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 11

post #301 of 691
Quote:
Originally Posted by Highjinx View Post

Watch that clip again...gents...all the clues are there.

2.38 " Currently the way the media is sent out to the user is via BD data disk, you put that in you're player and transfer the content, we haven't announced details if it will be IP based, maybe start it, buffer it up and watch it later or not........you get to keep the movies as well.."

Sounds the possibility of streaming from the disk....not direct play. Of course the download option as well would make sense.

YOU do not do it. Sony loads the content onto the server by a BD data disc. There is no reader on the server. The consumer gets no disc because Sony does not want the consumer to have access. Once Sony loads it onto the server's HD, its there forever bu its use is limited to the specific dusplay that the server is loaned for. Remember the server is a loaner and must be returned to Sony when the for purchase server is made available. How content will get to it and correspondingly how content can be purchased and put on the server is not known at this time. That's my take but if I am wrong or not hearing the video correctly, I don't know.
Edited by mark haflich - 2/23/13 at 5:37pm
post #302 of 691
Its still to early to tell what is going to happen. The Disc route most likely wont happen until there is a standard. If Sony does a the disc it will be just to Copy to the 4k player. The streaming/cloud/downloading will most likely be the initial route since Sony already has the infrastructure(Sony Network).
post #303 of 691
By standard, I think you are saying untill anf if a $K Blueray standard is agreed upon and implemented.
post #304 of 691
Quote:
Originally Posted by mark haflich View Post

By standard, I think you are saying untill anf if a $K Blueray standard is agreed upon and implemented.

Yes exactly...
post #305 of 691
Quote:
Originally Posted by mark haflich View Post

YOU do not do it. Sony loads the content onto the server by a BD data disc. There is no reader on the server. The consumer gets no disc because Sony does not want the consumer to have access. Once Sony loads it onto the server's HD, its there forever bu its use is limited to the specific dusplay that the server is loaned for. Remember the server is a loaner and must be returned to Sony when the for purchase server is made available. How content will get to it and correspondingly how content can be purchased and put on the server is not known at this time. That's my take but if I am wrong or not hearing the video correctly, I don't know.

You are talking about the current server loaned out to 84" owners.....not the impending server to be released. That server, if that clip is not ficticious, will have the capability to load a BD data disk and transfer the data to it's internal hard drive for storage and play back, not just one film but many...and the purchaser of the BD data disks, gets to keep the data disk.

What the clip again, the text in quotes is from the clip:

At the 2.38 minute point:

"Currently the way the media is sent out to the user is via BD data disk, you put that in you're player and transfer the content, we haven't announced details if it will be IP based, maybe start it, buffer it up and watch it later or not........you get to keep the movies(disks) as well.."

This is a data disk, no BD specification needs to be worked out....it's data deciphered internally by the server/PS4, they can change it as often as they like with no issues.......one simply downloads(automatically) the new decode alg....the server is essentially a PC, as is most of the PS4 architecture........as long as the resultting output is handleable by the display device it will work

Sony can issue their movies on BD Data disk in ABC format, Warner in DEF, Paramount in HIJ format, it does not matter, as long as the decode data for the specific alg is on the playback device..
Edited by Highjinx - 2/23/13 at 6:50pm
post #306 of 691
Quote:
Originally Posted by Highjinx View Post

You are talking about the current server loaned out to 84" owners.....not the impending server to be released. That server, if that clip is not ficticious, will have the capability to load a BD data disk and transfer the data to it's internal hard drive for storage and play back, not just one film but many...and the purchaser of the BD data disks, gets to keep the data disk.

What the clip again, the text in quotes is from the clip:

At the 2.38 minute point:

"Currently the way the media is sent out to the user is via BD data disk, you put that in you're player and transfer the content, we haven't announced details if it will be IP based, maybe start it, buffer it up and watch it later or not........you get to keep the movies(disks) as well.."

