't your eyes tell you that the right square is darker than the left square?:



But they are not. We know very well from empirical experience as above, not simply on some "funky theory," that how we perceive tonal shades is very influenced by a variety of factors. If we shift the contrast relationship around an area of the same brightness, it's brightness will appear to change to our eyes. Brightening bright areas will do this in an image, as will shifting gamma, which will shift the brightness of areas bordering on the dark areas. As I said, when I go to a higher gamma, I often perceive my black levels going lower, though I know they remain at the same actual measured levels.

Quote:
the question is whether its from the higher bitrate/encoding or HDR itself. I think it may actually be a combination.
See...you seem actually interested in the answer, so it doesn't help to start off on the wrong foot towards getting it. You are starting with a conclusion "UHD sources produces lower black levels than Blu-Ray" that has been arrived at via faulty methods of inference and dubious assumptions.

UHD can't make the *same display* produce lower black levels than it could with Blu-Ray. Good calibration already sets the back level of a display as low as it will go (some caveats in there for different display technologies). In other words, the usual rec709 calibration tends to use the lowest black level your display can manage as a base from which it builds toward the brightest areas. What UHD does is allow for encoding of more information, so you can get better shadow detail (though not lower black levels) but also encode picture information that allows for much brighter highlights to maintain detail. So now you can calibrate the brighter end of the display to extend brighter - much brighter displays up until now could do - without losing detail in the source.

So think of UHD as allowing higher brightness, not lower darkness. That's why the emphasis is always on "specular highlights" such as the glint of sun off metal, for a more realistic image.

(And, having seen UHD on some LCDs, as to be expected it was certainly clear UHD didn't help the LCDs magically achieve lower black levels - the brightness of highlights was certainly increased, but any low APL dark scenes still showed less than stellar black levels...because those are set by the display, not the source).
seanbryan, krichter1, muzz and 7 others like this.
R Harkness is online now  
post #96 of 345 Old 02-17-2016, 10:33 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
bruceames's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: San Rafael, CA
Posts: 1,427
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 538 Post(s)
Liked: 371
Quote:
What UHD does is allow for encoding of more information, so you can get better shadow detail
So Rich, do you think the increased shadow detail is due solely to the higher bit rate? If so, would that be seen equally as well playing a UHD on a 1080p display?
bruceames is offline  
post #97 of 345 Old 02-17-2016, 11:44 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
mpgxsvcd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Cary, NC
Posts: 8,898
Mentioned: 57 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2958 Post(s)
Liked: 2617
Wink

Quote:
Originally Posted by bruceames View Post
So Rich, do you think the increased shadow detail is due solely to the higher bit rate? If so, would that be seen equally as well playing a UHD on a 1080p display?
The increased shadow detail is due to a different edit of the original footage. They can pull the shadows in post processing to extract extra detail from dark regions. This extra shadow detail will also have additional noise. This is why HDR often shows extra details but often tends to be noisier as well. Sometimes the noise can be cleaned up with additional processing though.
bruceames likes this.

Last edited by mpgxsvcd; 02-18-2016 at 06:18 AM.
mpgxsvcd is offline  
post #98 of 345 Old 02-17-2016, 04:03 PM
Member
 
rcheng's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2000
Location: Belleville, IL
Posts: 107
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 17 Post(s)
Liked: 19
Comparing to MGO HDR on Samsung 65" JS9000.

Still images are pretty close. I can see more shadow detail in UHD disc. When watching live, the UHD disc looks more vibrant to my eyes.


Top: UHD HDR Disc (Standard picture mode)



Bottom: MGO HDR



Here is a closeup. Can you see a difference? They are pretty darn close.

Attached Thumbnails
Click image for larger version

Name:	20160217-_54A7529-2.jpg
Views:	2407
Size:	873.6 KB
ID:	1260889   Click image for larger version

Name:	20160217-_54A7527-2.jpg
Views:	2395
Size:	855.4 KB
ID:	1260897   Click image for larger version

Name:	Lightroom Exports9.jpg
Views:	2314
Size:	812.0 KB
ID:	1261097  
mpgxsvcd likes this.

