Apple Pushes Studios to Offer 4K Content for Upcoming Apple TV at Lower Prices, Report Says (bit.ly)

Apple appears to have ambitious plans to attract people's interest in its streaming device Apple TV, according to a new report. An anonymous reader shares a report: The company, which is widely expected to refresh the Apple TV next month to bring support for videos in 4K, is in talks with Hollywood studios to bring Ultra HD content at lower prices, WSJ reported on Tuesday. Apple is widely expected to unveil new iPhone models - including one called the iPhone 8 - next month. The publication reports that the iPhone-maker is pushing Hollywood studios to agree to sell Ultra HD editions of movies at $19.99, the usual price the company charges for full-HD of new movies. But Hollywood studios, which have seen a significant portion of their business go to Netflix and Amazon Prime Video, are pushing for higher prices. Hollywood studios, according to the report, are asking Apple to increase the asking price from proposed $19.99 per movie by $5 to $10.

Comments

$/resolution is becoming asymptotic?

[enjar]

When I was a kid, there was still some black and white content, and it wasn't uncommon to see a black and white TV set from time to time. Then things went to all color and standard definition. HD came out and there was a big WOW moment that created a compelling reason to switch over, helped by the broadcast changeover from analog to digital. Blu-Ray won the format war and it's only a little better than DVD, but it's not so much better that if I can only find a movie in DVD format I would skip it. From what I see, 4K is a little better than Blu-Ray but not the same as going from SD to HD. And a lot of the content I'm getting is streamed, anyway, so it can buffer and have compression artifacts. I guess if I was planning on getting some ginormous screen soon it might matter, but honestly the 42" size screens are "good enough" and we have better ways to spend money than to upgrade for only an incremental benefit.

Re:Greed

[Gr8Apes]

The 6 Mbit stream is compressed; it gets upconverted to a 25 Mbit stream before decoding. Most people will not be able to sense a difference

If you have 20/100 vision and don't wear any glasses, maybe. Otherwise you'll definitely notice a difference in relatively standard 1080p material visually, and don't forget the sound. A TrueHD stream itself is roughly 5Mbps. Converting to Dolby II 5.1 without too much loss results in about 1.5 Mbps, so your 6Mbps stream is now 4.5 Mbps video, which is about the limit for non-artifact simple cartoons with simple color palettes and stationary backgrounds. Movies with panning views including complex landscapes will easily eat up 12Mbps at a reasonably compressed rate with minimum artifacts, not including sound. Compare that with Cable (TWC does about 5-6 Mbps) or U-verse (6-8 Mbps) and you'll see why OTA (9-13 Mbps) is a better picture even though it's 1080i. All of those use DD 5.1 sound at most, so you lose 1-1.5 Mbps to sound. BluRays are between 28-35 Mbps and many have TrueHD or equivalent lossless sound. And yes, there is a different between TrueHD and DD 5.1. Of course, that makes no difference if you're only using the stereo TV speakers.

I only mention all that to contrast it with the requirements of 4K video, which has 4 times the potential content. Yes, H265 does a better job at compressing it, but you can compress 1080 with H265 as well, and in fact, my limit numbers are based on H265, so it's an apples to apples comparison. The 4K disks run about 70GB per movie. If you think you can compress that down to an acceptable 6 Mbps stream, well, I have some ocean front property in LA to sell you, just come at low tide.

Re:Greed

[houghi]

What they do is edit the 1080p to see how it works and then run the editor on the 4k image. That way the compiling of the image is done in the background.
If you actually down scale it and then edit it, you should not upscale it again, because you will not have done the following:
1) Paid for 4K camera that you do not need
2) Waste time downscaling to 1080p
3) Lost all the advantage of images in larger scale
4) Waste time upscaling

There are people who film in 8k, only so the information they have is better to have when they downscale to 4K, not to upload 8K, although some might still do that to show off.

ALWAYS edit the largest image with the most info and then downscale. Do not upscale, because that is useless.