Re: Let's talk about Ultra HD Blu-ray
 

Ahhhh...I'm a streaming fanboy? How did you come to that conclusion? I've collected almost every format since "Super 8!" Nahhh, I won't be eating my words because to quote one of my heroes, "I live in Realville."

The signs are everywhere—you would have to be blind to ignore them—that the audience for physical media is quickly shrinking and UHD is facing an uphill battle (to say the least) in a very indifferent climate. Those of us who have collected and then sold or traded numerous formats over the years are moving into our 40s, 50s and beyond. We have amassed very nice libraries and have yet to watch many of the titles that are sitting neatly in our bookcases—many still wrapped in cellophane! We are growing weary of upgrading and for the majority who buy physical media, DVD is simply good enough—roughly 60-70%. The rest have embraced downloading and streaming. The mass audience will have little to no exposure to this new format since the few remaining brick and mortar retailers are eliminating much of the floor space devoted to marketing physical media. There will be little to no marketing support for this expensive new format in a piss-poor economic climate and that will be its death knell.

Many collectors are also giving up on their hobby for a host of reasons. I mostly shop at local resellers, discounters, pawn shops and garage sales and I am amazed how fast I have replaced the Blu-ray collection I sold off for economic reasons a few years back and at a fraction of the cost. These are pristine older releases that were obviously collected with great care. I just bought 20 movies for $60 from a guy who was liquidating his entire collection on Craigslist because he was getting married and starting a family. Many had slipcovers and the only thing missing was the cellophane.

You state that the UHD upgrade in image quality is a greater leap than it was for DVD to Blu-ray but I have read a few reviews that would belie your claim. I've yet to view a DVD on my 65" display that can hold a candle to the Blu-ray image produced. Blu-ray was always more than a visual and audio upgrade over DVD. Its menu system did not require leaving the program you were viewing and it's surface is far more resilient to improper handling and surface damage. But even those improvements along with an unprecedented marketing push by the major studios weren't enough to convince a mass audience to upgrade to Blu-ray disc. And when it comes to economics, UHD fails because the benefits do not justify returning to a $30 pricing structure. Except for those with rather large disposable incomes, buying into UHD is ludicrous.

I'll admit, when I went to the store this past week to pick up "The Revenant" I thought about picking up the UHD copy since it comes with the Blu-ray version as well. But I decided the Blu-ray was good enough at $17.99. And many more still decided the DVD was good enough for them—I doubt they even looked at the measly dozen or so titles sitting on the shelf in those shiny black keep cases. The studio support for this format isn't even as robust as HD DVD or 3D for that matter.

Re: Let's talk about Ultra HD Blu-ray
 

Well your rant does seem to be about physical media in general, so yes, one can easily come to that conclusion.

I'm not saying physical media will not continue to decline, just that UHD BD will have a bigger piece of that pie than BD did (does or will have).

The decline of physical media is another topic, I'm referring to the future UHD BD market share within OD itself. Of course, if UHD BD does well, then that won't hurt that rate of physical media's decline any. Physical media will continue to decline, but there will be a bottoming out. It's definitely not going away.

Re: Let's talk about Ultra HD Blu-ray
 

The decline of physical media is not another topic. UHD as physical media will never surpass Blu-ray disc's market share largely because of that reality. The future is downloading and streaming whether you and I like it or not—it's simply reality and a technological evolution. Nobody is saying physical media will totally disappear in our lifetimes. But it will be a niche market—a small fraction of where even Blu-ray disc was at its zenith. If you are trying to be cute by saying that as physical media dies, UHD will represent a larger piece of an ever-shrinking pie then perhaps you are right—but so what? The vast majority of consumers won't be buying and studio support will be almost non-existent. There needs to be a profit motive and there won't be much for physical media at that point. There's just no logic in your assumptions.

Your argument reminds me of how the current administration handles economic data. We are supposedly at a 5% unemployment rate based on the U3 economic data. You get a better percentage by not counting the chronically unemployed and underemployed. It's laughable because when you look at the total employment picture using the U6 data, the reality is that we are far closer to 10% unemployment nationally. So when you look at UHD's share of a shrinking pie, the percentage of sales may eventually surpass Blu-ray or DVD because the only people still buying will be die-hard technophiles. Hardly an incentive for studios to dig deep into their catalogs.

So to illustrate, 40% of $1,000,000 is $400,000 and 50% of $700,000 is $350,000. So even if UHD is successful in grabbing a larger percentage of the overall market in a marketplace experiencing a precipitous decline —and I don't believe it has a prayer— that victory would be rather hollow.

