Quake3World.com Forums
     General Discussion
        New 100GB Blu-ray Disc may be used for 4K films
Post new topicReply to topic
Login | Profile | | FAQ | Search | IRC




Previous topic | Next topic 
Topic Starter Topic: New 100GB Blu-ray Disc may be used for 4K films
DTS
Elite
Elite
Joined: 12 Jul 2000
Posts: 11553
PostPosted: 10-17-2013 07:43 AM           Profile Send private message  E-mail  Edit post Reply with quote


Quote:
Singulus announced that they have successfully produced a test batch of triple-layer Blu-ray discs. Each layer has been further optimized to store 33GB, up from current Blu-ray's 25GB. The press release specifically mentions 4K movies as a possible use case for the 100GB discs.


http://www.digital-digest.com/news-6375 ... ovies.html

Glad to know we won't have to wait too long for 4K. (There are already 4K TVs on the market, in case you don't know.)
Top
                 
GONNAFISTYA
Glayven?
Glayven?
Joined: 23 Jan 2005
Posts: 13025
PostPosted: 10-17-2013 07:46 AM           Profile Send private message  E-mail  Edit post Reply with quote


If someone is excited about 4k and doesn't plan on buying a screen larger than 100 inches, then that person has no clue what 4k is about and how it will not help them if they buy a screen that's only 42 inches.
Top
                 
DTS
Elite
Elite
Joined: 12 Jul 2000
Posts: 11553
PostPosted: 10-17-2013 07:54 AM           Profile Send private message  E-mail  Edit post Reply with quote


Depends how close you sit to the screen, plus colour is better with higher resolution, you may notice better colour detail even if you don't notice better pixel resolution detail. (Not sure if you quoted the exact numbers for optimal viewing distance, if so I'm sorry, without citing a source you seem to have just plucked those numbers out of the air.)

Anyway, you are looking at it from a negative viewpoint; the poisitive veiwpoint is that 4K enables screens 4x the size with the same level of detail (scaled up).
Top
                 
GONNAFISTYA
Glayven?
Glayven?
Joined: 23 Jan 2005
Posts: 13025
PostPosted: 10-17-2013 07:59 AM           Profile Send private message  E-mail  Edit post Reply with quote


I know exactly how 4k works and what benefits it brings, and how it only brings benefits to less than one-tenth of one percent of the mass market audience.
Yes, I am looking at it from a negative viewpoint, because it's a tech that's not really relevant for consumer use.

"Depends how close you sit to the screen"? Yeah...you have no idea what you're talking about and morons like you will waste your money on it. Believe the hype, it's your wallet.




Last edited by GONNAFISTYA on 10-17-2013 08:04 AM, edited 1 time in total.
Top
                 
losCHUNK
Truffle Shuffle
Truffle Shuffle
Joined: 08 May 2002
Posts: 17167
PostPosted: 10-17-2013 08:03 AM           Profile Send private message  E-mail  Edit post Reply with quote


Would make 3d viewing better n all, no ?

If that's your thing. I'm not excited and don't see the point either, if it becomes the new standard in a few yrs though it would be better, even marginally.



_________________
. : You knows you knows

Last edited by losCHUNK on 10-17-2013 08:05 AM, edited 1 time in total.
Top
                 
obsidian
I'm the dude!
I'm the dude!
Joined: 04 Feb 2002
Posts: 12498
PostPosted: 10-17-2013 08:03 AM           Profile Send private message  E-mail  Edit post Reply with quote


DTS wrote:
plus colour is better with higher resolution


:dork:



_________________
GtkRadiant | Q3Map2 | Shader Manual
Top
                 
DTS
Elite
Elite
Joined: 12 Jul 2000
Posts: 11553
PostPosted: 10-17-2013 08:05 AM           Profile Send private message  E-mail  Edit post Reply with quote


A quick comparison shows that going from a 35" 1080p screen, a 72" screen would be an upgrade suited to 4K.

http://displaywars.com/35-inch-16x9-vs-72-inch-16x9

So unless you are going to argue that a 35" screen is not good enough for HD (it looks great compared to 576p to me), I think you are mistaken about the screen needing to be 100". Also isn't there a 70-something inch 4K TV on the market; or are they all bigger than that?

