|
bull3964 posted:Again, not true. The the vast majority of stuff produced today is still less than 4k. Filming with 4k cameras is becoming more common, but 4k workflows are still lagging and there still a ton of stuff being shot digitally in less than 4k. 2.8k is still a very popular format to capture in. Point taken, Are showes/movies still shot in film?
|
#
?
Feb 23, 2015 07:45
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 12, 2024 15:15 |
|
|
240hz > 4k
|
|
#
?
Feb 23, 2015 07:54
|
|
|
Tab8715 posted:The selection is slim but all new shows and movies will be filmed in it. Arri doesn't even make a 4k camera yet. So far your options camera wise are the Sony, Blackmagic, and the Red. Anything else is 2k at best. Tab8715 posted:Point taken, Not really. Not unless you have a huge budget or your name is Quentin Tarantino.
|
|
#
?
Feb 23, 2015 07:56
|
|
|
Eh, it's not like 1080p to 4k is as much of a subjective difference as the SD to 1080p transition was. I'd say that at this point in time most people are better off buying a nice HD set rather than a bargain 4k set. Even if 4k is widespread before you're ready to replace your set, it's not like like you're watching poo poo off of a VCR, you're watching some nice HD content!
|
|
#
?
Feb 23, 2015 07:57
|
|
|
Thermopyle posted:Eh, it's not like 1080p to 4k is as much of a subjective difference as the SD to 1080p transition was. It's pretty big considering 4k is what most digital projection systems in theaters are at this point. Obviously it makes more of a difference when we get to larger and larger screens, but we're rapidly approaching the point where we can recreate a majority of the theatre experience at home.
|
|
#
?
Feb 23, 2015 08:11
|
|
|
Who wanted 720p? 51" Samsung PN51F4500 720p 600Hz Plasma HDTV $348 + Free Site-to-Store Shipping - http://slickdeals.net/share/iphone_app/fp/146322
|
|
#
?
Feb 23, 2015 09:39
|
|
|
Viper_3000 posted:Arri doesn't even make a 4k camera yet. So far your options camera wise are the Sony, Blackmagic, and the Red. Anything else is 2k at best. The Arri Amira (smaller alexa focused on location work) just got a 4k firmware update. The Arri Alexa 65 shoots higher then 4k native. (6560 x 3102) Most shoots done on FHD also have uncompressed SDI-in recorders going as well (they bypass internal compression). You're right that SFX/VFX is done in 2k and then upscaled..rendering in 4k makes no sense..yet. Rendering power/time/storage, etc. I doubt you'll really be able to tell though. And the industry is well aware of the looming consumer switchover to 4k. Skyfall (the last james bond film) was shot on an alexa. Spectre, the bond film currently in production, is being shot on 35mm. I'll bet a part of that is sony pictures (the distributor) making sure they can pull 4k or even 8k scans from the negative for UHD and beyond. (plus the DP shot interstellar on film and is a pretty big fan of it, so, that too) UHD blurays in the back half of this year will be the actual content tipping point (and I'd guess if they actually sell or not being the biggest factor). I don't really see the point of streaming UHD at the bitrates it exists. When a 1080p blu ray is night and day above a 4k stream..well... yeah. Remember, the US is 11th in internet speed. Broadcasts are still done in 720/1080i. 4k should be more of a talking point this time next year..let's hope. I'm not tossing out my FHD set anytime soon though. e: and gaming! the newest consoles have trouble pushing 1080p/60. It takes a multi gpu solution to hit playable 4k frame rates (at least 2x 970s)... zer0spunk fucked around with this message at 15:52 on Feb 23, 2015 |
|
#
?
Feb 23, 2015 15:46
|
|
|
Viper_3000 posted:It's pretty big considering 4k is what most digital projection systems in theaters are at this point. That says little, if anything, about the relative subjective differences when it comes to purchasing TVs that fit in peoples homes.
|
|
#
?
