What's new

A Few Words About A few words about...™ 4k UHD - First Impressions (1 Viewer)

Robert Harris

Archivist
Reviewer
Senior HTF Member
Joined
Feb 8, 1999
Messages
18,890
Real Name
Robert Harris
I believe it's safe to say that between Samsung, the studios, the entities that press UHD discs, the processor manufacturers, and the public, thus far, the introduction of the 4k UHD Blu-ray format has been a veritable cluster-f**k.

Samsung does not seem to have been transparent regarding their release dates, and delivery of hardware. The studios seem to be stuck in a product logjam, and are not receiving enough product to deliver to reviewers. And one must presume that Samsung has some sort of deal with Best Buy, which confuses matters even more.

That, and seemingly tweaks are necessary at different hardware levels.

Samsung was unable to deliver a player on schedule, so I ended up going to Best Buy, which could not be picked up, but had to be ordered and shipped. At least Best Buy handled everything perfectly. Of course, that's after visiting a few of their stores and being told by at least two of their tech gurus that virtually all high end Blu-ray players will up-rez to 4k, and that there are no true 4k players.

Here's what I know thus far.

Setup seemed to be going well, until my Krell Foundation, which has 4k passthrough, and is HDMI 2.2 compliant, would not handshake.

I ended up wiring directing from the Samsung (only a single HDMI #2, for image, the other for audio) to my Sony projector, and a second connection from HDMI 1 to the Krell. Strangely, the Sony projector, a 665, only has a single HMDI 2.2 input. That worked, but I'll be chatting with Krell in the morning. Hopefully, it's something simple that I've overlooked.

The image?

Superb.

HDR adds measurable impact, and a 4k feed, even uprezzed from a 2k source at the studio, looks better than a hardware uprez.

Overall resolution, color, blacks, shadow detail, compared to the Blu-rays of Kingsman, Wild and The Martian, were superb.

I only noted a single problem. Banding in a single shot in the pre-credit sequence of Kingsman. Not good, but there may be a surmountable cause.

I have to thank Blu-ray.com's Michael Reuben, who was gracious enough to share some of his setup miseries with me in advance of my tackling it myself.

So far, early adopting of 4k is not for the weak of spirit, nor for those who frustrate easily.

But as far as image, which I've only seen on Fox product. Superb, with the exception of that single problem.

What the studios are doing that I believe is smart, is releasing the UHD along with BD product, allowing consumers to pay a bit extra to buy the UHD, presuming they'll upgrade in the future, while giving them something they can play with immediacy.

More to come, which will include comments regarding the first true 4k releases, Sicario and The Expendables 3, as well as the up-rez of Mad Max, which I'm hearing is a mixed bag.

RAH
 

Angelo Colombus

Senior HTF Member
Joined
Mar 19, 2009
Messages
3,467
Location
Chicago Area
Real Name
Angelo Colombus
Lets see...I have VHS (only a few because they were released only on vhs ), laserdisc (have over 200 mostly Criterion), dvd (have over 500 movies), short lived HD (35 movies with one Toshiba player), Blu-ray (have over 200 movies). For me I am stopping at Blu-ray which is fine with me and no longer in the mood to upgrade again to have multiple copies of one film in different formats.
 

MarkA

Second Unit
Joined
Dec 23, 1999
Messages
379
Real Name
Mark Abel
I just bought my 4k player and watched Sicario and thought it was fine, but not too different than Blu-ray on my Samsung 4k 55" set. However, my set doesn't have HDR and I am wondering whether this was worth the upgrade without it. Does Sicario have muted colors anyway? How important is HDR and is it necessary to have to see any benefits of the new format?
Thanks anyone that knows.
 

Carabimero

Senior HTF Member
Joined
Jun 9, 2008
Messages
5,207
Location
Los Angeles
Real Name
Alan
I went over and saw a friend's 4K set up. It's nice, but my eyes don't see the jump in quality that I saw from DVD to BD. I can see improvements in dynamic range more than clarity. But I think I'm stopping with BDs too. I will say this: I got the new BD of MY FAIR LADY and the trickle down from the 8K transfer definitely survived to delight me on the BD. Wow. So in that sense, I embrace the new technology, especially when 8K or 4K masters make for better BDs.
 

JoeDoakes

Senior HTF Member
Joined
Apr 1, 2009
Messages
3,483
Real Name
Ray
I believe it's safe to say that between Samsung, the studios, the entities that press UHD discs, the processor manufacturers, and the public, thus far, the introduction of the 4k UHD Blu-ray format has been a veritable cluster-f**k.

Samsung does not seem to have been transparent regarding their release dates, and delivery of hardware. The studios seem to be stuck in a product logjam, and are not receiving enough product to deliver to reviewers. And one must presume that Samsung has some sort of deal with Best Buy, which confuses matters even more.

That, and seemingly tweaks are necessary at different hardware levels.

Samsung was unable to deliver a player on schedule, so I ended up going to Best Buy, which could not be picked up, but had to be ordered and shipped. At least Best Buy handled everything perfectly. Of course, that's after visiting a few of their stores and being told by at least two of their tech gurus that virtually all high end Blu-ray players will up-rez to 4k, and that there are no true 4k players.

