I mean, HDR and all not withstanding, it seems to be normal FullHD 1080p, from what I gathered. I wonder why they didn't film it in 4K like so many other netflix shows?
It isn't produced by Netflix, it's only streaming on that platform. Maybe CBS can't afford 4K cameras? Or maybe they feel that majority of the market isn't into 4K at this point, which wouldn't be wrong, I'm sure.
You know I keep forgetting this isn't a Netflix-produced show like that..... I'm Dutch, the entire CBS All Acces thing isn't in the front of my mind.
So CBS can re-release it in 4K a few years from now and charge you for the privilege of watching it again. Not that the disc releases have made me jaded about how Paramount treats Star Trek or anything...
I've wondered the same thing but at this point I'd just be happy with season 1 on blu-ray, quickly, and DS9 and Voyager remastered and released on blu-ray as well.
I'd guess it actually is filmed in 4K, but they were only able to do the visual effects at 1080p for reasons of cost (heck, I seem to remember reading somewhere that even Star Trek Beyond didn't have its effects done at 4K).
Assuming it might be shot in 4K, I think it's not mastered in 4K so they can release re-mastered versions in the future. Double-dipping. The same as when I jokingly tell people one day they'll try to find a way to make TNG 3D. The JJ Abrams films too.
It's definitely shot is 4k, every modern show is shot in 4k these days. They are almost on the verge of starting to film shows with 8k cameras. 4k is the the standard right now.
It depends on screen size and viewing distance... but typically you'd compare native 1080p and native 4k, not upscaled anything. However, within about 8-10ft, the typical viewing distance in a home, and on a screen 55" and up, you begin to see the differences, even more so at either closer distances, larger screen sizes OR both. My 55" plasma, at 8-9' distance, it's hard to tell between quality 1080p (such as bluray) and 4k, but you can just sorta see more clarity and sharpness, but it is not huge.. lean in closer and at around that 6' mark you can tell, for sure. Back up some, like viewing in from my hallway into the living room, nah.. both look stunningly good.
Into Darkness and Beyond were 3D from the get-go, so it's only Star Trek '09 they'd have to convert into 3D. And considering the way things have been going, I'm half-expecting we'll get a 3D re-release of that film before any new Trek films.
Real 4K is still quite rare. Many, many current, high-budget special-effects laden films are shot on sub 4K cameras. Others are shot with 4K (or higher) cameras BUT the CGI and other F/X are rendered in post at 2K. The vast majority of UHD (4K) Blu-ray releases are up converted from a 2K digital interpositive (DI), the same DI digitally distributed to cinemas. Ironically, films shot on 35mm/65mm/70mm (so older films, mostly) with non digital special effects, are much more likely to be true 4K on UHD Blu-ray releases. There are some exceptions with recent films, where 4K is throughout the process, but most cinemas are 2K anyway. As for “telling the difference” between a 1080p TV and a 4K TV on a 55” screen at 8-9 feet? You’re not seeing the difference in resolution—no one is. However, the 4K TV has a more sophisticated video processor, likely HDR of some kind and, crucially, a wider colour gamut. Those are the characteristics that make the difference, not resolution (need a bigger screen or a closer seat to tell resolution). As for plasma, there were no commercially available 4K plasmas, so any improvement on screen from a 4K source is owing to the source’s mastering, not 4K itself. Streaming 4K, like Netflix, is an improvement over streaming 1080p BUT, on properly calibrated gear, isn’t better than the far less compressed 1080p (of the same master) Blu-ray. (HDR and wider colour gamut notwithstanding). I’d guess CBSAA is not currently set up for 4K, so 1080p is the current cap. And I’d bet a year’s salary that its digital effects are NOT 4K (the latest Guardians of the Galaxy movie effects were rendered in 2K for cost purposes, so DSC is not splurging there).
To be clear, I stated that the differences that were slightly noticeable were in clarity/sharpness, not resolution. Unless comparing to OLED, my Panasonic plasma beats nearly all LCD displays in black level and contrast, which is equally if not more important. I also never stated that my plasma could or was displaying 4k content; I can see how it sounds like I was implying that, but I was not. I am speaking about comparing my display to 4k capable ones in similar environments at the same viewing distances and screen sizes. Unless I stand 4-6' away from a 4k display at a store, or a friends house, I cannot see a significant difference compared to 1080p. So, yes.. I agree, but wanted to clarify my statements from earlier.
No worries. I thought you might have plugged a UHD player into your plasma and were comparing a UHD disc to a 1080p disc. I have a Blu-ray player plugged into an SDTV CRT in my living room (my home cinema projector is in the basement) and I can see a slight improvement in image quality compared to a standard DVD of the same title (thanks to those convenient dual format releases). Obviously not a resolution issue but a better colour gamut (Blu-ray exceeds my TV’s colour capacity but DVD falls a bit short). Essentially, re: my plasma point, I was hoping to avoid others going on a futile search for a 4K version. I completely agree that your TV beats out 85-90% of non-OLEDs in quality owing to black levels and contrast—both ranked more important than resolution by ISF engineers for image quality. Sadly, for the consumer, numbers sell better than technical concepts.
You speak the truth, for sure! For fun, you ever pop in an old VHS cassette and go down that memory lane? Ugh.. how did we ever survive!?
I still have a few things on VHS not available in other formats (mostly for my classes—students are often amused when I patch in a VCR to the projector). A couple of months ago I did pop in a VHS of Errand of Mercy and watched it on a mono 13” CRT I keep around to cue up the tapes before class. Instant flashback to 1978 or so (before then, almost all my Trek watching was a 13” B&W). My 12 year old son was quite befuddled. “Dad, didn’t we watch that last summer on the big screen?”
Imagine his response if you pulled out a LaserDisc! I had a college prof back in the early 2000s that played video lessons from laserdisc... it was so ridiculous. Of course, I'm also the guy that pulls out his N64 and is still happy with the graphical effects of that machine too...so.. hashtag Nostalgia?