No. Even if a physical 4K format gains traction (which seems very very unlikely), I don't think we'll ever see anywhere near the selection of titles released on that format that are currently available on bluray. 4K discs would probably only be available for new releases and a limited number of very popular catalog titles.

I have to admit that I'm a little more reserved in which Blu-rays that I buy now. I know 4k is a while off, but in the grand scheme of things a few years isn't that much for movies. Some movies I don't watch for a couple of years again and before you know it it's been re-released. So yeah the news of 4k has made me think more. But I'm still buying movies

No. See all reasons listed above.

Y4k

I'm sure I'll eventually get 4K. But that'll be when the TV's are affordable and I can comfortably fit an 80+ inch set in my living room.

Four bowls of Special K, or four helpings of potassium.

The former is less likely than the later since most (around 90%) of new releases are actually mastered in 2K. Older titles could maybe get a 4K remaster if it is deemed popular enough or if Criterion started making 4K masters and discs.

90%? Try more like 99%.

While a majority of theaters are capable of playing 4K content, most studios aren't releasing their content in 4K. Sony, for their major releases, have been the only studio releasing 4K content theatrically (I wonder why). The Dark Knight Rises, Lawrence of Arabia, Men in Black III, and Premium Rush were the only four films released theatrically in 4K during 2012.

I just don't grasp if you're shooting a film in native 4K resolution, why not master it in 4K resolution? Post-production is cheap when everything is all digital.

I guess they can get away with 2K saving a few bucks utilizing a smaller hard drive than would be used for 4K.

When you multiply this by the 8,000+ hard drives that are sent out during a film's initial release, I guess it adds up.

DCP, either based on a hard drive or sent from a satellite, is still cheaper than making 35mm reels. Way cheaper.

I recall reading that most post production facilities are simply not equiped to handle 4K content. So the places where such work can be carried out are usually booked solid all year round.

Apparently it's also significantly quicker to work in 2K rather than 4K. Since movies usually have very tight release schedules, the quicker option is usually seen as the "better" option.

I'll buy into 4K when quality projectors are reasonably priced ($2500 or less is what I consider "reasonable"). No need to be an early adopter this time around...

Dark Knight Rises was a Warner Bros. title, not Sony.

Post-production is most certainly not cheap at 4k. It takes up enormous bandwidth and computing resources.

Oscilloscope (while obviously not a major studio) released Samsara in 4K DCP.

didn't the Weisntein's release the DCP of The Master in 4K?

Why the studios don't seem all that hip to release 4K DCP's is beyond me, everyone really doesn't seem to be or want to be on the same page regarding the technology.

As they said above, it's all about cost. It takes 4 times as many compute, bandwidth, and storage resources to work on 4K as it does 2K. And the costs do not necessarily scale linearly. Especially for compute and bandwidth, it can be premium pricing to get the high-end performance equipment needed for 4K, so equipment costs could be 10-20 times as high as the equipment needed for 2K.

As technology improves, of course, the cost differential narrows, so 4K work will only continue to increase from this point.

I already got my pre-order in for The Fifth Element, The Last Samurai and The Phantom of the Opera.

Blu-ray is it for me. This 4K, or whatever comes next, can carry on without me. It was a good run.

This. This and This.

Also save up for the quiet re-release of The Fifth Element after they botch the initial transfer by using a less than pristine master.

As much as I'd like to put a period on my upgrades I'm not sure I will. I upgraded many DVDs with newer anamorphic restored versions only to replace them with Blu-Ray versions so I'm not sure I won't give in to better releases.

I've spent tens of thousands on my upgrades and video equipment and although good for now I see a potential upgrade in the future. Why not? As much as I'd like to have an "ultimate" collection I see it as more fluid than solid at the moment, as much as I don't like it. Still I'll wait for solid upgrades versus the newest and latest.

There are people that will stay this and MEAN it and others that will say it and end up buying into it. I think a lot more will mean it or maybe purchase just the newer releases in 4K.

When I see 4K films at the pawn shop for under five dollars? Sure. (For films I already own) There are just so many times one feels like buying the same things.

Sony's "Mastered in 4K" titles release on May 14. I guess this is the BD "Superbit" collection. Glory, The Other Guys, Total Recall remake, Spider-man, The Amazing Spider-Man, Ghostbusters, The Karate Kid remake, Battle: LA are all listed. There could be a few more.

A remastered Ghostbusters would be nice.

They just remind me of those DVDs that say "Mastered in High Definition".

Aren't most recent Blu-rays transferred from 4K masters sources anyway? Even if they are mastered from 2K sources, once you compress the information onto a Blu-ray disc, does it really matter?