8K Association is Formed at CES 2019 - Page 2 - AVS Forum | Home Theater Discussions And Reviews
Forum Jump: 
 61Likes
Reply
 
Thread Tools
post #31 of 78 Old 01-17-2019, 03:41 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Mark Rejhon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 1999
Location: North America
Posts: 4,171
Mentioned: 5 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 100 Post(s)
Liked: 280
Now with resolution race having gone full plaid retina.... Time for a refresh rate race! We're still a long way from retina refresh rates (scientifically confirmed to be >1000Hz).

(As pointed out in the previous post link, high Hz can also help low-Hz situations in unexpected ways, too -- from a display engineering perspective.)

Just like almost no cost difference between 720p, 1080p and 4K today at common sizes -- eventually true ultra-Hz will be almost no cost difference....someday. It'll be expensive initially, but that's why we must continue the (non-faked) refresh rate race as the unturned stone
Ericglo likes this.

Thanks,
Mark Rejhon
www.BlurBusters.com - Everything Better Than 60Hz(tm)
Mark Rejhon is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #32 of 78 Old 01-17-2019, 03:50 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Mark Rejhon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 1999
Location: North America
Posts: 4,171
Mentioned: 5 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 100 Post(s)
Liked: 280
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mashie Saldana View Post
So hi refresh rate is nothing new, there were/are LCD's running at 600Hz.
Faked refresh rate, not true refresh rate.

Big Hz was often marketing:
  • Plasma subfield frequency (which were like temporal dithers) of a lower Hz, e.g. 10 subfields per true refresh cycle image.
  • Temporal dither frequency; e.g. using 10 temporal dithered refresh cycles to generate one frame / one refresh cycle.
  • Scanning backlight frequency or strobe backlight length (real Hz was often still 60 or 120 in these times)
  • Motion clarity ratio based on 1/600sec strobe flash length even though refresh rate was only 60Hz or 120Hz (it's true that a strobed 1/600sec flash will have roughly the same motion blur of a true [email protected], but you will still have things like the phantom-array effect / stroboscopic effect like www.testufo.com/mousearrow
  • Repeat-refresh frequency (e.g. refreshing the display repeatedly to improve color quality or speed up pixel response)

Motion blur is frame visibility time, whether the frame is visible for full duration of refresh cycle or is padded by black frames. A 1ms flash at 120Hz, would have the same amount of display motion blur as 1ms frames filling the whole second ([email protected]) -- that's why it's so hard to eliminate motion blur strobelessly.

In those times, 600Hz has never been done by 600 unique non-faked frames in 600 refresh cycles. Even interpolation (Motionflow) didn't go at that high framerate.

Today, we finally can experiment with it now with the ultra-Hz displays that scientists/researchers now finally have -- true 600 unique frames at a true 600 Hz was not possible until relatively recently.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mashie Saldana View Post
What I'm talking about here is capturing video at 120Hz or more which is wasted
False.
Commonly perpetuated myth, understandably founded on old assumptions. But, buddy, it's time to lay that myth to rest as science has already proven otherwise. And camera shutter speeds can easily be faster than display persistence.

As founder of Blur Busters and inventor of TestUFO, I have ultra-Hz displays here.

While the camera shutter is indeed a limiting factor, remember, many sports camera can do a 1/1000sec shutter.

It depends on the camera shutter. 1/1000sec shutter video looks much clearer at 480fps at 480Hz on my experimental 480Hz display. I was the world first to write mainstream tests about 480Hz.

We are already doing UltraHFR experiments and I have a big reduser.net thread about Ultra HFR.

To have blurless sample-and-hold, and have 1/1000sec camera shutter without phantom array effects and without motion blur, you need to fill the whole second with 1ms frames, aka [email protected] Basically flickerless CRT clarity without the need for phosphor/impulsing/black frames/black periods/etc. To match 1ms motion blur and also completely avoid stroboscopic effects. Basically low-persistence sample-and-hold. Real life does not strobe, does not flicker, and strobing/BFI is a humankind band-aid until we've achieved ultra-Hz.