Here's what I know thus far.

Setup seemed to be going well, until my Krell Foundation, which has 4k passthrough, and is HDMI 2.2 compliant, would not handshake.

I ended up wiring directing from the Samsung (only a single HDMI #2, for image, the other for audio) to my Sony projector, and a second connection from HDMI 1 to the Krell. Strangely, the Sony projector, a 665, only has a single HMDI 2.2 input. That worked, but I'll be chatting with Krell in the morning. Hopefully, it's something simple that I've overlooked.

The image?

Superb.

HDR adds measurable impact, and a 4k feed, even uprezzed from a 2k source at the studio, looks better than a hardware uprez.

Overall resolution, color, blacks, shadow detail, compared to the Blu-rays of Kingsman, Wild and The Martian, were superb.

I only noted a single problem. Banding in a single shot in the pre-credit sequence of Kingsman. Not good, but there may be a surmountable cause.

I have to thank Blu-ray.com's Michael Reuben, who was gracious enough to share some of his setup miseries with me in advance of my tackling it myself.

So far, early adopting of 4k is not for the weak of spirit, nor for those who frustrate easily.

But as far as image, which I've only seen on Fox product. Superb, with the exception of that single problem.

What the studios are doing that I believe is smart, is releasing the UHD along with BD product, allowing consumers to pay a bit extra to buy the UHD, presuming they'll upgrade in the future, while giving them something they can play with immediacy.

More to come, which will include comments regarding the first true 4k releases, Sicario and The Expendables 3, as well as the up-rez of Mad Max, which I'm hearing is a mixed bag.

RAH
Starting I think with 2015 8000 (and above) Samsungs, Samsung was listing those tvs as SUHD, which is supposed to be more comparable to OLED. Mr. Harris, do you have any thought about SUHD versus UHD?
 

Robert Harris

Archivist
Reviewer
Senior HTF Member
Joined
Feb 8, 1999
Messages
18,890
Real Name
Robert Harris
I just bought my 4k player and watched Sicario and thought it was fine, but not too different than Blu-ray on my Samsung 4k 55" set. However, my set doesn't have HDR and I am wondering whether this was worth the upgrade without it. Does Sicario have muted colors anyway? How important is HDR and is it necessary to have to see any benefits of the new format?
Thanks anyone that knows.

HDR adds quite a bit, but is not necessary for many films. 55" sets are on the cusp of making a real difference. As I've said from the beginning of these discussions, with 4k, size does matter, IF one is appreciative, and highly attuned to the imagery.

If not, sitting back and viewing a 4k flat panel will add little to one's enjoyment.

Sitting half way back in a large theater, watching a film on a 40 foot screen, the difference between 2 and 4k will be minimal.

As things stand, if you feel that you'll be replacing your panel in the future, and going larger, then it's probably worth sticking with 4k.
 

Robert Harris

Archivist
Reviewer
Senior HTF Member
Joined
Feb 8, 1999
Messages
18,890
Real Name
Robert Harris
Starting I think with 2015 8000 (and above) Samsungs, Samsung was listing those tvs as SUHD, which is supposed to be more comparable to OLED. Mr. Harris, do you have any thought about SUHD versus UHD?

Panels are either OLED, or they aren't. It sounds a bit like JVC faux 4k, with pixel shift. The boxes may have the word 4k on them, but they're HD.
 

MarkA

Second Unit
Joined
Dec 23, 1999
Messages
379
Real Name
Mark Abel
HDR adds quite a bit, but is not necessary for many films. 55" sets are on the cusp of making a real difference. As I've said from the beginning of these discussions, with 4k, size does matter, IF one is appreciative, and highly attuned to the imagery.

If not, sitting back and viewing a 4k flat panel will add little to one's enjoyment.

Sitting half way back in a large theater, watching a film on a 40 foot screen, the difference between 2 and 4k will be minimal.

As things stand, if you feel that you'll be replacing your panel in the future, and going larger, then it's probably worth sticking with 4k.
Thanks Robert! I appreciate the feedback!
 

OliverK

Senior HTF Member
Joined
Feb 1, 2000
Messages
5,853
I went over and saw a friend's 4K set up. It's nice, but my eyes don't see the jump in quality that I saw from DVD to BD. I can see improvements in dynamic range more than clarity. But I think I'm stopping with BDs too. I will say this: I got the new BD of MY FAIR LADY and the trickle down from the 8K transfer definitely survived to delight me on the BD. Wow. So in that sense, I embrace the new technology, especially when 8K or 4K masters make for better BDs.

You will never again get the such a big increase in 2D picture quality of films, Blu-ray already is too good for that.
 

Carabimero

Senior HTF Member
Joined
Jun 9, 2008
Messages
5,207
Location
Los Angeles
Real Name
Alan
Speaking of the Krell, the jump cut at the end of FORBIDDEN PLANET bothered me more on BD. I noticed two or three jump cuts in the movie, but the last one is the only one that rattled me.

I wonder if the jump cuts would be even more pronounced on UHD.
 
