AVS Forum banner

8K by 4K or Octo HD - the real SUHDTV technology

76K views 838 replies 92 participants last post by  fafrd 
#1 ·
The Octo HD will be no-compromise Super Ultra HDTV including not only the 8K by 4K picture but also the 120 Hz frame rate and 10-bit color. With the experimental 8K LCD display demonstrated and now the 8K camera @120 Hz being shown the old 4K will be left in the dust even before it appears.
 
#2 ·
8K for the consumers will not happen for a long, long time. 2025 at the earliest. Absolutely no infrastructure in place to make it happen. 4K will be hard enough to make happen, but at least there is already infrastructure in place. I.E 4K cameras, blu-ray manufacting, ultra high speed internet, Movie Studio masters in 4K. There are exactly 3 full rez 8K cameras in the world right now all own by NHK in Japan.
 
#5 ·

Quote:
Originally Posted by Chronoptimist  /t/1428686/8k-by-4k-or-octo-hd-the-real-suhdtv-technology#post_22389240


Actually, I think you will find that 8K is 16× HD (I am unsure on the correct prefix) with its 7680×4320 resolution. Any Sytech is absolutely correct with his post. 8K is not happening any time soon, let’s wait until 4K OLEDs are beginning to materialise and then be made available at affordable prices first.

Japanese seem to be determined to skip the 4K and are moving directly to the 8K. They would also like to save their industry against barbarians making inroads on their shores so it looks they are thinking to speed up introduction of the 8K in Japan.


BTW, 2K is the 1920x1080 HD, 4K is double of that 3840x2160 and the 8K is again double at 7680x4320. The term Octo HD is thus correct.
 
#6 ·

Quote:
Originally Posted by greenland  /t/1428686/8k-by-4k-or-octo-hd-the-real-suhdtv-technology#post_22389315


Panasonic demonstrated a 145inch 8K plasma unit at the recent IFA show.
http://www.flatpanelshd.com/news.php?subaction=showfull&id=1347260638

No word on if it comes with it's own nuclear plant to supply the energy required to run it.

They could team up with Sharp (who probably has a lot of solar panels they can't sell right now due to the high yen) and claim it's "green" by offering it with 1 kw of solar.
 
#7 ·

Quote:
Originally Posted by irkuck  /t/1428686/8k-by-4k-or-octo-hd-the-real-suhdtv-technology/0_100#post_22389631


2K is the 1920x1080 HD, 4K is double of that 3840x2160 and the 8K is again double at 7680x4320. The term Octo HD is thus correct.
1920×1080 =   2,073,600 (1×)

3840×2160 =   8,294,400 (4×)

7680×4320 = 33,177,600 (16×)
 
#710 ·
Quote: Originally Posted by irkuck

2K is the 1920x1080 HD, 4K is double of that 3840x2160 and the 8K is again double at 7680x4320. The term Octo HD is thus correct.

1920×1080 =   2,073,600 (1×)
3840×2160 =   8,294,400 (4×)
7680×4320 = 33,177,600 (16×)
Chronoptimist is correct. Screen resolution is measured in two directions and expressed using multiplication. If you have a multiplication problem such as 2x2 and you want to double it, you don't double both of the numbers being multiplied and then calculate the product, as that would effectively quadruple it. For example, (2x2)x2 does not equal 4x4. I realize it sounds wrong because people are so used to using a single number to represent a specific resolution, but UHD-1 (3840x2160) is in fact 4 times as many pixels as Full HD (1920x1080) and UHD-2 (7680x4320) is four times as many pixels as UHD-1 or sixteen times as many pixels as Full HD. Likewise with the cinema standard...4K is four times as many pixels as 2K, and, 8K is four times as many pixels as 4K (which makes it sixteen times as many pixels as 2K).
 
#8 ·

Quote:
Originally Posted by irkuck  /t/1428686/8k-by-4k-or-octo-hd-the-real-suhdtv-technology#post_22389631


Japanese seem to be determined to skip the 4K and are moving directly to the 8K. They would also like to save their industry against barbarians making inroads on their shores so it looks they are thinking to speed up introduction of the 8K in Japan.

BTW, 2K is the 1920x1080 HD, 4K is double of that 3840x2160 and the 8K is again double at 7680x4320. The term Octo HD is thus correct.

Irkuck continues to confound me by starting new threads that he is totally cynical of.


As a pro-4k guy, I have to say 8k is an overkill, simply because of the size and viewing distance required which is likely to be beyond the normal city dwellings.
 
#9 ·

Quote:
Originally Posted by specuvestor  /t/1428686/8k-by-4k-or-octo-hd-the-real-suhdtv-technology/0_100#post_22390829


As a pro-4k guy, I have to say 8k is an overkill, simply because of the size and viewing distance required which is likely to be beyond the normal city dwellings.
I think the point is that 8K should look good at any size or viewing distance. At larger screen sizes, 4K is not going to look any better than current sub-60″ 1080p displays. Having more resolution than you need is never a bad thing, and I am definitely looking forward to 8K displays. I can’t imagine them being released any time in the near future though.
 
