UHD/4K Quandary: To Buy or Not to Buy - Page 22 - AVS Forum
Forum Jump: 
 540Likes
Reply
 
Thread Tools
post #631 of 1798 Old 07-29-2014, 07:11 PM
Senior Writer @ AVS
 
imagic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Philadelphia, PA
Posts: 6,523
Mentioned: 33 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1845 Post(s)
Liked: 3149
Quote:
Originally Posted by abates17 View Post
Right, exactly. Anyone who knows about video and photos will disregard any moiré effects that show up on the picture. These are known quantities, not mysterious artifacts that will confuse the viewer.
I'm not so sure about that, especially if one image has moire and the other does not because the two displays are two different resolutions. It's a fairly distracting artifact.

Mark Henninger
imagic is online now  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #632 of 1798 Old 07-29-2014, 07:27 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 imagic View Post
I know a number of good methods for taking better comparison shots of TVs. Use of a tripod, RAW format, and manual settings is a good start. Higher resolution won't help much—24 megapixel cameras show plenty of moire with 2 megapixel (1080p) displays. It follows that a 96 megapixel camera would have issues with a 8 megapixel (2160p) display. You can shoot a portion of the screen as a macro image and avoid moire.

What does help prevent moire is rotating the camera so it is not parallel with the display, as does also avoiding "perfect" focus. Downscaling does not make moire go away.
"24 megapixel cameras show plenty of moire with 2 megapixel (1080p) display" - are you sure this is moire as in the pixels of the display causing an interference pattern because of the difference in the placement of pixels between the TV and the camera, and not that it's just showing the resolution limitations in the display? ie. with a high enough resolution camera we should see the true pixel structure of the TV and it's limitations (unless the TV makers have built the sets to blend in a certain way) and we shouldn't try to eliminate that pixel structure by defocusing - if we are interested in what the TV is actually displaying and it's limitations.

Also, isn't downscaling (or other/similar processing - for 3840x2160 to 1920x1080) basically what certain video cameras do to avoid aliasing/moire?

Last edited by Joe Bloggs; 07-29-2014 at 07:40 PM.
Joe Bloggs is offline  
post #633 of 1798 Old 07-29-2014, 07:28 PM
AVS Special Member
 
JWhip's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Wayne, PA
Posts: 4,337
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 248 Post(s)
Liked: 310
Quote:
Originally Posted by abates17 View Post
No one will be playing catch-up. It’s a video format, not a race. The elitist attitude is the problem.
In 2 years the 4k sets will be bigger, OLED, support HDR, dci or some increased color gamut, etc. guys like mrorange will then want a new set that will be able to take advantage of same. My approach is to wait until the standards are set and content is readily available in significant amounts. The sets will be better and more affordable. Elitism has nothing to do with it.
Joe Bloggs likes this.
JWhip is offline  
post #634 of 1798 Old 07-29-2014, 07:57 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Mrorange303's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Posts: 1,738
Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 824 Post(s)
Liked: 226
Quote:
Originally Posted by abates17 View Post
See, this bugs me: Either you’re discounting his opinion that 4K TVs aren’t worth it right now, or you’re making a sarcastic comment on the fact that he will be interested in 4K displays in a few years, as if you’re superior for buying one now and he’ll be embarrassed having to catch up.

I know you feel like most people are against you in this conversation, but a lot of that is because (in my reading of the thread) the attitudes of those against 4K are, “4K doesn’t have much benefit right now until the technology improves and content is more widely available,” while your attitude seems to be, “Every 4K owner can see that 4K is clearly superior and even makes 1080p look better, and if you can’t see it you’re just ignorant, and you’re going to get 4K eventually no matter what, so when you do I’ll be laughing because you’ll just be playing catch-up.”
And that is the issue with your point of view.

