Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE: Any Advantage to 4K Now?

This is topic Any Advantage to 4K Now? in forum Digital Cinema Forum at Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE.

To visit this topic, use this URL:
https://ft-forum.com/ft/cgi-bin/ubb/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=16;t=000364

Posted by Martin McCaffery (Member # 37) on 05-12-2009, 10:58 AM:

At this time, is there any advantage to going 4k? Is anyone releasing stuff in 4k, or will everything just be downscaled to 2k? Will it help with 3D?

Posted by Mark Gulbrandsen (Member # 72) on 05-12-2009, 12:50 PM:

The whole question isn't 4K or 2K but it is can you stand and or trust anything that Sony sells or does??? I don't know anyone that does...

An for the record there is very little 4K content out there to play on them. That may change but I have yet to see anything heading towards that direction.

Mark

Posted by Martin McCaffery (Member # 37) on 05-12-2009, 12:59 PM:

Well, it's not like I'm about to install anything digital (unless they give it to me). I just heard about a theatre installing 4k, skipping right over 2k. I hope it is worth it for them.

Posted by Mark Gulbrandsen (Member # 72) on 05-12-2009, 04:17 PM:

We'll see if they can get parts in three years [Big Grin]

Posted by Mark J. Marshall (Member # 1409) on 05-12-2009, 07:08 PM:

Strangely, AMC is giving Sony another chance.

Posted by Mark Gulbrandsen (Member # 72) on 05-12-2009, 08:48 PM:

Probably only because they came in the cheapest!! Works out to about 58 grand a screen.

Mark

Posted by Mark J. Marshall (Member # 1409) on 05-12-2009, 10:08 PM:

Someone at Sony has figured out AMC's weakness.

Posted by Fred Tucker (Member # 4482) on 05-13-2009, 04:24 AM:

Lots of ways to look at that, the Sony's use a different technology that is more sustainable that DLP. Note that I didnt say it was sustainable.

Price is important to AMC, but AMC has always been very brand conscience. Sony is a name the public knows for quality products and AMC can emphasise Sony's name along with taughting the 4k resolution when such content is available.

Posted by Julio Roberto (Member # 4976) on 05-13-2009, 04:51 AM:

It may look better to say Sony 4K than to say JVC 8K

http://www.crunchgear.com/2009/05/12/jvc-introduces-8k-projector/

quote:
Because of the growing number of consumer-level cameras with 100-megapixel sensors and camcorders shooting at 4240p, JVC has come out with a new 8K (that’s 8000 horizontal pixels) projector with 10,000 lumens of brightness and a 5500:1 contrast ratio. Finally, an ultra-high-def projector the whole family can enjoy!

The comment quoted is ironic, but I wonder for how long [Wink]

JVC has a 4K projector in the market, but hasn't bothered to make it DCI certified or bright enough for most theatrical applications.

http://pro.jvc.com/prof/attributes/features.jsp?model_id=MDL101793

Now, seriously, Sony has a modest number of 4K installations currently and plenty lined-up for the coming months. If their plans follow through, and it looks that way, in a few months Sony will have some 5000 systems installed, eventually taking almost half of all the DCI market, including the other three 2K projectors combined.

The question, like Mark says, is that the 4K that Sony offers may not be a very good option right now. But it's the only one for those wanting to "skip" the 2K generation.

Also as Mark says, it will pbbly be a very, very long time before any other decent 4K option appears, so the choice of 2K is here and now to stay or just remain with 35mm for at least 2 more years, if not much longer. The new DLP projectors appearing at the end of this year/beginning of the next only offer advantages in cost, DCI security compliance and a bit in brightness/refresh-rates for alternative content 3D.

TI doesn't have a good outcome for 4K DLP, which sucks, because DLP is probably the best suited technology for DCI cinema that is fully developed and solid. They can do an affordeable 3K projector, so I wonder if they'll consider going that route and just downscale the 4K from the server to 3K and call it a day.

4K is (or can be) obvioulsy better than 2K, no doubts about it, but nothing majorly wrong with 2K either. Public seems to like it just fine and most people don't miss anything compared to what they felt 35mm was supplying.