This is a data disk, no BD specification needs to be worked out....it's data deciphered internally by the server/PS4, they can change it as often as they like with no issues.......one simply downloads(automatically) the new decode alg....the server is essentially a PC, as is most of the PS4 architecture.

It cannot stay this way. There NEEDS to be a standard created and here's why. The only content that these servers are getting (no matter the delivery method) are Sony titles and independent films/clips that Sony has authored. They playback and output correctly because the video and audio are encoded to a specification that Sony has made which ensures everything plays back and outputs properly on the hardware/software they have chosen to put into that server. What happens when Time Warner or Universal (or any other studio) wants to start selling their films in the 4K/UHD format? They need to know how to author the the information and encode the video/audio in a way that will play on a media server properly. Sony is VERY unique because it's a huge conglomerate which happens to manufacture every facet needed to film, encode and reproduce things any which way they want. There isn't another company like that. You aren't going to see Universal, MGM, Time Warner, ect making their own server so they will need to know how to encode the video so it will work on a specific media player. If you think Sony is going to be the only player in town with a 4K/UHD delivery system you're in a dream world. This is why there needs to be consistency in the encoding and delivery system. These studios do not want to limit themselves to a small market and pick and choose which media player/company they want their movies played back on. It doesn't make sense financially to do so. There will be a "4K Blu-ray player" with specific specifications on bit-rates, bit depths, chroma levels, codecs, output, ect and I don't think that every company will want to do the disc-to-harddrive delivery system. It's redundant and time consuming for consumers.

If this is how Sony chooses to do it until the specifications are created, that's fine. But I seriously doubt this will stick for the long run. Mark my words.
post #307 of 691
Quote:
Originally Posted by Seegs108 View Post

It cannot stay this way. There NEEDS to be a standard created and here's why. The only content that these servers are getting (no matter the delivery method) are Sony titles and independent films/clips that Sony has authored. They playback and output correctly because the video and audio are encoded to a specification that Sony has made which ensures everything plays back and outputs properly on the hardware/software they have chosen to put into that server. What happens when Time Warner or Universal (or any other studio) wants to start selling their films in the 4K/UHD format? They need to know how to author the the information and encode the video/audio in a way that will play on a media server properly. Sony is VERY unique because it's a huge conglomerate which happens to manufacture every facet needed to film, encode and reproduce things any which way they want. There isn't another company like that. You aren't going to see Universal, MGM, Time Warner, ect making their own server so they will need to know how to encode the video so it will work on a specific media player. If you think Sony is going to be the only player in town with a 4K/UHD delivery system you're in a dream world. This is why there needs to be consistency in the encoding and delivery system. These studios do not want to limit themselves to a small market and pick and choose which media player/company they want their movies played back on. It doesn't make sense financially to do so. There will be a "4K Blu-ray player" with specific specifications on bit-rates, bit depths, chroma levels, codecs, output, ect and I don't think that every company will want to do the disc-to-harddrive delivery system. It's redundant and time consuming for consumers.

If this is how Sony chooses to do it until the specifications are created, that's fine. But I seriously doubt this will stick for the long run. Mark my words.


That only applies if a 4k Optical STD is adopted quite frankly it is not required as long as the server has adequate number crunching power any format can be in putted. Let's reverse engineer the thinking:

1.4K display device input and display capability.

2.The server/PS4 or Samsung 4k player only needs to output the data that the display can display, that output is the only common thing required. The raw data, streamed or BD supplied can be in anyway as long as the playback device can decode that information into a common output stream that the display device can handle/understand.

How many video codecs are there for the PC, and how many new ones keep coming...AVI, MPG MPEG, ASF WMV, MP4, FLV etc........all output in a common display understood signal stream. All the playback software needs to do is figure out the input format, the data base for this can continually evolve. Why lock into any set parameters, except to the output parameters, it's backward redundant thinking. If a new compression alg is devevloped or improved, they can implement it immediately, all that will be required is a software update so the play back device can understand the 'new' BD data stream.. The decoded stream stored on the HD and played from there, no need to worry about optical disk spin rates etc.

