UHD Are There Going To Be Ulta HD Blu Rays For Ultra HD TV (1 Viewer)

[Garysb]

From Deadline.com
Are You Ready For “Ultra HD” TV?
By DAVID LIEBERMAN, Executive Editor | Thursday October 18, 2012 @ 5:54pm EDTTags: Consumer Electronics Association, Ultra HD
That’s now the official name for the next generation of television sets that will offer so-called 4K images — 8M pixels of resolution — the Consumer Electronics Association just announced. “Ultra HD is the next natural step forward in display technologies, offering consumers an incredibly immersive viewing experience with outstanding new levels of picture quality,” CEA chief Gary Shapiro says. “This new terminology and the recommended attributes will help consumers navigate the marketplace to find the TV that best meets their needs.” The trade organization’s CEA Ultra HD Working Group says that Ultra High Definition TVs, monitors and projectors must offer at least 3,840 active pixels horizontally and 2,160 vertically with an aspect ratio of 16 X 9. To secure an official “Ultra HD” endorsement, devices also must have at least one digital input that can accept 4K video without having to up-convert the signal. CEA says it expects Ultra HD televisions to be prominent at its January trade show in Las Vegas where manufacturers unveil their hottest new consumer electronics gadgets.

 

[Ethan Riley]

They're barely getting people used to 1080p and now they're worrying about 4000p?

 

[Worth]

Unless you have a serious front projection system, I don't really see the benefit of 4K for home theatre. Even on a 50' screen in the cinema, the difference between 2K and 4K is extremely subtle at normal viewing distances.
And given that the studios are reluctant to release anything but the newest titles in blu-ray, I can't see them being enthusiastic about yet another video format.

 

[TravisR]

They're barely getting people used to 1080p and now they're worrying about 4000p?

I think that, like the switch to HDTV, this upgrade will take many years to actually occur. I'd be surprised if Ultra HD was in the home of the average person by 2020 or even 2025.

 

[lukejosephchung]

Considering that 4k screens and projectors were already being demonstrated by the major manufacturers in last January's CES, I'll be very surprised if there isn't some type of prototype 4k disc player rolled out as the ultra-HD successor to blu-ray. However, I wouldn't expect this to be available in stores until 4th quarter of 2013 at the earliest...

 

[dargo]

I bet that the 4k displays will be a push to do passive 3D at 1080p. Lots of movies are scanned at 2K they would need to be rescanned 4K or higher. True 4K at home is years away. Buy now and you'll be watching 1080p scaled up to 4K

 

[cafink]

They're barely getting people used to 1080p and now they're worrying about 4000p?

4k is actually 2160p. "1080p" refers to vertical resolution, and "4k" refers to horizontal resolution.

 

[Maggi Magg]

I simply don't see Studios release a movie in this resolution.

 

[Ethan Riley]

4k is actually 2160p. "1080p" refers to vertical resolution, and "4k" refers to horizontal resolution.

So twice the resolution? I don't know about the rest of you...blu ray works for me. Could it be better? Obviously. But i have no desire to recompile a home video collection yet again. I probably said the same thing when dvd came out, but...

 

[schan1269]

If "the truth" is told by everybody...
Most movies that were scanned for BD have already been scanned for 4k, and some even for 8k.
The "current gold standard" for 1080P picture is Baraka. You can all cry and whine about The Dark Knight all you want. Watch Baraka-Remastered on a 1080P plasma/DLP/D-ILA(if you have a LCD, don't bother with the Remaster) and that is the ultimate.
The scan used for it was "dumbed down" to 1080P.
By the way, Baraka's 8K scan was done in 2008.

 

[lukejosephchung]

Originally Posted by Maggi Magg /t/324563/are-there-going-to-be-ulta-hd-blu-rays-for-ultra-hd-tv#post_3990931
I simply don't see Studios release a movie in this resolution.

The recent "Lawrence Of Arabia" 50th Anniversary restoration was scanned at 8k and restored at 4k...and shown theatrically at that resolution on Oct 4th!!! This would be one of the first titles out of the starting gate for Sony if the new format were to be announced!!!

 

[Steve Tannehill]

I see Ultra HD as a non-starter. The current displays are ghastly expensive, and the last time I checked the only commercial 4K release cost $300 for a hard disk version and $100 for a compressed USB stick of a 50-minute movie. There is no current optical media that can hold a movie in 4K, unless it is heavily compressed. Then, what's the point?
1080P looks fine to my eyes on a 73-inch DLP RPTV. At the distance I sit from it, there will be no benefit from doubling the resolution to 2160P.
And I don't see myself repurchasing my blu-ray collection.

 

[lukejosephchung]

Originally Posted by Steve Tannehill /t/324563/are-there-going-to-be-ulta-hd-blu-rays-for-ultra-hd-tv#post_3990960
I see Ultra HD as a non-starter. The current displays are ghastly expensive, and the last time I checked the only commercial 4K release cost $300 for a hard disk version and $100 for a compressed USB stick of a 50-minute movie. There is no current optical media that can hold a movie in 4K, unless it is heavily compressed. Then, what's the point?
1080P looks fine to my eyes on a 73-inch DLP RPTV. At the distance I sit from it, there will be no benefit from doubling the resolution to 2160P.
And I don't see myself repurchasing my blu-ray collection.

If I recall correctly, Steve, Sony announced six months ago a higher-capacity 5-inch optical disc successor to blu-ray with a dual-layer storage limit of 128 Gigabytes...more than double that of what's currently available, so it's not out of the realm of commercial possibility...

 

[Steve Tannehill]

From 2010: http://www.ign.com/articles/2010/07/26/sony-developing-successor-to-blu-ray
New laser tech, could lead to a terabyte per disc.

 

[Scott Calvert]

So twice the resolution?

4x

 

[schan1269]

And you know...if 4k or even 8k takes off...
You know there will be ICT all over it. Those who "stream" won't have access to it. Can you imagine the "internet providers" cries over bandwidth issues???

 

[lukejosephchung]

Originally Posted by schan1269 /t/324563/are-there-going-to-be-ulta-hd-blu-rays-for-ultra-hd-tv#post_3990971
And you know...if 4k or even 8k takes off...
You know there will be ICT all over it. Those who "stream" won't have access to it. Can you imagine the "internet providers" cries over bandwidth issues???

Which is precisely why physical media still plays a critical role in making 4k hi-def commercially viable in the home...just my two cents...

 

[Vincent_P]

If "the truth" is told by everybody...
Most movies that were scanned for BD have already been scanned for 4k, and some even for 8k....

I don't know that "most movies" are now scanned at 4K. In fact, most modern theatrical features are still finished via 2K DIs, and this includes movies shot with 4K REDs and even the 5K RED Epic.
Vincent

 

[schan1269]

Well, first...
A movie SHOT on a digital camera doesn't need to be SCANNED INTO THE DIGITAL REALM.
Only those movies shot on film do. Pretty much EVERY 65mm movie has been scanned at 4 or 8k. (if you doubt that read up on Galt)
Ben Hur was scanned at 8k. So were the "vast majority" of the "epic" movies.
Part of the "great myth" is that pixels have NOTHING to do with resolution. People interchange pixel and resolution, or even say "This has X pixels of resolution"...

 

[DaveF]

4x

twice the linear resolution. Four times the total pixel count
As Sam alludes to, we might be better off with higher dynamic range and better absolute black levels than getting more pixels.