Sad State of 4K [TVs] (article)

Of course Rogers is most interested in the sports broadcasting aspect; they have spent more than a few bob in their investments.

 

Not even close between the Panny and the LG.

 

Indeed. The reason why Japan is pushing it so far is because they have the 2020 olympics. Can you imagine? in less than 4 years 8k being the standard!? I say screw 4k, let 1080p hold the line for a few more years then give us 8k when it's done.

After that I'd seriously doubt anyone could see a difference between 8k and 12k. I'd be interested in seeing how TV companies try to push something new from then on.

 

By then it will be VR based retinal laser projection.

 

I heard that the highest K tv out there was fooling people into thinking it was real / 3D... I don't remember if it was 8K but I think it was a higher resolution than 8.

Here's a link suggesting Samsung 11K produces a 3D effect...

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencet...-super-resolution-display-pixel-overload.html

Overall though, I don't understand the fuss... If you're looking for a new television, just get what you want. Some can see the difference 4K brings, some can't. If you need a new tv now, no point in "holding out" for an 8K... You're getting a better product for the same or similar price range by going with 4K over the current 1080 sets.

When I looked into the sets that I thought were saving me money by going with 1080, I realized they were all 60hz anyway.

 

Yeah. For me the problem is there really isn't a disc player to go with it yet and I'm a physical format guy not a streamer (for the moment.)

 

The other strange thing is 4k marketers seem to be upfront about how the most benefit comes from screens 80"-100". I'm miffed at this. Do they think people will buy screens twice the size they already have just to suit the new tech? As if people could've had those giant screens all this time. Strange.

 

I think the truth is that 4K is a little premature right now. The options for watching it are limited, and there are connectivity and copy protection issues they haven't quite solved yet. I have been told (but haven't tried it) that if you take a Sony 4K server box intended for a Sony 4K TV and try to use it with a Samsung or LG 4K set, you don't get a picture. This is a big problem.

There are two other huge developments waiting in the wings: HDR (significantly brighter pictures with greater dynamic range) and Rec2020 (wider color gamut, meaning more colors than have ever been seen on a conventional screen), and these are very interesting ideas. I've seen them both, and they can work well under the right circumstances. But I'm skeptical at how much the consumer electronics companies will F it up, given that even after more than a decade of HD, we can't buy a consumer set that comes out of the box capable of showing normal Rec709 HD as seen in mastering rooms and on film sets. Without that, you'll never see the picture intended by the filmmakers.

For the record, I think that 4K is an improvement, but it's not a gigantic one. The difference between standard-def and HD is huge and massive; the difference between HD and UHD... not so much. Note that UHD (3840x2160) is still not exactly 4K, even though consumer manufacturers are calling it. Real 4K is 4096x2160 (or fractional changes based on aspect ratio), so they're playing a bit of a numbers game here. And I continue to say that getting the bits right is harder than getting the K right.

 

This thread is official now that Vidiot has chimed in. Glad you are recovering from your scary health issues!!
I bought a new tv last summer - pondered the 4k thing, but opted for a Samsung Smart TV 60" PLASMA, the last one to be made - and I love it!
I expect to get a 4K display in the future, but right now it is indeed premature. Only thing I dislike about the plasma is the heat - it is a space heater. Not bad in the winter however..

 

Plasma sets were (and still are) pretty good, but I gotta say, the reports on the new high-end Panasonic OLEDs are very promising.

 

Funny thing is with the adoption of HDR, the power consumption curve is trending up again (after a steady decline due to efficiency dividends). Both the OLED and LED TVs utilizing HDR have significantly higher power consumption levels then their brethren without it. I guess once OLEDs take over, they'll just have to find more efficient designs that extract more light with less power...

 

I'm interested in seeing how they are going to successfully push 4k let alone 8k or 12k. Blu-ray hasn't even been able to kill DVD and yet they want to try to push a format with less of an improvement than DVD to Blu-ray has? It's not going to go over well.

 

With respect to Japan, they're not pursuing it as the next international standard, but as a local TV transmission standard. Japan has always been one step ahead with adopting HQ picture standards for mainly domestic consumption.

 

This and this.
Also I'm physical format guy, but I'm stopping at blu-rays. I'm not repurchasing all the thousands of titles I own for a 5th time (and if blu ray taught us anything is that the first round of discs will get mucked up and they'll put out a second or third round of remastered UHD discs. No sale. Not this time.)
Also I'm almost certain, as it is with every format change that there'll be less titles available on the new format. Certainly the older ones I love. Anyone seen the first batch of UHD disc titles? Fant4stic? Puh-leeze.

