Comparison: iTunes 4k vs 1080p bluray vs 4k bluray

[GrumpyCoder]

An issue with 8K is that it cant get as bright as many bright LCD tv’s. You are talking closer to 1000 nits, whereas some 4K LCD tvs are over 2000 nits.

Are you talking full field or window? Those numbers mean little if you don't specify what you're actually measuring. And if you're going by spec sheets (which says little about actual performance) then manufacturers already claim 4000 nits for 8k.

Also energy consumption... 😆
Here's a pic from Peter Montoulieu's latest installation. 200" Sony µLED wall. This things converts so much energy into heat, you need HVAC to run it.
https://www.avsforum.com/threads/sony-crystal-led-owners-thread-2020-solfar.3125600/post-60267708

Image quality for 4K sources is usually best unaltered. Upscaling benefits tremendously from processing, but if it is already 4K, it more often makes it worse.

Not really, the same rules apply as always. Back in the days we used line doublers for laserdiscs, then quadruplers, then MuseLD came along. Then DVD, HD-DVD and BluRay. Upscaling always looked better if done right. The availability of 4k made upscaling less of a requirement, but there's still a benefit in doing it. It can be done much cheaper today than back then. A cheap Faroudja doubler ran for $30k back then, Snell & Wilcox and Teranex started in the $50k range, up to $150k depending on options. Today quality scaling can be done under $10k, just not with anything that's integrated in a TV or source device. A HTPC with madVR, Lumagen or Envy are your best best. With what manufacturers are putting into TVs/projectors/players these days, I wouldn't bother... I agree.

At some point, the display devices becomes the problem. An expensive 1080p option can still show a higher resolution than a cheap 4k solution. In the end, the materials used to built the device come into play.

 

[Packers1958]

Are you talking full field or window? Those numbers mean little if you don't specify what you're actually measuring. And if you're going by spec sheets (which says little about actual performance) then manufacturers already claim 4000 nits for 8k.

Also energy consumption... 😆
Here's a pic from Peter Montoulieu's latest installation. 200" Sony µLED wall. This things converts so much energy into heat, you need HVAC to run it.
https://www.avsforum.com/threads/sony-crystal-led-owners-thread-2020-solfar.3125600/post-60267708



Not really, the same rules apply as always. Back in the days we used line doublers for laserdiscs, then quadruplers, then MuseLD came along. Then DVD, HD-DVD and BluRay. Upscaling always looked better if done right. The availability of 4k made upscaling less of a requirement, but there's still a benefit in doing it. It can be done much cheaper today than back then. A cheap Faroudja doubler ran for $30k back then, Snell & Wilcox and Teranex started in the $50k range, up to $150k depending on options. Today quality scaling can be done under $10k, just not with anything that's integrated in a TV or source device. A HTPC with madVR, Lumagen or Envy are your best best. With what manufacturers are putting into TVs/projectors/players these days, I wouldn't bother... I agree.

At some point, the display devices becomes the problem. An expensive 1080p option can still show a higher resolution than a cheap 4k solution. In the end, the materials used to built the device come into play.

The TCL 8 series can hit 1800 nits sustained on a 25% window, 1200 nits on a 50% window, and 700 nits full screen. That's a light cannon that nothing can match right now. I'm sure they could make a 4K and 8K LCD that are much brighter, but it's the energy standards they have to meet to be able to sell those tv's. It will take more energy to power an 8K tv because an 8K tv will have 33 million pixels to drive, vs 8.3 million on a 4K tv. Plus 8K tv's will need to be larger to enjoy the effects of true 8K. Upscaling 4K to 8k will never look as good as 4K displayed on a 4k tv. It's simple science. True 1:1 pixel mapping will always look better than upscaling. And since there really is nothing in 8K, other than a few youtube videos, only a fool would waste their money on an 8K tv for the next 5 to 10 years.

 

[GrumpyCoder]

The TCL 8 series can hit 1800 nits sustained on a 25% window, 1200 nits on a 50% window, and 700 nits full screen.