Feb 23, 2015 16:15
|
|
|
zer0spunk posted:
Sony is the wildcard in all of this because they have a vested interest in pushing 4k since they make theater projection systems, camera equipment, AND TVs. Sony has been 'mastering' films in 4k for awhile to push their theater projection systems. Spider-Man 2 was one of the first ones they did. Though, all the SFX in the movie were still rendered at 2k making a 4k master a mixed bag at best. Warner should actually have a pretty good catalog when all is said and done because they were big on preserving their films with 4k and 8k scans and striking new 35mm prints from those scans for archival. Of course, this really only matters to stuff pre-2000 or so. I would actually like detailed article about how they did something like Breaking Bad in 4k. I wonder how much upscaled material is in there. You know they had to use CGI and virtual set extensions throughout the series in places. Did they go back and redo those scenes in a 4k workflow or did they simply splice 4k scans of the live action elements to upscaled scenes involving digital effects work (like how they are doing X-Files in HD)? It will be interesting to see how UHD Blu-rays pan out. Will studios repeat the mistakes they made for DVD and then HD blu-ray? Will releases be constrained to hand picked premium material or will they just throw anything on there? Will they even bother at all? For example, Disney has stopped releasing 3D versions of their blu-rays in the US. Big Hero Six has no domestic 3d release. They are still making the discs because they are selling them in every other country, but they don't feel it is worth it for the US market. Will UHD blu-ray have the same fate? bull3964 fucked around with this message at 17:32 on Feb 23, 2015 |
|
#
?
Feb 23, 2015 17:24
|
|
|
zer0spunk posted:The Arri Amira (smaller alexa focused on location work) just got a 4k firmware update. You're right. I haven't had any friends work on anything with the 65 yet, so I forgot that it's out there. The Amira firmware isn't a true 4K though, it's upscaled. Agree about most everything else you've said though. bull3964 posted:Warner should actually have a pretty good catalog when all is said and done because they were big on preserving their films with 4k and 8k scans and striking new 35mm prints from those scans for archival. Of course, this really only matters to stuff pre-2000 or so. This. This is what I'm most interested in. I want studios to start doing 8k scans and restorations of their 35mm films for 4k releases.
|
|
#
?
Feb 23, 2015 19:32
|
|
|
Viper_3000 posted:
Here's where things get convoluted, at least for Warner. Warner has jumped in with not only 4k, but Dolby Vision as well. Their 4k titles are going to be Dolby Vision titles. Dolby Vision is only optional for the UHD Blu-ray standard. I do not know if that's optional from the disc, or optional from the player perspective. If it's optional from the player perspective, then I would guess that most (at least initially) will not have it because that's the way things generally go with "optional." So, if Warner cannot guarantee that UHD Blu-ray players can do Dolby Vision, they will likely keep their 4k titles for streaming only and forgo UHD blu-ray releases.
|
|
#
?
Feb 23, 2015 20:46
|
|
|
bull3964 posted:Will UHD blu-ray have the same fate? Most likely. I don't see how it won't be niche for videophiles, especially looking at the adoption rates of normal blu ray. Everyone else will be happy with streaming options though... If that means we only get limited releases like the criterion collection, I'm totally cool with it. And I'll even rebuy em in 8k (cough ron fricke cough) Viper_3000 posted:The Amira firmware isn't a true 4K though, it's upscaled. It upscales 3.2k to 3.8! Kinda awesome. zer0spunk fucked around with this message at 21:33 on Feb 23, 2015 |
|
#
?
Feb 23, 2015 21:23
|
|
|
I'm just envisioning a lot of fragmentation. X studio will only be available on Y service while W studio will only be available on Z service. Oh, Z service has their own streaming dongle and partners only with certain TV vendors. So, you'll have 5 different streaming sticks hanging off the back of your TV to get the content you want. Additional caveat on top off all that, only certain services will have all the various features. Buy 4k movie on amazon and view it on a FireTV Stick, no Dolby Vision for you!. Buy a Samsung TV and watch the movie through Warner Bros own streaming service, now you get all your features!. You better hope that you don't decide to switch TV brands lest you get a lower quality streaming option.
|
|
#
?
Feb 23, 2015 21:31
|
|
|
That's going to kill the market totally. You're most likely right, but it will have to distill down to some kind of across the board standards over time. Look at HDDVD and blu ray in the same market, and that wasn't as proprietary as what you're describing.
zer0spunk fucked around with this message at 21:39 on Feb 23, 2015 |
|
#
?
