Do we really need yet another high res video standard?

[timm]

The new tech in the TV is only useful if you have content.... which would come on those shiny discs you were talking about a minute ago. There is hardly anything broadcast in even 1080p, let alone 4k.

Ha!! Agreeed 100%.... I just think it is interesting how my perception changed as soon as people started talking about hardware.... That was basically my point... I like the idea of better tv tech... but, start to feel like I'm getting churned when you have to buy the same software over and over again to get the better technology.... which I think was Rich's point in the original post.... However, I think it is a matter of software following the hardware....

 

[Rich]

The new tech in the TV is only useful if you have content.... which would come on those shiny discs you were talking about a minute ago. There is hardly anything broadcast in even 1080p, let alone 4k.

Bingo! The two go hand in hand. The tech is the same: 4k resolution vs. 1080p (2k). You cannot broadcast native 4k if you don't have 4k cameras taking the video, and some way to get that content to the 4k tv. Since we have insufficient bandwidth to send it on cable/internet, for the most part you are going to have to buy the shiny discs (at a steep premium) to get the full benefit of the medium.

So yes, I am still a sceptic. But mostly so because I have a ten foot diagonal projection screen in my media room, and couldn't possibly care for any greater detail than I get with blu-ray or a good high-def cable signal. And I really just get tired of the formats changing and the price of content getting more expensive every five to ten years. They haven't even really introduced 4k yet, and they are already planning for 8k! If there are marginal benefits for most users at 4k, why on earth would we need 8k? It just goes on and on.

 

[User211]

It is better. Full stop. Better is desirable. Progress has to be made.

Me? I'd like an entire wall dedicated to my viewing pleasure without the downsides of projectors or LED/LCD/plasma displays. I'd like it to look real. No hype or any hint of being anything else but real. With 3D depth without glasses - and to be indistinguishable from reality as a consequence.

The current sad fact is that the hardware/software capability is progressing faster than the service/content providers and general public can respond to.

The rational thing to do is simply buy when prices agrees with your particular wallet. You can't do anything about it. Good thing is you can still watch your old digital content on the newer hardware. This will always be the case if you are resourceful enough.

 

[JMAUSGP]

I highly recommend that those that have an interest check out 4K TVs and projectors. Sony now has a 55 inch for $6K, a 65 inch for $7K and an 84 inch for $25k, they also have a 4K projector the 1000ES that is under $20K. Seiki has a 50 inch for $1,299 and LG has an 84 inch for $40K.

When you see one with true 4K content it is truly jaw dropping. And limited 4K content is available for Sony customers now and they intend to offer a 4K service starting this summer for everyone. One thing to understand is that the Sony TVs upconvert any source below 4K to suedo 4K. Kind of like the DVD players that use to upconvert content to close to 1080P or 720P. Again, if you see one of these TVs or Projectors even with unconverted content you will be impressed. These 4K machines also handle 3D in 4K and I can say that it makes things look real not like you are watching a TV. What many people don't know is that movie theaters have been showing 4K content on 4K systems for years. Sony was just the first to offer a consumer display for their 4K studio content.

And don't forget, with these 4K TVs you can display hires digital photos that allow you to display at 400 percent the resolution of a 1080P display.

Anyway, before you make a decision on a new TV or projector, you should at least check out 4K and upconverted 4K for yourself, if you do and the resolution doesn't do it for you, then don't buy it

 

[Rich]

And don't forget, with these 4K TVs you can display hires digital photos that allow you to display at 400 percent the resolution of a 1080P display.

To get any benefit from the increased resolution, the pictures would have to be taken with a 36 megapixel or greater camera. This is medium format territory. We are just now getting to the point where the average consumer can afford a camera with that high resolution of a sensor in a normal DSLR. So I guess it will be useful in the future, but not much right now or even in the next few years for most people.

Also, how is 4k 400% resolution? It is about twice the resolution of 1080p, which is essentially 2k resolution. So it would be 100% greater resolution than 1080p.

As for upconverting, it adds nothing to actual resolution. The missing data is interpolated, which means it is basically guessing to fill in the blanks. This does not really add any detail and adds nothing to the actual picture quality from a resolution perspective. An interesting interview with John Galt of Panavision talks about this: http://magazine.creativecow.net/article/the-truth-about-2k-4k-the-future-of-pixels

 

[RUR]

...Also, how is 4k 400% resolution? It is about twice the resolution of 1080p, which is essentially 2k resolution. So it would be 100% greater resolution than 1080p.

You're calculation ignores horizontal resolution, Rich.
4K UHDTV (2160p) has a resolution of 3840 × 2160 (8.3 megapixels), 4 times the pixels of 1920 × 1080 (2.1 megapixels)

 

[Rich]

You're calculation ignores horizontal resolution, Rich.
4K UHDTV (2160p) has a resolution of 3840 × 2160 (8.3 megapixels), 4 times the pixels of 1920 × 1080 (2.1 megapixels)

Ok, that makes sense. Thanks for clearing that up for me.

