UHD/4K Quandary: To Buy or Not to Buy - Page 14 - AVS | Home Theater Discussions And Reviews
Baselworld is only a few weeks away. Getting the latest news is easy, Click Here for info on how to join the Watchuseek.com newsletter list. Follow our team for updates featuring event coverage, new product unveilings, watch industry news & more!


Forum Jump: 
 648Likes
Reply
 
Thread Tools
post #391 of 2253 Old 07-25-2014, 11:08 AM
AVS Special Member
 
sage11x's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Brighton, MI
Posts: 2,651
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 434 Post(s)
Liked: 618
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mrorange303 View Post
I watch ces coverage and watched the reps talk features. I watched hours of the stuff on sony lg and sammy 4k sets before I jumped in the sammy.

There is many forms of info. Not all is easy to find. Sorry but if you read above you will see my question is answered. The white pixel was from samsung.

I cant find the video. I am at work.

It was for better color in their pur color system.

But the end all was about better color on 4k sets with the same material.

I was not wrong. About that. I cant proce the sammy video now but ill look later.
So there's a big problem right there. You can't just listen to promotional material and expect to get the whole truth. Manufacturers make claims and boast results that never materialize or only exist in the advertising. That's called selling.
sage11x is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #392 of 2253 Old 07-25-2014, 12:36 PM
Member
 
vinnie123's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Ottawa, ON
Posts: 26
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 20 Post(s)
Liked: 15
Quote:
Originally Posted by imagic View Post
It's context... The F8500 looks better than LCD-based UHDTV when displaying 1080p content in a darkened room. Without a significant source of UHD content, a UHDTV does not earn its keep in terms of value.

However, a UHDTV is a much better choice than a plasma at those higher price points, if the TV is going to be used in a bright room, or as a computer monitor, or if you live in the mountains.

Now it's time to pimp my wife's opinion. Every time she looks at a movie playing on the F8500 and AX800U side-by-side, she shakes her head and says "that's a shame about that 4K TV." That's because with 1080p movies, the overall PQ on the F8500 is truly impressive, and it just plain looks better than the AX800U. It takes UHD content for the AX800U to compete in the "wow" department—not upscaled 1080p.
Just curious, why did you go with the F8500 over the VT/ZT60? You previously said it won the shootout, which is semi true. The audience chose the F8500 while the calibrators, chose the VT/ZT.
vinnie123 is offline  
post #393 of 2253 Old 07-25-2014, 12:38 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Mrorange303's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Posts: 2,388
Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1193 Post(s)
Liked: 350
Quote:
Originally Posted by sage11x View Post
So there's a big problem right there. You can't just listen to promotional material and expect to get the whole truth. Manufacturers make claims and boast results that never materialize or only exist in the advertising. That's called selling.
I get that. But you also cant just say im wrong because it may not be the case.

But it maybe the case. If I cant find it.

But that was asking about what makes the color better. I asked you if that mattered and you said no. I never argued when you corrected me on this same post right after. So then why are you having to correct this again. Obviously he didnt read your answer right after or he would of seen you corrected me immediately after.

I then said ok it must be something. The resolution thing is what I got on as the reason it has more defined color.

That is when he got into the conversation.

So I said your right. I am alao agreeing it was promotional and to take that with a grain of salt. Im just saying I had heard that in a video.

So im not sure why you want me to have a hard time agreeing with you again.

As you can tell other members have answered the question and this is not even the issue any longer. So whats the point of your post? Im just not sure it progresses our discussion. But he is late to the thread. So I dont expect hin to know. We have been going back and fourth. So you know whats going on.
Mrorange303 is offline  
post #394 of 2253 Old 07-25-2014, 01:53 PM
AVS Special Member
 
sage11x's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Brighton, MI
Posts: 2,651
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 434 Post(s)
Liked: 618
Quote:
Originally Posted by vinnie123 View Post
Just curious, why did you go with the F8500 over the VT/ZT60? You previously said it won the shootout, which is semi true. The audience chose the F8500 while the calibrators, chose the VT/ZT.
I feel I can answer for Mark as I followed that thread closely. Mainly availability and the ridiculous price he scored his F8500 for.

