ULTRA HD Blu-ray? Is SlySoft support coming?

[yahknow1]

I searched around and didn't find anything on the topic so I thought I'd start this thread.

Discs will be available in two varieties—66 GB dual layer and 100 GB triple layer with data-transfer rates up to 108 Mbps from a 66 GB disc and up to 128 Mbps from a 100 GB disc. Players will have HDMI 2.0 outputs with HDCP 2.2 copy protection. HEVC encoding will be used.

Any word on if/when SlySoft will be supporting these?

 

[Ch3vr0n]

They'll be able to add support when the first commercial discs come out, there's none yet. There are computer drives capable and standalone's but no movie releases yet. Adoption of those will take a while as it requires the user to buy new hardware. "Old" blu-ray players cannot play those bd-xl's.

afaik players today already use hdmi 2.0 and hdcp only comes into play for playback on pc. HDCP is handled by the standalone and the TV for standalone cases. HEVC is irrelevant in Anydvd's case, that's the video codec aka x265. That last one would be a case for CloneBD, not Anydvd.

 

[ddjmagic]

Any word on if/when SlySoft will be supporting these?

As far as I know licensing has only just recently started on Ultra HD Blu-ray.
No players have been announced yet (current "4K" Blu-ray players will not work), its not yet certain if current BDXL PC drives will even be able to play the retail pressed disc once released (even if licensed software was available)
No titles have been announced either and it is unsure exactly what protection methods will be used.

It's way to early and not enough info to speculate on if/when Slysoft will attempt to add support.

 

[yahknow1]

Ah very well then, thanks for the info

 

[Jong]

+1 for this!

The first "consumer ready" UHD player has just been announced by Samsung ("early" 2016 availability). UHD, HDR capable TVs will be widespread, if expensive, by early next year. I agree 4K resolution itself maybe of marginal benefit to most, but the other aspects of UHD are arguably as significant as HD in improving home video quality. For the first time we have everyone in the supply chain focused on picture quality - improved greyscale, improved colour fidelity - rather than megapixels. Whilst a lot of this material is going to be streamed it is going to be a while before this is feasible for most without significant compromise due to bandwidth.

It would be a real shame if all of us long term users of AnyDVD had to buy "old-school" disc players for the first time in over a decade! But, I'm confident James, Peer and the team will be on the case

 

[Ch3vr0n]

There's a difference between STANDALONE PLAYERS and retail MOVIE DISCS. there are no movies or yet that use this format, so they couldn't add support even if they wanted to.

Verstuurd vanaf mijn Nexus 7 met Tapatalk

 

[Jong]

Well, to be fair, I said that even the player is not available 'til early next year, whatever that means. And I certainly was not criticising anyone for not having support already available, just saying that the reasons behind this standard are much more interesting than more, largely invisible, pixels. Videophiles (and I suspect most AnyDVD users are videophiles) ARE going to want this.

 

[Ch3vr0n]

That's not what i said. There''s a difference between a player and a DISC. They can't add support for UHD discs because there are NO RETAIL MOVIES out yet on that format. I said nothing about wanting or not wanting support. You can't add support for something that doesn't physically exist.

 

[Jong]

And that wasn't what I said either. 1st, the player isn't here any more than the discs, Both are being demo'd at shows and they are both likely to arrive the same time (although only a small selection of discs at that time I'm sure). And I wasn't saying AnyDVD could support it yet! But there was a somewhat jaded view of "4K" earlier in this thread, debating whether it was or was not worthwhile or noticeable. I wanted to stress that UHD, regardless of 4K, will be important. Unrelated to AnyDVD of course, but Netflix, for example, are saying they will drop resolution down to 1080p before they drop HDR in UHD streams.

 

[Ch3vr0n]

well if they drop the resolution of UHD down to 1080p, its no longer uhd. Its that simple.

 

[Jong]

I'm not sure what point you are trying to make. The new standards have a number of components. Some argue, as James did, that the non-4K bits may be more important for many, even most. Netflix feel the same.

Sure "Full UHD (you heard it here first )" will have all those things and any device supporting UHD will of course need to support 4K. But doing some of them in a particular stream is still "HD+" and would require HDCP2.2/HDMI 2.0a/ UHD "Support".

