8K by 4K or Octo HD - the real SUHDTV technology - Page 3

If they use some form of mpeg or something similar, they can easily support any resolution. Mpeg is basically a series of jpegs where they store the differences between frames. They throw in full frames every now and then so you don't have to play a movie from the beginning to get to say 23 minutes into it.

They should be able to scale any native size mpeg to the TVs native size using the same logic regardless of source resolution. The only potential problem is if the logic that converts the jpegs into bitmaps doesn't have enough horsepower to keep up with larger native resolutions. You see some pauses and pixellation. The kind of thing you'll sometimes see if there's an explosion (Or any scene where the pixels change rapidly) on a cheap blu-ray player.

No it isn't.

HD = 2MP
4K = 8MP - Quad HD (4X)
8K = 32MP

Octo = 8
HD = 2MP

(Octo)8 x (HD)2MP = 16MP - doesn't exist

In Latin, 8K would be Sede HD (16 x HD)


Or you could call 8K . . . Quad 4K (4 x 8MP)
Edited by Lee Stewart - 9/14/12 at 12:20pm

Actually, in greek hexa means six (as in hexagon), not sixteen. You'd have to call Hexadeca HD (as in hexadecimal, or hexadecagon. The Octo name I would think came from the 8K horizontal pixels, and not because it is a factor of a given number of total pixels.

Oops - you are correct.

Edited my post.

But that is not how he used it. He used it as a multiplier. See post #63

We have 3D OTA broadcasts occasionally in the UK. BBC HD carries some side-by-side stuff (and they've produced an MHEG app that will stretch one eye view from 960x1080 to 1920x1080 to give 2D not-HD compatibility)

US OTA may not look at 4k or 8k - but other countries are. Korea is trialling 4k OTA, and Japan has done tests broadcasting 8k using 2x6MHz channels.

I see this as a boon to the Video Processor world.
But lee is correct.
We are locked into 1080i/720p for the foreseeable future as far as OTA/local US broadcasters are concerned.
We can easily do 4K on bluray. (aren't we glad we didn't do HD-DVD)
So those upconverted to 8K with VPs, will look very good indeed.

However current digital tuners based on 8VSB (and DVB-T in DVB regions) introduced for first generation digital standards are already using effectively obsolete and outmoded modulation (and in some cases receivers are also using similarly obsolete and outmoded MPEG2 compression schemes) These will not be used for 4k or 8k broadcasts - so similar issues as were encountered with the NTSC/ATSC (and PAL/DVB-T) switch are likely.

4k or 8k broadcasts are likely to use much more modern compression - a version of HEVC seems likely (HEVC is the replacement for AVC - aka MPEG4 pt 10 aka H264 - which itself replaced MPEG2) In terms of RF modulation - a form of MIMO and dual polarisation technique looks like likely - coupled with COFDM techniques using >256QAM constellations. (MIMO with dual polarisation will require new rooftop aerials)

HEVC isn't backwards compatible with AVC (aka MPEG4 pt10 aka H264) any more than AVC is backwards compatible with MPEG2. An MPEG2 decoder can't decode AVC, and an AVC decoder can't decode HEVC.

In the UK we went from PAL-I analogue broadcasts to DVB-T (2k 16QAM and 64QAM) using MPEG2 for SD 16:9 broadcasts from 1998-present day. However already we've switched one DVB-T SD mux to DVB-T2 (32k 256QAM) using H264 for 1080i broadcasts, and that required viewers who want HD to replace their existing DVB-T2 SD receivers with DVB-T2 HD receivers. (Sweden has also made the same change, as is - or will - Denmark and a few other European countries.)

Switching from one digital transmission system, to a newer one, is already happening, and without huge fuss.

However in some parts of Europe this is nothing new - as there have been multiple changes to analogue transmission systems in many countries (between VHF and UHF, between line standards - the UK started with 405, France had 819 etc. Lots of Eastern Europe used SECAM for colour but switched to PAL after the fall of the iron curtain etc.) So we're possibly more used to a more fluid standard than the US where NTSC was pretty much the same (apart from compatible colour and audio changes being introduced) from launch to switch-off?
Edited by sneals2000 - 9/14/12 at 7:03pm

I bet you the satellite companies will compress8K until it sucks!

What will happen first: Pioneer Kuro picture quality bested--70 inch plasma--or 8K for less than $5,000?

Well I don't doubt that - from the people that brought you . . . HD Lite.

