[Kunash]

just went into my local HMV and asked if the film companies have released or will soon release 4k UHD blu ray films. he said not yet.
ble
any idea when they might start releasing new films on 4k ?

and if you watch normal blu ray film on a 4k blu ray player, tv with hdmi 2 uhd cable - will the picture quality be significantly better? (and same for watching hd picture from sky on 4k?)

thank you

my 4k tv arrives Tuesday

I have googled it but is there a good list of 4k films that have been released. I looked on the bluray.com (?) website and it shows only documentaries. look on amazon and it shows spiderman 2010 etc. is there a good website to look at pls

[Nigel Goodwin]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kunash

just went into my local HMV and asked if the film companies have released or will soon release 4k UHD blu ray films. he said not yet.
ble
any idea when they might start releasing new films on 4k ?

and if you watch normal blu ray film on a 4k blu ray player, tv with hdmi 2 uhd cable - will the picture quality be significantly better? (and same for watching hd picture from sky on 4k?)

I wouldn't have thought so, upscaling merely makes it fit the screen, it doesn't give improved resolution.

Quote:

thank you

my 4k tv arrives Tuesday

I have googled it but is there a good list of 4k films that have been released. I looked on the bluray.com (?) website and it shows only documentaries. look on amazon and it shows spiderman 2010 etc. is there a good website to look at pls

Do you have a 4K BD player?, because 4K won't play in a normal one.

[Deacon1972]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kunash

just went into my local HMV and asked if the film companies have released or will soon release 4k UHD blu ray films. he said not yet.
ble
any idea when they might start releasing new films on 4k ?

and if you watch normal blu ray film on a 4k blu ray player, tv with hdmi 2 uhd cable - will the picture quality be significantly better? (and same for watching hd picture from sky on 4k?)

thank you

my 4k tv arrives Tuesday

I have googled it but is there a good list of 4k films that have been released. I looked on the bluray.com (?) website and it shows only documentaries. look on amazon and it shows spiderman 2010 etc. is there a good website to look at pls

Blu-ray Disc Association have said 4k bluray could be here by the end of 2014.

http://www.whathifi.com/news/4k-blu-...scs-will-exist

Bluray upscaled to 4k looks impressive, though this was on a £20k Sony 4k PJ, should still look as good on 4k TV.

Sony have released a number of blurays which have been mastered in 4k, (filmed, scanned in 4k then downscaled to 1080p). Initially there were about 15 titles, no idea if that has increased from the titles mentioned below....

http://www.whathifi.com/news/sony-co...u-ray-releases

What make/model are you getting?

[Kunash]

[
thanks for replies.


so a little while to wait then

yes I will be getting a 4k blu ray player

I am getting this one

http://www.currys.co.uk/gbuk/tv-dvd-....html#services

[Deacon1972]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kunash

[
thanks for replies.


so a little while to wait then

yes I will be getting a 4k blu ray player

I am getting this one

http://www.currys.co.uk/gbuk/tv-dvd-....html#services

A little wait for bluray, but if you have access to a PC/laptop and connect to the tv you could view some 4k from Youtube, there is also some 4k videos to download.

Netflix are streaming 4k in the states, no idea when it will launch this service in the UK, you will need a half decent BB speed to get it.

Nice TV btw, Xmas come early....

[Mythica]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nigel Goodwin

I wouldn't have thought so, upscaling merely makes it fit the screen, it doesn't give improved resolution.



Do you have a 4K BD player?, because 4K won't play in a normal one.

That would be stretching, not upscaling.

[grahamlthompson]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mythica

That would be stretching, not upscaling.

Inventing even more bizarre terms. To fill a 4K screen with a standard FULL-HD source you have to increase the number of pixels by a factor of 4. That means inventing 3 times the number of pixels present by a intelligent algorithm that guesses what the missing pixels might be. The device that does this is called a scaler (they can scale up or down as required). A pixel is a physical object, it can't be stretched, it's actually a tiny LCD in 3 parts (A square pixel like you get on a 1920 x 1080 16:9 display has three rectangular subpixels of Red Green and Blue each one being controlled by a matrix array of transistors.

It's much easier to downscale than upscale (ie remove content).

[Mythica]

Quote:

Originally Posted by grahamlthompson

Inventing even more bizarre terms. To fill a 4K screen with a standard FULL-HD source you have to increase the number of pixels by a factor of 4. That means inventing 3 times the number of pixels present by a intelligent algorithm that guesses what the missing pixels might be. The device that does this is called a scaler (they can scale up or down as required). A pixel is a physical object, it can't be stretched, it's actually a tiny LCD in 3 parts (A square pixel like you get on a 1920 x 1080 16:9 display has three rectangular subpixels of Red Green and Blue each one being controlled by a matrix array of transistors.

It's much easier to downscale than upscale (ie remove content).

Or, that would be stretching, not upscaling.

[Deacon1972]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mythica

That would be stretching, not upscaling.

Forcing 4x3/letterbox to fit a 16x9 is normally associated with stretching.....

Playing a source that has a lower/higher resolution than the displays native resolution requires up/downscaling - ie. A Sky HD movie (1920x1080) will need to be downscaled to view it on a HD ready TV with 1366x768 resolution - A 1280x720 source would need to be upscaled to view it on a Full HD TV.

[Mythica]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Deacon1972

Forcing 4x3/letterbox to fit a 16x9 is normally associated with stretching.....

Playing a source that has a lower/higher resolution than the displays native resolution requires up/downscaling - ie. A Sky HD movie (1920x1080) will need to be downscaled to view it on a HD ready TV with 1366x768 resolution - A 1280x720 source would need to be upscaled to view it on a Full HD TV.

