Store Pricing Feedback & Debate

[Wbhendrix]

As a relatively new K user I understand the frustration around the pricing of various movies but I find my brain telling myself several things.

1. This is what I signed up for. Premium viewing experience at a premium price. I knew what I was getting into and I've made peace with it.
2. The sound difference alone in my home theater justifies the price tag. I did A/B testing with interstellar (iTunes vs K) and I was blown away at the difference. I'll gladly spend the extra money every time I watch a movie to FEEL it.
3. $30-$40 is still cheaper than taking my wife (and sometimes kids) to the movies when drinks & food is added into the mix

 

[Sonus]

@thrillcat the bummer thing about your Elvis post as well is that your first viewing of the movie ends up being the lesser viewing.

If what you are saying is correct everyone should always watch first at the movie theater since that is the way the director/studio intended, big screen, etc...
K is lesser than the theater, and streaming is lesser than K.

I disagree, of course, you should watch a movie where you enjoy it the most. streaming, k ,theater people are different.

 

[Oldred]

that is not true, if that were true Google, Apple and K would have to sell at the same price.

I am not in that industry and so don't have specific info but my comment was a repeat of someone else's but in other industries they agree different pricing with different resellers due to volume typically. it's the min price and their cost price that are set. I.e so apple set min price for retailers or they simply won't supply.

From a common sense perspective I can't see it makes any sense for K to price differently per studio or even at such high prices for specific movies. As others keep stating it is counter productive for their proposition. They might be 'hiding behind that occasionally' but it would be in the 'shoot yourself category'.

So conjecture only but I very much doubt this is all K driven. If it is - STOP IT

 

[Oldred]

As a relatively new K user I understand the frustration around the pricing of various movies but I find my brain telling myself several things.

1. This is what I signed up for. Premium viewing experience at a premium price. I knew what I was getting into and I've made peace with it.
2. The sound difference alone in my home theater justifies the price tag. I did A/B testing with interstellar (iTunes vs K) and I was blown away at the difference. I'll gladly spend the extra money every time I watch a movie to FEEL it.
3. $30-$40 is still cheaper than taking my wife (and sometimes kids) to the movies when drinks & food is added into the mix

I am relatively new and agree with that so far at least. I do think the variance is weird and offputting and I think $40 seems beyond premium and should only apply while in theatres only and with full extras. But overall I am comfortable enough. If it doesn't feel right then I don't buy it. This week I think, with the D2D picked up 4 good movies for under $16. Or could have paid $28+ for one. But there is enough good things to make me positive currently.

 

[Oldred]

There is only ONE digital release pkg and everyone is using the same one.

They aren’t then providing the same to customers’ devices though. So you are suggesting that providers then strip features out of that package and also most compress those files and re-package for streaming. Interesting.

 

[Sonus]

I am not in that industry and so don't have specific info but my comment was a repeat of someone else's

Yes, that is a common mistake, blame it on the studio and everyone repeats the same mistake. That is how the internet works.

 

[Oldred]

Yes, that is a common mistake, blame it on the studio and everyone repeats the same mistake. That is how the internet works.

So how do you explain the variance across the studios then? You simply see that as a strange K tactic? You sound like you work for a studio

 

[Sonus]

So how do you explain the variance across the studios then? You simply see that as a strange K tactic? You sound like you work for a studio

K set their own pricing structure, they want to make money like any other company.
Up until 6 months ago I always saw a 5$ upcharge over iTunes and Google but now we are at a 15$ upcharge and maybe in the future it will be higher.

My problem is that K keep raising their prices without providing any additional value.
On top of that, streaming services are catching up at an alarming rate.

 

[TrackZ]

If what you are saying is correct everyone should always watch first at the movie theater since that is the way the director/studio intended, big screen, etc...
K is lesser than the theater, and streaming is lesser than K.

I disagree, of course, you should watch a movie where you enjoy it the most. streaming, k ,theater people are different.

True, for those that enjoy the commercial cinema. I generally prefer the experience of using my room over going out to the theater, which is why K add so much value for me. Early access to releases, convenience of play vs. disc handling or ripping the discs, and higher fidelity for a premium room vs. lesser streaming quality.

 

[Sonus]

True, for those that enjoy the commercial cinema. I generally prefer the experience of using my room over going out to the theater, which is why K add so much value for me. Early access to releases, convenience of play vs. disc handling or ripping the discs, and higher fidelity for a premium room vs. lesser streaming quality.

I tend to agree with some caveats.

If you want early access you go to the theater. Releases are available on K and the streaming services at the same time so there is no advantage on this for anyone.

Streaming on a DV display with OLED has better video quality compared to the claimed high bitrate of K. (They don't tell us the bitrate we have to believe them) K has the upper hand over streaming on sound.

If you run a projector with a big screen I agree K has better video quality over streaming but not by much. The audio is better on K.

 

[Substance]

the claimed high bitrate of K. (They don't tell us the bitrate we have to believe them)

They tell us the file size on the web version of the store. You can confirm the accuracy of these with a little investigation and simple math.

