SMPTE Webinar: Quad HD to UHDTV - AVS Forum
Forum Jump: 
 16Likes
Reply
 
Thread Tools
post #1 of 44 Old 07-19-2014, 03:54 PM - Thread Starter
AVS Special Member
 
Scott Wilkinson's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Burbank, CA
Posts: 1,354
Mentioned: 7 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 363 Post(s)
Liked: 1209
SMPTE Webinar: Quad HD to UHDTV



This webinar presented how UHDTV will be much more than simply four times more pixels than HDTV—in a couple of years.

This month's webinar from SMPTE (Society of Motion Picture and Television Engineers) was entitled "Quad HD to UHDTV: Making the Difference." The presenters were Hans Hoffmann, Senior Manager and Head of Media Fundaments and Production Unit at the EBU (European Broadcasting Union), and Howard Lukk, a movie director and technologist who worked on Toy Story 3 and co-created the ASC-DCI StEM (American Society of Cinematographers-Digital Cinema Initiative Standard Evaluation Material), a sequence of scenes that is used as an image-quality reference for digital cinema.

Hans Hoffmann focused primarily on the work being done in Europe on UHDTV, much of which wasn't news to me or any AVS members who have been following the development of the next TV standard. In particular, he stressed that "4K" is a marketing term that really refers only to pixel resolution—and confusingly at that—while "UHDTV" encompasses resolution as well as frame rate, dynamic range/bit depth, colorimetry, and immersive audio, most of which is outlined in the ITU-R (International Telecommunications Union-Radiocommunication) recommendation called ITU-R BT.2020. (This spec is sometimes called Rec.2020 because it's an ITU official recommendation; "BT" stands for Broadcast Television.)

When talking about the current crop of 4K TVs, Hans called them "Quad HD," since they have exactly four times the number of pixels as so-called Full HD but no other enhancements beyond HDTV. This is also referred to by the EBU as "UHD Phase 1" or "UHD-1," which retains all other aspects of current HDTV, such as BT.709 (often called Rec.709) colorimetry, dynamic range, and frame rates.

The next stop on the UHD roadmap is UHD-2, which is expected to be implemented in 2016 to 2018 and should include BT.2020 colorimetry, frame rates up to 120 fps, bit depth up to 12 bits for high dynamic range, and immersive audio of some sort. Finally, UHD-3 retains the characteristics of UHD-2 but with a pixel resolution of 7680x4320 (so-called "8K"); this is being promoted mostly by Japan and is expected to emerge sometime between 2020 and 2025.


As pixel resolution increases, so does the recommended viewing angle. Not indicated in this diagram is the 60° viewing angle for 4K. These angles correspond to seating distances of 3H (three times the screen height) for HD, 1.5H for 4K, and 0.75H for 8K. BTW, this graphic is an example of the confusion surrounding the various phases of UHD; what is labeled UHD-2 here is actually UHD-3 in the EBU roadmap. However, SMPTE also uses UHD-2 for 7680x4320.

Of course, increasing the pixel resolution by a factor of four quadruples the bandwidth required to transmit the signal at a given level of compression, and adding HFR (high frame rate) and HDR (high dynamic range, i.e., greater bit depth) increases the required bandwidth even more. Hans cited a rate of 6-14 Mbps for current HDTV broadcasts using H.264 compression and 25-35 Mbps for test broadcasts of 2160/50p (remember, Europe uses a frame rate of 50 rather than 60 Hz) with current implementations of H.265, though he expects that bit rate to drop as H.265 is improved. And don't forget that current HDTV broadcasts are 720p or 1080i, and 2160p test broadcasts do not yet include high frame rate or increased bit depth.

One interesting tidbit from the presentation was the notion that content with HFR and HDR might be downscaled to 1080p to reduce bandwidth requirements, since upscalers are so good these days. I'm not sure I agree with this idea, but something's gotta give, at least until H.265 or some other high-efficiency codec can reduce the required bandwidth to a reasonable level.


This slide reveals the results of a perceived-quality study conducted by the EBU with many viewers; the display was a 56" 4K monitor, and people viewed six scenes at a distance of 1.5H (41") and 2.7m (8.9 feet), which was deemed the most common seating distance in the average home. Interestingly, the viewers slightly preferred the greater seating distance when viewing HD, possibly because of upscaling artifacts, but when shown native UHD content, there was no preference between the two seating distances.


Another perceived-quality study by the EBU focused on different frame rates and shutter settings. Clearly, viewers preferred higher frame rates and a 50% (180°) shutter more than a 100% (360°) shutter. The "Low Anchor" point is 30 Hz; I don't know what the shutter setting was.


