It is currently Tue Sep 26, 2017 8:48 am

All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 376 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16  Next
Author Message
PostPosted: Wed Mar 02, 2016 5:46 pm 

Joined: Sat May 10, 2008 1:10 pm
Keep in mind that resolution is the least visible of the picture quality attributes. The advantages of the wide color gamut and HDR are a bigger deal.

It's a shame the studios didn't have the foresight to do better than 2K finishing though.


Top
 Profile  
 

PostPosted: Wed Mar 02, 2016 6:21 pm 
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jan 18, 2008 12:44 am
David M. wrote:
Keep in mind that resolution is the least visible of the picture quality attributes. The advantages of the wide color gamut and HDR are a bigger deal.

It's a shame the studios didn't have the foresight to do better than 2K finishing though.

monitor technology limitations.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Mar 03, 2016 10:57 am 
User avatar

Joined: Sun Sep 20, 2009 5:23 am
Location: Florida
The worst countries to be in if you’re in the DVD business
Quote:
Who buys or rents videos, when you can stream through Netflix and other services? With streaming video now rapidly expanding abroad, the worldwide DVD industry might be poised for collapse.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Mar 03, 2016 11:14 am 
User avatar

Joined: Tue May 25, 2010 11:26 pm
Conflating rentals with purchases seems misleading, given that the rental market has self evidently disappeared. I wish they'd separate blu-ray purchases from DVD, too, since I was under the impression the market on blu has been relatively consistent.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Mar 03, 2016 11:18 am 
User avatar

Joined: Fri Aug 11, 2006 6:20 pm
Location: Worthing
matrixschmatrix wrote:
I wish they'd separate blu-ray purchases from DVD, too, since I was under the impression the market on blu has been relatively consistent.


You can't do that with dual-format releases. Which of course is one of the reasons why they've been so attractive to some labels: they make their BD sales seem much better than they actually are!


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Mar 04, 2016 9:36 am 

Joined: Sat Dec 05, 2009 8:38 am
David M. wrote:
Keep in mind that resolution is the least visible of the picture quality attributes. The advantages of the wide color gamut and HDR are a bigger deal.

It's a shame the studios didn't have the foresight to do better than 2K finishing though.


True. Do you see though that it hardly matters?

With all the doom and gloom surrounding physical media, why launch something as vulnerable as UHD-BD, depending on so many parts of the chain to congregate? The advantages you cite will only become apparent within fairly optimal conditions. Even then, its advantages are still debatable.

I've seen Dolby Vision at the Cinema quite a few times now. And it can be awesome. It doesn't improve the films itself, unfortunately, but that's another matter. I've also seen DCP's on my other favorite cinema screen, where the contrast paled compared to my BR at home on my plasma.

The (two-fold) core of the UHD problem, as I see it: a format pushed on the market that is far from ready. See all the 2K rerenders. Which only underlines the fact that most DI's are 2K in the first place, let alone the post-chain and acquisition. While I do believe that 4K at the cinema has a lot of merit, give me solid 35mm (or up) before the usual bland digital projection, at home it makes very little sense. Especially, and then we come to the second point, how do people expect to make a viable market out of UHD-BR of something whose effect is, apparently, so darn subtle?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Mar 04, 2016 10:25 am 
User avatar

Joined: Wed Apr 29, 2009 11:13 am
It always seemed to me that the industry strategy is totally dopey and relies on expecting the success of something that wont succeed, just because flat screen and DVD sold very well.
They have seen the DVD selling well so when it wasnt anymore, they pushed HD TVs and BD. HDTVs sold very well but BD did not. Now that almost every customer has a HDTV, sales are depleting so they needed something bigger and louder to restarting the sales, and that's UHD TV. But you can't sell 4K TVs without 4K material, and since both DVD and BD arent selling much anymore, here comes UHD BD.
It's a laughable strategy but I do believe that's actually the logic behind.
The industry wants the same sales than in the early 2000s but they are doing it in a way that keeps on failing but doesnt seem to understand that.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Mar 04, 2016 11:19 am 
User avatar

Joined: Sun Sep 27, 2015 4:04 pm
Brian C wrote:
And here's the thing - I defy anyone to be able to tell the difference between 2K and 4K theatrical without prior knowledge of what you're seeing.


