4K… I have Seen The Light - AVS Forum
Forum Jump: 
Reply
 
Thread Tools
post #1 of 576 Old 09-06-2012, 09:50 PM - Thread Starter
Member
 
capnsmak's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 51
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 24

Heading into CEDIA today, my biggest interest was in seeing the 4K displays that Sony, LG, and others have recently announced. And while LG's weren't present (at the expo proper, at least), Sony had a pretty big presence at the show and its main focus was on 4K (for both its $25K 4K XBR-84X900 HDTV and its $25K 4K projector). As you can imagine, this is where I went first. 

 

Beyond just my personal interest in seeing one of these displays firsthand, I wanted to get a better sense of whether this is where things are headed -- especially after reading such articles as CNET's Why 4K TVs Are Stupid Still

 

 

Quote:
The 4K resolution is awesome, but 4K televisions are stupid. Your eye has a finite resolution, and at the distance that most people sit from their TVs, it's unlikely you'd be able to tell the difference between 720p and 1080p, let alone 4K (roughly 4,096x2,304 pixels). Countless comments were some variation of "well, I sit closer" or "I have a huge projection screen." Yes, if you sit closer than the average (9 feet) or have a huge screen (as I do), then 4K may be beneficial.

 

So yeah, a few of us AVS folks checked out the XBR-84X900 in Sony's booth right when we got to the show. I'll say this, at times I did stand closer to the screen than I might in my own living room, but… wow. Seriously. It was really impressive. I completely see the need for these -- when the price is right. We grabbed some photos and a video, but of course they can't do it justice. 

 

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by espodo View Post

This just in: photos of Sony's $25,000, 4K XBR-84X900 HDTV:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

(We also got a chance to check out Sony's 4K projector in its theater and saw 1080p upscaled to 4K (looked pretty good) as well as 007 Skyfall's trailer in full 4K -- WOW). 

 

Now, obviously, at $25K these displays aren't really viable for a majority of people at moment, but I'm curious to hear what people think about where we're headed with 4K. One of things that interested me at CEDIA was all the talk about the need of a new HDMI standard for 4K devices, as this recent Techradar article described. 

 

Quote:

Currently the only devices to offer 4K play-out are ultra high resolution PC graphics cards, which typically use a quartet of SDI or HDMI outputs to deliver 8MP of video.

 

Explains Nakane: "For 4K native content to be used, the HDMI specification must be modified to allow a super high resolution player to output 4K. There is no other solution available at the moment."

 

And obviously, the other big factor other than price will be content, but when you hear things like PS4 being 4K-enabled as well Hollywood increasingly mastering in 4K, it seems things are moving along. 

 

So yeah, color me impressed for sure. I didn't feel the need for a 3D set, but I absolutely see a 4K display in my future. Just certainly not the immediate future, that is. smile.gif

 

Randomoneh likes this.
capnsmak is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #2 of 576 Old 09-06-2012, 10:59 PM
Member
 
smooth tha boss's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 112
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 15
wish i could see it. sucks too cause i live in indy
smooth tha boss is offline  
post #3 of 576 Old 09-06-2012, 11:11 PM
AVS Special Member
 
popalock's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Chantilly, VA
Posts: 3,233
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 76 Post(s)
Liked: 486
Quote:
Originally Posted by smooth tha boss View Post

wish i could see it. sucks too cause i live in indy

Definitely one of those "have to be there" to appreciate it situations... Bet it looks great.

 

popalock is offline  
post #4 of 576 Old 09-07-2012, 05:15 AM
mnc
AVS Special Member
 
mnc's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Dallas, GA
Posts: 1,617
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 10 Post(s)
Liked: 52
Quote:
Originally Posted by capnsmak View Post

 

So yeah, color me impressed for sure. I didn't feel the need for a 3D set, but I'm absolutely see a 4K display in my future. Just certainly not the immediate future, that is. smile.gif

+1!!!!!
I completely agree. No interest in 3D, not even in theaters, but when I do a dedicated theater room with projector it will absolutely be 4K. Hopefully 4K blu-ray will be coming soon.

