or Connect
AVS › AVS Forum › Display Devices › Flat Panels General and OLED Technology › 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? - Page 72

post #2131 of 3670
4K was aka Quad HD and now its commercial name will be Ultra HD. For the 8K this leaves overblown terms like Super Ultra HD or Hyper HD. The only way out of this is to name the 8K as the Octo HD and in a glitzy commercial form as the Öcto HD.
post #2132 of 3670
I guess that makes 2560x1440 ("Quad 1280x720") something like Ultra HD lite...! biggrin.gif
_
post #2133 of 3670
Quad HD and Octo HD are nice terms, except, while Quad HD is really 4 times HD, Octo is not 8 times HD, but 16 times HD. A graceful way out of this mess might still be 4K and 8K, especially because these terms have been around for years now. Why mess with something simple and already working?
post #2134 of 3670
Quote:
Originally Posted by vtms View Post

But, the best solution would be to just stick to 4K and 8K later
Well the resolution (3840 pixels across) is under 4K (4000 pixels across), and 7680 is a lot under 8000. The other link said they might get lawsuits if the called it 4K, and they would probably be even more likely to if they called 7680 TVs "8K".

Maybe they should re-think calling 2.40:1 Blu-ray's (that only have about 800 lines of movie picture) "full 1080p".

Though I don't think calling it just Ultra HD is that good either, because there are 2 levels of Ultra HD or UHDTV (ie. 1 =3840x2160 and 2= 7680x4320), and this doesn't tell you which it is - just Ultra HD.

Maybe they will call this just "Ultra HD" and the 7680x4320 TVs "Ultra HD 2" or some other wording of Ultra HD.
Edited by Joe Bloggs - 10/19/12 at 12:57am
post #2135 of 3670
Quote:
Originally Posted by vtms View Post

Quad HD and Octo HD are nice terms, except, while Quad HD is really 4 times HD, Octo is not 8 times HD, but 16 times HD. A graceful way out of this mess might still be 4K and 8K, especially because these terms have been around for years now. Why mess with something simple and already working?

This is not a problem as it is well understood the 'K' does not have to mean exaclty 1 000 in digital world. Also, the 'K' in the TV area comes from the HD description as 2K tech. Thus 4K means double of 2K. Now, Quad HD means 4 times display area but it is obvious the relation between the '4' and 'Quad' here is absolutely pure coincidence of the type 2+2=2x2 and should not be associated with any meaning. From this one sees easily that Octo HD is fully justified as it is naturally related to the 8K.
post #2136 of 3670
Quote:
Originally Posted by vtms 
A graceful way out of this mess might still be 4K and 8K, especially because these terms have been around for years now. Why mess with something simple and already working?
right, 4K HD + 8K HD <- keep it simple.

They adopted 4K Ultra HD, nothing we can do about it mad.gif
http://www.techhive.com/article/2012664/ultra-hd-name-proposed-for-nextgeneration-highdef-tvs.html

Replying to ''4K by 2K or Quad HD Ultra HD...lots of rumours? thoughts?''


I hope they decide quick on 8K HD then the irkuck OCTO HD push will stop tongue.gif
post #2137 of 3670
Quote:
Originally Posted by Richard Paul View Post

A 10-bit consumer HEVC profile will be added to HEVC at the next meeting (the meeting notes refer to it as the "Main 10" profile). I posted about the proposal earlier in this thread and the latest version of the proposal was supported by ATEME, BBC, BSkyB, CISCO, DirecTV, Ericsson, Motorola Mobility, NGcodec, NHK, RAI, SVT, Technicolor, Thomson Video Networks, and ViXS Systems. Since the original plan was for additional HEVC profiles to be added a year after the Main profile it is interesting to note that these companies wanted a 10-bit consumer HEVC profile a year earlier than that.
In addition to a 10-bit consumer HEVC profile there will also be a HEVC profile for still pictures (the meeting notes refer to it as the "Main Still Picture" profile). Several proposals from previous HEVC meetings have shown that HEVC is better at compressing still pictures than JPEG2000.
ATEME had a demonstration in which 4K at 60 fps was encoded at 15 Mbps using HEVC. As such for 4K at 120 fps (8-bit 4:2:0) my guess is that with HEVC it would be possible to get acceptable video quality at about 15 GB per hour and good video quality at about 30 GB per hour.