According to Hans, the dynamic range of human vision encompasses 12 orders of magnitude ("decades") or 40 f-stops. The current TV system is limited to two orders of magnitude or 6.6 f-stops, while an HDR display would encompass five orders of magnitude or 16.7 f-stops, which corresponds to the capture capability of modern digital-video cameras.


Part of the BT.2020 recommendation is a definition of colorimetry, which includes more colors than BT.709 (the current standard), DCI P3 (the standard for digital cinema), or the gamut of real-life reflected-light surface colors. However, there are no displays capable of reproducing the BT.2020 color gamut, in which the colors of red, green, and blue are monochromatic. This might be possible using lasers or quantum dots.

Howard Lukk's presentation focused mainly on digital cinema and workflows during the production and post-production processes. He did show a few slides that were more germane to the consumer experience of UHD.


In this slide, Howard illustrated how a narrow dynamic range forces you to expose for and display different brightness levels without capturing the entire dynamic range in the scene. Seeing the detail in one brightness range means that darker ranges are underexposed and brighter ranges are overexposed.


In this Photoshopped composite image, the effect of a wide dynamic range is simulated; detail in the bright and dark parts of the image are visible.

As I said earlier, there wasn't much about UHDTV in this webinar that those who follow the subject from a consumer perspective don't already know. As I've been saying for some time, the so-called 4K TVs being sold today do not embody any of the enhancements promised by UHDTV except for increased pixel count, and the content-creation community is not yet geared up to deliver content with these enhancements. We should see these two paths converge in the next couple of years, at which point UHDTV will blow your socks off.

Thanks to SMPTE for hosting the webinar and to Hans Hoffmann and Howard Lukk for their presentations.

Like AVS Forum on Facebook
Follow AVS Forum on Twitter

+1 AVS Forum on Google+

Scott Wilkinson
AVS Editor
Scott Wilkinson is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #2 of 44 Old 07-19-2014, 04:17 PM
Advanced Member
 
mightyhuhn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2013
Posts: 745
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 329 Post(s)
Liked: 125
thx for the info.
so 709 for the first 4k BD or did they say something about DCI-p3 for UHD-1?
does this hole HDR only apply to camera made movies and not to CG producing or cartoon/anime?
mightyhuhn is online now  
post #3 of 44 Old 07-19-2014, 05:52 PM
AVS Special Member
 
sytech's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 1,357
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 309 Post(s)
Liked: 245
They should skip right to UHD-2 now. UHD-3 is never going to happen and we need new hardware anyway, might as well make it UHD-2 compatible. Always go beyond what you currently have to future proof. These people buying 4K displays that can not get bright enough to offer REC 2020 WCG, HDR and Dolby Vision are going to pissed.
Phrehdd and DanBa like this.

Last edited by sytech; 07-19-2014 at 05:58 PM.
sytech is online now  
post #4 of 44 Old 07-19-2014, 05:56 PM
AVS Special Member
 
MrEastSide's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Minneapolis, MN
Posts: 1,443
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 25 Post(s)
Liked: 53
And all of this technology will be affordable to the average consumer in, what, 2040? I'm pretty exited over here!
bulls likes this.

Quote:
Of course, I got it modified with the TK-427, which cheeks it up another, maybe, 3 or 4 quads per channel.
MrEastSide is online now  
post #5 of 44 Old 07-19-2014, 07:01 PM
AVS Special Member
 
wattheF's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 1,171
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 56 Post(s)
Liked: 131
Quote:
Originally Posted by MrEastSide View Post
And all of this technology will be affordable to the average consumer in, what, 2040? I'm pretty exited over here!
Haha! Seriously. I will just keep enjoying my Panasonic plasma for now. But this stuff is intriguing.
wattheF is offline  
post #6 of 44 Old 07-19-2014, 07:08 PM
Advanced Member
 
HockeyoAJB's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Posts: 788
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 237 Post(s)
Liked: 256
Quote:
Originally Posted by mightyhuhn View Post
thx for the info.
so 709 for the first 4k BD or did they say something about DCI-p3 for UHD-1?
does this hole HDR only apply to camera made movies and not to CG producing or cartoon/anime?
UHD-1 is already in place and it does not go beyond rec 709 colorimetry. Most of the consumer level "4K" content being made right now meets the UHD-1 standard.

