Sony Sticks with 4K Name - Page 2 - AVS Forum
Forum Jump: 
Reply
 
Thread Tools
post #31 of 48 Old 10-21-2012, 05:24 AM
Advanced Member
 
metallicaband's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 986
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 98
Quote:
Originally Posted by adidino View Post

Besides, we're talking about 160pixels for the rest of the products. Who cares? Let's all sue Seagate for labeling their Hard Drives 2tb and 3tb when they are actually 1.8tb and 2.7tb usable space.

Thank you!

I mean all these comments that's making this an evil marketing scheme seems like nitpicking to me, both resolutions are almost 4K or 8K, those terms just sound way cooler than 3840 or 7680 so I can see why they're using 'em.

KRP-500M | Kuro 9G 5020FD + e-lite mod | B&W 683 Fronts | B&W 685 Center | B&W DM601 S3 Rears | HSU VTF3 MK3 Sub | Yamaha RX-V663 AVR
metallicaband is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #32 of 48 Old 10-21-2012, 05:42 AM
AVS Club Gold
 
Art Sonneborn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Battle Creek,MI USA
Posts: 22,307
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 13 Post(s)
Liked: 49
Quote:
Originally Posted by rabident View Post

I hope they expand the color gamut. Almost every display shipped in the past few years is capable of exceeding HDTV/Bluray color standards. On the content side, the DCI spec also exceeds Bluray & HDTV. The technology and the content are available now. 4k is a solution looking for a problem. Better color is something we could all appreciate

+1 , it's obvious how constrained BD is in this regard relative to commercial cinema presentations. This is one of, if not the only, things I see about most commercial presentations which exceeds what I have at home.

Art

My HT


iRule rules my theater
 

"If she's amazing she won't be easy,if she's easy she won't be amazing"

 

Bob Marley

Art Sonneborn is offline  
post #33 of 48 Old 10-21-2012, 06:25 AM
AVS Special Member
 
pottscb's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 1,297
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 29 Post(s)
Liked: 40
I seriously hope the estimate of 3 yrs for 4K content is incorrect...maybe Sony learned from its past mistakes and having to sink billions into the Blu-ray formate war to keep HD-DVD from putting it under and will strike first with a 4K PS4 next year. (I would camp out for one of the new PS4K). I could care less if there's a lot of content immediately, heck, BD took years for lots of good content. Also, 4K is no more a misnomer than 2K, which everyone calls 1080P...its only 1.98K.

I also really hope that whomever pioneers the next 4K content format doesn't botch the 2.35:1 resolution and technical aspects as bad...that's just miserable.

Time for vendors to start thinking ahead for how to stream 4K wirelessly...
pottscb is offline  
post #34 of 48 Old 10-21-2012, 06:43 AM
 
Lee Stewart's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Albuquerque, NM
Posts: 19,369
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 44
Quote:
Originally Posted by rabident View Post

I hope they expand the color gamut. Almost every display shipped in the past few years is capable of exceeding HDTV/Bluray color standards. On the content side, the DCI spec also exceeds Bluray & HDTV. The technology and the content are available now. 4k is a solution looking for a problem. Better color is something we could all appreciate

Expanding the color gamut itsn't enough. Most people won't be able to tell the difference between 8bit and 10bit. What you need is an expansion of the dynamic range - more in line with Digital Cinema specs.
Lee Stewart is offline  
post #35 of 48 Old 10-21-2012, 06:45 AM
 
Lee Stewart's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Albuquerque, NM
Posts: 19,369
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 44
Quote:
Originally Posted by metallicaband View Post

Thank you!
I mean all these comments that's making this an evil marketing scheme seems like nitpicking to me, both resolutions are almost 4K or 8K, those terms just sound way cooler than 3840 or 7680 so I can see why they're using 'em.

And if you look back on the lawsuits filed for false advertising for advertised screen sizes which were slightly less than what was advertised, all you are doing is opening up Pandora's Box for future lawsuits.
Joe Bloggs likes this.
Lee Stewart is offline  
post #36 of 48 Old 10-21-2012, 06:52 AM
 
Lee Stewart's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Albuquerque, NM
Posts: 19,369
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 44
Quote:
Originally Posted by pottscb View Post

I seriously hope the estimate of 3 yrs for 4K content is incorrect...maybe Sony learned from its past mistakes and having to sink billions into the Blu-ray formate war to keep HD-DVD from putting it under and will strike first with a 4K PS4 next year. (I would camp out for one of the new PS4K). I could care less if there's a lot of content immediately, heck, BD took years for lots of good content.

I sincerely doubt that Sony will go it alone in creating UHD content. They also learned THAT lesson.
Quote:
Also, 4K is no more a misnomer than 2K, which everyone calls 1080P...its only 1.98K.

