RodhasGibson
Well-known member
Nugget, I think UHD Blu-Rays will have to be treated the same as standard blu-rays in as much as it all depends on the quality/source of the Mastering.So certain Films,when played back will hardly any improvement if any.Annoying as it is, Anyway I am waiting for my Pana UB900 Player to arrive from J L shortly,which I got for half price in a bundle with the New Pana 58" 902B.The TV by the way is awesome.
Native_bon
Well-known member
Seems there is a lot of confusion when it comes to 1080p and 4k material. 1080p material can never look better on a 4k tv set, it can only look as good as 1080p cause of the upscaling process.
On the other hand, you can get very good quality from 1080p,this will largely depend on the original video bitrate size. You only have to watch dwn converted YouTube video from 4k to 2k to see how good a 1080p display can perform.
HDR is not just about brightness but ability to display dark and bright and adding more contrast to the picture. 4k makes more sense for gamers. Any TV set 65inches and below makes no sense for viewing in 4k. May be except in the future when HDR and Dolby vision are fully established.
On the other hand, you can get very good quality from 1080p,this will largely depend on the original video bitrate size. You only have to watch dwn converted YouTube video from 4k to 2k to see how good a 1080p display can perform.
HDR is not just about brightness but ability to display dark and bright and adding more contrast to the picture. 4k makes more sense for gamers. Any TV set 65inches and below makes no sense for viewing in 4k. May be except in the future when HDR and Dolby vision are fully established.
Native_bon said:
so you're telling my sitting 6ft away from my 55" tv has no difference between 1080p and 4k.. *nea*
Native_bon
Well-known member
There may be if watching 4k material, but just artificially enhanced. The real difference from 1080p to 4k will come from HDR + DOLBY VISION and 75inches and above.nugget2014 said:
If I can't see any difference on the LG E6 I am not sure what I will do, it all then depends on the 2D performance.Native_bon said:
Native_bon
Well-known member
The E6 is a good TV set fullstop. If it were a 1080p set, it will still be the best 1080p set to buy. If you get what I mean.gel said:
4k doesnt matter just on the size. Its size to viewing distance ratio. You say 75 inches. What if you are 10ft away? 6ft from a 55 inch set would work as well as a projector and being further away. Or a monitor being closer.
Native_bon
Well-known member
The point am making is this. If you take that same 4k high bitrate and dwn convert it to 2k to play on a good 1080p set you could hardly tell the difference from the same distance.nugget2014 said:
4k is recorded in much higher bitrate hence much better picture quality. Now when you take high bitrate material and play on a screen over 65inches the 1080p displays starts to show clear lost of picture quality.
Native_bon
Well-known member
Native_bon said:
there's no 100gb uhd discs yet.so how can you use that as an argument? there's only 66gb discs used at the moment. and size of file has nothing to do with bitrate, the resolution increase demands more storage. but it could be the same bitrate or slightly higher, not night and day you are assuming.
I think 4k BluRays support 60 fps as opposed to the normal 24 fps.
HOWEVER, most movies are still shot at 24 fps and the human eye will struggle to percieve motion at higher "frame rates" anyway.
The main advantage of 4k remains smaller, more numerous pixels, which is best perceived by comparing size for size 625, 720, 1080 and 2160 (4k) Screens side by side.
HOWEVER, most movies are still shot at 24 fps and the human eye will struggle to percieve motion at higher "frame rates" anyway.
The main advantage of 4k remains smaller, more numerous pixels, which is best perceived by comparing size for size 625, 720, 1080 and 2160 (4k) Screens side by side.
Frank Harvey
Well-known member
Very few 1080p Blurays use 50Gb for picture, so presumably, like vinyl using more dynamic range than CD, UHD discs are using more space for video.
And the downsampling thing is the same as the claims that downsampled SACDs sound the same as CD - downsampling anything to a lower format is still better than the native lower format. Downsample Dolby TrueHD to Dolby Digital Plus and see how it sounds - still pretty impressive, but still way better than native DD+ due to the amount of compression used.
And the downsampling thing is the same as the claims that downsampled SACDs sound the same as CD - downsampling anything to a lower format is still better than the native lower format. Downsample Dolby TrueHD to Dolby Digital Plus and see how it sounds - still pretty impressive, but still way better than native DD+ due to the amount of compression used.
There is definitely benefit for 4k over 1080 that can't be in question however how much benefit the individual gets is affected by many factors
HDR is more of a benefit because it will change and improve the way content is mastered, it's all about the content quality to begin with and this allows for better production of content - I understand this more now I have seen it.
Let's not forget higher bit rate as well for colour gradation.
So at the moment the price of admission to this technology is high so to get 4k and high bit colour only might not justify the cost but doesn't mean it's not a true benefit to pq.
The issue for me is with the limited content available so you end up watching and buying crud just for something to watch on your shiny new boxes.
12 months time will be a good time for the format I think
HDR is more of a benefit because it will change and improve the way content is mastered, it's all about the content quality to begin with and this allows for better production of content - I understand this more now I have seen it.
Let's not forget higher bit rate as well for colour gradation.
So at the moment the price of admission to this technology is high so to get 4k and high bit colour only might not justify the cost but doesn't mean it's not a true benefit to pq.
The issue for me is with the limited content available so you end up watching and buying crud just for something to watch on your shiny new boxes.
12 months time will be a good time for the format I think
RodhasGibson
Well-known member
Gel take a look at this HDTV Test Summary
Summary
Let’s recap the problem in a nutshell: the HDR presentation in current Ultra HD Blu-ray films is not bright enough for viewing under moderate/ strong ambient lighting, because the HDR metadata forces compatible TVs to be driven at their maximum backlight capacity, leaving no room for higher light output. Of course, there exist other avenues (such as gamma adjustment or dynamic contrast trickery) to brighten the on-screen image for daytime viewing, but these are generally insubstantial compared with the most effective method of raising backlight luminance.
