|
Author
|
Topic: Anyone projected 4K upscaled Blue Ray etc
|
|
|
Rob Young.
Phenomenal Film Handler
Posts: 1633
From: Cheshire, U.K.
Registered: Dec 2003
|
posted October 23, 2016 01:52 PM
Mark, personally I'm holding out on 4K for now; not because it isn't potentially much better in terms of definition and colour gamut, but because one of the major potential advantages of new 4K displays (be they panels or projectors) and mastering, is High Dynamic Range.
Now at the moment, most displays and mastering conform to HDR 10, which, quite frankly, I think is a mistake, or a missed opportunity at best.
Nit figures aside, both HDR 10 and Dolby Vision conform to SMPTE ST-2084, but HDR works in 10 bit, whereas Dolby Vison was designed to work in 12 bit.
HDR 10 produces artifacts and such puts a bit of a damper on the whole 4K or UHD launch.
One can only hope that 12 bit Dolby Vision quickly becomes the standard and then 4K becomes tempting.
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rob Young.
Phenomenal Film Handler
Posts: 1633
From: Cheshire, U.K.
Registered: Dec 2003
|
posted October 24, 2016 05:11 AM
Mark, as Andrew says, you need a 4K display before trying to upscale standard Blu-ray to 4K.
Also, like upscaling DVD, there are various upscaling technologies (built into either player or display) to upscale standard Blu-ray to 4K and some are better than others. Actually, there are some stand alone upscaling processors which do a much better job, although they come at a price.
Unfortunately, like Blu-ray before it, 4K is rather marketed badly. Most of the emphasis with Blu-ray was that it was simply better definition than DVD and many wondered if they really needed that - the reality of course is that a well mastered Blu-ray has a multitude of improvements over DVD (less compression, better sound, better colour) which wasn't always made clear to potential buyers.
Same is true with UHD - as a format it obviously offers better definition, but, again, the colour gamut can be considerably better than Blu-ray and when HDR settles down, it potentially will provide the best viewing experience we have ever been able to see domestically ie, the best TVs and video projectors...ever.
But, as usual, it's launch hasn't been the best, with the whole HDR mess...making HDR 10 standard the first mistake.
Also, different display technologies make standardization difficult. OLED, for example, which was potentially the next big display technology hasn't quite lived up to expectations, and struggles to provide the high levels of brightness (or nit level) for really great HDR.
And projectors which claim to offer HDR really don't have the required brightness levels...hopefully laser light sources will eventually sort that out though.
Long and short...4K is still a bit of a mine field but will undoubtedly be the future of TV.
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rob Young.
Phenomenal Film Handler
Posts: 1633
From: Cheshire, U.K.
Registered: Dec 2003
|
posted October 24, 2016 04:29 PM
Also, let's not forget that whatever ends up on any form of exhibition is ideally the ideal choice of the film maker ("movie" maker), cinematographer, set designer, production designer, costume designer, musical composer, sound effects designer, sound mixer, etc...etc...etc.
Better quality presentation simply presents the best form of exhibition to all of these crafted people and enhances the experience.
I see that the "Cinema Home Choice" article on super 8 has been discussed on the Real Magic forum and applaud the whole advocate of this on going hobby, and celluloid presentation at home...my goodness, I'm one of it's biggest fans.
But in this day and age, if we want to watch a recent cinema (videma) release at home, we have to accept certain critera.
That doesn't mean seeing every skin blemish (I only make TV, so what do I know, but I frequently use, for example a 1/4 black promist filter when shooting CU interviews in HD just to avoid this very unflattering approach).
Point is, the drive here isn't simply for more definition, that's somewhat missing the point of this evolution as artistic approach to photography always remains, but that better formats give it more options.
Personally, I've seen movies both new and classic over the last few years, presented on Blu-ray, such that I have so much more respect and admiration for the people that made them.
I doubt that I would ever have been able to admire such craft when presented on lesser formats, other than running 35mm at home, and that this has considerably enhanced my enjoyment of such movies at home.
I think that striving for better quality presentation simply elevates any art form and that given the multitude of artist involved in making a "movie", nothing is more true than when watching one in the highest quality available.