Last edited by rcheng; 02-17-2016 at 05:20 PM.
rcheng is offline  
post #99 of 345 Old 02-17-2016, 04:39 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
JeffR1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: Canada
Posts: 1,698
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1072 Post(s)
Liked: 531
Quote:
Originally Posted by R Harkness View Post
Your responses suggest you aren't approaching this with a very "scientific" mindset, which means that perhaps this is a fruitless conversation. But one more go....

No, I'm not simply going of "theory" and "opinion." I'm going off the basis of how display technology actually works, facts you can look up yourself, and which you can test yourself, and which are routinely tested by professionals.

You are aware of the importance of black levels always being touted by AV professionals and reviewers, and educated AVSmembers, right? This is why the contrast ratio and black level measurements - the deepest black a display is capable of, so often features in the tests of displays going back decades. Now...before UHD came along, what would be the point of measuring the very deepest black a display is capable of...if it wasn't relevant to the black levels the display could produce with existing DVD/Blu-Rays? Of course it's relevant. Reviewers don't like seeing high black level measurements on displays because it tells you about the black levels you will see with actual content! It tells you what black level you will get when some portion of the image on DVD or Blu-Ray is putting out 0 IRE, or "no" light.
That's why you can use EXISTING Blu-Ray test discs to MEASURE the black levels of your display! Blu-Ray can already produce the "blackest blacks" your display is capable of.

If Blu-Ray can already reach the limits of black level that a display is even capable of...how is it you suggest that UHD can produce "even darker" black levels?

If your idea made sense, all the technical calibrating done to displays, based on how the technology is understood to work, has never made sense. You are operating under a different paradigm than the actual people who build our displays, and who calibrate displays.

Can you not see the problem there?




And have any of these been supported by measurements of the black level, showing it has actually deepened?

Do you not understand how easily our eyes are tricked in regards to contrast and light levels? Ever see any of the many
contrast effects on our vision?

The classic, wouldn't your eyes "tell you" that the A square is darker than the B square (even though it's not)?



Don't your eyes tell you that the right square is darker than the left square?:



But they are not. We know very well from empirical experience as above, not simply on some "funky theory," that how we perceive tonal shades is very influenced by a variety of factors. If we shift the contrast relationship around an area of the same brightness, it's brightness will appear to change to our eyes. Brightening bright areas will do this in an image, as will shifting gamma, which will shift the brightness of areas bordering on the dark areas. As I said, when I go to a higher gamma, I often perceive my black levels going lower, though I know they remain at the same actual measured levels.

See...you seem actually interested in the answer, so it doesn't help to start off on the wrong foot towards getting it. You are starting with a conclusion "UHD sources produces lower black levels than Blu-Ray" that has been arrived at via faulty methods of inference and dubious assumptions.

UHD can't make the *same display* produce lower black levels than it could with Blu-Ray. Good calibration already sets the back level of a display as low as it will go (some caveats in there for different display technologies). In other words, the usual rec709 calibration tends to use the lowest black level your display can manage as a base from which it builds toward the brightest areas. What UHD does is allow for encoding of more information, so you can get better shadow detail (though not lower black levels) but also encode picture information that allows for much brighter highlights to maintain detail. So now you can calibrate the brighter end of the display to extend brighter - much brighter displays up until now could do - without losing detail in the source.

So think of UHD as allowing higher brightness, not lower darkness. That's why the emphasis is always on "specular highlights" such as the glint of sun off metal, for a more realistic image.

(And, having seen UHD on some LCDs, as to be expected it was certainly clear UHD didn't help the LCDs magically achieve lower black levels - the brightness of highlights was certainly increased, but any low APL dark scenes still showed less than stellar black levels...because those are set by the display, not the source).
Interesting, I took a piece of paper and covered everything leaving only the two squares _ they are the same shade.
mpgxsvcd likes this.
JeffR1 is offline  
post #100 of 345 Old 02-17-2016, 04:57 PM - Thread Starter
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
R Harkness's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Toronto, Ontario, Canada
Posts: 15,176
Mentioned: 18 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2805 Post(s)
Liked: 2726
Quote:
Originally Posted by JeffR1 View Post
Interesting, I took a piece of paper and covered everything leaving only the two squares _ they are the same shade.
Yep. That's what we learn when we take the precaution of double-checking and testing our assumptions, rather than simply "testifying" how it looks to our eyes.
mpgxsvcd likes this.
R Harkness is online now  
post #101 of 345 Old 02-18-2016, 03:23 AM
Newbie
 
