or Connect
AVS › AVS Forum › Display Devices › Digital Hi-End Projectors - $3,000+ USD MSRP › Predictions for 2013 4K projectors
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Predictions for 2013 4K projectors - Page 8

post #211 of 691
Quote:
Originally Posted by Highjinx View Post

Ahhh!.....the reason for the hard drive is future proofing/dual use for the download model.....which will eventually become the standard. Sure once the yeilds are up for 4 layer disks a single disk may suffice. There is an advantage using the HD, as the movie data capacity does not have to be limited to 4 layers worth of data. A 250GB HD is all that would be required........let's see what the PS4 will offer.

They have yields as high as 10 layers. Also, if the harddrive was only 250GB that would mean you would need to "install" a movie everytime you wanted to view a different one. Most people want a playback system that is virtually instant. I know I wouldn't pay into a system like you're proposing. It seems like a pain in ass.

There is already a BDXL spec in places that has 128GB discs:

http://www.engadget.com/2010/04/03/blu-ray-discs-expand-to-128gb-under-new-bdxl-spec/

There really would be no need for a harddrive....honestly.

Here is TDK's 10 layer 320GB BD disc:

http://news.techworld.com/storage/3203791/tdk-creates-320gb-10-layer-blu-ray-disc/
post #212 of 691
Quote:
Originally Posted by Seegs108 View Post

They have yields as high as 10 layers. Also, if the harddrive was only 250GB that would mean you would need to "install" a movie everytime you wanted to view a different one. Most people want a playback system that is virtually instant. I know I wouldn't pay into a system like you're proposing. It seems like a pain in ass.

There is already a BDXL spec in places that has 128GB discs:

http://www.engadget.com/2010/04/03/blu-ray-discs-expand-to-128gb-under-new-bdxl-spec/

There really would be no need for a harddrive....honestly.

Those yeilds are for chemical disks not pressed aluminised disks........remember we need to have both optical stored data and (HD/SSD for the download model), the optically stored data will be the same as the downloadable data, with the possibility of an even higher quality if the manufacturere deemed so....at a higher price......this would cater to thoes countries that have download limits slow net speeds

Think of core movie data on the disk......extras downloadable........just possibilities.
post #213 of 691
It doesn't matter what the disc is made of. Mass production will drive the cost down. What I am proposing is a much more viable and practical option compared to what you're proposing. Like I said, what you're talking about is redundant and adds way too much cost overall.
post #214 of 691
Yes there will be a streaming option available to the masses (something like what Netflix currently offers) down the road. But it is going to look very similar in the quality difference between what a physical format like blu-ray will look like compared to the "HD" that Netflix currently offers. Most of us here don't want to be stuck with the 4K "Netlfix" of the future.
post #215 of 691
Quote:
Originally Posted by mark haflich View Post

Ron. It is sacriligious to say 8 bi tand 4k in the same breadth.. The ITU 4K standard does not allow 8 bit but requires a minimum of 10bits.

At the time when I said 8-bit I had only seen the ITU press release for h.265 where among other things it said 12-color color depth would be future extension. I have since located a briefing (link is HERE) which provides some more details. On page 30 of that briefing it says:

Version 1 of HEVC: January 2013

Main Profile
• 4:2:0 chroma format, 8-bit sample bit depth


Main 10 Profile
• 4:2:0 chroma format, 8 to 10-bit sample bit depth


Main Still Picture Profile
• 4:2:0 chroma format, 8-bit sample bit depth


And perhaps even more interesting it provides a schedule for the development of the standards for the extensions:

Range Extensions: Proposed Timescale

• PDAM (Preliminary Draft Amendment) January 2013
• DAM (Draft Amendment) July 2013
• FDAM ( Final Draft Amendment) January 2014


So you are correct in that the "Main 10" profiles as currently defined in the h.265 standard for HEVC does support 10-bit encoding. As background on the Main 10 profile I found the following info:

"The Main 10 profile was added at the October 2012 HEVC meeting based on proposal JCTVC-K0109 which proposed that a 10-bit profile be added to HEVC for consumer applications. The proposal stated that this was to allow for improved video quality and to support the Rec. 2020 color space that will be used by UHDTV."