Also, source persistence and destination persistence is additive. A 1/60sec camera shutter and a 1/60sec sample-hold display == creates 2/60sec combined motion blur. But now with camera shutter of 1/1000sec with UltraHFR video running at 240fps, even a 240Hz sample-hold display is a motion blur bottleneck (1ms source persistence, 4ms destination persistence).

When HDTVs first arrived, some camera operators had to slow down camera motion and increase shutter, to increase motion blur, to hide display limitations better -- you no longer had CRT motion clarity pans of yesteryear of CRTs. So to prevent excess motion blur, camera operation changed. Only on certain material (e.g. sunny day downhill skiing or such) that you see the 1/1000sec shutter used, and then you see the stroboscopic effects of low-Hz. I see it sometimes on video material, and so you've got a tradeoff between camera shutter blur or stroboscopic effect. Can't fix both simultaneously without ultra-Hz.

Motion blur from persistence behaves the same way on camera end and display end.
1ms display persistence = 1 pixel of motion blur per 1000 pixels/sec motion on a sample-hold-display
1ms shutter persistence = 1 mm of motion blur per 1000 mm/sec motion on a photograph
(or angular motion, if you prefer to measure that way)

60fps @ 60Hz = 16.7ms motion blur on sample-hold displays
120fps @ 120Hz = 8.3ms motion blur on sample-hold displays
1000fps @ 1000Hz = 1ms motion blur on sample-hold displays

To get the same improvement of 60fps->120fps (8.3ms improvement), one observes the need to jump extremely dramatically up the diminishing-points-of-returns curve 120fps->1000fps (7.3ms improvement). There are cheap ways to achieve ultra-Hz that display manufacturers are not yet milking, and also on old fashioned assumptions.

Not everyone needs ultra-Hz but the benefits for UltraHFR video are confirmed plainly human visible. Have you ever seen UltraHFR like I have, like [email protected], [email protected] and [email protected] realtime non-slomo?

Yes, we can fix motion blur by using strobe/flicker/phosphor/CRT flicker/light modulation. But real life doesn't flicker, and the only way to fix stroboscopic effects AND motion blur effects in video simultaneously, and get 100% strobeless (and phantom-array-less) CRT motion clarity with UltraHFR video, is ultra-fps at ultra-Hz.

It's already scientifically proven that to have cake (lack of stroboscopics/wagonwheel effects) AND eat it too (lack of motion blur), requires an extremely dramatic climb.

NVIDIA scientists such as Morgan Mcguire agree with me, and many people at NVIDIA are huge fans of me now, considering me as a refresh rate visionary, since very few people get to experiment with ultra-Hz displays and make observations that nobody else has ever seen.

Having the fortunate experience of working with display manufacturers, I've written an excellent Hertz myth-busting article, confirmed by several scientists, see Blur Busters Law And The Amazing Journey To Future 1000Hz Displays.
(Complete with peer reviewed links, annotated animations & photographic proofs)

I also have a peer reviewed paper, co-authored with NIST.gov, NOKIA, Keltek, on a display motion-blur measurement technique, so I know what I am writing about.
Ericglo, Joe Bloggs and dfa973 like this.

Thanks,
Mark Rejhon
www.BlurBusters.com - Everything Better Than 60Hz(tm)

Last edited by Mark Rejhon; 01-17-2019 at 04:17 AM.
Mark Rejhon is offline  
post #33 of 78 Old 01-17-2019, 04:17 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Mashie Saldana's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: UK
Posts: 2,276
Mentioned: 18 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1256 Post(s)
Liked: 1092
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mark Rejhon View Post
Faked refresh rate, not true refresh rate.
Correct but I was talking about your other post that was linked where you discussed insering inverted frames to remove uniformity issues (which would be great btw). Those inverted frames doesn't have to be part of the content at all. Hence the 600Hz display if it did such insertions would be just fine even if the content was at 60Hz.

I'm not entirely sure why you are so obsessed with motion blur, but hey, whatever makes you happy.