About films being released (or edited) in 4K, since until recently there was a lack of projection and a lack of 4K digital cameras, and 4K postproduction was substantially more expensive than 2K (not so much anymore), there weren't many 4K features.

http://pro.jvc.com/pro/pr/2009/nab/kyf4000.html
[Link is to press announcement of JVC 4K 60p compact camera under $200.000]

http://gadgets.boingboing.net/2009/05/12/jvc-8k-projector-unt.html

This is rapidly changing and I'd dare to say that around half the movies that start shooting by 2011 will be 4K (DI or native digital) and in just 2 or 3 years virtually all important films will be 4K. If only because the technology to do 4K will be very affordable by then and doing 2K will no longer make financial sense for all but the very low-budget stuff. But for the next 12 months or so, 2K will continue to be the mainstream, with perhaps only a handful of films going 4K.

Still, not a lot of "real" incentive to go 4K due to the lack of non-Sony DCI equipment. JVC is another player that could easily do what Sony is doing, but they know better than to sell a piece of equipment that is not really ready to take what it's demanded from it in the "harsh" theatrical enviroment.

Posted by Bruce Hansen (Member # 281) on 05-13-2009, 06:00 PM:

I would guess that as part of the AMC/Sony deal, Sony has told AMC that they will supply lots of 4K content. Most movies are still shot on film, and I believe they will be shot on film for some time to come. So, it is no problem to scan them at 4K. Don't forget that even though video tape equipemnt has been around for 50 years, most prime time TV showes, and commericals are still shot on film. The directors and producers like useing film, and know how to work with it, and light for it.

If Sony starts releasing lots of 4K content, the other studios will have to follow. If AMC starts showing lots of 4K stuff (and makes a lot of noise about it) the other theaters will have to follow.

As for Sony, sure they have had a few clunkers, but they have had a LOT more huge sucesses. The only way to not fail, is to not try, but that in itself is falure.

Posted by Julio Roberto (Member # 4976) on 05-13-2009, 08:35 PM:

I forgot a link to the actual JVC super hi vision 8K projector spec page:

http://translate.google.es/translate?u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.jvc-victor.co.jp%2Fpress%2F2009%2F3xd-ila.html&sl=ja&tl=en& hl=es&ie=UTF-8
[google translated page]

The important specs being:
8192 × 4320 resolution using 3 D-ILA (lcos) panels (no pixel shift like previous attempts)
400:1 static contrast
5500:1 sequential contrast
10.000 ANSI lumens (3000W xenon lamp, 3500W consumption)
Up to 60fps
Comes with 10bits HDMI support (12bits d-ila panels and RGB drivers)
Weights a ton

I don't know how it's all going to play out. All I know, is that 5 years from now it won't make sense that movie theaters are still projecting content in 2K anymore. Some broadcasters in Europe and Japan are seriouly talking to jumping to 8K 60fps as soon as possible and just skipping all other interim steps. The EBU meeting last month spent a lot of time and talk on that. Everybody knows that that's for 20+ years from now, but they want to just make the bold jump from today's HD to something so superior that consumers would want it rather than a small jump from say 2K (HD) to 4K or 6K.

But the solution to the dilemma is not so clear, unfortunately. I have the feeling a lot of people are just going to hold on to film for a while longer while the dust settles.

In Spain, there is virtually no move to DCI anymore other than converting a single screen with a 3D system. And even that is not all there. Until recently, there were 30 3D screens in the whole country, although that has jumped almost overnight to 83, but mostly thanks to good deals striked with Real-D and integrators and almost exclusively installing a single screen digital for the 3D only, leaving all other screens 35mm.

From my point of view the hurdle of moving cinema to digital exhibitions are:

-Distributors, the ones saving tons of money with the change, aren't willing to give squat or playing hardball to even pony up scrap.

-Equipment is expensive for what it is, expensive to maintain and upgrade, and inferior (or not clearly superior) to current 35mm.

Clear those 2 obstacles and everybody will be jumping in. [beer]

Posted by Mark J. Marshall (Member # 1409) on 05-13-2009, 09:23 PM:

Yeah, and if Sony starts making lots of 8 channel mixes everyone else will have to follow suit too.