A SATA 3 HD is capable of 3-6Gbps DTR, BD optical at 1x 50Mbps at 6x 300Mbps, not a patch on the HD DTR, use Download or BD data disk to transfer the data to the hard drive and instant bandwidth heaven and any codec any bit depth, if the processing hardware is slow, it just takes longer to decode, but once on the SATA 3 drive......it all evens out.

Gives CE manufacturers a reason to charge more.....faster loading/processing more $'s chargeable.
post #308 of 691
You aren't making a whole lot of sense to me. For some reason you have this naive view on this situation and think that a standalone server/4K media player is going to have some random chipset that has processing power beyond what is needed. You need to look at all of this from outside the bubble. These company's couldn't give a damn about what we want. For them, its about making money. What they are going to build is something that is as cost effective as possible to maximize profit. For example, why do you think cable providers chose to stick with MPEG2 for broadcasts? As far as compression algorithms go, it doesn't stand a chance against MPEG4 or even VC-1. So then why did they do it? IT"S CHEAPER. Plain and simple. Chipsets to decode MPEG2 are much cheaper because they don't require as much processing power to do so.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Highjinx View Post

How many video codecs are there for the PC, and how many new ones keep coming...AVI, MPG MPEG, ASF WMV, MP4, FLV etc........all output in a common display understood signal stream. All the playback software needs to do is figure out the input format, the data base for this can continually evolve. Why lock into any set parameters, except to the output parameters, it's backward redundant thinking. If a new compression alg is devevloped or improved, they can implement it immediately, all that will be required is a software update so the play back device can understand the 'new' BD data stream.. The decoded stream stored on the HD and played from there, no need to worry about optical disk spin rates etc.

First of all, those are all containers, not codecs and while the output to a display to and from HDMI is the same no matter the codec being used you seem to be generalizing that it doesn't matter the compression method used. It does and in a huge way. H.265 can ideally cut down the file size/bit-rates in half because of better algorithms. While that's great and all, this means we need even more powerful processing power than ever before to decode that information. Also, the difference in processing power it takes to decode 8-bit versus 10-bit video is large. If you then take into consideration along with huge fluctuations in bit-rate (as you propose without setting parameters) and higher chroma sampling rates on top of the higher bit-depth you would need an exceptionally powerful computer to be prepared to take on whatever anyone chooses to encode the information in.

They aren't going to invest money into creating another compression algorithm. They've been working on H.265 for years now and that WILL be the codec used. These things cost money. Let's get real and stop pretending.

Say you purchase this Sony server and it's made in the way you propose. It has free range to decode whatever it wants. The server will have limitations with it's processing power. Plain and simple. It will only be able to decode H.264/H.265 to a certain bitrate before faltering. Every computer has it's limits. This is why there needs to be a standard so there aren't any issues. The standard is there to make sure people feel comfortable with their purchase. They know that from now until the next format is released (8K or whatever) this player will play anything realeased by the studios in 4K. Why would I want to take a chance or have to buy another player down the road because it can't play things correctly? If people know what to expect from the video/audio they can build an architecture around that to ensure smooth playback and output.
post #309 of 691
Quote:
Originally Posted by Seegs108 View Post

You aren't making a whole lot of sense to me. For some reason you have this naive view on this situation and think that a standalone server/4K media player is going to have some random chipset that has processing power beyond what is needed. You need to look at all of this from outside the bubble. These company's couldn't give a damn about what we want. For them, its about making money. What they are going to build is something that is as cost effective as possible to maximize profit. For example, why do you think cable providers chose to stick with MPEG2 for broadcasts? As far as compression algorithms go, it doesn't stand a chance against MPEG4 or even VC-1. So then why did they do it? IT"S CHEAPER. Plain and simple. Chipsets to decode MPEG2 are much cheaper because they don't require as much processing power to do so.
First of all, those are all containers, not codecs and while the output to a display to and from HDMI is the same no matter the codec being used you seem to be generalizing that it doesn't matter the compression method used. It does and in a huge way. H.265 can ideally cut down the file size/bit-rates in half because of better algorithms. While that's great and all, this means we need even more powerful processing power than ever before to decode that information. Also, the difference in processing power it takes to decode 8-bit versus 10-bit video is large. If you then take into consideration along with huge fluctuations in bit-rate (as you propose without setting parameters) and higher chroma sampling rates on top of the higher bit-depth you would need an exceptionally powerful computer to be prepared to take on whatever anyone chooses to encode the information in.

