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 99

post #2941 of 3670
Bottom line of all bottom lines: Will 4K LCD contrast resolution suck more than current contrast ratio of say a Sharp Elite or a Sony HX950?

If it does then who needs it?
post #2942 of 3670
Quote:
Originally Posted by coolscan View Post

Microsoft proof of concept 120" 4K Display prototype.
[.........]
Looks like it is a 21:9 AR Display,


Yes, it is a 21:9. Popped the image into an image editor and measured it. LOL...... Sometimes the simplest tools do the job the best.
post #2943 of 3670
post #2944 of 3670


$40,000 starting price I suppose is for the 85". What on earth are they charging for the 95" and 110" ???
post #2945 of 3670
post #2946 of 3670
I do wish manufacturers had started small and worked up, rather than starting big and charging ridiculous prices.
The 32" Sharp is too small for me, and still too expensive. Around a 46" panel would be ideal. (really 44" but that's just too small) Anything much larger than that is going to need 8K.
It's not that 4K technology costs that much more than regular LCD, it's that they know they have a couple of years where they can charge a premium for it and hopefully make some more money from them.
post #2947 of 3670
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chronoptimist View Post

LCD, it's that they know they have a couple of years where they can charge a premium for it and hopefully make some more money from them.

This is a strange case where the cost is certainly barely higher but by trying to gouge early adopters they are actually failing to maximize profits.

Minuscule volumes at these prices x astronomical costs = lower profits than

Strong-ish volumes at high-ish prices

Dumb and dumber

No wonder they are all going out of business
post #2948 of 3670
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chronoptimist View Post

(really 44" but that's just too small) Anything much larger than that is going to need 8K.
The benefits of 4K @ 84" are not that striking beyond short distances. I fail to see the need of 8k in consumer applications (much less the content other than high-end gaming).
post #2949 of 3670
Quote:
Originally Posted by rogo View Post

This is a strange case where the cost is certainly barely higher but by trying to gouge early adopters they are actually failing to maximize profits.
Minuscule volumes at these prices x astronomical costs = lower profits than
Strong-ish volumes at high-ish prices
Dumb and dumber
No wonder they are all going out of business

This is very beginning, it gives opportunity to shave fur from fat cats biggrin.gif. Real question is how fast the prices will be falling. Headroom is enormous since 110"@4K=4x55"@2K so essentially 110" should easily fit into a 4-digit price range.
Quote:
Originally Posted by vinnie97 View Post

The benefits of 4K @ 84" are not that striking beyond short distances. I fail to see the need of 8k in consumer applications (much less the content other than high-end gaming).

Indeed, only 110" seems to make sense in standard living room/home theater viewing conditions.
8K has overhead for applications beyond the current mindset, e.g. visual walls.
post #2950 of 3670
Quote:
Originally Posted by vinnie97 View Post

The benefits of 4K @ 84" are not that striking beyond short distances. I fail to see the need of 8k in consumer applications (much less the content other than high-end gaming).
At 44" a 4K display is only comparable to a "standard" 100 PPI monitor - I use a HTPC for all entertainment - DVD, Blu-Ray, Streaming, Music, Gaming, Internet Browsing, and work. Affordable 4K and 8K displays can't come soon enough.

More and more people are cutting off their cable access these days, and using a PC hooked up to your TV is becoming more and more common.
Quote:
Originally Posted by rogo View Post

This is a strange case where the cost is certainly barely higher but by trying to gouge early adopters they are actually failing to maximize profits.
Minuscule volumes at these prices x astronomical costs = lower profits than
Strong-ish volumes at high-ish prices
Dumb and dumber
No wonder they are all going out of business
Yes, I really don't understand the logic behind it, other than to try and create a "high end" market for 4K displays, but those days are over.
post #2951 of 3670
Not sure if posted already but Sony just announced the MSRPs for its smaller 4K sets.

$5000 for the 55"
$7000 for the 65"

Tbh these are a fair bit lower than I expected. If Vizio can ship its already announced 4K sets in 2013 I'm fairly certain they will undercut Sony's pricing. Not bad as an opening gambit. I think we could see 4K 60" and 70" sets on Black Friday 2014 at essentially the prices we saw on BF for 1080p sets in 2012.
post #2952 of 3670
Quote:
Originally Posted by anthonymoody View Post

Not sure if posted already but Sony just announced the MSRPs for its smaller 4K sets.

$5000 for the 55"
$7000 for the 65"

Tbh these are a fair bit lower than I expected. If Vizio can ship its already announced 4K sets in 2013 I'm fairly certain they will undercut Sony's pricing. Not bad as an opening gambit. I think we could see 4K 60" and 70" sets on Black Friday 2014 at essentially the prices we saw on BF for 1080p sets in 2012.

