or Connect
AVS › AVS Forum › Display Devices › Flat Panels General and OLED Technology › Interest In A 1080 vs 4K Shootout? Can We Get to the Heart of the Matter?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Interest In A 1080 vs 4K Shootout? Can We Get to the Heart of the Matter? - Page 2

post #31 of 101
Quote:
Originally Posted by mastermaybe View Post

^ look out, don't you know that's the meritless Carlton Bale graph that "relies" on 20/20 vision? tongue.gifwink.gif
You need the NHK (you know, a company with a VESTED interest in the propagation of 4k media and equipment) graph to tell you- amongst other things- that 1080 is NOT WORTHWHILE AT 10, 20, 30 or even FORTY FEET on a 50" screen. LMAO rolleyes.gif It's 4k or nuttin (or really, AT LEAST according to them), don't you know?
James

NHK is not propagandising 4K, everybody knows they are working on 8K, 4K dropped on them by surprise.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chronoptimist View Post

When your goal is a perfect image the resolution requirements are very high. 400 pixels per degree is almost there.
I think the Carlton Bale chart is based on 60 pixels per degree, which gets you about 40% of the way there if you look at the NHK research.
Once you get to 100 pixels per degree, you're around 85% of the way there, and increased resolution starts to bring very little benefit. So while it may not be a perfect image, an ideal image would have about 70% more resolution than the Carlton Bale chart indicates.
I've been saying for a long time now that as a rough guide you want to double the numbers on that chart, which is pretty close to that. (120 PPD, or about 85-90% of a "perfect image")

NHK uses totally different measures of PQ like "realness". Before bothering with such measures and extreme pixel density I would like to see content which is transparent i.e. low compression, bigger color space and higher frame rate.
post #32 of 101
Thread Starter 
"I've been saying for a long time now that as a rough guide you want to double the numbers on that chart,"

So then 1080 is fully resolved at ~15 feet on a 50" screen rather than ~7 as indicated by the chart?

Well then, you can probably understand why no one is listening...well, maybe NHK...although they'd still tell you that 16K is really "needed" at 15 feet. Again, go figure.

James
post #33 of 101
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by irkuck View Post

NHK is not propagandising 4K, everybody knows they are working on 8K, 4K dropped on them by surprise.
NHK uses totally different measures of PQ like "realness". Before bothering with such measures and extreme pixel density I would like to see content which is transparent i.e. low compression, bigger color space and higher frame rate.

Right, they also realize 8k is complete pipe dream now and in the near future, given the lack of a proper compression scheme and massive bandwidth requirements. Till then, we'll all suffer, I guess.

And heh, just another step in the "upgrade" train.

James
post #34 of 101
Quote:
Originally Posted by mastermaybe View Post

Right, they also realize 8k is complete pipe dream now and in the near future, given the lack of a proper compression scheme and massive bandwidth requirements. Till then, we'll all suffer, I guess. And heh, just another step in the "upgrade" train.
James

NHK has longterm plan, 8K introduction 2020 at the Olympics in Tokio. They are working on full production and distribution chain and steadily progressing.
post #35 of 101

 

IMO that would be the biggest win of them all.  Even at very high FR, I'd want it coupled with a pulse technology to fully erase the remaining S+H blur....whatever is left.

post #36 of 101
When I had LASIK surgery in 1998 my vision was deemed 20/15, I had razor sharp vision for far away objects.
Now, it still 20/20, but being 50 I need reading glasses.
Watching at 10 feet I am still amazed at detail in my 1080p projector, with Darbee help.
I can't imagine how 20/8 would help, more so is that data point 3 sigma from avg?
Just 0.03%?


Via my 32GB iPhone4 using Tapatalk
post #37 of 101
There's no need for a 4K versus a 1080 shootout.

As long as 4K is LCD it sucks.

As long as OLED is curved it sucks.
post #38 of 101
Quote:
Originally Posted by Artwood View Post

There's no need for a 4K versus a 1080 shootout.

As long as 4K is LCD it sucks.