Also it appears the ITU/ISO committee plan is to have the standards for the extensions complete year next year.
Edited by Ron Jones - 2/8/13 at 6:54pm
post #216 of 691
Quote:
They have yields as high as 10 layers.
FWIW, from my engineering days, that isn't how the term "yield" would be used. It is kind of a percentage thing, telling you how many items are of acceptable quality out of a batch, as in "We have 80% yields" meaning 80 out of 100 meet some minimum quality standard, but that would not include repairs. So oled panels, from what I read recently had yields as low as 10%, but after repairs, 30% were salvageable.
Now you could say "They have acceptable yields for disks with 10 layers". You may mean something different when you use the term. That's just how I remember it. I would think that 10 layers is an "in the lab" thing, not ready for production.
Quote:
It doesn't matter what the disc is made of.
While it doesn't matter what the disk is made of, it does matter how you can get the data on the disk. The aluminized disk can be pressed with a low cycle time, suitable for BD/CD/DVD mass production. If the chemical disks could be manufactured with embedded data, that would also be acceptable, but my understanding is you would have to "write" the data on after the fact. The write times would likely make the cycle time so high that too few units could be produced per day to be economically feasible for mass sales. Now if you wanted to write to them in the mall, kiosk style, after the user makes their selection, that might be doable, but then you'd have to stand there for quite a while waiting for it to finish.
post #217 of 691
You're really mincing my words. My point is that the technology is already here to achieve what we here want. They have the technology to produce the discs we need. If they need to fine tune that technology to get discs to perform at the level we need that shouldn't be an issue unless it isn't economically feasible. But I think by and large that shouldn't be much of an issue. The BDXL disc isn't necessarily a commercial disc standard but I don't think it would take too much effort to conform that to a commercial standard and put it in use for 4K.
post #218 of 691
Quote:
Originally Posted by Seegs108 View Post

You're really mincing my words. My point is that the technology is already here to achieve what we here want. They have the technology to produce the discs we need. If they need to fine tune that technology to get discs to perform at the level we need that shouldn't be an issue unless it isn't economically feasible. But I think by and large that shouldn't be much of an issue. The BDXL disc isn't necessarily a commercial disc standard but I don't think it would take too much effort to conform that to a commercial standard and put it in use for 4K.

It's all just ideas and possibilities we are discussing.....good fun.

Aluminized disks above 2 layers are still a lab thing.........remember the time it took to go from 1 layer to 2 layers with BD, as the 2 layer yeilds were so low.......the same will/may happen going from 2 to 4 layer disks. It could very well be that 2 x two layer disks could be cheaper to produce than 1x4 layer disk in the early days.


Of course I think a Disk/HD download hybrid like the PS4 is a good idea!.......and better yet a cheaper version minus the gaming capability. smile.gif

BTW Chemical disks as sstephens said are for burners not stamping.
Edited by Highjinx - 2/8/13 at 8:14pm
post #219 of 691
The reason for 10 bit is than the consumer must see an improved picture and many are afraid that with smaller sized consumer sets( (50 - 55 inch D)going to 4K pixels with the old crappy 1080 Bluray parameters just won't look better to Joe. the marketing will be look at what 4K does for, and it will be the longer bit lengths and higher frame rates that seeing without knowing will make Joe want it. whatever. my name is Mark and i want it.
Edited by mark haflich - 2/9/13 at 7:49am
post #220 of 691
Quote:
Originally Posted by mark haflich View Post

The reason for 10 bit is than the consumer must see an improved picture and many are afraid that wihl smaller sized consumer sets( (50 - 55 inch D)going to 4K pixels with the old crappy 1080 Bluray parameters just won't look better to Joe. the marketing will be look at what 4K does for, and it will be the longer bit lengths and higher frame rates that seeing without knowing will make Joe want it. whatever. my name is Mark and i want it.

