Wag
Member
http://hexus.net/ce/news/audio-visual/79333-ultra-hd-blu-ray-specs-unveiled-4k-hdr-support/?
Sweet. I'll be buying one of these when I have my new 4k TV, hopefully it has all the 4k streaming services built in.
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Ultra HD Blu-Ray specs unveiled with 4K, HDR support
- Thread starter Wag
- Start date
- Status
http://hexus.net/ce/news/audio-visual/79333-ultra-hd-blu-ray-specs-unveiled-4k-hdr-support/?
Sweet. I'll be buying one of these when I have my new 4k TV, hopefully it has all the 4k streaming services built in.
BocoDragon
or, How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Realize This Assgrab is Delicious
Must support Video CD?
WTF does 1993 Hong Kong still exist out there, or something?
WTF does 1993 Hong Kong still exist out there, or something?
Cow Mengde
Banned
Yes it does. A lot of Chinese still use VCDs. That or a DVD crammed with VCD data.
Various Artists
Banned
Hopefully it comes out at a decent price point. I have a 4k tv and want the player but not if its going to be $1000 like when Blu Ray came out.
BocoDragon
or, How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Realize This Assgrab is Delicious
I'm no expert, but it doesn't seem like this new disc format requires completely new technologies like Blu-Ray and DVD did? Maybe they can start the prices off more reasonably?
Assuming the quotes are correct, it's good to know this unit's specs can be assumed to be near final. That wasn't clear at the unveiling since the spec is known to have not been finalized.
Though lol at whoever wrote the article.
Lol what's that?
Anyway ... I welcome our HDR overlords.
Though lol at whoever wrote the article.
Lol what's that?
Anyway ... I welcome our HDR overlords.
I doubt that's ever going to happen with how poorly it plays with refresh rates on TVs. You're better off hoping that HFR filmmaking graduates to 60 fps.
Are there even any TVs that support 144Hz?
Or that TVs support G-Sync, maybe?
Is nVidia equipped for a venture like that?
As someone that has a UHD 4K TV (I love it), I will get one. But I wonder what the price will be? If these are over $1 grand, I'm out. I can wait for players to drop in price, as they almost always do eventually.
Honestly, the picture on 4K TV's look good enough, that I'm not racing to get 4K content, if the price is going to be unrealistic.
Honestly, the picture on 4K TV's look good enough, that I'm not racing to get 4K content, if the price is going to be unrealistic.
Honestly I'm prepared for disappointment. That framerate seems to be an oversight of the Rec 2020 spec as defined in the UHD format proposal:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rec._2020
Seems you need to jump up to 60, which sucks since we'd have higher bitrates to play with if the framerate was kept down.
I can only assume it was left out since it relies on 240Hz displays to be practical. While TVs can use 2:3 pulldown for 24fps content, the math for 48fps on a 60Hz set just doesn't work out. If you find current telecine judder annoying ... that would be appalling. Unfortunately they are forced to respect backwards compatibility here. While I'd love to see them offer special editions or combo packs that have 24 and 48, I can only assume that would be way too niche and confusing for pleebs.
It's too bad the UHD alliance wasn't pushing for 120Hz displays as a minimum. Then we wouldn't have to worry about this. 2:3 could be used ... and if you have a 240Hz display, you could go native.
AMD was crowing about some 'freesync' thing they have that conforms to already open and available standards. I guess if the TV manufacturers cared enough they could club together and implement that.
They might prefer to hide the judder with some awful motion processing technique instead....
Unknown Soldier
Member
100 GB discs. Ultra BD-R is going to be a beast.
Support for up to Rec.2020 is not surprising, nor is the fact that it's not mandated. Rec.2020 is even wider than DCI after all and guess what, movies are made for DCI color space because you know that's the standard for digital cinema. None of the 2015 TVs at CES even hinted at full coverage of Rec.2020, the closest was Samsung's QD sets which promised full coverage of DCI. Actually covering all of Rec.2020 would require much more expensive TVs than the manufacturers would be willing to produce because no one would buy them.
The push for HDR is a bit surprising since dynamic range is not generally something modern TVs excel at but I guess it's the new 3D. I hope it works out better than 3D did, because the public ignored 3D so hard even though it's so awesome.
Films only run at 24fps, with a recent push for 48fps HFR. There wouldn't be any reason to include 120fps in the Ultra BD spec, so it's obviously not included.
Either way, early adopters of 4K TVs are looking pretty golden here, they might miss out on HDR encoding but otherwise they should have no problems playing back Ultra BD. They've been enjoying 4K all this time too in things like PC gaming, so it's win-win for them.