I'm glad that people like you will push Netflix to offer 8k 8000FPS streams in the future, it will mean I will be busy forever providing broadband when a single stream will require 100GB or even 1TB of bandwidth.

Tower Cinema - 9.1.6 in a 12'x12' room
Input : Nvidia Shield TV, Panasonic DMP-UB400
Magic : Marantz SR7010, Marantz SR6010, 2x NAD T743
Output : Panasonic TX65EZ952B, SVS PB13 Ultra, Monitor Audio GSLCR 2xGS20 2xGS10 4xGSFX 6xBX1
Mashie Saldana is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #34 of 78 Old 01-17-2019, 04:20 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Mark Rejhon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 1999
Location: North America
Posts: 4,171
Mentioned: 5 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 100 Post(s)
Liked: 280
I enjoy 24fps film myself.

What I take is the beef of spreading "non-human-visible" myths, "humans can't see past 30fps" myths, and "1080p is wasteful, stick to 720p" myths, and the like. I caught one and pounced.

I'm just merely correcting information, and will always. Not everyone needs UltraHFR as I said, and it won't apply to all materials. It depends on the use case and what you need it for. That said, I certainly do mythbusting.

Thanks,
Mark Rejhon
www.BlurBusters.com - Everything Better Than 60Hz(tm)

Last edited by Mark Rejhon; 01-17-2019 at 04:28 AM.
Mark Rejhon is offline  
post #35 of 78 Old 01-17-2019, 09:19 PM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
Ericglo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Just below the US in South Florida
Posts: 12,006
Mentioned: 23 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3710 Post(s)
Liked: 2123
Thanks Mark for the work you do and the website.

I personally can't do VR until they start to improve frame rates and motion.

Having fun playing the new mobile game Volley Village
Ericglo is offline  
post #36 of 78 Old 01-18-2019, 02:38 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
tenthplanet's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: North of Mexico, South of Oregon, West of desert
Posts: 6,501
Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2263 Post(s)
Liked: 3554
Quote:
Originally Posted by brazensol View Post
The next shiny new thing...
Ooooh shiny, shiny...my precious

"Espresso is like tequila, when in doubt apply more shots."
tenthplanet is online now  
post #37 of 78 Old 01-18-2019, 05:25 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Brian Hampton's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2000
Posts: 9,346
Mentioned: 8 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1539 Post(s)
Liked: 963
Progress is great and stuff.... But, I don't see the point of making 4K somewhat available to the average fella and then letting him know 8K is where the real quality is.

A standard should stick around for a while and become popular. I think it's just changing too fast. Even with 4K it's there but evolving as the format for HDR is changing.

I would rather think of myself as an Audiophile but not a Vidiot. I may have purchased some movies 7 times over in search of that new freshness and the old movies look about the same as they always did because at the time they were state of the art crafty but with the new resolution they just look worse.
Brian Hampton is offline  
post #38 of 78 Old 01-18-2019, 06:35 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
markmon1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 6,516
Mentioned: 118 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 5476 Post(s)
Liked: 3575
Quote:
Originally Posted by Brian Hampton View Post
Progress is great and stuff.... But, I don't see the point of making 4K somewhat available to the average fella and then letting him know 8K is where the real quality is.

A standard should stick around for a while and become popular. I think it's just changing too fast. Even with 4K it's there but evolving as the format for HDR is changing.

I would rather think of myself as an Audiophile but not a Vidiot. I may have purchased some movies 7 times over in search of that new freshness and the old movies look about the same as they always did because at the time they were state of the art crafty but with the new resolution they just look worse.
No worries about being out of date here Brian. I'm sure you're sitting too far back from your projector screen to benefit from 8K over 4K. Project a solid white image and walk up to the screen like within 1 foot and look for the pixel grid. The 8k will be 4 pixels to 1 4K pixel. Now start stepping back and see when the pixel grid is totally gone. I know this probably isn't super fair because really its the inter pixel gap that you're looking for which is smaller than a pixel. But you could repeat the test with a pixel-wide checker pattern and see where you have to sit in order to see that. That's just to see it. Then you'd need to be pretty much halfway between your screen and that point to see 8k. Again not to benefit from it but just to see it.