They aren't going to invest money into creating another compression algorithm. They've been working on H.265 for years now and that WILL be the codec used. These things cost money. Let's get real and stop pretending.

Say you purchase this Sony server and it's made in the way you propose. It has free range to decode whatever it wants. The server will have limitations with it's processing power. Plain and simple. It will only be able to decode H.264/H.265 to a certain bitrate before faltering. Every computer has it's limits. This is why there needs to be a standard so there aren't any issues. The standard is there to make sure people feel comfortable with their purchase. They know that from now until the next format is released (8K or whatever) this player will play anything realeased by the studios in 4K. Why would I want to take a chance or have to buy another player down the road because it can't play things correctly? If people know what to expect from the video/audio they can build an architecture around that to ensure smooth playback and output.

Dedicated hardware is great but also expensive to develop. An alternative is to use PC architecture and a software interface. H265 will not need a dedicated HW playback solution, just as BluRay will play fine on a PC, but the beauty of the HD transfer is that the data is converted/decoded and placed on the hard drive, the processing power is not so relevant, as it is not decoding and playing back in real time, it's decoding storing on a HD and playing back from there. If real time decoding and playback is required, then processing power that can keep up is required. If fully decoding and storing on a HD quite some space will be required.

I'm sure we'll soon see how it's going to be done. I doubt we will see dedicated HW.
post #310 of 691
The required servers for what is going to happen at least initially the for purchase Sony server shown under glass at CES and the coming Red Redray server would be considered hardware although they are just basically computer servers and thus within your discussion are computers not hardware? Actually CD players and bluray players and d/a converters are just portions of a computer gussied up more or less.
Edited by mark haflich - 3/1/13 at 8:42am
post #311 of 691
As much as I would like to get a JVC 4k projector, I REALLY would like JVC to really improve the contrast ratio and the ANSI contrast. Say, 200,000:1 native CR for their highest end projector. Imagine those kinds of contrast ratios (and improved ANSI) combined with native 4k. I can't wait for something like that. JVC has to one day get close to CRT projector blacks....
post #312 of 691
Quote:
Originally Posted by mark haflich View Post

The required servers for what is going to haopen at least initially *the cinibf for purchase Sony server shown under glass at CES and the coming Red Redray server would be considered hardware although they are just basically computer servers and thus within your discussion computers not hardware? Actually CD players and bluray players and d/a coverters are just portions of a computer gussied up more or less.

IMO ASIC's as found for most part in PS3 type architecture will give way to FPGA and PC CPU/GPU architecture with a dedicated GUI/OS...the PC HW is fast enough for 4k video as a bonus software easily updated. Cheaper that the ASIC path and more versatile.

PS4 is a good example of that.
post #313 of 691
Thread Starter 
Well, what does everybody think? There is a lot of new 4K tvs coming out this year from Samsung, LG, Toshiba, Westinghouse, and other brands that are cheaper. What do you all think about the fall? any new announcements for 4K projectors coming up? will next years JVC projectors be 4K finally? TRUE 4K? will sony release a successor to the VW1000 (hopefully cheaper as well)?
post #314 of 691
Quote:
Originally Posted by whitetrash66 View Post

Well, what does everybody think? There is a lot of new 4K tvs coming out this year from Samsung, LG, Toshiba, Westinghouse, and other brands that are cheaper. What do you all think about the fall? any new announcements for 4K projectors coming up? will next years JVC projectors be 4K finally? TRUE 4K? will sony release a successor to the VW1000 (hopefully cheaper as well)?

