Disney Is the Only Major Hollywood Studio Not Backing Apple's Plan to Sell 4K Films at $20

[Martinpa]

Anything filmed digitally nowadays is very most likely shot 4K, if not 8K. The color correction is done on the raw files, so if the source is 4K or more (could be 8K, or anything in-between -- 5K, 6K) then exporting your master in 4K doesn't cost any more money, per say... it'll take longer and create a significantly larger file, but that's about it... Then on the distribution end, it would only cost more from Apple for the infrastructure to be able to pipe the content through to the customers... so assuming they are taking their usual cut of the profit (~30%), then the studio isn't losing any money distributing that film in 4K vs. 1080p... Unless some third party along the way charges more for their services on a movie that would be distributed in 4K...

Something shot on film -- or a 4K rerelease -- is a different story... as I'd assume whoever scans the film will ask more for a 4K output... maybe even for Telecine (dunno about that one...)...
For a rerelease, you basically have to fork some money in order to do pay the people who will handle it... I would rationalize it by assuming it would reinvigorate sales for a product that probably as attain a sort of market saturation and isn't generating a lot of money anymore...

So when it's distributed digitally, I have a hard time accepting a price difference (even between SD and HD -- actually you'd think that by now the SD pricing would have been given to HD content, and UHD would be what HD cost when it first started, at the very least)... For physical copies, it's a different story, as the medium will cost more to produce...

If I missed something, feel free to enlighten me...

 

[MrXiro]

Anything filmed digitally nowadays is very most likely shot 4K, if not 8K. The color correction is done on the raw files, so if the source is 4K or more (could be 8K, or anything in-between -- 5K, 6K) then exporting your master in 4K doesn't cost any more money, per say... it'll take longer and create a significantly larger file, but that's about it... Then on the distribution end, it would only cost more from Apple for the infrastructure to be able to pipe the content through to the customers... so assuming they are taking their usual cut of the profit (~30%), then the studio isn't losing any money distributing that film in 4K vs. 1080p... Unless some third party along the way charges more for their services on a movie that would be distributed in 4K...

Something shot on film -- or a 4K rerelease -- is a different story... as I'd assume whoever scans the film will ask more for a 4K output... maybe even for Telecine (dunno about that one...)...
For a rerelease, you basically have to fork some money in order to do pay the people who will handle it... I would rationalize it by assuming it would reinvigorate sales for a product that probably as attain a sort of market saturation and isn't generating a lot of money anymore...

So when it's distributed digitally, I have a hard time accepting a price difference (even between SD and HD -- actually you'd think that by now the SD pricing would have been given to HD content, and UHD would be what HD cost when it first started, at the very least)... For physical copies, it's a different story, as the medium will cost more to produce...

If I missed something, feel free to enlighten me...

Are you talking to me or the angry troll?

Many films are lowered down to 2K for CG rendering because rendering 4K CG would take forever and the sizes are unruly. Maybe in a few years when storage sizes become even larger and processors and video processors become more powerful they'll do the CG work in 4K but that's not "worth the pain" with the current technology. But you're pretty spot on otherwise.

 

[Martinpa]

Are you talking to me or the angry troll?

To no one in particular. But you might have a better grasp of some aspects of this. I work in post too, but outside the studio system, and have mostly handled RED or Alexa files (so nothing shot on film and then scanned). Even outside big productions, everything I touch is 4K+ (I'd actually say that I pretty much never have to work with 4K files... it's always 5K or more). Higher Res -- with the stuff I tend to work with -- mostly means bigger more expensive hard drives... but nothing outrageous. But those productions are usually more "self-contained", hence why I say "Unless some third party along the way charges more for their services on a movie that would be distributed in 4K..." has big productions would have a lot more people involved/outsourced aspects.

But I do agree with you that it shouldn't be too expensive to do a 4K "conversion", or a the very least that there are ways to do it without it being expensive.