I doubt TV manufacturers are going to sell 4K TVs that give the same picture as 1080p TVs, so your concern is misplaced, I think :sly:

obsidian wrote:
DTS wrote:
plus colour is better with higher resolution


:dork:


It is, it's like having more, multicoloured subpixels.
Top
                 
GONNAFISTYA
Glayven?
Glayven?
Joined: 23 Jan 2005
Posts: 13025
PostPosted: 10-17-2013 08:09 AM           Profile Send private message  E-mail  Edit post Reply with quote


lol now he's arguing about HD on small screens...where there's a clear benefit regardless of screen size.

Give it up. You are discussing something you clearly do not understand.
Top
                 
DTS
Elite
Elite
Joined: 12 Jul 2000
Posts: 11553
PostPosted: 10-17-2013 08:13 AM           Profile Send private message  E-mail  Edit post Reply with quote


No, I do understand. You need glasses. :dork:
Top
                 
GONNAFISTYA
Glayven?
Glayven?
Joined: 23 Jan 2005
Posts: 13025
PostPosted: 10-17-2013 08:30 AM           Profile Send private message  E-mail  Edit post Reply with quote


Awesome retort. Based on reality and everything.
Top
                 
DTS
Elite
Elite
Joined: 12 Jul 2000
Posts: 11553
PostPosted: 10-17-2013 08:34 AM           Profile Send private message  E-mail  Edit post Reply with quote


Your icon has glasses :olo:

Seriously, though; how can you say that when you quadruple the resolutiuon, quadrupling the screen size is not enough?
Top
                 
shaft
Aneurysm
Aneurysm
Joined: 10 Dec 1999
Posts: 12260
PostPosted: 10-17-2013 08:36 AM           Profile   Send private message  E-mail  Edit post Reply with quote


GONNAFISTYA wrote:
If someone is excited about 4k and doesn't plan on buying a screen larger than 100 inches, then that person has no clue what 4k is about and how it will not help them if they buy a screen that's only 42 inches.


afaik they don't make them smaller than 55"

I've watched 4k on a 65" from 10ft away and it was very noticeable
Top
                 
GONNAFISTYA
Glayven?
Glayven?
Joined: 23 Jan 2005
Posts: 13025
PostPosted: 10-17-2013 08:38 AM           Profile Send private message  E-mail  Edit post Reply with quote


DTS wrote:
Your icon has glasses :olo:

Seriously, though; how can you say that when you quadruple the resolutiuon, quadrupling the screen size is not enough?


Just read this and stfu already...
Top
                 
DTS
Elite
Elite
Joined: 12 Jul 2000
Posts: 11553
PostPosted: 10-17-2013 08:41 AM           Profile Send private message  E-mail  Edit post Reply with quote


shaft wrote:
GONNAFISTYA wrote:
If someone is excited about 4k and doesn't plan on buying a screen larger than 100 inches, then that person has no clue what 4k is about and how it will not help them if they buy a screen that's only 42 inches.


afaik they don't make them smaller than 55"

I've watched 4k on a 65" from 10ft away and it was very noticeable


No you didn't notice it, GFY knows all about the technology and he says it has to be 100" so you must have been hallucinating :olo:

Seriously, I said 72", you watched 65" and said it was very noticalbe; who's right?
Top
                 
GONNAFISTYA
Glayven?
Glayven?
Joined: 23 Jan 2005
Posts: 13025
PostPosted: 10-17-2013 08:41 AM           Profile Send private message  E-mail  Edit post Reply with quote


shaft wrote:
GONNAFISTYA wrote:
If someone is excited about 4k and doesn't plan on buying a screen larger than 100 inches, then that person has no clue what 4k is about and how it will not help them if they buy a screen that's only 42 inches.


afaik they don't make them smaller than 55"

I've watched 4k on a 65" from 10ft away and it was very noticeable


Yeah...and with the average 65" 4k screen costing as much as a car, exactly how many consumers do you predict will buy it?