You have two levels of video; consumer and professional (Digital Cinema). Consumer HD is 1920x1080 while professional is 2048x1080. Consumer UHD will be 3840x2160 while professional 4K is 4096x2160
Lee Stewart is offline  
post #37 of 48 Old 10-21-2012, 06:55 AM
 
Lee Stewart's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Albuquerque, NM
Posts: 19,369
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 44
Quote:
Originally Posted by Art Sonneborn View Post

+1 , it's obvious how constrained BD is in this regard relative to commercial cinema presentations. This is one of, if not the only, things I see about most commercial presentations which exceeds what I have at home.
Art

Actually, there are four parameters that commerical digital cinema has over consumer video using a BD as a source:

1. Greater Color Space
2. Higher Dynamic Range
3. RGB Chroma Subsampling
4. Much less compression with a much higher data transfer rate (Motion JPEG2000)
Lee Stewart is offline  
post #38 of 48 Old 10-21-2012, 10:13 AM
Advanced Member
 
Daniel Chaves's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: LA (Valley Village)
Posts: 763
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 45 Post(s)
Liked: 63
To those complaining about hard drive labeling, when they state 2tb and so on but after FORMAT it is smaller, well there is several factors for this, one the type of formatting being used, the sector size being employed, and last if any RAID standard has been assigned, oh and last what OS is being installed as some OSes hide a certain amount of space after install for its uses like Windows 7 hides 100mb (yeah you can get around that but figured I would point out another way of lost storage), all of this effects the end storage capacity result.


Technically speaking their is two ways to calculate hard drive volume, by a bit block of 8 which is what tends to get you the average after format result, or the test standard of a bit block of 10 which excludes format loss which is what gets you the labeled storage amount on the box seen on retail boxes, so its not actually a flat out lie like what Sony is doing with their TV series.

Projector: BenQ w1070 v1.06 + Painted N9 Grey 120" Screen
AVR: Onkyo TX-NR636 ATMOS + Darbee
Bluray Player: Panasonic DMP-BDT 321
Speakers: Polk Audio + ButtKicker LFE
Arrangement: 5.2.2
Daniel Chaves is offline  
post #39 of 48 Old 10-21-2012, 10:27 AM
AVS Special Member
 
adidino's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: New Jersey
Posts: 4,217
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 20 Post(s)
Liked: 48
Quote:
Originally Posted by Daniel Chaves View Post

To those complaining about hard drive labeling, when they state 2tb and so on but after FORMAT it is smaller, well there is several factors for this, one the type of formatting being used, the sector size being employed, and last if any RAID standard has been assigned, oh and last what OS is being installed as some OSes hide a certain amount of space after install for its uses like Windows 7 hides 100mb (yeah you can get around that but figured I would point out another way of lost storage), all of this effects the end storage capacity result.
Technically speaking their is two ways to calculate hard drive volume, by a bit block of 8 which is what tends to get you the average after format result, or the test standard of a bit block of 10 which excludes format loss which is what gets you the labeled storage amount on the box seen on retail boxes, so its not actually a flat out lie like what Sony is doing with their TV series.

I was just trying to make a point. smile.gif

The average consumer isn't going to know all that. Most just pop a drive into a Windows OS based PC and format it.

McIntosh MX151 Owner's Thread

Owner, AudioXtream.
Authorized Dealer for Kef, Triad, Bryston, Auralic, Audeze, Grado, Audioquest, Marantz
adidino is offline  
post #40 of 48 Old 10-21-2012, 01:24 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Dan Hitchman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Northern Colorado
Posts: 9,072
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 917 Post(s)
Liked: 477
Unfortunately, we may have an answer, at least for now, about "4k" media... the BDA has plainly stated they think a BD50 is large enough for a full 3840x2160p movie using MPEG-5. That means a standard 8 bit, 4:2:0 consumer video stream that we've all come to loathe, and extremely high compression. I don't see how that would hold up well on the extra large flat panels and projectors they now want to push. It's clear that with 4k, manufacturers are going for the "BIGGER IS BETTER" mindset. I'd also assume that projectors and screens will be advertised more heavily than they are now in order to "bring the big screen movie theater experience home in glorious 4k."

Now, if they moved to multi-layered BD's (BD100 or BD200 GB discs) or a holographic type storage disc and increased the bitrate, it would be possible to not only lessen the compression ratio, but easily allow for higher progressive frame rates, more professional color gamuts and dynamic range, and full 4k 3D... and it would look stunning and without noticeable artifacting.

Pressure needs to be put on these guys before a 4k home video standard is set in stone.
metallicaband and Joe Bloggs like this.