Re: Let's talk about Ultra HD Blu-ray
 

I can see the hyperbole already:

"Sales of UHDBR players have increased by 300%! Blu-ray is down 20%!"

The reality: They sold 100 UHDBR players one week and 300 units the next week.

Re: Let's talk about Ultra HD Blu-ray
 

Well I think UHD will at least slow down the decline of physical media. Otherwise what's the point of having another new format in the first place? Even though BLu-ray underperformed, it did OK even though physical media continued to decline every single year since it launched.

Expectations for UHD BD seem to be so low that I don't think it's possible for it to sell under those expectations.

Re: Let's talk about Ultra HD Blu-ray
 

Do we really need the politics in this discussion? :lol:

Re: Let's talk about Ultra HD Blu-ray
 

Yes we do! Because one thread isn't enough when it comes to this! Especially with these fine thespians droning on about the same crap.

Re: Let's talk about Ultra HD Blu-ray
 

What politics? :scratch2:

Re: Let's talk about Ultra HD Blu-ray
 

If you can look into the seeds of time, and say which grain will grow and which will not, speak then unto me. ;)

Re: Let's talk about Ultra HD Blu-ray
 

My academic concern (since I won't be buying any of these 4k releases ever) is that bitrates will be rather low, since we've got longer films being released (over 2 hours for each)...

I'd be wary that these single-layer 1st-gen 4k releases are not going to showcase all the format has to offer in terms of PQ, since we've got compromising of space to get them onto only 66 GB...

I'd guess that double-layer (BD 128 GB?) should be used for any film > 90-100 minutes for absolute best presentation quality.

If catalogue films ever get released in the format, they absolutely should be on 128GB discs in order to preserve the grain structure and organic structure of their original 35-mm or 70-mm elements.

Is there such a thing as dual layer 4k BD discs?

Re: Let's talk about Ultra HD Blu-ray
 

I think we discussed this earlier in this thread. It shouldn't really be a concern. The movies so far have been released bare-bones, so with the increased encoding efficiency of HEVC, dual-layer (66GB) should be sufficient for 2-3 hour movies.

UHD BD is available in dual-layer (66GB) and triple-layer (100GB). Single-layer does not exist in the specification.

Re: Let's talk about Ultra HD Blu-ray
 

so the 100GB discs are available - guess that means Sony will release 'Lawrence of Arabia' on UHD then :D

Re: Let's talk about Ultra HD Blu-ray
 

Interesting... I wonder if quad-layer or other higher multiples will ever be made, or if 100GB discs is the highest capacity we'll ever get.

It seems strange indeed that 10 years after BD 25 GB single-layer discs, the increase in each layer has only been a measly 8 GB (= 33 GB total per layer).

Why the inertia in doubling / tripling capacity per layer in a decades' time? Is it for "laziness" or compatibility reasons? No violet lasers, then?

Re: Let's talk about Ultra HD Blu-ray
 

The "blu" laser in Blu-ray is actually violet, at a wavelength of 405nm.

I think the limitation isn't the laser though, but the manufacturing process used to press the discs. When Blu-ray first came out, there were a lot of manufacturing issues, since it was a whole new process. They weren't even able to make double-layer discs until a year or so after it was released.

HD DVD, by contrast, had less issues because they modified the DVD pressing process instead of going all new. However, a side-effect was that HD DVDs couldn't store as much data because the pit pattern wasn't as small. So even though Blu-ray and HD DVD used the same laser, Blu-ray could hold more:

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikiped...DVD_BD.svg.png
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Compar...l_disc_formats

The extra 8GB per layer is probably due to an incremental improvement of the pressing process.

As for seeing additional layers: probably not. Ever since dual-layer DVDs, we've been promised additional layers, with some people predicting dozens of layers. However, in practice, it gets exponentially more difficult for a drive to read the correct layer the more you have. It took near 2 decades to get us to 3 layers, so I wouldn't expect a 4 layer disc anytime soon.

Re: Let's talk about Ultra HD Blu-ray
 

Yep- I have Deadpool in front of me right now and it's dual-layer (of course I can't play the damn thing yet, but had to get my hands on one at least!) From some of the reviews I've read, it seems banding is still a problem- that's one of my biggest gripes about Blu-Rays right now, of course on "Digital HD" it's far worse.

Fun fact: Initial planning of laserdiscs in the 1970s wanted to have discs that were dual-layered instead of 2-sided for uninterrupted playback. That never happened until DVD finally came out in 1997.