Despite my reservations about samsung as a brand, the F8500 is a match for the VT/ZT60 and that's coming from a VT60 owner. Panasonic is a little better in the dark and I happen to like the shadow detail in the vt60 (some say panasonic exaggerated gamma near black) but the f8500 has gobs of brightness to make it slightly more versatile display.

Last edited by sage11x; 07-25-2014 at 01:57 PM.
sage11x is offline  
post #395 of 2253 Old 07-25-2014, 01:58 PM
AVS Special Member
 
sage11x's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Brighton, MI
Posts: 2,651
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 434 Post(s)
Liked: 618
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mrorange303 View Post
I get that. But you also cant just say im wrong because it may not be the case.

But it maybe the case. If I cant find it.

But that was asking about what makes the color better. I asked you if that mattered and you said no. I never argued when you corrected me on this same post right after. So then why are you having to correct this again. Obviously he didnt read your answer right after or he would of seen you corrected me immediately after.

I then said ok it must be something. The resolution thing is what I got on as the reason it has more defined color.

That is when he got into the conversation.

So I said your right. I am alao agreeing it was promotional and to take that with a grain of salt. Im just saying I had heard that in a video.

So im not sure why you want me to have a hard time agreeing with you again.

As you can tell other members have answered the question and this is not even the issue any longer. So whats the point of your post? Im just not sure it progresses our discussion. But he is late to the thread. So I dont expect hin to know. We have been going back and fourth. So you know whats going on.
I'm sorry, I don't follow you.
sage11x is offline  
post #396 of 2253 Old 07-25-2014, 02:28 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Anthony1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 1999
Posts: 6,217
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 234 Post(s)
Liked: 193
I have a question for the people that are pro 4K....


Is there a list somewhere that shows all the available media in 4K ? Obviously, I'm not talking about YouTube clips, or personal 4K camcorder movies. I'm talking about movies or tv shows, or maybe documentaries. Something that somebody would have actually heard of.

Basically... what is the compelling content from a TV show and Movie standpoint ?

I'd love to be tempted by 4K, but seeing I don't think After Earth or Elysium are enough of an incentive to try to jump on the 4K bandwagon. Plus, you're pretty much forced to go with Sony right ? How do you get the content on all the other 4K tv's ?
Anthony1 is offline  
post #397 of 2253 Old 07-25-2014, 02:58 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Joe Bloggs's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: UK
Posts: 2,780
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 267 Post(s)
Liked: 88
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stereodude View Post
It's not really that clear cut. Content isn't stored in a RGB color space. It's stored in a YCbCr color space. 8-bit YCbCr (16-235) doesn't automatically translate to RGB 16-235. In fact, that's not really the correct way to do it. A 8-bit TV should convert YCbCr to RGB (0-255) before sending it to the panel giving you 256 steps, not 219. Further, you can easily convert 8-bit YCbCr (16-235) to 10-bit RGB (0-255) and the 2 LSBs aren't 0's. The conversion uses floating point math so there is real data in those bits.
If the source only has 219 steps (because they are 16-235), converting those colours to the 0-255 range is still surely going to give you 219 actual steps (not fake ones), not 256.

Just like if I gave you a list of 219 numbers in a certain range, you could convert those 219 numbers to some other range, but unless you decide to add your own numbers, there will still only be 219 numbers. Assume it's greyscale for simplicity (the source video is greyscale) - the source can only have 219 values. The destination should only have 219 values even if the number range of those values are higher (unless you are faking/interpolating new values). Assume no upscaling/faking/interpolating new values.

eg. if source range was 0 to 100, and destination range was 0-1000 (everything else about the two standards are the same), and the source numbers were 10, 20, 30. The destination, without faking new values would just be 100, 200, 300. No new values, just the 3 original values (*10) in the new range.