Last edited:

Michel_Hafner

Screenwriter
Joined
Feb 28, 2002
Messages
1,351
Panels are either OLED, or they aren't. It sounds a bit like JVC faux 4k, with pixel shift. The boxes may have the word 4k on them, but they're HD.
The JVC "boxes" are not 4K. But they are definitely not HD either. I have watched real 4K material on them (Red Ray player) and the actual resolution is somewhere between 2K and 4K. 3K is not a bad guess. Will have to do for me till JVC has 4K or Sony or someone else has JVC brightness WITH JVC contrast.
UHD BD has to wait too till the "other" player is available. And Fox UHD I boycott for now. Are they kidding me? No Atmos/DTS:X soundtrack and no 3D BD for 3D movies in the package? No thanks. If they reissue with DTS:X (in case that is the reason they ignored Dolby Atmos) I will buy the reissue. The Sony titles on the other hand with Atmos: Here I come!
 

Dave H

Senior HTF Member
Joined
Aug 13, 2000
Messages
6,205
The JVC "boxes" are not 4K. But they are definitely not HD either. I have watched real 4K material on them (Red Ray player) and the actual resolution is somewhere between 2K and 4K. 3K is not a bad guess. Will have to do for me till JVC has 4K or Sony or someone else has JVC brightness WITH JVC contrast.
UHD BD has to wait too till the "other" player is available. And Fox UHD I boycott for now. Are they kidding me? No Atmos/DTS:X soundtrack and no 3D BD for 3D movies in the package? No thanks. If they reissue with DTS:X (in case that is the reason they ignored Dolby Atmos) I will buy the reissue. The Sony titles on the other hand with Atmos: Here I come!

According to Kris Deering (who is one of the most elaborate reviewers around) the new JVC e-shift resolves as much detail as the Sony 665. However, neither projector can resolve FULL 4K pixels on test patterns. He said subjectively comparing them side by side with native 4K content, both the JVC and Sony were about equal in this regard.

The Sony 1100 project can resolve true 4K as it has a very high quality lens, but that projector also has been discontinued and was priced much higher.
 

Robert Harris

Archivist
Reviewer
Senior HTF Member
Joined
Feb 8, 1999
Messages
18,890
Real Name
Robert Harris
The JVC "boxes" are not 4K. But they are definitely not HD either. I have watched real 4K material on them (Red Ray player) and the actual resolution is somewhere between 2K and 4K. 3K is not a bad guess. Will have to do for me till JVC has 4K or Sony or someone else has JVC brightness WITH JVC contrast.
UHD BD has to wait too till the "other" player is available. And Fox UHD I boycott for now. Are they kidding me? No Atmos/DTS:X soundtrack and no 3D BD for 3D movies in the package? No thanks. If they reissue with DTS:X (in case that is the reason they ignored Dolby Atmos) I will buy the reissue. The Sony titles on the other hand with Atmos: Here I come!

They're HD with a pixel shift, which seems to take down, and make the pixels less obvious.
 

Konstantinos

Senior HTF Member
Joined
Jan 26, 2014
Messages
2,939
Real Name
Konstantinos
I went over and saw a friend's 4K set up. It's nice, but my eyes don't see the jump in quality that I saw from DVD to BD.

yes, I would expect that. I also agree that you don't see the difference you saw between DVD and Bluray.
I went to a shop and the people there showed us a 4K TV and they had to use a magnifying glass to show us the difference between this and the regular HD TV.

Since I'm not watching my films in front of the screen with a magnifying glass, I'm gonna stop at Bluray too.
 

Robert Harris

Archivist
Reviewer
Senior HTF Member
Joined
Feb 8, 1999
Messages
18,890
Real Name
Robert Harris
According to Kris Deering (who is one of the most elaborate reviewers around) the new JVC e-shift resolves as much detail as the Sony 665. However, neither projector can resolve FULL 4K pixels on test patterns. He said subjectively comparing them side by side with native 4K content, both the JVC and Sony were about equal in this regard.

The Sony 1100 project can resolve true 4K as it has a very high quality lens, but that projector also has been discontinued and was priced much higher.

I'd have to disagree with Kris, who I respect immensely. And yes, the Achilles heel of the 665 is the glass. I'd love to be able to replace.

RAH
 

Robert Harris

Archivist
Reviewer
Senior HTF Member
Joined
Feb 8, 1999
Messages
18,890
Real Name
Robert Harris
yes, I would expect that. I also agree that you don't see the difference you saw between DVD and Bluray.
I went to a shop and the people there showed us a 4K TV and they had to use a magnifying glass to show us the difference between this and the regular HD TV.

Since I'm not watching my films in front of the screen with a magnifying glass, I'm gonna stop on Bluray too.

Unless you're sitting three feet from the screen or have other objectives in mind, I'd agree with you.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Sign up for our newsletter

and receive essential news, curated deals, and much more







You will only receive emails from us. We will never sell or distribute your email address to third party companies at any time.

Latest Articles

Forum statistics

Threads
357,879
Messages
5,145,173
Members
144,503
Latest member
nalandaretreat
Recent bookmarks
0
Top