As long as OLED is curved it sucks.

 

....then apparently curved LCD totally rattles your cage....

post #39 of 101
I think curved LCD should go 360 degrees concave--then no one would have to see it!
post #40 of 101
Quote:
Originally Posted by Artwood View Post

I think curved LCD should go 360 degrees concave--then no one would have to see it!

 

Just curious, do you own an LCD?

post #41 of 101
Quote:
Originally Posted by irkuck View Post

Yeah, but regarding the 4K sets they are on the road of parity with the 2K sets pricewise. When this happens everybody will buy 4K. Then 4K content starts appearing.
Quote:
Originally Posted by irkuck View Post

Yeah, but regarding the 4K sets they are on the road of parity with the 2K sets pricewise. When this happens everybody will buy 4K. Then 4K content starts appearing.
Yes, 265

Parity? BS. That happened with 1080p sets because the population all had big crt's that gave them a form factor reason to change. The change also meant that the they were going from ad to HD. There were enough people making that leap to bring tv's down in price. Save for a few budget tv's 1080p is also a standard because it matters.

4k is completely difference. The picture quality difference is not much. The next generation of consoles can't even run 4k games, there's no content availed, nobody is really streaming even 1080p yet, etc. 4k is like sacd. Great for AV nerds, but it's not going to go catch on like 1080p did.

I know people here will disagree, but we're not an average sample of the population. 4k is solving a problem that doesn't exist and creating problems of its own.
post #42 of 101

^You have nearly everything backwards.  The "average population" will want 4K *because* it's the next greatest thing (they'll believe this entirely without knowing why), and they are the ones that won't be having the cerebral AVS conversations about how much it matters, or if games support it yet, etc., etc., etc.

post #43 of 101
Quote:
Originally Posted by housequestion View Post

Parity? BS. That happened with 1080p sets because the population all had big crt's that gave them a form factor reason to change. The change also meant that the they were going from ad to HD. There were enough people making that leap to bring tv's down in price. Save for a few budget tv's 1080p is also a standard because it matters.4k is completely difference. The picture quality difference is not much. The next generation of consoles can't even run 4k games, there's no content availed, nobody is really streaming even 1080p yet, etc. 4k is like sacd. Great for AV nerds, but it's not going to go catch on like 1080p did.
I know people here will disagree, but we're not an average sample of the population. 4k is solving a problem that doesn't exist and creating problems of its own.

You do not catch the point. Average Joe Sixpack/Jane Pepsi don't give a damn about 4K. BUT once shown 4K and 2K sets with the same price sticker
they will buy 4K. This is the same as compact cameras with more megapixels are winning over cameras with less megapixels even if it goes to the point more megapixel is detrimental for PQ.

4K and 2K LCD panels are obviously moving towards price parity, this also means 2K panels are slowly entering death spiral.
post #44 of 101
Quote:
Originally Posted by tgm1024 View Post

Just curious, do you own an LCD?
I do....well, it's only a 32" model (the UN32EH5300F) from Samsung for the bedroom, but I can tell you it would be intolerable as my primary TV. I am actually impressed with its uniformity in comparison to the last LCD TV I owned from 2007 (also a Samsung) as well as a 22" Insignia from 3 to 4 years ago, but I am still abhorred by its black levels.
post #45 of 101
No, I don't have everything backwards. I'm just not looking at things from an AV enthusiast perspective. The average population won't give a s888 about 4K. That's why DVD's still outsell Bluray. The average person cared about making the shift to flag screens because the change in form factor was monumental and the change in image quality was huge. In the case of 4K, the change in form factor is nothing and the change is image quality is not much.

I know plenty of people who have flat screens and don't even get HD cable. The benefit is not there. The next generation of consoles won't even do it. There's next to no content available and that's not going to chagne any time soon.

"You do not catch the point. Average Joe Sixpack/Jane Pepsi don't give a damn about 4K. BUT once shown 4K and 2K sets with the same price sticker"

Where's your data showing that's ever going to happen? How is that going to scale? Outside of AV nerds, nobody is asking for it or willing to pay more for it. It doesn't make the content that's actually available for normal people (netflix, hulu, hbogo, discs, etc) look any better.