I fully agree. Even if you have a smaller 4K display (or even a 1080p TV and a player that downconverts a 4K source to 1080p) then having such things as increased bit depth, better chroma encoding (e.g., 4:2:2 and perhaps 4:4:4) and higher frame rates could make a visible difference. So it not just about increased resolution.

By the way - how is everthing going toward getting your MD house on the market in route to moviing to FL?
post #221 of 691
The contractors are working this morning again on the house in MD. We take a step forward and then two steps backward in getting it on the market.l
post #222 of 691
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ron Jones View Post

At the time when I said 8-bit I had only seen the ITU press release for h.265 where among other things it said 12-color color depth would be future extension. I have since located a briefing (link is HERE) which provides some more details. On page 30 of that briefing it says:

Version 1 of HEVC: January 2013

Main Profile
• 4:2:0 chroma format, 8-bit sample bit depth


Main 10 Profile
• 4:2:0 chroma format, 8 to 10-bit sample bit depth


Main Still Picture Profile
• 4:2:0 chroma format, 8-bit sample bit depth


And perhaps even more interesting it provides a schedule for the development of the standards for the extensions:

Range Extensions: Proposed Timescale

• PDAM (Preliminary Draft Amendment) January 2013
• DAM (Draft Amendment) July 2013
• FDAM ( Final Draft Amendment) January 2014


So you are correct in that the "Main 10" profiles as currently defined in the h.265 standard for HEVC does support 10-bit encoding. As background on the Main 10 profile I found the following info:

"The Main 10 profile was added at the October 2012 HEVC meeting based on proposal JCTVC-K0109 which proposed that a 10-bit profile be added to HEVC for consumer applications. The proposal stated that this was to allow for improved video quality and to support the Rec. 2020 color space that will be used by UHDTV."

Also it appears the ITU/ISO committee plan is to have the standards for the extensions complete year next year.


Ron. Take a look at Rec 2020. I would call that the new standard. but its not all that new. Perhaps you can set forth for the readership the distinction between rec and h. Let alone the differeces in specs in each.
post #223 of 691
Quote:
Originally Posted by mark haflich View Post

Ron. Take a look at Rec 2020. I would call that the new standard. but its not all that new. Perhaps you can set forth for the readership the distinction between rec and h. Let alone the differeces in specs in each.

ITU Rec. 2020 establishes some of the overall technical characteristics for the consumer version of 4K and also 8K (i.e., Ultra HD) retaining the 1.78:1 aspect ratio of HD. It includes the definition of the color space (i.e., with a larger color space than Rec. 709). It also defines the 10-bit and 12-bit encoding for UHD with frame rates of 24 Hz. to 120 Hz. Also 4:2:0, 4:2:2 and 4:4:4 chroma sampling schemes are defined. In a sense Rec 2020 defines the technical framework for UHD.

H.265 with HEVC specifies one flexible video compresson codec that is applicable all the way from low resolution streaming video up to UHD video. While the HEVC may only support a subset of the UHD related capabilities that are defined by Rec. 2020, when it is coding UHD video of the types covered by the Rec. 2020, it should be consistent with that standard for the specific features HEVC does define.

I have a copy of ITU Rec. 2020 but have not found a source to download the full h.265/HEVC standard for free since ITU requires an account and charges a fee for copies of many of their standards documents and that appears to be the case of the recently approved h.265 standard. This is the same as when I was supporting the development of ITU data comm. standards back in the 1990's.. Until (or if) I obtain a copy of the full ITU h.265/HEVC text, I cannot do a detailed comparison to verify that HEVC is fully consistent with Rec. 2020, but for now I assume these two ITU standards are consistent (or will be once the planned amendments are completed for h.265 next year).
Edited by Ron Jones - 2/9/13 at 5:32pm
post #224 of 691
Thanks Ron. I think that provides a good basis for all the future discussions as to what is evolving in the standards world for consumer 4K.