 

[MrXiro]

To no one in particular. But you might have a better grasp of some aspects of this. I work in post too, but outside the studio system, and have mostly handled RED or Alexa files (so nothing shot on film and then scanned). Even outside big productions, everything I touch is 4K+ (I'd actually say that I pretty much never have to work with 4K files... it's always 5K or more). Higher Res -- with the stuff I tend to work with -- mostly means bigger more expensive hard drives... but nothing outrageous. But those productions are usually more "self-contained", hence why I say "Unless some third party along the way charges more for their services on a movie that would be distributed in 4K..." has big productions would have a lot more people involved/outsourced aspects.

But I do agree with you that it shouldn't be too expensive to do a 4K "conversion", or a the very least that there are ways to do it without it being expensive.

You probably know more than me. I left post a few years back to work on features on set but times got hard and I had to go back into the system.

 

[cube]

Streaming only sucks

A Qobuz streaming subscription allows you to pre-download for offline listening, and there are MP3, FLAC, and Hi Res levels.
[doublepost=1505346333][/doublepost]

But I do agree with you that it shouldn't be too expensive to do a 4K "conversion", or a the very least that there are ways to do it without it being expensive.

I am not interested in 3D conversions or upscaling. And it can give a bad rep to the technology.

 

[Martinpa]

You probably know more than me. I left post a few years back to work on features on set but times got hard and I had to go back into the system.

I've also directed some independent projects... and literally the only additional cost to have my output in 4K would've been bigger hard drives... But, yeah, like I said, those productions are a lot more self-contained, and usually outsource to freelancers, rather than post houses.

What did you do on set? I sometimes DIT (or rather DUT as there never really is any color grading involved, and it's really just data wrangling), so I see a good amount of source footage directly out of camera... I also Scripty from time to time whenever I work on set.

I am not interested in 3D conversions or upscaling.

I put quotation marks around "conversion" for a reason... If you filmed digitally with older cameras that did not output 4K files, then it won't look that good upscaled... if you still have the source footage filmed in 4K (or more), you can reconform and export a new master (VFX would then be somewhat of an "issue"). If it was shot on film, depending on the stock and how well it was preserved, you can rescan in 4K and reconform the original, or I would even assume you could just scan the film positive (for exhibition) for 4K; wouldn't be as sharp as something that was always intended to be 4K, but Film holds information really well...

And 3D conversion is another beast... and although not as good as something shot in 3D, it is essential as certain things simply cannot technically be shot in 3D and need to be converted to it (if for example a whole movie is shot in 3D, but certain scenes, or even just some shots, cannot technically be done in 3D, you need 3D conversion to have those fit in the rest) But anyhow, that's a different thing

 

[Marx55]

The solution is quite simple: consumers, unite. Total boycott to Disney products. That will fix it overnight. End of problem. Move ahead.

 

[chatin]

A problem of Apple's own making. iTunes has me locked out until November. My six-year old wanted a quick switch!

 

[MrXiro]

I've also directed some independent projects... and literally the only additional cost to have my output in 4K would've been bigger hard drives... But, yeah, like I said, those productions are a lot more self-contained, and usually outsource to freelancers, rather than post houses.

What did you do on set? I sometimes DIT (or rather DUT as there never really is any color grading involved, and it's really just data wrangling), so I see a good amount of source footage directly out of camera... I also Scripty from time to time whenever I work on set.

I shoot and direct but after I left Sony I was trying into ADing on bigger projects. I got onto my buddy's film; Insidious which was ultra low budget, I was PAing and I opened my big mouth when the line producer asked if I knew anyone who could do crafty for cheap and said why don't we just buy food and put it on a table and just put a PA on it. I worked on an even lower budget film years prior in art department when I first moved to LA and I saw that's how they did crafty. Well the line producer stuck me on crafty and I ending up being a crafty guy for the next year and a half on 5 films and a commercial. It was the only thing people wanted me for and I got pigeon holed.

So I had to leave production and went back to running my own production company for online video content for marketing companies while temping and ended up at Fox doing commercials for FS1 and FS2 when they launched and now I'm at FX. Not what I want to do but it pays the bills I guess.