Plasma is pretty much dead in case you didn't know that. OLED will easily best the Kuro's PQ. Anyone that has seen one at a electronics show already knows that.

Here is some interesting information from a recent The Hollywood Reporter article:

Agreed, a transition will be required for ATSC 3.0 since it will almost certainly change both the supported audio/video codecs and the modulation method.
Edited by Richard Paul - 9/15/12 at 7:01pm

Tim Sweeney (Founder of Epic Games and creator of the Unreal software package) did a great key-note address on not only the future of gaming but the future of panel technology as a whole. This may be very interesting to some of you paying attention to this thread. Now, you have to get passed the fact that he is a terrible public speaker (by his own admission) and once you get passed the fact that he looks like he is about to projectile vomit and pass out, it actually is a very interesting and informing address.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XiQweemn2_A

Except there is no true 8K hortizontial. It's 7680.

Other monikers for resolution use the vertical:

HD = 1080P
4K = 2160P
8K = 4360P

LMAO - you are the only person to call 8K "Octo HD." There isn't a single source on the internet to call 8K that. Some call it 8K. Some call it Ultra High Definition. Some call it Super Hi-Vision. . . .No one but you calls it Octo HD.

heheh, Googling "Octo HD" results in two references for 8K video - both to this thread... it's quite the universal terminology...

Honestly, that's the kind of "Not Invented Here" thinking that will ruin a global standard. Who cares that Japan picked a system? As long as it is well thought out, and will serve us well for years to come, it shouldn't matter who invented it or where it was invented. Maybe you have a better system. Then present it to the standards group and hope it does well. For the greater good, we ought to learn to set our own collective ego's aside and accompllsh this goal.

It shouldn't matter? What about all the royalties and licensing fees?

When I want to see real High Definition - I put on my glasses. Just doubling and doubling the number of pixels again is a rather unimaginative idea of progress.

The "end game" for human movie viewing comes when we plug the signal directly into our cranium. We are not there yet but there are two recent developments that point in the right direction.

First there is the Sony video helmet. I have one of these and I hate it. It's very uncomfortable to wear. My head seems to be bigger than the Japanese think possible. I have modified it so that it is attached to a bicycle helmet. It's better but still uncomfortable. If you're looking for a technological improvement in the viewing experience, I think this is it, not just a higher resolution screen. Right now the Sony is less than 1080. The next generation will be 1080 maybe higher. The current first generation helmet is uncomfortable but that too will change. Even with relatively low resolution, the Sony helmet is immersive in a way that no flat screen can be. Soon the virtual screen will encompass more of the visual field.

I çonverted my second bedroom into a man-cave. That's where my home theater is. I would actually like a bigger screen than my 110" screen but as yet I can't figure out how to get it shoehorned in my room. My guess is that physical flat screens aren't going to get any bigger. And I doubt if flat screen resolution will get any greater either. I think 1080 will be the standard for some time - maybe forever. An 8K projector does me no good.

My local cinema multiplex started showing DLP movies a couple years ago. I went when they first opened. The digital projection was only 2K (roughly 1080) but it was miles better than the film projection of the same movie shown in another auditorium. All you had to do was walk into the digital theater and it was immediately obvious - no measurements required. But now a couple years later and they are still projecting film but very little DLP Cinema. I'm sure that 4k much less 8K would be better yet, but the public doesn't seem to care.

The other interesting viewing prospect is true surround screen. I don't mean wide screen. I mean 360 degree screen. There are gizmos already on the market for gamers that allow you to build a HT with your seat in the center and three or four projectors painting screens that form a continuous circle around you. The main problems with this approach are architecture and program content. But obviously in a first person auto race simulator this is the way to go.

So which technology would give you a more entertaining experience? A surround screen illuminated by multiple projectors, an HD helmet that covers most of the visual field and which moves with your head movement, or just a bigger, higher resolution conventional flat screen?

Yeah, right, octopus HD <- very creative, lets not forget about duo HD.


http://www.google.nl/search?q=octo+photo&hl=nl&rls=com.microsoft:nl:IE-SearchBox&rlz=1I7SNYK&prmd=imvns&tbm=isch&tbo=u&source=univ&sa=X&ei=TTpWUNeiKNCp0AWB8oHgDw&ved=0CCMQsAQ&biw=868&bih=623

Actually, professional HD used in Digital Cinema is 2048x1080. The same with 4K - Pro is 4096x2160. That's where the "4K" originally came from.

