or Connect
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

8K TV is here

post #1 of 17
Thread Starter 
http://www.bbc.com/news/technology-19370582\

smile.gif
post #2 of 17
Thread Starter 
Damn link isn't working!
post #3 of 17
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-19370582

Maybe this one

Though it says manufactures may want it by 2020.
post #4 of 17
I'm glad to see it. I hope it is true 4:4:4 color depth, and 72hz refresh rate.
post #5 of 17
8K TV STANDARD WITH 120FPS APPROVED

http://www.flatpanelshd.com/news.php?subaction=showfull&id=1345799482

"A new TV standard is here. Today, the 8K (7680x4320 pixels) TV standard has been approved. It will support up to 120 frames per second, greater color depth and a wider color gamut. Japanese NHK’s proposal has been selected as the standard by ITU.

8K TV standard approved
4K TVs are coming soon but the standard for 8K TVs is already approved. 8K resolution is 16 times higher than today’s Full HD standard that is utilized on almost every TV today. 8K promises greatly improved picture quality and detailing on large-size TVs..........
post #6 of 17
resolution_chart.png

Ok, yeah, wow. So, umm... I have to sit about 5 feet from a 100" screen to even begin to see the difference? And I have to sit about 2 1/2 feet away to get the full benefit?

I suppose all of you who like to sit 1 foot away from your 55" televisions will be happy. For those of us who like to sit at a normal distance, 2K (1080p) is arguably enough, and 4K is definitely enough. 8K is a waste of money unless you own a large venue theater and want the people sitting in the "bad seats" (the ones all the way up front) to see a super clear picture.

If you plan on getting 8K, and have a 100" display, get yourself a wheeled office chair also. Because if something happens on the left side of the screen, you'll have to physically move your head to the leftt side to be close enough to see the difference. And then if something happens on the right side, you'll have to wheel yourself over to the other side of the screen if you're concerned about seeing the full resolution. Better call Berkline. Maybe they have a wheeled HT chair in the works.
post #7 of 17
Quote:
Originally Posted by DanLW View Post

resolution_chart.png
Ok, yeah, wow. So, umm... I have to sit about 5 feet from a 100" screen to even begin to see the difference? And I have to sit about 2 1/2 feet away to get the full benefit?
I suppose all of you who like to sit 1 foot away from your 55" televisions will be happy. For those of us who like to sit at a normal distance, 2K (1080p) is arguably enough, and 4K is definitely enough. 8K is a waste of money unless you own a large venue theater and want the people sitting in the "bad seats" (the ones all the way up front) to see a super clear picture.
If you plan on getting 8K, and have a 100" display, get yourself a wheeled office chair also. Because if something happens on the left side of the screen, you'll have to physically move your head to the leftt side to be close enough to see the difference. And then if something happens on the right side, you'll have to wheel yourself over to the other side of the screen if you're concerned about seeing the full resolution. Better call Berkline. Maybe they have a wheeled HT chair in the works.


No, Luddites can sit wherever they want to sit. Nobody else cares.
post #8 of 17
It is not going to be compulsory that people must purchase the 8K models when they become available. Whiners never seem to grasp that reality. A lot of people like to watch very large home projection screens, and I suspect that many of them would be receptive to having either very large flat panels or projectors with super high resolution.

Luddites should never have gotten sucked in to the TV trap, and should have stuck with watching shadow puppets. It was good enough for their cave man ancestors.wink.gif
post #9 of 17
I do watch on a 100" screen, but even at my viewing distance of about 1.1 screen widths, even 4K is a hard sell. It's not a matter of fearing technology, it's a matter of whether or not the extra expense will yield a positive result. To me, 8K is like AudioQuest cable. A huge expense that doesn't yield any tangible benefit.
post #10 of 17
You know nothing, Jon Snow.
post #11 of 17
Quote:
Originally Posted by DanLW View Post

