I came across this story, pretty amazing technology. Japan Broadcasting (NHK) demonstrated a live relay of a 4x x 8k (actually 7680 x 4320) resolution Super Hi-Vision program connecting a 260-km distance by a fiberoptic network.

"NHK's next-generation broadcasting system can convey the sensation of reality to viewers. Super Hi-Vision is the provisional format for that purpose, achieving 7680 x 4320 pixels."

"NHK developed a Super Hi-Vision camera equipped with 8 megapixel CCD image sensors that can take 4k x 8k images. The signal of the total 24 gigabits per second was divided into 161.5 Gbps HD-SDI signals to sent using the DWDM (dense wavelength division multiplex) method."

This is surely some years away, but they do have a proof of concept. Wow.

Read the full story here:
"Japan demonstrates next-gen TV broadcast"
http://www.eetimes.com/showArticle.jhtml?articleID=173402762

- Dan

I actually don't understand why it always has to be more more more.
And it will take years and years untill somebody would broadcast in that (IF that will ever happen) and we will have media in that resolution.

Why not have a limit ;-)?
Then you can go to the theaters and still have something like: ooooh, still love the real theater!
I don't mind home cinemas, just, I don't know, looks like they always want to have more more more, and HD is okay, but this looks like VVVVVVVVVHD (very very very very.... very high definition)

Seriously, no usual house family will buy this... ever.
Will, maybe, one day, if it's as cheap as a 4/3 SD television now is...
Maybe I'm exagerating. I'll stop the ranting ;-)

Its like when you buy a new computer. Its state of the art technology when you first buy it but 5 years later its obsolete and you buy a new one. The problem with high definition is that the closeup shots look good but with the super high definition even the wide angle shots will look like closeup shots. The fact is that you can never have too much high definition. Since this technology uses 30 times as many pixels ( 32 megapixels as opposed to 1 or 2 megapixels) as regular high definition I predict that it will take about 10 years for this technology to become affordable which is why the research is starting now. Where will it all end? The technology will end with the Star Trek Holodeck.

Well said. Having too much resolution is like having too much money. How can you say you don't need more?

I think this is more of a world record type thing. I never heard of nhk before reading about this super HD stuff in the smpte and then it was on daily planet and now it is everywhere.

What was NHK before this... I don't know, really i don't have a clue... someone what to enlighten us.

I severly doubt the human eye can resolve that much relolution but it is a neat technical achievement - like a rocket car. Sure it goes fast, but will it help you get to work faster. (depends if you work at the other side of some desert flats, but generally no)

I'm amazed that they want to do this resolution on TV broadcasts rather than just cinema.

NHK is the public tv station in Japan, kinda like PBS. It is supposed to be supported and paid by everyone who has a tv, so they send collection people to your house and bug you to pay the NHK fee. If you have a TV then they expect you to pay.

This has to be the worst job in Japan. Everyone tries not to pay, but they always come around, and they keep coming back until they get your money. Every door will get an NHK sticker proving they are paying into the system, I think thats what it means. Recently there have been a lot of scandals involving NHK and its management so now more people don't want to pay anymore.

Here is a link to their English website: http://www.nhk.or.jp/nhkworld/english/aboutnw_e.html

wow, this going round? this is really old news. But still very interesting


Anhar

isn't this the thing that people were almost barfing at because it looked "too" real and it gave everybody motion sickness?

I think reality is 2400 dots per inch (not diagonally measured) at reading distance for monochrome, 1200dpi for colour. This is how much some people can resolve in the dead centre of their vision. I remember an instance where a person could see the moons of Jupiter without a telescope. 1080p gives resolution that is effectively like about 200-300dpi, UHD 4 times that. What's needed for the ultimate Startrek like VR is way beyond that. Should be great for digitally zooming in on distant details ;)

Reminds me, are these the people that developed Holo tape recording devices?

The title's wrong, It's supposed to be 4320p60. Yes, it's 60 progressive frames a second. This technology is supposed to be used for digital real-life quality cinema exibition only. This is in 2 words: Digital IMAX.

