Support NeoGAF

[DieH@rd]

TWICE: What’s the status on the development of an Ultra HD spec for the Blu-ray Disc format?

Parsons: The BDA recently approved the addition of 4K/UHD to the Blu-ray Disc specifications, and the effort to get this done is moving forward in earnest. It’s too soon to know any of the details yet, as this all needs to be sorted out by the BDA technical groups. But we are excited to have a decision in hand, and are looking forward to sharing more news about it once the specification process has been completed.

TWICE: Does it look like this will be a fast process?

Matsuda: The technical group working on the specification includes representatives from the BDA’s board of director companies, so we have CE manufacturers and studios working side by side to complete the spec … As with the original specs, we need to make sure that we will deliver 4K/UHD performance that’s second to none, as this is what everyone will expect from Blu-ray.

This means not just looking at delivering the requisite number of pixels, but at the range of features that contribute to the overall consumer experience – factors such as high dynamic range, bit depth, color gamut, content protection and mobility and digital bridge opportunities that encourage content ownership and collection and enable flexible enjoyment of that content in mobile environments. We’re looking at the entire range and will be prepared to talk about those features as the specification approaches completion.

This wont come soon [probably not in 2014], but it's gonna come. They will surely use HEVC codec [h265, 50% more efficient than h264], and maybe even push more than 2 layers on bluray discs. This is a good thing. More standardized content delivery options, the better.

Spoiler

And video player manufacturers will be MORE THAN HAPPY to sell you new versions of bluray players. Hollywood will have not one, but two more additional SKUs of films to sell [UHD/UHD 3D].

more @ http://www.twice.com/magazine-issue...sc-association-4k-ultra-hd-blu-ray-way/109597

 

[sfedai0]

Time to sell my BD collection.

 

[Sons Of Anarchy]

There will never be enough 4K content to justify the price tag of the hardware. Only company backing 4k content at the moment is SONY and they have only released a handful of movies on blu-ray.

 

[Anth0ny]

There will never be enough 4K content to justify the price tag of the hardware. Only company backing 4k content at the moment is SONY and they have only released a handful of movies on blu-ray.

Aren't they not even true 4K?

 

[BadAss2961]

There will never be enough 4K content to justify the price tag of the hardware. Only company backing 4k content at the moment is SONY and they have only released a handful of movies on blu-ray.

Isn't Naughty America on board now too?

 

[See You Next Wednesday]

Aren't they not even true 4K?

Yup, 1080p resolution, just "remastered" for 4k.

 

[LordCanti]

There will never be enough 4K content to justify the price tag of the hardware. Only company backing 4k content at the moment is SONY and they have only released a handful of movies on blu-ray.

A lot of content is shot in 4K now from what I understand. Some of the movies shot on...I want to say 35mm? Film will also benefit from the increased resolution.

I wouldn't buy a 4K TV this year, or next year probably (until that HDR standard is adopted and there's some sort of agreement on bit depth and such). Honestly I'd still probably wait to see what happens with OLED.

 

[teh_pwn]

I'll be streaming 8K by the time this stuff hits. Google Fiber.

 

[Sons Of Anarchy]

I'll be streaming 8K by the time this stuff hits. Google Fiber.

That's the other thing the industy is trying to push 8k now so who the hell wants 4k when you can have 8k ?

 

[jett]

Aren't most digital intermediates 2K by the by? I'm looking forward to these comparisons...

I'll be streaming 8K by the time this stuff hits. Google Fiber.

And what exactly will you be streaming at 8K?

 

[Radec]

There will never be enough 4K content to justify the price tag of the hardware. Only company backing 4k content at the moment is SONY and they have only released a handful of movies on blu-ray.

Because 4K is still a baby. It'll grow over the years.

Those words of yours are what most people said about Bluray/HDDVD during its first year.

 

[Valkyr Junkie]

That's the other thing the industy is trying to push 8k now so who the hell wants 4k when you can have 8k ?

The problem with 8k is that there is practically no content available aside from demo pieces and 70mm/IMAX film. With 4k every 35mm film can provide that resolution, as well as a few newer digital movies shot at 4k and with a 4k workflow (a lot of movies shot on 4k cameras were edited at 2k reolution). 4k really only leaves out digital films of the early 21st century whereas 8k leaves out just about everyone.

 

[scarybore]

There will never be enough 4K content to justify the price tag of the hardware. Only company backing 4k content at the moment is SONY and they have only released a handful of movies on blu-ray.

Never is too definitive, it will just take time like with all new formats.

Isn't Naughty America on board now too?

Considering the low bitrate of NA's 1080p videos, I dread to see what they are using for 4K.

 

[teh_pwn]

And what exactly will you be streaming at 8K?

Upsampled 240p youtube

But seriously 4K is like the next 720p. 8K is a good place to stop at least until human eyes are augmented.

 

[entremet]

Which no one will buy.