 

[User211]

I read your link Rich. Yup - more to life than resolution and ever since I was a kid I didn't think 24fps was enough. Quite a good read.

 

[RUR]

Did you see The Hobbit in HFR, Justin? Off-the-chart resolution, but it sure didn't look like film.

 

[User211]

No Ken but I just read about it: http://blog.vincentlaforet.com/2012...a-reaffirmation-of-what-makes-cinema-magical/

The 3D BluRays I have make it difficult for me to concentrate on the film rather than the rather odd 3D presentation. As this chap says 3D HFR could make that aspect worse for me.

But let's face it and think about it - if the technology is REALLY working, it should look and feel like theatre (special effects excepted); which isually totally engrossing given a good play.

Reviews like this chap gives to 3D HFR surely imply a large disparity between a real scenario and the "tech presented" one. But I will say it must be hard to optimise a film for a number of different video formats.

 

[JMAUSGP]

All I am saying Rich is just like Justin did, go and see 4K, in fact go and see both a Sony 1000ES and a 84 inch Bravia. View 2D 4K content and 3D 4K and don't forget the upscale content from 1080P and then tell us you don't need the resolution on your 10 foot screen. I can except that as your true opinion but only after you have seen it with your own eyes.

I must say that I have experience with both the 1000ES and the 84 inch Bravia and have displayed my own 3D videos and 12 megapixel 3D photos as well as I have watched the new Spiderman in 4K and they are all absolutely jaw dropping. Sony has already announced 4K content and 4K distribution of said content but in the mean time I have been doing all my photos in 3D for years now because when they are upscaled to 4K it really does seem to me that you are experiencing the moment again and not just looking at a photo.

But whatever your opinion, it carries more wait after you have looked at all of the technology with your own eyes. And just like listening to Logans, you can find reviews where someone will say the CLX is not worth it, that it doesn't make any sense to use CLXs for a 5.1 sound system. But I can tell you when you hear it with your own ears, I have never had anyone say afterwords that the listening experience is not the best they have every had. The the surround sound actually changes with CLX and goes up another level. With a CLX 5.1 you don't listen to music you experience it. At least to me and my ears CLX delivers a far better experience than the sound you will hear with a 5.1 system that uses lesser speakers for the surround channels. In fact I would go so far as to say the resolution of the sound is HiRes with the CLXs

 

[User211]

Rich, I second Joe's motion.

 

[Rich]

All I am saying Rich is just like Justin did, go and see 4K, in fact go and see both a Sony 1000ES and a 84 inch Bravia. View 2D 4K content and 3D 4K and don't forget the upscale content from 1080P and then tell us you don't need the resolution on your 10 foot screen. I can except that as your true opinion but only after you have seen it with your own eyes.

Oh, I agree wholeheartedly. I am voicing some rather strong opinions, I know. But I also realize that I have yet to actually observe the new tech with my own eyes and only after doing so will I be able to make a truly informed judgment. Not sure when I will get a chance to demo one of these sets, as I am not exactly in a large city. But one of these days . . .

At any rate, let's just say that I will go into the demo with a skeptical mind, and will hopefully be able to demo the tech under normal viewing conditions and distances, with the ability to directly compare a 4k signal with a 1080p signal on a variety of material.

At the same time . . . BluRay was officially released a mere 7 years ago. 3d BluRay just a couple of years ago. Now they are hyping 4k, and they say that 8k is already in the works. I really get tired of the notion that you should upgrade your tv, your player, and your content every five years or so just to take advantage of some new technology. I am very skeptical that the improvements over standard BluRay will be worth the investment in time, effort, and money to try to keep up with the ever-changing technology.

One other thing that I will note: increased resolution is not necessarily the panacea that everyone makes it out to be. Sharpness can be nice, but it can also be distracting to see every single detail of everything in the scene. I know that in photography, sharpness and high resolution can be particularly nice in some photos, and absolutely ruin others. In a closeup portrait, you don't necessarily want to accentuate every pore and wrinkle in the skin. I expect the same goes for movies.

 

[Hocky]

All I am saying Rich is just like Justin did, go and see 4K, in fact go and see both a Sony 1000ES and a 84 inch Bravia. View 2D 4K content and 3D 4K and don't forget the upscale content from 1080P and then tell us you don't need the resolution on your 10 foot screen. I can except that as your true opinion but only after you have seen it with your own eyes.