Last edited by Joe Bloggs; 07-25-2014 at 03:12 PM.
Joe Bloggs is offline  
post #398 of 2253 Old 07-25-2014, 03:14 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
bd2003's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Long Island, NY
Posts: 11,189
Mentioned: 5 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 682 Post(s)
Liked: 1572
Quote:
Originally Posted by Joe Bloggs View Post
If the source only has 219 steps (because they are 16-235), converting those colours to the 0-255 range is still surely going to give you 219 actual steps (not fake ones), not 256.

Just like if I gave you a list of 219 numbers in a certain range, you could convert those 219 numbers to some other range, but unless you decide to add your own numbers, there will still only be 219 numbers. Assume it's greyscale for simplicity (the source video is greyscale) - the source can only have 219 values. The destination should only have 219 values even if the number range of those values are higher (unless you are faking/interpolating new values).

eg. if source range was 0 to 100, and destination range was 0-1000 (everything else about the two standards are the same), and the source numbers were 10, 20, 30. The destination, without faking new values would just be 100, 200, 300. No new values, just the 3 original values in the new range.

I wouldn't conflate faking and interpolation like that. Two very different things.

Steam/PSN/Xbox Live: Darius510
bd2003 is offline  
post #399 of 2253 Old 07-25-2014, 03:27 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Joe Bloggs's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: UK
Posts: 2,780
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 267 Post(s)
Liked: 88
Quote:
Originally Posted by bd2003 View Post
I wouldn't conflate faking and interpolation like that. Two very different things.
But unless you are upscaling, or changing the resolution, if the source (greyscale in this case, 16-235), has 219 steps, and the source and destination both have the same pixel resolution, why wouldn't the destination (even if the dest range is 0-255) for those original pixels also be 219 steps? Why would you interpolate (since the resolution isn't changing). Maybe they might dither a bit if the 219 steps are obvious (ie. banding). But if you aren't changing resolution (no need to interpolate spatial info for that reason), why would the original 219 steps now be 255 (assuming no dithering) and what improvement would interpolating give in this case where the pixel resolution isn't changing (assuming standard RGB subpixels)? If you were upscaling you'd have room to interpolate new values between the existing ones, but not if the souce and dest pixel res is the same.

Am I oversimplifying the conversion too much? Do they convert it in a more complex way (eg. 255 steps / 219 steps isn't a simple integer division), so are they converting it in a way that each source pixel affects (to different degrees) more than one destination pixel (but wouldn't that also be reducing the spatial resolution)? But if the conversion was simpler (source range 0-100 to dest range 0-1000), with identical pixel resolutions for the source and dest wouldn't it work similar to how I said?

Last edited by Joe Bloggs; 07-25-2014 at 03:53 PM.
Joe Bloggs is offline  
post #400 of 2253 Old 07-25-2014, 04:04 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
Stereodude's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Detroit Metro Area
Posts: 10,934
Mentioned: 7 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1153 Post(s)
Liked: 820
Quote:
Originally Posted by Joe Bloggs View Post
If the source only has 219 steps (because they are 16-235), converting those colours to the 0-255 range is still surely going to give you 219 actual steps (not fake ones), not 256.