#679 ·
Quote:Originally Posted by specuvestor 

As a pro-4k guy, I have to say 8k is an overkill, simply because of the size and viewing distance required which is likely to be beyond the normal city dwellings.

I think the point is that 8K should look good at any size or viewing distance. At larger screen sizes, 4K is not going to look any better than current sub-60″ 1080p displays. Having more resolution than you need is never a bad thing, and I am definitely looking forward to 8K displays. I can’t imagine them being released any time in the near future though.
I'm sorry, this makes no sense to me. With 4K we are already at the point where most people don't have the room, at their current viewing distance, for either a display large enough to show all the benefits of 4K or the ability to move closer to smaller 4K screens to see all the benefits.

So I'm not sure how 8K improves on that. It simply exacerbates the well known issues of seeing all the detail that 4K offers. You'd need utterly huge screen sizes that almost no homes could accommodate, or absolutely absurdly close viewing distances.

No, it's hard enough now to take in all the goodness that 4K can offer, good luck with trying to make 8K work...forget the infrastructure issues.
 
#10 ·

Quote:
Originally Posted by Chronoptimist  /t/1428686/8k-by-4k-or-octo-hd-the-real-suhdtv-technology#post_22389240


Actually, I think you will find that 8K is 16× HD (I am unsure on the correct prefix) with its 7680×4320 resolution.

Any Sytech is absolutely correct with his post. 8K is not happening any time soon, let’s wait until 4K OLEDs are beginning to materialise and then be made available at affordable prices first.

LOL - how about just 2K OLED large panels. You have to crawl before you walk.


The proper moniker for NHK's 8K is Super Hi-Vision BTW.
 
#11 ·

Quote:
Originally Posted by specuvestor  /t/1428686/8k-by-4k-or-octo-hd-the-real-suhdtv-technology#post_22390829


Irkuck continues to confound me by starting new threads that he is totally cynical of.

As a pro-4k guy, I have to say 8k is an overkill, simply because of the size and viewing distance required which is likely to be beyond the normal city dwellings.

City dwelling helps. Smaller apartments mean sitting closer to the display. That is crutcial for both 4K and 8K:

 
#12 ·

Quote:
Originally Posted by irkuck  /t/1428686/8k-by-4k-or-octo-hd-the-real-suhdtv-technology#post_22389631


Japanese seem to be determined to skip the 4K and are moving directly to the 8K. They would also like to save their industry against barbarians making inroads on their shores so it looks they are thinking to speed up introduction of the 8K in Japan.

Do you have any evidence that NHK plans to release it's Super Hi-Vision format earlier than 2020? There is plenty of evidence for that date
 
#13 ·

Quote:
Originally Posted by irkuck  /t/1428686/8k-by-4k-or-octo-hd-the-real-suhdtv-technology#post_22388543


The Octo HD will be no-compromise Super Ultra HDTV including not only the 8K by 4K picture but also the 120 Hz frame rate and 10-bit color. With the experimental 8K LCD display demonstrated and now the 8K camera @120 Hz being shown the old 4K will be left in the dust even before it appears.
irkurk, in case you weren't joking I would point out that there is no such thing as "Super Ultra HDTV". There is simply 4K UHDTV and 8K UHDTV. Also 120 fps is supported at both 4K and 8K as seen in the official UHDTV standard . Are you trying to argue against the idea of 4K TVs by stating that there will eventually be 8K TVs? That doesn't seem logical since there is a huge TV size range where 4K would make more sense than either 2K or 8K.

Quote:
Originally Posted by irkuck  /t/1428686/8k-by-4k-or-octo-hd-the-real-suhdtv-technology#post_22389631


Japanese seem to be determined to skip the 4K and are moving directly to the 8K. They would also like to save their industry against barbarians making inroads on their shores so it looks they are thinking to speed up introduction of the 8K in Japan.
The NHK is promoting "Super Hi-Vision", which is 8K UHDTV with 22.2 channel audio, but from the various articles I have read I think most of the world will move towards 4K UHDTV.

Quote:
Originally Posted by irkuck  /t/1428686/8k-by-4k-or-octo-hd-the-real-suhdtv-technology#post_22389631


BTW, 2K is the 1920x1080 HD, 4K is double of that 3840x2160 and the 8K is again double at 7680x4320. The term Octo HD is thus correct.
The people at the ITU who made the UHDTV standard use the term "8K UHDTV".
 
#16 ·

Quote:
Originally Posted by Richard Paul  /t/1428686/8k-by-4k-or-octo-hd-the-real-suhdtv-technology#post_22391085


irkurk, in case you weren't joking I would point out that there is no such thing as "Super Ultra HDTV". There is simply 4K UHDTV and 8K UHDTV. Also 120 fps is supported at both 4K and 8K as seen in the official UHDTV standard . Are you trying to argue against the idea of 4K TVs by stating that there will eventually be 8K TVs? That doesn't seem logical since there is a huge TV size range where 4K would make more sense than either 2K or 8K.