I dont feel anything. I dont post for those who dont want 4k. I post for those who do.
Mrorange303 is online now  
post #635 of 1798 Old 07-29-2014, 08:03 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Mrorange303's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Posts: 1,738
Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 824 Post(s)
Liked: 226
Quote:
Originally Posted by mightyhuhn View Post
What did you get out of that?

Im not sure if you are making a point. The 4k sales were not huge?

Is this not expected until prices come down? More value 4k sets hit the market?
Mrorange303 is online now  
post #636 of 1798 Old 07-29-2014, 08:04 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
Stereodude's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Detroit Metro Area
Posts: 10,136
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 666 Post(s)
Liked: 633
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mrorange303 View Post
I dont feel anything. I dont post for those who dont want 4k. I post for those who do.
I wish you the best of luck on your crusade, but I won't be reading it any longer.
losservatore likes this.
Stereodude is offline  
post #637 of 1798 Old 07-29-2014, 08:08 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Mrorange303's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Posts: 1,738
Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 824 Post(s)
Liked: 226
Quote:
Originally Posted by JWhip View Post
In 2 years the 4k sets will be bigger, OLED, support HDR, dci or some increased color gamut, etc. guys like mrorange will then want a new set that will be able to take advantage of same. My approach is to wait until the standards are set and content is readily available in significant amounts. The sets will be better and more affordable. Elitism has nothing to do with it.
So why wont I be able to buy another 4k set again?

Oh snap. I have a 4k now and I can buy one when its standards are set.

I also will have accumilated a library of 4k content not only because all 4k owners are starved for it, but because now that I have a 4k set it doesnt make sense to get a lesser quality if I can get a 4k copy.

Not yet. But very very soon.

It maybe 2 years. Maybe 5. You have no idea.

But when it does happen which is all both of us can be sure about ill be ready I would imagine.

So how am I less prepared? Im still missing the point.
Mrorange303 is online now  
post #638 of 1798 Old 07-29-2014, 08:09 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Mrorange303's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Posts: 1,738
Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 824 Post(s)
Liked: 226
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stereodude View Post
I wish you the best of luck on your crusade, but I won't be reading it any longer.
You never did.
Mrorange303 is online now  
post #639 of 1798 Old 07-29-2014, 08:42 PM
Member
 
abates17's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 18
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 14 Post(s)
Liked: 24
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mrorange303 View Post
And that is the issue with your point of view.



I dont feel anything. I dont post for those who dont want 4k. I post for those who do.

Yeah, not elitist at all.
abates17 is offline  
post #640 of 1798 Old 07-29-2014, 08:45 PM
Member
 
abates17's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 18
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 14 Post(s)
Liked: 24
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mrorange303 View Post
So how am I less prepared? Im still missing the point.

See, no one is saying you’re not prepared. You’re saying that about people who aren't buying 4K now, but no one is saying the same thing about you.
abates17 is offline  
post #641 of 1798 Old 07-29-2014, 08:52 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Mrorange303's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Posts: 1,738
Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 824 Post(s)
Liked: 226
Quote:
Originally Posted by imagic View Post
I know a number of good methods for taking better comparison shots of TVs. Use of a tripod, RAW format, and manual settings is a good start. Higher resolution won't help much—24 megapixel cameras show plenty of moire with 2 megapixel (1080p) displays. It follows that a 96 megapixel camera would have issues with a 8 megapixel (2160p) display. You can shoot a portion of the screen as a macro image and avoid moire.

What does help prevent moire is rotating the camera so it is not parallel with the display, as does also avoiding "perfect" focus. Downscaling does not make moire go away.
Sounds good. The section of the screen idea. Use default settings? I mean the 1080p set is calibrated.

The 4k is not. So that one im not so hesitant. I guess I could just take pictures of the exact settings and just reapply them.

I have a cell phone. I can make a makeshift tripod.

I dont think it would matter though.

The issue is more than just pictures. Its that I am from a side that finds the uhd sets out now as worth every penny.

Its because we do see them as perfect transitional sets into uhd.