Indecision may or may not be my problem.
mnc is offline  
post #5 of 576 Old 09-07-2012, 05:50 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
Nuance's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Wisconsin
Posts: 11,583
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3 Post(s)
Liked: 58
For projectors I can see why someone would want 4000K, but CNET's article is pretty convincing and backs up their opinions with some factual information. I don't see why anyone would pay for 4000K unless it was for a projector screen. There is zero 4K HDTV content and currently no media offered (Blue-Ray) in it. I know there are 4K movie theater screens, and a handful of directors are shooting with 4K capable cameras, but even if it became the new standard would we be able to notice the difference on screens less than 77" in size? Unlikely. Most home consumers sit no closer than 9 feet to a 50" or larger HD screen, so 4000K seems like a gimmick to me, at least concerning consumer homes and non-projector screens.

YMMV.

My journey to find the "perfect" speaker
Dr. Olive's Blog

 

 

No matter what measurements tell us, a loudspeaker isn’t good until it
sounds good. - Dr. Floyd Toole
Nuance is offline  
post #6 of 576 Old 09-07-2012, 05:51 AM
AVS Special Member
 
KidHorn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Derwood, Maryland
Posts: 2,767
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 101 Post(s)
Liked: 170
But, but, the charts say it should look exactly the same as a 1080p TV showing 720p content. The human eye can't tell the difference. Sony and LG are throwing money down the toilet.

To me, there's a ton of room for improvement in resolution. When looking out a window looks the same as looking at a TV, then we'll be there. Right now, we're not even close.
KidHorn is offline  
post #7 of 576 Old 09-07-2012, 05:54 AM
AVS Special Member
 
petew's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Albuquerque, NM USA
Posts: 2,047
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 7 Post(s)
Liked: 41
I'd love to have a 4k projector with a 1.5x anamorphic lens which would yield a 2.66 "native" aspect ratio. I'd feed that with a smart scaler to zoom all input resolution to fill the full height of the display. Then the scaler would tell the screen controller where to set the masking system to perfectly frame the picture. All aspect ratios would display properly and nothing would be downrezzed except for (non existent) 4k content.

High Desert Theater - work in progress
Building Bass - Subs

Surrounds - Easy as Pi

Storage - unRAID unDELL

petew is offline  
post #8 of 576 Old 09-07-2012, 07:51 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Dan Hitchman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Northern Colorado
Posts: 8,209
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 268 Post(s)
Liked: 273
But without adding at least 10 bit, 4:2:2 and an even wider color gamut to the UHD specs. we'll still have the various problems associated with 8 bit, 4:2:0 content.

If they decide to cram UHD resolution onto a regular Blu-ray without increasing capacity and the bitrate bucket, that ain't gonna happen even with their H.265 "magic" codec.

You also know they'll want to stuff 3D support on as well, which takes up even more space, especially at UHD resolution for each eye. Again, even with MVC enabled on H.265.

Listen up, studios! Just say "NO" to DNR and EE!!
Dan Hitchman is offline  
post #9 of 576 Old 09-07-2012, 08:15 AM
Advanced Member
 
sytech's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 981
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 44 Post(s)
Liked: 114
I think one of the things that fails to translate in the pics and videos in the sense of depth 4K adds to the picture giving it a near 3D quality. I don't know if it is the video processing sharpening up the normally blurry background or just because of the increased resolution bring out more detail, but it definitely gives that "looking out the window" cliche, that was thrown around in the early days of HDTV as well.

Explains Nakane: "For 4K native content to be used, the HDMI specification must be modified to allow a super high resolution player to output 4K. There is no other solution available at the moment."