Actually it is very easy to spot the difference. 4K is nearly 4 times the resolution of 2K (it is literally 4 times the resolution of 1080p). The difference between 2K and 4K is more noticeable the larger the screen is, or the closer you sit to it. But believe me, it's very noticeable.

I had an opportunity this week to sit in on a 4K DI being done in HDR. They were using a Sony OLED HDR reference monitor, and the results were pretty stunning. Very bright overall image and highlights and beautiful, pure blacks with a lot of detail in the shadows. A lot of older films and many new releases are now getting HDR grades, with an eye toward the home-video market. At CES this this year, OLED TVs were all the rage. HDR and 4K are both coming to the home soon, so the old argument about dynamic range vs resolution has become moot... since both are coming simultaneously.

After sitting in on the HDR DI, I had an opportunity to see a Dolby Laser Vision 4K demo, which is basically Dolby's answer to HDR. This time I was pretty much blown away. They did a split-screen comparison between a standard Christie 4K projector (at around 1,800:1 contrast ratio) and the Christie-manufactured Dolby Laser Vision 4K projector (at 1,000,000:1 contrast).... WOW! The blacks were truly black. IE, when the screen went black during an edit, the theater was totally and completely dark. Blacks on that projector are actually totally black... no light emits from the projector.

I saw part of "The Revenant" in Dolby Vision HDR is it was jaw-dropping, especially during the scene where the search team was on horse, lit only by fire torches. :shock:

All of this is great news for both theater display (Dolby Vision for example) but also for home theater, where OLEDs are also able to display very deep blacks with an HDR gamma curve. Good things are happening in terms of gamma and DR.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Mar 04, 2016 11:40 am 
User avatar

Joined: Tue Oct 15, 2013 10:58 am
It seems that everyone agrees that a rather large screen is needed in order to appreciate the benefits of 4K. So it would behoove the manufacturers to quickly get 4K home theater projectors within the price range of 2K projectors. If there were 4K projectors around the same price point, I would be on board.

I watch movies on a 110" screen at a viewing distance of 12 feet. I can't imagine the images looking better than my current setup, but I'd love to see if 4K improved things. Then again, I don't want to rebuy movies again, especially Criterion releases. I have so many Criterion blu-rays, I get depressed just thinking about the prospect of "upgrading" them.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Mar 04, 2016 11:41 am 
User avatar

Joined: Wed Sep 16, 2009 11:58 am
Location: Chicago, IL
Great, so you saw a demo on reference-quality equipment when you knew what you were seeing. Side-by-side comps no less! I don't doubt it was stunning.

What that has to do with my point about theatrical releases, without prior knowledge of what you're seeing, is not clear.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Mar 04, 2016 11:55 am 
User avatar

Joined: Sun Sep 27, 2015 4:04 pm
When I answered that question, I was talking specifically about 4K projectors at cineplexes... it's very easy to spot the difference. The Dolby issue was a separate one. If you walk into a theater with an 80-foot screen and cannot see the difference between 2K and 4K, something is wrong. It's nearly 4 times the resolution. It's very easy to spot the difference. Can you see the difference between SD and 720p on a large screen, for example? Of course you can.

I have a Sony 4K projector at my house with a 110-inch screen and I like it a lot. I can definitely see the difference between 1080p and 4K on that projector, sitting about ten feet away from it. But 4K TVs and monitors are even better... you are able to see the resolution improvement even more clearly, when you sit near them.

