First Blu-Rays Mastered For 4K Ultra Hdtv's
Posted 17 May 2013 - 06:33 PM
Posted 17 May 2013 - 07:33 PM
I think the benefit here is in more attention to the mastering process rather than the medium itself.
Posted 17 May 2013 - 08:13 PM
Posted 18 May 2013 - 01:06 AM
Views from different camera angles with different aperture settings can look decidedly different in their finer detail; causing a distracting change when viewing a feature film at close range that alternates between different camera angles. One can become conscious of changes in depth of field, disturbing the viewing experience. (I sometimes notice this when watching old black and white movies.)
A very significant issue is the blurring when panning horizontally and shooting at 24fps with conventional exposure times (a 180 degree shutter). Even with frame interpolation in a display device, horizontal detail drops dramatically during a horizontal pan. If we really want to increase visibility of fine detail we will need to increase the frame rate of the shooting of the movie. This was done recently in Peter Jackson's The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey, albeit with what was probably a compromise. The exposure angle used was 270 degrees instead of the traditional 180 degrees. This I presume would have been a compromise for later projection at 24fps of every second captured frame for conventional projectors; and at the full 48fps for the new high frame-rate projectors. To have exposed each frame for only 1/96th second would have been too short a time for projection at 24fps: it would have introduced a noticeable strobing effect for some cinema goers, worse that the usual jitter during a medium paced 24fps pan.
Edited by MLXXX, 18 May 2013 - 01:19 AM.
Posted 18 May 2013 - 09:21 AM
True 4K would be no compromise path.....but for us 1080p projector owners the higher bit rate disks will/could be a interim solution as long as there is no premium charge.......and agree all BR encodes should be optimised....but I feel for cost sake the studios auto encode most of the stuff.
Posted 20 May 2013 - 12:22 PM
Posted Yesterday, 09:48 PM
I'm guessing if you've got the choice between a vanilla & 4K version, with both costing the same, then you've only got something to gain by going for the latter (if extras don't interest you)?
Posted Yesterday, 10:10 PM
Posted Today, 02:14 AM
A soft transfer can hide flaws. You may find a cgi sequence loses its realism if transferred at maximum resolution. Or an actress's skin may looks a little blotchy (e.g. a close up, with unforgiving maximum resolution). You could see some minor pixelation in frames containing rapid random motion. You could conceivably see some moiré patterns. You could very easily see video noise in dimly lit scenes.
Most blu-rays are on the soft side not just to keep the bitrate down so as to be able to make room for extras. They are intentionally soft so as to give a smooth cinematic look at all times, rather than an occasionally digital look.