|
|
Post by Talley on Feb 1, 2016 20:38:12 GMT -5
Well all data passing over the internet is a stream of bits (duh). Streaming is real time data passed directly to a display device with little in the way of buffer or storage. File transfer is not tied to any given broadband speed, but of course the slower, the longer the download takes. File transfer is by packets with error correction techniques to a storage device, thus it is not speed dependent. . Of course some type of compression codec must be used such as H.265 codec, which is commonly referred to as HEVC (High Efficiency Video Codec). The HEVC codec is more efficient than its predecessor. There are currently plans for 66GB (dual layer) and 100GB (triple layer) UHD Blu-ray discs. The goal with the new disc sizes is to keep movies on a single disc. The data rate for the 66GB discs will be 108mbps and the data rate for the 100GB discs will increase to 128mbps. Here is a little blurb about Vidity and their patented large file handling system. tv.about.com/od/cableandsatellitetv/fl/Introducing-Vidity-Delivering-4K-Movies-to-the-Broadband-Challenged.htmBut what is the bitrate of the movies you are downloading? I'm well versed in this area I don't need any explanation. I was just trying to understand the bitrate of the video your downloading vs. the data rate of the discs. I'm never fond of spending money on a movie that is not a hard media which I understand from now to the past couple years 4K has been few and far between. The players are really going to help move things along. Even though blu-ray discs/players can handle 54mbps they rarely do... mostly keep around 28-32mpbs because of all the "added" features that take up space. |
|
|
|
Post by mgbpuff on Feb 1, 2016 22:38:31 GMT -5
Blu-ray data rates are not directly comparable to UHD data rates because of the difference between H.264 and H.265 HVECs. So I don't have the faintest idea either but I would guess the MGO is for 4K 30hz whereas the new UHD disk can do 4K 60hz. Exodus a 150 minute movie on MGO takes up 100GB of disc space. That corresponds to 11Mbps of HEVC H.265 data. Now I'm lost. ( correction - 100GB of disc space is in gigabytes so the gigabit data rate is 11mps x 8 = 88mps)
|
|
bootman
Emo VIPs 
Typing useless posts on internet forums....
Posts: 9,358
|
Post by bootman on Feb 1, 2016 23:15:16 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by bluemeanies on Feb 2, 2016 7:09:07 GMT -5
jmilton...thanks for the thread. SO MANY CHOICES. I still have my SAMSUNG LCD tv and it operates flawlessly. Of course no it is not HD capable and until it bites the dust OR the Mrs. gets the bug I will be a long way from getting 4K. My second display is my Mitshibishi projector...which also operates flawlessly...so it looks like I have a long wait. Again THANKS! |
|
|
|
Post by mgbpuff on Feb 2, 2016 9:11:32 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by Talley on Feb 2, 2016 10:28:08 GMT -5
Current internet structures can only really accomodate around 15mbps feeds. It's an bigger issue with TV providers since they are bandwidth limited. They "Could" offer something like 4K TV to "ONE" tv and 1080P to the others but not multiples... I could see something like that happening. I read while back that your satallite feeds are only 720P and they are upconverted at your receiver back to 1080... I can tell you this the bluray disc on my 135" screen look a million times better than direct TV does... Direct TV looks like a DVD. You have RAW video... which is huge amounts of video with maxed out bitrates... I can record this with my 5D3 with a firmware hack but will fill a 125GB card with only 25MIN of video = a full 2hr movie would take some 600+GB but this is RAW 1080P and not raw 4k. Cameras that will allow raw recording are costly and require super fast memory cards. MOST cameras take the raw data and record the video to a memory card via a compressed codec. (all-i, IPB, mpeg, .mov etc) when it's compressed it's done so by a bitrate. bit rate is how ALL VIDEO are encoded and played back... it has nothing to do with internet streaming... it applies to ALL DIGITAL VIDEO. The higher the bitrate the higher the quality. When you move to RAW you get MAX quality that specific sensor can produce. 95% of video is recorded directly from the camera to a memory card in a compressed format. Most consumer cameras record around 25-40Mbps in their ability. 1080P bluray allows a maximum 54Mbps bitrate while 4K will be around 108Mbps if not more but this is because you have MORE resolution. It's the problem with my Phantom 3 drone... sure it does 4K but it's only at 40Mbps so it's not really truly 4K quality... it's a compressed version per se'. When that video is downloaded form that guys divinity site and it's 100GB for a movie well then I do believe it is the same quality as you would find on the disc itself. But streaming vimeo, netflix, youtube at 4K.... NOPE... your only getting 20% of the actual IQ you can achieve with the actual media of the disc and or full size disc downloaded to a hard drive. |
|
|
|
Post by Talley on Feb 2, 2016 10:30:37 GMT -5
I guess it doesn't help that my #1 passion in life is photography and I'm very picky about colors and sharpness. So I notice subpar video when I see it.