It's a useless tech that only benefits a few....much like the stock market.
Top
                 
GONNAFISTYA
Glayven?
Glayven?
Joined: 23 Jan 2005
Posts: 13025
PostPosted: 10-17-2013 08:42 AM           Profile Send private message  E-mail  Edit post Reply with quote


DTS wrote:
No you didn't notice it, GFY knows all about the technology and he says it has to be 100" so you must have been hallucinating :olo:

Seriously, I said 72", you watched 65" and said it was very noticalbe; who's right?


Keep digging that hole of stupid everyone knows you live in.
Top
                 
shaft
Aneurysm
Aneurysm
Joined: 10 Dec 1999
Posts: 12260
PostPosted: 10-17-2013 08:47 AM           Profile   Send private message  E-mail  Edit post Reply with quote


GONNAFISTYA wrote:
Yeah...and with the average 65" 4k screen costing as much as a car, exactly how many consumers do you predict will buy it?

It's a useless tech that only benefits a few....much like the stock market.


65" 4k TV's are around $5k now and falling

http://www.amazon.com/Sony-XBR65X850A-6 ... B00ES5YZCW
http://www.amazon.com/Samsung-UN65F9000 ... B00DV51DYS
http://www.amazon.com/Toshiba-65L9300U- ... B00DG0977S
Top
                 
GONNAFISTYA
Glayven?
Glayven?
Joined: 23 Jan 2005
Posts: 13025
PostPosted: 10-17-2013 08:53 AM           Profile Send private message  E-mail  Edit post Reply with quote


shaft wrote:
GONNAFISTYA wrote:
Yeah...and with the average 65" 4k screen costing as much as a car, exactly how many consumers do you predict will buy it?

It's a useless tech that only benefits a few....much like the stock market.


65" 4k TV's are around $5k now and falling


:rolleyes:

How many people buy a 65" television today? At much lower prices than $5k?

Yeah....nobody.

What part of the statement "the average consumer will get no benefit from the new tech" do you not understand?
Top
                 
seremtan
Etile
Etile
Joined: 19 Nov 2003
Posts: 34899
PostPosted: 10-17-2013 09:08 AM           Profile Send private message  E-mail  Edit post Reply with quote


in other news: someone on the internet has noticed that new technology often has a high price when launched due to initial shortage of production facilities, need to recoup development costs and uncertainty about the strength of the future market - but hasn't noticed that if/when the market becomes strong, the price tends to fall, often quite dramatically

more at 11
Top
                 
bitWISE
god xor reason
god xor reason
Joined: 08 Dec 1999
Posts: 21100
PostPosted: 10-17-2013 09:15 AM           Profile   Send private message  E-mail  Edit post Reply with quote


GONNAFISTYA wrote:
:rolleyes:

How many people buy a 65" television today? At much lower prices than $5k?

Yeah....nobody.

What part of the statement "the average consumer will get no benefit from the new tech" do you not understand?

Several of my friends run those 90" Mitsubishi DLPs and my projector shoots onto a 120". I'd upgrade to a 4K unit as the price came down but it is pretty much at the bottom on my priority list (unless my 1080P dies).




Last edited by bitWISE on 10-17-2013 09:16 AM, edited 1 time in total.
Top
                 
shaft
Aneurysm
Aneurysm
Joined: 10 Dec 1999
Posts: 12260
PostPosted: 10-17-2013 09:16 AM           Profile   Send private message  E-mail  Edit post Reply with quote


GONNAFISTYA wrote:
How many people buy a 65" television today? At much lower prices than $5k?


Millions. I mean seriously, maybe not in the slums where you live but the BestBuy around here hardly has any TVs under 50". While I agree that $5k for a 65" is a premium price when you can get a 1080p 65" for around $1500 these days..its definitely not that unreasonable for new tech.

