Sony Sticks with 4K Name

Nah, serves CEA right for not consulting the only company to have a full production projector and the leader of flat panel displays...this is basically like Apple coming up with a new interface and not telling anyone else and CEA will befall the same fate...no one will use it. I hope they didn't have a buncha' suits working on this a long time cause its money wasted! I think its funny that CEA didn't consult Sony...I think they made the same mistake a decade ago...something called HD-DVD. Sony proved time and again that it doesn't matter what reason you have/how right you are...throw enough money at it and you'll eventually get your way.

Though I am happy that they tried to specify "The screen aspect ratio should be 16 by 9.", I think that's already been defeated by movies that were shot in

I finally agree with something Sony did...now, how about 4K blu-ray on the PS4(K), pretty please?
Edited by pottscb - 10/20/12 at 5:07am

Yeah, at least 4k has the virtue of being descriptive.

Ultra is marketing speak, signifying nothing. The strict sense of the word is extreme, and implies one can go no further, as in "ne plus ultra", which would be ridiculous. But of course they didn't choose it because of that. They just thought it sounded good.

Let's face it. Sony is the one calling the shots for the 4K future, by simple virtue of the fact the have the media content to make it happen. No other electronics manufacture has the content the 4K hardware will need. Let's just hope they do not decide on another proprietary format and agree to implement HEVC for faster integration. Rumors are Sony, LG and Toshiba have already agreed on a 4K standard and we should know more after CES.

dont really care whats its called personally, i just want to know how much extra stuff do i need to buy(other display and avr with 4k passthrough) and whether not we'll have another format war on our hands, even more expansive(and expensive) combo packs, or just make multilayer bluray discs that current 4k capable players can read.

LOL - guess Sony will be the first CEM to be sued for false advertising. There is nothing about their new 84" UHDTV that is "4K."

AIUI both 8k and 4k are described as Ultra High Definition by the ITU (who set broadcast standards) - so Sony are just being clear with their description.

UHD on its own could mean 4k or 8k. UHD 4k is unambiguous.

Think Sony's approach makes total sense - particularly if 4k and 8k devices are both available.

I find it interesting that they don't refer to them as UHD 2160 and UHD 4320. There is no such thing as "8K."

Just like there's 720p HD and 1080p HD, it makes sense to use 4K UHD or 8K UHD.

Now let us see what kind of content should we expect for 4K displays, I also hope TV manufacturers don't forget about PQ and just focus on pixel count, it's ridiculous how slow the HDTV PQ development has been since 2008 and 9G Kuros.

It isn't what kind of content we should expect . . . it's when will UHD content become available. Everything I have read says 3 to 4 years.

Pioneer proved that building the very best PQ TV was regulated to a very small portion of the consumer marketplace that would pay the large premium for such a TV. When they pulled the plug on their Kuros, they were selling less than 450,000 per year. . . when 200 million TVs were sold per year.

Yeah I too am wondering when will they actually utilize the newer resolutions which is why I really hope TV manufacturers won't forget about PQ and just focus on marketing gimmicks. Gaming being my main source and current consoles are FAR from even making full use of 1080p (everything is upscaled crap and PC games don't interest me much), I don't see 4K being fully utilized for a very long time, let alone the ridiculous screen sizes you'll need to actually see the improvements.

BTW just to be sure:

4K = 3840 x 2160 = 8 MP

8K = 7680 x 4320 = 33 MP

?

I like "4k" better, it describes what it actually is. I don't really give a damn because I won't be getting 4k for a few years.

How they treat UHD will be up to the Hollywood studios. Will they go to 10 or 12 bit color space? Increase the Chroma Subsampling Rate to 4:2:2? Or will Hollywood cripple UHD by demanding they stay with 8 bit color space and leave the CSR at 4:2:0?

"Marginal Share" for 4K TV

http://www.on-ce.eu/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=1393:isuppli-qmarginal-shareq-for-4k-tv-&catid=24&Itemid=100038

Where do you see "4K" in the 3840x2160 pixel count? There is a 4K format for Digital Cinema which is not going to be used for consumer UHD. It is 4096x2160. That is where the moniker "4K" came from.

Good for Sony is all I can say. Just because some panel decides to change the name dont mean Sony has to. They walk to the beat of their own drum....always have and always will. I dont care really either way because 4K wont be for me anytime soon because I am satisfied.....more then satisfied with what I have and I dont see that changing anytime soon. 1080p is more then good enough for me.