Support for up to Rec.2020 is not surprising, nor is the fact that it's not mandated. Rec.2020 is even wider than DCI after all and guess what, movies are made for DCI color space because you know that's the standard for digital cinema. None of the 2015 TVs at CES even hinted at full coverage of Rec.2020, the closest was Samsung's QD sets which promised full coverage of DCI. Actually covering all of Rec.2020 would require much more expensive TVs than the manufacturers would be willing to produce because no one would buy them.
The push for HDR is a bit surprising since dynamic range is not generally something modern TVs excel at but I guess it's the new 3D. I hope it works out better than 3D did, because the public ignored 3D so hard even though it's so awesome.
Films only run at 24fps, with a recent push for 48fps HFR. There wouldn't be any reason to include 120fps in the Ultra BD spec, so it's obviously not included.
Either way, early adopters of 4K TVs are looking pretty golden here, they might miss out on HDR encoding but otherwise they should have no problems playing back Ultra BD. They've been enjoying 4K all this time too in things like PC gaming, so it's win-win for them.
Essentially the same laser assembly, and the HDMI Tx boards will be in mass production since the HDMI 2.0 spec has been ratified for a while. While I'm sure they're pricier, it shouldn't be too much and should come down quickly.
The only other thing would be h.265 decoders, but those should come down relatively fast as well since they're already in new 4K displays. Though I'm not sure if they may need some changes since it's unclear if the existing ones support all the HDR extensions, etc that are part of this spec?
That said, I expect early units will certainly be high margin for a bit because they can.
They have to consider backwards compatibility though :\
Zombie James
Banned
Bring on the 4K content.
More importantly, does it have MP3 support?
Serious reply: Don't see this getting much traction though, BD had a hard time as it was already, now another competing format that they'd have to print discs for. Depends if they're actually going to push for it for a large market, or just have it out there for the niche enthusiasts, which then begs the question, how much will film distributers invest to get the new discs out, as I suppose they'd need new plants, or modify existing plants to print these new discs, and that won't be free.
diggmcbadass
Member
It depends if the publishers put in the work. Digital movies are shot at high resolutions, and 35mm transfers can provide high ass quality if they do it right. Lazy transfers will probably also exist.
Just to point out for the other posters ... even DCI is a significant expansion compared to the Rec 709 (and lower in many sets) gamut we've been stuck with since DVD. People should certainly see a more realistic image in terms of color. Especially given how common greens are in the real world.100 GB discs. Ultra BD-R is going to be a beast.
Support for up to Rec.2020 is not surprising, nor is the fact that it's not mandated. Rec.2020 is even wider than DCI after all and guess what, movies are made for DCI color space because you know that's the standard for digital cinema. None of the 2015 TVs at CES even hinted at full coverage of Rec.2020, the closest was Samsung's QD sets which promised full coverage of DCI. Actually covering all of Rec.2020 would require much more expensive TVs than the manufacturers would be willing to produce because no one would buy them.
The push for HDR is a bit surprising since dynamic range is not generally something modern TVs excel at but I guess it's the new 3D. I hope it works out better than 3D did, because the public ignored 3D so hard even though it's so awesome.
Films only run at 24fps, with a recent push for 48fps HFR. There wouldn't be any reason to include 120fps in the Ultra BD spec, so it's obviously not included.
Either way, early adopters of 4K TVs are looking pretty golden here, they might miss out on HDR encoding but otherwise they should have no problems playing back Ultra BD. They've been enjoying 4K all this time too in things like PC gaming, so it's win-win for them.
Of course I'm hoping Rec 2020 sets are available within the next few years.
They do, and it's pretty incredible in the demo footage. But I've also seen hollywood content in 4k demoed -- specifically, The Amazing Spiderman -- and it wasn't a substantial gain over 1080p.
I think it'll be awesome when the BBC Natural History unit starts shooting in 4K.
I'm done with physical media and would rather just stream every damn thing, but always glad to see progress marching on.
BocoDragon
or, How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Realize This Assgrab is Delicious
I don't think including support for those formats really keeps them alive, so much as it moves those who are attached to those formats toward Blu-ray and UHD...
BoboBrazil
Member
As long as content makers keep charging a premium for blu-ray it won't.
TAJ
Darkness cannot drive out darkness; only light can do that. Hate cannot drive out hate; only love can do that.
Disappointed. They should have left it in the oven longer.
Dual layer is barely more storage than current Blu. Triple is still pretty weak, but I could be ok with that amount, I guess. Too bad no one is going to use them for cost reasons.
Dual layer is barely more storage than current Blu. Triple is still pretty weak, but I could be ok with that amount, I guess. Too bad no one is going to use them for cost reasons.
