Effects of incoming 8K format on current and future 4K content (1 Viewer)

[Lord Dalek]

That is sooooooooo absolutely NOT true.

...and you know this how?

 

[AcesHighStudios]

...and you know this how?

I've already answered that in subsequent posts.

 

[Lord Dalek]

I've already answered that in subsequent posts.

No you said you can see more than 2k. That's true. At an acceptable distance with a tv less than 80" wide you can see about 2.8K. Maybe 3.2 but that's with 20-20 vision which only 1/3 of humanity has. YOU CAN'T SEE 4K. Not unless you want to stick your face directly in front of your tv and soak in that radiation or waste some 2 grand on a 100" monitor and even then you STILL can't see it because your eyes don't perceive pixels!

 

[Ed Lachmann]

Hell, I'm still waiting for thousands of beloved films to make it to good old 1080. I'll probably never own a 4K disc...unless maybe if by some miracle they release Ben-Hur. I'm not interested in the recent stuff at all, and for me that's the last three decades plus some. All I can hope for in the 8K realm is that they offer digital downloads of great classics for sale in 8K which I could download overnight and have on a hard drive, or better, burn onto an 8K disc (which isn't invented yet). The shape of things to come? To be optimistic, I'm sure that these would look great...like maybe the restored The Golem.

 

[Kyrsten Brad]

No you said you can see more than 2k. That's true. At an acceptable distance with a tv less than 80" wide you can see about 2.8K. Maybe 3.2 but that's with 20-20 vision which only 1/3 of humanity has. YOU CAN'T SEE 4K. Not unless you want to stick your face directly in front of your tv and soak in that radiation or waste some 2 grand on a 100" monitor and even then you STILL can't see it because your eyes don't perceive pixels!

You know something I don’t?

Like where can one get a quality 100” screen (not a projector ) for 2 grand?

(But you can get quality 75” 4K TV in the $1400-$2109 price range)

 

[Doug Pyle]

I'm in like mind with Paul H's post: the abandonment of 3D also has me uninterested in new display tech, including 8K, until I can watch my 3D collection on it.

Until then, 8K provides this longtime early-adopter an unfamiliar outlook on my home theater:

Good old fashioned 4K OLED looks good enough to me.

 

[OLDTIMER]

My observation is, while it's great to be able to view the highest resolution images on a huge screen, what about the more-often-times that one has to view lower resolution images on the same huge screen. There has to be a compromise screen size/resolution.

 

[crowe-t]

The TV manufacturers got to sell most people new High Definition TV's when HD came out and it seems they wanted to sell more TV's so they pushed 4K. At a normal viewing distance the human eye can't see the difference between HD and 4K. Now the TV manufacturers are getting greedy because the higher number of K's sounds more impressive. Broadcast is still HD and looks terrific. 8K in the home is ridiculous and even 4K is overkill. I love my Sony XBR-55X900F 4K TV for the excellent black level, color...not necessarily for the added resolution.

 

[Josh Steinberg]

These won’t really be for me or you just yet. While I’m sure they’ll be displayed at some high end showrooms, they’ll probably be used in more corporate spaces than consumer ones. Think in terms of digital billboards that you can walk right up to without seeing pixels and that sort of thing.

Eventually they may take over in the way that it’s now easier to find a 4K set than an HD set in many places. But I don’t think content producers will be making a shift to 8K anytime soon so it’ll be a capability sets have that no one is taking advantage of.

 

[OliverK]

Like with 4k TV's the overall quality of TV's will continue to improve regardless of resolution. The best TV's will be 8k and they will not only be on top within their respective categories with regard to resolution but also because of other parameters that for most customers will be more relevant than resolution, like tone mapping and color accuracy, light output, color space coverage, black level and so on.

As for resolution I do not think that we need to have a different discussion than for 4k as there are the same limits to what the eye can see that apply for 8k as for 4k. While this is a bit of an oversimplification as absolute size plays a certain tole one can start by cutting distances and viewing angles in half with everything else being the same.

if one does the test for the distance at which 4k resolution can be appreciated for a meaningful percentage of content and then cuts that distance in half for the same screen size it will not be very far from the screen.
So probably not a distance that too many people would want to sit at but maybe it helps a little bit to get more movies out in 4k instead of 2k.

 

[Keith Cobby]

Since buying a 65" OLED I have been captivated by 4k content. The uplift in image quality is greater than I expected and I bought a Panny 4k camcorder for family/holiday filming. Looking forward to 8k if for no other reason than it gives a boost to 4k content.