Join Date: Feb 2016
Posts: 5
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2 Post(s)
Liked: 3
If possible for anyone to take some comparison shots of the BD and UHD with HDR on a setup like this:
  • 10-Bit DCI-P3 monitor at normal 100-120nits
  • 10-Bit DCI-P3 monitor at max brightness (probably ~350nits)

(e.g. LG 31MU97-B, Eizo ColorEdge CG318-4K, ...)

I would really like to know if the HDR impacts positively or negatively on a P3 monitor with such low brightness (a TV is out of my budget right now).
twgz is offline  
post #102 of 345 Old 02-18-2016, 03:36 AM
Advanced Member
 
James Freeman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2013
Posts: 757
Mentioned: 6 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 517 Post(s)
Liked: 348
The color difference between BD and UHD-BD in the rec.709 gamut range has to do with the color grading and TV setting, and can't be properly compared with screenshots.
In other words, 99% of the color content of UHD can be easily mapped to rec.709 gamut rang, any difference you see between the versions with: skin tones, rooms, clothing has nothing to do with wider gamut of rec.2020 or DCI-P3 but with color grading and TV setting.
The use of wider gamut shines in nature (flowers, plants, birds, insects, animals, etc..) and special effects (lasers, Avatar, extra vivid colors) where the captured/created colors actually wider than rec.709 and should be clearly visible alongside NORMAL mellow skin tones.

As for resolution;
You can clearly see that if the camera captured 4K and the studios downscaled it to 1080p (2K) the difference should look similar to what you see below.
To my eyes what we got now on the UHD disc is an upscaled 2K DCI version, as I see from the comparison images in this thread.



The new format will shine with HDR, HFR, lots of real vivid (outside rec.709) colors and real 4k content (camera with proper lenses etc.).
For now, what I see is HDR mastered and upscaled DCI 2K movies, not bad considering the difference is only 10 vs 12bit and 420 vs 444.
But the format is in its infancy and the potential is HUGE.

Unfortunately there is also a lot of trickery potential from the studios so that new customers will clearly see the difference between the HD and UHD version;
They may make the colors more vivid inside rec.709 (completely unnecessary) and sharpen the hell out of an upscaled 2k master, even without using HDR, so it looks "nicer" to the untrained eye in a side by side comparison.

Personally, I am waiting for a movie that was captured in 4K (or higher), HFR, with lots of nice colors.
The Hobbit comes to mind.

One last note,
The studios will definitely NOT redo the FX in 4K if the master is already in 2K.
So basically what we will get for the first couple of years is upscaled 2K DCI masters with HDR.

Last edited by James Freeman; 02-18-2016 at 06:41 AM.
James Freeman is offline  
post #103 of 345 Old 02-18-2016, 06:17 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
mpgxsvcd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Cary, NC
Posts: 8,898
Mentioned: 57 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2958 Post(s)
Liked: 2617
Wink

Quote:
Originally Posted by James Freeman View Post
The color difference between BD and UHD-BD in the rec.709 gamut range has to do with the color grading and TV setting, and can't be properly compared with screenshots.
In other words, 99% of the color content of UHD can be easily mapped to rec.709 gamut rang, any difference you see between the versions with: skin tones, rooms, clothing has nothing to do with wider gamut of rec.2020 or DCI-P3 but with color grading and TV setting.
The use of wider gamut shines in nature (flowers, plants, birds, insects, animals, etc..) and special effects (lasers, Avatar, extra vivid colors) where the captured/created colors actually wider than rec.709 and should be clearly visible.

As for resolution;
You can clearly see that if the camera captured 4K and the studios downscaled it to 1080p (2K) the difference should look similar to what you see below.
To my eyes what we got now on the UHD disc is an upscaled 2K DCI version, as I see from the comparison images in this thread.



The new format will shine with HDR, HFR, lots of real vivid (outside rec.709) colors and real 4k content (camera with proper lenses etc.).
For now, what I see is HDR mastered and upscaled DCI 2K movies, not bad considering the difference is only 10 vs 12bit and 420 vs 444.
But the format is in its infancy and the potential is HUGE.