The specs for 4K Blu-Ray are still a work in progress, but are likely to go beyond UHD-1. It is probably a safe bet that 4K Blu-Ray will include most, if not all, of the features included in UHD-2. Bear in mind that not every movie encoded onto a 4K Blu-Ray disc will take advantage of every feature supported by the format. For instance, not every movie will be filmed at 60 fps, even though the format will surely support 2160p60 content.

At this point in time, it seems unlikely that UHD-3 (or at least the 8K resolution portion of it) will ever be a part of the Blu-Ray spec. Without another large bump in compression capabilities, a 90 min 8K film won't fit on any optical disc that currently exists.
HockeyoAJB is online now  
post #7 of 44 Old 07-19-2014, 07:56 PM
Senior Member
 
eclipsegt's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Seattle
Posts: 298
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 17 Post(s)
Liked: 65
Great article. UHD TV prices are continuing to fall but sales won't truly pick up until they give people something they can see from any distance. I'm happy to see that UHD-Phase 2 addresses this issue. However, IMO 2016 is too far away. The UHD specs should have included wider color, HDR and higher frame rate from the beginning.

It is my hope that these companies start rolling out Rec.2020, HDR and possibly higher frame rate compatible displays on all of their 2015 flagship models. CES 2014 was all about 4K resolution. CES 2015 should be about giving us the full UHD experience.

I'm currently in the market for a bigger TV but I refuse to buy into an unfinished standard. This situation has got to be even more confusing for people who are not AV enthusiast. Worst yet the 4K Blu-Ray standard is STILL not set. This has been the most unorganized and confusing TV standard transition ever. Sure the move to HDTV wasn't perfectly smooth but it was a lot better than this transition.

Hopefully things get sorted out soon.
bass excavator and ControlZ like this.
eclipsegt is online now  
post #8 of 44 Old 07-19-2014, 09:36 PM
AVS Special Member
 
NuSoardGraphite's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Tucson AZ
Posts: 1,417
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 45 Post(s)
Liked: 114
Quote:
Originally Posted by eclipsegt View Post
Great article. UHD TV prices are continuing to fall but sales won't truly pick up until they give people something they can see from any distance. I'm happy to see that UHD-Phase 2 addresses this issue. However, IMO 2016 is too far away. The UHD specs should have included wider color, HDR and higher frame rate from the beginning.

It is my hope that these companies start rolling out Rec.2020, HDR and possibly higher frame rate compatible displays on all of their 2015 flagship models. CES 2014 was all about 4K resolution. CES 2015 should be about giving us the full UHD experience.

I'm currently in the market for a bigger TV but I refuse to buy into an unfinished standard. This situation has got to be even more confusing for people who are not AV enthusiast. Worst yet the 4K Blu-Ray standard is STILL not set. This has been the most unorganized and confusing TV standard transition ever. Sure the move to HDTV wasn't perfectly smooth but it was a lot better than this transition.

Hopefully things get sorted out soon.
The average consumer doesn't even know this is happening, let alone be confused by it. The only thing they know is that "4k" is the latest thing in TV tech and they "gotta have it" (if they can afford it)

By the time the marketing blitz for true UHDTV including the phase-2 technology enhancements hit the airwaves, the general consumer will assume they just mean "4k" and will happily buy into phase-1 4k HDTV's which will be affordable by that time and be none the wiser.

Stand tall and shake the heavens...
NuSoardGraphite is offline  
post #9 of 44 Old 07-20-2014, 04:50 AM
Member
 
HDfruitcake's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 96
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 15 Post(s)
Liked: 13
there are currently 50/60fps 10bit test atm, dont they count as high frame rate and increased bit depth?
HDfruitcake is offline  
post #10 of 44 Old 07-20-2014, 07:11 AM
AVS Special Member
 
mtbdudex's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: SE Michigan
Posts: 4,806
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 77 Post(s)
Liked: 324
Very nice to have this information and have mindset of where the technology is going.
Having funded R&D too often I'm simply waiting till 2016-2017 for UHD-2 to mature, become mainstream, object sound to also mature, etc.

Till then, my now getting long in the tooth 2008 Sony VW60 will do, along with my 2012 Denon 4520CI and 11.2 set-up.

Others on the upgrade-itis every 2 years bandwagon, thanks in advance for funding the R&D

Scott - as usual great info made easy to grasp.
mtbdudex is online now  
post #11 of 44 Old 07-20-2014, 02:59 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
mark haflich's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: brookeville, maryland, usa
Posts: 20,275
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 650 Post(s)
Liked: 600
Stop the Presses. The United States' consumers have been saved by that great humanitarian, Gary Shapiro, the President and CEO of the Consumer Electronics Association. Do you think Gary will win a Nobel Peace price for his work in safeguarding the American consumer from buying a pseudo UHD display? And the nice touch for the UHD standard from the CEA is that is voluntary. So if any manufacturer doesn't want to comply, but then again . . .