|
|
|
|
Post by mgbpuff on Feb 2, 2016 10:37:31 GMT -5
Talley - "When that video is downloaded form that guys divinity (sic - it's Vidity) site and it's 100GB for a movie well then I do believe it is the same quality as you would find on the disc itself. " Whew, that took a long time for you to finally admit!  |
|
|
|
Post by Talley on Feb 2, 2016 12:24:32 GMT -5
Talley - "When that video is downloaded form that guys divinity (sic - it's Vidity) site and it's 100GB for a movie well then I do believe it is the same quality as you would find on the disc itself. " Whew, that took a long time for you to finally admit! Took him a long time to just tell me the size of the video  Until then I could not find any information on it at all. I'm very much a stat person... keep up  |
|
|
|
Post by Talley on Feb 2, 2016 12:32:29 GMT -5
I should also state that most cameras that can do RAW 4K do so by either using SSD hard drives or external hard drives... not by memory cards.
|
|
|
|
Post by jmilton on Feb 2, 2016 14:52:45 GMT -5
|
|
KeithL
Administrator 
Posts: 10,261
|
Post by KeithL on Feb 2, 2016 14:55:05 GMT -5
The problem there is that it's still not assured..... One of the new UHD Blu-Ray discs can hold 100 gB+ of video, and will be using h.265 (HEVC), so that's "the target to match or beat"... and that works out to somewhere around 100 -125 mbps of data rate. However, it's not a given that all discs will be recorded at that data rate, or that the content itself will be good enough for it to matter. And, likewise, it's not a given that streaming services will do a good job encoding their data. The way the "back end of that math" works out is that current cable and streaming offerings rarely if ever look as good as a real HD Blu-Ray disc. Assuming that the same bandwidth limitations remain in effect, you can expect a slight improvement in quality because HEVC is more efficient than the older h.264 CODEC. (So, for a given bandwidth, and assuming a really well optimized conversion, an h.265 movie will look A LITTLE BIT better than one of the same size/bandwidth in the older h.264 CODEC. However, the difference because of that alone may be less than you were expecting.) I just upgraded to a UHD 4k TV (Samsung 50" - "mid-sized" by today's standards)... and I've acquired a few assorted trailers and demo clips to go with it... and so far... ... One or two really well produced demos and trailers I have look truly spectacular (which works out to about 15 minutes of really good looking 4k video) ... I haven't tried NetFlix 4k yet - partly because none of their 4k content is stuff I actually CARE about (although I'll certainly be signing up eventually) ... Likewise, of the list of movies which are supposedly going to be the first 4k releases, there are only one or two that I care enough about to buy them again in 4k ... Oddly (or annoyingly) most of the movies that I would REALLY like to see in 4k aren't even on the list yet ... And, yes, the TV does a really nice job upsampling HD Honestly, it seemed like it would have been foolish to upgrade to a new HD TV to replace the old one - but I'm still sort of waiting for the "excitement of 4k" part to happen... Talley - "When that video is downloaded form that guys divinity (sic - it's Vidity) site and it's 100GB for a movie well then I do believe it is the same quality as you would find on the disc itself. " Whew, that took a long time for you to finally admit! |
|
|
|
Post by Talley on Feb 2, 2016 15:07:29 GMT -5
The problem there is that it's still not assured..... One of the new UHD Blu-Ray discs can hold 100 gB+ of video, and will be using h.265 (HEVC), so that's "the target to match or beat"... and that works out to somewhere around 100 -125 mbps of data rate. However, it's not a given that all discs will be recorded at that data rate, or that the content itself will be good enough for it to matter. And, likewise, it's not a given that streaming services will do a good job encoding their data. The way the "back end of that math" works out is that current cable and streaming offerings rarely if ever look as good as a real HD Blu-Ray disc. Assuming that the same bandwidth limitations remain in effect, you can expect a slight improvement in quality because HEVC is more efficient than the older h.264 CODEC. (So, for a given bandwidth, and assuming a really well optimized conversion, an h.265 movie will look A LITTLE BIT better than one of the same size/bandwidth in the older h.264 CODEC. However, the difference because of that alone may be less than you were expecting.) I just upgraded to a UHD 4k TV (Samsung 50" - "mid-sized" by today's standards)... and I've acquired a few assorted trailers and demo clips to go with it... and so far... ... One or two really well produced demos and trailers I have look truly spectacular (which works out to about 15 minutes of really good looking 4k video) ... I haven't tried NetFlix 4k yet - partly because none of their 4k content is stuff I actually CARE about (although I'll certainly be signing up eventually) ... Likewise, of the list of movies which are supposedly going to be the first 4k releases, there are only one or two that I care enough about to buy them again in 4k ... Oddly (or annoyingly) most of the movies that I would REALLY like to see in 4k aren't even on the list yet ... And, yes, the TV does a really nice job upsampling HD Honestly, it seemed like it would have been foolish to upgrade to a new HD TV to replace the old one - but I'm still sort of waiting for the "excitement of 4k" part to happen... Talley - "When that video is downloaded form that guys divinity (sic - it's Vidity) site and it's 100GB for a movie well then I do believe it is the same quality as you would find on the disc itself. " Whew, that took a long time for you to finally admit! Excellent post. I've read and also by my personal experience have found that the 1080P to 4K is not as dramatic as DVD to 1080P was. Which is why everything is moving to wider color gamuts and HDR dynamic ranges which will have more of an impact on IQ than 4K does.... ...unless your like me and sit 12' away from 135" screen then yes I'm in the ballpark figure where 4K can have a dramatic affect. But a 50" and 12' you'd be hard pressed to see a difference from 1080 to 4K. |