I can remember walking into a Circuit City and seeing a 30" 720p HDTV for $10,000 10-12yrs ago....look at them now.
Top
                 
shaft
Aneurysm
Aneurysm
Joined: 10 Dec 1999
Posts: 12260
PostPosted: 10-17-2013 09:30 AM           Profile   Send private message  E-mail  Edit post Reply with quote


bitWISE wrote:
GONNAFISTYA wrote:
:rolleyes:

How many people buy a 65" television today? At much lower prices than $5k?

Yeah....nobody.

What part of the statement "the average consumer will get no benefit from the new tech" do you not understand?

Several of my friends run those 90" Mitsubishi DLPs and my projector shoots onto a 120". I'd upgrade to a 4K unit as the price came down but it is pretty much at the bottom on my priority list (unless my 1080P dies).


Yeah, apparently GFY is unfamiliar with middle class suburbanites in America.
Top
                 
Pext
Who's that man, Mommy?
Who's that man, Mommy?
Joined: 27 Aug 2003
Posts: 5316
PostPosted: 10-17-2013 09:47 AM           Profile Send private message  E-mail  Edit post Reply with quote


GONNAFISTYA wrote:
Just read this and stfu already...


Hm; the argument is totally valid. Buying media on physical devices is dying out fast. The only times i get a CD or DVD is when my parents get me some stuff for christmas.

But it does not adress the technical aspects of 4k vs 1080p. Neither does it adress the consumers experience.

The upside of 4k blu-rays is that i will find them ripped on irc. :up:

On the other hand: With the internet speeds google is working on 4k streaming is allready on its way.
Top
                 
Pext
Who's that man, Mommy?
Who's that man, Mommy?
Joined: 27 Aug 2003
Posts: 5316
PostPosted: 10-17-2013 09:50 AM           Profile Send private message  E-mail  Edit post Reply with quote


shaft wrote:
Yeah, apparently GFY is unfamiliar with middle class suburbanites in America.


... where a big tv is considered a status symbol. :olo:
Top
                 
YourGrandpa
Blockheaded Blubberboy
Blockheaded Blubberboy
Joined: 16 Apr 2000
Posts: 20816
PostPosted: 10-17-2013 09:52 AM           Profile Send private message  E-mail  Edit post Reply with quote


I paid $4,000.00 for my 720p 65" Plasma 10 or so years ago. So $5,000.00 isn't so bad.
Top
                 
shaft
Aneurysm
Aneurysm
Joined: 10 Dec 1999
Posts: 12260
PostPosted: 10-17-2013 10:12 AM           Profile   Send private message  E-mail  Edit post Reply with quote


Pext wrote:
shaft wrote:
Yeah, apparently GFY is unfamiliar with middle class suburbanites in America.


... where a big tv is considered a status symbol. :olo:



I don't really think so...unless you're speaking from experience? I don't know where you live. I'm just speaking in terms of viewing room size and the growing popularity of home theater rooms. Certainly if you were living in a small apartment and the tv took up your entire room that would just be showboating. I don't see a middle class suburbanite waving his dick around over $1,500 worth of electronics....unless its anonymously on the internet in which case..i win..lol poor ppl, etc.
Top
                 
seremtan
Etile
Etile
Joined: 19 Nov 2003
Posts: 34899
PostPosted: 10-17-2013 12:09 PM           Profile Send private message  E-mail  Edit post Reply with quote


i'm wondering if the industry has even finished copying all the old VHS stuff to DVD yet... then there's the blu-ray catalogue, which is a fraction of the DVD catalogue, and now 4K

ffs by the time 4K TVs become affordable to the 'average' consumer, we'll be on to 6K or 8K (showcasing another shitty lens flared CGI-fest starring Matt Cruise and directed by J J Spielberg)
Top
                 
xer0s
Digital Nausea
Digital Nausea
Joined: 10 Feb 2001
Posts: 24712
PostPosted: 10-17-2013 12:13 PM           Profile   Send private message  E-mail  Edit post Reply with quote