I think they moved up profile 10 to the Jan 2013 meeting because they know if they didn't take the led, Sony was going to make the decision for them. We all know how Sony likes it proprietary formats. Rumors are that Sony, Toshiba and LG have reached a secret standard for 4K and we can expect to see 4K Blu-ray players at CES, with availability as soon as Q3 of 2013.
post #2138 of 3670
Quote:
Originally Posted by irkuck View Post

4K was aka Quad HD and now its commercial name will be Ultra HD. For the 8K this leaves overblown terms like Super Ultra HD or Hyper HD. The only way out of this is to name the 8K as the Octo HD and in a glitzy commercial form as the Öcto HD.

Actually, NHK has been calling it UltraHD for awhile. Well, it is similar to the name. This paper was published in 2011. "Standardization of Super Hi-Vision video and audio at SMPTE is being done in the form of Ultra-High Definition TV (UHDTV) video and audio. SMPTE is standardizing UHDTV1, with 3,840 x 2,160 pixels, and UHDTV2, with 7,680 x 4,320 pixels10). UHDTV2 has the same video resolution as Super Hi-Vision, and the video, audio, and interface formats are respectively standardized in ST2036-1-200910), ST2036-2-200811), and ST2036-3-201012)."



http://www.nhk.or.jp/strl/publica/bt/en/fe0045-6.pdf
post #2139 of 3670
Ok, let's accept Ultra HD for 4K, which is not a bad term in itself, but, if we're going with this name scheme now, then I hope they won't start calling 8K Super Ultra HD, but just Super HD, especially since NHK has used a truly awful "Super Hi-Vision" term for many years.
post #2140 of 3670
Quote:
Originally Posted by vtms View Post

Ok, let's accept Ultra HD for 4K, which is not a bad term in itself, but, if we're going with this name scheme now, then I hope they won't start calling 8K Super Ultra HD, but just Super HD, especially since NHK has used a truly awful "Super Hi-Vision" term for many years.

NHK called their HD system "Hi-Vision" when they were first working on it. So they called their next step "Super Hi-Vision"

Makes all the sense in the world for that moniker
post #2141 of 3670
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lee Stewart View Post

NHK called their HD system "Hi-Vision" when they were first working on it. So they called their next step "Super Hi-Vision"
Makes all the sense in the world for that moniker

Sounds like film. Super 35 Every time, I hear Super Hi-Vison, I think of Super 35. Ultra is in there too...I wonder...
post #2142 of 3670
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nitro67 View Post

Sounds like film. Super 35 Every time, I hear Super Hi-Vison, I think of Super 35. Ultra is in there too...I wonder...

Also sounds like Super Panavision . . . . and Ultra Panavision, the two highest film formats ever used (for a complete film).
post #2143 of 3670
Some "news" about HEVC from an interview with an engineer at Cisco that is part of the ITU H.2xx team.

They have the goal to finish the codec by the summer 2013. Initially they thought they would need ten times the processing power to process the new codec, but see now they will manage with 2-4 times the processing power compared to H.264.

The ITU/H.2xx team also work in a «Joint Collaborative Team» with the ISO/MPEG group that is working on a comparable codec which will most probably be called MPEG-H.

Reading "between the lines"; It seems like they are mostly finished with the compression part but still need more work on the decoding/reassemble part.
post #2144 of 3670
Quote:
Originally Posted by coolscan View Post

Some "news" about HEVC from an interview with an engineer at Cisco that is part of the ITU H.2xx team.
They have the goal to finish the codec by the summer 2013. Initially they thought they would need ten times the processing power to process the new codec, but see now they will manage with 2-4 times the processing power compared to H.264.
The ITU/H.2xx team also work in a «Joint Collaborative Team» with the ISO/MPEG group that is working on a comparable codec which will most probably be called MPEG-H.
Reading "between the lines"; It seems like they are mostly finished with the compression part but still need more work on the decoding/reassemble part.