Starting in September 2014 a display manufacturer may only call one of its displays ultra High Definition (UHD) (remembers its voluntary) if at a minimum, it meets the following: (brace yourself, boy did Gary take on the tough issues and draw a line in the sand):


Pixels: 3840 x 2160. (more H or V pixels OK proved the multiplier for H meets the following for aspect ratio)

Aspect ratio: 16 x 9 (higher aspect ratios OK) (Sony projectors at 4096 x 2160 aspect are thus OK).


Able to Upscale 1920 x 1080 to 3840 x 2160.

HDMI. At least one and at least one must be able to input 3840 x 2160 at 24, 30, and 60 fps and one such UHD input MUST be protected by HDCP 2.2 or its equivalent. Political equivalent, no sense having an uprising over that. Bandwidth of inputs. No sir re, we are protecting the consumer and specify 18GBS would screw most of our members. Chroma subsampling. No need the consumer doesn't have a clue and doesn't care. Great job here CEA.

Colorimetry. Thank you once again CEA. 3840 x 2160 MUST do BT 709 at a minimum. Can be wider. Thank you. Thank you. We might have gotten BT 601 or something even worse. I am thinking of requesting my Congressman to nominate d the CEA for the Congressional medal of honor. We are saved.

Bit depth. Here is another biggie! In an exhibit of mooning and letting it all hang out, a minimum of 8 bits is required. No backward sliding to screw the consumer with 4 or 6 bits! Like it, love it, but if your display can't handle 8 bits you can't call it UHD. Thank you CEA. Thank you, thank you, thank you.

Wait. There is more. You can call your display a Connected UHD device if its meets all the above and its has HEVC for one of its HDMI 3840 x 2160 inputs and it can decode multi channel audio. There is more for the connectivity but I am getting tired of typing.

Its interesting that as of Sept 2014 there may be displays out there that are not HDCP 2.2 or equivalent compliant nor have the ability to handle HVEC.


All this is designed to provide manufacturers with marketing flexibility while providing clarity for the consumer. God Bless. Thamk you CEA. They are working on a Logo so that the consumer can tell at a glance that he really has purchased a CEA UHD compliant set.
Marc Wielage, dsinger and mtbdudex like this.

Mark Haflich
markhaflich@yahoo.com
call me at: 240 876 2536

Last edited by mark haflich; 07-21-2014 at 01:19 AM.
mark haflich is offline  
post #12 of 44 Old 07-20-2014, 04:02 PM
Advanced Member
 
mightyhuhn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2013
Posts: 745
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 329 Post(s)
Liked: 125
Quote:
Originally Posted by mark haflich View Post
Wait there is more. You can call your display a Connected UHD devixe if its meets all the above and its has HEVC for one of its HDMI 3840 x 2160 inputs and it can decode multi channel audio. There more for the connectivity but I am getting tired of typing.

Its interesting that as of Sept 2014 there may be displays out there that are not HDCP 2.2 or equivalent compliant nor have the ability to handle HVEC.
the HEVC decoder in current TV will turn useless sooner or later the spec is still expending and the format may ADD 4:4:4 or high bit deep MVC both can't be decoded by those screens sooner or later.
mightyhuhn is online now  
post #13 of 44 Old 07-20-2014, 04:22 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
mark haflich's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: brookeville, maryland, usa
Posts: 20,275
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 650 Post(s)
Liked: 600
Its all OK provided the display does what the CEA says a display must do for its Good Housekeeping Seal of Approval. Bite your tongue. The consumer is protected.

Mark Haflich
markhaflich@yahoo.com
call me at: 240 876 2536
mark haflich is offline  
post #14 of 44 Old 07-20-2014, 06:29 PM
AVS Special Member
 
GregLee's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Waimanalo HI
Posts: 3,250
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 167 Post(s)
Liked: 78
Quote:
Originally Posted by mark haflich View Post
All this is designed to provide manufacturers with marketing flexibility while providing clarity for the consumer.
It recognizes what is already the predominant use of terms, and so it does provide clarity for the consumer. That's a good thing. I guess, from your tone, you mean to be sarcastic and to insult Shapiro, but I don't see what you're getting at.