I would speculate that Sony will announce a replacement for the VW1000, most likely at the CEDIA Expo 2013 in late Sept. or perhaps at CES 2014 in January with a shipping date for the new projector in the first half of 2014. In either case I would expect it include HDMI 2.0 inputs and support 4K UHD signal inputs with up to 60Hz refreash rates with deep color and perhaps 3D at 4K resolution. There have been some rumors it will use a laser light engine instead of being bulb-based. I could also see Sony offering two models of 4K UHD projectors at two different price points. JVC is probably the most likely among the other manufacturers to begin shipping a native 4K consumer projector by the first half of 2014. However, I wouldn't rule out the DLP camp from offering 4K projectors during 2014, but only if TI offers them a consumer priced 4K DMD and companion chipset.

This speculation is based on JVC and TI, as well as Sony, making commercial 4K projectors (or components in TI's case) for the digital cinema market and thus they have a solid basis from which to develop a consumer version. Again this is just speculation and I do not expect we will have any actual facts related to plans for future consumer 4K projectors before CEDIA 2013.



-
Edited by Ron Jones - 3/1/13 at 10:39am
post #315 of 691
These questions are presently unanswerable. Though the interesting point is that attempting to answer and providing one would not involve the art of thinking. just pure speculation without any facts to think on.j
post #316 of 691
I'm seeing healthy intelligent deduction.....not wild speculation....so please keep those thoughts coming!

Food for thought re Sony's plans to replace the current on-loan preloaded 4k video server/player that is offered to purchases of their 4K 84" TV

post #317 of 691
Not a great interview with improper conclusions set forth by the young lady.

As to healthy, i suppose such speculation might keep one from otherwise getting introuble with idle time but there are simply no facts available at this time to make projector projections.

What we are getting is wish lists.
post #318 of 691
PS 4 confirmed as being able to serve 4K movies: http://www.trustedreviews.com/news/ps4-features-to-see-sony-4k-movie-downloads-available

Download only eek.gif
post #319 of 691
I dont mind downloading at all, it still beats driving to my local blockbuster and back again:)

I'm on a 60 mbit ISP, so 100gb movie would be around 4 hours to download. If they made an app for it that, you could be at work browing titles and hitting download, and by the time you got off work, it would be ready for your evening movie night at hopefully pristine quality. I hope they will offer renting, as a lot of movies, we simply only watch them once.

Can't wait.
post #320 of 691
This article claims 64% of ISP's in the US have a download cap.

http://gigaom.com/2012/10/01/data-caps-chart/

Verizon FIOS doesn't for now, but likely will once they see people downloading 100+ GB files on a regular basis. I'd still prefer a high capacity BD, it makes it more readily available for those who don't have that kind of bandwidth or living under ISP caps.

3 movies a month would be the current limit under Comcast's rules. Then $10 per each 50GB extra. This doesn't scale, they need to find a better way to get these massive files to the end users.
post #321 of 691
Quote:
Originally Posted by mark haflich View Post

Not a great interview with improper conclusions set forth by the young lady.

As to healthy, i suppose such speculation might keep one from otherwise getting introuble with idle time but there are simply no facts available at this time to make projector projections.

What we are getting is wish lists.

Some of us have bigger [crystal] balls than others.
post #322 of 691
Quote:
Originally Posted by zombie10k View Post

This article claims 64% of ISP's in the US have a download cap.

http://gigaom.com/2012/10/01/data-caps-chart/

Verizon FIOS doesn't for now, but likely will once they see people downloading 100+ GB files on a regular basis. I'd still prefer a high capacity BD, it makes it more readily available for those who don't have that kind of bandwidth or living under ISP caps.

3 movies a month would be the current limit under Comcast's rules. Then $10 per each 50GB extra. This doesn't scale, they need to find a better way to get these massive files to the end users.