HEVC is set to be finalized in Jan 2013. Motorola has already shown the h.265 codec running on a mobile platform, so it may just be additional profiles that need more work. Either way we should definitely see some finished hardware at CES in January.
post #2145 of 3670
I checked out the sony 4K set yesterday at the sony store. While the 4K demo they had did look good, it wasn't a night and day difference like some are claiming about 4K. Yes i saw improvements in detail, texture and color, but i had to look for them. Some clips looked just as good as 1080p. 4K does have a cleaner image though. Like nothing is in front of the screen. And better individual separated detail. The TV also had no pixel grid when i went up close. This is all based on the sony 4K demo.

Right now, i'd rather take a well designed 2K OLED TV. Or just keep my kuro. Which stuns me still today.
post #2146 of 3670
Quote:
Originally Posted by sytech View Post

HEVC is set to be finalized in Jan 2013. Motorola has already shown the h.265 codec running on a mobile platform, so it may just be additional profiles that need more work. Either way we should definitely see some finished hardware at CES in January.

Just looking at the new HEVC encoder,. Here is one of the h.265 encoders for broadcasters. [URL=http://]http://broadcastengineering.com/encoders/allegro-unveils-first-hevc-h265-compression-equipment[/URL] Your devices will get periodic firmware updates as well.
Consumers don't see finished hardware until April at the earliest or September 2013. NHK was right it would be better to wait to UHDTV2.
post #2147 of 3670
Quote:
Originally Posted by saprano View Post

I checked out the sony 4K set yesterday at the sony store. While the 4K demo they had did look good, it wasn't a night and day difference like some are claiming about 4K. Yes i saw improvements in detail, texture and color, but i had to look for them. Some clips looked just as good as 1080p. 4K does have a cleaner image though. Like nothing is in front of the screen. And better individual separated detail. The TV also had no pixel grid when i went up close. This is all based on the sony 4K demo.
Right now, i'd rather take a well designed 2K OLED TV. Or just keep my kuro. Which stuns me still today.

Saw it as well at a Sony store. I thought it beat the heck out of the Sony 1080p led's that they had next to it. I admit that they did not have a Kuro or a plasma there to compare. The 4k camera video showing the orchestra in the background with the conductor in front looked like 3d. The 3d demo of the new superman movie was the best I ave ever seen. I was told that they were getting 2k per eye on the passive glasses. Does anyone know?

However, I did notice a lot of motion problems in the 3d superman movie clip. Several folks noticed it as well. salesman said it could be a bad setting or perhaps because the panel was 120hx. Assumed that 4k panels would have to be 240 hz. Does anyone know if this set really only has a 120hz panel?
post #2148 of 3670
Quote:
Originally Posted by ordo View Post

Saw it as well at a Sony store. I thought it beat the heck out of the Sony 1080p led's that they had next to it. I admit that they did not have a Kuro or a plasma there to compare. The 4k camera video showing the orchestra in the background with the conductor in front looked like 3d. The 3d demo of the new superman movie was the best I ave ever seen. I was told that they were getting 2k per eye on the passive glasses. Does anyone know?

3840x1080 per eye with the LG and Sony 84" passive 3D UHDTVs
post #2149 of 3670
ordo, what sony store did you go to? The one i went to didn't have any movies playing. They wouldn't put anything on when i asked either.
post #2150 of 3670
Quote:
Originally Posted by ordo View Post

However, I did notice a lot of motion problems in the 3d superman movie clip. Several folks noticed it as well. salesman said it could be a bad setting or perhaps because the panel was 120hx. Assumed that 4k panels would have to be 240 hz. Does anyone know if this set really only has a 120hz panel?
Maybe the main problem was the 3D Superman clip was only 24Hz. The big, higher resolution TV (especially using 3D) can make the motion problems with 24Hz more noticeable.