Just like if I gave you a list of 219 numbers in a certain range, you could convert those 219 numbers to some other range, but unless you decide to add your own numbers, there will still only be 219 numbers. Assume it's greyscale for simplicity (the source video is greyscale) - the source can only have 219 values. The destination should only have 219 values even if the number range of those values are higher (unless you are faking/interpolating new values). Assume no upscaling/faking/interpolating new values.

eg. if source range was 0 to 100, and destination range was 0-1000 (everything else about the two standards are the same), and the source numbers were 10, 20, 30. The destination, without faking new values would just be 100, 200, 300. No new values, just the 3 original values (*10) in the new range.
It still doesn't necessarily work that way. If you were starting with a RGB source, why would you be working with RGB 16-235? You should be using the full RGB 0-255 space. That would be converted to YCbCr 8-bit (16-235) which if you do the math correctly converts back to RGB 0-255.
Stereodude is online now  
post #401 of 2253 Old 07-25-2014, 04:13 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Joe Bloggs's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: UK
Posts: 2,780
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 267 Post(s)
Liked: 88
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stereodude View Post
It still doesn't necessarily work that way. If you were starting with a RGB source, why would you be working with RGB 16-235? You should be using the full RGB 0-255 space. That would be converted to YCbCr 8-bit (16-235) which if you do the math correctly converts back to RGB 0-255.
I'm taking about 8 bit video sources eg. from Blu-ray (so not an RGB source).

Because the standard for the video encodes are supposed to be that the "nominal range" of video encoded in the 8 bit system on Blu-ray is that it is from 16-235. Don't the studios almost always encode the black bars at Luma 16 not 0? While there may be picture info outside of the 16-235 range, they tell you to calibrate your display so that only stuff in the 16-235 range is seen. That the black bars (encoded at Y=16 not 0) are the blackest thing that should be displayed on a calibrated TV. So converting a greyscale source (with black bars at 16) should surely take the 16-235 source to expand to 0-255.
Joe Bloggs is offline  
post #402 of 2253 Old 07-25-2014, 05:27 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Mrorange303's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Posts: 2,388
Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1193 Post(s)
Liked: 350
Quote:
Originally Posted by Anthony1 View Post
I have a question for the people that are pro 4K....


Is there a list somewhere that shows all the available media in 4K ? Obviously, I'm not talking about YouTube clips, or personal 4K camcorder movies. I'm talking about movies or tv shows, or maybe documentaries. Something that somebody would have actually heard of.

Basically... what is the compelling content from a TV show and Movie standpoint ?

I'd love to be tempted by 4K, but seeing I don't think After Earth or Elysium are enough of an incentive to try to jump on the 4K bandwagon. Plus, you're pretty much forced to go with Sony right ? How do you get the content on all the other 4K tv's ?
Remeber how much better the iphone got after a retina display. The resolution jump helped movies, Internet etc.

4k does the same. Its like going from dvd to bluray. Not so big but close to that big.

Every movie you own right now looks better.

3d is more sharp and better looking than 2d bluray. At least on my hu9000 it is. Not all 3d is the same.

Now add to that the uhd 1tb drive I have plenty of content for now.

And all my stuff looking better feels new.

When I get a 4k expirience im floored. So damn good.

But if you were buying a tv today think of it like the iphone or ipad.

One has a standard screen. One has a retina.

Does the non retina iphone or ipad still function? Yes.

Is everything better with a retina screen. Yes.

Can 4k get ink blacks from edge lit panels? Yes.

Is the motion handling better this year? Yes.

Will 10 but panels come out later? Yes.

But those will still be 4k. Imagine you only have 1080p 8 bit now. At least a 4k 8 bit has some future benefit.

The 1080p sets in 2 years will be bargin sets like the 720 sets before them.

Why but a 1080p set outside of black levels from a plasma? Motion is a wash.

And 4k led sets have amazing black levels. I posted a 4k video in the hu9000 owners thread of the panasonic kuro best video playing on my set.
The video was shot in 4k to give some sense of the real expirience. Still that cant match what I see in person.

But it will show the black levels these 2014 edge lit sets can accomplish.
Mrorange303 is offline  
post #403 of 2253 Old 07-25-2014, 05:38 PM
AVS Special Member
 
sage11x's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Brighton, MI
Posts: 2,651
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 434 Post(s)
Liked: 618
I don't know that panasonic kuro was pretty dark...

