Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE: 4K TVs coming

This is topic 4K TVs coming in forum The Afterlife at Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE.

To visit this topic, use this URL:
https://ft-forum.com/ft/cgi-bin/ubb/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=12;t=000960

Posted by Paul Mayer (Member # 355) on 05-23-2011, 03:19 PM:

Both of these links are old. Guess I wasn't paying much attention at the time (I was out of work for a year during that period). Anyways, it looks like 4K at home is much closer to the home theater market than I thought. Guess I should quit buying any more Blu-rays for now... [Roll Eyes]

From 2009: Want a 4K TV? Sony Has a $76,000 Set with Your Name on It

quote:
Adam Frucci, Gizmodo

Regular HDTV is so last year. What you really need is a 4k TV, one with four times the resolution of HD. And hey, Sony's new TRIMASTER offers just that, for a price.

Yes, this $76,583, 56-inch set sports a resolution of 3840x2160, which means you can cram four full-res HD feeds in there at one time. You know, for watching four football games at once, or four movies at once. Samsung announced a similar, larger set a couple years ago, but as far as we know it never actually became a real product. This thing is all real.

Sure, this thing isn't meant for normal consumers, as the price makes it clear. But that doesn't mean you can't get one if you have the scratch. Come on, go for it. It's only $76,000. [AV Watch via Engadget]

From 2008: Samsung Demos 63-inch 4K Plasma Display

quote:
At the FPD International show held in Japan, the division of Samsung has demonstrated its plasma screen 63 inches with a resolution of 4096×2160 pixels, more commonly known as 4K in the industry. The company has been able to accomplish this feat by reducing the size of each pixel, now 0.339mmx0.363mm (0.13×0.14 cm) by rationalizing the structure of the barrier rib and review of the transparent electrode and the bus electrode . These pixels are less than half the typical size of a pixel in a modern 63-inch, 1920×1080 HDTV.

Other Features Little is known about the Samsung, including the thickness of the panel, but the larger screen with a pixel size of superfine including prototypes using similar technology, such as Pioneer, Sharp and Japan Broadcasting Corp. (NHK), which constructed sample of 20 inches or less.

Many people think that 4K is the future of HD, which offers four times the definition of a modern 1080p HDTV, also equivalent to about nine million pixels.

Posted by Mike Blakesley (Member # 26) on 05-23-2011, 03:39 PM:

I guess I'll wait for 16K. No wait, 256K will be much better. For that matter, why not wait five years and go with 65536K which will make the TV picture look more real than normal human eyesight would if you were seeing the stuff in front of you.

Posted by Bobby Henderson (Member # 840) on 05-25-2011, 11:51 PM:

I could find use in a 4K TV set as a big computer monitor. Outside of that? Nah.

2K is still the de facto standard for motion picture post production (very few movies have their CGI, digital intermediates and any other miscellaneous materials natively rendered in 4K). As more and more emphasis gets placed on muscling movies into home living rooms as fast as possible there is even less reason to shoot any higher than 2K in post production.

1080p is pretty much it for a long time when it comes to home TV viewing standards. Over the air broadcast certainly isn't going past 1080i/60 and 720p/60 anytime soon. I don't see Blu-ray supporting 4K ever. Really if the compression level is going to be ramped up to extremely severe levels to fit 4K on there the loss of image detail through severe compression makes the effort laughably worthless.

As for streaming movies online, that's a joke in terms of driving image quality stanards. Online streaming is really only giving SD DVD a run for its money now. The HD quality with online streaming is inferior to all forms of cable and OTA broadcast and not even comparable to Blu-ray. This situation is going to persist for a long time while telephone and cable companies throw as much of their money into mobile phone infrastructure as possible and hardly anything into beefing up primary residential Internet access quality. Basically we need average sustained bit rates of well over 30 million bits per second for 1080p Blu-ray quality and quite a bit more than that for 4K streamed video that really looks like 4K to be feasible.

But it's nice the electronics companies are at least trying to build the TV sets.

Posted by Mike Heenan (Member # 392) on 05-26-2011, 11:13 AM:

I saw a clip on youtube not too long ago about an 8K monitor...

Posted by Scott Norwood (Member # 30) on 05-27-2011, 08:20 AM:

So, what would a normal person watch on something like this? Test patterns?

Unless and until there is 4k software available to home users, a 4k TV set is pretty useless, except maybe to a sports fan who wants to watch four HD broadcasts at the same time (never mind that four smaller HD sets would be cheaper than a single 4K set).

A 4K computer monitor would actually be useful to many people, however.

Posted by Michael Barry (Member # 237) on 05-27-2011, 11:18 PM:

I imagine there will be a successor to the Blu Ray format that will provide 4K resolution. Perhaps the capacity for this new disc will be 500GB or even 1TB. At that point, 4K will probably be the standard output resolution of movie production.

Posted by Brad Miller (Member # 2) on 05-28-2011, 08:37 AM:

I am with Michael. Blu-ray isn't going away anytime soon (just like DVD is still the prominent format), but I would welcome a 4K consumer format if they would do a better job with the compression. I find most blu-rays look nowhere near as good as they should. The Baraka blu-ray and most Disney animated blu-rays look excellent, but whoever is designing these new formats damn well needs to understand compression is everything. Heck, I would take 2K uncompressed ANY DAY over 4K or higher with compression.

Does anyone here have U-Verse HD tv service? My god that shit is awful! I was visiting my parents last week and was talking about how terrible the compression was. They didn't understand because "it was HD, how could it not be good". [Roll Eyes]

I then got them to fire up their old VHS deck connected to the new fancy HD tv that they had U-Verse running on it. The VHS tape really did look better, even to their eyes.