Posted by Julio Roberto (Member # 4976) on 05-13-2009, 11:08 PM:

Well, the thing about following standards is that it's fine when there is a wide market choice.

But with DCI it's basically either TI or Sony. Sony being "closed market" and "sole supplier" and TI being duopoly (or triopoly).

There is also serious talk in many countries of screwing DCI and just going e-cinema. It will allow theaters a wide choice of A/V equipment at much lower prices.

The thing is that Hollywood will continue to provide 35mm to those it was previously willing to, so no change there. Theatres already have the 35mm gear, everything will remain peachy.

By installing non-DCI equipment alongside, they will continue to provide the 35mm in those markets while allowing the theaters alternative content and the small distributors can finally put a foot in the terrain (theatres) previously monopolized by Hollywood.

This is great for smaller films in countries like India (1000 films/year), Japan (250), China (250), which could use wide electronic distribution and thus have a competition advantage (lower distribution cost, 3D-through-eprojectors) against Hollywood which will have to remain handling 35mm prints in those markets as they refuse non-DCI equipment.

Those opting for DCI equipment can, of course, also display an array of electronic formats other than encrypted DCP's.

Posted by Lyle Romer (Member # 1266) on 05-14-2009, 07:53 AM:

In movie theatres I agree that 4k needs to be the way to go for no other reason than marketing professional quality vs. what's available at home.

Now, as far as home systems getting above current HD, it's going to be a while. The current ATSC HDTV standard was approved in 1996. It is now 13 years later and we still can't get close to all programming on all channels in HD (720p or 1080i). I'd guess it'll be another 5 years before almost everything is available in HD.

Even if they came up with an 8k standard tomorrow it will be at least 10 years before it really gets going.

In the home I honestly don't understand the point of going above 1080p60 other than giving electronics manufacturers something else to sell. To take advantage of 4k (and especially 8k) in the home the screen sizes would have to be enormous. This creates two issues. First is that most people run into a practical limit of how big the TV can be and fit in the living room. Second, even with manufacturing improvements, 65" and larger TVs at 4k or higher resolution are going to be very expensive to build. So basically all that higher resolution is going to lead to is a bunch of people with more expensive 42" 2160p60 TVs that will only have a visible difference if they stick their face right up to it.

Bottom line is that if there was 4k available today that had the same brightness, contrast and color quality of 2k DLP and was within $10,000 per screen of 2k DLP then nobody would install anything but 4k.

Posted by Mark Gulbrandsen (Member # 72) on 05-14-2009, 08:31 AM:

quote: Lyle Romer
Bottom line is that if there was 4k available today that had the same brightness, contrast and color quality of 2k DLP and was within $10,000 per screen of 2k DLP then nobody would install anything but 4k.

Wrong! There would have to be at least one or two other 4K manufacturers. I don't know a sole in the exhibition industry that would trust Sony.

Mark

Posted by Lyle Romer (Member # 1266) on 05-14-2009, 08:40 AM:

Mark is correct. I meant my statement more in the way that if Christie, Barco, NEC etc. had 4k projectors within $10k each of the 2k models then everybody would pay the extra $10k and install 4k.

Posted by Frank Angel (Member # 248) on 05-19-2009, 11:50 AM:

Or....Washington can do like they did for TV and just decree that by a date certian, all theatrical projection will have to converted to Super High Definition 8K. Period. Cars have to get at least 35mpg and theatres will have to project at at least 8K. While they are at it, they can also decree that an IMAX screen has to be at least 70feet tall. End of discussion -- after all, that's what government is for. [Wink]

Posted by James B Gardiner (Member # 5151) on 05-24-2009, 09:27 AM:

Sony is taking a bold step here.

If one considers all the Sony Tech support departments around the world going bust as TAPE goes the way of the DODO, this could be a make or break move for Sony to re-invent itself, giving all this infrastructure new life supporting the cinema infrastructure.

