AVS › AVS Forum › Display Devices › Flat Panel General & New FP Tech › 4k by 2k or Quad HD...lots of rumors? thoughts?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

4k by 2k or Quad HD...lots of rumors? thoughts?

post #1 of 3076
1/23/11 at 6:25am
Thread Starter 
Guys I was told by two people this week that 4k by 2k would probably make its first real appearance in the 2012 or 2013 model cycle with quite a steep price tag on it.

I've heard off and on about 4k2k or quad HD for a while. I do google searches for the terms every 4 or 5 months looking to see if anything new has arisen and generally speaking I get nothing. But after this week when two people mentioned it to me I thought I had better do some looking. There are a few articles, engagenet and a couple others that have published 4k2k articles since October. But there is still not much out there, additionally, I don't recall reading anything about it at CES 2011.

Anyone have any thoughts or have any information on this?

I'm possibly upgrading from my Pioneer 5080HD this year to a Samsung D7000 or D8000. I could just save the coin if we're only a few years out from affordable quad HD sets.
Reply
Reply

Gear mentioned in this thread:

post #2 of 3076
1/23/11 at 7:00am
Quote:
Originally Posted by 6SpeedTA95 View Post

Guys I was told by two people this week that 4k by 2k would probably make its first real appearance in the 2012 or 2013 model cycle with quite a steep price tag on it.

I've heard off and on about 4k2k or quad HD for a while. I do google searches for the terms every 4 or 5 months looking to see if anything new has arisen and generally speaking I get nothing. But after this week when two people mentioned it to me I thought I had better do some looking. There are a few articles, engagenet and a couple others that have published 4k2k articles since October. But there is still not much out there, additionally, I don't recall reading anything about it at CES 2011.

Anyone have any thoughts or have any information on this?

I'm possibly upgrading from my Pioneer 5080HD this year to a Samsung D7000 or D8000. I could just save the coin if we're only a few years out from affordable quad HD sets.

4K is only going to matter for you if you are buying an extremely large size TV and sitting very close to it.

Or, buying a projector.
Reply
Reply
post #3 of 3076
1/23/11 at 7:10am
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by jmpage2 View Post

4K is only going to matter for you if you are buying an extremely large size TV and sitting very close to it.

Or, buying a projector.

I could see it making a difference on a projector...I was also curious about the differences I'd see on a 58 or 60 from 8 to 10 feet away. There's only so much the human eye can detect.
Reply
Reply
post #4 of 3076
1/23/11 at 7:14am
Quote:
Originally Posted by 6SpeedTA95 View Post

I could see it making a difference on a projector...I was also curious about the differences I'd see on a 58 or 60 from 8 to 10 feet away. There's only so much the human eye can detect.

Resolution charts would indicate that you would only get the full benefit of 1080P at those distances from a 58 or 60 inch screen.

So, 4K probably would not look any better at a similar seating distance.
Reply
Reply
post #5 of 3076
1/23/11 at 11:08am
It will benefit Passive 3D, but it may likely to negatively impact 2D.
Reply
Reply
post #6 of 3076
1/24/11 at 10:06am
I do not believe we will see 4k televisions in mass production for quite some time. You must consider the puzzle of tv set manufacturers, studios, online content providers and internet providers.

First is the infrastructure there to distribute 4k content?

Second do the studios want to move to an online cloud model for content distribution? No blu rays to crack or pirate with online streaming. You buy the movie but they host the content in a secure datacenter.

If the bandwidth is not there for the average home and studios want to move towards online cloud distribution, then why would tv manufacturers invest in mass production of 4k tvs?

I think uncompressed 4k requires 10gb/s of bandwidth. Seeing how they already compress 1080p to make online distribution possible, would you invest in a 4k tv to watch heavily compressed 4k content? I don't keep up on broadcast standards so maybe 4k is closer for that realm but seeing how most networks and local broadcasters recently invested billions for 1080, going through all that again to distribute 4k seems unlikely.

I believe when most homes have FIOS as the norm is when we will see 4k sets reach mass production. In the mean time, thinner sets, bezels, 3d, internet widgets and 70+ will be the norm.
Reply
Reply
post #7 of 3076
1/24/11 at 4:19pm
+1 I think we will see <$3k 40" OLED TV before we see 4k broadcast

But not impossible to see 4k BD content spread over 2 or 3 discs in next 5 years IMHO, especially if sales of >60" TV picks up. Go see a 85" or 103" panny and u will understand why 4k is needed.
Reply
Reply
post #8 of 3076
1/25/11 at 7:20am
Considering that LG's current solution for passive 3D is to split 1080p into two 540-line frames, I can see 1920x2160 sets coming to market.

