Reasons To Be Optimistic about 4k: Viewing Distances and Viewing Conditions. - AVS Forum
Forum Jump: 
Reply
 
Thread Tools
post #1 of 143 Old 02-12-2013, 07:20 PM - Thread Starter
Senior Member
 
catonic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 220
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 30 Post(s)
Liked: 56
There is a lot of scepticism about how much of an improvement 4k is going to be over blu-ray quality 1080P content. I would like to give some reasons why things are actually better than what many believe.
Firstly, viewing distances.
Many people mention the undoubted truth that we have to be seated at a close distance to our tv or projector screens of varying sizes to get the best or greatest benefit from going to 4k. And there is a graph which has been shown often on this forum which relates those distances to different screen sizes.
The problem here is that what is most important is not how close we need to sit to get the "best" or "greatest" benefit from 4k but whether or not there is a worthwhile improvement over 1080P at our current or chosen viewing distance that we are comfortable with.
To get the "best or greatest" benefit from blu-ray quality 1080P we need to be sitting far closer to our screens than we actually do, but we still get a worthwhile and significant benefit at normal viewing distances so as a society almost everyone has upgraded to 1080P tv's and projectors.
It will be the same with 4k.
At normal viewing distances there will be an obvious improvement over good quality 1080P.
Yes, it is true that, as this HDTV article points out..." there’s no denying that the jump from 1080p to 4K is not as pronounced as going from NTSC/PAL to 1080p..." yet there is still a noticeable improvement.

http://www.hdtvtest.co.uk/news/sony-vpl-vw1000es-201301162503.htm

Second reason.
Someone owns a 40" HD tv and wishes to keep that screen size in the future. Most would claim that a 40" screen is far too small to get any perceivable benefit from going to a 4k tv unless we sit ridiculously close to the screen. Only when we go to much larger screens (usually 80-100"+ sizes are quoted) is it believed that 4k becomes worthwhile.
Whilst that view is understandable it is wrong, imo, because it just looks at the negatives of a small screen size and ignores the positives.
As this information from coolscan points out, with smaller screen sizes we get more ppi and that enables more detail to be apparent:

"Apple iPhone 4 is 329.65 PPI.
50" HD TV is 44 PPI.
85" 8K TV is 103 PPI.
A 50 feet wide cinema screen at 2K is 3.15 PPI.
A 50 feet wide cinema screen at 8K is about 12 PPI."

http://www.avsforum.com/t/1309492/4k-by-2k-or-quad-hd-lots-of-rumors-thoughts/2490#post_22907205

In other words, smaller screen sizes have benefits as well as drawbacks when it comes to seeing the increased detail and quality of 4k content.

Viewing conditions.
Sensible and honest contributors such as Ken Ross have pointed out that they have compared 1080P content with 4k content in real life and there was little difference to their eyes and to that of others who were also looking at the content. The problem here is that those comparisons have been done under showroom or tradeshow conditions, and that makes it more difficult to perceive the increased detail etc that comes with 4k. Under home theatre conditions the differences are going to be more apparent, especially in a properly treated home theatre room etc.

It also needs to be remembered that 4k cameras, tv's and projectors will keep improving as technology marches along and that present day 4k content and equipment is right at the beginning of our 4k journey. Red, for example, are currently working on their 3rd generation 4k sensor which already shows significant improvements over their two ealier sensors.

http://reduser.net/forum/showthread.php?92158-Enter-the-Dragon

With the new HEVC codec and its extensions, HDMI v2.0 and the BDA's looking at 4k blu-ray, all of which are known to regular readers of these forums interested in this issue, there are solid reasons to look forward to a noticeable improvement in image quality as well as detail.
And that image quality will also be apparent on small screens sizes as well, due to their greater ppi etc.

In addition:

“There is actually a lot more information on 35mm film negatives than has ever made it to the screen because when you go from a negative to an inter-positive and then to a print you always had generational loss,” Sony Pictures chief technology officer Chris Cookson said. “When we scanned the negative for Laurence of Arabia in 4K we noticed that we got more detail than the inter-positive we got when we did the restoration. So in a sense, no one has ever really seen everything that’s in that movie. So now we’re scanning everything from negatives to prepare for 4K. It has a lot more information than what was used as the reference standard for HDTV.”