I'm 7 feet from my 135" and 4K is beneficial but not even as much as one might think on video content. I laugh at these guys that swear they can fully see the 4K benefits on their "big" 65" UHD TV from their couch 10 feet away. They can't.

Your 4K sony is not going obsolete so don't worry.
scotttnz and barrelbelly like this.

Video: JVC RS4500 135" screen in pure black room no light, htpc nvidia 1080ti.
Audio: Anthem mrx720 running 7.1.4, McIntosh MC-303, MC-152, B&W 802d3 LR, B&W HTM1D3 center, B&W 805d3 surround, B&W 702S2 rear, B&W 706s2 x 4 shelf mounted for atmos, 2 sub arrays both infinite baffle: 4x15 fi audio running on behringer ep4000 + 4x12 fi audio running on 2nd ep4000.
markmon1 is online now  
post #39 of 78 Old 01-18-2019, 06:48 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
dfa973's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2017
Location: EU
Posts: 1,257
Mentioned: 25 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 844 Post(s)
Liked: 787
Quote:
Originally Posted by Brian Hampton View Post
Progress is great and stuff.... But, I don't see the point of making 4K somewhat available to the average fella and then letting him know 8K is where the real quality is.
In 1989 Japan began broadcasts of High-Definition TV.
I am sure that everyone at that time was like: what???? This is a waste, nobody needs HD, we will never benefit from a resolution this high, the cost it too great, the human eye will not see the difference, bla, bla, bla....

Quote:
Originally Posted by Brian Hampton View Post
A standard should stick around for a while and become popular. I think it's just changing too fast.
As time goes on, the faster the changes will go. I guess that the transition to 10K will come even faster than that of 4K to 8K...

Last edited by dfa973; 01-18-2019 at 06:50 AM. Reason: spelling
dfa973 is offline  
post #40 of 78 Old 01-18-2019, 07:13 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Brian Hampton's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2000
Posts: 9,346
Mentioned: 8 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1539 Post(s)
Liked: 963
Quote:
Originally Posted by markmon1 View Post
No worries about being out of date here Brian. I'm sure you're sitting too far back from your projector screen to benefit from 8K over 4K. Project a solid white image and walk up to the screen like within 1 foot and look for the pixel grid. The 8k will be 4 pixels to 1 4K pixel. Now start stepping back and see when the pixel grid is totally gone.
I can't read TXTs on my Apple Watch because my arm isn't long enough. I shouldn't have a bad attitude so Welcome 8K Association. If you make me buy the Fifth Element again then more power to you.

I don't begin to think I can imagine what type of HT my kids will have 10 years from now.

Last edited by Brian Hampton; 01-18-2019 at 07:47 AM.
Brian Hampton is offline  
post #41 of 78 Old 01-18-2019, 08:13 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Location: College Station, Texas
Posts: 2,243
Mentioned: 17 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1074 Post(s)
Liked: 604
Quote:
Originally Posted by pbz06 View Post
I really hope my 4K UHD collection doesn't go obsolete already

Will be interesting to see what 8K does to home Cinema.
True 8K will probably never make it to home cinema. By true 8K I mean disc based. 8K streaming is a long way off, and current 4k streams from places like netflix don't touch UHD blu ray in terms of picture quality or sound.
liffie420 is offline  
post #42 of 78 Old 01-18-2019, 10:01 AM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
Ericglo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Just below the US in South Florida
Posts: 12,006
Mentioned: 23 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3710 Post(s)
Liked: 2123
Quote:
Originally Posted by markmon1 View Post

I'm 7 feet from my 135" and 4K is beneficial but not even as much as one might think on video content. I laugh at these guys that swear they can fully see the 4K benefits on their "big" 65" UHD TV from their couch 10 feet away. They can't.

Your 4K sony is not going obsolete so don't worry.
I mentioned this last year when I purchased my LG OLED. I set it up side by side with my plasma to see the differences. I was running the same content at the same time. My neighbor came over and swore he saw a difference in resolution from across the room. I kept saying it was other things like contrast, but he was adamant that it was resolution. I shook my head and let it go.