I think changing from 120Hz to 240Hz in the panel would give proper pull-down for 24Hz content if the TV used active glasses - if these are passive surely 120Hz would already get you 5:5 pull-down 3D for 24Hz content. Though I suppose a higher Hz (eg. 240Hz) for the TV could give you more options to reduce blur eg. through black frame insertion - or they could flash the LED backlight - but either of those would add some flickering/strobing and probably give less smooth motion. 240Hz should also allow slightly better motion interpolation.
Edited by Joe Bloggs - 10/21/12 at 6:01pm
post #2151 of 3670
Quote:
Originally Posted by ordo View Post

However, I did notice a lot of motion problems in the 3d superman movie clip. Several folks noticed it as well. salesman said it could be a bad setting or perhaps because the panel was 120hx. Assumed that 4k panels would have to be 240 hz. Does anyone know if this set really only has a 120hz panel?
"Man of Steel" was shot on film and not in 3D. Any 3D release will eventually be a Post Conversion.
Most likely that the trailer you saw was a crappy post conversion (maybe even a preliminary run through some 3D software or a Darbee Darblet?) as the film's 3D conversion started this summer and is very far from being finished. And 3D post conversion is usually very bad in most cases, except maybe like Titanic where they used years to do the conversion.
post #2152 of 3670
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lee Stewart View Post

There isn't a snowball's chance in Hell that HDMI is going away. It is the industry standard for home video. Since 2003, HDMI's launch, there are over 2 BILLION HDMI equipped devices in the marketplace.
As far as the custom installers, which represent about 2% of the total home video market - there are numerous ways to extend HDMI past 50 feet.

Here is a few devices that now have Thunderbolt. Savant systems is home automation company, that OS is apple based. This is the first devices that I seen so far with Thunderbolt, and it mentions a display. Not sure on their purpose at this point.

http://dealers.savantav.com/portal/SavantSandbox/QuickReferenceGuides/HST-4001,%20HST-4002,%20HST-4001S,%20HST-4002S%20-%20Savant%20Host%20Controller%20-%20Quick%20Reference%20Guide%20-%20009-0503-00.pdf

http://dealers.savantav.com/portal/SavantSandbox/Released%20Technical%20Specifications/009-0479-00%20SCS-3000%20Tech%20Spec.pdf

The mac Mini also has Thunderbolt, it is listed on Apple's website. Apple has both HDMI and Thunderbolt, but the odd thing is that Thunderbolt display allows for more resolution than HDMI. I expect the new Apple iPanel will have Thunderbolt as well. As far the resolution that can be increased by firmware. update.
post #2153 of 3670
Hisense Targets The US HDTV Market
Quote:
XT880 is a Ultra HDTV (4x resolution of Full HD) with every about every feature know to man including a pencil thin 7mm bezel, dual core processor with the latest Android Ice Cream Sandwich OS, Internet browser, detachable (to insure privacy) HD camera with facial recognition, gesture control, Skype video, 240 Hz refresh, edge lit LEDs, active 3D, games, Google apps and more. The XT880 will arrive in the USA during Q1 2013 in the 50, 58 and 65-inch screen sizes. The 50-inch is shipping this month into the Chinese market. Pricing is to be announced.

http://hdguru.com/hisense-targets-the-us-hdtv-market/8853/#more-8853
post #2154 of 3670
Please tell me we're using REC 2020

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rec._2020

Lets improve other things besides resolution.
post #2155 of 3670
Quote:
Originally Posted by saprano View Post

Please tell me we're using REC 2020
http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rec._2020
Lets improve other things besides resolution.
They always omit multiples of 50 fps (ie. >50 fps) in these UHDTV specs. frown.gif Surely when displaying existing content that's going to introduce artefacts without it.
post #2156 of 3670
Quote:
Originally Posted by Joe Bloggs View Post

They always omit multiples of 50 fps (ie. >50 fps) in these UHDTV specs. frown.gif Surely when displaying existing content that's going to introduce artefacts without it.

Frame rate

Rec. 2020 specifies the following frame rates: 120p, 60p, 59.94p, 50p, 30p, 29.97p, 25p, 24p, 23.976p.[1] Only progressive frame rates are allowed.[1]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rec._2020
post #2157 of 3670
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lee Stewart View Post

Frame rate

Rec. 2020 specifies the following frame rates: 120p, 60p, 59.94p, 50p, 30p, 29.97p, 25p, 24p, 23.976p.[1] Only progressive frame rates are allowed.[1]
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rec._2020
I said
Quote:
They always omit multiples of 50 fps (ie. >50 fps)
(more than 50 fps).

