• AnyStream is having some DRM issues currently, Netflix is not available in HD for the time being.
    Situations like this will always happen with AnyStream: streaming providers are continuously improving their countermeasures while we try to catch up, it's an ongoing cat-and-mouse game. Please be patient and don't flood our support or forum with requests, we are working on it 24/7 to get it resolved. Thank you.

Ultra HD Blu-ray Standard Is Now Complete

ron spencer said:
The bigger question is if anyone really needs it....I can't wait for the 32" panels supporting this...LOL
Click to expand...

The only reason for an Ultra HD format would be for those who are lucky enough to have a Cinema room, and for that you would really want 8K not 4K.

You are NOT really going to notice the greater definition at normal viewing distances on a 50" TV.

The ONLY affect this may have is to Destabilise an already fragile Blu Ray market.
 
rotty dog said:
The only reason for an Ultra HD format would be for those who are lucky enough to have a Cinema room
Click to expand...
IMHO the only good reason for this format is to get a wider color gamut and higher frame rates. But I believe I'll pass. :D
 
rotty dog said:
The only reason for an Ultra HD format would be for those who are lucky enough to have a Cinema room, and for that you would really want 8K not 4K.

You are NOT really going to notice the greater definition at normal viewing distances on a 50" TV.

The ONLY affect this may have is to Destabilise an already fragile Blu Ray market.
Click to expand...
Hmmm... 2K still looks plenty sharp on my 100 inch screen (still small)
I had a chance to see a 4K Sony projector in action fed a 4K source, it really didn't look any better then my 2K picture on my smaller screen.
The Sony 4K scene was on a 120 inch screen and what was noticeable was the high frame rate (60 fps)
It was a panning scene of Italy in a busy street market _ people eating, talking, shopping etc. It was my first experience with a true 4K projector and source _ Meh...
What does one need 8K for _ even 4K has gotten to the point where one can't even detect the difference. IMHO, :bowdown:


James said:
and higher frame rates. :D
Click to expand...
That's the ticket, but we'll see what happens, the film industry has done a good job in brain washing people into thinking that 24 fps is what the director called for.
Can't have that "soap opera" effect you know...
So many film purists condemning frame interpolation (changing 24 fps into 60 fps) and yet here comes 4K at 60fps ???? Will it apply to film or just documentaries ???
 
Last edited:
James said:
IMHO the only good reason for this format is to get a wider color gamut and higher frame rates. But I believe I'll pass. :D
Click to expand...

Yes I never understood the 8 bit depth for H264/VC1 Blu Ray. It seemed a step backwards from DVD.
 
James said:
IMHO the only good reason for this format is to get a wider color gamut and higher frame rates. But I believe I'll pass. :D
Click to expand...
For once I hope your signature disclaimer is correct and you're speaking for you personally, not for SlySoft. :doh:
 
I am guessing the one of the current blu-ray drives capable of playing BDXL disc will work for the new format. When I built my HPTC, I purchased a Pioneer BDR-2209 with the hope that it will work with the new higher capacity Ultra-HD movies.
 
I remember someone mentioning that purple ray would be the next best thing. Are they calling this purple ray? Who knows give It 5 more years and pink-ray will come out. $$$$$ Almost as bad as apple phones.
 
gereral1 said:
I remember someone mentioning that purple ray would be the next best thing. Are they calling this purple ray? Who knows give It 5 more years and pink-ray will come out. $$$$$ Almost as bad as apple phones.
Click to expand...
The color purple is not actually a shorter wavelength than blue. The true visible spectrum is from red to violet. Some people may think that violet looks purple. visible purple is actually between red and blue.
Shorter wavelength lasers are a definite way to increase capacity on existing media but I thought they were using the existing blu laser (~420nm) and more advanced codecs to compress the data.
Ultra violet lasers would definitely be a big step in increasing capacity.

The color "violet" produced with RGB levels on a monitor or HDTV is not the same monochromatic, shorter wavelength visible color that is produced by sunlight. The 3 visible wavelengths produced by most monitors are red green and blue. The colors between are simulated by combining levels of those 3 colors. The RGB standard does not actually produce color of pure monochromatic single wavelengths except for the 3 primary colors (red, green and blue).
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Purple
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Violet_(color)\
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ultraviolet
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RGB_color_model
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blu-ray_Disc
 
Last edited:
Purple and Violet are of course BOTH within the visible wavelengths, you can think of them as slightly different mixtures of red and blue light.

Ultra Violet is so called purely because of the quantum effect we see when looking at Ultra Violet light, we cant of course see it but we see this quantum effect which looks violet, it actually dosent exist.

This has NOTHING to do with Ultra HD of course, that uses same laser wavelength as now. Higher capacity Disks.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
gereral1 said:
Are they calling this purple ray?
Click to expand...

It's officially called Ultra HD Blu-ray. It's still Blu-ray, but with different specs.

Roycal said:
Shorter wavelength lasers are a definite way to increase capacity on existing media but I thought they were using the existing blu laser (~420nm) and more advanced codec
Click to expand...

Correct, they are using the same optics/laser, but now with larger capacity discs (66GB dual layer and 100GB triple layer)

I will probably upgrade eventually, depending on price of equipment/discs and what DRM is put into place this time around.
 
rotty dog said:
Purple and Violet are of course BOTH within the visible wavelengths, you can think of them as slightly different mixtures of red and blue light.

Ultra Violet is so called purely because of the quantum effect we see when looking at Ultra Violet light, we cant of course see it but we see this quantum effect which looks violet, it actually dosent exist.