That's ok, but nothing special, really. There's similar stuff out there in 4k/8k, also look at µLED walls and what Barco/Christie have to offer. From a price point of view, TCL is good, but as I've learned a long time ago, in home theater prices are irrelevant.

I'm sure they could make a 4K and 8K LCD that are much brighter, but it's the energy standards they have to meet to be able to sell those tv's.

What do you say about µLED walls then? I've seen plenty of display devices in the pro market, sucking up a few kW

It will take more energy to power an 8K tv because an 8K tv will have 33 million pixels to drive, vs 8.3 million on a 4K tv.

Power consumption depends on implementation and since you don't have to power each pixel individually, you have to base that on several factors.

Plus 8K tv's will need to be larger to enjoy the effects of true 8K.

Good. Most TVs are stamp size anyway. I don't understand why people get so excited about 85" TVs. They're tiny. We really need 15' to 20' wide panels to become available, preferably rollable. The µLED walls are there for size, but are a pain to install.

Upscaling 4K to 8k will never look as good as 4K displayed on a 4k tv. It's simple science. True 1:1 pixel mapping will always look better than upscaling.

That myth has been debunked in so many shootouts, it's not funny anymore. What processors have you used, what firmware and what algorithms? If it's so simple, surely you can explain it to us? I don't think it's so simple, but I've been doing image processing for only about 30 years all over the world.

And since there really is nothing in 8K, other than a few youtube videos, only a fool would waste their money on an 8K tv for the next 5 to 10 years.

Funny, I'm from the future I guess. I have 8k material not coming from Youtube. I've seen more in post and mastering facilities. The question is, how do I get back to the future now?

Maybe you meant to say, you don't have access to 8k material? Then I guess I wouldn't be from the future after all.

 

[Packers1958]

That's ok, but nothing special, really. There's similar stuff out there in 4k/8k, also look at µLED walls and what Barco/Christie have to offer. From a price point of view, TCL is good, but as I've learned a long time ago, in home theater prices are irrelevant.

What do you say about µLED walls then? I've seen plenty of display devices in the pro market, sucking up a few kW

Power consumption depends on implementation and since you don't have to power each pixel individually, you have to base that on several factors.

Good. Most TVs are stamp size anyway. I don't understand why people get so excited about 85" TVs. They're tiny. We really need 15' to 20' wide panels to become available, preferably rollable. The µLED walls are there for size, but are a pain to install.


That myth has been debunked in so many shootouts, it's not funny anymore. What processors have you used, what firmware and what algorithms? If it's so simple, surely you can explain it to us? I don't think it's so simple, but I've been doing image processing for only about 30 years all over the world.

Funny, I'm from the future I guess. I have 8k material not coming from Youtube. I've seen more in post and mastering facilities. The question is, how do I get back to the future now?

Maybe you meant to say, you don't have access to 8k material? Then I guess I wouldn't be from the future after all.

The energy regulations for consumer based tv's are different than the pro market. mass producing tv's that meet energy standards have always been an issue that manufacturers have had to deal with. The brighter you make the panel, the more energy it consumes. You have EU standards, US standards, etc, all of which they have to meet.

OLED tv's power each pixel, just like microLED has to do, QD-OLED will have to do, etc. So yes, they will consume quite a bit more energy the larger you make them, the brighter you make them, and going from 4K to 8K. LCD is not professional grade, due to it's required backlight technology that cant produce perfect blacks, poor off axis viewing, blooming etc. It's a dying technology. Samsung Display has already abandoned LCD production and is going to QD-OLED this year and QNED down the road. All pixel driven technology. TCL is now producing mini LED panels for Samsung, but even they are going to switch to QD-OLED.

I have seen with my own eyes that 1:1 pixel mapping is better. I have a 12 year old 60 inch Pioneer 600M plasma and it looks better with BD discs, than my 4K 65 inch LG OLED tv, both connected to my OPPO 203 UHD player set to Source Direct, which allows the tv to do the heavy lifting. I'm not talking about color volume, but actual clarity of the image. Motion of course, still is much better on plasma than any current technology. So i will stick with my claim, that upscaling can not match 1:1 pixel mapping, and also current technology can not match motion of plasma.