 

[rotty dog]

The buzz at all the shows is ALREADY 8K @ 60 and 120 FPS.
4K is very much a halfway house.
Early days for 8K, but none the less is 4K media worth investing in.

 

[Jong]

If we doubt 4K is noticeable in average homes at normal viewing distances 8K is just crazy! The cabling and network bandwidth you would need to feed it would be obscene. Whilst I am sure there will be other improvements over the years that will convince me to upgrade, going from 4K-8K even @65in will not be one of them.

 

[rotty dog]

I agree to a certain extent, at 50" you are not going to notice hardly any difference between HD and 4K (bar colour depth).
At 65" you do see a difference but again, as you said, dependant on person, not a great deal.

However, the newer formats are for the next gen screens, much larger than we see now, and for projection systems.
4K doesn't hack it at those sizes.

There are two questions here, one of them is self answered, that being the displays, most new screen will be 4K anyway and I'm in favour of that.
The second question is the media, I will not be investing in 4K media.

There is one more thing to consider, 8K media shown on a 4K display (i.e. downscaled) will look much better than native 4K for a few reasons.
One reason for example is 4 pixels downscaled to 1, the noise is self cancelled.

 

[Jong]

I agree to a certain extent, at 50" you are not going to notice hardly any difference between HD and 4K (bar colour depth).
At 65" you do see a difference but again, as you said, dependant on person, not a great deal.

However, the newer formats are for the next gen screens, much larger than we see now, and for projection systems.
4K doesn't hack it at those sizes.

There are two questions here, one of them is self answered, that being the displays, most new screen will be 4K anyway and I'm in favour of that.
The second question is the media, I will not be investing in 4K media.

There is one more thing to consider, 8K media shown on a 4K display (i.e. downscaled) will look much better than native 4K for a few reasons.
One reason for example is 4 pixels downscaled to 1, the noise is self cancelled.

All good points. I too will not invest in UHD or any physical media (i.e. proactively build up a catalogue of titles), even when 8K arrives, but that won't stop me buying UHD discs over the years. There is still little doubt that HD, even 1080p, online is not the same quality as Blu-ray and I expect the same will be true of UHD. For some movies it's worth it (to me at least).

 

[RedFox 1]

I like a great quality picture as much as anyone here, but I am not going to mortgage my house to buy it. Just because its available doesn't mean it will be adopted that fast.

 

[yahknow1]

The new Samsung UBD player is rumored to retail for $500 USD which was half the price of the first BD player, how is that out of line with any new early adopter tech? My guess is the prices of UBD movies will replace BD movies in the premium cost category and (hopefully) the regular BD movies will take the place of DVD's which would be SWEEET

 

[whatever_gong82]

How long have we been playing around with DVD's now approximately 15 years, and we still have DVD fans, and on this forum, who want nothing to do with Blu-ray disks, and are completely happy with only DVD's.

It takes a huge amount of years to move from DVD to 8K, past my remaining life time, to reach the main stream of video playback in everyones household.

I agree, fast eddie. One thing 's for sure: It will take a long time before I decide to adopt the newer format.

Even though I usually buy Blu-ray discs now, I still from time to time purchase a DVD.

 

[rotty dog]

I agree, the thing is of course, its not what we do its what the public at large do.

Look at sales right now. Blu Ray 15%, DVD 85%

We of course can/appreciate the difference in detail/audio, the sales say Joe Public do not.

I would think (not saying im right) that UHD disks will be a failure
I say that because its not us that will make it a success or failure but Joe Public.

They should have waited for the big and real jump to 8k (or as near as dam it).
Very large screens would have become affordable by then and the advantage would be obvious.

I know ive said it before, but UHD is an intermediate step.

I think that this is going to confuse the General Public even more.

P.S.
I am in favour of UHD TV's.
That is a totally different argument.

NON Curved of course LOL.

 

[manixx2020]

No adaption of a new standalone UHD player for me.
Nvidia shield TV for now does the trick of playing back 4K resolution runing XBmC KODI & diff builds for kodi, this is on android tv,
Plays back all ISO, nice UI interface, can also load hard drive blurays from the network.
This device is awesome & very powerful hdmi 2.0
As well I would say hands down best streaming device for streaming true 4K resolution plus no chinava issuses.