Reread the post I quoted. They said upscaling merely makes it fit the screen. That is incorrect. Stretching makes it merely fit the screen, as you know, upscaling involves a lot more than merely fitting the screen.

[Nigel Goodwin]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mythica

Reread the post I quoted. They said upscaling merely makes it fit the screen. That is incorrect. Stretching makes it merely fit the screen, as you know, upscaling involves a lot more than merely fitting the screen.

Not really, it merely fills the screen, trying to make as few artefacts as possible as it does so - it certainly doesn't just 'stretch' the picture to make it fit - but it also doesn't make it the up-scaled resolution, there's no way it can create the missing detail that isn't there.

The quality of the scaler though is one of the major differences between cheap sets and expensive ones, even cheap ones look stunning on an HD feed, it's how it copes with SD that is more difficult.

[Deacon1972]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mythica

Reread the post I quoted. They said upscaling merely makes it fit the screen. That is incorrect. Stretching makes it merely fit the screen, as you know, upscaling involves a lot more than merely fitting the screen.

The complexity of the scaler is not in debate, its job is to make sure the image fits the screen accordingly, that could either be done by up/downscaling, upscaling is precisely what the 4k scaler would be doing when the input source is 2k.

[Mythica]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Deacon1972

The complexity of the scaler is not in debate, its job is to make sure the image fits the screen accordingly, that could either be done by up/downscaling, upscaling is precisely what the 4k scaler would be doing when the input source is 2k.

The point being is that it 'merely' doesn't just fit the screen. That would be stretching the image. A lot more goes on in upscaling to just 'merely' fit the screen.

[Mythica]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nigel Goodwin

Not really, it merely fills the screen, trying to make as few artefacts as possible as it does so - it certainly doesn't just 'stretch' the picture to make it fit - but it also doesn't make it the up-scaled resolution, there's no way it can create the missing detail that isn't there.

The quality of the scaler though is one of the major differences between cheap sets and expensive ones, even cheap ones look stunning on an HD feed, it's how it copes with SD that is more difficult.

No. Look up the definition of merely. If something is done to just "merely" fit the screen, then that would be stretching the image to fit the screen. No more is done, it is just stretched. Upscaling is totally different as you know. Upscaling isn't just fitting the screen, it's trying to guess what pixels are suitable for the image. My point was with the word merely. If something is merely being used to fit/fill the screen then that would be stretching and not upscaling.

[Deacon1972]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mythica

The point being is that it 'merely' doesn't just fit the screen. That would be stretching the image. A lot more goes on in upscaling to just 'merely' fit the screen.

I'm pretty sure 'merely' was used in reference to the end product of a scaler, which is to scale images to fit the screen, it was not used in reference to the processes used by the scaler to achieve this.

[Peter_CJ]

Some explanation here on the issue...

http://www.red.com/learn/red-101/upscaled-1080P-vs-4K

[grahamlthompson]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mythica

No. Look up the definition of merely. If something is done to just "merely" fit the screen, then that would be stretching the image to fit the screen. No more is done, it is just stretched. Upscaling is totally different as you know. Upscaling isn't just fitting the screen, it's trying to guess what pixels are suitable for the image. My point was with the word merely. If something is merely being used to fit/fill the screen then that would be stretching and not upscaling.

How could you make a smaller image fit a screen without creating extra pixels ? I think you need to read up on the relationship between pixel aspect ratio (par) and the screen aspect ratio.

You could I guess take a FULL-HD source and show each pixel 4 times in a square block. Heaven knows how awfull the picture would be.

I have a Denon DVD player that has a faroujda scaler, these were well known for quality. It outputs 576i as 1080p over hdmi. With a good DVD it's not that far off Blu-ray quality. My Sony Blu-ray also has scaler.

[Mythica]

Quote:

Originally Posted by grahamlthompson

How could you make a smaller image fit a screen without creating extra pixels ? I think you need to read up on the relationship between pixel aspect ratio (par) and the screen aspect ratio.

You could I guess take a FULL-HD source and show each pixel 4 times in a square block. Heaven knows how awfull the picture would be.

I have a Denon DVD player that has a faroujda scaler, these were well known for quality. It outputs 576i as 1080p over hdmi. With a good DVD it's not that far off Blu-ray quality. My Sony Blu-ray also has scaler.

By stretching the image thought that was pretty common knowledge to be honest.

[Nigel Goodwin]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mythica

By stretching the image thought that was pretty common knowledge to be honest.

No, because it's not something that's done.

[grahamlthompson]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mythica

By stretching the image thought that was pretty common knowledge to be honest.

How do you stretch an image. The term is meaningless. The display is bitmapped, you have to send each pixel a value for every frame. How do you derive the data for your stretching ? It's not elastic it's just data.

[Mythica]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nigel Goodwin

No, because it's not something that's done.

Of course it is

[Mythica]

Quote:

Originally Posted by grahamlthompson

How do you stretch an image. The term is meaningless. The display is bitmapped, you have to send each pixel a value for every frame. How do you derive the data for your stretching ? It's not elastic it's just data.

No it isn't you stretch an image when the image isn't getting upscaled. For instance those wanting to watch 4:3 content in widescreen.

[gomezz]

Would you accept that simple "stretching" is a basic type of upscaling?

[Mythica]

Quote:

Originally Posted by gomezz

Would you accept that simple "stretching" is a basic type of upscaling?

No as they are two totally separate things.

[gomezz]

No point in discussing it further with you then.