I must say that I have experience with both the 1000ES and the 84 inch Bravia and have displayed my own 3D videos and 12 megapixel 3D photos as well as I have watched the new Spiderman in 4K and they are all absolutely jaw dropping. Sony has already announced 4K content and 4K distribution of said content but in the mean time I have been doing all my photos in 3D for years now because when they are upscaled to 4K it really does seem to me that you are experiencing the moment again and not just looking at a photo.

But whatever your opinion, it carries more wait after you have looked at all of the technology with your own eyes. And just like listening to Logans, you can find reviews where someone will say the CLX is not worth it, that it doesn't make any sense to use CLXs for a 5.1 sound system. But I can tell you when you hear it with your own ears, I have never had anyone say afterwords that the listening experience is not the best they have every had. The the surround sound actually changes with CLX and goes up another level. With a CLX 5.1 you don't listen to music you experience it. At least to me and my ears CLX delivers a far better experience than the sound you will hear with a 5.1 system that uses lesser speakers for the surround channels. In fact I would go so far as to say the resolution of the sound is HiRes with the CLXs

When am I getting an invite to come experience this for myself? ;-)

 

[JMAUSGP]

When am I getting an invite to come experience this for myself? ;-)

Hocky, yes we need to do that. Unfortunately or rather fortunately Interactive has continued to grow at an alarming rate. We are coming up on adding our 2,000th employee. And to add to the chaos, I was just elected President of the Ferrari Club which with 5500+ members, I now have more responsibilities than ever and it is our 50th Anniversary this year, which makes it more chaotic than usual. I am flying out to New York this weekend to meet with the President of Ferrari North America and that adds to.......well you see were I am coming from. I don't have much in the way of my own time any more. Basically I have not been on the Martin Logan Club site as much as I once was and I have not been able to listen to music as much as I have in the past all because of new responsibilities. And all of this doesn't include my interestests in videophile, golf, rock climbing and taking care of 300 acres here in Hamilton County

The next two weeks are nuts, but maybe toward the end of May we can do a listening session.

As for Rich, you are correct as usual, getting a good demo requires knowing someone who has one or going to one of the cities that Sony lists on the North American web page that has a demo 4K display in their Sony Store or if you are lucky and persistent you can find a Sony dealer that is big enough to have a demo 4K display set up in their showroom. I know the 84 inch 4K display is in Vegas at the main mall along the strip and they have one in Miami and LA and they are supposed to add them to all their major Sony stores throughout North America by the end of 2013. I understand your apprehension and skepticism, but what I found interesting is that Sony calls their technology a Reality Engine and when I first saw it in Vegas last year, I was skeptical too. But when I went up to the screen and got about18 inches from the 84 inch screen. I looked in to the field of sun flowers on the screen in 4K and noticed that I could focus on the individual flowers and then I noticed the bees which was cool, and then I noticed you could count the rings on the bees butt and that just blew me away. Then there was a scene in Italy on a beach and it too was pretty and then I saw the umbrellas, and then I saw that some of the woman lying under the umbrellas were au natural and basically after that I was hooked? But there was more, they put on 4K 3D and I just could not believe the brightness of the picture and the detail of the 3D images, I was just blown away. Then my wife came in and she has never been impressed with any of my previous projectors, which have included, Selecos, Sonys, Mitsubishis and more and she immediately said that is the bestest, clearest picture that I have ever seen, are we getting one of these. That as they say are words that she has never uttered before and that really blew me away

 

[Rich]

Then my wife came in and she has never been impressed with any of my previous projectors, which have included, Selecos, Sonys, Mitsubishis and more and she immediately said that is the bestest, clearest picture that I have ever seen, are we getting one of these. That as they say are words that she has never uttered before and that really blew me away

So when is the installer scheduled to show up at your house? :ROFL: I just may have to come up to Indiana for my demo.

 

[User211]

Congratulations on your Ferrari related appointment, Joe.

Rich - the biggest benefits of 4K are apparent close up - inevitably. I could quite understand rejection of the technology by someone who isn't too bothered by that. 4K 3D I've yet to see.

 

[User211]

Go and see Star Trek in 4K Real3D (passive specs). Jaw dropping. Seems a bit jerky in the action sequences but apart from that it looks amazing. So 4K DOES seem to pay off when screens get huge and 3D.

That is an order, Rich.

 

[RUR]

Saw it yesterday in IMAX 3d and it was a blast!

 

[projectormovielover]

Go and see Star Trek in 4K Real3D (passive specs). Jaw dropping. Seems a bit jerky in the action sequences but apart from that it looks amazing. So 4K DOES seem to pay off when screens get huge and 3D.

That is an order, Rich.

I love the passive 3D tv's but they half the resolution but 4k means 1080p each frame or eye. I welcome the 4k for projectors as its about time because 1080p is like vhs resolution per 20 inch of a 156 inch picture