They have all the whistles of the best 1080p led lcd sets but allow for additional content that allows us to build on our 4k content now and support warching that content not just obtain it and wait to view it. It may not be in the standard that 4k sets will have 3 or 5 years from now. Maybe 2 years. But that content will be longer. The affordable 4k sets that people in here want. I want. But that technology wont come out and be super cheap like so many assume.

Your not getting a 4k standard oled for an affordable price right away. The 8 bit library wont go away either. So it is only a benefit that the 4k sets now support natively that same content. The Samsungs will also be able to show future content. Just not at its best.

The idea is not lets get the best of the 1080p era. That idea is noble and has no issues. I get that and have never once said the things about anyone that have been aimed at me.

My idea is just a different way to transition into UHD.

The problem is no ine believes this point of view has merit. Others come in here and attempt to offer similar opinions but all of meet the same issue.

The elitest effect. My set is better than yours.

Have I once said do not buy a plasma? Or dont go buy a 1080p lcd led?

No ive defended 4k sets available now. Thats all. Pictures at request. Yes they can be completely just jacked around with and make no sense to use.

But I could just use my words. That doesnt seem to go well with most. Criticism wether you do or you don't. No one will ever fully agree on everything.

You guys simply look at it from a point of enjoy the best of the whats we have now because 4k hasn't made a better product. Not a defining difference that really makes you feel your having a new experience.

I never said your wrong. I said the 4k point of view also has the right to be heard. Its too bad so many members go out of their way to sway buyers who might share a similar perspective as I do.

I hope the people who are thinking of buying a 4k tv go to a store and look at one. If you dont feel its right for you there are so many options that can work for you.

Maybe you do feel its right for you. Then head on over to the owners forums. We will happily point you in the right direction to get your collection started.

But ive said all this before. Not once has it mattered.
Mrorange303 is online now  
post #642 of 1798 Old 07-29-2014, 09:09 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Mrorange303's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Posts: 1,738
Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 824 Post(s)
Liked: 226
Quote:
Originally Posted by JWhip View Post
In a couple of years, Mrorange will be playing catchup also as the 4K sets available then will be much better than what he has now.
Quote:
Originally Posted by abates17 View Post
See, no one is saying you’re not prepared. You’re saying that about people who aren't buying 4K now, but no one is saying the same thing about you.
Listen are you trying to make me look foolish? Or do you think Im replying to you directly each time? Im just not sure.

The problem is im directing many things at once. Im not wanting to post replies to every member individually. I apologize if that is causing the confusion but there is a lot coming at me and in such a misunderstood way I just dont really care to respond.

Like when you said my reply to sage was messed up. But he can post one of his legit reasons to support 4k as mr.orange said so. Thats not pointed at you. But you did mention how I should not respond in a similar manner to him which wasnt even nearly offensive and how I am just about im going to be ahead and you will play catch up. You chose to ignore one post and focus on my post. Just like this one.

I just think your tactics are bullying. To the mods I guess not. Its not really agresdive so I cant say your being mean or something. But its a low tactic either way.
Mrorange303 is online now  
post #643 of 1798 Old 07-29-2014, 09:47 PM
Newbie
 