For economies of scale to happen, a lot of regular people have to buy this. Nobody wants it. There's no content available for it, no real argument to make the change and a lot of people aren't even taking advantage of 1080P media let alone thinking about 4k. It's a pipe dream.
post #46 of 101
Quote:
Originally Posted by housequestion View Post

No, I don't have everything backwards. I'm just not looking at things from an AV enthusiast perspective. The average population won't give a s888 about 4K. That's why DVD's still outsell Bluray. The average person cared about making the shift to flag screens because the change in form factor was monumental and the change in image quality was huge. In the case of 4K, the change in form factor is nothing and the change is image quality is not much.

I know plenty of people who have flat screens and don't even get HD cable. The benefit is not there. The next generation of consoles won't even do it. There's next to no content available and that's not going to chagne any time soon.

"You do not catch the point. Average Joe Sixpack/Jane Pepsi don't give a damn about 4K. BUT once shown 4K and 2K sets with the same price sticker"

Where's your data showing that's ever going to happen? How is that going to scale? Outside of AV nerds, nobody is asking for it or willing to pay more for it. It doesn't make the content that's actually available for normal people (netflix, hulu, hbogo, discs, etc) look any better.

For economies of scale to happen, a lot of regular people have to buy this. Nobody wants it. There's no content available for it, no real argument to make the change and a lot of people aren't even taking advantage of 1080P media let alone thinking about 4k. It's a pipe dream.

 

Those that believe that there will be no benefit from 4K are primarily those AV nerds you refer to.

 

And I know plenty of non-nerds who think that ever sharper, ever clearer pictures matter a lot.  Whether it's true or not.  They've heard it will be ever sharper and ever clearer, and they believe it to be the next best thing.  Prices have fallen dramatically since the outset of the technology, and sure there's a content issue, but this does seem like an unstoppable phenomenon.  Not that I would ever want to stop it (be clear on that), because I do believe in it, but trust me: outside of AVS and the like, you are just not going to be hearing conversations about the Carlton Bale chart, and 20/20 accuity, and distances from the screen.

 

What you'll hear is what I hear from my non-tech friends all the time about such things---"should I hold off and make sure I get the new stuff?"---"I don't want to get a set that's obsolete too soon"---"I heard that blu-ray is going away"....etc., etc., etc.

 

Besides, this began with (loud) statements YOU were making.  The burden of proof is upon you to supply data supporting your claim, not to blast outward that others must supply data.

post #47 of 101
Quote:
Originally Posted by vinnie97 View Post
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by tgm1024 View Post

Just curious, do you own an LCD?
I do....well, it's only a 32" model (the UN32EH5300F) from Samsung for the bedroom, but I can tell you it would be intolerable as my primary TV. I am actually impressed with its uniformity in comparison to the last LCD TV I owned from 2007 (also a Samsung) as well as a 22" Insignia from 3 to 4 years ago, but I am still abhorred by its black levels.

 

Wait a minute.  I asked Artwood that.  Have you been logging in under two names and lost track?  :-P

 

:)

post #48 of 101
I just felt motivated to chime in. wink.gif Would the real Artwood admit to owning all those LCDs? :O
post #49 of 101
I have never been disrespected so much as to be asked if I own LCD.

The only way I would use LCD would be if it were in a porta potty and I could decorate it!
post #50 of 101
Quote:
Originally Posted by Artwood View Post

I have never been disrespected so much as to be asked if I own LCD.

The only way I would use LCD would be if it were in a porta potty and I could decorate it!

What do you use for a PC monitor? A CRT?
post #51 of 101
Quote:
Originally Posted by dsinger 

What do you use for a PC monitor? A CRT?
No, he owns a Plasma laptop wink.gif
post #52 of 101
Samsung should produce a plasma laptop.
post #53 of 101
Quote:
Originally Posted by Artwood View Post

Samsung should produce a plasma laptop.

