AVS Forum | Home Theater Discussions And Reviews (https://www.avsforum.com/forum/)
-   LCD Flat Panel Displays (https://www.avsforum.com/forum/166-lcd-flat-panel-displays/)
-   -   8K TV is Coming: What You Need to Know (https://www.avsforum.com/forum/166-lcd-flat-panel-displays/2953590-8k-tv-coming-what-you-need-know.html)

imagic 01-30-2018 09:03 AM

8K TV is Coming: What You Need to Know
 
8K TV is coming soon to a living room near you. Here's what you need to know about the next big leap in flat-panel display resolution.

Click here to read more: https://www.avsforum.com/8k-tv-is-com...-need-to-know/

DavidML3 01-30-2018 09:19 AM

The only thing I do know is
1. There is barely any content for 4k.
2. Tv broadcasts are still stuck in 720p
3. PC Games can barely run 4k at 60FPS. GPU's just aren't powerful enough.
4. There is barely any 4k playback devices
5. Did I mention there is barely any 4k content?

8k just isn't feasible and justifiable. It won't be until another decade until this takes hold.

4k tv have been out since around 2012 maybe and it took 6 years for it to go mainstream still with limited content. Maybe another 3 years until its on broadcasts and cable.

imagic 01-30-2018 09:23 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DavidML3 (Post 55599720)
The only thing I do know is
1. There is barely any content for 4k.
2. Tv broadcasts are still stuck in 720p
3. PC Games can barely run 4k at 60FPS. GPU's just aren't powerful enough.
4. There is barely any 4k playback devices
5. Did I mention there is barely any 4k content?

8k just isn't feasible and justifiable. It won't be until another decade until this takes hold.

4k tv have been out since around 2012 maybe and it took 6 years for it to go mainstream still with limited content. Maybe another 3 years until its on broadcasts and cable.

Sure, but as far as the actual TVs go, if you buy a new TV today you are almost certainly getting a 4K TV. Main point being that higher resolution is always backward-compatible and (it would appear) quickly drops in price, too.

Barely any content in 4K? I watch the UHD version of movies all the time; many popular new releases are in fact available in 4K (albeit with 2K CGI etc.).

Technology moves too quickly for it to take another decade for 8K to take hold when it comes to movies and streaming TV. And I'm confident the same is true for gaming.

ray0414 01-30-2018 10:09 AM

I used to think 8k was stupid. But if that means improved Processing to handle it(like Samsung's impressive AI demo), then I'm all for it. My biggest worry was lower resolution content looking atrocious. (in the case of 8k, even 1080p would be considered lower resolution content).

imagic 01-30-2018 10:14 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ray0414 (Post 55600134)
I used to think 8k was stupid. But if that means improved Processing to handle it(like Samsung's impressive AI demo), then I'm all for it. My biggest worry was lower resolution content looking atrocious. (in the case of 8k, even 1080p would be considered lower resolution content).

I’ve been to this rodeo enough times to know that show demos are not necessarily going to translate directly to final product, and that the benefit of new technology is usually demonstrated to maximum advantage, however in this case I definitely recognize the advantages of the superior processing and can correlate it to my experiences with processing still images.

For example, in Photoshop, sharpening after upsampling yield better results than doing it before upsampling. And with better algorithms, you can apply more sharpening before experiencing Halo artifacts. Plus you can certainly do better than what's currently available when it comes to noise reduction.

I’ve also seen some very impressive examples of how the improved processing helps with motion resolution and with improved FALD performance (of course it helps that the Q9S as has something like 10,000 FALD zones to work with).

KidHorn 01-30-2018 11:24 AM

I would guess in about 3 years, pretty much every new TV will be 8K. If the manufacturing costs are roughly the same, why make a 4K? I think almost everyone would pick an 8K over a 4K TV, all else being equal.

And even if there is no 8K content, as was written, the TVs will do a good job of upscaling. Everything will look better on a 8K TV.

Bklynblaze 01-30-2018 11:57 AM

Here we go..4K is not even mainstream yet.

imagic 01-30-2018 12:10 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bklynblaze (Post 55600914)
Here we go..4K is not even mainstream yet.

And yet, if you try to buy a 1080p TV at a size fit for a living room, you're going to have very few options. Even in a Walmart. Hmmmm.

Bklynblaze 01-30-2018 12:15 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by imagic (Post 55601008)
And yet, if you try to buy a 1080p TV at a size fit for a living room, you're going to have very few options. Even in a Walmart. Hmmmm.

Ok let me stop my search for 4K and re-finance my house for an 8K set. No thanks.

Doe Doe 01-30-2018 12:16 PM

I'll also need to know where to go to get new eyeballs implanted, so I could even see any difference between 8K and 4K. Actually I kind of need that eyeball upgrade even now, to see the difference between 4K and 1080p.

So unless this "big leap" in television tech comes with a free set of implantable eyeballs, it's all hype and marketing in my opinion.