At this point, I wouldn't even consider anything until the 100" prices are normalized.
post #2953 of 3670
Quote:
Originally Posted by anthonymoody View Post

Not sure if posted already but Sony just announced the MSRPs for its smaller 4K sets.

$5000 for the 55"
$7000 for the 65"

Tbh these are a fair bit lower than I expected. If Vizio can ship its already announced 4K sets in 2013 I'm fairly certain they will undercut Sony's pricing. Not bad as an opening gambit. I think we could see 4K 60" and 70" sets on Black Friday 2014 at essentially the prices we saw on BF for 1080p sets in 2012.
That is quite stunning. I was expecting them to be about 33-50% more than that. I think there is hope that in a few years an 80-85" will be $5,000 (much like today's Sharp 80" 2K rez TV).
post #2954 of 3670
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chronoptimist View Post

Yes, I really don't understand the logic behind it, other than to try and create a "high end" market for 4K displays, but those days are over.

It's the same way in the camera industry. A high end market with exorbitant pricing but minimal product differentiation has always been maintained for a select few. Manufacturers have been trying to hold on to an unsustainable market. Moore's law should eventually deflate the "high end" bubble. Maybe all consumer tech is going through a similar phase.
post #2955 of 3670
Quote:
Originally Posted by irkuck View Post

This is very beginning, it gives opportunity to shave fur from fat cats biggrin.gif..

This is a nonsense "strategy" based on an obsolete understanding of the market. Sony last tried this nonsense with their 70" LCD a few years ago. How many people ever even saw one? Hint: Probably none of you, unless it was at CES. Flat out price gouging outside the parameters of the existing market does not work for TVs. Period.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chronoptimist View Post

Yes, I really don't understand the logic behind it, other than to try and create a "high end" market for 4K displays, but those days are over.

If they ever really existed.

When you couldn't own a flat panel at all, $25,000 for one was reasonable. Now that you can get one at Costco or Walmart....
Quote:
Originally Posted by anthonymoody View Post

Not sure if posted already but Sony just announced the MSRPs for its smaller 4K sets.

$5000 for the 55"
$7000 for the 65"

Tbh these are a fair bit lower than I expected. If Vizio can ship its already announced 4K sets in 2013 I'm fairly certain they will undercut Sony's pricing. Not bad as an opening gambit. I think we could see 4K 60" and 70" sets on Black Friday 2014 at essentially the prices we saw on BF for 1080p sets in 2012.

This is, dare I say it, sensible. Sony understands there is no 4K without people owning 4K. It will be interesting to see what Sharp does with their pseudo-4K sets.
Quote:
Originally Posted by borf View Post

It's the same way in the camera industry. A high end market with exorbitant pricing but minimal product differentiation has always been maintained for a select few. Manufacturers have been trying to hold on to an unsustainable market. Moore's law should eventually deflate the "high end" bubble. Maybe all consumer tech is going through a similar phase.

Your use of the word "unsustainable" speaks volumes.
post #2956 of 3670
Rogo what pseudo 4K Sharp sets are you talking about? I didn't devour the CES news so maybe I missed something.
post #2957 of 3670
Quote:
Originally Posted by anthonymoody View Post

Not sure if posted already but Sony just announced the MSRPs for its smaller 4K sets.

$5000 for the 55"
$7000 for the 65"

Tbh these are a fair bit lower than I expected. If Vizio can ship its already announced 4K sets in 2013 I'm fairly certain they will undercut Sony's pricing. Not bad as an opening gambit. I think we could see 4K 60" and 70" sets on Black Friday 2014 at essentially the prices we saw on BF for 1080p sets in 2012.

That is MSRP. I would expect them to retail a little lower. Are they using the LG panels in their 55" and 65" sets, like they do in their 84" 4K? I would expect retail prices on the LG to be lower. I would say $3995 for the 55" and $5995 for the 65" LG 4K.
The thing to watch though, is the various Chinese/Taiwan manufactures. AUO, TCL and Hisense are rumored to have 65" 4K for $3500. If true, 4K prices are going to drop fast on the smaller 50"-65" segment.
post #2958 of 3670
Quote:
Originally Posted by anthonymoody View Post

Rogo what pseudo 4K Sharp sets are you talking about? I didn't devour the CES news so maybe I missed something.

Sharp is going to make a pseudo-4K line using the Quattron panels in what I would very, very loosely describe as a "Pentile-esque" method to up the effective resolution. They will market it as a "4K lite" of sorts and charge a smallish premium to the 2K Quattron sets. It looked nice at CES.
post #2959 of 3670
Rogo when you mentioned it, I thought it rang a bell.