The problem with all this HDR and Dobly Vision stuff is that once you see it, normal projectors and TVs look very washed out! I hope his HDR revolution will happen quickly. :D


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Mar 04, 2016 12:43 pm 
User avatar

Joined: Wed Apr 28, 2010 12:04 pm
Location: A Midland town spread and darkened into a city
Trees wrote:
...If you walk into a theater with an 80-foot screen and cannot see the difference between 2K and 4K, something is wrong. It's nearly 4 times the resolution.

Pretty sure four is still only two times more than two.

EDIT: Before you ask, 4K equals 2160p on home screens.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Mar 04, 2016 12:46 pm 
User avatar

Joined: Tue Apr 15, 2008 10:25 am
Location: SLC, UT
One dimension is twice as long but the area increases in both directions.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Mar 04, 2016 12:52 pm 
User avatar

Joined: Wed Apr 28, 2010 12:04 pm
Location: A Midland town spread and darkened into a city
swo17 wrote:
One dimension is twice as long but the area increases in both directions.

True. I think I was responding more to the "4K is four times more than 1080p" from the earlier post which, to me, implied 4,000 lines of horizontal resolution...or, I couldn't resist the obvious 2 +2 joke.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Mar 04, 2016 12:53 pm 
User avatar

Joined: Sun Sep 27, 2015 4:04 pm
Trust me, 4K is roughly 4x the resolution of 1080p and almost 4x 2K.

One way to think of it is that it takes four 1080p panels to make one UHD panel.


Last edited by Trees on Fri Mar 04, 2016 1:01 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Mar 04, 2016 1:01 pm 
User avatar

Joined: Wed Apr 28, 2010 12:04 pm
Location: A Midland town spread and darkened into a city
I knew this day would come. Two plus two no longer equals four. I love Big Brother.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Mar 04, 2016 1:08 pm 
User avatar

Joined: Tue Oct 15, 2013 10:58 am
(1920 x 1080) x 2 = (3840 x 2160)

What am I missing here?

(And I'm not trying to be jerk -- I'm actually trying to understand your statements.)


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Mar 04, 2016 1:26 pm 
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Tue Nov 02, 2004 2:45 pm
Location: Washington
You have to work in terms of area (like if you're putting in flooring):

1920 X 1080 = 2,073,600

3840 X 2160 = 8,294,440

2,073,600 X 4 = 8,294,440

(I suck at explaining math, as I've learned with "helping" my daughter, but I hope that explains the 4X thing)


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Mar 04, 2016 1:28 pm 
User avatar

Joined: Tue Oct 15, 2013 10:58 am
That's a good explanation. Thank you!


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Mar 04, 2016 1:29 pm 
User avatar

Joined: Tue Apr 15, 2008 10:25 am
Location: SLC, UT
I prefer Trees' explanation: "Trust me." This is what I would always write when a math teacher would ask me to show my work.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Mar 04, 2016 1:33 pm 
User avatar

Joined: Wed Apr 28, 2010 12:04 pm
Location: A Midland town spread and darkened into a city
This Wikipedia statement should help...

UHD has twice the horizontal and vertical resolution of the 1080p HDTV format, with four times as many pixels overall

So, the overall pixel count is what makes the "four times" assessment understandable.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Mar 04, 2016 2:14 pm 

Joined: Sat May 10, 2008 1:10 pm
Yes, the marketing people love to misuse the "four times the resolution" claim!


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Mar 04, 2016 4:20 pm 
User avatar

Joined: Sun Nov 21, 2004 12:49 am
Location: Transylvania
This image always helps me make sense of it:

Image


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Mar 04, 2016 4:22 pm 
Dot Com Dom
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jan 11, 2006 2:42 pm
I'll stick with VCD, thanks


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Mar 05, 2016 12:33 am 
User avatar

Joined: Sun Sep 27, 2015 4:04 pm
swo17 wrote:
I prefer Trees' explanation: "Trust me." This is what I would always write when a math teacher would ask me to show my work.


In all fairness, I did make an example explaining it below that. :)


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 376 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16  Next

All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group




This site is not affiliated with The Criterion Collection