I think it portends well for the future showing that while 4K resolution may not be a maningful improvement for small set folks, it will be a much better world for all curing or mioving forward with the many deficiences our present HD standards and codecs have. This will ensure the success of 4K and the future transition to 4K and higher resolution stands. And for big screens, the added resolution will be an additional big plus. thanks for doing the work.
post #225 of 691
Also of note is the Rec. 2020 is put out as broadcast television standard by ITU and they appear to foresee UHD broadcasts by early in the next decade. ITU is an UN Chartered organization and they frequently issue joint standards with ISO which is an industry organization. Rec. 2020 does not impose standards for media such a blu-ray or download services, but industry groups (e.g., BDA) frequently decide to use such ITU/ISO standards by invoking them within their own industry standards.
post #226 of 691
Thanks for taking the time to share all the info in the above posts Ron, very useful.
post #227 of 691
Course content in 4K would be essential for these 4K projectors, but I think it has hit something that would be fantastic, passive 3D in 1080p.

This month I saw the LG LCD 84 "4K. Was not available to demo 3D content in 4K format but I saw some passive 3D 1080p demos. Was the closest to perfection 3D I've ever seen. Super clear, bright, without ghost and all the erros that we already read and saw in 3D.

Do not know anything about hardware, if would be impractical or expensive to implement this, but the inclusion of passive 3D on 4K projectors, even taking into account that for some time we will only have 1080p content, it would be a fantastic bonus.

Let's dream a little ... a passive 3D 4K projector, 1080p movies and JVC's e-Shift, we would have a huge jump in image quality for 3D, even without 4K content!
post #228 of 691
Quote:
Originally Posted by dvrw2 View Post

Course content in 4K would be essential for these 4K projectors, but I think it has hit something that would be fantastic, passive 3D in 1080p.

Passive 3D actually needs silver screen that, for what I know, is not so ideal for 2D...
And I should change my new AT Screen Research 1.0,
For these reasons I'd prefer a better, less tiring active 3D
And I hope next Sony 4k laser will perform active 3d..
post #229 of 691
Quote:
Originally Posted by dvrw2 View Post

Course content in 4K would be essential for these 4K projectors, but I think it has hit something that would be fantastic, passive 3D in 1080p.

This month I saw the LG LCD 84 "4K. Was not available to demo 3D content in 4K format but I saw some passive 3D 1080p demos. Was the closest to perfection 3D I've ever seen. Super clear, bright, without ghost and all the erros that we already read and saw in 3D.

Do not know anything about hardware, if would be impractical or expensive to implement this, but the inclusion of passive 3D on 4K projectors, even taking into account that for some time we will only have 1080p content, it would be a fantastic bonus.

Let's dream a little ... a passive 3D 4K projector, 1080p movies and JVC's e-Shift, we would have a huge jump in image quality for 3D, even without 4K content!
Quote:
Originally Posted by Grifo View Post

Passive 3D actually needs silver screen that, for what I know, is not so ideal for 2D...
And I should change my new AT Screen Research 1.0,
For these reasons I'd prefer a better, less tiring active 3D
And I hope next Sony 4k laser will perform active 3d..