 

[moovtune]

If you consider that more than half of what is passed on as 4K is actually up-converted 2K masters (which means those extra pixels are not real new information), why would anyone think that 8K is going to be ACTUAL new information either. Until the studios start making real 4K masters we won't even be getting actual added pixels for 4K. As long as they continue to make movies with 1000+ CGI shots that already take huge amounts of hard drive space and hours to render, we'll probably not see actual 4K masters for a long time. If that ever happens, then 8K for years will just be up-converted 4K masters. For me, on my 110" screen, my Epson pixel-shifting projector showing a blu-ray with a touch of Darbee added before reaching the projector is about as sharp and detailed as I could ever see with my aging eyes.

 

[rsmithjr]

8K will become the next standard for TV sets because that is all that they will build. Most of the content displayed will be uprezzed. I would not be shocked to see 8K content in some form but likely not in physical media.

 

[OLDTIMER]

8K in the home is ridiculous and even 4K is overkill. I love my Sony XBR-55X900F 4K TV for the excellent black level, color...not necessarily for the added resolution.

I agree. Anything over 4K is overkill. The greatest improvements with modern TVs are great black levels (if you have an OLED), wider color gamut, extended dynamic range, non-reflective screen, etc. My Panasonic OLED has a very useful Gamma control (great for uncrushing blacks.)

 

[jcroy]

One question I haven't seen really addressed, is who exactly will be the first-adoptor audience for such 8K screens?

I suspect tv/movie folks might not be the target audience this time around.

The tarage audience might be somebody else, such as video gamers ? For example, will the next generation of video game consoles support 8K straight out of the box ?

 

[Robert Crawford]

I agree. Anything over 4K is overkill. The greatest improvements with modern TVs are great black levels (if you have an OLED), wider color gamut, extended dynamic range, non-reflective screen, etc. My Panasonic OLED has a very useful Gamma control (great for uncrushing blacks.)

I think people get too hung up on the "4K" designation as those other attributes are more important to me watching my two LG OLED displays which is why UHD discs derived from 2K elements don't bother me as much as others.

 

[Josh Steinberg]

One question I haven't seen really addressed, is who exactly will be the first-adoptor audience for such 8K screens?

I’ve said multiple times in this thread - they are being adopted for business and commercial use to begin with. My company, for example, has replaced static signage in the building with these types of monitors, which allow you to stand super close without seeing the pixels due to the super high resolution. Instead of paying someone to print out new signs and put up new displays, they can now just change the image on the monitor from a remote location. You’ll see other people using them for billboards, in store signage, that sort of thing. NYC is in the process of replacing printed billboards with digital screens for advertising and information.

They’ll also be adopted for theme park applications where they’ll be used to display custom made 8K video both in waiting areas and integrated within the attractions.

 

[jcroy]

I’ve said multiple times in this thread - they are being adopted for business and commercial use to begin with.

I was thinking more along the lines of home users. Which part of the "hardcore" crowd, would be the first to be widely buying 8K screens ?

(I assume commercial / business usage would be first adopters for many newer technologies, when there's significant benefits to the bottom line).

 

[jcroy]

Yes, and so obviously and easily disproven by the clear difference between true 4K and 1080p, which is almost 2K already. Also obviously easily disproven by the clear difference between a true 4K Blu-ray and a 2K upscale to 4K.

Also easily disproven by simply going outside and seeing far more detail with your naked eye than you can see on a 4K Blu-ray.

No you said you can see more than 2k. That's true. At an acceptable distance with a tv less than 80" wide you can see about 2.8K. Maybe 3.2 but that's with 20-20 vision which only 1/3 of humanity has. YOU CAN'T SEE 4K. Not unless you want to stick your face directly in front of your tv and soak in that radiation or waste some 2 grand on a 100" monitor and even then you STILL can't see it because your eyes don't perceive pixels!

I can certainly see the difference between an HD screen and real life with the naked eye in some scenarios.

As a very crass extreme example, I can certainly see the difference between an HD recording of myself having sex with my gf, in comparison to seeing the same / similar sex act in real life from a slightly different point-of-view angle / perspective. (Such as recording sex from a first person perspective).

 

[AcesHighStudios]

No you said you can see more than 2k. That's true. At an acceptable distance with a tv less than 80" wide you can see about 2.8K. Maybe 3.2 but that's with 20-20 vision which only 1/3 of humanity has. YOU CAN'T SEE 4K. Not unless you want to stick your face directly in front of your tv and soak in that radiation or waste some 2 grand on a 100" monitor and even then you STILL can't see it because your eyes don't perceive pixels!

Apparently you presume to speak for the entire world when you are only able to speak for yourself. I work in film and television. I have 8 4K cameras, which are an extremely noticeable upgrade from the HD cameras I had previously. I also have two 6K cameras, which are noticeably better than my 4K cameras. Not as large an upgrade as the jump from HD to 4K, but it's definitely there.

I don't really care whether you believe that or not. It doesn't change the actual facts I work with every single day.