LOL - no it isn't. Quad HD = 4X HD. HD = 2MP. Quad HD = 8MP. You can call it Sede HD though - 16X HD. 16 X 2MP = 32MP which is the pixel desity for Super Hi-Vision. Your made up moniker doesn't follow all the others in principal. It is saying 8X HD which would be 16MP and there is no format like that.

Anyways, I like Quad 4K. 4 x 8MP = 32MP

Or better yet . . . Super Duper High Definition Television! SDHDTV
Edited by Lee Stewart - 9/16/12 at 3:46pm

People have been complaining about 3D glasses. Your "helmut TV" would add a whole new level to those complaints. The biggest one being not able to multitask. And people used to laugh at how dorky people looked wearing just 3D glasses. Imagine what they will say when that morphs to a helmut!

A 360 degree screen? LOL - how do you see what is behind you? As soon as you turnaround to look, now you can't see what is in front of you.
Edited by Lee Stewart - 9/16/12 at 3:49pm

There is a logical contradiction in your statement. You shouldn't be calling 2K by the term HD if you are using 1K as the base resolution. Also traditional resolution naming uses the overall number of pixels which is why 4K can be called Quad HD since it increased the overall number of pixels by 4x. To call 8K by the term Octo HD doesn't make sense either logically or by traditional resolution naming.

Without a very major change in display technology for the NHK to say that they are saving money by going directly to 8K UHDTV sounds to me like an excuse that they are coming up with after they had made the decision.

What is patented in terms of the basic parameters of UHDTV? Also no one voted against the addition of 120 fps support when the NHK introduced it late in UHDTV development and from everything I have read there was broad agreement on the UHDTV standard.

Amen!

It was never NHK's intention to go to 4K. Always been 8K, right from the start of their research (first demo'd at Expo 2005 - Japan) They want to make a giant leap - not a step which is what 4K is.

It isn't the basic parameters that get patented, It's the execution - the equipment.

Why vote against it? They proved it was a benefit.

Has SMPTE accepted the standards for 8K as written by NHK?

LMAO! You are digging a deeper hole for yourself. The moniker "Quad HD " has been around for quite some time. Here is an article from January 2008 calling 3840x2160 "Quad HD."

http://www.engadget.com/2008/01/09/eyes-on-with-westinghouses-quad-hd-displays/

And yes Quad means 4. 1920x1080 (HD) = 2,073,600 pixels aka 2 Megapixels. 3840x2160 = 8,294,400 pixels aka 8.Megapixels. So Quad HD is a correct moniker instead of "4K" because 4 x 2MP = 8MP

Your "Octo HD" is not found anywheres other than in this thread. Thus it is nothing more than a made up name by you. We have explained your error in logic and numbering. You are only looking foolish defending something that is totally wrong.

If you accept Quad HD as an aka for 4K/2160P. Then Quad 4K is correct, while Octo HD is incorrect. It is a round peg in a square hole. It doesn't fit, no matter how much you desperately want it to.

It's like your Super Ultra High Defintion TV - That's that you stated in the OP right? SUHDTV. Another made up term.

Oh - BTW - you didn't even get the pixel count right:

8K by 4K or Octo HD - the real SUHDTV technology

8K UHDTV = 7680 × 4320
Edited by Lee Stewart - 9/17/12 at 1:14am

City Dwellers!




Nope. An all encompassing visual field is the end of the line for me. Say NO to neurocans (/otherland).

Be careful with inventing new terms if they are not very good. The marketing people might start to use them.
Like qHD, which has been used for marketing instead of SD.
The names for the two standards which has been commonly used when referenced in articles in the past are; Level 1 or UHDTV-1 = 4K, Level 2 or UHDTV-2 = 8K.
I thought that was the proper names used by SMPTE and ITU when the standards where finalised recently, but I can not find any other references than UHDTV in documents. So I don't know if they have settled for any names or if they leave that to the marketing people of CEMs.

But Ocho for 8K is quite new.

8K has had a moniker since it's inception; Super Hi-Vision. That sounds infinitely better than Octopus HD.

So tell me, what's the weather like on Planet Lubar? That's where you live right?

Oh my. 4K is called Quad HD not because horizontal resolution is close to 4000 but because its resolution is 4 times higher than HD. Octo HD would be a panel with resolution 8 times higher than HD. There is no such panel as far as I know.
Now, it would be misleading to call 8K "end of the resolution". That applies if horizontal viewing angle is ~60 degrees or less. For head-mounted displays that aim to cover larger field of view 8K is not "end of the resolution".