dvrw2 - The upcoming RED laser projector is claimed to support passive 3D. As Grifo stated above, passive 3D projection using polarization require a "silver screen", or a screen that retains virtually all of the polarized light. There is another less popular passive 3D technology that employs "color multiplexing" and is used by Dolby 3D and the Omega 3D system. This has the advantage of not needing a silver screen, but his more light loss and can introduce some color accuracy issues. The bottom line is active 3D is much simplier and less expensive to implement than passive 3D for projection systems. One key thing to improve active 3D is to increase the actual displayed frame rate. Many of the active 3D projection systems today (including those claiming 240 Hz or 480 Hz refresh rates), when using Blu-ray 3D as the 3D video source (with it 24 Hz frame rate), are only displaying at 48 Hz per eye (96 Hz total) while 60 Hz per eye are used for 30 Hz and 60 Hz video sources (which are typically only half resolution sources as delivered via satellite TV or cable TV). There are now some projectors that display the 3D at a more ideal 144 Hz total frame rate with 72 Hz per eye, which is the same as the most common setup used by RealD for their passive 3D setup used in commercial cinema.
Edited by Ron Jones - 2/10/13 at 8:09am
post #230 of 691
Since this thread is supposed to be for discussing predictions for 4K projectors and it has been a few days since anyone posted as new prediction, I felt i should go ahead and start a new highly speculative prediction. My crystal ball predicts that JVC will introduce a flagship native 4K projector, perhaps announced by the end of 2013 and shipping in 2014, with the bonus feature of eShift to provide 8K-lite resolution. They built a prototype 8K commercial projector that used eShift as a joint project with NHK 3 years ago and by adding the relatively inexpensive eShift feature and even including an 8K input (perhaps using the next generation HDMI if it can support 8K) they could have a good advertising claim compared to conventional 4K projectors, such as the VW1000.
Edited by Ron Jones - 2/10/13 at 7:06pm
post #231 of 691
With eshift, why would it need an 8K input?. You feed an Ultra HD in at 3840 x 2160 and eshift it to 7680 x 4320.. 8K sources are so far off that even swami couldn't make a reasonable prediction as to when they will be available.
Edited by mark haflich - 2/11/13 at 6:22am
post #232 of 691
For the same reason that the e-shift with 4K lite models (2K with eshift) can't play 4K native content without 4K inputs.
A 4K model with eshift to 4K would only be able to play 4K content. With 8K input, it could play native 8K content, even if without the full quality of a native 8K display.
I'm not sure I agree re 8K content availability. While movies should be 4K for a while given the distribution issue (how do you store it?), broadcasters have just upgraded to HD and will most likely skip 4K altogether and broadcast in 8K when they do the next step. Don't ask me about TiVO though...
That's what NHK is doing in Japan. So it's just future proofing. When you spend the amount of money that will be required byt a 4K JVC with eshift, you probably don't want to upgrade every year (as a VW1000 owner, you should agree:))..
Hopefully HDMI 1.5/2.0 will support both 4K and 8K. As 4K is seen as a stop gap and 8K is supposed to take over fairly soon (ie in a couple of years), it would be a good thing.
Edited by Manni01 - 2/11/13 at 1:17am
post #233 of 691
Quote:
Originally Posted by Manni01 View Post

For the same reason that the e-shift with 4K lite models (2K with eshift) can't play 4K native content without 4K inputs.
A 4K model with eshift to 4K would only be able to play 4K content. With 8K input, it could play native 8K content, even if without the full quality of a native 8K display.
I'm not sure I agree re 8K content availability. While movies should be 4K for a while given the distribution issue (how do you store it?), broadcasters have just upgraded to HD and will most likely skip 4K altogether and broadcast in 8K when they do the next step. Don't ask me about TiVO though...
That's what NHK is doing in Japan. So it's just future proofing. When you spend the amount of money that will be required byt a 4K JVC with eshift, you probably don't want to upgrade every year (as a VW1000 owner, you should agree:))..
Hopefully HDMI 1.5/2.0 will support both 4K and 8K. As 4K is seen as a stop gap and 8K is supposed to take over fairly soon (ie in a couple of years), it would be a good thing.