 

[GrumpyCoder]

I have seen with my own eyes that 1:1 pixel mapping is better. I have a 12 year old 60 inch Pioneer 600M plasma and it looks better with BD discs, than my 4K 65 inch LG OLED tv, both connected to my OPPO 203 UHD player set to Source Direct, which allows the tv to do the heavy lifting. I'm not talking about color volume, but actual clarity of the image. Motion of course, still is much better on plasma than any current technology. So i will stick with my claim, that upscaling can not match 1:1 pixel mapping, and also current technology can not match motion of plasma.

I see, your reference is a more than a decade old plasma that wasn't very good to begin with, not using a proper external video processor. But hey, as long as you're happy, that's what matters.

You might also be confusing motion (which anyone in the video market refers to as motion blur) with stutter due to different sample-and-hold technology? If you measure pixel reaction and frame-hold time, it's closer to what you say.

I've already written something about technology switches and what's happening exactly in an older thread (last year? can't remember). Too lazy to repeat.

 

[ActionableMango]

I have a 12 year old 60 inch Pioneer 600M plasma and it looks better with BD discs, than my 4K 65 inch LG OLED tv, both connected to my OPPO 203 UHD player set to Source Direct, which allows the tv to do the heavy lifting. I'm not talking about color volume, but actual clarity of the image. Motion of course, still is much better on plasma than any current technology. So i will stick with my claim, that upscaling can not match 1:1 pixel mapping, and also current technology can not match motion of plasma.

I too had a 600M and now an LG 65 OLED. I do miss the plasma's motion, a lot. Like A LOT.

Even after 4 years I still am not used to the poor motion of the LG OLED vs the Pioneer Plasma.

 

[GrumpyCoder]

I do miss the plasma's motion, a lot. Like A LOT.

Funny. I've owned a few. No way I'd go back to plasma. There's no perfect technology, they all have their pros and cons. But I'd take anything modern (and high quality) over the old days.

 

[Packers1958]

I see, your reference is a more than a decade old plasma that wasn't very good to begin with, not using a proper external video processor. But hey, as long as you're happy, that's what matters.

You might also be confusing motion (which anyone in the video market refers to as motion blur) with stutter due to different sample-and-hold technology? If you measure pixel reaction and frame-hold time, it's closer to what you say.

I've already written something about technology switches and what's happening exactly in an older thread (last year? can't remember). Too lazy to repeat.

Sure, you believe that. The 600M is still considered one of the best. To say it wasnt very good to begin with is just a false statement. Professionally calibrated, it looks stunning. I know what sample and hold is and the related stutter with OLED,
motion blur from LCD, and judder with 3:2 pulldown. Plasma motion still tops them all.

I have nothing against OLED, in fact I love it. But if i am going to watch a blu ray movie, it will be on my 600M, not on my OLED. As I said before, it looks better on the 600M. Both professionally calibrated. Whether you want to believe that, is your own choice.

As far as 30 years of experience, that means nothing to me. I have seen people with 30 years of experience in the medical field that are incompetent, as well as those with as little as 5 years being highly competent. So that argument in itself has little meaning to me.

 

[GrumpyCoder]

Whether you want to believe that, is your own choice.

A lot of people very high up in the industry, both on the creative side as well as those who actually make the technolgy "believe" that. So I guess I'll be alright.

 

[Packers1958]

A lot of people very high up in the industry, both on the creative side as well as those who actually make the technolgy "believe" that. So I guess I'll be alright.

I glad you believe yourself to be an expert. That's 1.

 

[GrumpyCoder]

I glad you believe yourself to be an expert. That's 1.

I don't really believe that. Other told me I am, guess that comes with the job. I give very little into this. Back when I was still really active in that marked with customers all over the world paying me for my services in image processing among other things, all I really cared about was the fun and making enough money to afford all the toys in audio and video I cared about with an option for early retirement to enjoy think's I'm interested in even more. Chances are good you're enjoying some of the things I've worked on in as well. Win-win situation.