Of course the technology will first make its way into the IMAX theatres. But as the technology becomes cheaper it will eventually, in about 10 years, make its way into the home theatre and it will become one of the broadcast formats. Next year the 2160p television will make its debut and will allow viewers to watch 4 HDTV shows at once. This television will sell for 10,000 dollars.

Yes, I think that is a much better value for now. The new Cinema digital ditro format has resolution similar to that, in jpeg2000. If Sony can release 720p/1080p Jpeg2000 on blue ray for ps3 at current pricing, and leave 2160p for expensive versions, that would be good.

It's not just because it's video that operates at the same resolution as VERY high end Hollywood workflows (Spiderman 2 was the first movie to stay at 4k resolution throughout the entire production process) - it's because images take on a whole new life at this level of resolution.

I was at a pro photo lab yesterday, using a loupe to examine 2"x3" color reversal film that I was going to use for DVD box-cover art, and was ASTONISHED by the three-dimensional quality the images had. It just reminded me that there are worlds of quality that exist beyond video's wildest dreams.

I don't know what the equivalent video resolution would be (I heard it would be like using a 20 mega pixel sensor) and I don't even want to THINK about the processing power, throughput requirements and disk capacity it would take to put images like that into motion. However, later that day I watched some 720p files played back on a 50" DLP HDTV, and though they blew doors of NTSC TV, they were by no means the 'best pictures ever'.

4k for the masses may be a decade away, or more, but it's something to look forward to - especially if you're in the computer or bandwidth trades, and are in a position to supply the insatiable for more pixels that will come with it.

Alex

Actually, it occurred to me recently, that I heard the new 4G mobile phone technologies will allow transmissions upto 400Mb's. That is more than 20 times the band with of HDTV in 1080. The resolution of 4320p is only around 16 times more. We can expect that the larger screen will compress batter at the same ratio, so we could get better than 1/5th better quality per pixel too, even without going to a better compression scheme. All the TV companies need to do is set it up to broadcast to all homes through a mobile channel. That is chilling. I expect they might drop the data-rate to 100-200MB/s for coverage, and introduce a new compression scheme. Now you will have to squint to see the compression artifacts ;)

Who cares? would be my responce to this new HDTV resolution. If 1080p was even half way to being a standard it would be great. Facts are 1080i HDTV has crap artifacting with motion and lower rez 720p60 is the best option going. To even give a damn about some uber resolution HDTV disregaurds all practicality. We have to remember we are still 80+% is SD interlaced 4:3 . I do not see another leap in the standards above 720p/1080i for a long time. So there are F1 cars that do 0- to - 300km/hr in 5 sec, what are we driving to work is what matters! This is not HDV talk and should be crystal balled.

Who cares? would be my responce to this new HDTV resolution. If 1080p was even half way to being a standard it would be great. Facts are 1080i HDTV has crap artifacting with motion and lower rez 720p60 is the best option going. To even give a damn about some uber resolution HDTV disregaurds all practicality. We have to remember we are still 80+% is SD interlaced 4:3 . I do not see another leap in the standards above 720p/1080i for a long time. So there are F1 cars that do 0- to - 300km/hr in 5 sec, what are we driving to work is what matters! This is not HDV talk and should be crystal balled.

Well Ken...at least half the world disagrees with your "facts" about 1080i, and aside from that, we're moving towards it every day. 720p60 is great. So is 1080p30, and eventually 1080p60, at least on a consumer delivery, if not broadcast side.
Do you know when NHK developed 1080i? It sure wasn't 5, 10, or even 20 years ago. Can anyone fault them for moving towards new standards each day? When most people were watching Brady Bunch and Gilligans Island, NHK was developing and proposing new standards. They, and others, tend to be the pioneers of broadcast, and will continue down that road. I doubt it will take them 20 years to bring this to SMPTE, but it'll be 25 years before it's an accepted standard. If you're not growing, you're dying. NHK surely won't be dying anytime soon.

