Thread: Oppo BD 105D

Posts: 68
Page: prev 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 next

Post by AmonRa June 3, 2015 (21 of 68)
I do not believe 4K disk format is going to take off at all. BluRay did not take off in a meaningful way, DVD is still much bigger. Now network sources are stronger than ever (my kids do not buy disks anymore, everything comes online). 4K does not offer much in a domestic setting, many people can not even distinguish between SD and HD from the normal viewing distances. Those with dedicated home theaters are a small minority, they might buy, no matter what the cost.

I will be getting a new TV for my cave later this year, and it will be 4K. Not for 4K movies, but for better still picture presentations.

Post by onenairb June 4, 2015 (22 of 68)
samayoeruorandajin said:

Watch it happen. I know I don't watch BR or DVDs much any more. Netflix and Amazon Prime are my main sources of HD viewing. And I'm not the only one.

I think you mean disc will become obsolete. Data is contained on the media disc or streamed whether the data is music, film, pictures

Software is a completely different thing - software is the generic term to describe operating system, firmware, applications (including games) etc that drive your computer, streamer, bluray player, mobile phone, tablet, games platform etc

Post by samayoeruorandajin June 4, 2015 (23 of 68)
I think most people understood what I meant.

Post by Iain June 4, 2015 (24 of 68)
onenairb said:

I think you mean disc will become obsolete. Data is contained on the media disc or streamed whether the data is music, film, pictures

Software is a completely different thing - software is the generic term to describe operating system, firmware, applications (including games) etc that drive your computer, streamer, bluray player, mobile phone, tablet, games platform etc

Perhaps the source of this confusion is this forum:
http://www.avsforum.com/forum/150-blu-ray-software/

... as it's the only forum I'm aware of that uses this term in that context. Also, BD contains much more than video streams, It also contains Java and other software components.

It's a semantics issue, regardless.

Post by Fitzcaraldo215 June 4, 2015 (25 of 68)
AmonRa said:

I do not believe 4K disk format is going to take off at all. BluRay did not take off in a meaningful way, DVD is still much bigger. Now network sources are stronger than ever (my kids do not buy disks anymore, everything comes online). 4K does not offer much in a domestic setting, many people can not even distinguish between SD and HD from the normal viewing distances. Those with dedicated home theaters are a small minority, they might buy, no matter what the cost.

I will be getting a new TV for my cave later this year, and it will be 4K. Not for 4K movies, but for better still picture presentations.

There are really at least two issues in the typical chicken/egg process in rolling out new technologies in the consumer market. One is the hardware delivery side. I do not think there will be any stopping 4k displays and players from becoming dominant in new equipment sales and superceding today's standards. That will occur whether people watch TV, Blu-Rays, DVDs or streaming in 4k or not. It is supply-push rather than demand-pull.

The best displays and players will be the newer 4k capable ones and the older 2k gear will be gradually relegated to the bargain basement at Walmart, etc. until they eventually disappear, except perhaps in Third World countries. The engineers who design this stuff for the big consumer makers will all be working on the newest 4k technology, and none will be working on further improving video capabilities for just 2k -capable gear. 2k equipment will become obsolete in time, but 4k gear will of course handle all the older formats.

When I bought a new bedroom display last year, to get the best picture and features, I had to buy a 3-d capable set, though I never have and likely never will watch anything in 3-d. That 3-d was a flop was irrelevant. The best sets even for 2-d all had 3-d, too.

I do not think 4k adoption is anything like 3-d adoption, however, in terms of potential viewing quality and enjoyment. You just need a bigger set or sit closer to make the most if it. Some people will do that, others not. The 4k standard also will offer more than just more pixels. The color rendition with 4k sources promises to be much better, as well, regardless of viewing distance or screen size. Existing 4k sets might not have have that capability, which might take time to fully emerge.

4k discs, on the other hand, might indeed face a much longer, slower and more difficult task in being adopted and superceding BD or DVD, even as the installed base of 4K hardware becomes the norm. I do not know yet whether 4k discs will be downward compatible with 2k players, but that would certainly ease the transition.

It should also be interesting to see how 4k streaming by Netflix and others plays out. The availability of 4k material on disc or via streaming will help 4k equipment sales, again chicken/egg style. Had 4k BD been available, I might well have opted for a 4k set last year, since they were available. An eventual shift in TV broadcast standards to 4k would also be huge, although watching TV broadcasts over the air or by cable is declining relatively, I believe, except for live sports.

I question whether DVD is still bigger than BD in more advanced markets, like the US. By most expert commentaries, BD has been a big success. There were plenty of comments when BD was introduced about most people supposedly not being able to see the difference vs. DVD. That did not stop BD's success story, one reason being that opinion proved patently false. And, finding a decent DVD-only player is virtually impossible today. They may still be in the bargain basement at Walmart, but there are absolutely none on display at my local Best Buy or at Crutchfield, two big electronics mass marketers.