 

[ActionableMango]

Funny. I've owned a few. No way I'd go back to plasma. There's no perfect technology, they all have their pros and cons. But I'd take anything modern (and high quality) over the old days.

What is funny? I don't get it. I wouldn't go back either. Maybe you meant to respond to the other guy.

 

[Packers1958]

I don't really believe that. Other told me I am, guess that comes with the job. I give very little into this. Back when I was still really active in that marked with customers all over the world paying me for my services in image processing among other things, all I really cared about was the fun and making enough money to afford all the toys in audio and video I cared about with an option for early retirement to enjoy think's I'm interested in even more. Chances are good you're enjoying some of the things I've worked on in as well. Win-win situation.

I guess we share that in common. We are old and retired.

 

[HDFan]

too had a 600M and now an LG 65 OLED. I do miss the plasma's motion, a lot.

No way I'd go back to plasma.

I have a Panasonic tc-p60st60 plasma and an LG OLED. Never saw any difference in motion, but the OLED is so much better in color/HDR. I won't regret replacing the plasma when it dies.

 

[Macalicious2011]

Image quality for 4K sources is usually best unaltered. Upscaling benefits tremendously from processing, but if it is already 4K, it more often makes it worse. My first step when I went 4K (I have a Panasonic OLED, a few years old, but still amazing) was to search for suggested settings on AVForums, but a quick search didn't show any for your set. Delve a bit deeper and you might find them. The general rule of thumb is turn off every piece of processing, play a good bit of source material (the best 4K scene you have), then try with different bits of processing turned back on. My TV has nothing turned on for 4K. For upscaling I have a few things turned on, including a mild widening of the colours near to what the TV is capable of, allowing the non-HDR content to look a bit better.

A 4K Blu Ray should look better than iTunes 4K due to a much higher bitrate, but you will only see the real differences if you set up your TV properly. If the Blu Ray has been upscaled from a 2K intermediate, so will the iTunes version in almost all cases. note that a 2K intermediate can look a lot better than a standard Blu Ray. The original source will be a far higher bit rate, so the 4K Blu Ray will have been exposed to less compression, plus there is the HDR.

How much difference will vary, plus some movies benefit from image quality than others. Sci-fi tends to benefit more than a rom-com for example. It makes sense to buy the best stuff on 4K Blu Ray, while saving money by buying the iTunes for others. Particularly as many films are on offer each week. Plus some movies are only 4K on iTunes. I got War of the Worlds (1953 version) because the only disc version was DVD at the time, but iTunes was 4K on special offer for £3.99.

You asked for some recommendations for good quality 4K Blu Rays. The David Attenborough BBC documentaries are excellent. Planet Earth 2, Blue Planet 2, and Dynasties (not as good as the others) are all in what remains of Zoom UK's 3 for £30 offer. The most recent is Seven Worlds, One Planet and it looks amazing. Another good one from that Zoom offer is Black Hawk Down.

The original Blade Runner looks great, as does The Martian. Gemini Man is divisive. It is nothing special as a movie, but being made at 120FPS is different. Many hate it as are used to 24FPS, but I love it, even though the 4K Blu Ray is downsampled to 60FPS. It allows action to be seen because blur does not have to be added to compensate for a low frame rate. The movie is very sharp and detailed. It looks more 4K than anything else I have seen. A search suggests the iTunes version is only 24FPS. I'd love to see a 120FPS version if the Apple TV gets updated to HDMI 2.1 and getting 120FPS capability as part of that.

Great tips.

My new TV has more image settings than I have ever seen on a TV. Yesterday I managed to find a few settings recommendations that I will try this weekend.

I do agree that processing should be kept to a minimum when possible.

iTunes sales can be great. Two Christmas ago I bought a bunch of UHD movies at £1-3 each.

Interesting that you mentioned Gemini Man. This past week I have watched a HDR snippet of it on YouTube. The train scene is beautiful, however it didn't occur to me that it's shot in a high frame rate!

My TV is only capable of 120fps at 1080p or 4k/60. Will the movie default to 60fps?

 

[HDFan]

Although I prefer physical media, I did find one instance where streaming was better (other than audio). There are some movies that I like that are only available physically on DVD. Amazon Prime, however, streams them in 1080p. Pointing to the future I am afraid.