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Andrew Woodcock
Film God
Posts: 7477
From: Manchester Uk
Registered: Aug 2012
|
posted October 25, 2016 10:37 AM
Agreed John but on nearly all the later stuff from Derann (85 onwards),you'd be very unlucky to find a bad film of poor print quality unless a white box special of course.
Same can be said of many many others from this era from Germany and the U.S.
Far more than a handful John, that's for sure!
It's only the old faded stuff that tends to be from inferior master material, printed to a budget and can also be very grainy on inferior earlier stock, I find.
Equally, I've had some and seen some very poor DVD transfers at times, especially in the early days of this technology surfacing and many made from older and in some cases, worn inferior master material, just the same as film often could be.
The thing that winds my dial out of screening any disc, is the time it takes you to get to the movie itself.
Often you are forced to watch trailers, adverts and make choices to your viewing preferences in the main menu that can take an age to navigate at times.
I usually shout the wife in to the watch the movie about 20 minutes after I've put the disc in just so the beginning of the film can be got at and paused.
She hates trailers and padding.
--------------------
"C'mon Baggy..Get with the beat"
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rob Young.
Phenomenal Film Handler
Posts: 1633
From: Cheshire, U.K.
Registered: Dec 2003
|
posted October 25, 2016 02:10 PM
Phil, Blu-ray is the format to go for currently - the range of titles available at sensible prices and the outstanding quality make it the perfect format for movie lovers, and it is no longer that expensive to buy a quality player.
Projector wise, I'd suggest setting yourself a budget and then getting demonstrations of what is available before deciding - it doesn't matter how good a review is, only seeing the image for yourself will be important.
That said, you will need a full HD 1080p 24Hz capable projector to take full advantage of Blu-ray.
Most projectors are, but some cheaper models aren't quite up to the job.
Technology wise, you have LCD projectors (such as the Panasonic range, which are excellent), or DLP based machines, which arguably have better motion and contrast, but, in the case of single chip DLP machines, can suffer form irritating "rainbow" effect - look around the internet for more information.
Slightly more expensive, you have the LCOS system which both Sony and JVC projectors use.
Personally, I think JVC LCOS (or D-ILA) as they call it, is the best domestic projection image available.
But, it is about budget and expectation, so my advice is do a lot of internet research on the differing technologies and always, always find a good retailer who can give you a good range of demonstrations.
In the end, it doesn't matter what anyone else advises, so long as you are happy with the results.
PS - Just for anyone interested and not intended in any way as self promotion, but I recently shot this and used a lot of promist filtration to take the "edge" off HD while shooting - just thought it may demonstrates that definition doesn't always rule over stylistic choice.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b0801p64/books-that-made-britain-north-west-england
[ October 25, 2016, 03:11 PM: Message edited by: Rob Young. ]
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
Del Phillipson
Jedi Master Film Handler
Posts: 679
From: Derbyshire, England
Registered: Dec 2005
|
posted October 26, 2016 10:53 AM
There you go Rob, don't shoot the messenger :-)
Sharp has announced plans to sell an 8K television screen from October.
Although several companies have developed "super hi-vision" resolution test models, this is the first such TV to be made commercially available.
The 8K format provides 16 times as many pixels as 1080p high definition. It creates an image so detailed that it can appear three-dimensional.
However, the 85in (2.16m) device's 16m yen ($133,000; £86,000) price is likely to limit sales.
Interest is expected to come mainly from broadcasters and other companies involved in testing the format.
Sharp is promoting the 8K TV on its website and will show it to the public soon
One analyst suggested it would not become a serious proposition for members of the public until the turn of the decade.
"We're not expecting 8K TVs targeted at consumers to be released until at least 2016, and we don't expect they will cross one million units until after 2019," said Abhi Mallick, from IHS Technology.
"Japan's NHK is the only broadcaster so far to announce plans to create and broadcast 8K content."
But he added that the relatively small size of people's homes in Japan might mean many families would not be interested.
"Japan's a region in which the average size of TVs sold tends to be smaller, and we think the minimum size 8K TVs would be sold at would be 65in."
He added that for the time being, he expected manufacturers to focus their efforts on trying to convince families to buy 4K sets instead.
They provide a quarter of the resolution of 8K, but are being made in sizes of up to about 100in to create "cinema-like" experiences in the home.
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!
![[Razz]](tongue.gif)
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
Printer-friendly view of this topic