2013guy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Posts: 14
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 7 Post(s)
Liked: 11
For those with a calibrated plasma, or 1080p set who happen to have a disc of the animated film, how about you post shots of the same scenes so we know how the characters are supposed to look like ?
2013guy is offline  
post #644 of 1798 Old 07-29-2014, 10:02 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 Mrorange303 View Post
They have all the whistles of the best 1080p led lcd sets but allow for additional content that allows us to build on our 4k content now and support warching that content not just obtain it and wait to view it. It may not be in the standard that 4k sets will have 3 or 5 years from now. Maybe 2 years. But that content will be longer. The affordable 4k sets that people in here want. I want. But that technology wont come out and be super cheap like so many assume.
What 4K content are you building now? Other than YouTube clips, in the UK there's practically nothing. There's no Blu-ray UHD standard yet. If you replace your 4K TV next year or the next, you've spent thousands of dollars on something (something where there will be better featured displays for cheaper next year or the next) and had hardly any value out if it. Surely you can agree that, even for people who want 4K, but who don't want to replace their TV every year, now (where there's practically 0 content and the various standards aren't set) is not the best time to buy if you want to get any reasonable amount of value and use from the UHD set.
Joe Bloggs is offline  
post #645 of 1798 Old 07-29-2014, 10:39 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Mrorange303's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Posts: 1,738
Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 824 Post(s)
Liked: 226
Quote:
Originally Posted by Joe Bloggs View Post
What 4K content are you building now? Other than YouTube clips, in the UK there's practically nothing. There's no Blu-ray UHD standard yet. If you replace your 4K TV next year or the next, you've spent thousands of dollars on something (something where there will be better featured displays for cheaper next year or the next) and had hardly any value out if it. Surely you can agree that, even for people who want 4K, but who don't want to replace their TV every year, now (where there's practically 0 content and the various standards aren't set) is not the best time to buy if you want to get any reasonable amount of value and use from the UHD set.
Maybe its for you. Maybe its not. Your point of view from the uk perspective in particular I cannot comment on. Sorry I am in the us. I am not sure the extent of your services.

However I found the perfect article.

Argues all my points and ends with 99 percent of people should wait. But it just says everything in this thread in one place.

http://www.consumerreports.org/cro/magazine/2014/09/ultra-hd-tvs-best-picture-yet/index.htm

Last edited by Mrorange303; 07-29-2014 at 10:42 PM.
Mrorange303 is online now  
post #646 of 1798 Old 07-29-2014, 10:47 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Mrorange303's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Posts: 1,738
Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 824 Post(s)
Liked: 226
Here is more info. Its not going to convince you if you dont want to be. I doubt you care. But someone else might.
Still it early tech and thats not for evryone.


http://m.techradar.com/news/televisi...-4k-tv-1048954

Last edited by Mrorange303; 07-29-2014 at 10:54 PM.
Mrorange303 is online now  
post #647 of 1798 Old 07-30-2014, 04:17 AM
Member
 
abates17's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 18
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 14 Post(s)
Liked: 24
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mrorange303 View Post
But you did mention how I should not respond in a similar manner to him which wasnt even nearly offensive and how I am just about im going to be ahead and you will play catch up. You chose to ignore one post and focus on my post. Just like this one.

I just think your tactics are bullying. To the mods I guess not. Its not really agresdive so I cant say your being mean or something. But its a low tactic either way.
I’m not sure how you consider it “bullying” when I point out that you’ve been very aggressive and talking down to people who disagree that 4K sets are worth the price right now. When people talk about how 1080p sets can look better, you say that 4K improves the resolution and the color and the picture overall. And when people talk about how the resolution really depends on screen size and viewing distance, and how resolution doesn’t really improve the color, you go on about “Don’t talk to me about the science! Just look at the picture!” Then someone says that a well-calibrated plasma can look better than a 4K TV, you respond with, “Well what if I like the look of the uncalibrated picture better? You can’t dictate preference! So you’re wrong there.” And if you can’t argue the science, you fall back on, “You can’t argue that because you don’t own a 4K set so you don’t know.”

It just seems like you’ve been very aggressive since the first page on this discussion. I hardly see how it’s bullying to point that out.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mrorange303 View Post
How do you know its a better expirience? I get you have a great plasma. But if like younyou all say it was so good then why did it die?

Everything is better in 4k. Everything.

I have never liked plasma televisions.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mrorange303 View Post
Also please explain how greater color graduation to produce better transition in color detail is going to stop a 4k resolution tv from being a 4k resolution tv?

