UHD Are There Going To Be Ulta HD Blu Rays For Ultra HD TV (1 Viewer)

[Paul Hillenbrand]

IMO, the CNET article, "Why 4K TVs are stupid" is missing a very pertinent point, and for me it is very essential. 3D renditon for Passive and for Auto-Stereoscopic displays. i.e. The result will make it possible for viewing 3D movies with theatrical polarized glasses (passive) and "no-glasses" (on Lenticular & Auto-Stereoscopic displays), that will be able to finally match the current HOME - 2D High-Definition qualitative standards.
Paul

 

[Persianimmortal]

If the studios don't release 4k physical media, the whole 4k screen product marketing would be pointless...broadcast HDTV and Internet streaming for the home don't have nearly enough bandwidth to take advantage of the additional picture resolution, especially without compression artifacts!!!

And that's exactly the crux of the issue. The CE manufacturers dearly want 4K because it means consumers will have to rebuy everything in the viewing chain. Conversely, the studios and other content providers seem to be moving to a cloud/streaming model, which isn't yet providing 2K at full quality, much less 4K.
The upshot is that yes, 4K is likely to be the next standard for home video. But it will take several years at least before all factors converge to allow it to flourish. How long is anybody's guess, but I'd suggest at least 5 years, and most likely it will really take hold when OLED TVs reach a good size/price ratio. After all, if people are going to upgrade to OLED, it will also be a good time to upgrade to 4K.

 

[Dave H]

And that's exactly the crux of the issue. The CE manufacturers dearly want 4K because it means consumers will have to rebuy everything in the viewing chain. Conversely, the studios and other content providers seem to be moving to a cloud/streaming model, which isn't yet providing 2K at full quality, much less 4K.
The upshot is that yes, 4K is likely to be the next standard for home video. But it will take several years at least before all factors converge to allow it to flourish. How long is anybody's guess, but I'd suggest at least 5 years, and most likely it will really take hold when OLED TVs reach a good size/price ratio. After all, if people are going to upgrade to OLED, it will also be a good time to upgrade to 4K.

That's along the same lines I was thinking. I think OLED will be tied in with 4K at some point unlike how it is now - all of which will be the next generation experience.

 

[KevinFC]

The 4k actually refers to the speed and has nothing to do with the resolution at all as it is 3,840 x 2,160. Sony already has a 84 inch out for 25k . Reminds me of the 1080p toshiba that cost around 10k to have. Also sony doesnt want to change the name so it may be a fight like bluray v hd dvd was.....
Manufacturers are afraid of getting sued over this 4k as it is misleading. Thus the name change to Ultra HD, but then what will the 8k sets be called.... , maybe super high ultra HD lol

 

[Scott Calvert]

The 4k actually refers to the speed and has nothing to do with the resolution at all as it is 3,840 x 2,160.

Speed? What are you talking about?
I don't know the exact pixel count of these new 4K sets but what you mentioned above is 2x 1080p. Which is close enough to 4K to essentially call it that.

 

[Persianimmortal]

The 4k actually refers to the speed and has nothing to do with the resolution at all as it is 3,840 x 2,160.

No, it has nothing to do with speed, it is the resolution in (approximate) pixel width. It's also called 2,160p for the standard pixel height.
The Consumer Electronics Association has officially provided the name and specs for Ultra HD TV in this Press Release from last week:

The group also defined the core characteristics of Ultra High-Definition TVs, monitors and projectors for the home. Minimum performance attributes include display resolution of at least eight million active pixels, with at least 3,840 horizontally and at least 2,160 vertically. Displays will have an aspect ratio with width to height of at least 16 X 9. To use the Ultra HD label, display products will require at least one digital input capable of carrying and presenting native 4K format video from this input at full 3,840 X 2,160 resolution without relying solely on up-converting.