Also, if you recorded a 4k video of a 4k tv would you have 8k? I think so!
sage11x is offline  
post #404 of 2253 Old 07-25-2014, 06:19 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Dr.Shankenstein's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 1,136
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 151 Post(s)
Liked: 109
Quote:
Originally Posted by Anthony1 View Post
I have a question for the people that are pro 4K....


Is there a list somewhere that shows all the available media in 4K ? Obviously, I'm not talking about YouTube clips, or personal 4K camcorder movies. I'm talking about movies or tv shows, or maybe documentaries. Something that somebody would have actually heard of.

Basically... what is the compelling content from a TV show and Movie standpoint ?

I'd love to be tempted by 4K, but seeing I don't think After Earth or Elysium are enough of an incentive to try to jump on the 4K bandwagon. Plus, you're pretty much forced to go with Sony right ? How do you get the content on all the other 4K tv's ?
Samsung offers a similar hard drive solution and download service as Sony. It will set you back $300,but will come with five UHD films and a few nature docs as well. I am not entirely sure about cost of additional content.
Dr.Shankenstein is offline  
post #405 of 2253 Old 07-25-2014, 06:28 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Mrorange303's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Posts: 2,388
Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1193 Post(s)
Liked: 350
Quote:
Originally Posted by sage11x View Post
I don't know that panasonic kuro was pretty dark...

Also, if you recorded a 4k video of a 4k tv would you have 8k? I think so!
Lol smooth.
Mrorange303 is offline  
post #406 of 2253 Old 07-25-2014, 06:41 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Dr.Shankenstein's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 1,136
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 151 Post(s)
Liked: 109
Quote:
Originally Posted by sage11x View Post
I don't know that panasonic kuro was pretty dark...

Also, if you recorded a 4k video of a 4k tv would you have 8k? I think so!
That is some serious math happening,hahahahaha! This thread has been getting pretty heavy,that brought a smile to my face.
Dr.Shankenstein is offline  
post #407 of 2253 Old 07-25-2014, 06:56 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
bd2003's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Long Island, NY
Posts: 11,189
Mentioned: 5 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 682 Post(s)
Liked: 1572
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mrorange303 View Post
Remeber how much better the iphone got after a retina display. The resolution jump helped movies, Internet etc.



4k does the same. Its like going from dvd to bluray. Not so big but close to that big.



Every movie you own right now looks better.



3d is more sharp and better looking than 2d bluray. At least on my hu9000 it is. Not all 3d is the same.



Now add to that the uhd 1tb drive I have plenty of content for now.



And all my stuff looking better feels new.



When I get a 4k expirience im floored. So damn good.



But if you were buying a tv today think of it like the iphone or ipad.



One has a standard screen. One has a retina.



Does the non retina iphone or ipad still function? Yes.



Is everything better with a retina screen. Yes.



Can 4k get ink blacks from edge lit panels? Yes.



Is the motion handling better this year? Yes.



Will 10 but panels come out later? Yes.



But those will still be 4k. Imagine you only have 1080p 8 bit now. At least a 4k 8 bit has some future benefit.



The 1080p sets in 2 years will be bargin sets like the 720 sets before them.



Why but a 1080p set outside of black levels from a plasma? Motion is a wash.



And 4k led sets have amazing black levels. I posted a 4k video in the hu9000 owners thread of the panasonic kuro best video playing on my set.

The video was shot in 4k to give some sense of the real expirience. Still that cant match what I see in person.



But it will show the black levels these 2014 edge lit sets can accomplish.

Wait until he finds out why they called it a retina display.

Steam/PSN/Xbox Live: Darius510
bd2003 is offline  
post #408 of 2253 Old 07-25-2014, 07:36 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Mrorange303's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Posts: 2,388
Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1193 Post(s)
Liked: 350
Quote:
Originally Posted by bd2003 View Post
Wait until he finds out why they called it a retina display.
So you mean me? You mean you didnt get the comparisons to picture improvement?