I thought AMD was using 1.4a to get 4096x2160 24Hz @3Ghz over one HDMI cable or one DisplayPort™ 1.2 ( HBR2 ) 4096x2304 at 60Hz
sytech is offline  
post #10 of 576 Old 09-07-2012, 08:30 AM
Senior Member
 
Randomoneh's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 210
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 22
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nuance View Post

For projectors I can see why someone would want 4000K, but CNET's article is pretty convincing and backs up their opinions with some factual information. I don't see why anyone would pay for 4000K unless it was for a projector screen. There is zero 4K HDTV content and currently no media offered (Blue-Ray) in it. I know there are 4K movie theater screens, and a handful of directors are shooting with 4K capable cameras, but even if it became the new standard would we be able to notice the difference on screens less than 77" in size? Unlikely. Most home consumers sit no closer than 9 feet to a 50" or larger HD screen, so 4000K seems like a gimmick to me, at least concerning consumer homes and non-projector screens.
YMMV.
I don't see how CNET's article could be convincing to anyone familiar with acuity of human eye. Author of that article is taking 1-arcminute (center-to-center pixel spacing) to be absolute acuity limit for majority of population. Many find this not to be true.
amoocow421 likes this.
Randomoneh is offline  
post #11 of 576 Old 09-07-2012, 09:12 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Rach's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 1,688
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 12
I am interested in all things new in the A/V world. 4K...Honestly, I can't wait but $25,000 is beyond the pale for a tv.
Rach is offline  
post #12 of 576 Old 09-07-2012, 09:21 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
Nuance's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Wisconsin
Posts: 11,583
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3 Post(s)
Liked: 58
Quote:
Originally Posted by Randomoneh View Post

I don't see how CNET's article could be convincing to anyone familiar with acuity of human eye. Author of that article is taking 1-arcminute (center-to-center pixel spacing) to be absolute acuity limit for majority of population. Many find this not to be true.

How many consumers do you think are thoroughly familiar with "acuity of human eye" right off the top of their heads? Just sayin'...

My journey to find the "perfect" speaker
Dr. Olive's Blog

 

 

No matter what measurements tell us, a loudspeaker isn’t good until it
sounds good. - Dr. Floyd Toole
Nuance is offline  
post #13 of 576 Old 09-07-2012, 11:40 AM
AVS Special Member
 
petew's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Albuquerque, NM USA
Posts: 2,047
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 7 Post(s)
Liked: 41
Quote:
Originally Posted by sytech View Post

.... the sense of depth 4K adds to the picture giving it a near 3D quality....

How much of that can be attributed to 4:2:2 (or higher) encoding and a wider color gamut?

High Desert Theater - work in progress
Building Bass - Subs

Surrounds - Easy as Pi

Storage - unRAID unDELL

petew is offline  
post #14 of 576 Old 09-07-2012, 12:22 PM
Member
 
jeffs2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 159
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 11
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nuance View Post

How many consumers do you think are thoroughly familiar with "acuity of human eye" right off the top of their heads? Just sayin'...

You don't have to be familiar with the acuity of the human eye. See one in person and you'll see the value of 4k.

Even the CNET author is backpedaling on the 4k is stupid comment now that he's actually seen it.... Yes, most people will not have a screen big enough to appreciate the additional quality; but who cares about the masses....let them eat cake. I have the space for an 84" screen, I do sit close enough to see the difference, and I want it now (though not at that price point thanks)
jeffs2 is offline  
post #15 of 576 Old 09-07-2012, 12:28 PM
Member
 
halcy81's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 52
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 11
I don't understand the articles comment about there being no way to play 4k content over HDMI.. how does that make sense? There is a resolution that is standard, and there is a refresh rate that is standard.. what else do you need?

In general I am thrilled for 4k, I can see dots quite easily on practically any TV greater than 55". What I'd REALLY like is a 4k OLED with GOOD glasses-free 3d at 65" or greater smile.gif
amoocow421 likes this.
halcy81 is offline  
post #16 of 576 Old 09-07-2012, 12:29 PM
Member
 
kamgol's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: San Diego, CA
Posts: 50
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 11
Quote:
Originally Posted by mnc View Post

+1!!!!!
I completely agree. No interest in 3D, not even in theaters, but when I do a dedicated theater room with projector it will absolutely be 4K. Hopefully 4K blu-ray will be coming soon.