These new discs should require minimal changes to fabrication lines. The dot pitch is the same range since they're using the same laser, and BDXL has been around so it's not like they haven't fabbed discs beyond 2 layers. I believe the packing method is a bit different, but I wouldn't expect major yield issues. Changes to disc materials and design is what ultimately impacts fabrication - and there's no indication of changes here. They made decisions with the original BD specification so the move to UHD would be viable. It cost them up front, but they can reap the benefits now. It was always intended to be able to support more data.
Be thankful HD-DVD didn't win. They were kicking the can down the road by staying with a red laser, and it would basically be impossible to bring out a blue laser now in the current market. With competition from streaming, studios and CE's know the physical media market is smaller than the DVD days. The significant R&D for BluRay is already a sunk cost though, so they can make this transition without major risk. The BDA was very long-term in their design.
Had they been stuck with a red laser and required to do that transition now though ... yeah, it would be ugly ... or simply not happen at all.
[EDIT]
I must be high. Though in terms of fabrication the point stands, just not for the reason I incorrectly remembered.
HD-DVD did use a blue laser (same 405nm as BD), however they went with a disc that is essentially unchanged from DVD-9. At the time, it was advertised as a benefit since DVD disc fabricators could relatively easily and cheaply modify their lines to support it. However it limited it in terms of layer capacity and ultimately the number layers.
Nerdkiller
Membeur
Uhhh...I don't recall HD DVD ever incorporating a red laser as part of its specifications.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HD_DVD
Are you arguing for content or as a storage medium?
While I do think they should have went up to 4, you have to remember they're using a new codec here. So in terms of image quality versus regular BD, we shouldn't really see a drop off from lack of bitrate. And remember, they don't need to scale up the audio's overhead by nearly as much as the video (object based audio like Atmos doesn't linearly scale).
Recent Attenborough documentary Life Story was shot in 4K.
Stumpokapow
listen to the mad man
I feel like the content availability problem is going to be pretty serious, for a variety of reasons:
1. General shift towards streaming has led to a collapse in physical media sales, particularly in some sectors (TV-on-DVD is in freefall). This is not likely to change. Streaming, meanwhile, has not really made full use of 1080p as a resolution, and I'd like to see higher bitrates and better codecs at 1080p than carrying forward existing limitations to higher resolutions. Just personally. So there's not a lot of incentive for studios to be producing the initial content.
2. Although a lot of stuff got a Blu-Ray release, some didn't, because consumer adoption (either in install base or in purchasing pace) never quite reached the peak fervor of DVD. This is not likely to change.
3. Although a lot of stuff benefitted immensely from B-R release, some didn't, because the cost of doing restorations for lower quality content were too high. This is especially visible in companies like Disney that have really old content. The difference between their initial top-quality restorations, which look breathtaking on Blu, and some of their low tier stuff like Sword and the Stone which is basically just a DNR-plagued transfer of a relatively poor master originally made for the DVD version, is immense. The gap between the content that's "worth it" and not worth it will only be bigger here, because the work involved will be higher.
That's not to say I won't buy in at some point, but my point is more than I don't believe it will be possible to build an immense and amazing Ultra HD BR library. Rather, a media junkie will have a library that consists of a lot of Blu-Rays, some DVDs, and some showcase UHDBRs. And I don't see there being a successor format at all.
1. General shift towards streaming has led to a collapse in physical media sales, particularly in some sectors (TV-on-DVD is in freefall). This is not likely to change. Streaming, meanwhile, has not really made full use of 1080p as a resolution, and I'd like to see higher bitrates and better codecs at 1080p than carrying forward existing limitations to higher resolutions. Just personally. So there's not a lot of incentive for studios to be producing the initial content.
2. Although a lot of stuff got a Blu-Ray release, some didn't, because consumer adoption (either in install base or in purchasing pace) never quite reached the peak fervor of DVD. This is not likely to change.
3. Although a lot of stuff benefitted immensely from B-R release, some didn't, because the cost of doing restorations for lower quality content were too high. This is especially visible in companies like Disney that have really old content. The difference between their initial top-quality restorations, which look breathtaking on Blu, and some of their low tier stuff like Sword and the Stone which is basically just a DNR-plagued transfer of a relatively poor master originally made for the DVD version, is immense. The gap between the content that's "worth it" and not worth it will only be bigger here, because the work involved will be higher.
That's not to say I won't buy in at some point, but my point is more than I don't believe it will be possible to build an immense and amazing Ultra HD BR library. Rather, a media junkie will have a library that consists of a lot of Blu-Rays, some DVDs, and some showcase UHDBRs. And I don't see there being a successor format at all.
Speaking of color standards:
Is it worth the cost of spectrometer to calibrate fine tune your TV vs using for example, the AVS HD 709 DVD to calibrate?
I have every TV in my home calibrated with this BluRay
http://www.avsforum.com/forum/139-display-calibration/948496-avs-hd-709-blu-ray-mp4-calibration.html
Is it worth the cost of spectrometer to calibrate fine tune your TV vs using for example, the AVS HD 709 DVD to calibrate?
