Anyone hype for UHD Blu-Ray?
>physical media
>>63824594
It feels good knowing piratefags are about to get BTFO by the government.
It's looking like it will be a DOA format.
Digital is getting pushed hard by the studios now. Plus the major retail stores like Best Buy, Walmart and Target have been cutting back their home video sections harshly.
>>63824594
Also, why are you replying to yourself, OP? There was literally only one poster before I replied.
>>63824714
It's confirmed that they will be discs.
>>63824714
Yeah, plus DVD still has about 70% market share to this day.
I fully expect 4k will be a massive niche only thing. Even more so than laserdisc back in the day.
>>63824147
It scares me
>>63824852
>actually believe market share today means something
Everything is kicking DVD off.
>>63825026
The big studios are making huge pushes for digital right now. They want everything to be streamed. Bigger profits and they can pull the content anytime.
>>63825802
that guy on the right, my sides
>>63825802
Me on the left
>>63824698
BitTorrent need to fucking die anyway. Bigger and better things ahead, especially when we're talking about distributing 4K content rapidly.
Will it work with PS3 or current PC BD drives?
Could be cool to rip 4K BDs to my computer
>>63824147
It's sounds as exiting as the 3d TV.
most ppl still don't even own bluray players, and those that do have one dont buy disks anymore
I can't wait. Got a new TV that'll be compatible and 1080p is for plebs
>>63824147
what i want is:
UUUHD
200TB
laser disc physical format
exponent world jet style case as standard
is that too much to ask
Give it a few years to get big. 4K TVs are just starting to become popular enough to warrant new physical media. People get the TV and sit on it for a year or two, and then they get the discs.
I read something about most of the films in the first wave of UHD BD releases not being 'true' 4K, as in maybe the digital camera used to shoot the film didn't shoot that high, or they were 'mastered' (all the digital effects and post production shit?) was at less than 4K. Is this truth?
>>63826894
Attack of the Clones, one of the first films to be done entirely in digital, was filmed in 1080p, so any 4K release will need to be up-scaled, so any 4K release will be pretty much identical to the BR.
http://www.theverge.com/2015/11/11/9713580/4k-uhd-blu-rays-announced-release-date
>When they do hit retail, Sony says its UHD titles will support HDR, which will result in a much bolder, brighter picture
>Just oversaturate my shit up senpai
>>63824147
On older films that were shot on film the quality will never be able get better than 4k right? So some movie from the 1990s once you buy it on 4k bluray you're set untill you die because there will never be a better quality copy?
>>63824147
>getting hyped for 4K
>not for 8K
pretty glib to be honest
>>63827877
basically yes, which makes me very happy
http://caps-a-holic.com/c.php?a=1&x=479&y=200&d1=6625&d2=6851&s1=62432&s2=64731&l=0&i=14&go=1
From here you can see the difference between 4k and 2k is slight, the grain is just more detailed and stronger. 2k is pretty much good enough for me though.
>>63827877
Depends on the film used. 35mm film ranges from about 4 to 16 megapixels, but some people quote 20. Obviously 72mm is a lot more. 4 K resolution is around 8 million megapixels, so a lot of films can be upscaled beyond 4K, 8K is probably the limit for the majority of movies.
Obviously film doesn't really have pixels, but its easier to just pretend that they do. Also I'm ignoring things like grain and noise which add difficulties to conversion.
Can't wait until physical media is dead and the internet speeds are able to support bluray quality streaming
>>63824594
>legal
>highest bitrate
>special features, deleted scenes, commentary
>something to showcase on your shelf