This additional information relates to not just resolution but to colour range, accuracy and depth and also has implications for contrast levels.


http://mesalliance.org/blog/2013/01/14/4k-may-be-here-to-stay/?utm_source=MESA+Email+Newsletter&utm_campaign=77f8a366f4-my_google_analytics_key&utm_medium=email

Statements such as the above give us practical reasons to expect that 4k is going to be a much bigger and more obvious improvement than many currently believe.

Of course there are many people who couldn't care less about such benefits but there are enough of us who do to support the many companies working to bring 4k to the marketplace.

All in all, I think there are many reasons to be positive about 4k in the future. smile.gif
Joe Bloggs and Tazishere like this.
catonic is online now  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #2 of 143 Old 02-13-2013, 11:49 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Bigus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: The South
Posts: 4,258
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 50
Call me underwhelmed. I don't see any facts or explanations to back up your beliefs... just repeated citings of what other experiments and facts regarding human vision tell us and your response that 'you don't believe that...'

Bigus is offline  
post #3 of 143 Old 02-13-2013, 04:50 PM - Thread Starter
Senior Member
 
catonic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 220
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 30 Post(s)
Liked: 56
That's fair enough Bigus.
I suppose what it comes down to in the end is that I do not believe that those "facts" and "experiences" are as valid as some people believe they are. smile.gif
Time will tell.
catonic is online now  
post #4 of 143 Old 02-13-2013, 05:43 PM
Advanced Member
 
hoozthatat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: Big Sky Country
Posts: 603
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 38
I believe 4K will catch on, it's more of a matter of when not if. Again that's an opinion. But the same limiting factors will still be prevalent, I.E. screen size/viewing distance, content, and etc. I find it hard to believe that massive 100" and up screens will become the norm. It's been cited by various members on here that the current market for 70" and up is below and well below 1%.

60F8000; RX-V367; TSi300 x2; YST-SW102; Harmony 650; Apple TV; Microsoft Xbox One Console; RF-HTS120;

xRite i1 Display Pro (OEM); CalMAN 5 Basic; ColorHCFR
hoozthatat is offline  
post #5 of 143 Old 02-13-2013, 07:54 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Artwood's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Hoover, Alabama
Posts: 4,829
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 30 Post(s)
Liked: 204
How hard or easy would it be to change Blu-ray specs so that they could accomodate 4K?

If anybody could make a good 4K player it would be Oppo.

Aren't they making a player now that will acomodate 4K in the future?
Artwood is offline  
post #6 of 143 Old 02-15-2013, 05:02 PM - Thread Starter
Senior Member
 
catonic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 220
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 30 Post(s)
Liked: 56
One reason why 4k content is going to be a bigger improvement than many expect, (even on small screen sizes) is due to the improvement in other factors such as colour accuracy and depth etc.
As this thread on the 1080P V's 720P debate points out, other factors beside resolution influence if it is worthwhile to upgrade to a higher resolution or not.

http://www.avsforum.com/t/768167/official-1080p-vs-720p-thread-discussion (see the first post by CruelInventions).

Due to the extensions to the HEVC or h.265 format there exists the possibility (and intention) of going from 8bit 4:2:0 capture and playback (the current blu-ray standard) to 10bit 4:2:2 or higher which reduces problems such as banding in certain scenes and allows greater colour depth and accuracy. The upcoming HDMI v2.0 standard is intended to support more than 8bit 4:2:0 and its many limitations.
The BDA is also looking into these issues in relation to 4k blu-ray.
In addition we have the situation that due to 3D higher frame rates are being supported on computer monitors, tv's and projectors but the current HDMI and blu-ray specs limit us to 24fps (in most situations AFAIK). Those limitations are also being addressed as a part of the push for 4k.
These are more reasons why 4k has the potential to make substantial improvements at all screen sizes.
catonic is online now  
post #7 of 143 Old 02-15-2013, 05:33 PM - Thread Starter
Senior Member
 
catonic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 220
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 30 Post(s)
Liked: 56
Quote:
Originally Posted by Artwood View Post

How hard or easy would it be to change Blu-ray specs so that they could accomodate 4K?

If anybody could make a good 4K player it would be Oppo.

Aren't they making a player now that will acomodate 4K in the future?