Yah, it stinks because so many more people are now using streaming services than say 1-2 years ago that the cable companies now have 2 reasons to cap bandwidth:

1) To conserve bandwidth (though I doubt this is the real reason since they have a huge excess of bandwidth, and I doubt they even pay for transit exchange)
2) To fight off and reduce the market share of the streaming companies (this is key)

A lot of them haven't implemented it yet on a full-scale, some are still just threatening. There is an anti-trust problem here and the government will need to step in, because by them capping bandwidth they are using it to wage war against the streaming companies. Since the fastest speed Internet access to consumer homes is controlled by too few companies in the US and almost all of those companies also provide subscriber based cable or sat, major conflict of interest. Who knows what will happen.
post #323 of 691
Quote:
Originally Posted by zombie10k View Post

This article claims 64% of ISP's in the US have a download cap.

http://gigaom.com/2012/10/01/data-caps-chart/

Verizon FIOS doesn't for now, but likely will once they see people downloading 100+ GB files on a regular basis. I'd still prefer a high capacity BD, it makes it more readily available for those who don't have that kind of bandwidth or living under ISP caps.

3 movies a month would be the current limit under Comcast's rules. Then $10 per each 50GB extra. This doesn't scale, they need to find a better way to get these massive files to the end users.

+1. In the UK, I have one of the most liberal ISP with unlimited download between 8pm and 8am (and all week-end), but, I'm limited to 15GB per month between 8am-8pm. So there is no way I could download a 100GB in one night at 12Mb/s (which is pretty fast in the UK). It would take me at best 2-3 nights or one week-end.

Download NOT a solution for most people in most countries. They have to offer a disc based solution (optical, flash, HDD, I don't care as long as the price is right, so optical is the only solution right away).

Whether it's a few BD Data discs or one convenient bluray 4K when (if) it shows up, I don't really mind, but download is a no-no for me at this stage.
post #324 of 691
I said this before...I think it's a logical deduction that the download service will be supplimented by the sale of BD data disks containing the same data file as the download, at least till international internet speeds are 'fast enough'.....the disk data will need to be loaded into the hard drive.......no way would Sony purposefully limit the potential income stream and up take of 4k...the information will be leaked slowly....they are testing the water currently......smile.gif
post #325 of 691
With the recent news that, later this month, Chinese manufacturer Seiki will begin shipping their 50inch (SE50YU04) Ultra HD TV for $2000 (dscussion is HERE). I suspect this is but the first of the more moderate priced, and moderate size flat panel UHD TVs coming from China within the next year. I can see a growing demand over the next year or two for 4K UHD video sources as the UHD TVs become affordable.. Let's face it the market from just the owners of 4K projectors will be very small as compared to UHD flat panel owners, and the speedy roll out of much lower priced UHD TVs will benefit us all in encouraging the CE manufacturers to get the standards in place for UHD physical media (e.g. Blu-ray UHD) and the UHD players into consumers hands and also the studios to offer UHD movies to the consumer.
post #326 of 691
I hope this will help with UHD bluray the way you describe, however unless you sit 50" from a 50" TV, there is really very little point in buying a 4K display of that size for video/movie content.
Even with an 84-88" display, you have to sit very close (around 1SW) to see any difference with a 1080p display (except for passive 3D, as this gets much better, but the display you mention has no 3D).
So hopefully lots of people will fall for the marketing of 4K instead of thinking "do I need this in my set up".
42" displays look fine with 768p panels in most living rooms, and 1080p is enough up to at least 60", if not 65" IMHO, unless you use these as giant computer monitors of course.
I have an 88" diag 16/9 display and 4K does very little by itself as the increase in resolution is simply not visible from my sitting distance (12ft). This is the main reason why I stuck to 1080p to date.
So it's the same chicken and egg situation. Unless a 4K standard for content brings more to the table than a simple increase in resolution that doesn't improve the picture quality unless your display is huge and/or you sit very close to it, why would people pay $2000 for a 50" display when they can get exactly the same picture quality for half less?