Either way your buying a tv. The 4k set has all the stuff your best 1080p set has plus more.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mrorange303 View Post
If you buy a brand new 1080p set today then you missed an opportunity. Youll be back looking at sets in less than 5 years.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mrorange303 View Post
" plasma is superior currently in every regard" you just said not resolution. Now if there is 4 times the pixels than how is there not 4 times the opportunity to display more color? Is this not the trick to sharp getting better color? Samsung with pur color etc?

And last about resolution. How can any 1080p set have a higher resolution picture in any circumstance than a 4k set scientifically?

Ghost busters 2 on netflix in uhd is the best you have ever seen it. Again not being a jerk but to me that's another win.

Everyone is so quick to claim how superior their sets are right now but I ask you if this is true then why do these things even exist? Am I wrong about them?

Don't give me feet away resolution yada yada count the pixels. I can see them. At least on a 1080 set. It's not fair to think everyone can't on a FALD.

Plasma is beautiful but it lacks the depth of a 4k picture. Sorry but it's true. When you own your set the depth may have slightly richer color transitions in your mind because it is rec standard for all 4k and a great 10bit panel.

I hope you stop being blind to the beauty you have a chance to have. It's amazing. It really is.
abates17 is offline  
post #648 of 1798 Old 07-30-2014, 04:58 AM
Newbie
 
Join Date: Jul 2014
Posts: 3
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 2
What a fruitless discussion, remains me at times in the sandpit. Who has the best, great...
It's just a TV, Hobby, for me there is no perfect Set, System or whatever, in my opinion you may find a Television which means less Compromise to you, and this is maybe a Plasma or a UHD or...
Torosen is offline  
post #649 of 1798 Old 07-30-2014, 05:36 AM
Senior Writer @ AVS
 
imagic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Philadelphia, PA
Posts: 6,523
Mentioned: 33 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1845 Post(s)
Liked: 3149
Quote:
Originally Posted by Joe Bloggs View Post
"24 megapixel cameras show plenty of moire with 2 megapixel (1080p) display" - are you sure this is moire as in the pixels of the display causing an interference pattern because of the difference in the placement of pixels between the TV and the camera, and not that it's just showing the resolution limitations in the display? ie. with a high enough resolution camera we should see the true pixel structure of the TV and it's limitations (unless the TV makers have built the sets to blend in a certain way) and we shouldn't try to eliminate that pixel structure by defocusing - if we are interested in what the TV is actually displaying and it's limitations.

Also, isn't downscaling (or other/similar processing - for 3840x2160 to 1920x1080) basically what certain video cameras do to avoid aliasing/moire?
I'm 100% certain.

Mark Henninger
imagic is online now  
post #650 of 1798 Old 07-30-2014, 07:01 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 imagic View Post
I'm 100% certain.
So shouldn't 24 megapixels in theory (nyquist) be enough to eliminate moire from a 2 megapixel display? I mean in theory, shouldn't that be high enough over the number of pixels in the display? Could the moire be due to the subpixels in the display rather than pixels (but even then, there'd only be around 1920*1080*3=6.2 million subpixels). What's the science/maths behind how many megapixels you'd need for a display of x pixels (or subpixels) to avoid moire (if it isn't based on nyquist ie. >=double in both directions)? Are you saying you'd need more/much more than 24 megapixels?
Joe Bloggs is offline  
post #651 of 1798 Old 07-30-2014, 07:18 AM
Senior Writer @ AVS
 
imagic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Philadelphia, PA
Posts: 6,523
Mentioned: 33 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1845 Post(s)
Liked: 3149
Quote:
Originally Posted by Joe Bloggs View Post
So shouldn't 24 megapixels in theory (nyquist) be enough to eliminate moire from a 2 megapixel display? I mean in theory, shouldn't that be high enough over the number of pixels in the display? Could the moire be due to the subpixels in the display rather than pixels (but even then, there'd only be around 1920*1080*3=6.2 million subpixels). What's the science/maths behind how many megapixels you'd need for a display of x pixels (or subpixels) to avoid moire (if it isn't based on nyquist ie. >=double in both directions)? Are you saying you'd need more/much more than 24 megapixels?