Not as far as I am aware Artwood. Their latest players (the 103 and 105) just do upscaling to 4k.
catonic is online now  
post #8 of 143 Old 02-15-2013, 06:55 PM
AVS Special Member
 
sytech's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 1,179
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 184 Post(s)
Liked: 183
There is no need to be optimistic about 4K. It is happening whether it is needed or not. Definite benefit on 60" plus screens and 60" and below screens get the benefit of 6MP HD Passive 3D. Plus the additional cost will be minimal over standard 2K set within a couple years, once volume ramps up. 8K is not happening for the US consumer market any time soon, if ever.
sytech is online now  
post #9 of 143 Old 02-15-2013, 08:12 PM - Thread Starter
Senior Member
 
catonic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 220
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 30 Post(s)
Liked: 56
Ahh, but sytech, what with all the doom and gloom on the AVScience forums about 4k what we need is a bit of good old fashioned happy positive trolling, scientifically based of course. smile.gif
catonic is online now  
post #10 of 143 Old 02-27-2013, 09:40 AM
Senior Member
 
Tazishere's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Broadus, Montana
Posts: 250
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 22
Call me overwhelmed. I'm optimistic that my next TV will be 4k. Until then, I will keep watching my Panasonic GT55. With 4k, I can enyoy a bigger screen at closer viewing distances. If I can see the difference between a 70mm picture and a 35mm picture up close, then I am confident I will be able to see the difference between 1080p and 4k at any viewing distance. My HTC DNA screen has 1080p with a screen size of only 5 inches. It clearly looks superior to my previous Palm Treo at any viewing distnce. I cannot see the pixels in my HTC DNA. All I see is a pretty picture. I was able to see the pixels in my Palm Treo up close. This is why I am anticipating 4k TV. 4k will set us free from having to sit a prescribed viewing distance, to enjoy the picture. There is nothing wrong with that.
Tazishere is offline  
post #11 of 143 Old 02-27-2013, 09:44 AM
AVS Special Member
 
irkuck's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: cyberspace
Posts: 3,501
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 35 Post(s)
Liked: 63
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tazishere View Post

Call me overwhelmed. I'm optimistic that my next TV will be 4k. Until then, I will keep watching my Panasonic GT55. With 4k, I can enyoy a bigger screen at closer viewing distances. If I can see the difference between a 70mm picture and a 35mm picture up close, then I am confident I will be able to see the difference between 1080p and 4k at any viewing distance. My HTC DNA screen has 1080p with a screen size of only 5 inches. It clearly looks superior to my previous Palm Treo at any viewing distnce. I cannot see the pixels in my HTC DNA. All I see is a pretty picture. I was able to see the pixels in my Palm Treo up close. This is why I am anticipating 4k TV. 4k will set us free from having to sit a prescribed viewing distance, to enjoy the picture. There is nothing wrong with that.

Use magnifying glass to see the pixels in your HTC DNA.

irkuck
irkuck is offline  
post #12 of 143 Old 02-27-2013, 09:59 AM
Senior Member
 
Jetmeck's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 480
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 20
No native content unless you will be happy with whatever Sony sees to feed you.

Cable and sat will be unable to send you anything near 4k.

No content no problem it upscales but in this case it will have at minimum doble the pixels from

present full HD to 4k..............talk about artifacts and edge issues.

So some Sony Blurays and some internet content.......whooptydo whatever.

Good luck with interent fast enough to stream that.............lol

I like most people get 99% of my content from cable or sat.

I have seen Sony's 25k 4k tv and LG's 18.5k 4k offering.


If you have a need to sit on top of huge tv you will see a difference as I did with my nose

pressed against the screen.....................large lcds that would take advantage of this tech are still 6k and above

for 1080P sets right now.

This lack of content and costs make this tech a pipe dream but heh they want fools to upgrade every 3-4 years so go along like

a good little doggy.

IF THEY EVER FIND A WAY TO PUT 10 LBS OF STUFF IN A 5 LB BAG OR IN THIS CASE CABLE I WILL LET YOU KNOW

BUT RIGHT NOW AND INTO THE FORSEEABLE FUTURE YOU ARE BUYING AN UPCONVERTING TV.

Read all the threads about upconverting issues and you have to wonder how this thing is going to DOUBLE the available info it receives

and make it look decent and anything near 4k..............

Use your heads............people
Jetmeck is offline  
post #13 of 143 Old 02-27-2013, 10:35 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
Ken Ross's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: N.Y.
Posts: 23,978
Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 998 Post(s)
Liked: 1083
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jetmeck View Post

No content no problem it upscales but in this case it will have at minimum doble the pixels from

present full HD to 4k..............talk about artifacts and edge issues.