 

[GrumpyCoder]

What is funny? I don't get it. I wouldn't go back either. Maybe you meant to respond to the other guy.

All I meant was, I don't miss plasma at all. Plasma never did it for me. The one plasma I enjoyed, was the one that Pioneer never brought to the market. They invited for a pre-production presentation and it was really good, but then stopped doing plasma. So this wonderful prototype never came to the market. I'm also very sensitive to artefacts and since plasma had modulation involved, I can to this day still see color separation artefacts on plasmas whenever I move my head or my eyes in a certain way. Nowhere near as bad a 1-chip DLP projection with colorwheels, but enough to bother me. It's something I got used to, but it never went away completely.

 

[Macalicious2011]

The TCL 8 series can hit 1800 nits sustained on a 25% window, 1200 nits on a 50% window, and 700 nits full screen.

That is nuts. I had no idea that there are TVs capable of this level of brightness.

 

[Moonjumper]

Great tips.

My new TV has more image settings than I have ever seen on a TV. Yesterday I managed to find a few settings recommendations that I will try this weekend.

I do agree that processing should be kept to a minimum when possible.

iTunes sales can be great. Two Christmas ago I bought a bunch of UHD movies at £1-3 each.

Interesting that you mentioned Gemini Man. This past week I have watched a HDR snippet of it on YouTube. The train scene is beautiful, however it didn't occur to me that it's shot in a high frame rate!

My TV is only capable of 120fps at 1080p or 4k/60. Will the movie default to 60fps?

The 4K Blu Ray is 60FPS. I'm not sure if the iTunes version is 24FPS or 60FPS. I believe 120FPS requires HDMI 2.1, which some people hope will appear in the next version of the Apple TV, but the TV will also need it as well. I don't think that is as important as the jump to 60FPS, but 120FPS would be nice to see.

The hotUKdeals website has someone posting each Monday with the iTunes movie content on sale for the week. It is worth checking out, and is a good list this week.

 

[Macalicious2011]

The 4K Blu Ray is 60FPS. I'm not sure if the iTunes version is 24FPS or 60FPS. I believe 120FPS requires HDMI 2.1, which some people hope will appear in the next version of the Apple TV, but the TV will also need it as well. I don't think that is as important as the jump to 60FPS, but 120FPS would be nice to see.

The hotUKdeals website has someone posting each Monday with the iTunes movie content on sale for the week. It is worth checking out, and is a good list this week.

After watching the train clip on YouTube i was tempted to buy Gemini UHD as a technical showcase. However I binned the idea after watching the motion sickness inducing motorcycle chase scene 🤢

 

[GrumpyCoder]

After watching the train clip on YouTube i was tempted to buy Gemini UHD as a technical showcase. However I binned the idea after watching the motion sickness inducing motorcycle chase scene 🤢

HFR isn't for everyone. I don't like it either. For me it looks like a cheap video based studio production.

 

[satcomer]

Just let you know most of the cable users don’t even get true 1080i out of cable boxes! Just prove it to you try Antenna on your TV, especially in Suburb or city! You will see a huge step up and see how much Cable companies are lying to you on 1080i the TV companies are putting out. Heck to new stand is coming to 4K streaming over air signals in next 2 years!

I feel that’s why Apple hasn’t upgraded their TV box until that new TV standard comes out!

 

[HDFan]

most of the cable users don’t even get true 1080i out of cable boxes!

That would be very difficult for certain channels in the U.S. as Fox, ABC, ESPN and others are 720p.

 

[HDFan]

That is nuts. I had no idea that there are TVs capable of this level of brightness.

There are some Samsung displays that hit 2500 nits.

 

[satcomer]

That would be very difficult for certain channels in the U.S. as Fox, ABC, ESPN and others are 720p.

That because ISPs on cable modems, 100s of channels of crap and are compressed down to save bandwidth on their cable systems! Don’t believe me I still say (especially when you are in a hugs suburb or city) is get a decent antenna and you’ll see the true 1080i pictures especially in sports!