Re: Let's talk about Ultra HD Blu-ray
 

Is that a problem for HDR TVs? This review seems to indicate it's free of banding:
https://www.avforums.com/review/dead...y-review.12618

Re: Let's talk about Ultra HD Blu-ray
 

Intriguing, and it begs the question: If 33 GB single-layer discs are being made now solely due to improvements in pressing process: Why can't I buy 33 GB BD-R blanks? Are they in fact made, and compatible with current BD burners and standalone players?

So, there must be some other incompatibility in addition, which makes 33 GB discs different from 25 GB BD-Rs.

Also, I must be misremembering, but I thought HD-DVDs could actually hold 30 GB? It must have been for dual-layer HD-DVDs, based on your above diagrams. Capacity of double-layer BDs being 50 GB of course.

Re: Let's talk about Ultra HD Blu-ray
 

Because that's not in the original Blu-ray spec. Search for BD-R XL, though. You have options.

Re: Let's talk about Ultra HD Blu-ray
 

Yeah, I'm guessing the change in pit pattern size means drives have to be specifically configured to read the new discs.

Also, you can't get a 33GB BD-R XL, they seem to only come in 100GB triple-layer form:
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16817130265

Which makes sense: with 25GB and 50GB BD-R, the only reason a person would get a BD-R XL capable burner is for capacities above 50GB.

Re: Let's talk about Ultra HD Blu-ray
 

Yes, HD DVD held 15GB per layer, with almost all discs being dual-layer 30GB out of the gate. This gave HD DVD a slight advantage over the single-layer 25GB Blu-rays initially, but once Blu-ray manufacturers had dual-layer figured out, the 50GB capacity blew HD DVD out of the water.

Re: Let's talk about Ultra HD Blu-ray
 

How'd those guys get a Panasonic DMP-UB900 Ultra HD Blu-ray player? Regular folks can't get it yet.

Re: Let's talk about Ultra HD Blu-ray
 

It's out in the UK, which their review of the player seems to indicate their model is:
https://www.avforums.com/review/pana...r-review.12538
https://www.amazon.co.uk/Panasonic-4...dp/B01CGC6JC2/

Re: Let's talk about Ultra HD Blu-ray
 

My guess is that most, if not all existing BD players and drives could read the "out-of-spec" 33 GB discs, if it's only the pits and lands that have been slightly decreased in distance. Tolerances are known to be very conservative in "standards", so there's much more possibility in pushing the spec.

Anybody remember that with CDs, the original spec was 63 and 74 minute length, then later 80-min, and "out-of-spec" 90-minute and 99-minute CD-Rs?

I remember routinely burning 80 min CD-Rs to 100 minutes with great results in 95% of my standalone players... Used a Plextor drive, with "Gigarec" 1.2x and overburning as well.

I suppose a similar "tightening" of DVDs and BD-Rs *could* have occured, but nobody seems to have cared enough to implement it in firmware like Plextor and Yamaha did with their excellent CD-R burners.

33-GB is only ~32% more capacity per layer. With overburning and a 1.2x "Gigarec" setting, most existing drives could read these discs.

Re: Let's talk about Ultra HD Blu-ray
 

Wow, and it's almost a grand if you convert the pound to dollars.

Re: Let's talk about Ultra HD Blu-ray
 

For CD, they extended the playtime by reducing the "track pitch," or the distance between tracks.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Compact_disc
Blu-ray already drastically reduced the track pitch though:
http://electronics.howstuffworks.com/blu-ray1.htm
More info:
http://i.imgur.com/bab0JtO.gif
http://i.imgur.com/27j5IaP.jpg
http://physics.fullerton.edu/files/L...DVD_or_Blu.pdf
From what I can find, BDXL kept the track pitch the same, but reduced the minimum pit length. This required changing the "Signal quality evaluation index" process:
https://wikileaks.org/sony/docs/05/d...l_20121204.pdf
http://blu-raydisc.com/Assets/Downlo...ions-18326.pdf
I think this change wasn't the same as the CD expansion back in the day. It looks to me like existing drives would, at the least, require a firmware update to change their signal processing, if it's even possible.

I think for compatibility reasons, and the fact that UHD was going to require a new spec for the resolution and codec changes anyway, they decided to keep the BDXL disc spec separate as well, instead of trying to "improve" the BD disc spec and potentially breaking compatibility with thousands of existing players.

Re: Let's talk about Ultra HD Blu-ray
 

I've never seen a CD that ran more than a few seconds over 80 minutes. I don't think even my CD burning software would let me make one that long. I remember always checking the running time of my CDs though trying to get the longest in existence- the 80-minute one was a Razormaid dance mix disc.

