dslreports logo
site
 
    All Forums Hot Topics Gallery
spc

spacer




how-to block ads


Search Topic:
uniqs
17
share rss forum feed


danclan

join:2005-11-01
Midlothian, VA

1 edit
reply to MURICA

Re: Ultra HD at CES

said by MURICA:

said by bull3964 :

said by MURICA:

Even the worst 4k TV will be better than the best 1080p TV.

So you would take a panel with 50% higher minimum black level or apparent clouding just because it's 4k over a 1080p TV that doesn't?

Hell. Yes.

said by danclan:

FYI all digital screens in theaters are 4K.

It's 48fps that's new and what is causing a stir.

No they aren't.

The bulk of theaters still have crappy 2K screens - you know, the same resolution as your TV. And it's blown up to a giant screen.

Sorry...I thought most had finally converted over. Where I live, all the theaters are 4K and have been for a long time.

However I disagree with your statements about quality. For the Video junkie it makes a difference. For the general public, it's "good enough". 48fps however is totally up to the viewer. Like many things artsy its totally in the eye of the viewer. 48fps for me felt like I was watching a soap opera and distracted me from the film itself.


danclan

join:2005-11-01
Midlothian, VA

1 edit

The more I read the more I see 4K as a solution in search of a problem.

Sure there will always be those in search of 1000$ copper cables to make their speakers sound better. These TV's currently are very much in that same vein. If broadcasts were all 1080p I doubt very much we would be caring about 4K. As it is, with the horrible job many cable companies are doing with supplying HD content, 4K content will also be subject to horrific artifacts and compression residue.

The plus side of all this? Maybe cable co's will actually bite the bullet and move everyone over to mpep4. That alone would free up a HUGE amount of bandwidth to provide better quality broadcasts and freeing up bandwidth to boot.

Will it happen? Not likely the deployed base of slow dated cable boxes with no upgrade path will forever keep this away from the public.

If the FCC were to finally allow us to purchase and own our cable boxes we wouldn't be having this discussion as there would be a boom in features, capabilities and options for consumers as well as variety of choice and lower costs.

edit: grammer



Abraxas601

@pacbell.net

My biggest interest in 4K is the effect it will have on high resolution computer monitors. I look forward to the current standard of 1920x1080 to be replaced with 4096x2160 (or 3840x2160). It would be nice to start buying LCD monitors that are 30" or greater in size and not cost $1K.

I predict that since very little needs to change with existing hardware technologies, support will be adopted at a rate similar to 3D. It will be available whether you want it or not. I believe it's mostly just a chip hardware update. The latest HDMI (1.4) has support and existing panel technology shouldn't have a problem.

I think it will quickly become the standard for projectors since they would benefit the most. Already Blu-ray players and A/V receivers are adding 4K support at little to no additional cost.

The biggest failing will be content. Source material will come in the form of "criterion" style Blu-rays at double the cost and directed towards the Home Theater enthusiast. Similar to Laserdiscs in the early 90s.


MURICA

join:2013-01-03
reply to danclan

said by danclan:

However I disagree with your statements about quality. For the Video junkie it makes a difference. For the general public, it's "good enough". 48fps however is totally up to the viewer. Like many things artsy its totally in the eye of the viewer. 48fps for me felt like I was watching a soap opera and distracted me from the film itself.

But I am a video junkie.

I won't watch a TV show when it airs if I know there's going to be a Blu-ray release.

That's right; I am always consistently one season behind on shows like Modern Family, The Walking Dead, and Breaking Bad.

I won't watch a network affiliate. I'd rather take the time and effort to retrieve the national distribution feed off C-BAND.

And even I will admit that resolution is the single most important factor when it comes to video quality.

said by danclan:

If the FCC were to finally allow us to purchase and own our cable boxes we wouldn't be having this discussion as there would be a boom in features, capabilities and options for consumers as well as variety of choice and lower costs.

They do. It's called the CableCARD.

said by Abraxas601 :

I predict that since very little needs to change with existing hardware technologies, support will be adopted at a rate similar to 3D. It will be available whether you want it or not. I believe it's mostly just a chip hardware update. The latest HDMI (1.4) has support and existing panel technology shouldn't have a problem.

HDMI 1.4 does not support 4k at a refresh rate higher than 24 fps. This will need to change for computer monitor usage. Anything below 60 Hz is unacceptable.

said by Abraxas601 :

The biggest failing will be content. Source material will come in the form of "criterion" style Blu-rays at double the cost and directed towards the Home Theater enthusiast. Similar to Laserdiscs in the early 90s.

I think once again the porn industry will be leading the charge in providing 4K content. When HD was in its infancy it was the porn sites which offered the first widespread HD video via the Internet. Today, they are still leading the way when it comes to quality. Brazzers delivers 1080p MPEG-4 scenes at 12 Mbps for all of its new material. This blows everyone else away except for Blu-ray. It's higher quality than cable, Verizon, iTunes, Netflix, etc and twice the bitrate of DirecTV's MPEG-4 HD channels.

All a player like Manwin needs to do is get ahold of a few RED cameras. 4K digital cameras are gradually decreasing in price.

Because they already have a great Internet distribution system in place they are in a better position to get lots of 4K content out there at this stage in the game than mainstream Hollywood which is locked into bureaucracies with bandwidth-starved cable providers, a high definition home video format which does not have 4K support in its technical specifications, and Apple's iTunes service which won't support 4K until Apple decides to release a piece of hardware that plays 4K.