I bought a 4k ultra HD premium t.v. and I want to start gathering

>>58675289
4K is a gimmick. Great waste of money.

Read the sticky.

>>58675378
Everything is a gimmick according to /g/, even ssd's are called gimmicks here

>>58675393
Not gonna install gentoo

>>58675405
Numbers don't lie.

A 55" 4K TV is optimal at 3' 7". No one sits that fucking close to a 55" display.

>>58675435
Regardless, any high end t.v. has 4k nowadays anyway.

I didn't buy the t.v. for 4k, I bought it for HDR, a bigger screen, wider color gamut, higher refresh rate, and because it has a 10 bit panel over my old 8 bit panel. The 4k is just a nice bonus, even if some people will argue it doesn't make a difference.

Nobody knows the answer?

File: raw.gif (292KB, 241x200px) Image search: [Google]

292KB, 241x200px

>>58675289
The only drawback to 4K content is how fucking big it is. Glad I bought into the 4K meme early though, I'm loving it.

As for storage device, nothing really specific. Anything decent will do. I just use a 4TB HDD USB enclosure.

>>58675435
>t. poorfag

>>58675289
NAS with PLEX

>>58675804
So the storage device doesn't really matter?

>>58675861
Nah, not at all.

>>58675804
Yeah the files are like 70gb, top kek

>>58675912
Word.
I was like "Haha time to download my first 4K master race content!" then saw a 56GB file for a movie and was just like "Aw hell naw, senpai."

Thank god I have FIOS.

>>58675919
What kind of mediaplayer do you use to play 4k hdr content, or do you just use your tv?

>>58675953
I just use my TV.

>>58675970
Which one?

File: scammed again.png (110KB, 847x431px) Image search: [Google]

110KB, 847x431px

>>58675289
>I bought a 4k ultra HD premium t.v.

>>58676002
Got an LG 60UH6150.
Well worth it imo.

>>58676055
Stay mad

>>58675289
I guess it's already been answered, but any normal harddrive will do, I just use 2-4TB WDs.

Here's some test footage.
http://jell.yfish.us/

The UHD Blueray spec calls for 128mbit 10bit hevc so if the 140mbps 10bit hevc file works for you you are set.
http://jell.yfish.us/media/jellyfish-140-mbps-4k-uhd-hevc-10bit.mkv

Also all those 10bit hevc mkv files you might have torrented work just fine on the tv. Oddly enough while h264 mkv's work fine, 10 bit ones aren't supported.

>>58676089
>LG 60UH6150
That's a big t.v.

Enjoy your non-existing content

>>58676190
Heck yeah it is.
Got this badboy mounted right up on the wall over my PC monitor.

File: 1.png (10KB, 870x164px) Image search: [Google]

10KB, 870x164px

>>58676186
Thanks m8, so this should work?

>>58676253
Yes

File: 1317464430091.jpg (12KB, 472x472px) Image search: [Google]

12KB, 472x472px

>>58676258
That's awesome

File: 1241231212.jpg (120KB, 376x490px) Image search: [Google]

120KB, 376x490px

>>58676217
>>58676253

>>58675435
>>>>>>optimal

Literally couldn't give a fuck about "optimal". Lighting and particle effects in games look great on my 4K TV from the distance I sit.

Anyway, how can a resolution be a gimmick? That doesn't even make sense. Some use cases demand more pixels than others, you cater accordingly.

>>58676253
>4K UltraHD BluRay
lol no

>>58676253
lel that's a 1080p upscale

>>58676320
It's 35mm film 'mastered' into a 10bit hevc encode, where did you get source that it was an upscale?

>>58676362
BTFO

>>58676320
>>58676362
I guess it has about 30mins shot in imax and 8 in 65mm still doesn't explain where you got 1080p upscale from.

>>58676371
He's just portraying the typle uneducated mad response of somebody who doesn't have acces to 4k content

>>58676362
because the file says 4K BD even though AACS2.0 has yet to be cracked

File: 123.jpg (175KB, 663x1116px) Image search: [Google]

175KB, 663x1116px

>>58676433
Sounds pretty awesome to me

File: 1234.jpg (182KB, 615x1096px) Image search: [Google]

182KB, 615x1096px

>>58676475
whoops, meant this ofcourse

>>58676491
>Upscaled from 2k master.
Ahahaha

>>58676514
Did you read the actual text?

You sound like somebody seeing a 9/10 but saying 'pointy elbows would not bang 1/10'

>>58676525
Yeah it basically says it's upscaled but looks a lot better than the 1080p release.
I'm just laughing at the fact that they used a 2k master source when they have 35mm raws that they where too lazy or cheap to digitize again and make a proper master source.

>>58676554
>Yeah it basically says it's upscaled but looks a lot better than the 1080p release.
Coupled with proper HDR, it sounds like a pretty amazing movie experience, don't see the issue

>>58676568
The movie itself is fine, the issue is that it could have been better.
Also when they originally made the master source, they weren't thinking UHD is about the be the standard lets digitize this at around 8k or you know at least 4k. They made a 2k source instead.