Note that there are two resolutions currently floating around for Ultra HD TV. 3,840 x 2,160 is the minimum as defined by the CEA, but there are also 4,096 × 2,160 sets as well, which of course will do wonders for consumer confusion.
And yes, Sony has decided on its own name for the 4K standard, calling it 4K UHD, which of course is completely redundant, given Ultra HD is already defined as 4K by CEA. Add another notch for consumer confusion. Unfortunately it seems the lessons of the Blu-ray vs. HDDVD debacle were not learned very well. Which is again why I personally believe that it will be many years before 4K becomes mainstream.

 

[DaveF]

Originally Posted by Scott Calvert /t/324563/are-there-going-to-be-ulta-hd-blu-rays-for-ultra-hd-tv/60#post_3992473
Speed? What are you talking about?

4K shows quadruple the pixels in the same time as a 1K display. So, 4x faster.

 

[KevinFC]

actually it does have to do with speed as 1080p is also known as 2k. but since consumers dont get or understand that and isnt very catchy and the fact that 4k is no where in the resolution, TV manufactures want to go with Ultra HD instead to keep from being sued over false advertisement. 3480x2160p is the base standard of 4k with some sets at 3840x2160p, but the later sets will be the higher end and base line sets will be the former. So if you just say Ultra HD 2160p...you can do either resolution and there be no issue with false claims.

 

[Scott Calvert]

actually it does have to do with speed as 1080p is also known as 2k.

2K as in like 2 kilometers and hour? Of course.

 

[KevinFC]

2K as in like 2 kilometers and hour? Of course.

Do you think of these yourself....

 

[Stephen_J_H]

Definitely the only clear benefit I can see to a 4K display is better passive 3D on flat panels. On projectors, youd need a massive display to see any difference, and be able to sit less than 1 screen-width away from the screen.

 

[KevinFC]

4k in the projector arena has been out for some time. 4k only benefits movie theaters to be truthful. but it will sell to those who have to be the must haves.... I think if you take a top of the line 1080p set at 80+ inches and compare it to the sony or even the lg that sits at 20 grand at a regular viewing distance you wont see to much of a difference other then you wallet being a lot lighter.
But it should help passive 3D alot which is a benefit for the extra 18 or so grand you will pay...

 

[Persianimmortal]

actually it does have to do with speed as 1080p is also known as 2k.

Actually it has to do with cost, not speed - 1080p is called 2K because the first 18" 1080p set cost $2,000
Seriously though, please stop posting about speed as it's irrelevant, and you will confuse others. 4K is approx. 4,000 pixels wide, 2K is approximately 2,000 pixels wide. From here:

 

[Scott Calvert]

Actually it has to do with cost, not speed - 1080p is called 2K because the first 18" 1080p set cost $2,000
Seriously though, please stop posting about speed as it's irrelevant, and you will confuse others. 4K is approx. 4,000 pixels wide, 2K is approximately 2,000 pixels wide. From here:

Thank you!

 

[Persianimmortal]

I think people are ignoring one thing when considering whether the upgrade to 4K is "necessary": it may not be necessary, but it is inevitable.
The consumer electronics manufacturers will steadily replace all 2K and below hardware with 4K hardware. They did this with 1080p, phasing out the sale of 720p TVs over time, and also phasing out smaller screen sizes as well. They've also done something similar with 3D and "smart TV" capabilities - they've built 3D and Smart TV into pretty much all of the latest medium to high-end TVs, whether you want it or not.
That means that in years to come, when the average person goes to replace their recently-deceased TV or projector, they will essentially have no choice but to buy 4K native equipment, and probably only at larger screen sizes. And once you have the equipment, it will be very difficult not to be tempted into buying the media for it, especially if reviews come out stating that there is any improvement in clarity, color reproduction or other image quality aspects.
The CE manufacturers aren't just going to leave it up to personal choice. They will be foisting this technology on consumers whether we want it or not, and in a few years, at upgrade time our choices will be severely limited if we don't want 4K.