The Next Generation of Quattron Sharp is also demonstrating the next generation of Quattron technology at CES 2013. Using a specialized sub-pixel signal processing for Sharp's red-green-blue-yellow Quattron pixel panel, the next genesis of Quattron will allow the control and use of these colors individually, enabling the reproduction of double resolution in one singular pixel. As a result of this breakthrough feature, the next generation of Quattron can increase the effective resolution of a 1080p panel to Ultra HD-like for video and still image content as well as Web based text. The next generation of Quattron technology also includes specialized signal processing for scaling up from 1080p to 4K images. Sharp expects to introduce products with the next generation of Quattron technology in 2014


http://www.sharpusa.com/AboutSharp/NewsAndEvents/PressReleases/2013/January/CES2013_GlimpseoftheFuture.aspx
post #2960 of 3670
That's funny, because Sharp have been claiming increased resolution ever since introducing the Quattron panels, but I've never seen it - it looks like they were only claiming that increase in resolution "on paper" due to the increased number of subpixels compared to a regular display, rather than actually using subpixel rendering, as I had always suspected.

I wonder if the new panels will be better for PC use than previous Quattron/UV2A panels now. Previously they would selectively disable one half of the subpixel depending on pixel brightness, which meant that horizontal lines could look ragged, as they alternated between the upper/lower half of the subpixel. (at a distance this should "average out" to create a smooth line of normal thickness)

Now it looks like the panels will still do that, but they will actually be addressable, so you essentially have a 1920x2160 display, and hopefully you won't have that problem any more.

Either that or they just staggered the subpixels, which will give you smoother diagonals, but ragged horizontal lines. (but they already suffered from ragged horizontal lines)
post #2961 of 3670
Quote:
Originally Posted by rogo View Post

This is a nonsense "strategy" based on an obsolete understanding of the market. Sony last tried this nonsense with their 70" LCD a few years ago. How many people ever even saw one?

As far as I remember Sony was nonexisting product. It looks like 110" will be real products since Chinese are behind it. I would say one can sell globally a 100 pieces of 110" to sheikhs, oligarchs, billionaires and professional organizations like 7-star hotels or new shopping centers in Asia. Even if it costs 2-300 000 it is not a big deal if e.g. oligarchs yachts cost 300 000 000.
post #2962 of 3670
Quote:
Originally Posted by irkuck View Post

As far as I remember Sony was nonexisting product. It looks like 110" will be real products since Chinese are behind it. I would say one can sell globally a 100 pieces of 110" to sheikhs, oligarchs, billionaires and professional organizations like 7-star hotels or new shopping centers in Asia. Even if it costs 2-300 000 it is not a big deal if e.g. oligarchs yachts cost 300 000 000.

We should call this Irkuck Logic (tm) and register it.

To wit: Sony, a company that has shipped something now approaching a billion TVs sold some niche product that was stupid, but did, in fact, sell some infinitestimal quantity.

"Chinese companies" that have sold a few million TVs at most and have no real technology expertise at these point, however, have more credibility.

That said, I agree with you. I see no problem selling 100 units of a 110-inch TV for $200,000-300,000. In fact, I suspect the market might even be 500 at that price.

Of course, the market is probably 50,000 at $20,000 -- a price at which said TV could be sold profitably today. And, of course, the company that sold 50,000 would get a "halo effect" of marketing that the company selling 100-500 wouldn't really get (orders of magnitude difference and all since both would be in the lobbies of that cool hotel in Dubai).

Oh, and by selling 50,000 @ $20K, you'd actually be pushing the curve that would allow you to eventually sell ~1MM @ $10K. Selling those 500 would achieve the selling of the 500... and absolutely nothing else.
post #2963 of 3670
Oy that Sharp tech is giving me flashbacks to DMD wobulation. I remember endless threads speculating on and then dissecting the technology. I was so happy when native 1080 dmds finally shipped!! I know JVC is now doing the same in projectiors with 1080-> 4K and also now 4K -> 8K (on a quarter million dollar projector!)

I'll withhold judgement until I see it in action but all else equal I'll take native over tricksy smile.gif
post #2964 of 3670
Quote:
Originally Posted by anthonymoody View Post

Oy that Sharp tech is giving me flashbacks to DMD wobulation. I remember endless threads speculating on and then dissecting the technology. I was so happy when native 1080 dmds finally shipped!! I know JVC is now doing the same in projectiors with 1080-> 4K and also now 4K -> 8K (on a quarter million dollar projector!)