The issue is that there is basically nothing out there in 8K at the moment and I don't mean it in the same way most are complaining about 4K here on this forum. There is plenty of 4K material out there, it just happens to be kept on the commercial/professional side of things and hasn't been released to the consumer side of things. There is literally close to nothing in an 8K digital format as far as movies go. When movies shot on film go through a telecine process and converted to digital, that master is almost always (99.995%) in 4K. That's just film, when you look at digital, there isn't anyone in Hollywood shooting in 8K. That has to do with the lack of cameras. Sure there are prototypes that can shoot in 8K, but there aren't any mass produced, director/DP friendly, contrast quality 8K cameras out there. The highest resoultion you're going to see currently is 5K being shot on RED digital cameras. There are only a handful of digital masters in 8K at the moment. So when I say there is no content, there really is no content....anywhere.

So if people have serious doubts about 4K you can quadruple those doubts about 8K. Don't even waste your time typing the words "8K" because we are not going to see it within the next 15 years. And that's a minimum time frame. It isn't going to happen.

I also think we need to get off this subject about JVC 1080p projectors having 4K inputs. The reality of it is that JVC will most likely put out native 4K projectors (maybe two generations) with appropriate inputs before there is a lot of content. This is what we saw with 1080p projectors as well. I realize what the benefits could be with e-shift and 4K inputs but I don't think JVC wants to waste money on something like this. If anything, this will hinder people from buying those new units. If they deny you that 4K input it's going to push many to buy a new model that is 4K native. They're going to make more money this way. If you were JVC wouldn't you do that?
Edited by Seegs108 - 2/11/13 at 1:44am
post #234 of 691
I assumed whenever JVC came out with a 4k model, they would include eshift for 8k just for marketing. Even if it does nothing to help the picture, they would claim the first 8k projector. They did it with the current models.
post #235 of 691
Quote:
Originally Posted by Seegs108 View Post

The issue is that there is basically nothing out there in 8K at the moment and I don't mean it in the same way most are complaining about 4K here on this forum. There is plenty of 4K material out there, it just happens to be kept on the commercial/professional side of things and hasn't been released to the consumer side of things. There is literally close to nothing in an 8K digital format as far as movies go. When movies shot on film go through a telecine process and converted to digital, that master is almost always (99.995%) in 4K. That's just film, when you look at digital, there isn't anyone in Hollywood shooting in 8K. That has to do with the lack of cameras. Sure there are prototypes that can shoot in 8K, but there aren't any mass produced, director/DP friendly, contrast quality 8K cameras out there. The highest resoultion you're going to see currently is 5K being shot on RED digital cameras. There are only a handful of digital masters in 8K at the moment. So when I say there is no content, there really is no content....anywhere.

So if people have serious doubts about 4K you can quadruple those doubts about 8K. Don't even waste your time typing the words "8K" because we are not going to see it within the next 15 years. And that's a minimum time frame. It isn't going to happen.

I also think we need to get off this subject about JVC 1080p projectors having 4K inputs. The reality of it is that JVC will most likely put out native 4K projectors (maybe two generations) with appropriate inputs before there is a lot of content. This is what we saw with 1080p projectors as well. I realize what the benefits could be with e-shift and 4K inputs but I don't think JVC wants to waste money on something like this. If anything, this will hinder people from buying those new units. If they deny you that 4K input it's going to push many to buy a new model that is 4K native. They're going to make more money this way. If you were JVC wouldn't you do that?


Segs108

I totally agree on that, I dont think we are going to see 8K content for many years

I just want the damn 4K movie content out now biggrin.gif

dj
post #236 of 691
Quote:
Originally Posted by Seegs108 View Post

The issue is that there is basically nothing out there in 8K at the moment and I don't mean it in the same way most are complaining about 4K here on this forum. There is plenty of 4K material out there, it just happens to be kept on the commercial/professional side of things and hasn't been released to the consumer side of things. There is literally close to nothing in an 8K digital format as far as movies go. When movies shot on film go through a telecine process and converted to digital, that master is almost always (99.995%) in 4K. That's just film, when you look at digital, there isn't anyone in Hollywood shooting in 8K. That has to do with the lack of cameras. Sure there are prototypes that can shoot in 8K, but there aren't any mass produced, director/DP friendly, contrast quality 8K cameras out there. The highest resoultion you're going to see currently is 5K being shot on RED digital cameras. There are only a handful of digital masters in 8K at the moment. So when I say there is no content, there really is no content....anywhere.