Feb 23, 2015 21:35
|
|
|
That's why I'm not very optimistic about all of this. The studios crave control. Race to the bottom tanked DVD margins so they tried to prop them up with blu-ray. Blu-ray resisted for awhile, but then they tanked too. It's just not possible to consume that much shelf-space in retail and not be subject to market forces. Stores want to move volume and they aren't going to do that with MSRP. Now, on blu-ray, you already have this sort of lovely situation where the Target version of the blu-ray will have x special feature while the Best Buy one will have y special feature. If you want a comprehensive release, you have to buy the movie 3 times over half the time. This is all an effort to both prop up margins and to negotiate for prominent shelf space in the various retailers. Then you have vendors like Amazon who follow their own rules for pricing that further devalue the market. Streaming is their out. Releasing on UHD blu-ray will be more of the same, margin erosion until UHD blu-rays are in the $5 bargin tub at Best Buy. They DO NOT want this again. Streaming works differently since the content is really just being licensed and there's no physical product to stock. Prices are much more stable. Big Hero 6 blu-ray is 53% off MSRP on amazon at $18. Big Hero 6 3d on Vudu is $34.99 and it will likely always be $34.99. That's also why they've been doing digital releases weeks before the blu-ray release. Margin is much higher on the digital release so they're hoping a timed exclusive will push people in that direction. So, you have physical media + premium product yet again with UHD blu-ray and the studios already know that this does not work out well for them in the long term. 4k streaming is already here now, so it's going to be much easier for the studios to ignore a physical format and focus on the thing they can more tightly control.
|
|
#
?
Feb 23, 2015 22:06
|
|
|
bull3964 posted:That's why I'm not very optimistic about all of this. It all leads back to this country having incredibly lovely internet across the board. Netflix 4k (we'll call it "4k") is out for anyone with bandwidth caps. h265 is going to be super fun because all of a sudden you're going to have a ton of folks that can't handle HEVC at all without upgrading something (tv, receiver, player, etc). A smart way to go would be reverting back to the redbox/old netflix model but using self booting flash media. UHD files are quickly loaded from a server with insane bandwidth onto a small portable flash stick. Users pay a small fee to own the stick (so no one loses or resells them)..Sticks are able to plug into any capable display and play using their own headless software..content erases itself after licensing period is up. You'd just need to lower the cost ratio on 64/128 gig flash media for it to be viable...
|
|
#
?
Feb 23, 2015 22:24
|
|
|
I would wager the overlap of people buying the latest and greatest 4k TV and having lovely internet will be pretty small for the most part. A hardware purchase is going to be necessary for UHD blu-ray regardless, so that's not a huge knock against streaming if your tv was one of the early ones that doesn't support HEVC. I just don't see a huge buy in for studios beyond expensive collector's editions because they don't want to support yet another commodity media format that they have little control over pricing. If they have 50% higher margins on streaming, they can afford to have fewer people buy it. They also obliterate the used market at the same time.
|
|
#
?
Feb 23, 2015 22:35
|
|
|
bull3964 posted:I would wager the overlap of people buying the latest and greatest 4k TV and having lovely internet will be pretty small for the most part. I wouldn't.
|
|
#
?
Feb 24, 2015 06:08
|
|
|
So my tax money arrived this week and it's burning a hole in my pocket. I've picked out a VIZIO M652i-B2 65-Inch and this mount. However, after looking into the specs and seeing only 720p runs at 240hz I am having reservations. I watch a lot of movies and do some pc gaming on my tv currently. The price of the Vizio is about right for my budget, with a bit of wiggle room if something really great is out there. Is it worth looking for something around 60in and 240hz in 1080p or will there be little to no difference? Open to other recommendations but I really want a set at 60+ inches. My viewing distance is something like ~6ft. MacheteZombie fucked around with this message at 19:37 on Feb 24, 2015 |
|
#
?
Feb 24, 2015 19:04
|
|
|
MacheteZombie posted:So my tax money arrived this week and it's burning a hole in my pocket. 60-120 is plenty for 1080p. Most people don't have a graphics card that can push past 60-120 on modern non-indie titles.
|
|
#
?
Feb 24, 2015 22:54
|
|
|
I'm in the same boat as the gentlemen above. I'm looking for a 60" led with 240hz for less than 1200 bucks and I am not having good luck. Does it make that much of a difference over 120hz cause I see plenty of those. I watch football and all types of movies which I stream to my chromecast using videostream. Also would anyone buy a vizio that's planning on keeping the tv for longer than a year?
|
|
#
?