 

[Sons Of Anarchy]

Never is too definitive, it will just take time like with all new formats.



Considering the low bitrate of NA's 1080p videos, I dread to see what they are using for 4K.

True, I should have used a better word instead of "never"

 

[teh_pwn]

And if I were to stream 4K/8K, I'm going to use an overclocked x86 HTPC because I still think HD devices have the most ridiculous laggy UI with their pentium and ARM CPUs running on poorly implemented Java apps.

 

[JoshuaJSlone]

3D was added to Blu-ray, even higher resolutions are being added to Blu-ray, what about higher frame rates at the same time? Last I knew it wasn't possible to have, say, a version of the Hobbit movies that was both 3D and 48fps.

 

[LordCanti]

I'll be streaming 8K by the time this stuff hits. Google Fiber.

I've said it before in 4k/8k threads: We're going to be the only people in NA that are actually capable of watching 4k/8k content that isn't on a disc (at an acceptable bitrate).

If Google actually builds here like they promised anyway.

 

[teh_pwn]

I've said it before in 4k/8k threads: We're going to be the only people in NA that are actually capable of watching 4k/8k content that isn't on a disc (at an acceptable bitrate).

If Google actually builds here like they promised anyway.

I think the networks will burst and any major city (ie, top 30 cities in US by metro population) will have fiber and 5G data everywhere. At least that's the hype with the internet of things. It will probably be oversold and become a tech bubble, but have very meaningful impact on society much like the internet did. It's the 1994 of the internet of things right now.

And it won't just be Google. Some newcomers will show up and some of the old teleco will "me too".

 

[NekoFever]

A lot of classic movies that have been given expensive remasters were done in 8K. I know there's an 8K version of The Wizard of Oz that was made when they were creating the Blu-ray. Lawrence of Arabia was too, although it may only have been scanned at 8K and remastered at 4K.

 

[CadetMahoney]

how about making 60fps an option, instead of this 23.976 garbage

framerates > resolution

 

[teh_pwn]

A lot of classic movies that have been given expensive remasters were done in 8K. I know there's an 8K version of The Wizard of Oz that was made when they were creating the Blu-ray. Lawrence of Arabia was too, although it may only have been scanned at 8K and remastered at 4K.

Hm, this is interesting. In the future there may be a gap between late 1990s and late 2000s where picture quality is worse because films moved from high resolution film to low resolution digital.

 

[Fusebox]

4K discs, now with twice the amount of unskippable legal disclaimers and trailers at the start of every film!

 

[killertofu]

how about making 60fps an option, instead of this 23.976 garbage

framerates > resolution

Don't want my movies lookin like day time dramas

 

[entremet]

how about making 60fps an option, instead of this 23.976 garbage

framerates > resolution

Looks terrible. This ain't video games.

 

[Madness]

Let's be honest, it wouldn't be blu-ray, it would be an entirely new format.

That being said, whatever they're working on, I'd appreciate if they kept an eye on 8K as well. Just so that it is future proofed in a sense. Internet infrastructure supporting mass streaming of HD content hasnt really materialized as people thought, so it would be nice to get say 4+ hours of 4K video, with 7.1 or 9.1 audio on a single disc.

 

[CassidyIzABeast]

3D was added to Blu-ray, even higher resolutions are being added to Blu-ray, what about higher frame rates at the same time? Last I knew it wasn't possible to have, say, a version of the Hobbit movies that was both 3D and 48fps.

HDMI 2.0 spec should allow the triple dip 48fps/3D Hobbit bluray to happen sometime in the future.

 

[angular graphics]

how about making 60fps an option, instead of this 23.976 garbage

framerates > resolution

No such content being made to support it.

 

[nomis]

No such content being made to support it.

AHBUDAR 2

Spoiler

, AHBUDAR 3, AHBUDAR 4

 

[Mudkips]

I'm all for resolution increases, but I want 60 fps, with 120 fps for 3D (60 fps per eye), please. And how about a decent color depth or how about they stop subsampling chroma for no fucking reason?

Most panels and sets can in the wild today can benefit from 60 fps content and from full color resolution. Many displays do native 10 or 12 bit processing as well, even if they physically only display 8 (or less for shitty TN panels) bit color physically.

 

[Foaloal]

What resolution does Pixar render their movies at?
If it's significantly less than 4K, I wonder how long until they could render at that resolution?
And how long until they could render at 4K

Spoiler

in 3D

?

 

[Branduil]

how about making 60fps an option, instead of this 23.976 garbage

framerates > resolution

This.

 

[TAJ]

Aren't most digital intermediates 2K by the by? I'm looking forward to these comparisons...

Yes, and even the 4K ones are often loaded with 2K effects shots. Someone mentioned Spider-Man 2. All the graphics work in that movie is 2K.
Even some pretty recent theatrical stuff is forever limited to below 4K because of what is what shot with. Mockingjay isn't even out yet and it's cropped from 2880×2160.