I'm still producing, directing and shooting my own stuff on the side. I have ties in horror movies so I've been trying to do more horror stuff to get my stuff seen. My buddy bought Lights Out last year and turned it into a successful feature and now that guy who directed it just came out with Annabelle Creation and is hitting it big.
Some of my stuff can be seen at www.hashtagcreepy.com if you want to see it.

 

[Mirice99]

You assume consumers still want discs...they don't. Pay $5 more (plus tax) for a coaster. Sales having been dwindling every year and retailers have cut back on stock.

Sometimes they just want to click 'buy' and start watching.

Captain America Three Civil War grossed over 54 million dollars in blu ray sales so your claim that consumers don't want a "coaster" which offers vastly higher quality in both picture and sound is beyond stupid and you are completely misinformed or willfully ignorant. Oh and people pay tax on Apple purchases too...

 

[GizmoDVD]

The solution is quite simple: consumers, unite. Total boycott to Disney products. That will fix it overnight. End of problem. Move ahead.

For a $5 difference? LMAO.

They have 1 4k release right now. 1. And the amount of people who care are fractional it a percent.
[doublepost=1505351146][/doublepost]

Captain America Three Civil War grossed over 54 million dollars in blu ray sales so your claim that consumers don't want a "coaster" which offers vastly higher quality in both picture and sound is beyond stupid and you are completely misinformed or willfully ignorant. Oh and people pay tax on Apple purchases too...

You don’t follow numbers closely enough to releaize disc sales are down YoY. Trying to show the diamond in the rough isn’t proof enough. If sales are so great why did Best Buy recently reduce stock? Or Wal-Mart? Target?

 

[Tech198]

"but the WSJ pointed out that Disney currently sells its films in 4K on apps like Vudu, but at a higher price of $24.99."

I believe this too, as to why Disney wasn't mentioned...

 

[KrispE00]

I was really hoping for 4K TV shows. I’m not much of a movie person, but 4K TV episodes would be great.

 

[Barry Marshall]

I am not about to start shelling out more money to Apple for another Apple TV nor am I shelling out more money to Apple for movies I have already bought just so they can charge me some more to turn them into 4K and I am not shelling out more for a display that can you can view 4K movies on. Apple and the studios can start offering something better than the **** they produce these days since very few have a plot and this sci-fi crap has to look a lot more for realistic than what it does now.

 

[smorrissey]

First the music industry now the movie industry...

 

[JamesPDX]

Right now 4K content is mainly:

1) Streaming services like Netflix, Amazon, Hulu and their original programming
2) Movies (feature films) you can buy

Don't think there are any network shows available in 4K yet. Even HBO/Showtime/etc hasn't gotten into 4K.

The Amazon/Netflix/Vudu/etc apps on the new ATV will all stream in 4K with updates. The announcement we are talking about here movies because that's where the content is.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1856010/technical?ref_=tt_dt_spec
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1856010/technical?ref_=tt_dt_spec
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0944947/technical -Depends on the master.
[doublepost=1505360035][/doublepost]

First the music industry now the movie industry...

The majors now require 24 bit 96KHz stems for future remixing/remastering. The olden days (of a mastering house only delivering a stereo 16/44.1 "ready for red-book" file) are over.
Check this out regarding Netflix:
https://backlothelp.netflix.com/hc/...duction-and-Post-Production-Requirements-v2-1

 

[ILikeAllOS]

I thought it was weird how they showed a clip of Sony's Spider-Man on stage, and in both the marketing materials on the site as well as the hands-on area at Apple Park they were using WB's Wonder Woman but now it all makes sense.

As for why Disney is doing this, it's for the same reason they have been fighting with Amazon and why they will be ending their deal with Netflix - because Disney is launching their own streaming service soon, so they have this "**** everyone else" attitude now.

 

[TechZeke]

Disney has become really greedy when it come to the movie prices.

Disney is a money making power house in-general. Disney is able to get away with it most of the time because most people are willing to pay.

Heck, I was shocked when I got invited to Disneyland and I saw the $99 sticker price for a single day at a single park. $165 for a single day Park Hopper with California Adventure. It'll probably go higher after Disney starts milking Star Wars land.