Well, if 4K is here, maybe Holographic Versatile Disc (HVD) is right around the corner:
http://electronics.howstuffworks.com/hvd.htm
paulw2 likes this.
kamgol is offline  
post #17 of 576 Old 09-07-2012, 12:33 PM
Newbie
 
jazomir's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Sunderland, UK
Posts: 3
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nuance View Post

For projectors I can see why someone would want 4000K, but CNET's article is pretty convincing and backs up their opinions with some factual information. I don't see why anyone would pay for 4000K unless it was for a projector screen. There is zero 4K HDTV content and currently no media offered (Blue-Ray) in it. I know there are 4K movie theater screens, and a handful of directors are shooting with 4K capable cameras, but even if it became the new standard would we be able to notice the difference on screens less than 77" in size? Unlikely. Most home consumers sit no closer than 9 feet to a 50" or larger HD screen, so 4000K seems like a gimmick to me, at least concerning consumer homes and non-projector screens.
YMMV.
Certainly in the UK, AFAIK the BBC shoots all it's HD in 4K so there is a tremendous amount of material from this source alone - don't know about all other TV companies around the world but I have a feeling they produce lots of stuff in 4K too. The movie companies could easily release all their source material in 4K on multi-layer Blu-Ray if they wanted to and would make even more money for them which they would definitely appreciate and the hardware manufacturers would have another field day with another format to take advantage of. The alternative is to go the audio route as in MP3 - which is a true dumbing down because it is cheap and convenient - who would want to go back to lo-definition TV after seeing HD?

Regards,
Jazomir
jazomir is offline  
post #18 of 576 Old 09-07-2012, 12:35 PM
Newbie
 
Aldo25's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Silicon Valley, California
Posts: 10
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by sytech View Post


I thought AMD was using 1.4a to get 4096x2160 24Hz @3Ghz over one HDMI cable or one DisplayPort™ 1.2 ( HBR2 ) 4096x2304 at 60Hz

Yes 4Kx2K can be done with HDMI 1.4 but it's only at 24Hz and 8 bit color output.
Aldo25 is offline  
post #19 of 576 Old 09-07-2012, 12:42 PM
Newbie
 
Delegator's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 12
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Ask me again in about 10 years and maybe I'll think 4k TVs make sense. Right now I just don't see it. What kind of network bandwidth is needed to stream 4k content? What physical medium will hold a 4k movie? How many cameras will have to be replaced before 4k content is even available?

Even now I watch sporting events in HD, and it is clear when you come across lesser broadcasts that are either over-compressing the video or simply filming in SD and up-converting. It will take at least a decade for there to be anything approaching a critical mass of content for 4k TVs.

In short, anybody buying one of these things now is foolish. By the time content is available, the prices will have dropped by a factor of 5-10.
Delegator is offline  
post #20 of 576 Old 09-07-2012, 12:44 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Dan Hitchman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Northern Colorado
Posts: 8,209
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 268 Post(s)
Liked: 273
I would assume they either are using ProRes or Cineform or some other visually lossless codec and a large hard drive off a computer...

Not sure if they would try displaying UHD video at a trade show using the lossy H.265 consumer codec yet. Of course, if there's a consumer UHD medium, it will use this codec as that's one of the reasons they developed it. They don't want to give us the best, do they?

Listen up, studios! Just say "NO" to DNR and EE!!
Dan Hitchman is offline  
post #21 of 576 Old 09-07-2012, 12:44 PM
Member
 
espodo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: San Francisco, CA
Posts: 67
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 19

Looks like LG is releasing their own 4K TV sooner than we thought -- and it's $5k less than Sony's! What a bargain!