That's actually not true. I've seen upconverted material from my 2K camcorder on the Sony 4K screen and it looks great. Read the reviews on the other 4K TVs and you'll see reviewers talking about how good 2K content looks on these screens. No, it's not 4K in appearance, but it looks very good.

Catonic, I was actually very impressed with the large screen 4K Sony. Close up, the detail was unreal. It was only upon moving further back that I thought its advantages were largely gone. The pathway that most shoppers took in the store was at that further viewing distance and I believe that's why they were not paying much attention.
Ken Ross is offline  
post #14 of 143 Old 02-27-2013, 11:57 AM
AVS Special Member
 
mastermaybe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 7,182
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 63 Post(s)
Liked: 162
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bigus View Post

Call me underwhelmed. I don't see any facts or explanations to back up your beliefs... just repeated citings of what other experiments and facts regarding human vision tell us and your response that 'you don't believe that...'

Precisely. As a new owner of an 84" projection screen at ~11' , a 60" Kuro from the same distance...and 20/15 vision, I remain unmoved:

Projectors? Great, bring affordable units sooner than later.

Typical 40-60" televisions? Complete joke.

James

Actual phone call (see pic to left):

 

Tech (responding to laughter): "I'm sorry sir, did I miss something?"

Me: "Yeah, a case of Diet Mountain Dew walking across my living room."

mastermaybe is online now  
post #15 of 143 Old 03-08-2013, 08:34 AM
Senior Member
 
NetGod's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Posts: 340
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 12
I remember very clearly the weeks/months leading up to the launch of HDTV . . . .

It was all about: "HDTV will dramatically improve the picture quality of your viewing experience, but only for those with large (60+ inch) rear projection tvs, and those willing to sit within 10' of the screen, otherwise you will never be able to tell a difference...."



Does anyone else think that sounds familiar today? rolleyes.gif

I'm just say'n . . . .


Once people see a 4K Tv of any size (with 4K material on it), 4K will own you.
If they build it, you will come . . . . ummm, I mean buy it. wink.gif
(Just my opinion of course. wink.gif)

.


.
jjnbos likes this.

2 Hometheaters
9 HDTV's (LCD, LED, Plasma and DLPs, 32" to 65")
4 Computers (1 laptop, 3 desktops)
6 Gaming consoles (1 PS2, 2 PS3, 1 XB, 2 XB360)
80+ total video games
1 iTouch
1 iPad 2
NetGod is offline  
post #16 of 143 Old 03-08-2013, 08:59 AM
AVS Special Member
 
KidHorn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Derwood, Maryland
Posts: 2,889
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 189 Post(s)
Liked: 201
Quote:
Originally Posted by NetGod View Post

I remember very clearly the weeks/months leading up to the launch of HDTV . . . .

It was all about: "HDTV will dramatically improve the picture quality of your viewing experience, but only for those with large (60+ inch) rear projection tvs, and those willing to sit within 10' of the screen, otherwise you will never be able to tell a difference...."

Does anyone else think that sounds familiar today? rolleyes.gif
.

I also remember the arguments about how no one can tell the difference between 720 and 1080. There were charts and data pointing out how they looked the same to the human eye. Once 1080 TVs came out and everyone saw for themselves, it was clear 1080 was superior.

I'm taking a wait and see for myself approach.
RLBURNSIDE likes this.
KidHorn is offline  
post #17 of 143 Old 03-08-2013, 10:17 AM
AVS Special Member
 
mastermaybe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 7,182
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 63 Post(s)
Liked: 162
^ Those would be (and were) simply idiotic contentions. When is 1080 "superior" to 720? When it can be DISCERNED, lmfao.

Thankfully, these are based upon empirical evidence and as more and more reviews roll in we begin to hear the same:

"And that was pretty much my experience with the 84X900. In the demo’s native 4K/1080p clip comparison using the two Sony TVs, the native 4K display’s extra detail could be clearly seen at a 5-6 foot (or closer) distance. But when I backed up a few steps — to around 8 feet — the differences faded. It wasn’t that the native 4K picture didn’t look great; it’s just that it no longer displayed clearly better detail than what I was seeing on the other set."

http://www.soundandvisionmag.com/article/hands-sony-xbr-84x900-ultra-hd-tv?page=0,1

And that's for people sitting EIGHT feet from an EIGHTY FOUR inch screen, lmao.

