or Connect
AVS › AVS Forum › News Forum › Community News & Polls › Divergence of Content and Display Technology
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Divergence of Content and Display Technology

post #1 of 15
Thread Starter 
Divergence of Content and Display Technology
Author - Mark Anderson


Current and emerging TV technologies have the capability to display a color gamut far beyond that available in consumer content. Movie studios are not delivering better content that takes advantage of these new technologies and the world seems to be rushing headlong towards lower quality streaming as the preferred deliver method. Surely there's something wrong with this picture?

TV Display Technology

If we look at today's major TV technologies, there's no doubt that Plasma and LED Backlit LCD lead the field in terms of color quality. Emerging standards such as 4K, OLED and QDEF (we'll be covering QDEF next month) are pushing the capabilities of displays even further. Yet all content is still authored to a Dickensian standard known as Rec. 709 standard, which dates back to the early nineties (and is actually based on standards from the sixties). In contrast, digital movies for the theater are authored to the DCI P3 standard, which has a significantly larger gamut than than Rec. 709 (more on this later).

Many colors found in real life fall outside the boundaries of the Rec. 709 gamut, so why don't the movie studios choose a lager gamut (such as P3) for consumer content? Before we attempt to answer this, we'll take a closer look at color gamut and gamut mapping.

Read the complete article at the Newly Renovated HomeToys.com
post #2 of 15
Good read.
DCI + 4K will be perfect
post #3 of 15
Quote:
Originally Posted by fight4yu View Post

Good read.
DCI + 4K will be perfect

Agreed. I can't see DCI alone - it may come with 4k standard
post #4 of 15
4K really won't matter until you hit really large displays. As in projection. Heck, some people still think that their 1080p resolution (note I didn't say picture since there are other variables depending on models) on their 47" TV is superior to someone else's 720p resolution on the same size screen when sitting at normal living room distance (10+ feet). Proven that the human eye can't see the increased resolution, and yet the above argument happens all of the time. Granted today, the price is pretty much the same and you don't find many displays that aren't 1080p anyway, but do we REALLY need 4K? No. Then again, the new iPad doesn't need it's massive pixel count either, and yet people will eat it up that its resolution is so high.
post #5 of 15
10+ Feet from a 47" TV, well yah in that case you mise well be watching SD quality, that is way too far back for a 47" TV.

From normal recommended viewing distances, to me some 720p TV's show the pixel grid too much (SDE) regardless of resolution, that is the one thing there...
Similar thing can be said about projectors, you can often see an improvement in the smoothness of the image easier than the actual resolution improvement.
post #6 of 15
Quote:
Originally Posted by nickbuol View Post

4K really won't matter until you hit really large displays. As in projection. Heck, some people still think that their 1080p resolution (note I didn't say picture since there are other variables depending on models) on their 47" TV is superior to someone else's 720p resolution on the same size screen when sitting at normal living room distance (10+ feet). Proven that the human eye can't see the increased resolution, and yet the above argument happens all of the time. Granted today, the price is pretty much the same and you don't find many displays that aren't 1080p anyway, but do we REALLY need 4K? No. Then again, the new iPad doesn't need it's massive pixel count either, and yet people will eat it up that its resolution is so high.

My rule of thumb is match the display with the content. For example if you have 1080p content use a 1080p screen regardless of screen size (within limits - i.e. not a mobile device). The reason been that if you play 1080p content on a 720p device it's going to be downscaled which will cause loss of quality
post #7 of 15
Quote:
Originally Posted by nickbuol View Post

do we REALLY need 4K?

I do.

Quote:
Originally Posted by mark_anderson_u View Post

My rule of thumb is match the display with the content. For example if you have 1080p content use a 1080p screen regardless of screen size (within limits - i.e. not a mobile device).

There are benefits to viewing 1080p content at 2160p. It would be better if Blurays had 4:4:4 chroma though.
post #8 of 15
4K is only way to get 1080p 3D, so those into 3D will want it
post #9 of 15
Quote:
Originally Posted by BroderickAU View Post

I do.



There are benefits to viewing 1080p content at 2160p. It would be better if Blurays had 4:4:4 chroma though.

I would be happy with 4:2:2 10 bits. I think that would be compatible with BD technology.
post #10 of 15
Quote:
Originally Posted by mark_anderson_u View Post

4K is only way to get 1080p 3D, so those into 3D will want it

Active glasses give you 1080p 3D. Passive glasses however give you 1920x540.
post #11 of 15
Quote:
Originally Posted by BroderickAU View Post

There are benefits to viewing 1080p content at 2160p.

In some situations perhaps, but usually the less video scaling, the better. One reason why I am partial towards multisync-capable CRT displays.
post #12 of 15
Quote:
Originally Posted by nickbuol View Post

4K really won't matter until you hit really large displays. As in projection. Heck, some people still think that their 1080p resolution (note I didn't say picture since there are other variables depending on models) on their 47" TV is superior to someone else's 720p resolution on the same size screen when sitting at normal living room distance (10+ feet). Proven that the human eye can't see the increased resolution, and yet the above argument happens all of the time. Granted today, the price is pretty much the same and you don't find many displays that aren't 1080p anyway, but do we REALLY need 4K? No. Then again, the new iPad doesn't need it's massive pixel count either, and yet people will eat it up that its resolution is so high.

Actually have you seen the new retina display on the iPAD? Its a fantastic display. This display has made me retink some aspects of resolution without question and how important it can be. But to have the pixel count per inch of the new apple ipad on a 60" display or larger would be incredible......it would also be well beyond "4k" resolution too.
post #13 of 15
Quote:
Originally Posted by ntrain96 View Post

Actually have you seen the new retina display on the iPAD? Its a fantastic display. This display has made me retink some aspects of resolution without question and how important it can be. But to have the pixel count per inch of the new apple ipad on a 60" display or larger would be incredible......it would also be well beyond "4k" resolution too.

Why the new iPad's resolution is irrelevant to HDTVs
post #14 of 15
The irony is that he sounds like the average window shopper...

4k is just a footnote in resolution, start looking at 8k and higher and muck larger screens than you have in your home..

I think they be reintrodicing the old lp type players and attaching bd tech or better to it to cater for 4k and beyond i really think bd as we know it today will end up in a larger format due to current size issues with the bd size..
post #15 of 15
Quote:
Originally Posted by mystic_sniper28 View Post

The irony is that he sounds like the average window shopper...


..

who does?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Community News & Polls
AVS › AVS Forum › News Forum › Community News & Polls › Divergence of Content and Display Technology