Ken,

Many of the HDTV's are designed to connect to any decoder through their ports. So there is a big option to pipe something better to them (resolution or compression) all they need is a new decoder box, for 80% of people. The 4G technology might be cheap enough to lower the cost for the box, and you can start at whatever resolution . TV stations already deal with higher quality work-flows. So TV manufacturers and broadcasters can work there own way upto UHD resolution and use lower resolutions in the meantime (as they do now with HDTV). We could even piggyback this on the 3D TV upgrade by 2010. Newer TV display technologies should drastically drop the price of hi-res big screens (Earlier this year/last year, I found a announcement of a $400 OLED 40inch TV technology for next year, resolution I don't remember).

But for indie production, the latest film distro format is around 8MPixel, and IMAX just screams for 32 Mpixel. Technically, things are not as far a way as they seem.

I would love to buy a cheap 1080p set next year, and tap into a better than HDTV broadcast in future, even if the box has to down convert it.

OK, OK, I see some of us really believe those popular mechanics articles of the 50's. I know I really love my hovercraft!

DSE- "Well Ken...at least half the world disagrees with your "facts" about 1080i

Well very few HDTV's are native 1080i, I think that is fact. They are not close to 50% in America. And yes they do suck at high motion based on HDTV broadcasts. Watch sports at 1080i? Olympics? Yes 720p60 has a big advantage in that regard. Not a secret.

"and eventually 1080p60, at least on a consumer delivery, if not broadcast side. "

Well not if we stick with the same compressions and HDTV bandwidth!

"I doubt it will take them 20 years to bring this to SMPTE, but it'll be 25 years before it's an accepted standard"

I think that was my point! Who gives a damn about a new beta standard 25 years away? We don't tollerate talk about the XL-H2 and it is only two years away.

Wayne - "But for indie production, the latest film distro format is around 8MPixel, and IMAX just screams for 32 Mpixel. Technically, things are not as far a way as they seem."

Uh, yeah they are. Lets come back to earth guy. How about you map out the progression of delivery/consumer broadcast standards and let me know what the eta is ;>)

"I would love to buy a cheap 1080p set next year, and tap into a better than HDTV broadcast in future, even if the box has to down convert it."

Yeah, good luck with that. I am also hoping my new MB will just drop in a new 10Ghz quad core processor!

I respect your guys wishes, but we have to comprehend the time frame from SD to HD. And we are still in the middle of it( beginning?). And will be so for at least the next five years. Standards such as broadcast for cunsumer adoption do not change fast. The DVD player will be the focal point for at least 5 more years. Were are your uber TV's even going to fit in? Who will even want to broadcast at that rez?
Keep the hope though. Someone has to buy the first sets. We will all catch up when the prices drop %80.

OK, OK, I see some of us really believe those popular mechanics articles of the 50's. I know I really love my hovercraft!
That gave me a good laugh ;). I know what you mean, I'm still waiting for my Muller flying car myself, I've seen many others, like OELD. But I'm talking of technologies long coming that are just about ready to get to market. It has been been many years ago that Foveon did the first 16MP cmos chip (before they announced x3). Most people would not even know about it, but now we are seeing those cameras, 32Mp is not too far away, within the limits of technology (a lot of the behind the scenes technologies have made great leaps and are heading market way nowadays).

I respect your guys wishes, but we have to comprehend the time frame from SD to HD. And we are still in the middle of it( beginning?). And will be so for at least the next five years. Standards such as broadcast for consumer adoption do not change fast. The DVD player will be the focal point for at least 5 more years... We will all catch up when the prices drop %80.
8 mpixel standard and projectors are already on the way for movies.

http://www.hdforindies.com/2005/07/studios-dci-specification-to-be

Technically the technology for Imax is there, they need to consider it once the theaters move to 8Mpixel. That is enough to force them onto another road. In normal cinema, they will hang on for dear life to the equipment of the new standard.