But 4Kx2K? Not for a while, I'd say.
Reply
Reply
post #9 of 3076
1/25/11 at 7:59am
I'm not sure if you understand how this awkward resolution of 1920x2160 will do to the 2D PQ. It may be an incremental improvement for 3D but a backward step for 2D
Reply
Reply
post #10 of 3076
1/25/11 at 9:35am
The way I look at it, there won't be any media with the 4K by 2K resolution, and therefore no demand for displays in that density. Blu-Ray is effectively limited to 1080p with or without 3D, and current BR players do not have the bandwidth for 4K by 2K. Therefore the widespread ability to actually USE the higher resolution, outside of specialty apps like simulators and medical imaging, is a long way off.

Not to mention that Blu-Ray is actually failing in the marketplace. Had it been in place earlier, it might have succeeded, but the prolonged HD-DVD vs. Blu-Ray confusion basicly killed the media. By "killed" I mean that it allowed the streaming services to gain market share. I myself watch the great majority of movies streaming today, even though they are a mix of 720p and 480p material, and seldom 1080i or 5.1 sound. But the convenience factor is undeniable, flipping disks is SO 1990's, and waiting days for a movie does not satisfy my desire for instant gratification.

I actually think the next advance in realistic video comes from higher frame rates, not higher resolutions. Live 720p60 broadcasts sometimes have a magical quality to them, that one does not see in 1080p24 Blu-Ray.

YES there are 4K Digital Intermediates for many movies today. But I can't think of a good reason that 4K by 2K distriibution is needed, when most folks are satisfied with 720p24 and 5.1 sound.
Reply
Reply
post #11 of 3076
1/26/11 at 12:07am
+1 higher density BD is in the works. Just as 50 GB BD is slowly but surely becoming defacto.

IMHO after so many years of false start I think 2011 especially 2H we shall see volume on >60" sold. With that I would think it would usher in 4k, and as Gary mentioned, more and more studios are adopting 4K scans anyway

OTOH high fps like 1080p60 will take more infrastructure change and industry negotiations. Ultimately though it should all converge at 1080p120 or 2160p120 but I'm not holding my breath.
Reply
Reply
post #12 of 3076
1/26/11 at 1:58am
BluRay adoption is actually more or less equivalent to DVD adoption. Not sure how exactly that's failing unless you see the world as Steve Jobs does.

I fully expect someone to figure out how to make 8 megapixel displays that can display passive 3-D at full resolution, because more or less the only chance 3-d has in the home is as a passive technology. And I imagine some video processing or equivalent will allow that to work with existing 3-d BluRays.
Reply
Reply
post #13 of 3076
1/26/11 at 10:06am
Quote:


ctually, this year was the best year for Blu-ray format. The HD DVD - Blu-ray battle just delayed it. There is far more media companies that produce media on blu-ray than streaming companies. The movie streaming works but the problem is the current bandwidth, and it can't do the new audio formats. Get out of the 90's and go out and buy a new receiver that is capable to decode the new audio formats with blu-ray. Sorry, after you hear Dolby TrueHD or DTS-HD Master Audio. Then you think that Dolby 5.1 with streaming sounds like crap! Oh, I never flip discs anymore..I just use a Sony 400 disc blu-ray changer.

I think Blu-Ray is thing in home entertainment right now. I will not get into the streaming movies thing unless it comes with those high quality sound formats.
Reply
Reply
post #14 of 3076
1/26/11 at 10:08am
There is simply no sense behind doubling and "quadding" resolution until even a % of people start welcoming 70+" displays into their home.

they didn't just pull 1080 out of the sky. The number is what it is for a reason.

It will be a long,

long,

long,

time.

James
Reply
Reply
post #15 of 3076
1/26/11 at 10:10am
Quote:
Originally Posted by Auditor55 View Post

I think Blu-Ray is thing in home entertainment right now. I will not get into the streaming movies thing unless it comes with those high quality sound formats.

I concur...and throw hi bit-rate 1080P video in there as well.