Quote:
Originally Posted by dfa973 View Post
In 1989 Japan began broadcasts of High-Definition TV.
I am sure that everyone at that time was like: what???? This is a waste, nobody needs HD, we will never benefit from a resolution this high, the cost it too great, the human eye will not see the difference, bla, bla, bla....
As someone who was around back then, I can assure you that everyone was looking forward to HDTV. I am not sure what they thought in Japan, but people were definitely wanting a better picture in the US. 480i just wasn't cutting it. If people didn't care, then they wouldn't have unloaded there old SDTVs for new HDTVs.

The problem that has been mentioned is getting that content. Codecs are getting better, but there is still no way around the amount of data in 8k.

I have mentioned this before, but people have a threshold and it is an individual preference. My guess is 4k would satisfy 99% of the population. What would be beneficial is to focus on raising the bar in other areas like frame rate.
scotttnz likes this.

Having fun playing the new mobile game Volley Village
Ericglo is offline  
post #43 of 78 Old 01-18-2019, 11:05 AM
Member
 
goke313's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: New York City/Denver
Posts: 149
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 68 Post(s)
Liked: 44
Don't care until we can get live sports in 8K
jorgebetancourt likes this.
goke313 is offline  
post #44 of 78 Old 01-18-2019, 10:08 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
barrelbelly's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 2,508
Mentioned: 6 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 426 Post(s)
Liked: 512
The real beneficiaries of 8k will be professional markets and very high end HT IMO. Why? Because the 99% market has resolution fatigue...resolution whiplash...and extreme wariness about technology they can't really see in their 40"-55" displays. Regardless of the resolution, network broadcasters which most of them watch are 1080i...720p...and 480i. Cable/Sat watchers are still serving up highly compressed 1080p. And Streaming services are barely driving stable 1080p through their overtaxed bandwidth pipes. So bottom line is 8k just may be a superior application without a market home for the foreseeable future. I mean...Will the everyday consumer pay nosebleed prices for 8k just to watch their METV Perry Mason and Mash episodes...or their 480p DVDs & 1080p Blu Rays? That's a tough sale, when their 1080p & 4k sets look pretty much the same to them. If broadcasters...cable/Sat providers...Media Streamers agreed to invest in the infrastructure to deliver 8k, it may take hold. But that has literally zero percent chance of happening. They won't even invest in uniform native 1080p (which would make most people happy). And I wouldn't look for 8k gaming for over 10-15 years for the very same reasons. Game devs & publishers just will not bite the bullet on that kind of expense to code to it. They're just dabbling with 4k right now. While reaping the benefits of full/ultra optimization of 1080p. Which can still be massively improved with Ray Tracing, HDR, HFR & etc. So I wouldn't hold my breadth there. So 8k is going to be a long hard slog IMO.
gbaby likes this.
barrelbelly is offline  
post #45 of 78 Old 01-19-2019, 06:01 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
3DBob's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: Southeastern Michigan
Posts: 2,446
Mentioned: 31 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1087 Post(s)
Liked: 586
Quote:
Originally Posted by goke313 View Post
Don't care until we can get live sports in 8K
Ha ha, good one. Most sports are delivered at 720p. You rarely see 1080p true HD sports. They can't do that because of the need to do instant playbacks so you see compressed video feeds, otherwise the bandwidth would crush the instant replays. Here is a link from 2015: https://forums.xfinity.com/t5/TV-Arc...0/td-p/2608589. Xfinity/Comcast insists it broadcasts in 1080 HD, but the problem is most of the sport feeds are still 720p to save bandwidth and use 5-10 year old broadcast tech. Just because cable transmits in 1080HD, doesn't mean the content is 1080HD.
3DBob is offline  
post #46 of 78 Old 01-20-2019, 06:08 AM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
Ericglo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Just below the US in South Florida
Posts: 12,006
Mentioned: 23 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3710 Post(s)
Liked: 2123
I would be satisfied with 1080p 120 for OTA.

