Get your own 4k telly

Brian Drysdale · January 16th, 2012, 10:03 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by R Geoff Baker

I would note that the bandwidth point may be a non-issue -- like as not, compression 'solves' bandwidth issues. Don't be surprized to see 4k broadcast arrive at substantially less than 4x the bandwith of current 1080 signals.

Unfortunately, it tends to be motion that suffers with compression and the larger the screen the more likely it is to become noticeable. For sports you could be better increasing the temporal resolution i.e the frame rate.

One argument for increasing the resolution in the camera is that you can trim the frame as stills photographers do. However, that isn't the same as making a framing decision with a particular lens at a particular distance on the set, the effect is entirely different.

Again there's little point having more resolution in the display than human eyes can perceive at the viewing distance. That doesn't operate under Moore's law, if you're doing that, inserting the images directly into the brain makes a lot more sense... as in "Strange Days".

R Geoff Baker · January 16th, 2012, 10:44 AM

My point on compression is merely that there is both continued improvement and continued acceptance by the consumer -- what was impossible a decade ago is commonplace today. My own cable system has gone from little MPEG compression to more MPEG compression and is a likely to 'leap' to AVCHD compression anytime soon. That is not to say it will make you happy -- just to predict that it will happen.

There are plenty of reasons to encourage increased resolution in cameras -- you've no argument from me.

Notions of resolution and viewing distance return me to my original point -- a viewer that wants the experience of a screen that dominates their field of view, whether for cinema, sports or other ... is going to want to break the 'rules' common today. At seven or eight feet of viewing, even a casual viewer will see an improvement on a 100" screen if the resolution is quadrupled. Wrapping your head around 100" in a home rec room is the leap required.

Cheers,
GB

Brian Drysdale · January 16th, 2012, 10:48 AM

Indeed, it really depends how large the front stalls' market is.

Charles W. Hull · January 16th, 2012, 03:12 PM

There were a few 4K TVs on display last week at CES in Las Vegas. These were technology demonstrations, not new products to go to market. I spent quite a bit of time viewing the Samsung demo - it was about 55 inch and you could stand very close. Of course it gives a fantastic image compared to 1080. I didn't come away wanting to replace my 1080 TVs, but it is certainly an upgrade I would like in the future. A product might be something that plays 1080 broadcast as well as 4K home theater.

I also saw one, maybe more, glasses free 3D TVs. What I saw was a very poor effect compared to 3D with glasses. The much bigger 3D thing was moving to non-active glasses, polarized glasses - I didn't count how many companies were doing this but it was quite a few. And the ones I looked at had very good 3D.

January 16th, 2012, 10:44 AM	#17
R Geoff Baker Major Player Join Date: Jan 2005 Location: Ottawa, ON Posts: 471	Re: Get your own 4k telly My point on compression is merely that there is both continued improvement and continued acceptance by the consumer -- what was impossible a decade ago is commonplace today. My own cable system has gone from little MPEG compression to more MPEG compression and is a likely to 'leap' to AVCHD compression anytime soon. That is not to say it will make you happy -- just to predict that it will happen. There are plenty of reasons to encourage increased resolution in cameras -- you've no argument from me. Notions of resolution and viewing distance return me to my original point -- a viewer that wants the experience of a screen that dominates their field of view, whether for cinema, sports or other ... is going to want to break the 'rules' common today. At seven or eight feet of viewing, even a casual viewer will see an improvement on a 100" screen if the resolution is quadrupled. Wrapping your head around 100" in a home rec room is the leap required. Cheers, GB

January 16th, 2012, 10:48 AM	#18
Brian Drysdale Inner Circle Join Date: Feb 2006 Location: Belfast, UK Posts: 6,152	Re: Get your own 4k telly Indeed, it really depends how large the front stalls' market is.

January 16th, 2012, 03:12 PM	#19
Charles W. Hull Major Player Join Date: Dec 2008 Location: Canyon Country, CA Posts: 445	Re: Get your own 4k telly There were a few 4K TVs on display last week at CES in Las Vegas. These were technology demonstrations, not new products to go to market. I spent quite a bit of time viewing the Samsung demo - it was about 55 inch and you could stand very close. Of course it gives a fantastic image compared to 1080. I didn't come away wanting to replace my 1080 TVs, but it is certainly an upgrade I would like in the future. A product might be something that plays 1080 broadcast as well as 4K home theater. I also saw one, maybe more, glasses free 3D TVs. What I saw was a very poor effect compared to 3D with glasses. The much bigger 3D thing was moving to non-active glasses, polarized glasses - I didn't count how many companies were doing this but it was quite a few. And the ones I looked at had very good 3D.