 

LOL......battery time of 13 minutes....

post #54 of 101
Quote:
Originally Posted by Artwood View Post

Samsung should produce a plasma laptop.

when they do, we will run an AVS Power Buy so all AVS members can take advantage of this technology

Art: I gave you a thumbs up for the idea...
post #55 of 101
Quote:
Originally Posted by markrubin View Post
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Artwood View Post

Samsung should produce a plasma laptop.

when they do, we will run an AVS Power Buy so all AVS members can take advantage of this technology

Art: I gave you a thumbs up for the idea...

 

....and then Mark, you'll need to create a forum called "Windows Taskbar burn-in, HELP!"....

post #56 of 101
Finally a real, controlled, public and blind shootout: Samsung UE55F9000 and UE55F8000 will each be placed in a custom-built cabinet that masks the bezel and stand, leaving only the LCD screen in view for attendees, so that they won’t know from the outset which is the 4K display and which is the full HD one. Sorry guys but it is on Dec 1st in Europe.
post #57 of 101
Quote:
Originally Posted by irkuck View Post

Finally a real, controlled, public and blind shootout: Samsung UE55F9000 and UE55F8000 will each be placed in a custom-built cabinet that masks the bezel and stand, leaving only the LCD screen in view for attendees, so that they won’t know from the outset which is the 4K display and which is the full HD one. Sorry guys but it is on Dec 1st in Europe.

 

They better start them out from far far away and then move them incrementally forward until they "see" the difference.  Otherwise it'll be endless arguments about them detecting the 4Kness ahead of time and using that to color their observations.

 

BTW, I'm assuming that this is a side-by-side test, not a one at a time thing?

post #58 of 101
Maybe the question is - do you notice the difference, not if you can see the difference. My father used to decorate the house with candles in the windows for Christmas and unfortunately I often didn't notice. My mother would change her hair style and my father often didn't notice.

I was with a friend the other night looking at TVs. At 8'-10' we stopped in our tracks to look at a 55" TV not knowing it was UHD - just that it was the best dang picture we saw at that point and we walked past many TVs all with their own source - none were using a general broadcast.

The truth is you can DEFINITELY see the difference on a much bigger screen than the 55" screen we were looking at, at 20' . Will you appreciate it or notice it - that is up to you. I couldn't tell you the difference between a $1.80 bottle of wine and a $1,000 bottle of wine but I can tell you the difference instantly between miller, bud, sam adams, Michelob, rolling rock etc - just hand me an unlabeled pitcher of beer and I can identify all the major brands right away.

My attitude is if you and your guests don't care why spend more money but if you do then you have to decide how much it is worth to you.
post #59 of 101
Quote:
Originally Posted by irkuck View Post

Finally a real, controlled, public and blind shootout: Samsung UE55F9000 and UE55F8000 will each be placed in a custom-built cabinet that masks the bezel and stand, leaving only the LCD screen in view for attendees, so that they won’t know from the outset which is the 4K display and which is the full HD one. Sorry guys but it is on Dec 1st in Europe.
I hope they will be using more than just video in their tests. E.g. 4K gaming, running a Mac at retina and non-retina resolutions. (Macs use 2x scaling so they should be otherwise identical - Windows only goes up to 150%)
post #60 of 101
4K gaming with nice visuals is really only possible with most modern games with about $4k in video cards if you want to have the highest settings turned on. A good test would be to contrast 1080P with FSAA and visuals cranked vs 4K without. Windows does do above 150% by the way. It's just not one of the options that they hand feed you. In Windows 7, it goes up to 500%. I use it on my MPBr to keep text in certain applications more readable.

The better test is a light controlled environment and put a ZT up against a lesser (which would be basically any) 4K TV and see if running a higher resolution makes up for the shortcomings of the set.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
AVS › AVS Forum › Display Devices › Flat Panels General and OLED Technology › Interest In A 1080 vs 4K Shootout? Can We Get to the Heart of the Matter?