Sony is basically making this happen by throughing money at it.
In the long term, if they capture 60% of the industry, its a win. Especially as it keeps the SONY brand king. As Dolby bows out and fails to archive the domestic branding it has been attempting to archive (Ie Dolby Plasma's etc failed to take of), Sony will take its place on the exhibition side and garanttee its brand on the domestic, TV/consumer elec side.
DCI supports open standards, and consumer elec kit is bound to follow. No more Dolby-digital logo and $5 cost for every DVD player sold. (Thank god).

So I expect more of this. And, is it that bad. Sony tends to do a great job on the 3 or 4th attempt. (see this old post on my blog. http://www.crafted.com.au/blog/2008/03/09/sony-makes-a-decent-vtr-%E2%80%93-about-time/) Tho Sony Kit is expensive in general..

I get the opinion that the current 4K kit still has some large technical issues compared to DLP 2K. But hell, 4K must have some price to its technical advantages.

James

Posted by Bobby Henderson (Member # 840) on 05-24-2009, 12:17 PM:

Dolby still has a foothold in digital cinema via its own d-cinema server system and Dolby 3D -although it largely centered around 2K projectors like Christie's CP2000 product lineup.

I only see Dolby getting into trouble if Hollywood movie studios do like they did a few years ago when they pulled the plug on 1280 X 1024 resolution DLP systems and end up doing the same with 2K based units in favor of 4K. I don't think chances are good such a thing will happen anytime soon.

As I've said previously, very few movies have digital intermediates and CGI rendered in 4K. The vast majority of movies are merely 2K. So there's really very little marketing advantage in a movie theater circuit trumpeting "4K" in their ads unless they're showing native 4K content.

4K resolution would be better for digital cinema, provided the other elements of the picture (color quality, contrast, brightness, etc.) were as good or better than any 2K setup. 35mm prints would look better if they were laser recorded with 4K material rather than the usual 2K stuff. In that regard, if 4K use became common then 2K systems would be at a disadvantage to both 4K d-cinema systems and 35mm projection.

I think Sony is making a potentially bad mistake by making its 4K system closed and compatible only with Sony-branded hardware. It will open the door for competitors like Christie, NEC, etc. to develop their own 4K projectors that will work with a variety of d-cinema servers. I would be surprised if those companies (and Dolby as well) weren't already at work investigating what they can do with 4K.

Posted by James B Gardiner (Member # 5151) on 05-25-2009, 07:19 AM:

Dolby make very good, over the top kit.
This is why no big chain is purchasing it. Tho independents who love their Dolby are willing to drop the extra 5-10k for the name.
Dolby kit is over engineered in that. Its the most expensive kit because it has to be based on the hardware that goes into it.
Tho, as a cinema chain, you never purchase the most expensive. You purchase what works at the best price.
Dolby is not it. Dolby is also rumoured to be bleeding badly from its digital division.
So. Dolby is not looking to bright right now. But it could change. They could re-group and come oout with a surprise. They have the Tech. Its just not in the right package currently.

Right now its a race to the bottom for DCI media players. Who can make something that works well enough but is also the cheapest.

Dorami a good example of this.

James

Posted by Mark Gulbrandsen (Member # 72) on 05-26-2009, 08:52 AM:

James,

You overlook one VERY important point though... If Cinemark signs with Sony for 4K (very likely) it will more then likely spell the end of all 2K since there is then no real market left for it. Certainly not enough market to sustain DLP and still having made no profit T.I. would probably be the first to pull the plug. HEnce all the servers, and most other related items would vanish in a quick poof.

Mark

Posted by Bobby Henderson (Member # 840) on 05-26-2009, 09:05 AM:

Don't some of the existing servers, such as the Doremi DCP2000, have the ability to down-sample 4K content and output it as 2K for 2K projectors?

Posted by Julio Roberto (Member # 4976) on 05-26-2009, 10:11 AM:

AFAIK, all Dcinema players must be able to decode 4K content to be DCI compatible. Another thing is if they have to downsample it to 2K fit a dual HD-SDI stream if not equipped with quad HD-SDI outputs.

Even if equipped with quad outputs, they still may have decided to offer the 4K output as an option and force 2K output unless you pay extra.

But DCI specs say all players must be able to decode 2K, 2K 48fps (3D) and 4K or they are not DCI. If I understood correctly.