Yes it's more complex that just moire from mere pixels. It's easy to photograph a projected image, but when you deal with flat panel displays moire rears its ugly head most of the time. Different sub pixel layouts mean that the moire is different from TV to TV. Different cameras are also more/less sensitive to the effect.
Joe Bloggs likes this.

Mark Henninger
imagic is online now  
post #652 of 1798 Old 07-30-2014, 08:04 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
Ken Ross's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: N.Y.
Posts: 24,833
Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1546 Post(s)
Liked: 1647
Quote:
Originally Posted by JWhip View Post
In a couple of years, Mrorange will be playing catchup also as the 4K sets available then will be much better than what he has now.
If you're referring to 'catch up' as having the 'latest & greatest', then that's something we all potentially do. No matter what we buy, if you want the latest technology, you'll need to buy again, whether that time frame is 1, 3 or 5 years. It all depends on what you consider to be the worthwhile advancements and how much value you place on them.

I agree with MrOrange in terms of 4K being that worthwhile advancement.
bruceames and Mrorange303 like this.
Ken Ross is offline  
post #653 of 1798 Old 07-30-2014, 08:06 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
Ken Ross's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: N.Y.
Posts: 24,833
Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1546 Post(s)
Liked: 1647
Quote:
Originally Posted by imagic View Post
Yes it's more complex that just moire from mere pixels. It's easy to photograph a projected image, but when you deal with flat panel displays moire rears its ugly head most of the time. Different sub pixel layouts mean that the moire is different from TV to TV. Different cameras are also more/less sensitive to the effect.
It is also very difficult to capture the true dynamic range of the display as well as truly accurate colors.
Ken Ross is offline  
post #654 of 1798 Old 07-30-2014, 08:07 AM
Advanced Member
 
vddobrev's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 812
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 83 Post(s)
Liked: 39
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ken Ross View Post
If you're referring to 'catch up' as having the 'latest & greatest', then that's something we all potentially do. No matter what we buy, if you want the latest technology, you'll need to buy again, whether that time frame is 1, 3 or 5 years. It all depends on what you consider to be the worthwhile advancements and how much value you place on them.

I agree with MrOrange in terms of 4K being that worthwhile advancement.
Ditto.
Mrorange303 likes this.
vddobrev is offline  
post #655 of 1798 Old 07-30-2014, 08:11 AM
Senior Writer @ AVS
 
imagic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Philadelphia, PA
Posts: 6,523
Mentioned: 33 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1845 Post(s)
Liked: 3149
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ken Ross View Post
If you're referring to 'catch up' as having the 'latest & greatest', then that's something we all potentially do. No matter what we buy, if you want the latest technology, you'll need to buy again, whether that time frame is 1, 3 or 5 years. It all depends on what you consider to be the worthwhile advancements and how much value you place on them.

I agree with MrOrange in terms of 4K being that worthwhile advancement.
Even if 8K comes along far sooner than anyone expected?

Mark Henninger
imagic is online now  
post #656 of 1798 Old 07-30-2014, 08:16 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
Ken Ross's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: N.Y.
Posts: 24,833
Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1546 Post(s)
Liked: 1647
Mark, as we make each resolution jump at this point, I don't see a corresponding increase in perceived benefits.

With the arguments about how large a screen or how close a viewing distance is required to enjoy the full benefits of 4K, I can only imagine what's required for 8K. We'll be watching 200" screens at 8'. Good luck with that.

So no, I have no real interest in 8K. Certainly from an acquisition standpoint, I cringe at the thought of how large files sizes will become when we shoot in 8K. We'll certainly need new compression standards for 8K to make much sense. But the Japanese want it and I'm sure they CE industry will apply pressure once 4K is saturated.
Ken Ross is offline  
post #657 of 1798 Old 07-30-2014, 08:26 AM
Senior Writer @ AVS
 
imagic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Philadelphia, PA
Posts: 6,523
Mentioned: 33 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1845 Post(s)
Liked: 3149
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ken Ross View Post
Mark, as we make each resolution jump at this point, I don't see a corresponding increase in perceived benefits.