Greg Lee
GregLee is offline  
post #15 of 44 Old 07-20-2014, 07:42 PM
Advanced Member
 
James A. McGahee's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 762
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 6 Post(s)
Liked: 11
Question Quandry Now! Need your thoughts!

We are having wall work done soon. I need to decide which TV to buy for it. My wife and I cut out a piece of clear plastic to simulate the size of a 65" TV. Although I had decided to go with either the Samsung 65" flat screen or 65" curved screen. We decided either would be lost on the wall. We cut more plastic and ended up feeling we need an 80". That pretty much takes us out of the 4K arena due to cost.

I was somewhat surprised when I checked out the 65" curved and flat Sammys sitting beside each other that I could hardly tell which one was which and really felt the flat panel looked somewhat bigger and had less distortion (minimal off center) than the curved model, but I really like the style of the curve-duh!

We are also considering the 75" Samsung flat screen (although I haven't been able to find one to check it out) as the curved model of this size is also too expensive.

Another option we have looked at is the Sharp 70" Flat screen which is a quasi 4K? for $2699.99. Good price, not sure what I'm getting for the price!

I saw a group of 6 Sony XBR 85" TVs boxed and banded together at Fry's. The next week they were no where in sight. Anyone know anything about the Sony XBR 85" the Sammy 75inchers, the Sharp, or any other TV I should be looking for?

As I need to make this decision in the next couple of weeks what you guys suggest and why?

One other question. The guy sales rep. telling me about the side by side Sammy 65s", the 75" Sammys as well as the 70" Sharp said all are full array local dimming sets! Any discussion here.

At this point in the evolution of TVs would any of you thinK investing in an over 65" 4K TV (especially curved) is the way to go?
Thanks!!
James A. McGahee is offline  
post #16 of 44 Old 07-20-2014, 07:54 PM
Advanced Member
 
JediFonger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 654
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 37 Post(s)
Liked: 14
i'd be content w/1080p in 12 or 16bit colors at variable fps!
JediFonger is offline  
post #17 of 44 Old 07-20-2014, 07:57 PM
Advanced Member
 
James A. McGahee's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 762
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 6 Post(s)
Liked: 11
I know-it's "Quandary"

Sorry, I left the "a" out and couldn't figure out how to correct the spelling after it was posted.
James A. McGahee is offline  
post #18 of 44 Old 07-20-2014, 10:14 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Joe Bloggs's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: UK
Posts: 2,608
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 176 Post(s)
Liked: 60
Quote:
Originally Posted by Scott Wilkinson View Post
The next stop on the UHD roadmap is UHD-2, which is expected to be implemented in 2016 to 2018 and should include BT.2020 colorimetry, frame rates up to 120 fps, bit depth up to 12 bits for high dynamic range, and immersive audio of some sort. Finally, UHD-3 retains the characteristics of UHD-2 but with a pixel resolution of 7680x4320 (so-called "8K"); this is being promoted mostly by Japan and is expected to emerge sometime between 2020 and 2025.

As pixel resolution increases, so does the recommended viewing angle. Not indicated in this diagram is the 60° viewing angle for 4K. These angles correspond to seating distances of 3H (three times the screen height) for HD, 1.5H for 4K, and 0.75H for 8K. BTW, this graphic is an example of the confusion surrounding the various phases of UHD; what is labeled UHD-2 here is actually UHD-3 in the EBU roadmap. However, SMPTE also uses UHD-2 for 7680x4320.
I've never heard the EBU call 7680x4320 "UHD-3" before. If they are now, it's a new thing. In the past the EBU have called 7680x4320 "UHD-2" - see https://tech.ebu.ch/docs/events/webi...dHD_update.pdf

The EBU called it "UHD1 Phase 1" (for the 2160p at 50/60 fps etc.) and "UHD1 Phase 2" (for 2160p with 100 fps or more). I think it's a bad idea if they've now changed their terminology and are calling something else UHD2 (what they previously called UHD1 Phase 2).

This EBU document http://www.hoek.nl/dg/18mrt14/Dutch_...as_handout.pdf from March 2014 from the EBU project manager also refers to 7680x4320 as UHD2 not UHD3 - and that looks practically the same as the one in the first post - and the picture in the first post, also has the "EBU" written on it where they refer to 7680x4320 as "UHD-2" not "UHD-3".

Do you have a link to an EBU document where they have now changed UHD2 to be called "UHD3"?