 

 

 

Quote:

LG said it would release its 84-inch 4K (3,840 x 2,160, or four times the resolution of your current HDTV) UHDTV outside Korea this month and the company confirmed shipments would be on the way during an event at CEDIA 2012 before also announcing an MSRP of $19,999. According to LG the first units will begin shipping this month, with limited availability through the usual high-end sources slated for October. Just as we'd heard, the 84LM9600 includes LG's passive glasses Cinema 3D technology plus all the Smart TV, WiDi, dual-core L9 processor, 2.2 channel speakers and Magic Remote bells and whistles it can muster.

 


http://www.engadget.com/2012/09/06/lg-84-inch-4k-uhdtv/

espodo is offline  
post #22 of 576 Old 09-07-2012, 12:45 PM
Senior Member
 
hyedipin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 211
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 11
BDXL is capable of carrying 100GB, I am sure 100GB is more than enough for a movie. Currently most movies take up 10 to 20GB space, including all the crap they put in the blurays, just because there is room, they add all these different languages, etc..
You can easily fit 2-3 hrs 4k res movie in a BDXL. Just make the drives compatible. Afterall, if they don't make a new technology, how will they sell new hardware? So that's what's going to happen.
For the extras like alternative sound tracks, commentary, behind the scenes, etc.. since bandwidth is cheap, those can always be downloaded. So make the BDXL 4K movie $10, and extras pay-per-option, like you want to watch Scarface in Chinese dub? $2.00
Cravit8 likes this.

No More Cable Box
Time Warner Cable NYC | ATI OCUR Cable Card Tuner | Windows Media Center 7 | Cisco STA1520 Tuning Adapter | HDHomeRun Dual | Unlimited Possibilities & Customization
KDL52W4100TV
hyedipin is offline  
post #23 of 576 Old 09-07-2012, 12:50 PM
Member
 
Valkyrie-MT's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Indianapolis, IN
Posts: 75
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 11
I just saw the Sony 4K at Cedia as well. Quite stunning. Although, I found it interesting that they won't be making many 4K TVs smaller than the 84" if they make any at all. The suggestion from Sony was that on a smaller size, it is kinda pointless. Interesting point.

-Valkyrie-MT
capnsmak likes this.
Valkyrie-MT is offline  
post #24 of 576 Old 09-07-2012, 12:52 PM
Newbie
 
mtbikerjc's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: San Jose, CA
Posts: 13
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dan Hitchman View Post

If they decide to cram UHD resolution onto a regular Blu-ray without increasing capacity and the bitrate bucket, that ain't gonna happen even with their H.265 "magic" codec.
You also know they'll want to stuff 3D support on as well, which takes up even more space, especially at UHD resolution for each eye. Again, even with MVC enabled on H.265.

Can't they just release 4K movies on USB thumb drives? I'td be cheap and easy to make 4K TVs and AVRs that source content from USB drives. Fabrication costs for USB drives keeps dropping all the time, and using them to distribute 4K movies can help those prices drop even more! smile.gif
mtbikerjc is offline  
post #25 of 576 Old 09-07-2012, 12:54 PM
Member
 
dr_gallup's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Posts: 164
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 7 Post(s)
Liked: 15
Right now the only source are the movie files used in theaters. The files are huge and the bit rate is huge. The entire chain is lacking, from the source (some kind of enhanced super Blu Ray) to the interconnects. The only thing here and now for the "consumer" is the display (only if money is no object) so it's really a moot point at this time. I'm kind of surprised that Sony, etc. are even showing this as it's wildly premature. I suppose they want to generate buzz, which they have. I expect it will be 5 years before we have to worry about upgrading to 4K.
dr_gallup is offline  
post #26 of 576 Old 09-07-2012, 12:58 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Dan Hitchman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Northern Colorado
Posts: 8,209
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 268 Post(s)
Liked: 273
Quote:
Originally Posted by espodo View Post

Looks like LG is releasing their own 4K TV sooner than we thought -- and it's $5k less than Sony's! What a bargain!




http://www.engadget.com/2012/09/06/lg-84-inch-4k-uhdtv/

Does that hot Asian model come with the TV? biggrin.gif
chirpie likes this.