Appletv, DirecTv, etc for a laugh/looking into movies.

My 400 disc BD changer for serious viewing/owned content.

James
Reply
Reply
post #16 of 3076
1/26/11 at 12:48pm
You guys are thinking wishfully again, and substituting your own value judgements for that of the general public. In mid-2009, streaming video surpassed DVD as the most-used video medium. Blu-Ray player take-up has stalled at less than 1/3rd that of DVD, and it's not because the economy is soft, either. The only stats that matter are how many videos get rented/delivered and streaming is the new king.

Meanwhile DVD is still out-selling BRD, and most people see little difference in video quality. I'm not one of those folks, I can clearly see the difference on my 1080p display, when I buy I always choose BRD when available, but I still watch 10x the streams as disks of both types.

The rankings now:

1) Streaming video (includes both Internet delivery and cable VOD)
2) DVD
3) VHS
4) BRD
5) HD-DVD
6) Laserdisk
7) Beta

I'll grant you, BRD is still alive, in the sense that the three media below it in popularity are virtually extinct, but it's anything but healthy. In fact CNET just listed BRD in an HD Podcast this week entitled "Top 5 Doomed Technologies". BRD players have yet to equal the rapidly shrinking VHS installed base.

Go to any store selling disk video, and compare the DVD shelfspace to BRD. In the local stores here in tech-savvy Silicon Valley, it's still better than 10:1. I know that's an apples/oranges sort of thing, as DVD has 85,000+ titles released and BRD is still below 1000. But even if you restrict your sample to just those movies released in the last two years and available in both disk formats, BRD comes in at 10-15% the DVD volume. It's a popular flop, and BRD may in fact be doomed.

The combined US sales of BOTH DVD and BRD disks were below 20% of the number of titles streamed over cable and Internet over the last 12 months. That is counting only the legal streams and ignoring the whole underground Bit-Torrent phenomenon. In fact I only order the disks I can't stand to wait the extra few months to see on one of my streaming sources.

Convenience trumps video quality convincingly in popular tastes. BRD is the latest Laserdisk equivalent, the top choice of video nerds.
Reply
Reply
post #17 of 3076
1/26/11 at 1:42pm
Just because BD sales are only 25% or so of DVD sales does not mean studios are going to abandon them any time soon.

For one thing I would expect that BDs carry a much higher margin and have a longer time before that margin degrades compared to DVDs that start out at much lower prices and wind up in the $5.99 Walmart discount rack after just six months.

Sales of prime cuts of beef might only make up 25% of the beef market, with hamburger being the product of choice, but it doesn't mean super market chains should ditch their meat departments and only sell frozen hamburger.

I do agree with you that BD is the last physical format we are like to see for a very very long time, with possibly the eventual adoption of SD card type media for delivery of heavily DVR infested files for those users who lack sufficient broadband for streaming of content.

Even with streaming picking up speed, there are still a good number of collectors out there who want their movies in the absolute highest quality possible, and that number is already much, MUCH higher than it ever was for laserdisc, the last similar format, which still lasted for over 10 years.
Reply
Reply
post #18 of 3076
1/26/11 at 2:05pm
Panasonic has a 4K2K display on the market.

http://panasonic.net/proplasma/products/

Recent journals suggest they are trying new cell structures for enabling 4K2K in various sizes.
Reply
Reply
post #19 of 3076
1/26/11 at 4:18pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gary McCoy View Post

You guys are thinking wishfully again, and substituting your own value judgements for that of the general public. In mid-2009, streaming video surpassed DVD as the most-used video medium. Blu-Ray player take-up has stalled at less than 1/3rd that of DVD, and it's not because the economy is soft, either. The only stats that matter are how many videos get rented/delivered and streaming is the new king.

Meanwhile DVD is still out-selling BRD, and most people see little difference in video quality. I'm not one of those folks, I can clearly see the difference on my 1080p display, when I buy I always choose BRD when available, but I still watch 10x the streams as disks of both types.

The rankings now:

1) Streaming video (includes both Internet delivery and cable VOD)
2) DVD
3) VHS
4) BRD
5) HD-DVD
6) Laserdisk
7) Beta

I'll grant you, BRD is still alive, in the sense that the three media below it in popularity are virtually extinct, but it's anything but healthy. In fact CNET just listed BRD in an HD Podcast this week entitled "Top 5 Doomed Technologies". BRD players have yet to equal the rapidly shrinking VHS installed base.