 

The Samsung F8500 series? I got the 51" model last summer and I love it. I haven't yet bought into the 4K idea, but I think it won't be long until it's pushed on everyone.

 

Don't forget, it was only a few years ago that there was a huge collective yawn over 3D. I truly believe that HDR will be a much more visual difference. When you see a picture five times brighter (or possibly even ten times brighter) than what we have now, believe me, that's a difference you can see from across the room, from any chair in any position. My opinion is that 4K is only a subtle difference by comparison.

 

I'm wondering how I could get a 100" monitor through the door

 

I saw a huge Sony 4K a couple years ago and was enthused. I read with skepticism Vidiot's comments here that in many cases you probably wouldn't even notice the difference between a good HD set and a 4K set. What? But it's more "k!" I pooh-poohed his observation, then. But now that you can go out and see 4K sets everywhere next to regular HD sets, I have to demur. He was absolutely right. I can't tell the difference most of the time. I'm gonna take his advice and wait for these new HDR and Recogoo-goo, or whatever, sets before I consider an upgrade.

 

One inch at a time!

Resolution and viewing distance are inextricably linked. The farther away you stand from a screen, the less you will be able to resolve, so more pixels/inch will not be noticeable at all. This applies to most normal sized screens and average viewing distances.

Now, were you to get up close and personal to a screen, say a foot away, you most definitely will be able to tell the difference between HD & UHD, because the eye will be able to resolve the dots (pixels) at that distance. With normal viewing distances, you would need a really huge screen (100+ inch say) to see a difference.

However, HDR and wide color gamuts are a different kettle of fish because the eye is sensitive to color, brightness and contrast, no matter what the viewing distance, so these things will make a big difference (when they're fully implemented).

 

Be warned that these sets ain't gonna be cheap. I tend to doubt there's gonna be HDR/Rec2020 sets at Costco for $499 anytime soon. What's funny is that 4K sets are already below $800, which is pretty crazy. It's also driving down the cost of HD displays to below $10/inch, which was already dirt cheap as far as I'm concerned.

 

And when you finally get HDR there will be something better on the horizon... Which is always the case. 4K is certainly not the revolutionary experience of moving from standard to high definition, but the 4K streams on Netflix are spectacular, and everything else looks really good, too.

This may be simply from moving to a 65" Samsung 8500 from a 60" Vizio, but the Samsung cost $800 less than the first 42" flat screen I bought 10 years ago. It's not like you're buying a house...

 

I believe most cable company HD is 1080p so not sure what benefit you would see with 4k.

 

A few things to clarify my early post, FWIW.
I have a JVC projector in a dedicated music\theater room and a Panny plasma in the living room.
I bought a Sony 4k display last weekend after my 11 year-old bedroom CRT went kaput. It was 1080 capable.
I would not have purchased a 4k set while the old CRT was still working.
In doing my research, I saw little point in getting a 1080 set vs 4k.

I'm usually late-early adopter waiting for things to settle out and prices to moderate.
I was pretty surprised at what $1100 could buy. Not top drawer but I wasn't going to spend big on a bedroom TV.
I was also surprised at what features are added, enhanced and fixed via firmware and how important CPUs are now in TVs.
I also did not go for the set that most of the reviews report as having the best PQ in my price range.
Before this, PQ has been the over-riding factor in my decisions, along with reliability.
When I last bought a TV, plasma was the only choice for me.
I bought the current set because of the overall package and something I rarely do when buying from a big box and that is listening to the salesmen's opinions.
PQ, UI, HDR, rec 2020, DirecTV compatibility, firmware updates, streaming apps, etc.
In short there was a lot more to consider when buying this set than ever before and it can be daunting.

BTW, the clarity and depth of this set on a 1080i satellite signal is really quite a surprise.
I haven't had a chance to get it professionally calibrated yet or pop in a really dark BD like Alien vs. Predator to test the contrast and shadow detail yet.
Looking forward to some real 4k content as well.

Healthy skepticism is always a good thing but don't let one article from a computer mag convince you that 4k is BS.
I've been wrong about emerging technology as often as I've been right so I've learned to wait a bit.
I never thought home 3D would be a big deal but I did think hi-res music would. Go figure.
4k has come on a lot faster than I ever thought it would and hopefully the industry won't water-down the spec especially on the color range.
I don't want another 720p vs 1080p fiasco.

 

How far will it go where it just won't make a difference anymore? The resolution the human eye sees is just so much, Right?

 

Well, I've never looked at a television image and felt like I was looking at a real thing. It always looks like an image of something, even if it's a really good image. That could be a goal. Our eyes are still capable of seeing a broader range of light to dark than any camera, so it's not all about how many lines of resolution are there.