Sharp has already shown an 85" Super Hi-Vision display:

http://www.engadget.com/2012/01/11/sharp-8k-super-hi-vision-lcd-4k-tv-and-freestyle-wireless-lcd-h/
 
#17 ·

Quote:
Originally Posted by Lee Stewart  /t/1428686/8k-by-4k-or-octo-hd-the-real-suhdtv-technology#post_22391016


City dwelling helps. Smaller apartments mean sitting closer to the display. That is crutcial for both 4K and 8K:

We have already discussed this at length in the 4k thread. But just even looking at your picture... how big do you think the wall has to be?
 
#18 ·

Quote:
Originally Posted by specuvestor  /t/1428686/8k-by-4k-or-octo-hd-the-real-suhdtv-technology#post_22391340


We have already discussed this at length in the 4k thread. But just even looking at your picture... how big do you think the wall has to be?

LOl - I think you realize that the sizes of the images in that photo have been . . . exaggerated a bit.
 
#19 ·

Quote:
Originally Posted by Lee Stewart  /t/1428686/8k-by-4k-or-octo-hd-the-real-suhdtv-technology#post_22391354


LOl - I think you realize that the sizes of the images in that photo have been . . . exaggerated a bit.

"a bit" is right... nonetheless it is representative. The Digital Cinema picture looks roughly like 100" screen with respect to the humanoid. Again, how large do you think an 8k screen will require for say 1-0.75X picture height?


8k for movies and conventions may make sense. Not for mere mortals in city dwellings.
 
#20 ·

Quote:
Originally Posted by specuvestor  /t/1428686/8k-by-4k-or-octo-hd-the-real-suhdtv-technology#post_22391362


"a bit" is right... nonetheless it is representative. The Digital Cinema picture looks roughly like 100" screen with respect to the humanoid. Again, how large do you think an 8k screen will require for say 1-0.75X picture height?

8k for movies and conventions may make sense. Not for mere mortals in city dwellings.

That DC image is 200+", not 100". I know - I used to have a 16x9 144" screen and it was WAY smaller than that DC image.


So you thnk an 84" display is too big? That's what the CEMs are showing for 4K and again Sharp showed an 85" 8K display.


Remember, people are going to be sitting 6 feet away from those kinds of displays.
 
#21 ·
I don't think 84" is too big. In fact for the past 2 years I have been saying optimal size for city dwellers is roughly 80" and I am a proponent for huge TV.


But I am not unrealistic. 8k TV require much larger TV size and uncomfortable seating distance to be perceivable. Heuristically, if you get any layman to place a sofa vs the TV, it would likely be about 10-12' away.
 
#22 ·
The market is strongly ignoring even 70" TV at this point; I'm not clear why people are again bullish on even bigger screens. Sharp's 70" sets are even cheaper in year 2 but are poised to manage
 
#23 ·

Quote:
Originally Posted by specuvestor  /t/1428686/8k-by-4k-or-octo-hd-the-real-suhdtv-technology#post_22391403


I don't think 84" is too big. In fact for the past 2 years I have been saying optimal size for city dwellers is roughly 80" and I am a proponent for huge TV.

But I am not unrealistic. 8k TV require much larger TV size and uncomfortable seating distance to be perceivable. Heuristically, if you get any layman to place a sofa vs the TV, it would likely be about 10-12' away.

They used to say the same thing about HDTV . . . you need a BIG display. Yet the most common size sold is 36/42"


Then you have the differences in the amount of pixels in each display:


HD: 2MP

4K: 8MP

8K 32MP


Where many are saying that sitting 10 feet away from an 84" 4K TV doesn't look much different than a compatiably sized HDTV, those that have seen 8K don't say that.
 
#25 ·
Everything I have read says 8k is the holy grail of high resolution displays. The human eye cannot perceive any higher rez.


I think over the next 5-10 years the trend will be to up to 70-90" screens so the higher Rez will illustrate itself in most homes. In the 6-10 years before 8k is available for home consumption, most folks will have evolved to their second gen hd set, and they won't be staying at 36-48" screens but will be looking to double that.


If it were me, I'd pass on this new consumer versions of 4k, unless you're a 3 d fan, and hold out for oled (first), and then 8k (next)
 
#26 ·

Quote:
Originally Posted by mr. wally  /t/1428686/8k-by-4k-or-octo-hd-the-real-suhdtv-technology#post_22391588


Everything I have read says 8k is the holy grail of high resolution displays. The human eye cannot perceive any higher rez.

So what you are saying is that 8K looks indistinguishable from real life?
Quote:
I think over the next 5-10 years the trend will be to up to 70-90" screens so the higher Rez will illustrate itself in most homes. In the 6-10 years before 8k is available for home consumption, most folks will have evolved to their second gen hd set, and they won't be staying at 36-48" screens but will be looking to double that.

If it were me, I'd pass on this new consumer versions of 4k, unless you're a 3 d fan, and hold out for oled (first), and then 8k (next)

How much are those 70+" HDTVs going to cost? What's the cheapest price for a 65" HDTV today?


Consumers are having issues spending $100 for a BD player and paying the upcharge over what a DVD costs today. What is going to motivate them to start spending thousands of dollars for an HDTV when most today look to spend less than $1000? Do you see the economy maiking a huge improvement in the next 5 years? I don't.
 
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top