This has NOTHING to do with Ultra HD of course, that uses same laser wavelength as now. Higher capacity Disks.
Click to expand...

No offense, but actual wavelengths of light have nothing to do with the observer. The visual spectrum is from red to violet. "Ultra-violet" is so named because it borders the visible range. Purple is a lower wavelength between blue and red. It's really not that complicated and well known. Pure wavelength photons are produced by the sun and are not a combination of different wavelength photons.
The human eyes are easily fooled by synthetic sources of light.

The upper end of the visual range is known as violet and not purple. So called "purple" can be simulated by mixing red and blue but is not the same monochromatic wavelength as violet.
 
Last edited:
Roycal said:
No offense, but actual wavelengths of light have nothing to do with the observer. The visual spectrum is from red to violet. "Ultra-violet" is so named because it borders the visible range. Purple is a lower wavelength between blue and red. It's really not that complicated and well known. Pure wavelength photons are produced by the sun and are not a combination of different wavelength photons.
The human eyes are easily fooled by synthetic sources of light.

The upper end of the visual range is known as violet and not purple. So called "purple" can be simulated by mixing red and blue but is not the same monochromatic wavelength as violet.
Click to expand...

This is not the place to argue about this so ill only post this.
Of course different colours (frequencies) of light are NOT combinations of frequencies, each colour is defined by the energy within the molecules producing the electromagnetic energy, red light is the lowest energy, blue the highest (visible).

i.e. if you heat metal, at the lower heat level you will produce red light, hoter up to white, even hotter blue/white etc. Higher and higher energy producing higher and higher frequencies and energies.
The violet you see looking at Ultra Violet light is a down conversion i.e. reducing the energy, in the same way that Ultra Violet light will illuminate some detergents in clothes etc.

Yes I agree, we can be fooled by mixing the three visible primaries to make us see all the colours within our detectable spectrum. LOL no Colour TV otherwise.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
rotty dog said:
The only reason for an Ultra HD format would be for those who are lucky enough to have a Cinema room, and for that you would really want 8K not 4K.

You are NOT really going to notice the greater definition at normal viewing distances on a 50" TV.

The ONLY affect this may have is to Destabilise an already fragile Blu Ray market.
Click to expand...
Your so wrong, I have a 65 inch 4k screen and high bit rate 4k stuff is stunning, upscaled blu ray is good, even better if you have A Pioneer LX58/88 blu ray deck but still high bit rate 4k is mega.
 
DaMacFunkin said:
Your so wrong, I have a 65 inch 4k screen and high bit rate 4k stuff is stunning, upscaled blu ray is good, even better if you have A Pioneer LX58/88 blu ray deck but still high bit rate 4k is mega.
Click to expand...

Yes I said at 50" you really wont notice much difference, 65" is actually significantly larger.
Of course, as you go up in size you will notice it more and more.

If you look at a 100" HD TV (1920x1080), then at normal viewing distances I can actually see the pixel matrix, im sure a lot of people can.
That is not good and 4K would be ideal.

BUT it is a halfway house, most people will not notice the difference because screen is not large enough.
Anyone that wants to go the whole hog and have a very large projection Cinema screen then 4K is ok but not ideal.

The increased bit depth will be noticed of course on all sizes.
 
Just to say also:

There are two different arguments here>

One is the 4K format and the other is 4K TV.

Apart from greater bit depth, will a standard Blu Ray disk up-scaled look about as good as a 4K source on say a 65" 4K screen.

If so, 4K TV will be a winner and 4K Blu Ray disks/Players wont.

As far as audio is concerned, I think we really have good enough options already. At least speaking for myself that is.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
DaMacFunkin said:
Your so wrong, I have a 65 inch 4k screen and high bit rate 4k stuff is stunning, upscaled blu ray is good, even better if you have A Pioneer LX58/88 blu ray deck but still high bit rate 4k is mega.
Click to expand...
The same was said when television went from 480p to 720p. They always say this, that the improved resolution will not matter. I think the mistake that some make is using a 4k televison to view 2k material. When they switch back and forth they don't see the difference they expected. Part of the reason for that is that the 4K television is upscaling and that's not taken into account. I see a hugh difference with native 4k material. I agree 4k is MEGA:bowdown: I am using larger than a 50 inch screen.
 
spicy said:
The same was said when television went from 480p to 720p. They always say this, that the improved resolution will not matter. I think the mistake that some make is using a 4k televison to view 2k material. When they switch back and forth they don't see the difference they expected. Part of the reason for that is that the 4K television is upscaling and that's not taken into account. I see a hugh difference with native 4k material. I agree 4k is MEGA:bowdown: I am using larger than a 50 inch screen.
Click to expand...

I sort of agree with you, and as far as 1080 v 720, 1080 if far better and I sure CAN see the difference.

The thing is that we have got to the stage where the size of TV's in the majority of households will not really see this 4K advantage.

This means that as far as sales go, this will be interesting.

Im sure you are correct when you say that at 65" 4K native is stunning.

I have to say that the examples ive seen were bad, over the top sharpened and VERY un-natural.
BUT I do still believe what you say.

I am WELL up for 4K TV displays.

4K Blu Ray disks success depends on price and if they take the P_SS.

(The original film material in most Movies is not that great anyway as we have seen HD wise)

The test for me is: Does it look like im looking out of a window, OR does it look like an artificial over the top sharpened image

A while back, this was the test that I gave Plasma vs LED, LCD.
Plasma STILL comes out on top, im sure you will disagree but for me, it gives the most natural image (closest to looking out of a window)
Not made anymore.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top