4k…Okay, Now I Get It! (1 Viewer)

[Robert Crawford]

What was the model number on that 3D OLED?

OLED65E6P

 

[Tina_H_V]

Way to get it done, Ron!!!! I, too, made the move last fall!!! I am so liking what I am seeing.

I paired it up with an OPPO UDP-203 shortly afterward!!!

Dolby Atmos and DTS:X are next!!!!

 

[DaveF]

Personally, I am a bit afraid to upgrade. Seems whenever I up my system to something new, all the manufacturers announce their new latest and greatest upgrades and new formats.

The first rule of technology shopping: The best time to buy is always tomorrow.

 

[Bryan^H]

How is OLED for classic TV DVD (mostly color shows from the 60's-80's)?

 

[John G]

I just had my KURO plasma repaired..based on your post I am now regretting my decision not to upgrade instead

 

[Keith Cobby]

Received my first 4k blu-rays today: La La Land, The Martian, Fast & Furious 6/7.

 

[JWC1969]

Ron et al, hate to be that guy, but what you're responding to isn't the 4K resolution, which, unless you're sitting very close to a very large TV isn't that noticeable over 1080p (think 720p v. 1080p), but rather the High Dynamic Range (HDR) and Wide Color Gamut (WCG) afforded most 4K programming. And, of course, the brilliant blacks of the LG OLED. So the real game-changer isn't 4K but rather HDR and WCG, the latter producing 46% (DCI-P3 color gamut )/67% (Rec.2020 gamut) of the colors the human eye can see v. the 34% afforded us by the Blu-ray standard (Rec.709 gamut). Lucky for us, 4K just happens to be vessel in which both are embedded. Not that the additional resolution isn't appreciated, but again, the real difference makers are the improved dynamic range of the HDR10/Dolby Vision metadata and more accurate/poppier colors of the BT.2020 color space (which, in reality, is more like the DCI-P3 color space until TVs are able to produce more colors, still a ways off.) Enjoy the wonderful pictures. Once you've seen a 4K HDR10/Dolby Vision encoded image, Standard Dynamic Range (SDR) is a big, fat bummer.

 

[JediFonger]

i've said this before, but i think i would have been happy w/2k+HDR.

but this focus on 4k/8k/etc. sets a terrible precedence for consumers. what *SHOULD* have happened is to highlight (pun intended) and focus in on what HDR can do for your display and how much more awesome that is than traditional non-HDR.

but so far... all the mass marketing has 0 clue on how to sell that for avg joes.

it's kind of sad.

also... from the latest CEDIA news... we are finally seeing more and more displays capable of displaying the full rec2020 (at least they claim so) on both display and projection products!

the future looks bright! >)

Ron et al, hate to be that guy, but what you're responding to isn't the 4K resolution, which, unless you're sitting very close to a very large TV isn't that noticeable over 1080p (think 720p v. 1080p), but rather the High Dynamic Range (HDR) and Wide Color Gamut (WCG) afforded most 4K programming. And, of course, the brilliant blacks of the LG OLED. So the real game-changer isn't 4K but rather HDR and WCG, the latter producing 46% (DCI-P3 color gamut )/67% (Rec.2020 gamut) of the colors the human eye can see v. the 34% afforded us by the Blu-ray standard (Rec.709 gamut). Lucky for us, 4K just happens to be vessel in which both are embedded. Not that the additional resolution isn't appreciated, but again, the real difference makers are the improved dynamic range of the HDR10/Dolby Vision metadata and more accurate/poppier colors of the BT.2020 color space (which, in reality, is more like the DCI-P3 color space until TVs are able to produce more colors, still a ways off.) Enjoy the wonderful pictures. Once you've seen a 4K HDR10/Dolby Vision encoded image, Standard Dynamic Range (SDR) is a big, fat bummer.

 

[JQuintana]

I don't think 99% of the average TV buyers even know what HDR is, let alone what it does.

All they want to see on the TV box is "4K" and maybe "UHD"

 

[JediFonger]

i think most of them still dunno what 1080p from a technical perspective except "it's the best thing evah".

most people upgrade when their old TV dies or they want a larger size, through attrition.

it's the same w/older LCD->newer TVs. once old TV is dead or 'too small', then they replace it with whatever is on sale, which was (depending on time/generation) 720, 1080p, 4k and now 8k.

folks could care less about what rez it is as long as it's cheap and they can afford it.

I don't think 99% of the average TV buyers even know what HDR is, let alone what it does.