I can download a 90 min film in 4K HDR in about 10 mins at 900mbps.

900mbps x 60 seconds x 10 mins = 540000 mb or 540gb

1 byte = 8 bits, hence 540gb / 8 = 67.5 GB is the complete file size.

Let's assume the average bitrate for a lossless track is 2mbps

2mbps x 60 seconds x 90 mins = 10800mb then 10800mb / 8 = 1350mb or 1.35GB.

Let's assume 3 lossless audio tracks included in the file, 1.35GB x 3 = approximately 4GB file size for the audio tracks.

Now subtract this from the complete file size and subtract another 2GB for metadata to find the approximate size dedicated to the video portion.

67.5 GB - 4GB - 2GB = 61.5GB.

Let's calculate the bits for the video from this,

61.5GB x 1000 = 61500MB, then 61500 x 8 = 492000mb

Now let's calculate the average bitrates,

(492000 / 90 minutes) / 60 seconds = approximately 91.1mbps.

If you run a projector with a big screen I agree K has better video quality over streaming but not by much. The audio is better on K.

This is subjective on whether you care more about the fidelity of the image as in the case of higher bitrates (Kaleidescape and Blu-rays) with much higher native detail and color accuracy or in the case of lower bitrates(Streaming) with the lack of detail and the color pop compensated in the post processing* at the player or the display.

*interpolating pixels (upscaling), chroma upscaling and contrast boost (edge enhancement/ sharpening).

It is also highly dependent on how large your display is and how close you sit from your display. There are many references online for the optimal seating distance to your display.

Imperfections(deficiencies) will escape your eyes if they are not trained to find them. Once you start noticing imperfections in your image, it will be very difficult not to see them.

It is true DoIby Vision can be superior to HDR in some setups. There are remedies such as Lumagen Radiance Pro and MadVR Envy then the level is field. In my case, HDR is the icing on the cake but not the cake itself. In other words, HDR doesn't matter to me if the image lacks native detail, color accuracy and it has unacceptable level of compression artifacts, artificial sharpening and contrast boost.

I am unfortunate that I have already started to notice the deficiencies in the streaming media, my eyes are always drawn to them. I will be forever locked to Kaleidescape or disc media until something better comes along.

 

[Sonus]

They tell us the file size on the web version of the store. You can confirm the accuracy of these with a little investigation and simple math.

I can download a 90 min film in 4K HDR in about 10 mins at 900mbps.

900mbps x 60 seconds x 10 mins = 540000 mb or 540gb

1 byte = 8 bits, hence 540gb / 8 = 67.5 GB is the complete file size.

Let's assume the average bitrate for a lossless track is 2mbps

2mbps x 60 seconds x 90 mins = 10800mb then 10800mb / 8 = 1350mb or 1.35GB.

Let's assume 3 lossless audio tracks included in the file, 1.35GB x 3 = approximately 4GB file size for the audio tracks.

Now subtract this from the complete file size and subtract another 2GB for metadata to find the approximate size dedicated to the video portion.

67.5 GB - 4GB - 2GB = 61.5GB.

Let's calculate the bits for the video from this,

61.5GB x 1000 = 61500MB, then 61500 x 8 = 492000mb

Now let's calculate the average bitrates,

(492000 / 90 minutes) / 60 seconds = approximately 91.1mbps.

The formula is simple, here it is - Bitrate = file size / (number of minutes * .0075)
K filesize has audio, and other stuff in it, and also this formula gives you AVG bitrate, everyone uses VBR anyhow so you can't really know much about what is going on there. Ask yourself why K is not displaying the bitrate to us, if it was over 90 they would have.

This is subjective on whether you care more about the fidelity of the image as in the case of higher bitrates (Kaleidescape and Blu-rays) with much higher native detail and color accuracy or in the case of lower bitrates(Streaming) with the lack of detail and the color pop compensated in the post processing* at the player or the display.

*interpolating pixels (upscaling), chroma upscaling and contrast boost (edge enhancement/ sharpening).

It is also highly dependent on how large your display is and how close you sit from your display. There are many references online for the optimal seating distance to your display.

Imperfections(deficiencies) will escape your eyes if they are not trained to find them. Once you start noticing imperfections in your image, it will be very difficult not to see them.

It is true DoIby Vision can be superior to HDR in some setups. There are remedies such as Lumagen Radiance Pro and MadVR Envy then the level is field. In my case, HDR is the icing on the cake but not the cake itself. In other words, HDR doesn't matter to me if the image lacks native detail, color accuracy and it has unacceptable level of compression artifacts, artificial sharpening and contrast boost.

I am unfortunate that I have already started to notice the deficiencies in the streaming media, my eyes are always drawn to them. I will be forever locked to Kaleidescape or disc media until something better comes along.

LOL, you remind me how audiophiles tell people who can't hear a difference in cables that their hearing is not good.

Lumagen or MadVR can never be good as a DV done right no matter how good your processor is it can only do so much.
The same goes when you upscale 5.1 to Atmos no matter how good your computer/algo is Atmos done right will be better.