Keep drinking the kool aid. Sony's (and all CEMs for that matter are) loving it.


James

Actual phone call (see pic to left):

 

Tech (responding to laughter): "I'm sorry sir, did I miss something?"

Me: "Yeah, a case of Diet Mountain Dew walking across my living room."

mastermaybe is online now  
post #18 of 143 Old 03-08-2013, 10:38 AM
 
vinnie97's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Nunya
Posts: 11,657
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 213 Post(s)
Liked: 1010
^Phew, sanity finally returns to this thread.

Of the 1% or less who purchase this TV, how many will be sitting that close to realize its greatness? It's such an infinitesimally small number of people, that it's not even worth considering.
vinnie97 is offline  
post #19 of 143 Old 03-13-2013, 09:16 PM
AVS Special Member
 
barth2k's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Posts: 3,244
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 71 Post(s)
Liked: 91
Well, my iPad 3 does look better than the ipad 2, but I don't typically read text on TV or get close enough to see pixels. (The iPad 3 also has superior color filters, it is not just the resolution.)

So how close does a person with 20/20 vision have to sit to see the difference? If it's closer than the thx recommendation of 1.2 x screen diag., then it's probably a waste because I think few people sit even that close. People do get very close to the tv at the store, so 4k will sell that way smile.gif
barth2k is online now  
post #20 of 143 Old 03-31-2013, 04:05 AM
Member
 
value's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 34
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Just saw the Sony 4K TV at my local electronics store. I demo it at my current viewing position. First they had the new mission impossible on and it and it looked better but I had to ask is this 4K content. The Sony salesmen told me nope and changed to a 4K demo and boom it's easy as day to tell the difference even at my viewing seat 8-10 feet. Amazing detail in the europe city videos, the shots of town from above you could see the people with great details. The interior shots of the grand ballrooms were very nice. Good thing here in Japan, it sells for 1,640,000 so with the yen rate going up daily it's getting cheaper by the day.The 84 inch size wasn't that huge to me since I'm running a 60" Pioneer.
value is offline  
post #21 of 143 Old 03-31-2013, 05:16 AM - Thread Starter
Senior Member
 
catonic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 220
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 30 Post(s)
Liked: 56
Yes, that is something that we need to watch out for, that we are actually seeing 4k content. For example, the Spiderman movie was said to be a 4k movie but it was shot in 2k and then up-rezzed to 4k. I have seen the LG 84" 4k tv twice and the improvement over 2k is very obvious to my eyes, but other's view may vary. smile.gif
To each their own. smile.gif
catonic is online now  
post #22 of 143 Old 03-31-2013, 10:32 AM
AVS Special Member
 
coolscan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 1,794
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 9 Post(s)
Liked: 102
Quote:
Originally Posted by catonic View Post

Yes, that is something that we need to watch out for, that we are actually seeing 4k content. For example, the Spiderman movie was said to be a 4k movie but it was shot in 2k and then up-rezzed to 4k. I have seen the LG 84" 4k tv twice and the improvement over 2k is very obvious to my eyes, but other's view may vary. smile.gif
To each their own. smile.gif
If it is The Amazing Spider-Man you refer to. This one was actually shot in 2x5K for 3D and down-converted to 4K for the DI. But due to the cost of the CGI, they where only 2K and mixed with the 4K DI for a 2K release.

How they got a 4K release of this is anybodies guess. Possibly that they up-converted all the CGI elements to 4K and re-assembled the edit with the live 4K elements.
Or they just up-converted the whole thing from 2K.
As usual they don't provide the proper information of the method, which point to that it is somewhat sub-par.

This method of 2K CGI is the norm for all the films shot in 4K at the moment. Until we have some direct confirmation of CGI heavy movies that they actually render the CGI in 4K it is just to assume they have done some up-conversion "trickery" they don't want you to know about.

For those that are interested, here is a breakdown of the CGI in The Amazing Spider-Man which also describe how they had to reduce surface shader elemnts even in 2K because of render time. 4K would not be possible to do with today's processors.
Here a quote for the workflow standard for the live elements. http://www.fxguide.com/featured/spider-man-the-detailed-vfx-of-spiders-and-lizards/
Quote:
Imageworks also worked closely with the color scientists at RED in terms of resolution and color from the EPICs. “Our working pipeline was around 2K resolution with a ten percent pad and 16 bit DPX colorspace,” says Chen. “We would take the R3D files, use Nuke to scale it down using a Simon filter, and then go right to 16 bit DPX in a log format. In compositing we would open to a linear format, and go back out to log.”
Strangely enough; The Amazing Spider-Man 2 is being shot on film and has to be post-converted to 3D.

