Viper1 said:
Jega said:
Viper1 said:
Jega said:
Viper1 said:
I don't think you understand integrated the industries are. First, TV manufacturers are not going to release a whole line of 'affordable' 2160p TV's just because gamers want them.
Second, Triple layer Blu-ray discs cannot handle 2160p content without a compression scheme that negates the video quality advantage of Blu-ray.
Thrid, The movie industry is not going to back another physical movie median just a few years after already upgrading everything for 1080p. Especially wne content is moving into the digital space.
|
Wow some of you guys must not know how to read or comprehend what you are reading.
What new medium did I mention other than what's already available on the market (Blu-ray) wow just wow.
|
You are trying to suggest that I can't read yet you failed to read my own post. Irony.
I just told you that a triple layered Blu-ray cannot handle 2160p content without a compression scheme that negates the video quality that Blu-ray offers. Do you want blurry 2160p content?
You can put 1920x1080 content on a DVD but the compression scheme to make that happen means the image quality is very poor compared to Blu-ray at the same resolution.
So in order to maintain the same standard in image quality at 2160p, you'd need a new format that can handle the capacity and bit rate required. Or maybe you are hoping for a magical compression scheme that can put 2 hours of 2160p content on a triple layer Blu-ray without sacrificing image quality. Good luck.
|
Ok so you are telling me that a bluray disc than is 25 gigs can do 1080p.
But a bluray disc than is over 100 gigs cannot do 2160p.
Is that what you are telling me.
keeping in mind 4x the resolution doesn't necessarily mean 4x the disc space.
|
If you want the same level of picture quality, yes. You are also not taking time into consideration. Most Blu-ray movies are 40+ GB's with many pushing all the way up to 49.9 GB's.
|
Actually, you're wrong.
Bluray can go up to 43-44GB.
Also a Bluray of that size generally only uses about 20-25GB for the video, usually less. The rest is just filler extras and multiple audio tracks in every language under the sun and pointless picture in picture and so on.
A compressed version of the main movie only with a single audio track can look almost the same as a Bluray original on a dual layer DVD (7.95GB). There's a guy over on doom9 forums that has made a frontend for doing exactly this, the results are generally very good for movies up to around 90 mins long. By very good I mean indistinguishable from a bluray on anything up 50 inch set watched close.
You underestimate the quality of good encoders like x264 and overestimate the quality of poor hardware encoders that publishers use for Bluray video encoding in h264.
A dual layer Bluray disk could easily manage 2160p video.
Irrelevent anyway, since h264 won't be used for Ultra-HD video encoding when it reaches consumer optical media sales in a few years. A new codec will be used that will give around 30%-50% reduction in bitrate compared to h264