http://s3.carltonbale.com/resolution_chart.png
Ok, yeah, wow. So, umm... I have to sit about 5 feet from a 100" screen to even begin to see the difference? And I have to sit about 2 1/2 feet away to get the full benefit?
I suppose all of you who like to sit 1 foot away from your 55" televisions will be happy. For those of us who like to sit at a normal distance, 2K (1080p) is arguably enough, and 4K is definitely enough. 8K is a waste of money unless you own a large venue theater and want the people sitting in the "bad seats" (the ones all the way up front) to see a super clear picture.
If you plan on getting 8K, and have a 100" display, get yourself a wheeled office chair also. Because if something happens on the left side of the screen, you'll have to physically move your head to the leftt side to be close enough to see the difference. And then if something happens on the right side, you'll have to wheel yourself over to the other side of the screen if you're concerned about seeing the full resolution. Better call Berkline. Maybe they have a wheeled HT chair in the works.
These charts are wildly inaccurate. I remember them being posted all over forums back when people were arguing that 1080p wasn’t worth it, and you would have to sit 5ft from your display to see a difference.

To actually fool the eye into believing an image is real, you need to have enough resolution where you can no longer discern the pixels—and then double it.
Quote:
Originally Posted by DanLW View Post

I do watch on a 100" screen, but even at my viewing distance of about 1.1 screen widths, even 4K is a hard sell. It's not a matter of fearing technology, it's a matter of whether or not the extra expense will yield a positive result. To me, 8K is like AudioQuest cable. A huge expense that doesn't yield any tangible benefit.
Might want to get your vision checked if you’re not seeing screendoor with a 1080p projector at that distance.
post #12 of 17
Quote:
Originally Posted by greenland View Post

How can some one claim that large 8K panels will have no viewing benefit, before they have ever seen one in action?! It is just griping for the sake of griping without having anything tangible to base it on. Once more; no one is going to be forced to buy one, if they do not wish to, but that does not mean that everyone else must not be allowed to if they wish to.

I agree with this, but there will be diminishing returns. Many are rightfully skeptical of 4k (which I believe will be a nice win). I'm in the "8K is probably a ways away from being especially relevant" camp. But I look forward to the technology being pushed.
post #13 of 17
I, for one, look forward to re-purchasing all my Blu-Ray movies on Blu-Ray 4K, and then re-purchasing those on Blu-Ray 8K.
post #14 of 17
New thread posted here in the interests of leaving this thread on topic.

http://www.avsforum.com/t/1426614/2k-vs-4k-vs-8k-can-you-tell-the-difference
post #15 of 17
Quote:
Originally Posted by DanLW View Post

Ok, yeah, wow. So, umm... I have to sit about 5 feet from a 100" screen to even begin to see the difference? And I have to sit about 2 1/2 feet away to get the full benefit?
I suppose all of you who like to sit 1 foot away from your 55" televisions will be happy. For those of us who like to sit at a normal distance, 2K (1080p) is arguably enough, and 4K is definitely enough. 8K is a waste of money unless you own a large venue theater and want the people sitting in the "bad seats" (the ones all the way up front) to see a super clear picture.
If you plan on getting 8K, and have a 100" display, get yourself a wheeled office chair also. Because if something happens on the left side of the screen, you'll have to physically move your head to the leftt side to be close enough to see the difference. And then if something happens on the right side, you'll have to wheel yourself over to the other side of the screen if you're concerned about seeing the full resolution. Better call Berkline. Maybe they have a wheeled HT chair in the works.
At the moment an 8K TV may sound absurd though it does make sense given the NHK goal of a 100 degree horizontal viewing angle for Super Hi-Vision. The big issue of course is that it will likely take a very long time before it makes sense for most people in Japan. On one hand I think that goal of the NHK to make a "perfect" display is admirable and that they are a government entity means that they were able to explore what was needed to do that. Their research on color space and frame rate was truly well done. On the other hand since they are a government entity they are somewhat detached from cost concerns which is why the NHK is promoting 8K resolution even though it doesn't make sense given what is likely in the near term for display technology.
post #16 of 17
8k is beyond home theater. 8k will find new markets that we can't even imagine yet.
post #17 of 17
Quote:
Originally Posted by greenland View Post

How can some one claim that large 8K panels will have no viewing benefit, before they have ever seen one in action?! It is just griping for the sake of griping without having anything tangible to base it on. Once more; no one is going to be forced to buy one, if they do not wish to, but that does not mean that everyone else must not be allowed to if they wish to.

Exactly. I'll reserve my judgement until I see one. Which I would guess will be sometime in 2015 if I'm lucky.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home