At the moment there are only three ways of getting real 4K live shot movies.
1; Shot on film and scanned for 4K DI and release (film is actually less than 4K resolution but 4K scans will be counted as proper 4K).
2; Red Epic, Scarlet and Red One cameras as main cameras.
3; Sony F65 camera. The new Sony F55 is also in this category but as it is just now released it is not likely that footage from this cameras will be seen in a feature for about a year minimum (movie production time).

So footage from any of this digital cameras and film scans can be judged as real 4K. Anything else from cameras that have 4K sensors will be 4K sub-par.

PS; The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo was shot and edited in 5K/4K and released in 4K. The first digital feature that was shot, edited and released in 4K.
Read the post production description; http://michaelcioni.tumblr.com/post/14725750331/4k-digital-intermediate

Funny thing; The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo had almost as many VFX shots as Prometheus. If I remember right, 1200 for The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo and about 1400 for Prometheus.
The Prometheus VFX was rather more complicated with more moving elements an in 3D, and because of this Prometheus was edited and released in 2K. Very little of the Prometheus VFX was CGI created but done "Old-School" with live shot background plates.
Supposedly they are preparing a 4K version of Prometheus.
coolscan is offline  
post #23 of 143 Old 04-01-2013, 12:48 PM
AVS Special Member
 
KidHorn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Derwood, Maryland
Posts: 2,889
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 189 Post(s)
Liked: 201
Quote:
Originally Posted by value View Post

Just saw the Sony 4K TV at my local electronics store. I demo it at my current viewing position. First they had the new mission impossible on and it and it looked better but I had to ask is this 4K content. The Sony salesmen told me nope and changed to a 4K demo and boom it's easy as day to tell the difference even at my viewing seat 8-10 feet. Amazing detail in the europe city videos, the shots of town from above you could see the people with great details. The interior shots of the grand ballrooms were very nice. Good thing here in Japan, it sells for 1,640,000 so with the yen rate going up daily it's getting cheaper by the day.The 84 inch size wasn't that huge to me since I'm running a 60" Pioneer.

I'm glad you could see a difference with 4K content. Something to look forward to in maybe about 5 years in my family room.
KidHorn is offline  
post #24 of 143 Old 04-01-2013, 01:48 PM
AVS Special Member
 
tgm1024's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 6,303
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 368 Post(s)
Liked: 745
Quote:
Originally Posted by KidHorn View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by value View Post

Just saw the Sony 4K TV at my local electronics store. I demo it at my current viewing position. First they had the new mission impossible on and it and it looked better but I had to ask is this 4K content. The Sony salesmen told me nope and changed to a 4K demo and boom it's easy as day to tell the difference even at my viewing seat 8-10 feet. Amazing detail in the europe city videos, the shots of town from above you could see the people with great details. The interior shots of the grand ballrooms were very nice. Good thing here in Japan, it sells for 1,640,000 so with the yen rate going up daily it's getting cheaper by the day.The 84 inch size wasn't that huge to me since I'm running a 60" Pioneer.

I'm glad you could see a difference with 4K content. Something to look forward to in maybe about 5 years in my family room.


Or 17 in mine, at the rate I'm going.

Grow milkweed. The Monarch Butterfly requires it, and its numbers are dwindling fast.
tgm1024 is offline  
post #25 of 143 Old 04-02-2013, 05:50 AM - Thread Starter
Senior Member
 
catonic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 220
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 30 Post(s)
Liked: 56
Yes, The Amazing Spider-Man is the movie I was referring to coolscan.
Thanks for the clarification.
catonic is online now  
post #26 of 143 Old 04-03-2013, 05:02 AM
Member
 
value's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 34
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
So from what remember the sony 84 inch 4K is going for 20K stateside correct? So here it's going for 17,400 depending on the yen rate. If it keeps going up maybe I should pick one up. How fast do you think the prices will drop stateside.
value is offline  
post #27 of 143 Old 04-03-2013, 01:28 PM
AVS Special Member
 
coolscan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 1,794
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 9 Post(s)
Liked: 102
Quote:
Originally Posted by value View Post

