If it's economically feasible, I would think 4K would be more widely accepted than 3D. 3D is just a fad that shows up every ten years or so and fades back into osbcurity. And it will never catch on as long as you need expensive uncomfortable glasses for each person viewing the movie. The technology is still basically the same as it was in 1950. It doesn't help that there are only a handful of titles available in 3D and virtually no cable content.
I saw this at the SONY store in Tyson's Coner, VA. It was playing a 4k demo loop from SONY and it was amazing. Although I can't justify the $25,000 price, it was nonetheless an awe inspiring sight. I hope 4k trickles down to smaller sizes soon. The sheer resolution would be awesome for an HTPC.
its been awhile since I've pulled apart a BR 1080P movie, but do you guys really think 50gig's will be enough space for an uncompressed 4k 2 hour movie?
Even 1080p blu-ray is compressed. I don't think anyone is offering anything uncompressed except the 4K studio masters in raw format. I am probably wrong on this, but that would be 8MB per frame at 24 to 48 frames per second. So on the low end, that would be 192MB per second, 691.2 GB per hour. So about 2.06 TB per 2 hour move at 24FPS. I don't even think the DCI format used by digital 4K movie theaters is that big.