Or the most recognizable way to have a person envision the difference with a picture in their mind?

A very large amount of people can understand that comparison. What would of been better? Per a marketing standpoint I think my purpose would be considered a home run.
Mrorange303 is offline  
post #409 of 2253 Old 07-25-2014, 09:00 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
bd2003's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Long Island, NY
Posts: 11,189
Mentioned: 5 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 682 Post(s)
Liked: 1572
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mrorange303 View Post
So you mean me? You mean you didnt get the comparisons to picture improvement?

Or the most recognizable way to have a person envision the difference with a picture in their mind?

A very large amount of people can understand that comparison. What would of been better? Per a marketing standpoint I think my purpose would be considered a home run.
The reason they call it a retina display is that it has just enough resolution that your retina can't perceive any higher from a normal viewing/holding distance.

An iphone retina display held at 1 foot is roughly equal to a 60" 1080p set at 8 feet. So we've had "retina displays" for years. The only thing people will get from your comparison is that they don't need 4K.
losservatore likes this.

Steam/PSN/Xbox Live: Darius510
bd2003 is offline  
post #410 of 2253 Old 07-25-2014, 10:10 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Mrorange303's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Posts: 2,388
Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1193 Post(s)
Liked: 350
Quote:
Originally Posted by bd2003 View Post
The reason they call it a retina display is that it has just enough resolution that your retina can't perceive any higher from a normal viewing/holding distance.

An iphone retina display held at 1 foot is roughly equal to a 60" 1080p set at 8 feet. So we've had "retina displays" for years. The only thing people will get from your comparison is that they don't need 4K.
It was to demonstrate a screens benefit with more pixels??

The idea behind color can improve with more resolution??

Using the iphone so users would get the benefit and relate to a common item that is still usable without a resolution upgrade but still benefits?

How and at what point did I ever say the iphone has a 4k screen? Or did I ever care about arguing your point?

Do you think the other members don't realize what your saying? They chose to understand the context of the conversation.

Which is relevant to this discussion and what benefits a higher resolution screen can have for a display.

Are you saying I'm wrong? I'd encourage you to go a page back before you make that claim again. It is ridiculous how many people feel more pixels don't help a picture.

I use a simple example and people really try to argue scientific fact.

There are 4 times the pixels on a uhd tv. That means more pixels that benefit the picture. Yet you say I'm wrong?

Is that correct?
Mrorange303 is offline  
post #411 of 2253 Old 07-25-2014, 10:12 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Mrorange303's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Posts: 2,388
Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1193 Post(s)
Liked: 350
It's simple is this wrong or not. If it's wrong tell me why and please include all those fancy numbers. Thanks.

Ps I have better than 20/20 vision. I see pixels. I find constantly people think we all see the same. I can still see PLENTY OF PIXELS ON A 1080p PANEL. caps monster. They are not nearly as visible on an upscaled 1080p image on a 4k screen.
Attached Thumbnails
Click image for larger version

Name:	image.jpg
Views:	22
Size:	93.9 KB
ID:	180602  

Last edited by Mrorange303; 07-25-2014 at 10:17 PM.
Mrorange303 is offline  
post #412 of 2253 Old 07-25-2014, 10:55 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Joe Bloggs's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: UK
Posts: 2,780
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 267 Post(s)
Liked: 88
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mrorange303 View Post
It's simple is this wrong or not. If it's wrong tell me why and please include all those fancy numbers. Thanks.

Ps I have better than 20/20 vision. I see pixels. I find constantly people think we all see the same. I can still see PLENTY OF PIXELS ON A 1080p PANEL. caps monster. They are not nearly as visible on an upscaled 1080p image on a 4k screen.
Do you still have the 1080p TV too? Wouldn't a better comparison of the improvement (instead of a link to pictures of iphones), if it's about how much better 1080p looks on a 4K TV (I do think there will be a certain amount of benefit, even though it may be limited with just upscaled content) be to show 2 comparison pictures, both of a res of >=3840x2160, of the same content (same frame) showing on the 1080p TV and 3840x2160 TV both taking up the whole frame of the photo?

