Devices > Video Cards, Monitors, Televisions, and Projectors
4K TV's
jmone:
Sorry - I meant 4K commercial content for mainstream content such as Movies and TV.
6233638:
--- Quote from: jmone on November 14, 2013, 03:11:39 am ---Sorry - I meant 4K commercial content for mainstream content such as Movies and TV.
--- End quote ---
Well anything shot in 35mm could benefit from 4K (but probably not 8K) and most new productions are shot in at least 4K now. The only problem is that we don't currently have a distribution format - and that will hopefully be announced at CES in January.
Even just upscaled 1080p content should look better than it does on 1080p displays though.
dean70:
--- Quote from: Sparks67 on November 14, 2013, 01:57:48 am --- Audio right now is still at 7.1, but here is the recommended standard from NHK. http://www.nhk.or.jp/strl/publica/bt/en/fe0045-6.pdf I doubt we see any changes for audio for awhile.
--- End quote ---
Trying to get 22.2 channels to play nice in a typical room (even with treatment) would not be fun :o
jmone:
--- Quote from: 6233638 on November 14, 2013, 03:22:11 am ---Well anything shot in 35mm could benefit from 4K (but probably not 8K) and most new productions are shot in at least 4K now. The only problem is that we don't currently have a distribution format - and that will hopefully be announced at CES in January.
Even just upscaled 1080p content should look better than it does on 1080p displays though.
--- End quote ---
I agree.... we already have to scale chroma with the current distribution formats and good algorithms could make luma scaling look good on high res screens if you sit close enough for the screen size to perceive the difference, but the law of diminishing returns kick in. I'd personally prefer to see an increase of frame rate over resolution given any given limitation of bandwidth. The jump from 24p to 50/60p is a marked difference and makes content looks great at the current 1920x1080 resolution. While I'm on my soapbox, Interlaced content should be relegated to the history books as quickly as possible.
Edit: One day we may even get "lossless" video so we can prattle on like the audiophiles! Bring on 4gbps media!
Vocalpoint:
--- Quote from: 6233638 on November 14, 2013, 03:04:07 am ---I think what you meant to say was "wake me up when we have 4K broadcast" - we have plenty of 4K source material, just not much commercial 4K video, and no 4K broadcast yet.
--- End quote ---
And since no one cares about "non-commercial" content - they will not care about 4K until there is LOTS of "commercial" content and at a price cheaper than HD is now.
I cannot see 4K (or 8K) being any cheaper for broadcast as the overhead and bandwidth for pushing that kind of resolution down the broadcast pipe simply does not exist right now. Here in Calgary - we can barely get a decent HD signal on cable on the 50 or so HD channels vying for position without it looking like crap due to severe compression.
I can't imagine how horrible it will look when our local CATV company tries to hammer us with 4K. They will have to replace the entire city infrastructure with fiber (at theor expense) if they hope to have any chance of delivering 4K broadcast content with any success.
But - due to these clowns upping their existing monthly charges seemingly every two months - they are bleeding customers like crazy...so it's doubtful there will be enough of a user base left to support something like 4K here in the not too distant future. Cable cutting is rampant up here - and folks do not seem to care about HD resolution...they simply do not want to pay the cable company for ANY content. HD or otherwise.
Unless these providers get their costs under control and start delivering value to the customer instead of price increase letters - I do not see a future for 4K broadcast as it stands right now. There will be no one left to pay for it.
VP
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version