Notice the inclusion of 120 fps, but no 100 fps or 150 fps.

So if America/Japan decide to run their stations at 120 fps (for high quality motion), their existing 30Hz/60Hz content can be played back with no problem - since 120 is a multiple of 60 and also of 30 and 24 (except maybe the fact that 23.976Hz, 29.97Hz or 59.94Hz content may need very slight speedup).

But if the European/Australian broadcasters wanted a frame rate about as high for their UHDTV system, and weren't going to add other rates to the spec (eg. 150 fps - or worse 100 fps), if they choose the 120 fps option, all their existing 50Hz or 25Hz content is going to be played with added pull-down judder. They'll probably also have problems with some types of lighting which they wouldn't if they chose 150 fps instead of 120 fps.

Lets hope they add 150 fps to the spec when Europe/Australia specs their UHDTV system smile.gif.

Note: it's likely, just as now, that stations will stick to one frame rate instead of switching between them between programmes

Also, notice the lack of 48 fps or 48 fps multiples in the specs frown.gif
Edited by Joe Bloggs - 10/24/12 at 3:36am
post #2158 of 3670
Quote:
Originally Posted by Joe Bloggs View Post


So if America/Japan decide to run their stations at 120 fps (for high quality motion), their existing 30Hz/60Hz content can be played back with no problem - since 120 since 120 is a multiple of 60 and also of 30 and 24 (except maybe the fact that 23.976Hz, 29.97Hz or 59.94Hz content may need very slight speedup).
But if the European/Australian broadcasters wanted a frame rate about as high for their UHDTV system, and weren't going to add other rates to the spec (eg. 150 fps - or worse 100 fps), if they choose the 120 fps option, all their existing 50Hz or 25Hz content is going to be played with added pull-down judder. They'll probably also have problems with some types of lighting which they wouldn't if they chose 150 fps instead of 120 fps.
Lets hope they add 150 fps to the spec when Europe/Australia specs their UHDTV system smile.gif.

It won't be necessary.
By the time UHD becomes regular broadcasting, there will not be any NTSC or PAL, but a unified system for the whole world.
This is what the Future of Broadcast Television Initiative (FOBTV) is working towards.

Advanced Television Systems Committee (ATSC),
Canadian Broadcast Corporation (CBC),
Communications Research Center (CRC),
Digital Video Broadcast Project (DVB),
European Broadcast Union (EBU),
Electronics and Telecommunications Research Institute (ETRI),
Globo TV Network,
IEEE Broadcast Technology Society,
National Association of Broadcasters (NAB),
National Engineering Research Center of Digital TV of China,
NHK Science and Technology Research Laboratories,
Public Broadcasting Service (PBS)
Brazilian Society of Television Engineering (SET)


Quote:
The other major point of these objectives is that in order to survive and thrive, the terrestrial world will need common DTT standards, rather than as at present being split into four distinct regional groupings. Indeed all the world’s DTT standard groups, including the DVB Project and the Advanced Television Systems Committee (ATSC) have signed the FOBTV agreement.
http://broadcastengineering.com/news/ebu-gets-behind-global-terrestrial-broadcasting-initiative

Edited by coolscan - 10/24/12 at 2:18am
post #2159 of 3670
Quote:
Originally Posted by coolscan View Post

It won't be necessary.
By the time UHD becomes regular broadcasting, there will not be any NTSC or PAL, but a unified system for the whole world.
This is what the Future of Broadcast Television Initiative (FOBTV) is working towards.
It doesn't say they are all going to agree on just one frame rate. If that was the case, they would probably have just one rate in the specs above.

Having just one standard could mean multiple allowable frame rates, but the same set of standards. ie. all using the same modulation, all using the same spec (instead of some using DVB and some using ATSC), but some could use one frame rate within the spec, and others could use another frame rate within the spec. Just like today, with the ATSC standard, some broadcasters broadcast 1280x720 and some broadcast 1920x1080i - both options are in the same ATSC standard.