I personally do not buy movie discs, although I do buy BD-A and BD-V classical, plus the occasional historical DVD performance if that is all that is available. I do stream Netflix, etc., but even for movies, I greatly prefer playing a rented BD because audio and video quality are much better than streaming.

Post by onenairb June 5, 2015 (26 of 68)
samayoeruorandajin said:

I think most people understood what I meant.

Sorry. Didn't mean to patronise. I used to be a software engineer and often had to explain the differences to stop customer confusion.... moving on :)

Post by Yoropiko1 June 5, 2015 (27 of 68)
onenairb said:

Erm.. how will software ever be obsolete?

If you refer to the " software " being the discs themselves ( ie DVDs and Blu rays ) then I guess like videotape they will become obsolete purely because the "hardware " required to play them will cease to exist in any meaningful way. Of course even today although many formats have bit the dust, there is always a healthy second hand market of legacy playback hardware which can still be found. Even old 78 records can still be played today after all!

I hear many people harking about how most people see no benefit to 4K visually over existing blu ray and of course heard the same argument back when Blu ray was released following DVD. I genuinely don't know anybody EVER who couldn't see a quality difference between the various formats unless of course they had very bad eyesight! Now if we re word it, and say "most people cannot perceive a benefit over one format over the one that it followed ", by perceived we mean they see no value, ie they wouldn't pay a premium for the " extra " resolution. Thats not the same thing as them not being able to physically " see " a difference!

We talk here of how we can hear the subtle differences between low bit rate audio over high rez PCM and DSD, yet those differences are vastly harder to detect than the difference between DVD, Blu Ray and 4K video.

Lets say I set up 3 identical screens , all 50 inches. Screen one is a 852 x 480 rez screen, screen two is a 1920 x 1080 rez screen and screen 3 is a 3840 x 2160 rez screen. Humour me, lets say they are all LCD LED models from the same manufacturer using the same screen tech, the only difference is the resolution. Play DVD through the first screen, Blu Ray through the second screen and 4K through the third screen, so the native resolution of the format matches the screen as close as possible. Play the exact same movie clip through all three and have the screens side by side. Is anybody honestly telling me that only a small percentage of the population could tell which was which??
Lets say you play all 3 formats through a 4K screen and let the screen upscale the DVD and Blu ray formats so they are all equal. Yes its going to be harder but the native 4K will be razor sharp, the blu ray a bit softer and the DVD, well it will look like burry VHS. Ive not seen any upscaling that comes close to native video no matter how good or expensive it is.

So my point is, and sorry for waffling is I believe most everybody can see a difference and appreciates it, as to if they are willing to buy it is another thing altogether, and in that regard 4K blu ray is at no less advantage to 4K streaming. If you see no point in 4K, they you won't buy into any 4K, period no matter how its delivered.

Post by AmonRa June 5, 2015 (28 of 68)
Yoropiko1 said:

Lets say I set up 3 identical screens , all 50 inches. Screen one is a 852 x 480 rez screen, screen two is a 1920 x 1080 rez screen and screen 3 is a 3840 x 2160 rez screen.

You do not specify the viewing distance. The human eye has a certain acutance angle, sharpness beyond which can not be perceived. Many people look at their TVs so far away, that BluRay goes to waste, even more so 4K. Looking at the screens close enough makes things easy, of course. We should talk about real life situations, not close-up testing.

Better colors are a different matter, though. That is not resolution dependent, but BR & 4K have wider gamut by design.

Post by Yoropiko1 June 6, 2015 (29 of 68)
AmonRa said:

You do not specify the viewing distance.

This is true, and of course as the resolution increases the ability to differentiate the higher resolutions will become harder if the same viewing distance is maintained.

I personally view from about 8ft away, of course that will vary from household to household but I am sure that at that distance I and most others would be able to discern a difference between the resolutions all else being equal. I have a 60" screen at home and I don't think I view especially close or far away compared to most other people.

The increase in resolution is also perhaps why more people have adopted larger and larger screen sizes over the years. In the days of DVD, pictures looked pretty poor on screens bigger than 50 inches in my opinion. I only went and purchased a larger TV when Blu ray arrived, and I would seriously consider a 70"+ screen ( funds permitting of course ) once I could view native 4K on it. In fact my plan is to do exactly that, I will only purchase a 4K screen once 4K blu ray becomes a commercial reality and you can be sure that I will go up a screen size from my current 60" because of the greater resolution on offer : )

Post by Disbeliever June 6, 2015 (30 of 68)
I view a 55" screen from 14ft away and listen to my my CD/SACD same distance , I would not waste money paying extra for 4K , it ever becomes available I find both DVD & BD are excellent on my Samsung LED TV , so is SD TV ,I never even bother with HD which is freely available. IMO viewing a 60" TV from only 8 ft away is far too close and not the norm.

Page: prev 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 next

Closed