It almost seems like they are using brute force with 8k to improve motion resolution.

Having fun playing the new mobile game Volley Village
Ericglo is offline  
post #47 of 78 Old 01-22-2019, 06:49 PM
Member
 
maxl's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 140
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 55 Post(s)
Liked: 28
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tom Roper View Post
I agree that 8K is ways away and makes sense for super-large screens, but this graph makes little sense to me. Just considering my own experience.

I had a 100" projector screen and was sitting 13' away from it, and at 1080p I could clearly see not just individual pixels but also the spaces between pixels (screendoor effect), and those were less than 1/4 of a pixel in size! It was so annoying I had to defocus the lens a little to blur it.

Now I have 78" 4K LCD 11' away. I cannot see any pixels or jaggies in 4K moving images at all, but I can still see jaggies on high-contrast still images (e.g., like dark hairs against a white background on a photo). Displaying non-upscaled 1080p picture is just plain bad - I can almost count each pixel in high-contrast situations. But it's very hard to tell the difference between properly upscaled 1080p and real 4K.

I think whoever comes up with these diagrams uses a logic that if you cannot see every individual pixel or cannot count lines one pixel wide, the resolution is wasted. In my opinion, it's the other way around - if you can see jaggies or pixels even on a portion of a screen and even for a moment, you can benefit from a higher resolution.

I'd estimate with my vision, I would not benefit from more than 4K on the 78"-85" screen for moving pictures and would benefit very little for still images. But there is definitely room for it for bigger screens.
bochoss and dfa973 like this.
maxl is offline  
post #48 of 78 Old 01-23-2019, 11:07 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Tom Roper's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Denver, Colorado
Posts: 4,558
Mentioned: 12 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 466 Post(s)
Liked: 433
Quote:
Originally Posted by maxl View Post
I agree that 8K is ways away and makes sense for super-large screens, but this graph makes little sense to me. Just considering my own experience.
Here is the full article link

https://www.extremetech.com/electron...will-ship-2018

HDR Colorist and Conversions
INTO THE CAVE OF WONDERS
Directed by MANUEL BENITO DE VALLE Produced by PEDRO PABLO FIGUEROA
Cast MANUEL ANGEL REINA, CLAUDIA GARROTE
LOVETHEFRAME STORIES, SOUNDTRACKS AND FILMS
Tom Roper is offline  
post #49 of 78 Old 01-23-2019, 12:25 PM
Advanced Member
 
bryantc's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2016
Location: Europa
Posts: 805
Mentioned: 7 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 565 Post(s)
Liked: 506
You don't need to see every individual pixel on a screen to be able to distinguish resolution.


I don't know about you but I can easily see the difference between a DVD and Blu-ray from 15 feet on a 40" display. And between a 1080p and 4K Blu-ray from 10 feet on a 80" display.


Charts and graphs are a starting point not the final word.

Media: LG 88" 8K OLED Z9 / Denon AVR-X8500H 7.1.4 / Oppo UDP-203 / Nvidia SHIELD (2017) / Apple TV 4K / Sony 4K FMP-X10 / Gaming PC (Threadripper 1950X / 2x GeForce GTX 1080 Ti SLI) / PlayStation 4 Pro with PS VR / PlayStation (original)
Family: Sony 85" 4K XBR-85X900F / Denon AVR-X3400H 5.1 / Nvidia SHIELD (2017) / Apple TV 4K / C64 Mini - Game: LG 77" 4K OLED C8 / Denon AVR-X3400H 5.1 / Nvidia SHIELD (2017) / Apple TV 4K
bryantc is offline  
post #50 of 78 Old 01-24-2019, 08:23 AM
Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2017
Posts: 66
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 33 Post(s)
Liked: 19
I really don't understand why the optimal size versus distance chart gets brought up so much anymore. Like, okay I guess I don't need a 4k tv, so I'll go to the store and buy a 55-65" 1080p tv instead. Oh wait those don't exist. No, in all seriousness, I'm just not jazzed at all about 8K. I'm still waiting for 4K tv's to get cheaper. I think tv companies realized that the price is coming down so to have an excuse to jack up their tv prices again, they need to go all in on 8K. Bleah... When it comes to 8K, I'm also in agreement with those who say that can discern a difference in 4k even at non-optimal viewing distances. I know i can. I may not be seeing all the details, but the crispness of the image is easily noticeable over 1080p.
Deputy Moonman is offline  
post #51 of 78 Old 01-24-2019, 02:14 PM
Advanced Member
 