This issue is not confined to 4K Blu-ray – any HDR content that pushes backlight/ contrast to the limit for peak brightness while maintaining an SDR-like APL is going to suffer from the same problem. One potential solution is for manufacturers to provide the option to disable HDR mode either from the display or the Ultra HD BD player (so you’ll get 3840×2160 in SDR instead), but that would mean missing out on the most attractive component in the next wave of UHD (ultra high-definition) development.
Whilst it took the arrival of Ultra HD Blu-ray (so we could compare against standard Blu-ray) for us to spot the problem, it seems the video industry was already aware of this potential banana skin. A white paper titled “HDR/WCG Systems Survey: Emerging UHDTV Systems” published by leading calibration software developer SpectraCal here (email registration required to download) contains this illuminating snippet:
For HDR, the industry is considering 5 nits (cd/m2) to be a desirable surround luminance level.
5 cd/m2 is very dark, roughly the amount of light generated by five lit candles; any switched-on room lamp is likely to exceed this figure. With its usage pretty much restricted to a dark room (not dissimilar to 3D if you think about it), 4K HDR Blu-ray is a niche format that may become even more niche, although in fairness most video enthusiasts would do their critical viewing in a dimly-lit environment anyway. It will be interesting to see if HDR broadcast can succeed in the average living room which is typically not light-controlled…
Summary
Let’s recap the problem in a nutshell: the HDR presentation in current Ultra HD Blu-ray films is not bright enough for viewing under moderate/ strong ambient lighting, because the HDR metadata forces compatible TVs to be driven at their maximum backlight capacity, leaving no room for higher light output. Of course, there exist other avenues (such as gamma adjustment or dynamic contrast trickery) to brighten the on-screen image for daytime viewing, but these are generally insubstantial compared with the most effective method of raising backlight luminance.
This issue is not confined to 4K Blu-ray – any HDR content that pushes backlight/ contrast to the limit for peak brightness while maintaining an SDR-like APL is going to suffer from the same problem. One potential solution is for manufacturers to provide the option to disable HDR mode either from the display or the Ultra HD BD player (so you’ll get 3840×2160 in SDR instead), but that would mean missing out on the most attractive component in the next wave of UHD (ultra high-definition) development.
Whilst it took the arrival of Ultra HD Blu-ray (so we could compare against standard Blu-ray) for us to spot the problem, it seems the video industry was already aware of this potential banana skin. A white paper titled “HDR/WCG Systems Survey: Emerging UHDTV Systems” published by leading calibration software developer SpectraCal here (email registration required to download) contains this illuminating snippet:
For HDR, the industry is considering 5 nits (cd/m2) to be a desirable surround luminance level.
5 cd/m2 is very dark, roughly the amount of light generated by five lit candles; any switched-on room lamp is likely to exceed this figure. With its usage pretty much restricted to a dark room (not dissimilar to 3D if you think about it), 4K HDR Blu-ray is a niche format that may become even more niche, although in fairness most video enthusiasts would do their critical viewing in a dimly-lit environment anyway. It will be interesting to see if HDR broadcast can succeed in the average living room which is typically not light-controlled…
From everything I have read and seen 4K ultra HD blu Ray HDR is definitely a complete waste of money! *ok*
Of course it is. It doesnt have 3x the picture quality of 1080p blu ray. But is 3x the price (hardware) diminishing returns of the tv world. But everything is subjective. You havent had a good enough demo of 4k hdr to make you want to buy into the format.
I read a review of the new Samsung too which said HDR isn't good on it, that swung it for me.nugget2014 said:
Frank Harvey
Well-known member
Gel - before dismissing the best picture quality we can and have ever enjoyed in our homes, why not wait until there are a few more films out, do a little bit of research on which films really have been shot and mastered in 4K, then try those on a TV that actually does everything (HDR etc), THEN come back and state that 4K is a waste of money. What you're saying is like saying that hi-res music is a waste of money against CD on a £500 hi-fi system with average size bookshelf speakers.
I still say myself that a good 1080p screen is all that's needed for general everyday viewing on 40"/50"/60" screens, and that UHD is a projector format that will put 1080p to shame on a 180" (15 foot) wide screen.
On normal size screens, you have to take into account how good 1080p can look. With 1080p, you've already made the jump to HD, so any further HD improvements aren't going to be anywhere near as big. And don't forget that any comparison will be against upscaled 1080p Bluray - you're not watching Bluray at 1080 lines on a 4K screen.
I still say myself that a good 1080p screen is all that's needed for general everyday viewing on 40"/50"/60" screens, and that UHD is a projector format that will put 1080p to shame on a 180" (15 foot) wide screen.
On normal size screens, you have to take into account how good 1080p can look. With 1080p, you've already made the jump to HD, so any further HD improvements aren't going to be anywhere near as big. And don't forget that any comparison will be against upscaled 1080p Bluray - you're not watching Bluray at 1080 lines on a 4K screen.
Yep, I have tried around 8 discs though so far and still the same, I think most if not all were upscaled though. Like I say YouTube with a proper 4K forget HDR screen it does look good. Movies on YouTube not. And HDR don't seem to make much difference to the picture.David@FrankHarvey said:
Similar threads
TRENDING THREADS
-
-
I’m a wireless headphones expert and there are 6 new pairs I want to see launch in 2025
- Started by What Hi-Fi?
- Replies: 0
-
-
-
-
-
Facebook
Twitter
Instagram