So if people have serious doubts about 4K you can quadruple those doubts about 8K. Don't even waste your time typing the words "8K" because we are not going to see it within the next 15 years. And that's a minimum time frame. It isn't going to happen.

I also think we need to get off this subject about JVC 1080p projectors having 4K inputs. The reality of it is that JVC will most likely put out native 4K projectors (maybe two generations) with appropriate inputs before there is a lot of content. This is what we saw with 1080p projectors as well. I realize what the benefits could be with e-shift and 4K inputs but I don't think JVC wants to waste money on something like this. If anything, this will hinder people from buying those new units. If they deny you that 4K input it's going to push many to buy a new model that is 4K native. They're going to make more money this way. If you were JVC wouldn't you do that?

As I said, 8K content isn't for movies, at least in a near future, it's the future standard for broadcasting.

Implementation of UHDTV is expected to be rolled over in 2013-2014 in Japan and China, and from 2015-2020 for the rest of the world. Granted, this could be 4K or 8K, but everything I hear tends to suggest that broadcasters will skip 4K and go directly for 8K, as they can't afford to change their architecture all the time and have just done so for HD (in quite a minimal way given the amount of compression we have to live with). As we are talking about products sold at the end of 2013, early 2014, it makes sense to take into consideration the ability to handle broadcasting signals which might start being rolled out within a year of purchase, especially for a 10K+ product.

This being said, I totally agree with what you are saying about the lack of availability of 8K movies in a near future. I am personally only interested in movies, so I was just trying to explain why I thought Ron's prediction was relevant. I have strictly no interest in 8K projectors, eshifted or not, because I so rarely watch TV that I have no plans to upgrade my HD satellite receiver within the next 5 years.

Regarding true 4K vs 2K with eshift and 4K inputs, I have already explained why I thought it mattered.

If JVC (or Sony) offers a native 4K projector for 5-10K, which is very unlikely, I might consider it.

But as it's likely to be about twice as much to start with, there is NO WAY I would buy one, because as I explained in my setup the benefit of 4K as far as H/V resolution is concerned is minimal, at best. This is the case for most people without a huge room and screen, which doesn't seem to be the majority in the U.S. but is the majority in most other countries, including the U.K.

If, however, they offer on all the esfhift models 4K inputs for the price of the present range (5-10K), I will definitely buy an rs49 or an rs57 (or whatever they call them) to replace my rs45, simply to be able to benefit from the increase color depth, resolution and gamut that is likely to come with 4K content. Unless there is a VW96ES with 4K inputs, which might also tempt me.

At the end of the day, we're only making predictions:).

Mine is for JVC an entry level model with no eshift, two mid-range models with eshift and a native 4K model (with or without 8K eshift) only if the new HDMI interface is available by then (end of 2013 / early 2014). And it will probably be on all models except the low end one, unless cost is roughly the same compared to HDMI 1.4, in which case they'll put it on all models to get the latest standard and the non 4K related improvements (like faster refresh rates in 2K 3D).

If the new HDMI interface is not available, then I believe we'll have another year of incremental improvements, and no 4K model at all on the whole range, just better 2K panels with a faster switching rate and better 3D.

Re Sony, the successor to the 95ES has been reported to not have 4K and 4K inputs wouldn't make any sense as 4K content would have to be downscaled to 2K as it doesn't have eshift, so not much to expect from Sony at this stage.

Which at the end of the day means I'll probably keep my rs45 another year:)
Edited by Manni01 - 2/11/13 at 5:10am
post #237 of 691
And I will be keeping my 4K Sony 1000ES and hopefully will have some 4K content to play.
post #238 of 691
Quote:
Originally Posted by mark haflich View Post

And I will be keeping my 4K Sony 1000ES and hopefully will have some 4K content to play.