Also, there will be existing pre-UHDTV content that is in all the current frame rates/refresh rates that they will still want to broadcast, just like they currently broadcast content (or use clips from content) that was shot in standard definition.

----
Also, in June 2012 the EBU shot a series of 4K tests (4096x2160, 16 bit, 50 fps), that were supposed to "test the full production chain but could still be considered typical broadcast material".
If there was only going to be 1 UHDTV frame rate (eg. 60 fps or 120 fps) why would the EBU have done their 4K tests at 50 fps?

http://tech.ebu.ch/docs/tech-i/ebu_tech-i_013.pdf

Also in the June 2012 tests the EBU did tests for full 1080p per eye 3D at 50/100/120Hz (using a higher res camera but downscaling to 1080p).

edit:

Here's something to do with my previous post:

according to the wiki page, "ITU-R Recommendation BT.2020 or Rec. 2020 was posted on the International Telecommunication Union (ITU) website on August 23, 2012"

According to this page:
http://www.itu.int/md/meetingdoc.asp?lang=en&parent=R12-WP6C.AR-C&source=European%20Broadcasting%20Union

On 4th October 2012, the ITU received "EBU request to include 50 Hz based frame rates in Recommendation ITU-R BT.2020"
(/\ I hope that includes 150 fps).
Quote:
Originally Posted by coolscan 
By the time UHD becomes regular broadcasting, there will not be any NTSC or PAL, but a unified system for the whole world.
I don't think the EBU would have made the above request (to add 50Hz based frame rates to ITU-R BT.2020) if they, and the others, had decided to use just one frame rate for the whole world.
Edited by Joe Bloggs - 10/24/12 at 3:46am
post #2160 of 3670
Quote:
Originally Posted by Joe Bloggs View Post

It doesn't say they are all going to agree on just one frame rate. If that was the case, they would probably have just one rate in the specs above.

I don't think the EBU would have made the above request (to add 50Hz based frame rates to ITU-R BT.2020) if they, and the others, had decided to use just one frame rate for the whole world.
I think you miss some important points here.
These things are not set in stone.

The ITU-R BT.2020 recommendation was finalized recently after some years of work to set a standard for UHD material which is created/tested now.

The FoBTV initiative was commenced in April this year, so it is a very new initiative.
If they are successful and manage to create a unified broadcast system for the whole world, there will be a lot of new ITU standards recommendations, which means 150fps will have no real purpose as all new UHD material will be produced according to the new future broadcast standard.

Much will change before any meaningful amount of HRF UHD material will be produced for broadcast.

There are still very little 4K material produced at all for the time being.

The base framerate which for broadcast has been 30/60 and 25/50 because of the NTSC and PAL differences that came with the two systems created at different times in history, but most importantly had to sync to the electrical system differences between the US and EU of 60Hz and 50Hz.
It was not really even a choice of "What is the best framerate".

NTSC and PAL material have really no business being broadcasted in a future proper UHD channel.
120fps is more useful than 150fps because it is multiple of 5*24fps, and then Cine frame rates and Broadcast frame rates starts to merge.
If FoBTV initiative is smart they rather settle for 24,48,72,96,120. Then they can use the same equipment and frame rates as the movie industry.
150fps doesn't really make any sense at all. Multiple of PAL 25fps*5 = 125fps, which would make more sense than 150fps.

There are really no UHD/4K 120fps material being produced except for test purposes today.

Some people have been shooting 120fps 5K in 2,4:1 3D recently for a demo for; "Qube Digital Cinema Company to showcase their 120fps HFR capable QUBE IMB which is only the first and only one right now to project 2K @ 120fps in 3D using QUBE Digital Cinema Server and Two Projectors."
It seems to not be too easy.
And even that is in the end only 2K, and is for cinema.
Edited by coolscan - 10/24/12 at 8:54am
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
AVS › AVS Forum › Display Devices › Flat Panels General and OLED Technology › 4k by 2k or Quad HD...lots of rumors? thoughts?