I'll withhold judgement until I see it in action but all else equal I'll take native over tricksy smile.gif

Anything that seems like a not-quite-native always bugs me a little psychologically, even against my better judgement at times. Even compression schemes. This pentile business has me scratching my head, because I don't believe I've ever seen it, nor am I completely convinced it could work, even though it does.

Though I'm one to know we went to the moon, but doubt HTF we lauched *from* the moon to connect with an orbiter without sensors calling the shots, so I'm consistent anyway.
post #2965 of 3670
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chronoptimist View Post

That's funny, because Sharp have been claiming increased resolution ever since introducing the Quattron panels, but I've never seen it - it looks like they were only claiming that increase in resolution "on paper" due to the increased number of subpixels compared to a regular display, rather than actually using subpixel rendering, as I had always suspected.

I wonder if the new panels will be better for PC use than previous Quattron/UV2A panels now. Previously they would selectively disable one half of the subpixel depending on pixel brightness, which meant that horizontal lines could look ragged, as they alternated between the upper/lower half of the subpixel. (at a distance this should "average out" to create a smooth line of normal thickness)

For PC use, the 2012 Samsungs are amazing. I just upgraded to the ES7500. The very high fill factor makes the pixels very hard to distinguish, almost somehow making some of my desktop backgrounds feel like i upgraded the resolution of the display. I went to a Sony store the other day just to see if any of the new Sony's had this attribute, only the HX950's screen had a similar pixel fill factor. From this experience, i will now always check the fill factor of displays im considering for PC use. Makes me wonder what 4k screens are like as far a fill factor goes. I'd think you'd definitely want to eliminate any screen door effect with those since there is technically more 4x more between-pixel border regions.

The Sharp 835u was the worst i've seen for 2d image quality for PC use, due to the problem you mentioned. Absolutely horrible. When a 3D resolution was set (1080p24), the problem went away somehow and it looked great, but was at 24hz...........
post #2966 of 3670
Quote:
Originally Posted by rogo View Post

It will be broadcast.

It will be downloadable.

And there are even likely going to be BluRays.

Otherwise, your assertions are likely to prove true.


Several problems with your broad based assumptions...............

Via internet there are bandwidth limitations for most and then that ole data limit would kick your ass with 4k .
If they could just have a server around every corner....lol
Sony doesn't include a server with their 84" 4k monstrosity for nothing.


Via mainstream cable and sat tv they can't even get us 1080P yet except on a one or two PPV channels
so how pray tell do they do 4k ? In other words the tech doesn't exist. Course compression is always
a possibility but then what would be the point......everybody bitches as is.

Blu-Rays......this new tech is thought about so little the powers at be haven't even met to discuss a standard
for a new format.

Your seriously making stuff up...................

http://tech2.in.com/opinions/hdtvs/theres-no-point-in-buying-a-4k-tv-this-year/774772
post #2967 of 3670
Quote:
Originally Posted by tory40 View Post

The Sharp 835u was the worst i've seen for 2d image quality for PC use, due to the problem you mentioned. Absolutely horrible. When a 3D resolution was set (1080p24), the problem went away somehow and it looked great, but was at 24hz...........
The fill factor is good, but when the brightness of the pixel is around 50% or less, it turns off the upper/lower half of the subpixel. With 3D you want as much brightness as possible, so I assume it stops doing that. I wish there was a way to disable it all the time.

However, this is another good example of why 1080p is not enough - you're seeing a difference that is half a subpixel.
post #2968 of 3670
The talk of pixel density and fill factor reminds me of my recent vacation down south. It's funny how things change once you aren't acclimated anymore to lower resolution/pixel count displays. Several times I was watching some old CRT tvs (e.g. at the restaurant) and the pixel structure just jumped out so crudely as to be absurd and intrusive. As in "how the hell did we ever enjoy watching these things?"
post #2969 of 3670
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jetmeck View Post



Via mainstream cable and sat tv they can't even get us 1080P yet except on a one or two PPV channels
so how pray tell do they do 4k ? In other words the tech doesn't exist. Course compression is always
a possibility but then what would be the point......everybody bitches as is.

I thought the HEVC h.265 factor was discussed here. Don't know if there was a consensus on how it would perform, but until it's seen I'm not making any predictions.
post #2970 of 3670
Quote:
Originally Posted by borf View Post

I thought the HEVC h.265 factor was discussed here. Don't know if there was a consensus on how it would perform, but until it's seen I'm not making any predictions.
Still not everybody that have gotten the memo of the new efficient codecs like H.265, .RED-Ray and Mpeg-5?.
Expect .RED to be demoed with RedRay players at NAB in April and ready to be launched, maybe some of the others.
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?