Re: Let's talk about Ultra HD Blu-ray
 

I've just pulled out all the comments regarding title announcements and the discussions around them (it got a bit cluttered and scattershot) - this thread will remain but concentrate on the technology side of UHD

Re: Let's talk about Ultra HD Blu-ray
 

I have several factory-pressed CDs over 83 minutes in length. Mostly by Bear Family Records out of Germany. Not all CD players handle them. It is hit or miss if a specific player can play them.

Re: Let's talk about Ultra HD Blu-ray
 

There's a process called overburning that, from what I can tell, burns data into the "lead out" area of a CD-R, giving it a little extra space at the expense of compatibility.

There were also some 90/99 minute CD-R media. From what I can tell, they further reduced the track pitch to increase capacity, again, at the expense of compatibility.

For maximum storage, you could overburn a high capacity CD-R, but results varied depending on drive, media, and burning software. And of course, playback compatibility was compromised:

http://www.osta.org/technology/cdqa7.htm
http://www.infocellar.com/CD/overburn.htm

Re: Let's talk about Ultra HD Blu-ray
 

I still have some unused Comp-USA 99 minute CD-Rs. Back in the day, I could overburn these to 122 minutes and still be compatible with 5 out of my 6 standalone players. Once I tried and successfully burned one of these to 143 minutes, but it could only be played on 2 of my standalones... c1 / c2 errors through the roof, but it still plays today!

There was one drive which could burn 160 minutes of 16 bit / 44.1 khz stereo PCM audio on an 80 minute CD-R without compression, but by reducing the pitch length alone. I forget the brand or model, though.

Resuming normal discussion, exit stage right CD-Talk...

Re: Let's talk about Ultra HD Blu-ray
 

128GB discs should be more common than 100GB discs?

Re: Let's talk about Ultra HD Blu-ray
 

According to page 32 of this white-paper, UHD Blu-ray only supports up to the triple-layer 100GB discs. Quad-layer 128GB discs aren't part of the spec:
http://www.blu-raydisc.com/Assets/Do...0817_clean.pdf

While Quad-layer 128GB discs were part of the earlier BDXL spec, I don't think any QL discs were ever released, pressed or recordable or otherwise. I think the scaling-back to TL max on UHD Blu-ray seems to indicate that QL is impractical.

Re: Let's talk about Ultra HD Blu-ray
 

Ah, thanks.

Will we get the THX logo with some 4K movies? Not sure I remember it being on blu-rays, maybe only a few.

Re: Let's talk about Ultra HD Blu-ray
 

THX costs money to license and I don't think the studios believe it sells additional copies anymore. It became virtually extinct on Blu-ray once sales growth vanished.

Re: Let's talk about Ultra HD Blu-ray
 

This article was posted on the UHD Blu-ray Title announcements thread:

An interesting quote from the article:
So it seems like, similar to how Blu-ray launched with pressed 2-layer discs not yet being ready for production, UHD Blu-ray has launched with 3-layer discs not yet ready for production.

Re: Let's talk about Ultra HD Blu-ray
 

Plus has been proven to be meaningless as an indication of quality. THX-certified VHS tapes were a REAL joke, as they did nothing to address the quality problems with that format.

Re: Let's talk about Ultra HD Blu-ray
 

Does being "THX certified" hold any value anymore? I don't even remember seeing the logo on any blus at all. I would think with the new audio formats, Atmos and DTS-X would have bigger weight than THX. And are there still any theaters these days that have and tout THX?

Re: Let's talk about Ultra HD Blu-ray
 

AFI Silver's three screens are THX certified, but I haven't seen any pre-film ads for it.

Re: Let's talk about Ultra HD Blu-ray
 

The Star Wars Blu-rays have THX certification, perhaps unsurprisingly:
http://www.thx.com/consumer/home-ent...releases&pg=18

The UHD Alliance has the UHD Premium certification for UHDTVs:
http://www.cnet.com/news/what-is-uhd...ium-certified/

Re: Let's talk about Ultra HD Blu-ray
 

Genuinely surprised this thread didn't get bumped with this news yesterday.

The cheapest UHD player is now the XBox One S at $299. Coming out in August. (EDIT: I guess only the 2TB comes out in August... the cheaper ones are later)
http://i.imgur.com/4fYfi0F.png

I guess there will be 500GB models (shown above) but also 1TB ($349) and 2TB ($399, same price as the Samsung UHD player).

all details here:
http://www.xbox.com/en-US/xbox-one-s