With the arguments about how large a screen or how close a viewing distance is required to enjoy the full benefits of 4K, I can only imagine what's required for 8K. We'll be watching 200" screens at 8'. Good luck with that.

So no, I have no real interest in 8K. Certainly from an acquisition standpoint, I cringe at the thought of how large files sizes will become when we shoot in 8K. We'll certainly need new compression standards for 8K to make much sense. But the Japanese want it and I'm sure they CE industry will apply pressure once 4K is saturated.
Sure, but the whole discussion about 1080p vs. 2160p is not solely centered around the benefit of flawless content presented at native resolution. Every argument made here will be made for 8K—the only question is when.

When 8K does arrive, it'll be the same batch of questions: How does 1080p upscale to 8K, as opposed to 4K? How does 4K upscale to 8K, and is it better than native 4K? And most importantly, are the best TVs 8K TVs, whether we need those extra pixels or not, because 4K TVs are just cheap commodities?

Mark Henninger
imagic is online now  
post #658 of 1798 Old 07-30-2014, 08:58 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Mrorange303's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Posts: 1,738
Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 824 Post(s)
Liked: 226
Quote:
Originally Posted by imagic View Post
Sure, but the whole discussion about 1080p vs. 2160p is not solely centered around the benefit of flawless content presented at native resolution. Every argument made here will be made for 8K—the only question is when.

When 8K does arrive, it'll be the same batch of questions: How does 1080p upscale to 8K, as opposed to 4K? How does 4K upscale to 8K, and is it better than native 4K? And most importantly, are the best TVs 8K TVs, whether we need those extra pixels or not, because 4K TVs are just cheap commodities?
I'm not even gonna lie if I truly seen a benefit of the 8k sets I would buy those. I just embrace technology.

I've watched time lapses and people make fun of content but the truth is I've come to appreciate the the style and I actually love them.

Imagine those on a 120" 8k. It would be glorious.
Mrorange303 is online now  
post #659 of 1798 Old 07-30-2014, 09:40 AM
AVS Special Member
 
sytech's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 1,355
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 307 Post(s)
Liked: 244
Quote:
Originally Posted by imagic View Post
Even if 8K comes along far sooner than anyone expected?
8K is not going to happen for the home market in the US. Even with HEVC, the file sizes would be enoromus and there is the law of diminishing returns. The expense and hardware needed are just not worth it. Last timed I checked there were only 3 or 4 NHK 8K cameras in Japan. As it is, the resolution of 4k only adds a slight improvement at smaller sizes. So to get any benefit from 8K you would need huge screens. Ironically, most of what is going make 4K the new standard has to do more with WCG and HDR than with actual resolution.
bruceames likes this.
sytech is offline  
post #660 of 1798 Old 07-30-2014, 09:48 AM
Senior Writer @ AVS
 
imagic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Philadelphia, PA
Posts: 6,523
Mentioned: 33 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1845 Post(s)
Liked: 3149
Quote:
Originally Posted by sytech View Post
8K is not going to happen for the home market in the US. Even with HEVC, the file sizes would be enoromus and there is the law of diminishing returns. The expense and hardware needed are just not worth it. Last timed I checked there were only 3 or 4 NHK 8K cameras in Japan. As it is, the resolution of 4k only adds a slight improvement at smaller sizes. So to get any benefit from 8K you would need huge screens. Ironically, most of what is going make 4K the new standard has to do more with WCG and HDR than with actual resolution.
Just looking at what's going on with phones—8K screens will be here before you know it, whether humans can see the detail or not. 8K content, not so much. But as far as the screen resolution goes... I'd count on it.

Mark Henninger
imagic is online now  
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