One of the hidden benefits of 4k displays is that they allow passive glasses viewing of 1080p 3D content without a loss of resolution. (i.e. you can show 2 x 1080p line eye feeds simultaneously on a 2160p vertical resolution 4k display - so avoid the flicker and cost of active glasses, but avoid the resolution loss that you get with passive 1080p displays which drop to 540p resolution with 3D content)

Sky in the UK have been shooting some sporting events in 4k as a test I believe - and as they control the entire chain from acquisition to set-top box, they could easily make 4k their 'next big thing'...

BUT those TVs and projectors are NOT actually 4k so in a way its false marketing... thats why I like UltraHD as its not, it simply means anything higher then Current High Def, which for now is 720p and 1080p....

What 2160p is just too.... what? Why not just call it that.

The consumer "4k" displays won't actually have 4000 horizontal lines, and consumers are used to horizontal line counts, why change it? Anyways just give me some high bitrate "4k" feeds so I can downscale to my 1080p. Of course it will most likely be compress to the point that we'd be better of with 1080p video after a short time anyways.

Shouldn't a resolution be at least 8MP to qualify as being UHD? That's way higher than 1080p.

The Sony projector is a true 4K projector because they are using the same pixel count that they use for their Digital Cinema projectors; 4096x2160. But their new 84" LCD is not. It's 3840x2160.

Are they using to hortizontial pixel counts? Most of the advertising I see is 1080P . . . they use the vertical pixel count.

That is part of what the CEA has defined for Ultra HD:

The group also defined the core characteristics of Ultra High-Definition TVs, monitors and projectors for the home. Minimum performance attributes include display resolution of at least eight million active pixels, with at least 3,840 horizontally and at least 2,160 vertically. Displays will have an aspect ratio with width to height of at least 16 X 9. To use the Ultra HD label, display products will require at least one digital input capable of carrying and presenting native 4K format video from this input at full 3,840 X 2,160 resolution without relying solely on up-converting.

ah okay

Sony is wrong for calling it 4K when 3840 is under 4000 pixels across - so false advertising/misleading consumers.

The Consumer Electronics Association (CEA) is wrong for not picking a more descriptive name since just "Ultra HD" doesn't distinguish between 3840x2160 and 7680x4320. The CEA should have given a name to the 7680x4320 format at the same time as they did the 3840x2160 one.

(I know 3840x2160 is referred to by as UHDTV level 1 in some places and 7680x4320 as UHDTV level 2 but I think for consumer products they should have more descriptive names).

I think it's okay if Sony call their products that deliver at least 4000 pixels across "4K" (like I think some of their projectors do), but not their products that only deliver 3840 since that would be false advertising.
Edited by Joe Bloggs - 10/20/12 at 8:05pm

Sony's current 4k projector is 4096x2160. So they have a right IMO.

Besides, we're talking about 160pixels for the rest of the products. Who cares? Let's all sue Seagate for labeling their Hard Drives 2tb and 3tb when they are actually 1.8tb and 2.7tb usable space.

See my last line above:
Sony's XBR-84X900 TV has 3840 pixels across - advertising that as 4K is false advertising.

Companies calling 3840 pixel wide products 4K, or even worse, calling 7680 wide products 8K risk a lawsuit (like according to hometheaterreview, they did by calling screens a certain size when they were really under that) and even if they didn't , it's still misleading consumers.

--
I think another problem with the "Ultra High Definition" name (or even 4K name) for TVs is it doesn't specify the supported frame rates. When broadcasts start using UHDTV1, it's very unlikely they'll be limited to the frame rates that these current TVs are with the current HDMI standard (eg. max of only 30Hz at 3840x2160) - it's likely they will use at least 50/60Hz for UHDTV1 broadcasts.
Edited by Joe Bloggs - 10/20/12 at 10:12pm

HDMI.org will be adding a new version of HDMI (1.5?) to accomodate higher frame rates for 2160. They have said it will be out by the end of this year.

I hope they expand the color gamut. Almost every display shipped in the past few years is capable of exceeding HDTV/Bluray color standards. On the content side, the DCI spec also exceeds Bluray & HDTV. The technology and the content are available now. 4k is a solution looking for a problem. Better color is something we could all appreciate

Sony is using the 4K I think because thier current production projecter VW1000 is 4096x2160,  but it is not 16:9 (1.78), but rather 1.89 ratio, on the projection then I think users are simply zooming to fill the 16:9 screen,  I don't how that will work out on HDTVs.  The 3840x2160 is exactly 16:9 and will fill edge to edge the usual HDTV. 

That is exactly correct. Although no need to zoom in. There is a setting within the vvw1000 menu for 1.78 or use the full panel.