Feb 24, 2015 23:02
|
|
|
Goddamn it, my 3 year old Panasonic TH-P50GT30A just crapped itself. Google tells me 7 flashing lights = power supply. Cost me $1k to buy, quoted $560 to repair. That's unlikely to happen. So, new TV time. Seems Plasma TV's have gone out of fashion. *sigh* There are no sales :'( worst time to shop for a TV right now. EvilElmo fucked around with this message at 00:10 on Feb 25, 2015 |
|
#
?
Feb 25, 2015 00:06
|
|
|
EvilElmo posted:Goddamn it, my 3 year old Panasonic TH-P50GT30A just crapped itself. Google tells me 7 flashing lights = power supply. Cost me $1k to buy, quoted $560 to repair. That's unlikely to happen. If you wanna take out the power supply and mail it, these guys say they'll repair it for $68. Pay on eBay with your credit card through Paypal so just in case they get screwy you can do a chargeback: http://www.ebay.com/itm/Panasonic-T...=item2a483bf54d] I've actually done something like this for a loose phone jack and got the thing back fixed, so hey, works sometimes!
|
|
#
?
Feb 25, 2015 00:53
|
|
|
Zero VGS posted:If you wanna take out the power supply and mail it, these guys say they'll repair it for $68. Pay on eBay with your credit card through Paypal so just in case they get screwy you can do a chargeback: Probably cost a lot of cashola for international shipping and stuff though. I'll look into it.
|
|
#
?
Feb 25, 2015 02:34
|
|
|
I want a cheap 4K TV to mostly watch 1080p stuff but occasionally do poo poo like stream House of Cards Season 3 at 4k or maybe play Dark Souls with my GTX 970 at 4K. The couch is only like 10 feet away right now because my roommates only have a 32" 720p. Which should I get? $340 http://www.amazon.com/Seiki-SE39UY04-39-Inch-Ultra-120Hz/dp/B00DOPGO2G $450 plus sales tax: http://www.walmart.com/ip/Sceptre-U500CV-UMK-49-4K-Ultra-HD-60Hz-Class-LED-HDTV/39664946 First one can only hit 30hz at 4K so no gaming, but super cheap and good reviews, if it sucks I gottta return to Amazon. Second one can do 60hz at 4K, and bigger, but questionable reviews and more expensive. If it sucks I gotta drive it to Walmart.
|
|
#
?
Feb 25, 2015 03:42
|
|
|
Looks like the price on 55" LG OLED is starting to creep down further. I just don't think I'll be happy with 55" and want bigger. But the 65" is 8500.
|
|
#
?
Feb 26, 2015 06:19
|
|
|
OLED TVs look cool, and are on my list, but I'm fearful of 1st gen tech like this. How is the life of the TV estimated at? Any stange issues?
|
|
#
?
Feb 26, 2015 17:03
|
|
|
Well, it's more like 2 or 2.5 gen tech by now. I think with the most recent TVs, there really haven't been any issues that stand out more egregious than other types of TVs. I'm starting to wonder if it's realistic to expect any tv to last beyond 3 years or so anymore as it is. So, if the price is right, I wouldn't hesitate to dive in. I've been kicking myself for the lack of crystal ball last year when I got my W900A to replace my 55ST50. Granted, the OLED tv was still twice what I paid for the W900A, but since I was being reimbursed for the ST50 I could have made it work. I would have held on and lived with the yellow splotches on the ST50 until the price drops of the LG TV if I knew that was going to happen.
|
|
#
?
Feb 26, 2015 17:16
|
|
|
I don't know, the W900 is awesome and I'm sure will last more then three years...
|
|
#
?
Feb 26, 2015 17:18
|
|
|
LorneReams posted:OLED TVs look cool, and are on my list, but I'm fearful of 1st gen tech like this. How is the life of the TV estimated at? Any stange issues? I don't think there's any information on that. People have made guesses based on the manufacturing information they have on the blue OLED. Using information a couple years old, they basically put the blue pixel at half brightness after 5 years of 8 hours/day usage. But the issue is that that information is out of date, they haven't been around long enough to tell, and the companies aren't putting out any numbers. They are also prone to burn in like plasma before it, and again, there is no good information about how much of an issue that actually is.I would only go with OLED right now if you have a lot of money to throw around and you really really care about how good the video is, because it is the best picture on the market today.
|
|
#
?