>>58676627
I see, would the difference be very visible though?

>>58676362
>>58676369
>>58676371
Bunch of retards, AACS2.0 hasn't been cracked and that's not an HDCP stream rip.
It's just an upscale some mongoloid did with the 1080p bluray.
Typical consumerist 4k drones.

>>58676660
So lets concede it isn't a true 4k format coupled with HDR it still sounds like a much better experience than regular 1080p SDR content
>>58676491

>>58676253
>he fell the blu-ray upscale

>>58676660
>AACS2.0 hasn't been cracked
Wtf does that even mean

>>58676669
You missed
>>58676660
point in that that's not the UHD Blueray, that's some dude on the intenet who upscaled the 1080p blueray.

>>58676682
It's supposed to mean that we can't dumb 4k UHD Blueray discs and watch the video content yet.

>>58676682
That it is impossible to rip 4K BDs at this point

>>58676696
>dumb
dump
fuck me

>>58676685
Does it matter though, would one really see the difference? And would the impact be as big as moving away from 1080 SDR content to this type of upscaled HDR content?

>>58676669
Yeah no it doesn't. No upscale will look better than the original no matter what memes like HDR you throw at it much less when some retard who likes upscales encoded it.

>>58676716
Yes, in this case you WANT the 1080p blueray over this.

>>58676720
Yes, but this is an upscale from the 2k source NOT the already lossy blueray. It won't look as good as the 2k source, but we don't have the source. So it should look better than the 1080p blueray.

>>58676720
>no matter what memes like HDR you throw at it

You just called HDR a meme, this completey discredits anything you are saying on this topic, you are simply ignorant

>>58676720
>>58676748
Sorry this is not from the 2k source. The UHD Blueray is.

>>58676748
>Yes, but this is an upscale from the 2k source NOT the already lossy blueray.
What? i'm talking about the star trek encode, the source is the 1080p bluray.

>>58676771
No it isn't

>>58676750
t. faggot who doesn't even know what HDR is

>>58676771
Yeah corrected myself here
>>58676768
Conversation is getting confusing:
UHD Blueray > 1080p Blueray > Random internet reencode upscale

>>58676788
They seem to think it's a reencode from someone on the interent on account of UHD Blueray's being uncrackable at this time.

>>58676812
You don't know what HDR is if you call it a meme

>>58676814
>Blueray
pls

>>58676820
You clearly don't know what it is since you think it just magically makes some NON HDR upscale look better even though you can apply it to the original source of the upscale as well.

>>58676840
Actually doom9 has experimented with removing banding with 8 bit content upscaled to 10 bit for many years. That's where all these 10 bit anime encodes came from.

>>58676866
it's time to stop. You obviously have no idea what you're talking about

>>58676866
Fallacy, you don't need 10bit to remove banding.
Go away.

>>58676840
>>58676814
>>58676812
>>58676771
tl;dr

The only thing I want to know is wether watching this

>>58676253

on a capable HDR 4k tv (so ultra HD premium, not some cheap model). will look better than on a standard 1080 non hdr capable tv?

For the rest, I don't care, even though you might be right

>>58676905
Will probably look better on a 4k HDR capable tv.

>>58676905
It won't.

>>58676905
It won't look better

>>58676916
>>58676921
/g/

File: 1402065566623.jpg (43KB, 450x450px) Image search: [Google]

43KB, 450x450px

>>58676921
>>58676921

So after "ultra" what word are they gonna use to market higher resolutions?

>>58676930
>>58676921
So you're assuming HDR doesn't add anything to the experience?

>>58676905
Why not just, you know look at it on both?

>>58676905
No, it won't much less on your shitty 55'' tv.

>>58676945
Well ofcourse I plan on doing that.

I just feel it's just another thing that /g/ calls a meme, when it really isn't.

>>58676937
Hyper HD aka HHD for the goyim

>>58676952
49 inches

Why is it so hard to crack UHD BDs
What's so special about them

>>58676944
And you're assuming it won't add to the experience of watching the 1080p bluray as well.

>>58676964
lel even worse, why would you buy a 4k meme tv under 65'' anyways? totally retarded

>>58676973
It won't on a t.v. that isn't capable of displaying a wide enough colour gamut, and/or high enough peak brightness which is what I was comparing it to

>>58676986
I'm confused, are you saying it's a meme, or are you conceding here that it actualy matters at higher display sizes? You can't have both

>>58676973
Here is 1 example of "HDR" processing
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/7/78/StLouisArchMultExpCDR.jpg
vs
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/e/ec/StLouisArchMultExpToneMapped.jpg
HDR isn't just 10 bit, it's fucking with color settings and shit. Doesn't necessarily look "better". Just changes how it looks.

>>58677001
I'm not saying it looks better, i agree with you completely, i'm just trying to show him his failed thinking.
It'll change the lightness colors on both the upscale and the bluray source.