Unfortunately there is also a lot of trickery potential from the studios so that new customers will clearly see the difference between the HD and UHD version;
They may make the colors more vivid inside rec.709 (completely unnecessary) and sharpen the hell out of an upscaled 2k master, even without using HDR, so it looks "nicer" to the untrained eye in a side by side comparison.

Personally, I am waiting for a movie that was captured in 4K (or higher), HFR, with lots of nice colors.
The Hobbit comes to mind.

One last note,
The studios will definitely NOT redo the FX in 4K if the master is already in 2K.
So basically what we will get for the first couple of years is upscaled 2K DCI masters with HDR.
Most of what you said was correct. However, there is no 12 bit or 4:4:4 content at the moment unless you count the few Dolby Vision movies the Vizio R-series is supposed to play.
mpgxsvcd is offline  
post #104 of 345 Old 02-18-2016, 06:36 AM
Advanced Member
 
James Freeman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2013
Posts: 757
Mentioned: 6 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 517 Post(s)
Liked: 348
I meant that DCI 2K is 12bit, 4:4:4, P3 Gamut,
vs UHD which is upscaled 2K 10bit 4:2:0, P3 Gamut (in a rec.2020 container).
Also the bitrate of UHD now allows for 128MBit/s while DCI allows 250MBit/s.
Anything above 50MBit/s is practically invisible, so not even DCI compressed (not compressed I should say) to 250MBit/s.

If they upscale the 2K 4:4:4 12bit to 4K 4:4:4 12bit before compressing with HEVC to 4:2:0 10bit, we might not even lose any color at all.
Most probably than not, as it's much more lengthy process to first convert to 4:2:0 10bit and only then upscale, and then compress.
It's a lot faster to just upscale the 2K 4:4:4 12bit master to 4K (can be easily done in real time on your desktop PC) and let HEVC compress it to 4:2:0 10bit.

Not bad for a home format.
With UHD-BR you basically buy the DCI Master, what more do we want?

EDIT:
I know what we want.
4K 12bit, 4:4:4 HFR, HDR, Rec.2020 in 128MBit/s or they're not getting my 30$.
reanimator likes this.

Last edited by James Freeman; 02-18-2016 at 06:59 AM.
James Freeman is offline  
post #105 of 345 Old 02-18-2016, 07:45 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
metalsaber's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Western, Pennsylvania
Posts: 5,321
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1048 Post(s)
Liked: 858
Quote:
Originally Posted by wuther View Post
Like sharpening artifacts?
it was actual macroblock like compression. not sharpening.
metalsaber is offline  
post #106 of 345 Old 02-18-2016, 08:05 AM
Member
 
MisterXDTV's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 156
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 49 Post(s)
Liked: 26
Quote:
Originally Posted by James Freeman View Post
I meant that DCI 2K is 12bit, 4:4:4, P3 Gamut,
vs UHD which is upscaled 2K 10bit 4:2:0, P3 Gamut (in a rec.2020 container).
Also the bitrate of UHD now allows for 128MBit/s while DCI allows 250MBit/s.
Anything above 50MBit/s is practically invisible, so not even DCI compressed (not compressed I should say) to 250MBit/s.

If they upscale the 2K 4:4:4 12bit to 4K 4:4:4 12bit before compressing with HEVC to 4:2:0 10bit, we might not even lose any color at all.
Most probably than not, as it's much more lengthy process to first convert to 4:2:0 10bit and only then upscale, and then compress.
It's a lot faster to just upscale the 2K 4:4:4 12bit master to 4K (can be easily done in real time on your desktop PC) and let HEVC compress it to 4:2:0 10bit.

Not bad for a home format.

With UHD-BR you basically buy the DCI Master, what more do we want?
Wrong, you get the DCI Master (reduced to 4:2:0, 10bit) re-graded in HDR for no reason and upscaled most of the time
MisterXDTV is offline  
post #107 of 345 Old 02-18-2016, 06:48 PM
Member
 
rcheng's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2000
Location: Belleville, IL
Posts: 107
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 17 Post(s)
Liked: 19
For those that are still on the fence, judge the difference for yourselves. Try to stand back at normal tv viewing distance and see if you see the improvements.