We need cheaper BIG displays. 88"+ UHDTV or 4K projectors for less than $10K. That will do it!
Edited by Manni01 - 3/3/13 at 4:05am
post #327 of 691
Quote:
Originally Posted by Manni01 View Post

I hope this will help with UHD bluray the way you describe, however unless you sit 50" from a 50" TV, there is really very little point in buying a 4K display of that size for video/movie content.
Even with an 84-88" display, you have to sit very close (around 1SW) to see any difference with a 1080p display (except for passive 3D, as this gets much better, but the display you mention has no 3D).
So hopefully lots of people will fall for the marketing of 4K instead of thinking "do I need this in my set up".
42" displays look fine with 768p panels in most living rooms, and 1080p is enough up to at least 60", if not 65" IMHO, unless you use these as giant computer monitors of course.
I have an 88" diag 16/9 display and 4K does very little by itself as the increase in resolution is simply not visible from my sitting distance (12ft). This is the main reason why I stuck to 1080p to date.
So it's the same chicken and egg situation. Unless a 4K standard for content brings more to the table than a simple increase in resolution that doesn't improve the picture quality unless your display is huge and/or you sit very close to it, why would people pay $2000 for a 50" display when they can get exactly the same picture quality for half less?

We need cheaper BIG displays. 88"+ UHDTV or 4K projectors for less than $10K. That will do it!

I agree that you won't generally realize the increased resolution benefits of UHD on a 50" display. This is similar to the situation with selling 32"-42" HDTVs with 1080p vs. 720p where must people watch from too far away to gets the benefits of 1080p. However, once UHD TVs start to get into the mainstream there will be new owners that really want UHD sources and that will help build market demand for such UHD sources. Other CE manufacturers from China (e.g., Westinghouse) announced plans at CES for larger screens (i.e. larger than 50") and as we get more UHD products competing prices will come down. Probably by the end of 2013 there will a few choices for UHD TVs in the 55" to 65" sizes for $5K or less and perhaps some ~80" model selling for under $10K. I do think that industry standard based UHD sources, with the broad backing of the movie studios, will not come to market until the latter half of 2014 or perhaps 2015. I would also expect to see some form of 4K projector in the $10K price range by late 2014 or 2015.
Edited by Ron Jones - 3/3/13 at 7:02am
post #328 of 691
The pipe to most homes in the US with vendor limits do not support 4K download. I'm lucky enough to have uncapped FIOS, but still don't like the delay in downloading. H.265 will help, but it still takes time. Optical BD is a necessity until the pipe is big enough and caps removed in the US.

As for 4K displays taking off, the CEs will eventually stop making 2K screens (or only sell them at Walmart). Most 1080p displays are 3D ready now, were once that was an option. Good luck finding a 720p display there days. Marketing dictates that 4K will start to replace 1080p this year and going forward regardless of seating distance.
post #329 of 691
Quote:
The pipe to most homes in the US with vendor limits do not support 4K download.

You mean it won't support 4k streaming. People seem to use streaming and download interchangeably. I have interest in 4k download. I have no interest in 4k streaming. My reason? Where I live, for the forseeable future, 4k streaming will be so bandwidth limited that I expect any PQ improvement due to the higher resolution will be lost because of too high compression, even with h265. But I am willing to wait a day to finish a 4k download with low enough compression that I CAN derive some PQ improvement vs 1080. That of course depends on the caps in place, which would be my limiting factor right now. My current plan has a cap of 250g/mo. At the moment my ISP doesn't charge for overage, but I can't see that lasting very much longer with netflix etc. becoming more popular. Most ISP's here list at least $2/G overage charge for plans <$50/mo. Some as high as $6 per gig. That despite reports the cost is <$0.05 per gig to the ISP. So in Canada we get royally screwed by our ISPs. Too much monopoly and too little oversight. C'est la vie. So my biggest problem will be 2 movies/month unless I change to a more expensive plan.
post #330 of 691
Scott. Are you the hockey defenseman from the Ccaps and the Devils?
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