It's true. We're constantly playing catch-up...
Top
                 
Eraser
Cool #9
Cool #9
Joined: 01 Dec 2000
Posts: 44139
PostPosted: 10-17-2013 12:14 PM           Profile   Send private message  E-mail  Edit post Reply with quote


4K may have its benefits, but I don't see myself buying a screen bigger than the 40" one I got now. I guess that in a few years, 4K will be the new 3D (meaning: a hype) and somewhere down the line it'll probably be the average standard. Nothing particularly wrong with that, but I do hope it doesn't end up becoming a resolution race. Instead, they should focus on more interesting techs. A higher resolution is cute on paper, but it doesn't really bring anything new to the table.
Top
                 
Doombrain
Kempston Joy
Kempston Joy
Joined: 11 Aug 2000
Posts: 48594
PostPosted: 10-17-2013 12:24 PM           Profile   Send private message  E-mail  Edit post Reply with quote


obsidian wrote:
DTS wrote:
plus colour is better with higher resolution


:dork:


The clown is correct. Higher pixel density will equal a wider gamut.
Top
                 
Doombrain
Kempston Joy
Kempston Joy
Joined: 11 Aug 2000
Posts: 48594
PostPosted: 10-17-2013 12:25 PM           Profile   Send private message  E-mail  Edit post Reply with quote


seremtan wrote:
i'm wondering if the industry has even finished copying all the old VHS stuff to DVD yet... then there's the blu-ray catalogue, which is a fraction of the DVD catalogue, and now 4K

ffs by the time 4K TVs become affordable to the 'average' consumer, we'll be on to 6K or 8K (showcasing another shitty lens flared CGI-fest starring Matt Cruise and directed by J J Spielberg)


16k is already being developed :!:
Top
                 
Pext
Who's that man, Mommy?
Who's that man, Mommy?
Joined: 27 Aug 2003
Posts: 5316
PostPosted: 10-17-2013 12:43 PM           Profile Send private message  E-mail  Edit post Reply with quote


instead of upping the resolution they should work on the latency!

carmack said somewhere that it takes longer to get an image to the screen than to send bits of data from korea to the us!
Top
                 
seremtan
Etile
Etile
Joined: 19 Nov 2003
Posts: 34899
PostPosted: 10-17-2013 02:39 PM           Profile Send private message  E-mail  Edit post Reply with quote


or they could work on the content because, let's be honest, we really don't need to see every follicle on Walter White's shaven head (though admittedly GoT would look awesome in 4K), so this is going to be - at least initially - aimed at cookie-cutter Hollywood CGI shitfests
Top
                 
Tsakali
opa!
opa!
Joined: 02 Mar 2000
Posts: 14658
PostPosted: 10-17-2013 03:09 PM           Profile Send private message  E-mail  Edit post Reply with quote


Doombrain wrote:
The clown is correct. Higher pixel density will equal a wider gamut.

I guess it makes sense, it would allow for more true representation of a color gradient across the screen for example. granted it's all relative to the view distance, because technically, if you can actually see the pixels that means that subtleties of a color gradient must be missed from one pixel to the next.




Last edited by Tsakali on 10-17-2013 03:23 PM, edited 2 times in total.
Top
                 
Pext
Who's that man, Mommy?
Who's that man, Mommy?
Joined: 27 Aug 2003
Posts: 5316
PostPosted: 10-17-2013 03:11 PM           Profile Send private message  E-mail  Edit post Reply with quote


seremtan wrote:
though admittedly GoT would look awesome in 4K


are you sure? the better the resolution the harder it gets to make convincing sets and costumes. even the hobbit looks cheap in some places and they had a shitload of money to spend on the production design!
Top
                 
Quake3World.com | Forum Index | General Discussion


Post new topic Reply to topic


cron
Quake3World.com
© ZeniMax. Zenimax, QUAKE III ARENA, Id Software and associated trademarks are trademarks of the ZeniMax group of companies. All rights reserved.
This is an unofficial fan website without any affiliation with or endorsement by ZeniMax.
All views and opinions expressed are those of the author.