Also, it's not that 3840x2160 pixel resolution isn't an improvement - it is, but 1) There's almost no real 4K consumer content (other than YouTube clips - no Blu-ray 4K yet or 4K broadcasts really - other than test transmissions). And in the EBU tests it was the other things (eg. frame rate) that the people doing the test gave higher scores for (for more visible improvement). So Phase 2 should be where the most visible improvement over current standards is, assuming we have the content/broadcasts (assuming high enough bitrates, etc.).

With hardly any 4K content/broadcasts (almost none), I think for most people it would probably be better to wait a bit. By waiting a bit, until there's actual UHD broadcasts/enough 4K media (eg. 4K Blu-ray), the TVs will likely support the better standards and/or be cheaper.
Joe Bloggs is offline  
post #413 of 2253 Old 07-25-2014, 11:52 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Mrorange303's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Posts: 2,388
Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1193 Post(s)
Liked: 350
Quote:
Originally Posted by Joe Bloggs View Post
Do you still have the 1080p TV too? Wouldn't a better comparison of the improvement (instead of a link to pictures of iphones), if it's about how much better 1080p looks on a 4K TV (I do think there will be a certain amount of benefit, even though it may be limited with just upscaled content) be to show 2 comparison pictures, both of a res of >=3840x2160, of the same content (same frame) showing on the 1080p TV and 3840x2160 TV both taking up the whole frame of the photo?

Also, it's not that 3840x2160 pixel resolution isn't an improvement - it is, but 1) There's almost no real 4K consumer content (other than YouTube clips - no Blu-ray 4K yet or 4K broadcasts really - other than test transmissions). And in the EBU tests it was the other things (eg. frame rate) that the people doing the test gave higher scores for (for more visible improvement). So Phase 2 should be where the most visible improvement over current standards is, assuming we have the content/broadcasts (assuming high enough bitrates, etc.).

With hardly any 4K content/broadcasts (almost none), I think for most people it would probably be better to wait a bit. By waiting a bit, until there's actual UHD broadcasts/enough 4K media (eg. 4K Blu-ray), the TVs will likely support the better standards and/or be cheaper.
Does anybody look one page back anymore? And I never argued the content. This is repeated comments that other readers have covered and the answer has been given.
Attached Thumbnails
Click image for larger version

Name:	image.jpg
Views:	23
Size:	268.3 KB
ID:	180690  
Mrorange303 is offline  
post #414 of 2253 Old 07-25-2014, 11:55 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Joe Bloggs's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: UK
Posts: 2,780
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 267 Post(s)
Liked: 88
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mrorange303 View Post
Does anybody look one page back anymore?
Is that an insult ? Did you read my post? Is that a picture of your new 4K TV upscaling 1080p content compared to your 1080p TV showing 1080p content like I asked? I've posted simulations showing improvements. I wanted to see the actual increase in quality of actual 1080p content showing as stated above.
Joe Bloggs is offline  
post #415 of 2253 Old 07-25-2014, 11:56 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Mrorange303's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Posts: 2,388
Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1193 Post(s)
Liked: 350
Quote:
Originally Posted by GregLee View Post
I didn't look at your photos, but I've just agreed with you on improving colors with 4k pictures.

There might be something technically wrong with the following intuitive account, since I'm no expert, but you can think of substituting color depth for resolution. Since 4k resolution is more than we actually need, consider that the 4k picture is reduced to 2k by supposing that squares of 4 pixels are grouped into super pixels, so that the 4k picture has 1080 rows of super pixels. What is the color depth of a super pixel? If a red pixel, say, has 2^8 levels, then since a super pixel has four red pixels, a super pixel has (2^8)^4 levels of red, so in effect, the super pixels have a color depth of 32. From color depth 8 for 2k, we go to what corresponds to color depth 32 for 4k.