Closeup comparison BD vs UHD on Samsung JS9000. Photos taken with 50MP Canon 5DSR on tripod.




rcheng is offline  
post #108 of 345 Old 02-19-2016, 12:29 PM
Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Posts: 58
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 38 Post(s)
Liked: 14
Quote:
Originally Posted by rcheng View Post
For those that are still on the fence, judge the difference for yourselves. Try to stand back at normal tv viewing distance and see if you see the improvements.

Closeup comparison BD vs UHD on Samsung JS9000. Photos taken with 50MP Canon 5DSR on tripod.




I wish stores would hurry up and start displaying UHD discs. That's the only way I'll be able to see for myself for the time being.
JRobinson84 is offline  
post #109 of 345 Old 02-19-2016, 12:51 PM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
darinp2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Seattle, WA
Posts: 23,188
Mentioned: 7 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1135 Post(s)
Liked: 1767
Quote:
Originally Posted by James Freeman View Post
They may make the colors more vivid inside rec.709 (completely unnecessary)
Would you expect pixels encoded at say 90% of REC.709 on BD to be encoded at the same x,y coordinates in UHD Blu-Ray just because those pixels are inside REC.709? I expect sone degree of roll off and not just clipping, so expect that some things inside REC.709 would be encoded differently between a REC.709 encode and a P3 or REC.2020 encode.

--Darin
darinp2 is offline  
post #110 of 345 Old 02-19-2016, 01:09 PM
Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Posts: 58
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 38 Post(s)
Liked: 14
For anyone in the West LA area, I just found out that the Magnolia at the Best Buy on Pico/Sawtelle just set up their UHD disc display last night. The guy said they're currently playing The Martian and that it looks fantastic. I'll be heading over there to check it out. If I'm impressed, I'm gonna be in financial trouble!
aaronwt and reanimator like this.
JRobinson84 is offline  
post #111 of 345 Old 02-19-2016, 04:33 PM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
DavidHir's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 14,324
Mentioned: 31 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2576 Post(s)
Liked: 2258
Quote:
Originally Posted by James Freeman View Post
The color difference between BD and UHD-BD in the rec.709 gamut range has to do with the color grading and TV setting, and can't be properly compared with screenshots.
In other words, 99% of the color content of UHD can be easily mapped to rec.709 gamut rang, any difference you see between the versions with: skin tones, rooms, clothing has nothing to do with wider gamut of rec.2020 or DCI-P3 but with color grading and TV setting.
The use of wider gamut shines in nature (flowers, plants, birds, insects, animals, etc..) and special effects (lasers, Avatar, extra vivid colors) where the captured/created colors actually wider than rec.709 and should be clearly visible alongside NORMAL mellow skin tones.

As for resolution;
You can clearly see that if the camera captured 4K and the studios downscaled it to 1080p (2K) the difference should look similar to what you see below.
To my eyes what we got now on the UHD disc is an upscaled 2K DCI version, as I see from the comparison images in this thread.



The new format will shine with HDR, HFR, lots of real vivid (outside rec.709) colors and real 4k content (camera with proper lenses etc.).
For now, what I see is HDR mastered and upscaled DCI 2K movies, not bad considering the difference is only 10 vs 12bit and 420 vs 444.
But the format is in its infancy and the potential is HUGE.

Unfortunately there is also a lot of trickery potential from the studios so that new customers will clearly see the difference between the HD and UHD version;
They may make the colors more vivid inside rec.709 (completely unnecessary) and sharpen the hell out of an upscaled 2k master, even without using HDR, so it looks "nicer" to the untrained eye in a side by side comparison.

Personally, I am waiting for a movie that was captured in 4K (or higher), HFR, with lots of nice colors.
The Hobbit comes to mind.

One last note,
The studios will definitely NOT redo the FX in 4K if the master is already in 2K.
So basically what we will get for the first couple of years is upscaled 2K DCI masters with HDR.
The Hobbit was actually finished in 2K.