Both, 2K and 4K are explicitly supported by DCI and, thus, not likely to "dissapear" overnight, as support is mandatory. From "day one", "universal" support for 4K delivery packages playback was "guaranteed" by DCI.

Of course, no real sweat on a player capable of 4K to scale down the output to 2K to support whatever 2K devices may be in existence in the future.

I wonder if there is ever a 4K (non-Sony) projector what interface they'll settle for. Would need something encrypted (á la Cinelink) and either non standard quad-hd-sdi or non-standard 3G-SDI, but Quad-HD-SDI, even if non-standard, doesn't quite cover the full 4K at 4:4:4 12 bits ...

Octo-DC-SDI? Lol

Let's not forget 4K is FOUR times the amount of pixels of 2K, not two times the amount of pixels ... Talking 2.2 millions of pixels against 8.8 Millions ...

Full support for 4K on players has been spotty not because they have any trouble decoding it ... but because there is no projector that can take the input.

Sony has external 4K input (dual channel SRLV), but it is not Cinelink encrypted. Cinelink II is a Texas Instruments "exclusive" encryption scheme that meets DCI security demands while being implemented over dual HD-SDI serial digital transport. So Sony can only playback (encrypted) DCP's from the internal player, which has its own, propietary encrypted path and transport protocol to the projector head. It can project unencrypted (no chance for Hollywood movies) 4K or 2K from an external player, provided fitted with the appropiate outputs or a (theoretical) convertion box if necessary (for 4K, 2K is standard dual channel HD/SC-SDI or DVI, but unencrypted only).

Posted by Mark Gulbrandsen (Member # 72) on 05-26-2009, 12:18 PM:

James,

It ain't just going to be Dolby bowing out... it'll be the entire 2K industry that goes up in a quick atomic poof if T.I. pulls the plug. Manufacturers, dealers, et all. The only thing that will be left are the techs and Sony will need them badly to make this all happen. I bet they buy us cheap at a slave auction!

Julio,
Isn't Sony going to the Media Block type of arrangement on the latest projectors? Thats what a Sony tech told me not long ago... So that precludes the use or need for any of the other servers on the market... Seems like they are heading towards a monolopy...

Posted by Steve Guttag (Member # 268) on 05-26-2009, 09:38 PM:

Yep...the LMS-200 is what currently ships with the SRX-R220. It handles the cinema content and also there are dual DVI and HDSDI inputs for "alternative content."

Note, they don't have dual 3G SDI inputs nor 4 HDSDI inputs so you can use an alternative 4K source! A surprise to some that I'm working with.

Steve

Posted by Julio Roberto (Member # 4976) on 05-26-2009, 10:32 PM:

Yeah,

It's kind of ... hmmm ... retarded I think I must say, to have a 4K projector out in the market and not been able to input a 4K signal in any reasonable form unless it's coming from their media player.

Heck, it doesn't even offer a HD (or 2K) encrypted input. It only does well unencrypted DCinema (2K, 12 bits, 4:4:4 over dual DC-SDI), HD (over dual or single HD-SDI) and DVI (up to 2K). No HDMI, no HDCP, no Cinelink (no surprise there, TI will not license it nor will Sony want it), no 3G-SDI, no Quad-HD/DC-SDI, although it would need 4 of the former and 8 of the latter to fit the full 4:4:4 4K at 12bits...

Just the dual SRLV is the only input for the 4K and so far only their LMS-200 player can use it ...

[Shrug]

Posted by Steve Guttag (Member # 268) on 05-26-2009, 10:45 PM:

Despite their current web site...the current DVI inputs on the SRX-R210/220 ARE HDCP compliant...so at least Blu-Rays will work.

Only on their A/V version can you load up 4 HDSDI or 4 DVI inputs to get 4K content.

Note however...Sony is moving towards 3G SDI inputs so that issue may be resolved before the year is out.

Steve

Posted by Julio Roberto (Member # 4976) on 05-26-2009, 10:58 PM:

Good to know they at least support HDCP over the DVI ... I was pretty amazed they claimed they didn't in their manual, considering who the father of blu-ray is and their open embrace of the scheme ...

[beer]