|
cawgijoe
Emo VIPs
"When you come to a fork in the road, take it." - Yogi Berra
Posts: 5,033
|
Post by cawgijoe on Feb 2, 2016 15:12:47 GMT -5
The problem there is that it's still not assured..... One of the new UHD Blu-Ray discs can hold 100 gB+ of video, and will be using h.265 (HEVC), so that's "the target to match or beat"... and that works out to somewhere around 100 -125 mbps of data rate. However, it's not a given that all discs will be recorded at that data rate, or that the content itself will be good enough for it to matter. And, likewise, it's not a given that streaming services will do a good job encoding their data. The way the "back end of that math" works out is that current cable and streaming offerings rarely if ever look as good as a real HD Blu-Ray disc. Assuming that the same bandwidth limitations remain in effect, you can expect a slight improvement in quality because HEVC is more efficient than the older h.264 CODEC. (So, for a given bandwidth, and assuming a really well optimized conversion, an h.265 movie will look A LITTLE BIT better than one of the same size/bandwidth in the older h.264 CODEC. However, the difference because of that alone may be less than you were expecting.) I just upgraded to a UHD 4k TV (Samsung 50" - "mid-sized" by today's standards)... and I've acquired a few assorted trailers and demo clips to go with it... and so far... ... One or two really well produced demos and trailers I have look truly spectacular (which works out to about 15 minutes of really good looking 4k video) ... I haven't tried NetFlix 4k yet - partly because none of their 4k content is stuff I actually CARE about (although I'll certainly be signing up eventually) ... Likewise, of the list of movies which are supposedly going to be the first 4k releases, there are only one or two that I care enough about to buy them again in 4k ... Oddly (or annoyingly) most of the movies that I would REALLY like to see in 4k aren't even on the list yet ... And, yes, the TV does a really nice job upsampling HD Honestly, it seemed like it would have been foolish to upgrade to a new HD TV to replace the old one - but I'm still sort of waiting for the "excitement of 4k" part to happen... I was not going to buy a 4K set for at least another year, but my set's HDMI board died and between the age of the set and parts availability I decided it was time for a new set. I think that if you are in that boat, it makes no sense to buy a non 4K set now, especially if it's your 'main" set. The prices are very good and if you are like me, you will keep the set for a long time. If your current set is fine and you are happy with it, by all means wait another few months to a year for more stability. Just my opinion of course.Talley - "When that video is downloaded form that guys divinity (sic - it's Vidity) site and it's 100GB for a movie well then I do believe it is the same quality as you would find on the disc itself. " Whew, that took a long time for you to finally admit! |
|
|
|
Post by restless on Aug 11, 2016 14:40:08 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by brutiarti on Aug 11, 2016 15:06:50 GMT -5
I guess all 4K equipment is already "outdated"  |
|
|
|
Post by jmilton on Aug 11, 2016 15:26:14 GMT -5
...not till the holo-deck gets perfected.
4K. Live long and prosper.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 11, 2016 17:07:50 GMT -5
Talley, your spot on nice post, I had a 50" 4K, returned it for a 1080 backlit full array 120hz motion 50" 100 bucks less. For my living room small and like Keith said in his post, 4K not much on Netflix worth the while..soooo...just a note I did own a 51" Sammy plasma 3D a few years ago loved it blacks where awesome but I paid over 1800 for it. The blacks on my 1080p just as good no bleed or grayish areas on the corners and paid less than half than the sammy...
|
|
|
|
Post by Gary Cook on Aug 11, 2016 18:15:37 GMT -5
Ultimately it was the lack of content that killed Betamax, video disk and saw the demise of 3D amongst many others. I see that as the #1 reason holding back 4K, simply not enough content right up front, in their faces, so the consumer can experience it. In the silver medal place, HDCP has some responsibility, for example sharing around content on copied VHS tapes was a brilliant introduction to the format. Sowed the seed, once hooked then consumerism took over. Keeping with the Olympic theme, in the bronze medal position there is the complexity, HDCP 2.2, HDMI 2.0, 30 frames, 60 frames, HDR etc. The KISS principle is right out the window, currently it's far too complex and ever changing for the average consumer to make a buying decision. That stops people from exercising their credit card.
4K may well be technically superior, but that on it's own has never guaranteed success. You have to convince the consumer that they really should have it, and right now that's a fail.
Cheers
Gary
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 11, 2016 19:33:45 GMT -5
gary, nicely done post good read on this thread. since the mid 90,s with the inception of Dolby Surround, and yes technology changes and improves speaking for me only, I'm staying put with 1080p and 5.2, 7.2.
|
|
Until then I could not find any information on it at all.