Thus, increasing resolution from 2k to 4k should improve the rendition of colors.
Unless you can argue this?
Mrorange303 is offline  
post #416 of 2253 Old 07-25-2014, 11:57 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Mrorange303's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Posts: 2,388
Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1193 Post(s)
Liked: 350
Quote:
Originally Posted by Joe Bloggs View Post
Is that an insult ? Did you read my post? Is that a picture of your new 4K TV upscaling 1080p content compared to your 1080p TV showing 1080p content like I asked?
I don't have to. I posted pics. You go find some. Do your part man. Some very high ranked members have already agreed including mark. I don't get your issue with the science?
Mrorange303 is offline  
post #417 of 2253 Old 07-26-2014, 12:01 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Joe Bloggs's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: UK
Posts: 2,780
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 267 Post(s)
Liked: 88
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mrorange303 View Post
I don't have to. I posted pics. You go find some. Do your part man. Some very high ranked members have already agreed including mark. I don't get your issue with the science?
You posted pics of iphones and simulations - the picture above isn't showing an upscale, yet you are saying how much better upscales look, but if you don't want to provide any evidence of how much better upscales look (even though currently that will be the vast majority of content), no problem.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mrorange303
I don't get your issue with the science
My issue is, that though upscaling can (/should) remove the aliasing effect of the pixels/subpixels, which is good and can be an improvement (though I don't think it will provide enough of an improvement to spend thousands on a 4K TV when there's almost 0 4K content, especially if you'll have to replace the 4K TV again in a very short time once the better UHD standard TVs are out), I still think it's best waiting a bit for the standards to improve since there's practically no actual 4K content to watch on a 4K TV. There is also the issue that a lot of 4K films will have less (sometimes a lot less) than 4K worth of info - but that's less of an issue. So I agree there will be an improvment (or should be) with upscaling, but it will be limited so I think most people are better off waiting till there's 4K content. And that waiting will get us more UHD improvements than pixel resolution alone.

Last edited by Joe Bloggs; 07-26-2014 at 12:14 AM.
Joe Bloggs is offline  
post #418 of 2253 Old 07-26-2014, 12:23 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Mrorange303's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Posts: 2,388
Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1193 Post(s)
Liked: 350
1080p
Attached Thumbnails
Click image for larger version

Name:	image.jpg
Views:	72
Size:	174.1 KB
ID:	180698  
Mrorange303 is offline  
post #419 of 2253 Old 07-26-2014, 12:24 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Mrorange303's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Posts: 2,388
Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1193 Post(s)
Liked: 350
4k. But then you'll make an excuse for something. Notice the freckles. Better color?
Attached Thumbnails
Click image for larger version

Name:	image.jpg
Views:	66
Size:	162.1 KB
ID:	180706  

Last edited by Mrorange303; 07-26-2014 at 12:35 AM.
Mrorange303 is offline  
post #420 of 2253 Old 07-26-2014, 12:30 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Joe Bloggs's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: UK
Posts: 2,780
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 267 Post(s)
Liked: 88
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mrorange303 View Post
Unless you can argue this?
Well in that post he says "Since 4k resolution is more than we actually need" well that basically throws out your argument for buying a 4K TV if you think that is correct. If we can't visually get any benefit from 4K over 1080p at a particular screen size and viewing distance, we also won't see any benefit to those extra pixels being used for dithering. There is also the fact that he is claiming that dithering in that way will give "2^8^4" values per RGB subpixel (4,294,967,296 values) which I think is extremely unlikely . Plus the video sources for these TVs are only 256 (less in video colours 16-235), so are you really saying you can convert current 256 (or less) levels to one of 4,294,967,296 levels by dithering 4 pixels . It wouldn't give you more accurate colour.
Joe Bloggs is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Reply Latest Industry News

Tags
frontpage

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