For TV though, there has been an huge artificial delay in delivery for many years (HD is from long back) as they try to prevent costs of quality competition. One real problem is that it is cheap to deliver 1080p on a small crt, but they got too big in large sizes. For camera manufacturers the same sort of thing, as they try to delay the phasing out, and maximise profits, on the SD consumer line, until they could offer low bit rate cameras cheaply (that don't compete with expensive cameras because of artifacting etc). But this is backfiring on them, as people, like in alternative imaging, realise that technology has dropped in price so far to allow cheap high bit rate setups to compete with very expensive HD cameras at a fraction of the cost. That, apparently European TV stations realise that better technology is available and they don't have to go with the regular HDTV standard. On the consumer side, it wouldn't matter to the 80% without expensive, present day, HDTV's, if there was a better standard by the time they could afford the TV's. Depending on the TV station setup, they might only need to change there transmission coder ends to get started, and keep the rest of the equipment.

So these things can force a change before most of us get stuck with existing HDTV. But your, right it would need industry backing to achieve.

The novel idea, is that they could define a new standard of delivery open to taking any resolution upto Ultra HD 3D, at any variable compression rate, in any formate. All you would need to do is define the channel and it's use, and provide decoder boxes that can handle the formats. At the moment the market, of early adopters, is getting milked, but multiple cheaper technologies are coming to fruition (try FED from the 80's) and $100 for the decoder is not out of the question in future. You could even theoretically define a standard where the decoder box is re-programmable with the new format over the air live. You would buy a new TV/Decoder, keep it for 5+ years and get another one.

Thanks Ken.

Now, where did they park my UFO ;)

Technically the technology for Imax is there, they need to consider it once the theaters move to 8Mpixel. That is enough to force them onto another road.

As far as I remember, IMAX were talking about wanting to switch to digital projection years ago: if you've ever seen an IMAX negative side-by-side with a 35mm negative, the reasons would be obvious.

Well as far as the practicality of ultra high definition how much does it cost to print an hours worth of footage for an IMAX film. I bet going digital would be a lot cheaper. Ultra High definition has 36 times the resolution as 720p. So I predict that it will be 10 years before this technology is affordable for home theatres.

One reason why ultra high defintion is being developed is to try and mainstream the current high definition formats. When ultra high definition is considered a high definition format it will make the current high definition formats become standard definition and the current standard definition formats will become low definition. One of the problems with the current high definition standards is that they are considered high definition and therefore not mainstream and not accepted by everyone. When high definition is considered the standard definition then and only then will it be universally accepted just as color television is today.

Sorry guys, I didn't mean to say that it was the only reason for Imax going digital, just another good reason to finally do it.

and yet they still insist on keeping interlaced video. 4320i will be useless since the only people who will want to use it at first is Hollywood and they would never want a interlaced camera. Instead of 4320i I would much rather see a 5120x2880p.

Actually by the year 2020 the ultimate home theater will have about 20 of these flat panel ultra high definition 4320p televisions stacked on top of one another in order to display a 3 dimensional ultra high definition image. This will be a total of 664 megapixels or about 664 times the resolution of a typical 720p television. This is a resolution of about 2 thirds of a gigapixel. Of course high speed internet connections by use of fiber optic technology will make this all possible. However transmission speed will have to be a thousand times faster. To make this technology work transmission speeds of up to 2 gigabits per secound will have to be realized using MPEG-4 technology. This is about 1000 times faster than the typical
DSL connection. It is estimated that by 2020 10 gigabit per secound transmission speeds will be possible.

Nah, old hat, I saw a Popular Science today that had an article on an hand made 4 Giga pixel camera (which is equivalent to around 64 thousand by 64 thousand pixels). Should have sent he lens of that one. I didn't read it but it was talking about Spy planes over Russia at 71 thousand feet. I don't know if it was an old spy camera, or some new custom version. But I think the limits of really good human vision is up in that region ;). If it had mpeg4 we could hook it up to regular 10Gig Ethernet.

Have a good night Tom.

Thanks

Wayne.