The next big leap would be if OLED became affordable and they iron out the kinks. Contrast/blacks/color is what matters at this point, not extra resolution that nobody can see unless they sit 2' from their TV... and have any content to watch to begin with.

nesto719 01-30-2018 12:22 PM

I’ve been saying this to friends now for a while, 4k is gonna be treated just like 720p TVs were . How quickly the manufactures skipped to 1080p

Bklynblaze 01-30-2018 12:25 PM

When 4K becomes the equivalent of 1080P sets in my local Best Buy that’s when I’ll consider 8K. We’re a far ways off from that. Until then, I’ll enjoy my 4K tv that I don’t even have yet. :p

jh901 01-30-2018 12:29 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by imagic (Post 55599590)
8K TV is coming soon to a living room near you. Here's what you need to know about the next big leap in flat-panel display resolution.

How do you define a "pure 4K viewing experience"?

What do you mean when you state, as fact, that there's no such thing as "too many pixels"?

BoboBrazil 01-30-2018 12:36 PM

I doubt the jump from 4k to 8k would even be noticeable for most people. My girlfriend can't even tell the difference between 1080p and 4k :P

JWhip 01-30-2018 12:45 PM

Just another reason to hold onto my money and skip 4K altogether.

ray0414 01-30-2018 12:50 PM

8k will mostly just benefit tvs 75" and up in my opinion. So I wouldn't expect a difference with smaller tvs.

Stereodude 01-30-2018 12:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ray0414 (Post 55600134)
I used to think 8k was stupid. But if that means improved Processing to handle it(like Samsung's impressive AI demo), then I'm all for it. My biggest worry was lower resolution content looking atrocious. (in the case of 8k, even 1080p would be considered lower resolution content).

Samsung's AI processing demo was all smoke and mirrors. There's no way it did what they were claiming. The before and after footage in their demo loop absolutely had to be simulated, not real.

It was close to the eye roll inducing "enhancing" you see in movies where they take grainy SD security camera footage where you can barely tell the make and model of the car and they somehow enhance it enough to read the expiration date on the license plate.

gmarceau 01-30-2018 12:59 PM

Mark, just curious since you've seen some of these sets in person, do you notice any discernible difference in the demo content with 8k vs 4k?

I've heard that 4k sets need to be at least 85" before the differences with 1080 become apparent, but since Sony is making TV demos with walls...

JohnAV 01-30-2018 12:59 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by imagic (Post 55599590)
8K TV is coming soon to a living room near you. Here's what you need to know about the next big leap in flat-panel display resolution.

You seemed to completely have forgotten about how 8K displays are not currently energy conservative. The current maximum nit race combined with existing 2012 EU law still in effect, along with California's similar energy conservation laws will shunt this industry's race to 8K. :)

For example
Quote:

the on-mode power consumption of a television with visible screen area A expressed in dm2 shall not exceed 16 Watts + A * 3.4579 Watts/dm2

A 65in widescreen TV has a screen area of 116.47 dm2, according to this excellent TV screen size comparator and an online conversion tool. Plugging the number into the EU’s equation gives us a maximum power consumption of 419 watts
This is from a another posters observations with displays that show you can't get too much brighter and still allowed to be sold in EU and California as examples.

Quote:

Z9D power consumption
65" 322w (1800 peak nits)
75" 428w (1800 peak nits)

100" 767w (2800 peak nits)
As I said in another forum, technology will advance pushing lighting source efficiency to the max for TV's. The huge question will be concerning 8k panels, that will be tough as they use a lot of energy comparably.

Where do you think all the jokes about the first ever CES black out came from? :D

jh901 01-30-2018 01:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JWhip (Post 55601264)
Just another reason to hold onto my money and skip 4K altogether.

No, it's not. Sincerely.

This is why pieces such as this are irresponsible. There are more of you looking to confirm false beliefs than those who understand what the new UHD standard delivers. Anyone who is passionate about home theater who can afford to do so will be getting a UHD player and display.

Stereodude 01-30-2018 01:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by imagic (Post 55599778)
Sure, but as far as the actual TVs go, if you buy a new TV today you are almost certainly getting a 4K TV. Main point being that higher resolution is always backward-compatible and (it would appear) quickly drops in price, too.

Funny, because if you buy a "8k" TV now all your most certainly getting is an overpriced "4k" (3840x2160) TV. So, pay a premium for an already obsolete TV for what?

Lets see how this went last time around... Lets find some owners who bought the very first generation of "4k" TVs and ask them how they like watching WCG, HDR from UHD Blu-ray or streaming on their "4k" TVs. Oh wait, my bad, they can't... Their TVs don't have WCG, HDR, HDCP 2.2, or even a single HDMI 2.0 input. They just bought expensive 1080p sets that displays 1080p content with 3840x2160 pixels.

LumensLover 01-30-2018 01:01 PM

This is what you need to know: 8K is already obsolete compared to 16k.

imagic 01-30-2018 01:05 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by LumensLover (Post 55601380)
This is what you need to know: 8K is already obsolete compared to 16k.

Boom. End of story.