Go to any store selling disk video, and compare the DVD shelfspace to BRD. In the local stores here in tech-savvy Silicon Valley, it's still better than 10:1. I know that's an apples/oranges sort of thing, as DVD has 85,000+ titles released and BRD is still below 1000. But even if you restrict your sample to just those movies released in the last two years and available in both disk formats, BRD comes in at 10-15% the DVD volume. It's a popular flop, and BRD may in fact be doomed.

The combined US sales of BOTH DVD and BRD disks were below 20% of the number of titles streamed over cable and Internet over the last 12 months. That is counting only the legal streams and ignoring the whole underground Bit-Torrent phenomenon. In fact I only order the disks I can't stand to wait the extra few months to see on one of my streaming sources.

Convenience trumps video quality convincingly in popular tastes. BRD is the latest Laserdisk equivalent, the top choice of video nerds.

Like rogo said, the adoption rate of BD is similar to DVD at their respective development stage.

When BD are selling <$10 DVD will be doomed, just as VCD was.

And we all know why Internet streaming will ALWAYS be at the top When I see pirates stop selling BD I will know legal streaming has won BD. In my part of the world these guys don't sell DVD anymore.

Steve Job's vision is a connected entertainment world which is possible only with the rapid growth of bandwidth. With 4k res it will take sometime before bandwidth catchup which is another reason why I think the industry will move there when huge TVs are shipping in volume.
Reply
Reply
post #20 of 3076
1/26/11 at 6:30pm
Thread Starter 
Not sure why a videophile would prefer streaming over BD. We've done the netflix streaming gig, the quality is terrible. Just because something is hi resolution doesn't mean it offers the same level of color clarity and punch that you get from an actual blu ray disk that can play uncompressed.

I'll stick with my BD...why? Because online quality is way below par unless you want to download illegal uncompressed BD's. I don't...
Reply
Reply
post #21 of 3076
1/27/11 at 12:59am
Quote:
Originally Posted by 6SpeedTA95 View Post
Not sure why a videophile would prefer streaming over BD. We've done the netflix streaming gig, the quality is terrible. Just because something is hi resolution doesn't mean it offers the same level of color clarity and punch that you get from an actual blu ray disk that can play uncompressed.

I'll stick with my BD...why? Because online quality is way below par unless you want to download illegal uncompressed BD's. I don't...
I never said I preferred streaming quality - I just said I found the instant nature compelling. Those streaming features are seldom better than 720p and stereo sound. But much of the stuff I'm watching is TV programs and the HD stream IS BETTER than the DVD which is the only available disk.

But in terms of quantities streaming has cut BRD off at the knees before it had a chance. Streaming is already 5X the volume of DVD and 50X the volume of BRD. Streaming is the medium with the future - and the future is NOW.

Laserdisk was absolutely better than tape, and also lost. It's all a matter of timing and the HD-DVD confusion caused just enough delay that BRD will probably remain a videophile-only format. I have mine and I love it, but if BRD releases ever reach 1/10th the volume of DVD, I'll be surprised. (That's 500% of the present BRD volume.)
Reply
Reply
post #22 of 3076
1/27/11 at 9:07am
Eventually bluray prices will drop and DVD will disapear(in the Western World).
Reply
Reply
post #23 of 3076
1/27/11 at 10:02am
I don't think so. The best analogy is Laserdisk vs. VHS. No question, Laserdisk was better by miles - but lost big time because it arrived too late. For most people, the barely perceptable (to them) improvement from DVD to BRD is not worth buying a new player, even if they are fairly cheap now.

BRD has ALREADY lost, and Streaming Video is already the victor.
Reply
Reply
post #24 of 3076
1/27/11 at 10:10am
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gary McCoy View Post

I don't think so. The best analogy is Laserdisk vs. VHS. No question, Laserdisk was better by miles - but lost big time because it arrived too late. For most people, the barely perceptable (to them) improvement from DVD to BRD is not worth buying a new player, even if they are fairly cheap now.

BRD has ALREADY lost, and Streaming Video is already the victor.

I don't think that LD ever got to even 10% of the VHS market in the US, and Blu-ray is already at 25% to DVD. Your streaming numbers are also flawed because they include cheeseball stuff that Netflix sends to people who would never otherwise rent it. I don't think you can count someone who streams a schlocky (free) B-movie into the same hopper as someone making an actual media purchase.

