UHD promises better image quality by upgrading various parameters. Which do you think are most important to achieve that goal?

After returning from the National Association of Broadcasters (NAB) convention last week, I wrote a piece about the high dynamic-range (HDR) flat panels and content I saw there. It sparked a lively debate in the comments about whether HDR or increased pixel count—or perhaps another element of UHD—is more important when it comes to improving image quality over conventional high-definition video.

This leads me to wonder, which elements of UHD do you think are most important for improving image quality? I'm assuming that HDR and WCG content and displays will use more than 8 bits, since these elements will look terrible with obvious banding if the bit depth is not increased beyond the 8 bits we use today.

This is a multiple-choice poll, since some might think that two or more of these elements are equally important. I look forward to learning what's most important to you from your vote and comments.

Like AVS Forum on Facebook
Follow AVS Forum on Twitter
+1 AVS Forum on Google+

Personally, I would go WCG, HDR, UHD and HFR in that order top to bottom.

I voted HDR. But rank them in this order of importance for myself:

1. HDR
2. WCG
3. HFR
4. UHD

They are all important when applied together properly IMO.

HDR and Color gamut!

/ thread

I will be shocked if anyone picks pixels.

Agreed. Frankly, give me my first 3 with 1080p in OLED or a Laser Projector system and I'm good as gold.

I picked pixel count as I can see the difference in clarity and details on larger screens with true 4K content. HDR is my #2 because it will improve contrast, and we all know what is king.

1. HFR (nothings more distracting then blur)
2. WCG (like crack for eyes)
3. UHD (no big pixels please)
4. HDR (icing on the cake)

Totally agree, blur is the most distracting. It takes me right out of the movie. Color then uhd then hdr.

UHD makes little sense without HFR.

So..

1. HDR
2. HFR
3. WCG
.
.
.
4. UHD

Basically everything other than higher pixel count. I voted higher dynamic range #1 , followed by wider color gamut and higher frame rate.

1. hdr
2. wcg
3. uhd
4. hfr

I'd split gamut into gamut and have bit depth as a separate tick box


I'd prefer HDR, HFR and Bit Depth before the other aspects, however all are good for the long run.

I would vote for option 5: black level.

Black level is the canvas onto which the display paints all it's colors. What's the use of an expanded color gamut if piss-poor blacks are washing out all the colors? What's the use of high dynamic range if the display can't create a convincing shade of black? What's the use of a higher frame rate if the display's inability to create a realistic sense of contrast takes you out of the movie anyway? This is the reason OLED continues to garner rave reviews despite it's high price and litany of issues.

you may read the question again...

Which Elements of UHD are Most important for Improving Image Quality

is black level different with FHD?

100% with you ,blacks sets the foundation for all the other aspects in PQ.

For the home in order of importance:
1. WCG
2. HDR

For the commercial theater in order of importance:
1. WCG
2. HDR
2. HPC
3. HFR

Cheers,

This. But then again, Oled+HDR-$$$=

It would always be HFR for me but not so much for blur, wouldn't that would be governed by the refresh rate (frequency)?. Be great if sets could do super slow mo if the source provides it. I think the WCG is important but hasn't that already gone beyond what we can perceive?

Hard to disagree w/ the points you make, but what if you had great black level(and all the benefits that come w/ it), but a lot of motion blur? I guess it comes down to personal preference, but I'd take a good black level display w/ no motion blur vs a perfect black level display w/ substantial motion blur. I wouldn't enjoy the lower quality black level, but the blur is just so much more distracting to me.

Black level is a result of your TV, so uhd won't change that.

HFR
HDR
WCG
UHD

I'm all for uhd, but the others need to happen first. 4k is great for those of us with projectors, pointless below 100". In my opinion.

WCG with 10 bits.

You ask what elements are most important and then construct a poll allowing only one element to be selected. Not that you will acknowledge this or fix the poll question, this comes as no surprise being yet another one in your long line of poll construction errors. What is your mean time between poll construction errors (MTBPCE)? I know you will take this as just a playful poke and it is no big deal. But a much better poll would be to ask responders to rank the four attributes in descending order of importance to them. Most are posting such a response anyway.

Of course despite your refusal to acknowledge my pointing out it pointing yet another error in your long history of poll construction , you are definitely the man in fixing it.

Option 5 which only addicted forum members can see, (lower black level) is not an element of UHD. It is an element of display device technology and is not source dependent. Nor is not including it an error in Scott's construction of this poll.

Good poll, so truly I ask what is the holy grail for video?
What are the limits for our eyes to see at and the tech to achieve that?

I see lots of pieces stated here and there, yet I desire a wider viewpoint....
Is there a discussion thread here?

The eventual convergence of all this individual discrete technology's.
just example:

For sports, HFR.

Personally I would think in order of importance it should be in the following order:
1. HDR
2. WCG
3. HFR
4. UHD
Although they are all important components to achieving the best possible picture...

1. HDR
2. WCG
3. HFR
4. UHD (higher if you are extremely close to a gigantic screen)

Now what? Blinding sunlight intensity to watch the Torchwood episode where Gwen walks in and Suzi is arc welding something and on a killing spree with that weird-looking knife. After that, atomic flash that vaporizes flesh in Terminator.

Just kidding. I do think that color gamut is probably the most important to me since I get bored with the colors available on yesterday's equipment. Ever since the Laservue died I have missed that eery ultraviolet no-signal blue screen. Yes I did watch it in extended gamut mode even though it did not support the interface for it, just to see the wider gamut even if it was technically wrong.

Nice wide range of responses.

Seems like everyone knows what they are talking about.

I voted HFR because never seeing any perceivable semblance of motion artifacts (blurring, ghosting, etc...) would bring my viewing experience up another level.

Then again, unlike everyone else that has provided their input, I have absolutely no idea what I am talking about when it comes to the "V" side of the hobby.