----
I think you are mixing up "Phase" with the UHD (level) number. It's "Phase 3", but not "UHD3". 7680x4320 is still UHD2, but it's "Phase 3" of the UHD rollout.
Phase 1 & Phase 2 are UHD1 (3840x2160) [though 2nd to last page of link below calls Phase 2 UHD-1H], Phase 3 is UHD2 (7680x4320).
See second to last page of this http://www.media-tech.net/fileadmin/...KA_handout.pdf

Last edited by Joe Bloggs; 07-20-2014 at 10:46 PM.
Joe Bloggs is offline  
post #19 of 44 Old 07-21-2014, 05:08 AM
Member
 
Matthias Hutter's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 58
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 20 Post(s)
Liked: 33
Quote:
Originally Posted by MrEastSide View Post
And all of this technology will be affordable to the average consumer in, what, 2040? I'm pretty exited over here!
My guess is ... 2020
Matthias Hutter is offline  
post #20 of 44 Old 07-21-2014, 06:05 AM
AVS Special Member
 
dsinger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Posts: 1,804
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 101 Post(s)
Liked: 114
Quote:
Originally Posted by James A. McGahee View Post
We are having wall work done soon. I need to decide which TV to buy for it. My wife and I cut out a piece of clear plastic to simulate the size of a 65" TV. Although I had decided to go with either the Samsung 65" flat screen or 65" curved screen. We decided either would be lost on the wall. We cut more plastic and ended up feeling we need an 80". That pretty much takes us out of the 4K arena due to cost.

I was somewhat surprised when I checked out the 65" curved and flat Sammys sitting beside each other that I could hardly tell which one was which and really felt the flat panel looked somewhat bigger and had less distortion (minimal off center) than the curved model, but I really like the style of the curve-duh!

We are also considering the 75" Samsung flat screen (although I haven't been able to find one to check it out) as the curved model of this size is also too expensive.

Another option we have looked at is the Sharp 70" Flat screen which is a quasi 4K? for $2699.99. Good price, not sure what I'm getting for the price!

I saw a group of 6 Sony XBR 85" TVs boxed and banded together at Fry's. The next week they were no where in sight. Anyone know anything about the Sony XBR 85" the Sammy 75inchers, the Sharp, or any other TV I should be looking for?



One other question. The guy sales rep. telling me about the side by side Sammy 65s", the 75" Sammys as well as the 70" Sharp said all are full array local dimming sets! Any discussion here.

At this point in the evolution of TVs would any of you thinK investing in an over 65" 4K TV (especially curved) is the way to go?
Thanks!!
Regarding the local dimming comment; the sales rep is full of Sh@$. All listed are edge lit. Overall, if I were you, I would buy something cheap or put up your existing set and wait a year to buy a larger and more future proof set. Read Mark's comments above.
dsinger is offline  
post #21 of 44 Old 07-21-2014, 06:21 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
mark haflich's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: brookeville, maryland, usa
Posts: 20,275
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 650 Post(s)
Liked: 600
Quote:
Originally Posted by GregLee View Post
It recognizes what is already the predominant use of terms, and so it does provide clarity for the consumer. That's a good thing. I guess, from your tone, you mean to be sarcastic and to insult Shapiro, but I don't see what you're getting at.
Gary has been around a long time. I personally just don't like him, I never have and I never will. CEA is a manufacturers' trade association. It furthers the interests of its members and not those of the consumer.

Why did it come out with a standard that reflects what its members are manufacturing. Nothing being make today or tomorrow with or without the standard would not be at least 3840 x 2160, 16:9, BT 709. 8 bit, and have an HDMI 24, 30, and 60 inputT they did step out and require one input to be HDCP 2.2 but weaseled out with an or equivalent. I guess they do not want a customer to be concerned that his potential purchase might not be as good as a display with 18 GBS chip and full HDMI 2.2 and other things. Its full UHD, yes sir, it has the CEA, the Consumer (did you catch the Consumer) Electronics Association, seal of approval. Its UHD

Mark Haflich
markhaflich@yahoo.com
call me at: 240 876 2536

Last edited by mark haflich; 07-21-2014 at 06:24 AM.
mark haflich is offline  
post #22 of 44 Old 07-21-2014, 08:03 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Joe Bloggs's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: UK
Posts: 2,608
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 176 Post(s)
Liked: 60
Quote:
Originally Posted by HDfruitcake View Post
there are currently 50/60fps 10bit test atm, dont they count as high frame rate and increased bit depth?
Not really in broadcast terms. They are already broadcasting 720p60 (60 fps) to the consumer and have done for years, so having quadrupled the pixel resolution, doing 60 fps UHD tests isn't really high (in broadcast) terms any more - there has been no increase in temporal resolution to keep up with the increase in spatial resolution (4x pixel res). In broadcast terms, when they do 100/120 or higher it will be the "high"/higher frame rate tests.
Joe Bloggs is offline  
post #23 of 44 Old 07-21-2014, 09:00 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Joe Bloggs's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: UK
Posts: 2,608
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 176 Post(s)
Liked: 60
Quote:
Originally Posted by HockeyoAJB View Post
UHD-1 is already in place and it does not go beyond rec 709 colorimetry. Most of the consumer level "4K" content being made right now meets the UHD-1 standard.