Actionable Mango's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Seattle
Posts: 654
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 330 Post(s)
Liked: 276
Quote:
Originally Posted by maxl View Post
I could clearly see not just individual pixels but also the spaces between pixels (screendoor effect), and those were less than 1/4 of a pixel in size!
I see the same.

But I have 20/10 vision and I wouldn't be surprised if you have similar vision. I read the name on a distant boat once and my friends were calling BS on me because all they could see was white blob. We walked up the boat and when they saw that I was correct, they accused me of remembering the name from prior visit.

I assume the graph makes sense for average vision. It should be taken as "your mileage may vary" at best.
Actionable Mango is offline  
post #52 of 78 Old 01-24-2019, 02:17 PM
Advanced Member
 
Actionable Mango's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Seattle
Posts: 654
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 330 Post(s)
Liked: 276
I'd still rather see 4k UHD "v2" with all of the non-resolution-related improvements. The biggest PQ problems I see are banding and motion, certainly not lack of resolution.

There are also other problems like compatibility and usability issues that I feel would be far more beneficial to fix than adding resolution.
Actionable Mango is offline  
post #53 of 78 Old 01-24-2019, 04:00 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2019
Posts: 2,538
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 881 Post(s)
Liked: 2095
Quote:
Originally Posted by saprano View Post
And we wonder why bluray and UHD doesn't become the leading format for sales. Casual consumers keep hearing about the next technology before they even get a chance to buy the current one.

They'll keep buying DVD's and use streaming.
Bought "The Interview" DVD new for three bucks. Life's grand.
Panson is offline  
post #54 of 78 Old 01-24-2019, 04:02 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2019
Posts: 2,538
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 881 Post(s)
Liked: 2095
Quote:
Originally Posted by Actionable Mango View Post
I'd still rather see 4k UHD "v2" with all of the non-resolution-related improvements. The biggest PQ problems I see are banding and motion, certainly not lack of resolution.

There are also other problems like compatibility and usability issues that I feel would be far more beneficial to fix than adding resolution.
Were you able to combat those with player and TV adjustments?

Last edited by Panson; 01-24-2019 at 04:58 PM.
Panson is offline  
post #55 of 78 Old 01-24-2019, 04:08 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2019
Posts: 2,538
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 881 Post(s)
Liked: 2095
I tend to agree with engineers who say 4K is experiencing Laws of Diminishing Returns. However, if I need a TV in 2026, and the price is right....
Panson is offline  
post #56 of 78 Old 01-24-2019, 04:20 PM
Advanced Member
 
Actionable Mango's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Seattle
Posts: 654
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 330 Post(s)
Liked: 276
Quote:
Originally Posted by Panson View Post
We're you able to combat those with player and TV adjustments?
These can't really be adjusted out. Banding is due to lack of sufficient colors so it exists all the way into the source material. I don't know how a TV could fix that except perhaps analyzing every frame to look for banding, and replacing it with dithering.

I suppose motion could be fixed with adjustments like frame interpolation, but that's a controversial topic. My 2016 LG is sort of known for being bad at motion handling.
Actionable Mango is offline  
post #57 of 78 Old 01-24-2019, 04:56 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2019
Posts: 2,538
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 881 Post(s)
Liked: 2095
Quote:
Originally Posted by Actionable Mango View Post
These can't really be adjusted out. Banding is due to lack of sufficient colors so it exists all the way into the source material. I don't know how a TV could fix that except perhaps analyzing every frame to look for banding, and replacing it with dithering.