All they want to see on the TV box is "4K" and maybe "UHD"

 

[Dave>h]

This is probably most directed to Ron Epstein but anyone can chime in.

I am a huge fan of 3d and especially 3d in the home. I currently own a benq w1070, a great affordable 3d 1080p projector but recently upgraded to a 4k, dolby atmos etc. capable yamaha receiver and have been toying with an upgrade to 4k on the projector front. There are 3d capable 4k projectors that are quite reasonably priced but I am gathering from above comments that what really matters is not the 4K per se but the HDR and WCG. It also sounds like maybe the lower end 4k projectors may not have HDR and WCG capacity but I am not sure of that.

I know Ron is (was??) big into 3d and I am curious if the loss of 3d capabilities played into the decision of moving to 4k at all?

Is the move to 4k worth losing the ability to do 3d? I don't have the luxury of having 2 different set ups so if I were to move to 4k it would be via a projector upgrade. However, I am thinking I may need to lose 3d in order to get affordable HDR and WCG in a projector. Is that a reasonable assumption?

Glad you are happy with your new set up Ron!

Regards,

Kip

 

[JediFonger]

https://www.projectorreviews.com/projector-reports/the-2018-best-home-theater-projectors-report/
^look at the $1000+ some of the mid-range 'faux k` (DLP pixel shifted 4k) projectors will do 4k HDR AND 3D

however... some of the newer 4k announced that will do better HDR:
https://www.projectorreviews.com/articles-guides/epson-pro-cinema-4050-announced-at-cedia-2018/

https://www.projectorreviews.com/articles-guides/jvc-dla-n5-dla-n7-and-dla-nx9-launch-at-cedia-2018/

but none of those have 3D... except Sony apparently:
https://www.projectorreviews.com/ar...tors-vpl-vw295es-vpl-vw695es-and-vpl-vw995es/

but again... all those things are $!

This is probably most directed to Ron Epstein but anyone can chime in.

I am a huge fan of 3d and especially 3d in the home. I currently own a benq w1070, a great affordable 3d 1080p projector but recently upgraded to a 4k, dolby atmos etc. capable yamaha receiver and have been toying with an upgrade to 4k on the projector front. There are 3d capable 4k projectors that are quite reasonably priced but I am gathering from above comments that what really matters is not the 4K per se but the HDR and WCG. It also sounds like maybe the lower end 4k projectors may not have HDR and WCG capacity but I am not sure of that.

I know Ron is (was??) big into 3d and I am curious if the loss of 3d capabilities played into the decision of moving to 4k at all?

Is the move to 4k worth losing the ability to do 3d? I don't have the luxury of having 2 different set ups so if I were to move to 4k it would be via a projector upgrade. However, I am thinking I may need to lose 3d in order to get affordable HDR and WCG in a projector. Is that a reasonable assumption?

Glad you are happy with your new set up Ron!

Regards,

Kip

 

[Brian Husar]

Finally got a 4k UHD player, a Sony to go with our 4K Hisense Television. Not hi tech but it does the job. Had to get a new sound system, so we ended up with the Logitech Z906 THX system. Not an Atmos but it does the job for us on a budget. I am loving 4K, but I also agree, not every film needs to be a 4K UHD.

 

[ScottHM]

I am one of the last handfuls of members on this forum to finally get into 4k. As I noted, it wasn't really my intention. I completely sympathize with those members still holding on to their 1080p displays. It's an expensive upgrade when you want to do it right. However, sooner or later the rest of you will also be dealing with failing equipment. When that happens, don't be afraid to open your wallet and step up.​

Congratulations on the upgrade.

I am one of those holdouts and a question I'd like to ask you is how do your old DVDs look on this new display? The reason I ask is that my movie collection is probably quite different than that of the average HTF member.

I currently have 2379 films in my home video collection, 1742 of which are black & white films released before 1960, and over 1400 of those are not available even on Blu-ray, much less 4K. What could I expect most of these DVDs to look like in the event my seven year old DLP television dies and I have to make the same decision you did?

---------------

 

[Matt Hough]

It depends on the authoring of the original DVDs. Many of my favorite films haven't made the transition to Blu-ray, but if some expert hands were present when the films were authored for DVD, they hold up quite well on a TV (projection might be less appealing). On my 65" OLED, most studio releases still look very watchable without a lot of distracting artifacts. They certainly look superior to standard definition cable broadcasts which I find soft and rather a chore to watch so I try to avoid them whenever possible.