JWhip 01-30-2018 01:06 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jh901 (Post 55601356)
No, it's not. Sincerely.

This is why pieces such as this are irresponsible. There are more of you looking to confirm false beliefs than those who understand what the new UHD standard delivers. Anyone who is passionate about home theater who can afford to do so will be getting a UHD player and display.

With all due respect, my statement was made in jest. However, I am a bit turned off by the ever moving goalposts in this arena, which is why I am spending my money on 2 channel.

imagic 01-30-2018 01:08 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JohnAV (Post 55601350)
You seemed to completely have forgotten about how 8K displays are not currently energy conservative. The current maximum nit race combined with existing 2012 EU law still in effect, along with California's similar energy conservation laws will shunt this industry's race to 8K. :)

For example

This is from a another posters observations with displays that show you can't get too much brighter and still allowed to be sold in EU and California as examples.

As I said in another forum, technology will advance pushing lighting source efficiency to the max for TV's. The huge question will be concerning 8k panels, that will be tough as they use a lot of energy comparably.

Where do you think all the jokes about the first ever CES black out came from? :D

Explain by what mechanism 8K TVs use more power than same-size, same-brightness 4K?

Europeans can't fit large TVs in their homes anyhow, they'll be fine with 4K.

I bet you big bucks that if worse comes to worse, the EPA will exempt huge power-hungry TVs because someone who happens to be in power loves TVs a lot. ;)

golfster 01-30-2018 01:12 PM

On a 70" 1080p display, I can start to see the pixels at about 6 feet. On a 4k display that drops to about 3 feet. I suppose with an 8k display, I can start to enjoy my viewing at less than a foot and a half. Explain to me where I start to benefit from any of those resolutions at a normal viewing distance.

barrelbelly 01-30-2018 01:21 PM

"Visually, what you can expect from an 8K TV—at the bare minimum—is totally invisible pixels, which is already the defacto standard for smartphones and tablets."

This is the keynote comment in your wonderful article IMO Mark. 8k has always been the defacto golden ring sought by home display makers to achieve "reality" imaging. The standard will obviously be pushed even higher in the future for emerging formats such as VR and AI imaging. Those and others could theoretically require 18-32K to achieve total realism. But although 1080p-4kx2k with all of the bells and whistles like HDR, DV can be awe inspiring. 8k QLED & OLED with the same bells & whistles...along with invisible pixels, most definitely will become the "Gold & Platinum" standard for home based displays in my lifetime.

cober319 01-30-2018 01:23 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Doe Doe (Post 55601060)
I'll also need to know where to go to get new eyeballs implanted, so I could even see any difference between 8K and 4K. Actually I kind of need that eyeball upgrade even now, to see the difference between 4K and 1080p.

So unless this "big leap" in television tech comes with a free set of implantable eyeballs, it's all hype and marketing in my opinion.

The next big leap would be if OLED became affordable and they iron out the kinks. Contrast/blacks/color is what matters at this point, not extra resolution that nobody can see unless they sit 2' from their TV... and have any content to watch to begin with.

Agreed. Can we lock down the present before we start panicking about the future?

Most OLED TVs are still pretty expensive, and have potential burn-in issues (looking forward to the rtings.com testing results currently underway). Most Non-OLED 4k TVs have bad viewing angle problems, poor local dimming, or poor HDR capabilities unless you push into the OLED price-zone.

Lets be honest, 8k is at LEAST 5 years away, and by then you'll want to upgrade your 4k TV anyway. So, you can spend your $1,000 - $2000 on a 4k TV now and enjoy it in all its glory, or you can save your money and buy a $10,000 8k TV in 5 years, :D

BCRSS 01-30-2018 01:24 PM

1 Attachment(s)
Quote:

Originally Posted by imagic (Post 55599590)
8K TV is coming soon to a living room near you. Here's what you need to know about the next big leap in flat-panel display resolution.

Click here to read more: https://www.avsforum.com/8k-tv-is-com...-need-to-know/
Anyhow, by definition 8K UHD TVs sport boundary-pushing specifications including the all-important 7680 x 4320 resolution.


Yet picture on front page is 1080. :)


https://www.avsforum.com/forum/attach...6&d=1517347443

imagic 01-30-2018 01:26 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Stereodude (Post 55601500)
Uh, pixel aperture ratio. :rolleyes:

We'll wait for you to catch up...

OK, but do you know what you are claiming is a fact if taken in the holistic context of a TV, as opposed to discussing the specifics of one panel type or another? In other words, given advances in technology that improve the efficiency of displays, do you know for sure that future 8K TVs will be more power hungry than current 4K, given the same screen size and peak brightness.

And as a corollary, are today's 4K TVs more power hungry than the 1080P models they replace, again given the screen size and peak brightness? Where's the proof? Don't keep me in suspense, show me. ;)


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 01:46 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
vBulletin Security provided by vBSecurity (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2019 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.

vBulletin Optimisation provided by vB Optimise (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2019 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
User Alert System provided by Advanced User Tagging (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2019 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.