So from what remember the sony 84 inch 4K is going for 20K stateside correct? So here it's going for 17,400 depending on the yen rate.
mspr of the Sony is $25K. The LG $19999.
Quote:
If it keeps going up maybe I should pick one up. How fast do you think the prices will drop stateside.
You get a 50" UHD for $1300. 65" and 84" will be between $5K - $10K as soon as they start to arrive in shops in great numbers from variouse brands.
Better be patient.
coolscan is offline  
post #28 of 143 Old 04-03-2013, 10:01 PM
AVS Special Member
 
whityfrd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 1,576
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 21
to be honest, television makers should be ashamed of themselves. since pioneer went out of the business, all i see is strong emphasis placed on things that shouldnt matter from just about anyone that makes flatscreens nowadays. 3d sucks, and is and was a complete waste of time and R&D. Ultra HD for contemporary use is also a waste of time and R&D. This is something that should be getting its feet wet in the movie theatres and then gradually hovering over to projection displays. Just about no one has a flatscreen big enough to see a difference. And no one usually sits way too close to a tv set on a regular basis to say to themselves "hey, i need to go ahead and get that ultra HD set instead of moving my comfort spot to the couch at the farther end of the room".

Not to mention the lack of content that will follow. Most of what people watch today are cable tv and netflix. Cable TV will never support ultra HD as it cant even produce native 1080P and will continue to not do so for the forseeable future. Its just not feasible. Netflix claims they will host some ultra HD content, but it wlll be as scarce as it is experimental. Given that it is also a streamed service and not direct physical media, it will not even be fully realized when it does eventually come around in small doses.

In a nutshell, TV makers simply have run out of ideas to keep you coming back. They overload on features that do not matter at all, and have absolutely no focus on genral PQ at all. 6 years from now it will be megatron ultra HD, and you will still have sub par black levels and basic performance issues like banding, motion blur, and early failure in the lifecycle of these sets due to cheaper manufacturing tactics. For the price of one of these overhyped sets, Pioneer is probably thinking about coming back and making a 10G kuro with Vizio as their main competitior from a price standpoint.

The industry clearly thinks it can run before it walks and everyone is holding on to their current sets pretty tight and praying nothing happens to it. The sweet spot has passed and we are left with nothing more than a grand mullenum firework show lit off of a kayak for the fourth of July. OLED will be nothing more than an expensive experiment for the very select handfull of consumer, 3D is not utilized by most consumers that have the capability, and ultra HD is simply pointless for the average consumer market. I wonder what other irrelevant feature will be the next fad for the industry?
gorman42 likes this.
whityfrd is offline  
post #29 of 143 Old 04-13-2013, 11:51 PM
Senior Member
 
Jetmeck's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 480
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 20
Quote:
Originally Posted by coolscan View Post

mspr of the Sony is $25K. The LG $19999.
You get a 50" UHD for $1300. 65" and 84" will be between $5K - $10K as soon as they start to arrive in shops in great numbers from variouse brands.
Better be patient.


http://www.zdnet.com/4k-uhd-tv-needs-big-pipes-not-a-pipe-dream-7000010632/


http://www.forbes.com/sites/larrymagid/2013/01/08/4k-tv-promising-but-not-ready-for-prime-time/


You keep believing fan boy ....................


Without infractructure advancements in internet and cable/sat this is going nowhere fast...................


Maybe they come up with a codec to cram 4 x times the stuff down the same pipe and say hello

to major artifact issues, bad enough now with the current batch of compression we have.


80 plus size screens are needed to even notice a difference...................nobody will sit that close to see the difference

and I have seen them side by side............with Sony's own material there was a slight diff at best.

These large tvs will never be the norm, maybe projectors.

As I said pipe dream not because there isn't a slight diff on larger tvs but because the content issues...........
Jetmeck is offline  
post #30 of 143 Old 04-16-2013, 05:42 AM
Senior Member
 
Jetmeck's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 480
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 20
Manufacturers think the public is stupid.............4k is more than 2k or whatever so it must be better.

Just because we can do something doesn't mean we should especially if you don't think things through.

They need your money, just close your eyes and hope they move mountains in infrastructure to get you actual 4k

content someday......................
Jetmeck is offline  
Reply OLED Technology and Flat Panels General

User Tag List

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


Forum Jump: 

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

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