The specs for 4K Blu-Ray are still a work in progress, but are likely to go beyond UHD-1. It is probably a safe bet that 4K Blu-Ray will include most, if not all, of the features included in UHD-2. Bear in mind that not every movie encoded onto a 4K Blu-Ray disc will take advantage of every feature supported by the format. For instance, not every movie will be filmed at 60 fps, even though the format will surely support 2160p60 content.

At this point in time, it seems unlikely that UHD-3 (or at least the 8K resolution portion of it) will ever be a part of the Blu-Ray spec. Without another large bump in compression capabilities, a 90 min 8K film won't fit on any optical disc that currently exists.
There is no UHD-3. UHD-2 is 7680x4320.
Joe Bloggs is offline  
post #24 of 44 Old 07-21-2014, 09:03 AM
Advanced Member
 
HockeyoAJB's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Posts: 788
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 237 Post(s)
Liked: 256
Quote:
Originally Posted by mark haflich View Post
Why did it come out with a standard that reflects what its members are manufacturing. Nothing being make today or tomorrow with or without the standard would not be at least 3840 x 2160, 16:9, BT 709. 8 bit, and have an HDMI 24, 30, and 60 inputT they did step out and require one input to be HDCP 2.2 but weaseled out with an or equivalent. I guess they do not want a customer to be concerned that his potential purchase might not be as good as a display with 18 GBS chip and full HDMI 2.2 and other things. Its full UHD, yes sir, it has the CEA, the Consumer (did you catch the Consumer) Electronics Association, seal of approval. Its UHD
There were 1st generation "4K/UHD" sets that did not/do not have all of the requirements to be classified as "UHD" under the new definition. For example, most 2013 models did not have HEVC or equivalent decoders. Most did not have support for HDCP 2.2 encrypted content. Most could not accept 2160p @ 50/60 fps. Some of the cheaper brands (e.g. Seiki) did not have built-in 4K upscaling.

The adoption of this standard allows them to set the bar for what must be included to qualify as "UHD" from here on out. Without this standard, some manufacturers could have marketed their 2013 models as "UHD". Brands looking to cut costs could have skimped on any of the above and yet, without significant research, a consumer would have no way of knowing that. Admittedly, the standards for colorimetry are no better than what 99% of the TV's made in the last 5+ years have already supported and they were not able to raise the bar on bandwidth/connectivity in this version, due to a shortage of 18 Gbps chips. But, I don't think it hurts to include these things in the standard. When they roll out the next phase of UHD, they will raise the bar on those portions of the specification.

If avoidance of confusion was the goal, none of these TV's would exist yet. The industry would have waited until they were capable of implementing all of the features that are likely to be a part of UHD Phase 2, adopted that as the "UHD" standard, and then started making the TV's. Unfortunately (or fortunately, depending on your point of view), the indusrty needed these TV's to be on the market to boost sales before everyone could agree on what all of the specifications needed to be.
HockeyoAJB is online now  
post #25 of 44 Old 07-21-2014, 09:16 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
mark haflich's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: brookeville, maryland, usa
Posts: 20,275
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 650 Post(s)
Liked: 600
A lucid post. Thank you. You make some great points.

Mark Haflich
markhaflich@yahoo.com
call me at: 240 876 2536
mark haflich is offline  
post #26 of 44 Old 07-21-2014, 11:57 AM
AVS Special Member
 
GregLee's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Waimanalo HI
Posts: 3,250
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 167 Post(s)
Liked: 78
Quote:
Originally Posted by mark haflich View Post
CEA is a manufacturers' trade association. It furthers the interests of its members and not those of the consumer.
Truly shocking.

It was inevitable that manufacturers would choose the most impressive sounding term for the premium sets they want us to buy now. It's not Shapiro's fault. I hope that in a few years, we'll have need for a term to replace "UHD", for future TVs that really do have better pictures. Like, for instance, "Dolby Vision".