Listen up, studios! Just say "NO" to DNR and EE!!
Dan Hitchman is offline  
post #27 of 576 Old 09-07-2012, 01:04 PM
AVS Special Member
 
tgm1024's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 5,878
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 130 Post(s)
Liked: 563
Good grief. That thing is so expensive I hope it comes with a free TV..... <----age old cliche
chirpie likes this.

Well vinnie97, one of the kindest and most helpful and respected members here, was banned for silly reasons. And now vinnie_RIP is banned as well. The mark of an inexperienced moderator is to forget that their role is one of resource, not one of petulant authority and further that the members are doing the forum organization a favor by being here, not the other way around. They know darn well they screwed up here.
tgm1024 is online now  
post #28 of 576 Old 09-07-2012, 01:07 PM
AVS Special Member
 
tgm1024's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 5,878
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 130 Post(s)
Liked: 563
By far the biggest problem I see facing the world is this ridiculous lockdown on FPS recordings.

The movie moguls are trying their best to force major releases to be only shown at things like 48 fps, etc., and having trouble.

From this guy I heard on NPR, anddamnitIcan'trememberhisfreak'nname, his experiments with 120 fps recordings (for movies) is truly resulting in stunning displays.

Apparently we've been tormented by 24 fps for so long we can't even imagine anything better.
Cravit8 likes this.

Well vinnie97, one of the kindest and most helpful and respected members here, was banned for silly reasons. And now vinnie_RIP is banned as well. The mark of an inexperienced moderator is to forget that their role is one of resource, not one of petulant authority and further that the members are doing the forum organization a favor by being here, not the other way around. They know darn well they screwed up here.
tgm1024 is online now  
post #29 of 576 Old 09-07-2012, 01:07 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Dan Hitchman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Northern Colorado
Posts: 8,209
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 268 Post(s)
Liked: 273
Quote:
Originally Posted by hyedipin View Post

BDXL is capable of carrying 100GB, I am sure 100GB is more than enough for a movie. Currently most movies take up 10 to 20GB space, including all the crap they put in the blurays, just because there is room, they add all these different languages, etc..
You can easily fit 2-3 hrs 4k res movie in a BDXL. Just make the drives compatible. Afterall, if they don't make a new technology, how will they sell new hardware? So that's what's going to happen.
For the extras like alternative sound tracks, commentary, behind the scenes, etc.. since bandwidth is cheap, those can always be downloaded. So make the BDXL 4K movie $10, and extras pay-per-option, like you want to watch Scarface in Chinese dub? $2.00

From interviews given by members of the Blu-ray Disc Association... they were still talking about what they could fit on a BD50 (if they decided to go the 4k route). Things could change, but these guys had a real hard-on for H.265 as if it was the second-coming. I'm sure they believe "it's good enough for the dumb consumers" and they won't have to spend more in BD blank manufacturing costs. The yields will probably be less for BDXL discs due to the complexity of increasing the layers, and the per-disc costs will be higher too. If they can save $.02 in the long run, that's what they'll do. rolleyes.gif

Listen up, studios! Just say "NO" to DNR and EE!!
Dan Hitchman is offline  
post #30 of 576 Old 09-07-2012, 01:11 PM
Newbie
 
jmcgoblue's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 10
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 11
6-7 years ago an "UNBELIEVABLY HUGE" 60" 1080p LCD from Sharp would set you back $20k, so it's not unreasonable to expect that in 5 more years you'll be able to get a 90" 4k screen for under $2,000. The Raw materials going in won't be that much more expensive, it's just a matter of the market materializing and the factories being built. In fact once OLED finally ramps up & becomes the standard you'll probably be seeing "TV Walls" start popping up in homes where the distinction between the TV screen and the wall is blurred...the screen will be pretty much whatever size you want, depending on the situation.
capnsmak likes this.
jmcgoblue is offline  
Reply Ultra Hi-End HT Gear ($20,000+)

Tags
Cedia

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