4K… I have Seen The Light - Page 15

What is wrong with the lens on the 1000ES? My lens is close to perfect, I say this because I see absolutely no lens caused problems at all. The lens completely resolves the grid and all pixels are tack sharp. Are you confusing the VPL-vw1000ES with the VPL-HW50ES, a projector that MSRPs for $4K but is a 1080p machine with a less than stellar lens? An understandable mistake for someone who doesn't know much about how end projectors and think well they are way overpriced and overkill. You know someone who believes a JVC projector mail ordered discounted for $3K is reference class.

The weaknesses of the 1000ES machine are a lack of a CMS and less than steller scaling, there is some ringing.

When 4K content becomes available, imminently from Red, a 1080p limited video processor won't be able to process the colors through its CMS and one will need a 4K processor with a CMS. Lumagen will have one but it will be expensive. Hopefully, and expectedly, it will have ring free scaling like the present Lumagen processors have for scaling to 1080p.
Edited by mark haflich - 12/26/12 at 6:07am

Any possibility, Mark, that Sony will announce a 4KBD unit at CES?

I really don't know. But we will all know in a a few weeks.

Are you planning to be at the CES?

No. It's a long way to go and I suspect there will be little to see that would take me no more than a day If I lived in CA, I would go, probably early am and going back late, cetainly I wouldn't stay more than one night.

I did that (down in am, back in pm, on same day) a couple times some years ago, but in the last ~5 yrs have just gone to CEDIA.    Will look forward to reading the reports for those that are there.

Well, I for one HAVE "seen the light" of 4K within the last two weeks, and it came as a MAJOR disappointment. Specifically, this was LG's 84-inch 4K display with a native 4k travelogue, and it was - well - nice. But that's about it. A quantum leap in display technology? Gimme a break, especially at the $17,000 price on this unit. If the cost was the same as a 1080p nearby 80-incher, it might be worth the bucks but certainly not what I saw. Maybe OLED, once the kinks are worked out, WILL be that quantum leap. But this is DEFINITELY not it. Keep your wallets shut tight buckaroos.

Hey Mark just noticed you are posting under your own name again, no longer selling for AVS?

@mrsmith, last year someone here bought the Sony 1000 projector sight unseen, 'if it is no good I just put it in the kids room', for some 20K is 'pocket change', and off again to check the bottomfeeders section at 'f=16', lol.

Was it a true 4K source?.. What was the medium and how was it served to the display please find out this fore sure and no what some sales guy told you

I have never been impressed with anything LG including their kitchen appliances.

I would not leap to a firm conclusion based on seeing an LG.

I can tell you my Sony is the best image I have ever seen in my HT though I recognize there is more to that projector's superiority than just its native 4K panels. I have not yet seen true 4K source ciontent on it and that will await February when I get my Redray player and some content.


I did see a brief 4K sample at the last Cedia. but it was too brief to form much of an impression that would be valid..
Edited by mark haflich - 12/24/12 at 8:20pm

The LG is a different TV than the Sony. But, LG is found in more places, not as many LG dealers take the time to properly calibrate a TV. That's harsh, I know, and some will find speculative. Sony demands more from their dealers; and many dealers don't have the resources to work with Sony. And, as of this writing, LG is not providing dealers with 4k content, so there is a very good possibility it was upscaled 1k (ooooh, a new term!). As far as other LGs, I have seen their ISF-THX cerified LED (LCD) and with proper calibration (not the internal "everyone can do the ISF" mode) they turn out quite the picture. I believe in the next couple of weeks (CES time) we will see a LOT more on 4k. For a while they will be expensive (remember $15,000.00 42" plasmas?) as early adopters will pay as well as a few hard core videophiles. No one says "that's too much for a car" when they are talking about a Ferrari. And for many, Sony is offering Ferraris, with the 1000ES and the 84".

You mean upscaled 1920 x 1080 or close enough to call it 2k. So you mean upscaled 2K.

Out of curiosity, how close were you?

No, 2k is 2048 X 1108; I'm trying to create a new buzz word! And, for those who can't handle butter, don't forget Par-k....

actually full 2k 2048 x 1556

2k
16:9 is 2048 x 1080
2.35:1 is 2048 x 858

Smpte_2k.jpg 643k .jpg file HighJinx sorry but that is wrong. I work in Film and Visual effects. the Negative is scanned at 2048 x 1556, then it is cropped. But that resolution actually makes it lower then HD 1920x1080. So they have to scan it at 4k 4096 x 3112.

There is a lot of processing on movies today since a lot are shot digital. For example the Latest Spiderman was shot on red at 4k but once it was de-bayered it was actually only 2.5k.

Hmm.... but it was shown in 4k.

I was going by the DCi spec sheet.....