As previously pointed out, you can fight it all you want, but BD is roughly at parity for where DVD was at the same point in its life cycle when compared to VHS.

LD players, at their absolute heyday had a selling price starting at $200, and that is in early 1990's dollars.

A consumer can buy a respectable BD player now for $75 or less. Soon, all optical players will have BD as a function and consumers will get it regardless of their interest in the format.

The penetration in the home will keep the format alive for years and prices of media will continue to come down. We will likely see multiple versions of the same title released in some cases, such as in the case of Red in which the stripped down version without special features and without lossless audio sold new for $12.99 where as the special edition was $22.

Streaming in the long run is of course the victor, but don't write off Blu-ray so quickly. Many homes are years away from having broadband capable of reliable streaming, not to mention that ISPs putting caps on peoples total usage is going to continue impacting how quickly streaming picks up steam.
Reply
Reply
post #25 of 3076
1/27/11 at 11:52am
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gary McCoy View Post

I don't think so. The best analogy is Laserdisk vs. VHS. No question, Laserdisk was better by miles - but lost big time because it arrived too late. For most people, the barely perceptable (to them) improvement from DVD to BRD is not worth buying a new player, even if they are fairly cheap now.

At a certain point stores will stop selling dvd-players and TV's won't have scart inputs anymore - and yes,the time will come when stores will stop selling dvd's too.

The prediction is that dvd will be obsolete within 20 years .
Reply
Reply
post #26 of 3076
1/27/11 at 12:42pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gary McCoy View Post

I don't think so. The best analogy is Laserdisk vs. VHS. No question, Laserdisk was better by miles - but lost big time because it arrived too late. For most people, the barely perceptable (to them) improvement from DVD to BRD is not worth buying a new player, even if they are fairly cheap now.

BRD has ALREADY lost, and Streaming Video is already the victor.

You could be right. I was a Laserdisc owner. I bought DTS encoded LD's, yes the ones that allegedly had the cooked up sound, loved them!! In that time LD was the best video source in home theater.

If Blu Ray becomes a niche product, I will be in that niche.
Reply
Reply
post #27 of 3076
1/28/11 at 5:29am
I don't think anyone is disagreeing with you, McCoy (except of course with the "barely perceptible" comment regarding DVD vs BD...I for one haven't met a single person yet who would label the difference anywhere near such terms). Night and day? No. Barely perceptible? No. Somewhere safely in the middle for 95%.

It's obvious that streaming is the future (and even the present for a good number)...for more than one reason.

That said, us crazy videophiles will continue with BDs until streaming quality can at least begin to compare.

I have a 6 mbps service and Netflix is mostly shameful and atv2 passable to decent.

Not good enough for a dork like me who has $25k worth of audio video equip in his living room.

But you can bet within a matter of years it (streaming) will be. Then I'll gladly be onboard.


James
Reply
Reply
post #28 of 3076
1/28/11 at 7:51am
My basic fear is that as disk sales decline, the movie studios will choose to keep just a single format in disk distribution, and because of the relative quantities, that single format will be DVD.
Reply
Reply
post #29 of 3076
1/28/11 at 7:54am
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gary McCoy View Post

My basic fear is that as disk sales decline, the movie studios will choose to keep just a single format in disk distribution, and because of the relative quantities, that single format will be DVD.

That is my concern as well.
Reply
Reply
post #30 of 3076
1/28/11 at 11:24am
Yet another alternative would be the download. TVs and other entertainment devices are acquiring internet connections and hard drives. Download is already a very common thing for gaming. So, instead of ordering physical media off a place like amazon, and waiting for delivery, you buy it via your PC (or via TV) and in a coulple hours, your movie is downloaded. Kinda like pirate torrents of today, but legal, paid for, and locked to particular device or account.

At stores that sell/rent DVDs today, you would be able to hook up your phone, iPod, thumb drive, or memory card and download a purchased title to it. At USB3.0 speed, provided source and target devices can sustain it, a 25GB title can be downloaded in under a minute. Heck, you will not even need a player anymore.
Reply
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home

Gear mentioned in this thread:

AVS › AVS Forum › Display Devices › Flat Panel General & New FP Tech › 4k by 2k or Quad HD...lots of rumors? thoughts?