There are a lot of catalog titles that have been remastered or restored in 4K, however, I get the sense the studios will be focused on newer releases for the next couple of years but it would be nice if they released a few.
DavidHir is online now  
post #112 of 345 Old 02-21-2016, 11:40 AM
Senior Member
 
kristoffer77's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 254
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 84 Post(s)
Liked: 57
For people with the Samsung. How much noise does it make and how fast is it?
kristoffer77 is offline  
post #113 of 345 Old 02-21-2016, 10:57 PM
Member
 
carr857's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Posts: 97
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 59 Post(s)
Liked: 37
Quote:
Originally Posted by kristoffer77 View Post
For people with the Samsung. How much noise does it make and how fast is it?
Its super fast actually. One of the fastest blu ray players I have ever used. As far as noise, pretty quiet as far as I can tell. It does get hot, and has a small fan in the back.
carr857 is offline  
post #114 of 345 Old 02-22-2016, 04:27 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
metalsaber's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Western, Pennsylvania
Posts: 5,321
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1048 Post(s)
Liked: 858
Agreed. Super fast and quiet. Pretty much what you want.
metalsaber is offline  
post #115 of 345 Old 02-22-2016, 05:41 AM
Advanced Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2014
Posts: 931
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 743 Post(s)
Liked: 123
Quote:
Originally Posted by James Freeman View Post
The color difference between BD and UHD-BD in the rec.709 gamut range has to do with the color grading and TV setting, and can't be properly compared with screenshots.
In other words, 99% of the color content of UHD can be easily mapped to rec.709 gamut rang, any difference you see between the versions with: skin tones, rooms, clothing has nothing to do with wider gamut of rec.2020 or DCI-P3 but with color grading and TV setting.
The use of wider gamut shines in nature (flowers, plants, birds, insects, animals, etc..) and special effects (lasers, Avatar, extra vivid colors) where the captured/created colors actually wider than rec.709 and should be clearly visible alongside NORMAL mellow skin tones.

As for resolution;
You can clearly see that if the camera captured 4K and the studios downscaled it to 1080p (2K) the difference should look similar to what you see below.
To my eyes what we got now on the UHD disc is an upscaled 2K DCI version, as I see from the comparison images in this thread.



The new format will shine with HDR, HFR, lots of real vivid (outside rec.709) colors and real 4k content (camera with proper lenses etc.).
For now, what I see is HDR mastered and upscaled DCI 2K movies, not bad considering the difference is only 10 vs 12bit and 420 vs 444.
But the format is in its infancy and the potential is HUGE.

Unfortunately there is also a lot of trickery potential from the studios so that new customers will clearly see the difference between the HD and UHD version;
They may make the colors more vivid inside rec.709 (completely unnecessary) and sharpen the hell out of an upscaled 2k master, even without using HDR, so it looks "nicer" to the untrained eye in a side by side comparison.

Personally, I am waiting for a movie that was captured in 4K (or higher), HFR, with lots of nice colors.
The Hobbit comes to mind.

One last note,
The studios will definitely NOT redo the FX in 4K if the master is already in 2K.
So basically what we will get for the first couple of years is upscaled 2K DCI masters with HDR.
Hi James

Could you explain what is rec 709 , rec 2020? I am new to 4K . Thanks a lot
Roudan is offline  
post #116 of 345 Old 02-22-2016, 08:24 PM
Advanced Member
 
James Freeman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2013
Posts: 757
Mentioned: 6 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 517 Post(s)
Liked: 348
Quote:
Originally Posted by MisterXDTV View Post
Wrong, you get the DCI Master (reduced to 4:2:0, 10bit) re-graded in HDR for no reason and upscaled most of the time
Wrong, wrong.
First upscaling to 4K then truncating to 4:2:0 retains 100% of the original 2K 4:4:4 chroma.
Understand why?

Quote:
Originally Posted by darinp2 View Post
Would you expect pixels encoded at say 90% of REC.709 on BD to be encoded at the same x,y coordinates in UHD Blu-Ray just because those pixels are inside REC.709? I expect sone degree of roll off and not just clipping, so expect that some things inside REC.709 would be encoded differently between a REC.709 encode and a P3 or REC.2020 encode.
--Darin
Of course there will be difference.
The 2K DCI master is projected with 2.6 gamma to begin with and has to be regraded.
It is obvious that the colorist will create completely new result with UHD Blu-ray without taking reference of the rec.709 Blu-ray version.

