>>62014851
Just buy an XXX XBOX ONE X XXX
If you've got 4k blurays that need to be played and a proper 4k monitor to watch them on. Then yeah it's worth it.
Otherwise wait.
>>62014851
Well, no because you'll never use a BR disc.
Unless you're a grandpa who still buys movies on physical media. In that case you'll never notice the difference between FHD and UHD.
>>62014851
yeah but you need a good 4k tv. the resolution bump isn't worth it because chances are you sit too far away to really notice; it's the HDR that will blow your socks off. Good HDR tv's are minimum $1k
>>62015731
this post makes no fucking sense. The only way to watch actual UHD films is on blu ray discs. UHD HDR BDs aren't cracked yet, and 15MBps amazon streams don't count
>>62015731
You're a retard.
I bet you think 2GB 1080p movies are great quality.
nah not really. blu ray was already a dieing platform, i found i used my bluray played barely at all. its been disconnected from my pc forever. really i wish i spent the $100 on getting a better motherboard.
>>62014880
/thread
>>62014851
>yfw jewlywood shoots on $100k 8K cameras but does all the intermediate process at 1080p and the upscale to 4K.
good goy.
>>62015784
I don't dispute the quality difference between FHD and UHD. I just don't think the target audience that buys BR discs will notice it because they're old.
My point was that you don't buy BR discs. You download them.
>>62015755
>15MBps amazon streams don't count
Regular bds, and maybe dvds are better than this.
>>62015807
You can't download UHD blurays you fucking moron.
The ONLY way to watch a UHD bluray is with a UHD bluray player.
>>62015812
exactly, which is why it makes no sense for somebody to pretend that any form of UHD streaming/downloading is better than UHD Blu Rays.
if you buy a UHD Blu ray you have a movie theater quality backup of that film. Someday if you rent or own a movie theater sized screen and projector you will have the same or better quality than the movie theaters actualy get nowadays
Bluray in general is a massive cancer that use java and the blood of satan to make those uninterruptible slow messes that don't want to let you actually watch the movie.
The correct way to use those things is to put on your PC, crack the fucker and steal the video files.
>>62015847
UHD blurays are so far uncrackable.
>>62015836
Holy fuck you're joking right? You were one (1) search query away from looking like a total idiot.
>>62015807
i disagree, the target audience of blurays in primarily enthusiasts of cinema to whatever degree and are usually around 35. the issue is uhd blu ray only appeals to 40% of blu ray consumers and is often already pointless considering we have Internet connections faster than the bluray transfer rate.
>>62015856
Then you know what not to do.
>>62015865
Lol, you're showing how retarded you really are kid.
The only UHD downloads out there besides Smurfs 2 and one or two others, is a UHD screen capture using a capture card, which is NOT a 1:1 copy.
Screen caps are on the fly encodes, which are not the same as a remux.
AACS 2.0 has not been cracked, though there are rumors the intel SGX instruction set might have some loopholes which would allow you to read the media files directly from RAM so you can make a 1:1 copy that way.
>>62015880
Ya know, unless you actually care about the quality of the media you're watching and aren't poor.
If you've got disposable income, buy a UHD bluray player.
If you don't have disposable income, keep downloading lower quality shit and be happy it's free.
>>62015946
I think the quality of the media is degraded quite horribly by the forced trailers at the beginning and horrid slow java menu.
>>62015891
>Claims you cannot download UHD BR and calls someone a moron.
>Has to admit you actually can.
>Has to admit it may have been cracked to by-passed
>Slowly realizes the temporary inconvenience of ripping UHD BR will be fixed any moment now.
>>62015994
not him, but you are dumb.
>>62015994
Any moment now?
Smurfs 2 was released in may. It's been 3 months+ and still we have only 1 or 2 other titles that have been released, despite 20+ UHD blurays being released during this time.
So if there is a work around, it isn't being released for wide use.
The truth is we don't know how they're getting 1:1 copies of the few UHD titles that have been released. And there is no time line for when they will be more widely available.
90% of UHD downloads online are fake web downloads or screen caps.
Who the fuck gives a shit about Smurfs 2? I'd rather have John wick 2, Dawn of the planet of the apes, bourne collection, etc.
All of those have come out in the last month and you can't find them online in true 4k quality.
So if there is a crack, it isn't actually being used widely.
>>62015994
>>Slowly realizes the temporary inconvenience of ripping UHD BR will be fixed any moment now says increasingly nervous man for the 7th time this year
>I'm too autistic to just pirate the movie and watch the movie at 1080p, too impatient to wait for UHD blu rays to be cracked, but not rich enough to just buy it without worrying about "if it's worth it"
to answer your question: no the difference between 1080p and 4K is not worth spending hundreds of dollars unless you're a millionaire.
>>62016127
>unless you're a millionaire
fuck off kid.
UHD bluray player is $200-400
UHD TV is $2500-3500 (for a decent one with HDR, none of that garbage $400 4k bullshit)
and ~$20-40 per movie.
2-3 movies a month. that's $120 at the high end.
So a full year of ownership is ~$5000 with ~$1200 a year afterwards for new movies assuming several per month.
Even someone making $100,000 a year assuming they don't have kids could easily afford this. With 2 kids and a wife you'd probably need to break $150-200k a year for this much disposable income (kids aint cheap).
But you don't need to be a millionaire, not even close.
>>62016164
>So a full year of ownership is ~$5000
I would never pay this much to watch a movie with the current price
>>62016256
That's okay, most people wouldn't.
However it's also a lot easier to swallow if you already own a high end 4k TV, or you need to purchase a new TV anyway.
Take out the cost of the TV and it drops to $1400-1700 for the first year and $1200 a year afterwards.
And again that's assuming you're purchasing several UHD blurays a month, every month.
>>62014851
Looked up pricing for John wick 2
>4k blu ray is 25€
>blu ray is 15€
>dvd is 13€
>4k blu ray "as new" pre-owned is 11€
I have a xbox one s and a 4k tv but don't own a single 4k blu ray. I'll wait till the prices drop or I get some movies off of a sale/ pre-owned
>>62016330
so buy it you dumbass and see what the fuss is about. John Wick 2 rules and the HDR is great in that movie
>>62017961
assuming you have an OLED HDR TV or a nicer higher end VA/IPS panel with a large backlight array (the more dimmable backlight zones the better).
The shitty barely capable of HDR panels really don't do most movies justice.
Most of the movies aren't even 4k; they are mastered at 2k. Some of them don't even have HDR.
Don't fall for the meme.
>>62018029
while you're not wrong.
MOST new releases are native 4k. Further, many old releases shot on 35mm+ film can be re-released at full 4k native res.
And HDR is generally present, though there are some titles that don't have it. You can expect the majority of releases going forward to have it.