I meant...TonyD said:I have no problem with my Sony bluray player.
View=TV
Play would have been BD player...(clarification...I meant an "improvement to 4K, would be not watching on a Sony LCD...")
I meant...TonyD said:I have no problem with my Sony bluray player.
Yes, it was my understanding that the original master for the 2009 release was 2K resolution, Given that, then, shouldn't the Mastered in 4K Blu-ray be a noticeable improvement, since a new 4K master had to be created for it?Eastmancolor said:Nope, standard 1080p, only with a slightly higher bit rate. As mentioned previously this is Superbit all over again.
There isn't enough room on current Blu-ray discs to hold an entire feature in 4k.
So did I, different strokes for different folks.TonyD said:I liked it and thought it was really funny.
Ditto. And, further, it was smart. (Also, surprisingly, about something.)TonyD said:I liked it and thought it was really funny.
I'm guessing you meant "The Karate Kid" which is the remake version no one has ever had a desire to see.So this is snake oil then, nothing to see until RAH does a review or something. I'm curious if they scrubbed all the grain out of Taxi Driver, I thought the current bluray of that one was pretty much perfect.Peter Neski said:gee whiz you need a 4k master for a piece of crap like The Other Guys ?
Sony/Columbia will not scrub the grain, they have been consistently good for a number of years about leaving it in, they understand the fine detail is lost when you remove the film grain, yes, even on Lowry titles, Taxi Driver's last release was taken from a 4K film scan, i bet its identical, the only exception might be Ghostbusters perhaps they have returned the film to it's original look and removed the contrast boost, i doubt they have though as i understand it was cinematographer approved, just before they died.Russell G said:I'm guessing you meant "The Karate Kid" which is the remake version no one has ever had a desire to see.So this is snake oil then, nothing to see until RAH does a review or something. I'm curious if they scrubbed all the grain out of Taxi Driver, I thought the current bluray of that one was pretty much perfect.
That's interesting, the blu ray spec doesn't use expanded colour but many want it for any new 4K format, is this marketing BS or actually real or just a simulation of expanded colour, someone needs to buy some of these discs and compare and Sony needs to release more info.Chuck Anstey said:Did you all miss why these are actually optimized for 4K TVs?
From Amazon:
*Expanded color requires xvYCC-compatible TV and Blu-ray player
Larger color space that is backwards compatible with existing TVs and players that don't know it (can't use it but doesn't break the old stuff). So these discs would have to be remastered if for nothing else than the new colorspace, assuming this isn't all pure hype.
The colours are on the original film, even simple HD camcorders can do xvYCC these days, my HD camcorder from four years back does xvYCC, i was getting confused between this and true 10 or 12 bit colour, the HDMI spec has had xvYCC in it for years so all players over the last few years can do it, most projectors for years have had it too.Persianimmortal said:As I understand it, the expanded color gamut of xvYCC only works if every step of the chain, from the original camera, through to the master, the blu-ray player, HDMI cable, and TV, all support(ed) the extended colors. Otherwise color accuracy is affected.
In other words, the principle seems to be that xvYCC allows for a wider palette for color reproduction, if those extended colors were originally captured on the film in the first place. We need an expert on film to tell us whether films were originally shot on cameras/film stock that were capable of capturing a wide enough color gamut to encompass xvYCC. I believe cameras usually shoot to the rec.709 standard, which does not fill out to the larger color gamut of xvYCC. So it seems like a marketing gimmick.
BS or SB (SuperBit).dpippel said:This whole "Mastered in 4K" thing smells very much like good old-fashioned BS.
I don't want to be a part of their "big push..."Peter Neski said:This is just part of Sony's big 4k Push,if they could have a 4k BR they would give us one,but they can't ,They want to sell their new 4k sets(which look
great,if you ask me,and not just close up) they want to get 4k out there anyway they can,they want theaters to buy their 4k projectors too
how much a difference a 4k master looks compressed to a BR over a 2k master is hard to say till these titles are out
Most titles from Sony have been scanned at 4K, i believe they then make a 2K master from which the blu ray is produced, i'm more interested in the possible benefits of a wider colour gamut, more information is needed on whether these discs have that though.Persianimmortal said:Purely from a practical perspective, it's a lose-lose situation from the consumer's point of view.
If the "mastered in 4K" material actually does provide any visible benefit (and the jury is still out on that one), who is really going to go out and re-buy movies they already own on blu-ray, on what is just a slightly upgraded 2K blu-ray, when the next real step is a genuine 4K video format?
If the "mastered in 4K" material doesn't provide any visible benefit on most people's equipment, then it's just a cynical cashing in on 4K hype just to peddle extremely expensive 4K hardware.
Either way, it only serves to create confusion for the consumer, further disillusions anyone who was thinking of upgrading from DVD to blu ("see, 4K is out already and blu-ray is obsolete!"), and will make things even worse when actual 4K content comes out in the next few years. It's amazing that after all these years, consumer electronics companies still haven't worked out that consumers want clearly-defined and well-spaced upgrade paths, not a mishmash of formats driven by marketing-based technical jargon.
very good , LOL!Robert Harris said:I don't want to be a part of their "big push..."
RAH