What I want to say is, if you have all the colors in the world it does not mean you have to use them.
What I "fear" the most is the studios will oversharpen the upscaled 2K video and unnecessarily make the video more colorful.
Everything has its proper place in the Chromaticity diagram, from pale skin tones to super vivid red neon lights (which can't be displayed on 709 BTW).

Quote:
Originally Posted by Roudan View Post
Could you explain what is rec 709 , rec 2020? I am new to 4K . Thanks a lot
Our eye can see much more color than what a TV can display.
rec.709 color space is what TVs display for almost 50 years now (CRT or LCD).
rec.2020 is the new standard which can display much more vivid colors.
DCI-P3 is the colors that a Xeonon lamp cinema projector can display.
Google "color space".
Roudan likes this.

Last edited by James Freeman; 02-22-2016 at 08:41 PM.
James Freeman is offline  
post #117 of 345 Old 02-25-2016, 01:57 PM
Member
 
frenchie903's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 71
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 38 Post(s)
Liked: 16
Quote:
Originally Posted by mpgxsvcd View Post
This post sums up how I feel about it at the moment. Maybe if they ever produce a "Real" 4K disc I will feel differently then. However, for now it just seems like a scam.

https://www.avsforum.com/forum/150-bl...l#post41512417
Yes I was taken back when I learned alot of the early releases were not shot in true 4k. At the time I purchased Martian 4k I did not realize that. When I first put it in and from beginning to end I said WOW! There is definitely a improved sharpness and color factor to it. Then I played the standard bluray disc. Amazing. The standard one looked dull compared to the "fake" 4k one. All I can say is that these are the best knockoffs I've ever seen:-).
aaronwt likes this.
frenchie903 is online now  
post #118 of 345 Old 02-25-2016, 02:18 PM
UHD Addict
 
aaronwt's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Northern VA(Woodbridge)
Posts: 35,976
Mentioned: 71 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 9327 Post(s)
Liked: 6008
Quote:
Originally Posted by frenchie903 View Post
Yes I was taken back when I learned alot of the early releases were not shot in true 4k. At the time I purchased Martian 4k I did not realize that. When I first put it in and from beginning to end I said WOW! There is definitely a improved sharpness and color factor to it. Then I played the standard bluray disc. Amazing. The standard one looked dull compared to the "fake" 4k one. All I can say is that these are the best knockoffs I've ever seen:-).
Yes. i figured if these UHD BD titles, with supposedly 2K Masters, can look so much better than a BD. Then I can't wait for the UHD BD titles from actual 4K masters. Hopefully my first UHD BDs, from 4K masters, show up next week.

53TB unRAID1a--49TB unRAID2--76TB unRAID3
TCL 6 Series--Sony UBP-X800--Philips BDP7502--Onkyo HT-S7800
XBL/PSN: WormholeXtreme
aaronwt is online now  
post #119 of 345 Old 02-25-2016, 03:54 PM
Member
 
frenchie903's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 71
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 38 Post(s)
Liked: 16
I read here that the "Real" 4k releases are Hancock Salt Spiderman 2 Sicario and Expendables 3. My 4k receiver will arrive tomorrow so I'll have it hooked up for next week. I think I'll have a "Real" 4k release party:-).
frenchie903 is online now  
post #120 of 345 Old 02-25-2016, 04:52 PM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
ray0414's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: michigan
Posts: 16,844
Mentioned: 260 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 12691 Post(s)
Liked: 11949
Quote:
Originally Posted by frenchie903 View Post
Yes I was taken back when I learned alot of the early releases were not shot in true 4k. At the time I purchased Martian 4k I did not realize that. When I first put it in and from beginning to end I said WOW! There is definitely a improved sharpness and color factor to it. Then I played the standard bluray disc. Amazing. The standard one looked dull compared to the "fake" 4k one. All I can say is that these are the best knockoffs I've ever seen:-).
Thats because the uhd version of the martian IS part native 4k. It has 5k elements spliced in. Everyone is ignoring this. It's like a hybrid.
aaronwt likes this.
ray0414 is online now  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Reply Blu-ray Software

Tags
artifacts

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