I'd be lying if I said I didn't have my own fair share of Disney favorites, but you could literally go broke over all this Disney crap whether it be movies, theme parks, merchandise, whatever.

 

[Cigsm]

Homecoming is a Sony movie, coproduced by Marvel, distributed by Sony. Marvel didn't make a dollar from the movie itself. Marvel DOES NOT own the film rights to Spider-Man.

Fact they use Spiderman Homecoming is very intresting.
It's a Marvel movie, not Sony. Well Columbia may have distributing rights but this time it's Marvel that own the creative right to his own character, so it's more Disney than other Spiderman movies before

 

[Cigsm]

Lol go find torrents of 4K Disney movies. Spoiler alert: there's only Guardians 2

Disney pushing more customers to torrents

 

[Cigsm]

Again, Disney DOES NOT own the film rights to Spider-Man. Marvel wanted to use Soider-Man in Civil War and avengers movies, so agreed to coproduce the Sony spider movies in return for that plus merchandising. They didn't make a dollar from the film itself.

They do however we don;t know details of the contract. Otherwise it doesn't make sense.

 

[Cigsm]

Again, about 98% of movies have their DI's in 2K. They would have to redo every single special fx shot in 4k. That's time consuming and costly.

Anything filmed digitally nowadays is very most likely shot 4K, if not 8K. The color correction is done on the raw files, so if the source is 4K or more (could be 8K, or anything in-between -- 5K, 6K) then exporting your master in 4K doesn't cost any more money, per say... it'll take longer and create a significantly larger file, but that's about it... Then on the distribution end, it would only cost more from Apple for the infrastructure to be able to pipe the content through to the customers... so assuming they are taking their usual cut of the profit (~30%), then the studio isn't losing any money distributing that film in 4K vs. 1080p... Unless some third party along the way charges more for their services on a movie that would be distributed in 4K...

Something shot on film -- or a 4K rerelease -- is a different story... as I'd assume whoever scans the film will ask more for a 4K output... maybe even for Telecine (dunno about that one...)...
For a rerelease, you basically have to fork some money in order to do pay the people who will handle it... I would rationalize it by assuming it would reinvigorate sales for a product that probably as attain a sort of market saturation and isn't generating a lot of money anymore...

So when it's distributed digitally, I have a hard time accepting a price difference (even between SD and HD -- actually you'd think that by now the SD pricing would have been given to HD content, and UHD would be what HD cost when it first started, at the very least)... For physical copies, it's a different story, as the medium will cost more to produce...

If I missed something, feel free to enlighten me...

 

[Cigsm]

There's very very very few shows filmed in 4k

I was really hoping for 4K TV shows. I’m not much of a movie person, but 4K TV episodes would be great.

 

[skottichan]

Homecoming is a Sony movie, coproduced by Marvel, distributed by Sony. Marvel didn't make a dollar from the movie itself. Marvel DOES NOT own the film rights to Spider-Man.

It's only because Marvel Studios gets creative control with Spider-man, and no longer has to share merchandising profits for the entire Spider-man portfolio.

They also wholly retain the TV rights to all their characters (which is why we've gotten yet another Spidey cartoon), and retained the rights to many of Spidey's character base including Miles Morales.

 

[HiRez]

I like that all iTunes movie prices are capped at $20 and standard for new releases, you know what to expect. Disney at $25 would suck but I guess I wouldn't mind upgrading select Disney movies I own for $5 if that were an option. Re-buying all my Disney movies (I probably have about 3 dozen) at $25 is absurd and will never happen, so I hope there's at least some upgrade path.

Let's say I have 30 Disney movies and I want to upgrade 25 of them to 4K HDR (sorry, Star Wars I, II, III). Thrat would cost me $125 with an upgrade fee, something I'd balk at but probably go for. But repurchasing would cost $625. Nope. Not going to happen, and I don't think I'm alone.

In other words, if they offer an upgrade path, Disney gets $125 from me. If they don't, they get nothing.

That said, hopefully Apple works something out with them. Maybe they each eat $2.50 of the $5 to maintain consistency and make it up with extra sales, or something.