>>58676995
What he means is that you're dumb enough to buy a 4k tv and also even dumber to buy one under 65 inches.

>>58677001
>https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/e/ec/StLouisArchMultExpToneMapped.jpg

You are making the classical mistake of thinking the technique behind HDR photographs is comparable to the technique behind HDR content on a television. It isn't.

Which is why you can display an HDR photograph in full glory on a non HDR screen, but you can't display HDR content in it's full glory on a tv screen that lacks the required brightness or color levels

>>58677048
mentioning display size as a relevant factor means 4k is not a meme. Which is what he is conceding to with his dumb ass post, and so are you.

>>58677077
>>58676995
I'm not conceding anything though.
You're so retarded that you not only fell for a meme but also for the shittier version of the meme aka a small 4k tv in which you notice jack shit difference unless you sit 3'' away from the screen, good going there pal.

>>58677065
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/High-dynamic-range_video
I see

>>58677107
>but also for the shittier version of the meme
So you are conceding 4k isn't a meme, based on the display size (since you imply a difference between two 4k screens of different display sizes). Glad we got that straight.

>>58677117
There you go, an actual article that go's into the differences, not just a wikipedia article describing hdr video.

https://www.cnet.com/news/hdr-for-cameras-vs-hdr-for-tvs-whats-the-difference/

>>58677129
Np, 4k is still a marketing meme cause there's no content. Enjoy your day goyim ;^)

>>58677140
That contradicts your claims earlier, I guess we can discard your opinions on this subject as horseshit then

>>58677149
Nope, it doesn't.
Learn to read ;^)

>>58677159
There's plenty of 4k content, also have fun with your stone age shitty non HDR capable t.v.

>>58677172
Enjoy your shitty upscales and your bitstarved 4k netflix that looks worse than their own 1080p blurays, goy ;^)

>>58677172
Can only think of 4k porn

>>58677194
Whatever makes you feel better about your inferior piece of technology.

>>58677218
Enjoy your useless meme technology, goy ;^)

>>58677232
Sure thing grandpa

>>58677218
But he's right

>>58677251
You think HDR photography is the same as HDR video, your opinion is irrelevant

>>58677270
wrong poster

>>58677296
I'm confused which idiot is which

>OP asks about 4k content achieving
>/g/ spergs about 4k and doesn't come to a single conclusion

i guess it's just another day on /g/

>>58677336
It's quite simmilar to every discussion on here, it always ends in semantics

>>58677355
i just thought/wish that if i bring it up enough times, things will change

>>58677368
Be the change you want to see anon

>>58677387
i guess.

i recently also bought into a 4k 55" tv. i'm still unsure of how I'd go about collecting media on my shit broatband connection.

i think I'll get either a hacked netflix, or simply go buy the stuff i like the most on a phyical copy. which would require me a uhd bluray player..

>>58677407
If you have a slow internet connection your only options really are netflix streaming (if it's fast enough for that) or a 4k bluray player with physical copies, but they cost alot.

So yeah, you're right

>>58677434
what also could work is amazon prime video with the fire tv box but i'm not sure if h265 4k is enough for 1,2mb/s download speed. also my speed is unreliable so i can't have it on demand sometimes.

physical it is then i guess, has better quality anyway

>>58677460
Or you could invest that money into a faster internet connection, if that is a possibility

>>58677466
mommas basement won't allow this.

i have to move out first for that to happen.. i think it's better so save my ressources on this first

>>58677476
Did you really have to be a walking meme?

>>58677483
you'd puke baskets if you would see my lifestyle

>>58677483
atleast i have a great personality, but the money i have won't change my degree of famousity

>>58675289
The only problem with 4k is how crap modern film is

>>58677508
You sound like a tryhard hippie

>>58675970
I doubt your TV has the graphics card to run 4k and none of the mpv configs

Also enjoy your 3 movies

>>58677591
That doesn't necessarily make him wrong.

>>58675289
movies in pic are
shit, shit, great, good, shit
shit, really shit, good, REALLY shit, great

I have a 4k sony HDR TV... I have 100mb internet. How do I know if the content I'm watching is HDR? The TV has an HDR setting but everything I've turned it on for has a washed out appearance. I just leave it on auto.

It's a "smart" TV with Netflix, but when I play HDR shows on it, I can't really tell if HDR is working. I doubt it is. HDR is a mystery to me. Guessing I need to actually download and physically play it, or get a UHD Blu ray player.

4K blurays have not been cracked and may not be for the foreseeable future. So you cannot store them on HD. All the rips out there are copied from an external connection that degrades the image and removes the HDR.

realorfake4k.com

Before you buy into any of the Hollywoods BS.

>>58676301
Poorfags call anything that they can't afford a gimmick or a meme. The worst is the "SSD's are meme" meme. Fucking fox and and grapes

>>58675378
Naw, 4k is the future.

Youtube has already started streaming 4k stuff. It's pretty nice.

>>58679906
>YouTube
>4k
>pretty nice
my sides