 

[JordanN]

What resolution does Pixar render their movies at?
If it's significantly less than 4K, I wonder how long until they could render at that resolution?
And how long until they could render at 4K

Spoiler

in 3D

?

Toy Story 1, A Bug's Life and Monsters Inc were 1536 x 922

Cars was their first 2k movie (2048 x 1080).

Edit: Ignore the 10x number. It was for ray tracing that Cars used, not the resolution. My mistake.

 

[hodayathink]

Considering the low bitrate of NA's 1080p videos, I dread to see what they are using for 4K.

12mbps.

Yeah, it's that bad.

 

[mrklaw]

How about proper 4:4:4 chroma while we're at it?

 

[DBT85]

I thought they couldn't press disks with more than two layers or did they get over that hurdle?

I welcome my H.265 overlord.

Yes, and even the 4K ones are often loaded with 2K effects shots. Someone mentioned Spider-Man 2. All the graphics work in that movie is 2K.
Even some pretty recent theatrical stuff is forever limited to below 4K because of what is what shot with. Mockingjay isn't even out yet and it's cropped from 2880×2160.

Weren't Star Wars 2 and 3 also shot digitally on 1080 cameras?

 

[Foaloal]

Toy Story 1, A Bug's Life and Monsters Inc were 1536 x 922

Cars was their first 2k movie (2048 x 1080). It took 10x more power to render than their previous resolution.

Ah, thanks for the solid info.

I guess it will be quite a while before we see 4K computer graphics movies.

Oh nonono, you missed the edit. The 10x figure was for ray tracing, not the resolution. I got that mixed up.

Oh.

 

[GameAddict411]

will any of the next gen consoles support this in the future?

 

[JordanN]

Ah, thanks for the solid info.

I guess it will be quite a while before we see 4K computer graphics movies.

Oh nonono, you missed the edit. The 10x figure was for ray tracing, not the resolution. I got that mixed up.

 

[TAJ]

Weren't Star Wars 2 and 3 also shot digitally on 1080 cameras?

They were. That's not what I meant by recent, though.
But now that you mention it the OP of the last thread like this was holding out for Speed Racer 4K and that's 1,920x1080, too.

 

[mrklaw]

I thought they couldn't press disks with more than two layers or did they get over that hurdle?

I welcome my H.265 overlord.



Weren't Star Wars 2 and 3 also shot digitally on 1080 cameras?

BDXL is 4 layers I think! for a total of 100GB. But for some reason it's a writable format, not used for BD movies. That suggests that home machines are capable of reading and writing 4 layers,so why aren't they adopted for movies?

My guess is that, although they can be directly written by a home machine, it is difficult to mass produce - you'd be pressing 4 separate layers and sandwiching then together so that could be problematic.

 

[DBT85]

BDXL is 4 layers I think! for a total of 100GB. But for some reason it's a writable format, not used for BD movies. That suggests that home machines are capable of reading and writing 4 layers,so why aren't they adopted for movies?

My guess is that, although they can be directly written by a home machine, it is difficult to mass produce - you'd be pressing 4 separate layers and sandwiching then together so that could be problematic.

If I recall it was indeed due to a problem manufacturing disks with more than two pressed layers. Making multiple layers that can be burned is a different process which they managed. Obviously mass production of content needs to be pressed, not burned.

Also I think the BDXL 4 layer disks go up to 128GB for write once, 100GB is for RW.

I also believe Sony and Panasonic were working together on a new disk format with 300GB capacities due for 2015, but primarily that's for enterprise level storage rather than consumer.

 

[Mr. Wonderful]

BDXL is 4 layers I think! for a total of 100GB. But for some reason it's a writable format, not used for BD movies. That suggests that home machines are capable of reading and writing 4 layers,so why aren't they adopted for movies?

My guess is that, although they can be directly written by a home machine, it is difficult to mass produce - you'd be pressing 4 separate layers and sandwiching then together so that could be problematic.

Blu-rays are also capable of around 33GB per layer, rather than 25, though I'm not sure if that has ever materialized in consumer devices.

 

[Futureman]

why can't they just launch a bunch of bad ass satellites so we can have ubiquitous 5G streaming internet all over the globe? Fast enough to stream 4K without sweating.

 

[alr1ght]

What will they call real 4k (meaning 4000 lines of horizontal resolution)?

 

[Metalingus5150]

Didn't someone get very high capacity discs to run on the PS3 a while back?

 

[nhlducks35]

Yes, and even the 4K ones are often loaded with 2K effects shots. Someone mentioned Spider-Man 2. All the graphics work in that movie is 2K.
Even some pretty recent theatrical stuff is forever limited to below 4K because of what is what shot with. Mockingjay isn't even out yet and it's cropped from 2880×2160.

Yeah, I believe Gravity was shot in the same resolution. Kind of a shame, wished the whole movie was shot in IMAX.

 

[hodayathink]

Edit: Nevermind. Misread.