Listen up, studios! Just say "NO" to DNR and EE!!
Dan Hitchman is offline  
post #41 of 48 Old 10-21-2012, 04:04 PM
Senior Member
 
fritzi93's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 424
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2 Post(s)
Liked: 39
Well, at present, and discounting lossless audio tracks, the main movie video of the average 2 hour Blu-Ray for the most part just about fits on a BD25. A quick and imprecise back of the envelope calculation gives a bitrate requirement increase of ~4x, and a gain in efficiency from H265 of ~2x, for an increase in needed storage space of 2x. So it would be a squeeze on a BD50. Sure, you could do it, but why?

I agree, why not a worthwhile upgrade? What they're talking about is just scaling the picture up.

The increase in computational complexity of H265 over H264 is of no real concern these days. But why not an improvement in color space? And increased frame rate to 60, or at least 48, that's what I most wish for.
fritzi93 is offline  
post #42 of 48 Old 10-22-2012, 08:14 AM
Senior Member
 
dnoyeB's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Southfield, MI
Posts: 437
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
If the screen is not getting any bigger, why do we require more pixels?

Signature.
dnoyeB is offline  
post #43 of 48 Old 10-22-2012, 10:19 AM
Advanced Member
 
Daniel Chaves's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: LA (Valley Village)
Posts: 763
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 45 Post(s)
Liked: 63
Quote:
Originally Posted by dnoyeB View Post

If the screen is not getting any bigger, why do we require more pixels?

because if I watch a 1080p source on a 65" or larger I can see distortion in the image just like how back in the day when you had a 480 source on a larger screen you could see distortion in the image so by upping the res you clean up the image on much larger screens so you can be closer to the screen.

Projector: BenQ w1070 v1.06 + Painted N9 Grey 120" Screen
AVR: Onkyo TX-NR636 ATMOS + Darbee
Bluray Player: Panasonic DMP-BDT 321
Speakers: Polk Audio + ButtKicker LFE
Arrangement: 5.2.2
Daniel Chaves is offline  
post #44 of 48 Old 10-22-2012, 10:36 AM
Advanced Member
 
lobosrul's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 857
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 32 Post(s)
Liked: 30
Quote:
Originally Posted by adidino View Post

Sony's current 4k projector is 4096x2160. So they have a right IMO.
Besides, we're talking about 160pixels for the rest of the products. Who cares? Let's all sue Seagate for labeling their Hard Drives 2tb and 3tb when they are actually 1.8tb and 2.7tb usable space.

Sorry, I see people say this all the time, and I can't stand not correcting them. Seagate (as do all HDD manufactures) counts a TB as 10^12 whereas your operating system defines a TB as 2^40 (which is technically a TiB). 10^12 is about 10% smaller than 2^40, which is why a drive advertised as 3TB shows up as about 2.7TB in Windows. It has nothing to do with usable space or formatting.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Terrabyte
lobosrul is online now  
post #45 of 48 Old 10-22-2012, 10:48 AM
Advanced Member
 
lobosrul's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 857
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 32 Post(s)
Liked: 30
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lee Stewart View Post

Are they using to hortizontial pixel counts? Most of the advertising I see is 1080P . . . they use the vertical pixel count.

Yes 4k refers to horizontal lines. 4096x2096 is the pixel count of the "professional" 4k digital cinema format, and (so I've read in this thread) Sony's upcoming projector format. UHD is to be 3840x2160, exactly double as many horizontal and vertical lines as 1080p (or 4 times as many pixels).
lobosrul is online now  
post #46 of 48 Old 10-22-2012, 12:06 PM
 
Lee Stewart's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Albuquerque, NM
Posts: 19,369
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 44
Quote:
Originally Posted by lobosrul View Post

Yes 4k refers to horizontal lines. 4096x2096 is the pixel count of the "professional" 4k digital cinema format, and (so I've read in this thread) Sony's upcoming projector format. UHD is to be 3840x2160, exactly double as many horizontal and vertical lines as 1080p (or 4 times as many pixels).

The professional version for Digital Cinema is 4096x2160.
Lee Stewart is offline  
post #47 of 48 Old 10-22-2012, 12:24 PM
Advanced Member
 
lobosrul's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 857
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 32 Post(s)
Liked: 30
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lee Stewart View Post

The professional version for Digital Cinema is 4096x2160.

Oops, i just typed 096 twice I think.
lobosrul is online now  
post #48 of 48 Old 10-24-2012, 11:53 AM
AVS Special Member
 
KBMAN's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Grass Valley, CA
Posts: 2,875
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 28 Post(s)
Liked: 42
What the hell will 4K or UHD make a difference when we STILL get DNR'ed, Contrast Boosted, and Color-shifted transfers???? I'm gonna wait this out for quite a while.....

Terrence
"Hey Vasquez, have you ever been mistaken for a man?...."No, have you?" -ALIENS

KBMAN is offline  
Reply Latest Industry News

User Tag List

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page


Forum Jump: 

Posting Rules  
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off