That is full frame 35mm. I chose the Academy standard, 1.85:1. Cinemascope/Panavision is 2048 X 1736 (Academy Offset). There are 18 2k resolution "standards", and 18 4k resolution "standards". Standards, everybody's got them...

At CES 2013, I saw 4k demonstrated in the simplest, most visible means yet. Two TV's, one 1080p and the other 4k side by side displaying... a newspaper page. The 4k was most definately sharper and more legible. Both TVs were Sony; no games. I know that every one around me could see the difference. It was clear as night and day. Add to that the display of the Sony VW1000ES on a 177" diagonal (2.35:1) at 9 feet away, and I am convinced. Watching a blu ray upscaled at the projector also yeilded pleasant results.

Thing is they can cheat that by putting a crummy image on the 1080p. What I would like to see is a BD on the 1080p vs a 4K version of the same film or you give them a highrez photo to display on both.

Btw did you see the OLEDs?

Wow. Is there really this much distrust towards a company? In an age where people believe everything on the internet (Ummm, bonjour), manufacturers are doing their very best to keep it above board. The images were on two Sony TV's, both at their optimum settings. There is a lot of Japanese pride and integrity still left at Sony, as well as other Japanese companies. The damage from "fixed" compairisons is too much to risk. And I would hope no company would make one of their own products perform subpar.
With that said, I did see OLED, even Sony displayed theirs, as did LG and Samsung. But industry insiders are predicting (but remember the Mayans) that OLED will be taking a back seat to 4K.
Having a HW50ES (simply amazing 1080p projector) on a 102" screen with a seating distance of 11 feet, I can tell you on the same clip I was able to see a difference on the VW1000ES on a 177" screen at 9 feet seating distance. I have been in this industry for over 25 years, so I am confident with my observations, all the while keeping an open mind to others, as this is, I believe, an opportunity to learn.
For the record, possibly the weakest 4K demonstration came from Samsung. But this could be the result of content. Sony's strong showing could be attributed to their involvement in the movie industry; 4K theaters, 4K digital cinema cameras, their own movie studios (Sony Picture Group), authoring (mastering), production and editing facilities.

Yes we shall see.

BR is one one example and 3d is nothing more than a tag along on new tvs as people
are not looking to get it.

4k is good for one thing..............having your nose up against the screen.

If you want to sit right on top of your set then I saw your set yesterday.

84"LG 4K for only 16,999.00.............but wait they also had a Sony 80" 4K for a mere 25k.

Looks great at 6 inches with no screen door effect.

No content........whatever this is stupid and you guys know it.

Nothing says this will drop in price as you obviously expect or at least drop

enough for the average joe to buy................if in doubt just look at the prices

of large LCDs still floating at 6k or above for an 80" lcd...................


Whats next ? 8k ? 16k ?

Better get those Bionic eye implants....................

Companies lie every day of the week, the best rule is dont believe it until you see it.

Everybody with non-defective sight already has 'Bionic eyes', the fact you do not know the human eye has much greater then 1080p vision proves you are making the same sight unseen 'upscaled dvd is just as good as 1080p' argument.
Edited by wuther - 1/16/13 at 6:41pm

Just as this is a waste so is BR versus an upscaled dvd on a high quality set and player.

There is very little difference.

4k will die a slow death and likely never be affordable or have the content to back it up.

The single largest thing most of you refuse to acknowledge is content.

Cable and satellite cannot even get the bandwidth to support 1080P, indeed a few movies are

On Demand in 1080P but 99.99% is in 1080i.

Good luck with 4k...................lol

This

guy.........................................

Can you

believe it?................................. ..........................................lol

Good luck with color TV, HD . I remember when a 50 inch plasma went for $15K and I sold 100s of them

I use to use a slide and send letters. I use to date a long distance operator.

Interesting page by Joe Kane entitled Update on 4K in this months WSR. Joe refers to a document published by ITU ITU-R BT.2020 and suggess readers google WIKI Rec. 2020 for a read. The document takes a stab at defining 2160p and 4320p. A new color space is made part of the standard and it is double the area of Rec. 709. in or on the CIE diagram. This new color space will require a lot more lumens than our consmer level machines can put out. The filtering required to obtain the primaries of the new space will eat up mucho mucho light. Have a read and let's discuss.
Edited by mark haflich - 1/18/13 at 3:56pm

It puzzles me that he talks about usability of different resolutions in relation to size of the display instead of the angle that any given display occupies.
Now about color, does the ability to fully perceive a color space really depends on the ability to output very wide range of luminance?
Edited by Randomoneh - 1/18/13 at 9:53pm

I think that Joe Kane is making the (usually correct) assumption that most people do not sit close enough to make full use of 1080p on smaller screens, the same goes for 4k.