 

[Substance]

The formula is simple, here it is - Bitrate = file size / (number of minutes * .0075)
K filesize has audio, and other stuff in it, and also this formula gives you AVG bitrate, everyone uses VBR anyhow so you can't really know much about what is going on there. Ask yourself why K is not displaying the bitrate to us, if it was over 90 they would have.


LOL, you remind me how audiophiles tell people who can't hear a difference in cables that their hearing is not good.

Lumagen or MadVR can never be good as a DV done right no matter how good your processor is it can only do so much.
The same goes when you upscale 5.1 to Atmos no matter how good your computer/algo is Atmos done right will be better.

Thanks for simplifying my formula. I wanted to display my logic with expanding the formula.

Math is there. 4K downloads have zero extras and fewer audio tracks. 100mbps is max allowed by the 4K UHD format. At 91mbps average, above example hovers close to the ceiling. Streaming 4K is 16 to 25mbps peak, for all we know the averages might be far from their peaks.

Audiophile claims vs mine are not apples and apples. Everything I mentioned above are measurable.

What is your argument about LPR or Envy not ever matching DV?

Either way, let’s not continue to highjack the thread here. Apologize to everyone for that. Out of respect to others, I will be happy to admit defeat here and move on. Or feel free to create another thread or reach out in dm, although the math part is straight forward, I am open minded, maybe I will learn a new thing on the other parts.

 

[Sonus]

We can keep going, the moderator can split it if they think it is necessary.

Thanks for simplifying my formula. I wanted to display my logic with expanding the formula.

Math is there. 4K downloads have zero extras and fewer audio tracks. 100mbps is max allowed by the 4K UHD format. At 91mbps average, above example hovers close to the ceiling. Streaming 4K is 16 to 25mbps peak, for all we know the averages might be far from their peaks.

I think the AVG bitrate on K is 60, not 90, but one thing to remember is that the streaming services use a proprietary compression and they are not bound by the limitation 264 has. For example, the max bitrate on K is limited to twice the AVG bitrate, streaming services do not have that limitation and they can use 8bitare and move to 80 if they want to, iTunes 4k streaming today jumps to 80bitrate sometimes. they experiment with a lot these days.

Anyhow, I think you and I are agreeing that K video quality is better over streaming, all I am saying is that it is becoming smaller and smaller of a difference.

Audiophile claims vs mine are not apples and apples. Everything I mentioned above are measurable.

I have a 200K set of front speakers in my audio room. The measurable difference between them and a set of 20K$ is very small and for me the difference in audio quality is big and for most people it is small or does not even exist.
We who pay for a K system think the difference is worth it.

What is your argument about LPR or Envy not ever matching DV?

In your first post, you argue artistic intent, you said that by using K you are closer to the source.
Today, most grading (if not all) is done using DV tools. This is the artistic intention, DV will represent the source better compared to HDR, so even with a lower bitrate the streaming services are closer to the source.

LPR and Envy are taking static metadata and using algorithms to transform it into dynamic, whereas DV already did this offline.
So a DV monitor can reproduce the original content all the time, whereas LPR will have its own representation of how the picture should look like.

Don't get me wrong, I have a LPR and I love it I think it is great but you will not need it if your chain will support DV and the source is in DV.

 

[cinelife]

No need to break into just for the above posts, but youwant to continue this discussion any further, please start another discussion thread. If that happens, I'll move the above to that thread.

Jim

 

[Transepoch]

While not looking to defend the studios here (who set the pricing) there is perhaps a small argument for a premium before the 4k disk is released. I.e. quite often they are released well in advance but that should disappear when that difference disappears. As there are a whole bunch of costs that disappear (manufacturing, packaging. distribution and retail) then I think there is a solid argument for it being cheaper. Kaleidescape bears the cost of hosting which is the closest to the retail costs I guess.

If everyone receives the same MEZ file, then they all have to do some degree of processing, which means more retail & packaging being borne by someone other than the studio (but likely part of the conversation with the studio on how the pot should get split.) However, with K's bookmarking and other features, they are probably putting more into it than most providers.

 

[KDeering]

If everyone receives the same MEZ file, then they all have to do some degree of processing, which means more retail & packaging being borne by someone other than the studio (but likely part of the conversation with the studio on how the pot should get split.) However, with K's bookmarking and other features, they are probably putting more into it than most providers.

Studios do their own master for disc release and obviously packaging. The digital assets are what go to K and streaming services (Amazon, Apple, Vudu, etc). There is no packaging for these. And one could argue that Apple does as much or more with the assets given the way their service/menus/info work. K's interface was pretty state of the art back in the DVD days, but it pales in comparison to most modern digital movie markets/systems.

 

[TrackZ]

I'm seeing $17.27 to upgrade the Star Trek to 4K.

 

[KDeering]

I'm seeing $17.27 to upgrade the Star Trek to 4K.

Me too. Again, is it just a screw up or is it the new norm.

 

[Hunter67]

I'm seeing $17.27 to upgrade the Star Trek to 4K.

Same here, HD upgrade is $3.14, 4k upgrade $17.27, regular price $19.99