I have every TV in my home calibrated with this BluRay
http://www.avsforum.com/forum/139-display-calibration/948496-avs-hd-709-blu-ray-mp4-calibration.html
Marty Chinn
Member
I would hope for a bigger storage medium personally. I hate the fact that I have to swap discs in order to watch Lord of the Rings. I ended up ripping that and editing it into one movie as a result. I know the newer codec is supposed to give better compression for the same video quality, but it almost feels between that and the resolution increase, we're just at the same capacity as Blu Ray.
I'm not sure this point is totally true. I'm sure it is to some degree, but when a lot of studios went to remaster their content, they did it with forward thinking and mastered it in 4K and/or in 8K. That's not to say everyone did, but a lot of movies were done that way for archiving purposes.
Oh dear, that's embarrassing. I'm having a major brain fart. Lol I'll go change it.
I was remembering that one of the advertised advantages of HD-DVD was that disc fabricators didn't need to start over ... they could easily transition DVD lines. As you say though, that was due to the disc itself essentially being a DVD-9. The dot-pitch however was quote similar to BD though as it has the same 405nm laser. It was the physical disc itself that didn't change much.
Unknown Soldier
Member
Ultra BD will likely occupy a niche similar what Blu-ray 3D has now. Laserdisc was a viable format for decades with a much smaller install base than BD3D or Ultra BD will ultimately have so I'm not concerned.
I'm done collecting spinny optical discs personally, I don't really buy that many movies a year because honestly who has time to watch them more than once anyways? I'll definitely have a small collection of Ultra BDs but it will be just that, small.
Marty Chinn
Member
I'm not sure how many I'll upgrade to 4K, probably only really key titles, but for me, collecting optical discs has been an investment to share with my kids. The Disney collection is already paying off with my daughter and I'm sure as they grow older, so will the other movies. I'm really looking forward to enjoying some of my favorite movies with them.
Nerdkiller
Membeur
I'd like to see BD4K attempt at getting a deeper penetration into the marked by having it be a part of a flipper disc for certain movies that have had a 4K workflow or restoration on BD, seeing that having a new generation of home media seems to be a harder sell than ever. Though I'm not sure if the extra layer of a 3 layer disc would cause it to get all screwy with the drive of a regular BD player, due to the extra weight of that additional layer.
They produce the content for theaters and broadcast (the UHD spec for broadcast is quite robust), so the incentive is already there. And not just the incentive, the recording equipment regularly used captures a wider gamut and dynamic range. Not to mention we've already had Netflix announce support for HDR with others like Amazon said to be in negotiations. The writing is on the wall.
It's really no different than the recording industry. While people may regularly use MP3's and streaming, it's not like the masters are engineered to those specifications. DSD or high-bitrate/depth PCM is used in the recording and engineering process.
And while you're right about streaming services in terms of rentals and TV episodes, the drop off of physical media has not been nearly as precipitous for movies. Discs are still the leader there.
That's true of back catalogs, but not true of new releases (though regionally we've seen a drop off in TV BD releases).
Again though, that's regarding back catalogs. While I'm sure studios would love everyone to double/triple/etc dip on purchases, they have the data and know what the market is for that.
This is more about content moving forward. Same as it was when transitioning to BD (and to a lesser extent DVD). That said, a number of movies that were remastered for BD released were done in 4K (or higher), and with high dynamic ranges, etc. for long-term archival purposes.
If I recall, most filmmakers already film at 4K. It's only a matter of if distributors want to release the movie at 4K.
I guess it comes down to whether you think you'll use it enough ... or whether it's better to just go the ISF route since they have the equipment? Obviously you have to consider the fact we're moving to a new color specification. So is it worth getting one now that only does Rec 709? Might want to wait until one is available with selectable gamuts?
Another cheap option would be to buy this - http://www.amazon.com/dp/B000V6LST0/?tag=neogaf0e-20
It comes with a card that has a red, green, and blue Rec 709 cellophane cutout so you can at least get approximate settings for your colors.
Yeah unfortunately that is the case. Apples to apples, the capacity is basically the same when talking about UHD content. They tried to be as forward thinking as possible when they went to blue ray discs, but it was near the practical limit of chemical engineering at the time when considering all facets of the pipeline. Not sure things have really changed all that much either? Every once in a while you hear stuff like holographic storage and the like, but how practical is the full pipeline for getting that out to people? And obviously now, the market makes transitioning to an entirely new fabrication process pretty damn risky.
Certainly they will. But whether they'll do a better job than your TV will depend on the player and TV. You'll need to do a few comparisons to see which is preferable in your setup.
- Status