I suppose motion could be fixed with adjustments like frame interpolation, but that's a controversial topic. My 2016 LG is sort of known for being bad at motion handling.
I've had neither issue. Re Banding, Panasonic player DMP-UB900 makes Deep Color mention of it. Reduce to 10-bit Priority or OFF. I've Motion set as Weak on the TV.
Panson is offline  
post #58 of 78 Old 01-24-2019, 06:07 PM
Advanced Member
 
Actionable Mango's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Seattle
Posts: 654
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 330 Post(s)
Liked: 276
Quote:
Originally Posted by Panson View Post
I've had neither issue. Re Banding, Panasonic player DMP-UB900 makes Deep Color mention of it. Reduce to 10-bit Priority or OFF. I've Motion set as Weak on the TV.
I do have Deep Color on--without it, HDR won't work. I'm not talking about the blatantly obvious banding with 8-bit color (for example Planet Earth's opening scenes with the Earth shot). I mean the more subtle banding that shows up even in "Deep Color" on a large enough screen with certain types of admittedly rare content. Planet Earth II has this issue, occasionally, in some of the open bright sky scenes. I see a little bit of banding and/or macroblocking. It's very rare--but it's still there. My TV doesn't have a setting to fix this. I can imagine a theoretical on-the-fly dithering fix (don't know if any TV has that), but that would still be trading one problem for another because it would introduce noise.

As for motion, you have to pick your problem. 24 fps content will have motion blur, so it won't be smooth and clear. A TV setting can do frame interpolation to make it smooth and clear, but then the motion can also look awkward or unnatural and can also introduce artifacts. Maybe one setting or the other doesn't bother you, but either way there is a problem. So I think it would be more accurate to say you aren't bothered by it, not that you don't have the issue at all. When the source itself is the problem, no TV setting can fix it without adding a different kind of problem.

That's the tip of the iceberg anyway. There are also problems like macroblocking and clipped black and whites. There is a mismash of color and HDR standards. For crying out loud you can have a Dolby Vision player with Dolby Vision content and a Dolby Vision TV, and yet still not be able to get Dolby Vision because they are different Dolby Vision profiles. There is no one setting for a TV that fixes all this. The entire path from disc to player to AVR to TV is a goddamn mess.
dfa973 and Panson like this.
Actionable Mango is offline  
post #59 of 78 Old 01-27-2019, 03:06 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Jonas2's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2015
Location: South Bay Area
Posts: 5,773
Mentioned: 46 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2862 Post(s)
Liked: 1829
Quote:
Originally Posted by bryantc View Post
You don't need to see every individual pixel on a screen to be able to distinguish resolution.

I don't know about you but I can easily see the difference between a DVD and Blu-ray from 15 feet on a 40" display. And between a 1080p and 4K Blu-ray from 10 feet on a 80" display.

Charts and graphs are a starting point not the final word.

Yeah, I'm right there with you. The difference for me is quite plain too. Anyway, 8K? I say bring it! And whatever is after that too!

7.2.4 System: Display: Sony XBR-65X930D; Processing: Anthem AVM60
Mains:
Paradigm Prestige 85F and 55C; Side / Rear Surrounds: Totem Acoustic Tribe III / Tribe I; Amplification: D-Sonic M3a-2800-7 (7ch. x 400w)
ATMOS:
Definitive Technology DI8R; Amplification: Class D Audio SDS-470C (4ch. x 300w)
Subwoofers:
2 x SVS-SB13Ultras; Media: Oppo UDP-203, Pioneer CLD-59
Jonas2 is offline  
post #60 of 78 Old 01-29-2019, 12:35 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
gbaby's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 3,312
Mentioned: 9 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 845 Post(s)
Liked: 441
Quote:
Originally Posted by JRock3x8 View Post
9.5 feet from a 12’ wide screen. Am I seeing 4k?




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
At 12', you should be seeing 4k.
UHDFAN1 likes this.
gbaby is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Reply Latest Industry News

Tags
8k association , 8k tv , ces 2019

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page


Forum Jump: 

Posting Rules  
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off