I envy you Mark. I wish I had a room big enough to justify the VW1000, I would probably have found it more difficult to justify not buying one:).
Unfortunately, unless I move house, the main limitation is my room, which is a 3mx4m dedicated loft with two seats. It's a proper batloft (I used to call it the batbin) with a nominal gain screen (Carada BW with a 1.1 gain), but I really can't justify a 4K projector in that room, not at current prices. I still have my kids to feed:)!
I plan to move house at some stage, then it will be a different story as I won't move until I can get a dedicated room big enough to fit a 120+ screen with at least two rows.

I'm sure you'll have some 4K content to play soon, the redray player looks great and you'll find a way to get your hands on one of these Sony servers. And hopefully Sony won't go bankrupt before delivering a new HDMI board to you.

Irrespective of the room though, I clearly don't have as much disposable income as you, so I need to be able to justify my expenses. That's why I prefer to wait until a standard is available.

I waited a couple of years without buying either bluray or HD DVDs until the dust settled, so I guess that's just the way I am:).

When I bought my rs45 (which I calibrate with a mini 3d) after getting rid of my rs50, I thought it would be a stop gap projector for a year or two. Looks like it might be more than that before I can go back higher in the range, and I'm not complaining as it's a great little projector.
Edited by Manni01 - 2/11/13 at 7:42am
post #239 of 691
Quote:
Originally Posted by mark haflich View Post

With eshift, why would it need an 8K input?. You feed an Ultra HD in at 3840 x 2160 and eshift it to 7680 x 4320.. 8K sources are so far off that even swami couldn't make a reasonable prediction as to when they will be available.

I only included an 8K input assuming it will be a supported feature of the next generation of HDMI (a question mark at this point) and also assuming there will be HDMI chips available to support that feature. I agree that we are perhaps a decade away from a consumer 8K video source, but in the near term it might have some utility for inputing super high res. digital still images. Finally if it doesn't cost much to add the 8K input capability, then its another advertising point.
Edited by Ron Jones - 2/11/13 at 8:07am
post #240 of 691
Quote:
Originally Posted by Manni01 View Post


I envy you Mark. I wish I had a room big enough to justify the VW1000, I would probably have found it more difficult to justify not buying one:).
Unfortunately, unless I move house, the main limitation is my room, which is a 3mx4m dedicated loft with two seats. It's a proper batloft (I used to call it the batbin) with a nominal gain screen (Carada BW with a 1.1 gain), but I really can't justify a 4K projector in that room, not at current prices. I still have my kids to feed:)!
I plan to move house at some stage, then it will be a different story as I won't move until I can get a dedicated room big enough to fit a 120+ screen with at least two rows.

I'm sure you'll have some 4K content to play soon, the redray player looks great and you'll find a way to get your hands on one of these Sony servers. And hopefully Sony won't go bankrupt before delivering a new HDMI board to you.

Irrespective of the room though, I clearly don't have as much disposable income as you, so I need to be able to justify my expenses. That's why I prefer to wait until a standard is available.

I waited a couple of years without buying either bluray or HD DVDs until the dust settled, so I guess that's just the way I am:).

When I bought my rs45 (which I calibrate with a mini 3d) after getting rid of my rs50, I thought it would be a stop gap projector for a year or two. Looks like it might be more than that before I can go back higher in the range, and I'm not complaining as it's a great little projector.

 

So are you saying I'm BSing myself with my 120x51 scope screen trying to convince myself that the vw1000 is overkill and my vw95 is good enough smile.gif

 

Yeah, I'm not a bleeding edge tech kind, I like to wait until 2nd generation products become available because generally they are cheaper and more of the movies I like will be available in that format and at least the big bugs will have been worked out and I won't have to spend so much time on the forum begging for help troubleshooting.

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
AVS › AVS Forum › Display Devices › Digital Hi-End Projectors - $3,000+ USD MSRP › Predictions for 2013 4K projectors