 

[JediFonger]

dont have 4k/hdr but as someone who loves b&w classics like you one of the things i noticed when i have chances to view 4k hdr using older sd b&w content is things will be darker/brighter. the dynamic range of light/dark is greatly increased. u can also bring it into stores to demo if you wish. is it night/day compared to what you have? probably not. the biggest thing to me about 4k hdr is how it doesnt matter as much as size. so to me a brighter projector to 100” screen does it for me vs smaller 4k hdr displays

Congratulations on the upgrade.

I am one of those holdouts and a question I'd like to ask you is how do your old DVDs look on this new display? The reason I ask is that my movie collection is probably quite different than that of the average HTF member.

I currently have 2379 films in my home video collection, 1742 of which are black & white films released before 1960, and over 1400 of those are not available even on Blu-ray, much less 4K. What could I expect most of these DVDs to look like in the event my seven year old DLP television dies and I have to make the same decision you did?

---------------

 

[ScottHM]

On my 65" OLED, most studio releases still look very watchable without a lot of distracting artifacts.

That's good to hear. My major concern with an eventual "upgrade" to 4K has been that my existing DVD collection will look worse on a 4K TV than on my current television, which is a 73" DLP set on which most of my DVDs look very good.

---------------

 

[Robert Crawford]

It depends on the authoring of the original DVDs. Many of my favorite films haven't made the transition to Blu-ray, but if some expert hands were present when the films were authored for DVD, they hold up quite well on a TV (projection might be less appealing). On my 65" OLED, most studio releases still look very watchable without a lot of distracting artifacts. They certainly look superior to standard definition cable broadcasts which I find soft and rather a chore to watch so I try to avoid them whenever possible.

I had the same experience as Matt.

 

[PMF]

Robert Zohn will have Mr. Epstein to thank on other future occasions, as well;
as it was Ronald who first alerted me to Robert's excellence, when first I joined HTF.
Thanks for both the guidance and the goal; as excellence is always well worth the journey.

 

[Sean Bryan]

This is probably most directed to Ron Epstein but anyone can chime in.

I am a huge fan of 3d and especially 3d in the home. I currently own a benq w1070, a great affordable 3d 1080p projector but recently upgraded to a 4k, dolby atmos etc. capable yamaha receiver and have been toying with an upgrade to 4k on the projector front. There are 3d capable 4k projectors that are quite reasonably priced but I am gathering from above comments that what really matters is not the 4K per se but the HDR and WCG. It also sounds like maybe the lower end 4k projectors may not have HDR and WCG capacity but I am not sure of that.

I know Ron is (was??) big into 3d and I am curious if the loss of 3d capabilities played into the decision of moving to 4k at all?

Is the move to 4k worth losing the ability to do 3d? I don't have the luxury of having 2 different set ups so if I were to move to 4k it would be via a projector upgrade. However, I am thinking I may need to lose 3d in order to get affordable HDR and WCG in a projector. Is that a reasonable assumption?

Glad you are happy with your new set up Ron!

Regards,

Kip

I don’t know what range you personally consider affordable, but JVC is dropping the MSRP on the RS540 to $3,999 (was $5,999). The JVC projectors are excellent at 3D. This line is not native 4K, as it uses their pixel-shifting “Eshift” technology, which effectively displays about halfway between “HD” and “4K”. It does a great job with 4K material and has fantastic native contrast (130,000:1 native). It also can do 100% of the DCI-P3 color space of UHD. It handles HDR ok on its own, but you’d get better HDR from the new Panasonic UB820 taking advantage of its tone mapping (which will automatically optimize based on the disc’s meta data). I wouldn’t be surprised to find street pricing around $3,500 or less, which is a phenomenal price for this level of projector.

The price drop happened because JVC is launching their NATIVE 4K projectors this fall. The RS1000 entry model for that line is $5,999 MSRP. So native 4K, WCG, HDR (the new line has an auto tone mapping feature supposedly similar to the Panasonic UB820 player) 1800 lumens with 40,000:1 native on/off contrast ratio (400,00:1 dynamic contrast) at a street price of probably around or below $5,500.

Their RS2000 midrange native 4K offers 80,000:1 native contrast (800,000:1 dynamic) with 1900 lumens at an MSRP of $7999, and the big boy RS3000 features the same amazing lens from their laser projector, 100,000:1 native contrast (1,000,000:1 dynamic) and 2200 lumens for a whopping $17,999! The difference in price between between the $8k RS2000 and the $18K RS3000 is mainly due to the quality of the lens. The only other projector with this lens is their $35,000 laser projector.

All, of course, handle 3D very well.