It's because a lot of the visual effects companies still work in 2K. All of these films are very effects heavy as compared to a TV show.
As far as i'm aware Skyfall has a 4K digital intermediate.Worth said:I stand corrected. Looks like Breaking Bad has indeed been remastered to 4K. It just seems kind of odd that a relatively modestly budgeted series would be completed in 4K when massive films like The Hobbit, Skyfall, Edge of Tomorrow and the new X-Men only exist at 2K.
I wonder how they achieved that, upscaled i guess, i read a rumour that they are working on a new Arri 6K camera with a proper 65mm sensor thus it will give much better image quality than the rival competition which squeezes things onto smaller sensors.Worth said:Skyfall claims a 4K DI, but was shot almost entirely with the Arri Alexa, which is limited to 2.8K.
Perhaps it would be more accurate to say that Blu-ray has not achieved "critical mass market" status Robert...i.e. has not rendered the previous mass format obsolete and replaced it, as happened with DVD vs. VHS and eventually Laserdisc.Robert Crawford said:I don't buy that as the BD sales are too great in numbers to be a niche market. This isn't a small market like LD. Granted, certain classic titles might be niche especially with these licensed out titles, but overall, the BD market is mass market.
True. Still happens today - this year's "Amazing Spider-Man 2" was shot in 4K resolution, but according to American Cinematographer, all of that was downrezzed to 2K for editing and effects work, so any 4K release of that film wouldn't truly be 4K.Brandon Conway said:It's because a lot of the visual effects companies still work in 2K. All of these films are very effects heavy as compared to a TV show.
The format war plus bad economic timing hurt BD's penetration as far as a sale through market, but there aren't too many people I know that haven't watched a BD at home. They might not own a lot of them, but they have a BD player in their home which is unlike the lack of LD players within the homes of the general public.ROclockCK said:Perhaps it would be more accurate to say that Blu-ray has not achieved "critical mass market" status Robert...i.e. has not rendered the previous mass format obsolete and replaced it, as happened with DVD vs. VHS and eventually Laserdisc.
In that sense, Blu-ray is concurrently mass-ish, while still niche-ish...if that makes any sense*.
* a moot point anyway since Blu-ray will face the same inevitable decline for all packaged media as streaming/download delivery gathers momentum.
Well, that's what I was alluding to Robert; the course of the Blu-ray market has been full of such contradictions. Mass penetration of the 'hardware' is now there, just not mass engagement with the 'software'...Robert Crawford said:The format war plus bad economic timing hurt BD's penetration as far as a sale through market, but there aren't too many people I know that haven't watched a BD at home. They might not own a lot of them, but they have a BD player in their home which is unlike the lack of LD players within the homes of the general public.
I'll try to track it down - I read an interview with Roger Deakins where he talked a little about the IMAX version. He said he was unsure whether it'd blow up well for IMAX, and they did a few tests. First one, IMAX put it through their normal process, and it didn't look good (can't remember why). RD then supervised am upscale and it was good enough - I think he was quite impressed.FoxyMulder said:I wonder how they achieved that, upscaled i guess, i read a rumour that they are working on a new Arri 6K camera with a proper 65mm sensor thus it will give much better image quality than the rival competition which squeezes things onto smaller sensors.
I'm somewhat skeptical of arguments blaming hd-dvd/bluray's shortcomings directly on the great recession.Robert Crawford said:The format war plus bad economic timing hurt BD's penetration as far as a sale through market
Have it your way as I'm not going to get into some pseudo social-economic discussion here except to say disposable income spending was down during that recession. If you don't think so then you were living in a different world than I during those bad days.jcroy said:I'm somewhat skeptical of arguments blaming hd-dvd/bluray's shortcomings directly on the great recession.
(Hypothetically).
If bluray was released after the great recession was over (such as in 2010 or 2011), would bluray have done better?
For that matter, would bluray (or hd-dvd) have done better if it was released years earlier before the great recession (such as in 2001 or 2002)? (Assuming the patent disputes over blue lasers were settled earlier).
Except that many people will be jumping directly from DVD to 4K, which is hardly an incremental change, and that difference will be all the more noticeable on the bigger screens most people are buying now.Plus let's remember that 4K is not going to be a disc-bound format requiring significant hardware upgrade - for most people, upgrading to 4K will probably just involve switching to an appropriate steaming service, or downloading 4K movie files.Keith Cobby said:I think most consumers see blu-ray as incremental and not always worth upgrading. Whereas DVD was almost always superior to VHS and many more films/TV were made available for the first time. There are not many films released on blu-ray for the first time in comparison. These diminishing returns will carry through to 4K as far fewer consumers will want to upgrade to a new format (if available).
The Great Recession is still going on, and if it is not, then the small recession is going on; and if it is not a recession, it is very slow growth coupled with high unemployment. I work at a business that is involved with wholesale and retail sales, and I have seen first hand that discretionary income is not as plentiful as it once was. I read an article a few days ago the described how many golf courses are shutting down due to lack of business. Atlantic City is on the verge of shutting its doors. Food prices keep rising and gasoline prices are holding steady at a fairly high level. The format war and its end could not have come at a worse time. People have to make a choice as to what to spend their money on. Fanatics like us will choose media more than the average casual fan.jcroy said:I'm somewhat skeptical of arguments blaming hd-dvd/bluray's shortcomings directly on the great recession.
(Hypothetically).
If bluray was released after the great recession was over (such as in 2010 or 2011), would bluray have done better?
For that matter, would bluray (or hd-dvd) have done better if it was released years earlier before the great recession (such as in 2001 or 2002)? (Assuming the patent disputes over blue lasers were settled earlier).
Maybe you've got unlimited data, but with carriers like Verizon putting the clamps on that idea, anyone outside the hard-wired big cities and their suburbs will never see 4K streaming. The data cost will be through the roof. That, of course, assumes the FIOS/cable companies don't also make it highly expensive, in which case 4K streaming will be a (very small) niche item.Persianimmortal said:Plus let's remember that 4K is not going to be a disc-bound format requiring significant hardware upgrade - for most people, upgrading to 4K will probably just involve switching to an appropriate steaming service, or downloading 4K movie files.
Persianimmortal said:Plus let's remember that 4K is not going to be a disc-bound format requiring significant hardware upgrade - for most people, upgrading to 4K will probably just involve switching to an appropriate steaming service, or downloading 4K movie files.
No.cineMANIAC said:Is 4K being marketed primarily as a streaming-only platform?