Feb 26, 2015 17:25
|
|
|
bull3964 posted:I've been kicking myself for the lack of crystal ball last year when I got my W900A to replace my 55ST50. Granted, the OLED tv was still twice what I paid for the W900A, but since I was being reimbursed for the ST50 I could have made it work. I would have held on and lived with the yellow splotches on the ST50 until the price drops of the LG TV if I knew that was going to happen. LorneReams posted:I don't know, the W900 is awesome and I'm sure will last more then three years... Yeah, if you're not happy with that w900a I'd be happy to take it off your hands.
|
|
#
?
Feb 26, 2015 17:41
|
|
|
Fremry posted:They are also prone to burn in like plasma before it, and again, there is no good information about how much of an issue that actually is.I would only go with OLED right now if you have a lot of money to throw around and you really really care about how good the video is, because it is the best picture on the market today. Like with modern plasma, aren't burn in concerns greatly overstated? sellouts fucked around with this message at 17:55 on Feb 26, 2015 |
|
#
?
Feb 26, 2015 17:48
|
|
|
sellouts posted:Like with modern plasma, aren't burn in concerns greatly overstated? 
|
|
#
?
Feb 26, 2015 18:05
|
|
|
Wilford Cutlery posted:Yeah, if you're not happy with that w900a I'd be happy to take it off your hands. Ha, I'm plenty happy with it, it's just that after my dealings with Panasonic, it just seems like sooner or later a component will fail even on high end TVs. The W900A does seem to be a solid one though, been out for almost two years and the thread on AVS really hasn't reported any failure trends with it. I've had it for just over a year now and still love it. It's just that OLED is so pretty... But, i'll probably keep the W900A for a few more years until 4k REC2020 compliant OLED TVs are truly affordable and really robust. Either that or we'll get to the point where I'll say gently caress the living room TV and watch everything through an Oculus Rift. butt dickus posted:Note (heh) yellow where you would expect white due to blue OLEDs wearing faster. This is an extreme example, but I still wouldn't buy any current OLED TV. To be fair, if you used a plasma under those same circumstances, it would be just as bad if not worse. Besides, they are fundamentally different. The phone display uses RGB LEDs. LG uses all white LEDs behind a color filter. Pixels on the LG OLED TVs should not wear at different rates based on their color (only due to runtime.) bull3964 fucked around with this message at 18:13 on Feb 26, 2015 |
|
#
?
Feb 26, 2015 18:09
|
|
|
I have a 55" Samsung TV (3D too) that I almost never watch, don't even know why I bought it. I don't feel like the quality is different though except that it's way bigger. I can see the quality change on the HD channels though of course.
|
|
#
?
Feb 26, 2015 18:16
|
|
|
bull3964 posted:LG uses all white LEDs behind a color filter.
|
|
#
?
Feb 26, 2015 18:23
|
|
|
butt dickus posted:So it's like an LCD but with individual backlights for each subpixel? More or less yeah. It gives all the advantages of RGB AMOLED while side-stepping a lot of the yield and wear issues. It probably adds a bit more thickness which would make it unsuitable for a phone, but it's fine for a TV. Their TVs also include a 4th unfiltered white subpixel to boost brightness without having to run the filtered ones at high output to help wear leveling even more. http://www.cnet.com/news/lg-says-white-oled-gives-it-ten-years-on-tv-competition/
|
|
#
?
Feb 26, 2015 18:28
|
|
|
It seems like you'd also lose the power savings of OLED as you're throwing away all that light just like an LED.
|
|
#
?
Feb 26, 2015 18:37
|
|
|
butt dickus posted:It seems like you'd also lose the power savings of OLED as you're throwing away all that light just like an LED. Well, that sort of power saving's isn't really necessary for a TV, but that's also something the 4th white pixel helps to mitigate. It really is an elegant solution to many of OLED woes and LG is right is saying it's amazing no one has followed them down that route.
|
|
#
?
Feb 26, 2015 18:44
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 12, 2024 15:15 |
|
|
I'll agree that it's a good compromise that at least stops blue from burning out faster than the other two. What's the half-brightness life on those white OLEDs?
|
|
#
?
Feb 26, 2015 18:59
|
|