Originally Posted by sbarnhar
I would hate to spend all that money and not like how it looks for 30-40% of our viewing.
The problem is pretty unavoidable, and if you think like that, you'll never buy a new TV unfortunately.
When you become used to 4K HDR picture quality, which is something far more impressive than what you're used to now, it sets a new "default" expectation. Later, when you watch any SD content upscaled to 4K on your new TV, it will look way worse than (for example) the HD-to-4K upscaled content, or the 4K content which you'll be watching daily, for the other 60%-70% of your viewing. I wouldn't think that - when you get excited about how amazing HDR looks - you'll only watch it for 70% of the time. You will seek it out as much as possible.
On the times you get nostalgic and dust off an old DVD to re-watch, you may then start to think to yourself "When I watched this DVD on my old TV, it didn't look this bad!". But it'll be because in your mind, you are seeing a big drop in quality compared with the 4K quality you are now used to, and your brain is extrapolating that back to your memory of what "the same thing" used to look like the last time you saw it.
The actual scaling from SD-4K will likely be just as good or better than your current TV, but it's not only trying to scale 1/16th of the screen up to full screen, it will also show you every imperfection, every MPEG artefact, of that original image much more clearly than it's possible to display those imperfections on your current TV. Something else which will lead you to think it's different/worse than your memories of the same DVD watched on previous TV.
I think there is far too much attention on scaling. Yes it's needed for the old back catalogue. But it can't/shouldn't be the driving factor in a TV purchase. You can assume that it's very good, and it does the best it can but everyone needs to be realistic. You are expecting the TV to scale an 0.4MP image up to 8.3MP (megapixels, in camera terms!). Another way of looking at it is the maximum 10Mbps video bitrate, in the ancient MPEG2 codec, of a DVD. The picture is compressed to 4% of its original size. In terms of 4K, that's now 0.2% of the size of the eventual picture (full 4K resolution). in a combination of upscaling and MPEG expansion, you're asking for the miracle of 99.8% of the pixels to be unpacked, expanded and interpolated. That's a very big [thing to] ask of any technology.
Ah. To address your question now that I've re-read your post - yes, I think you would be satisfied. You do seem to understand the limitations