Greg Lee
GregLee is offline  
post #27 of 44 Old 07-21-2014, 12:55 PM - Thread Starter
AVS Special Member
 
Scott Wilkinson's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Burbank, CA
Posts: 1,354
Mentioned: 7 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 363 Post(s)
Liked: 1209
Quote:
Originally Posted by Joe Bloggs View Post
There is no UHD-3. UHD-2 is 7680x4320.
Actually, there seems to be some confusion around this point. According to Hans Hoffmann in the webinar, the EBU's designations include UHD-3 to mean 7680x4320, whereas SMPTE designates this resolution as UHD-2. Also, SMPTE designates UHD-1 Phase 1 as 3840x2160 with BT.709, 8-bit color, etc., and UHD-1 Phase 2 as 3840x2160 with BT-2020, higher bit depth, etc. I wish these standards bodies would agree on a common nomenclature. Or did I misunderstand something in the webinar?

Scott Wilkinson
AVS Editor
Scott Wilkinson is offline  
post #28 of 44 Old 07-21-2014, 02:11 PM
AVS Special Member
 
dsinger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Posts: 1,804
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 101 Post(s)
Liked: 114
^ Wonder where 4K Blu-ray fits in SMPTE's view of things? IMO 4k BD will not use BT 2020 unless we wait until roughly 2020 for discs to come out and continuing to have only BT 709 and 8 bit as the 4K BD standard makes moving to 4K almost useless from my viewpoint.
dsinger is offline  
post #29 of 44 Old 07-21-2014, 02:44 PM
Advanced Member
 
HockeyoAJB's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Posts: 788
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 237 Post(s)
Liked: 256
Quote:
Originally Posted by dsinger View Post
^ Wonder where 4K Blu-ray fits in SMPTE's view of things? IMO 4k BD will not use BT 2020 unless we wait until roughly 2020 for discs to come out and continuing to have only BT 709 and 8 bit as the 4K BD standard makes moving to 4K almost useless from my viewpoint.
They could always go with something between rec 709 and rec 2020, such as DCI P3. That could be accomplished in the near future while still offering an improvement over the Full HD Blu-Ray spec. Going to a higher bit depth, such as 10-bit, is also well within the capability of current display technology. Rec 2020 color space is the only feature that really seems to be beyond the capabilities of current display technology. The main concerns with the rest of the specs is how it will impact bandwidth requirements from the source to the display, particularly if content is to be streamed, and ensuring backwards compatibility with new content on old displays.
HockeyoAJB is online now  
post #30 of 44 Old 07-21-2014, 11:50 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Joe Bloggs's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: UK
Posts: 2,608
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 176 Post(s)
Liked: 60
Quote:
Originally Posted by Scott Wilkinson View Post
Actually, there seems to be some confusion around this point. According to Hans Hoffmann in the webinar, the EBU's designations include UHD-3 to mean 7680x4320, whereas SMPTE designates this resolution as UHD-2. Also, SMPTE designates UHD-1 Phase 1 as 3840x2160 with BT.709, 8-bit color, etc., and UHD-1 Phase 2 as 3840x2160 with BT-2020, higher bit depth, etc. I wish these standards bodies would agree on a common nomenclature. Or did I misunderstand something in the webinar?

In your picture in the first post, it shows "UHD-2" as being 7680x4320 and below the diagram (but above SMPTE) it shows "EBU". A similar diagram is on page 7 of this EBU document http://www.hoek.nl/dg/18mrt14/Dutch_...as_handout.pdf from March 2014 where the EBU again say UHD-2 is 7680x4320, as well as in the other EBU document(s) I linked to in a previous post.

But in the linked document above, they do refer to the 3 Phases (not UHD numbers). So the 3 phases are not the same as the numbers after the "UHD". The EBU have never written "UHD-3" or "UHD3" as far as I know. The number after the UHD is the level I believe (where 1=3840x2160, and 2=7680x4320), which is different to the 3 Phases. The Phase number is never shown as a number directly after "UHD" in any EBU document I've seen (ie. they never say UHD-2 is 3840x2160, because it's Phase 2 not UHD-2 that is 3840x2160).

Basically they've split UHD-1 into 2 phases (so there can be a better standard for 3840x2160 later on), and made UHD-2 (7680x4320) the 3rd Phase.

I haven't actually seen the Webinar, as I'm not an SMPTE member, but what I have stated is how it is in the EBU documents I've seen on the web, some of which I've linked to in this/the other post.

Last edited by Joe Bloggs; 07-22-2014 at 12:15 AM.
Joe Bloggs is offline  
Reply Latest Industry News

Tags
frontpage



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