4k is just an interim resolution... at DVinfo.net

Evan Donn · January 15th, 2008, 11:25 AM

Here comes Super Hi-Vision (someone better come up with a better name for this):

http://www.engadget.com/2008/01/14/3...on-the-air-in/

7,680x4,320 and 22.2 channel surround - the new broadcast standard in Japan for 2015.

Bill Koehler · January 15th, 2008, 11:40 AM

Read the article...the compression codec will have to be amazing or the majors, ABC, CBS, and NBC, will be reduced to one channel each, Over The Air Broadcast.

OK, maybe two channels ;-)

More realistically, I would put this under the 'To much, to soon' file.
1. The bandwidth requirements are going to be high.
2. The upgrade costs for production, distribution, and broadcast will be high.
These folks haven't even finished the transition to 1080 HD!
3. The consumer is just getting used to 1080 HD. To obsolete them this fast...
This goes under the upgrade cycles are getting to crazy fast for even the end user to keep up with.

Ethan Cooper · January 15th, 2008, 11:41 AM

Guys, I saw this at NAB last year and I wasn't impressed. I'm not sure how great the latitude was, it had a VERY videoish feel to it and sorta reminded me of video from the early 90's but at super high resolution. It just didn't feel organic or warm in any way shape or form and left me wondering, "wow, what's the big deal?".
I think what we'll see in the coming years is camera resolution far out stripping typical in-home displays. People can't afford to upgrade to the latest and greatest displays every 2 or 3 years to keep up with shooting resolutions, and what about delivery? How are you going to pipe that much information over existing networks, and where are you going to get the funding to establish new networks that can handle the load?

***EDIT***
And with the increasing pace of the expansion of technology, EVERYTHING is an intermediate solution.

Don Blish · January 15th, 2008, 11:47 AM

I echo the "too much too soon". Its similar to the Japanese/NHK 1100 line TV in 1969. It took 30 years for technology to make it practical, an then the underlying tech was unrecognizable.

David Heath · January 15th, 2008, 11:54 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Evan Donn

7,680x4,320 and 22.2 channel surround - the new broadcast standard in Japan for 2015.

I see this being targeted not at broadcast as we think of it, but more special purpose "live-IMAX" for want of a better term. I can also see scope for industrial, medical, scientific etc applications. (Flight simulators, maybe?)

For conventional broadcasting, there's a law of diminishing returns, and the physics of the human eye to consider. I don't see a lot of point in going beyond 1080p for standard broadcast.

Ethan Cooper · January 15th, 2008, 11:59 AM

The gear they were shooting this stuff with was nuts... the surround sound mic system looked like a huge spider with microphone arms.... or maybe more like a retro satellite with all these mics sticking out of it. The camera was huge. It looked like a 1950's studio camera. It was a large metal box with, gosh, I don't know, like 20 or more SDI cables coming off the back of it and running into a small fridge sized box of drives. It's not exactly a portable or pretty system.

All the specs I've given were for illustrative purposes only, don't quote me on the number of connections and such.

Jon Fairhurst · January 15th, 2008, 12:23 PM

I saw the technology demos from NHK at the previous two NABs.

Imagine looking at your computer monitor with a detailed image of Google Earth. Now step back. It covers the entire (very large) wall with no loss of detail at any point.

The feeling I got was one of sensory overload. Everywhere you look there is detail. It's like playing "Where's Waldo?"

There is a reason why filmmakers like the shallow DOF of 35mm film for the big screen. You can focus the attention on one face or one object. The rest of the scene blurs into the subconscious.

NHK has made a great technical achievement. Now the artists and audience need to figure out how to best use it.

Ocean Zen · January 15th, 2008, 12:26 PM

Wow that's a lot of pixels

Eric Stemen · January 15th, 2008, 02:23 PM

I think manufacturers should concentrate more on dynamic range/latitude, lower light, and maybe 3D before upping the resolution more.

David Parks · January 15th, 2008, 02:41 PM

This is a ways off. I saw HD analog 1080i in a Sony booth at NAB in 1986.
Didn't shoot HD until 2003, 17 years later. Manufacturers are always showing proof of concepts. Doesn't mean that it is coming out next year or even in 5 years. So 4k is still the next step. You might see 8K, 7.5k or whatever 10 or 15 years from now. You might see it when we land on the moon again around 2018 or 2020.

Cheers.

George Ellis · January 15th, 2008, 05:06 PM

Just for the record, I have been in technology for 20+ years. EVERYTHING is an interim solution. That is all. ;)

Evan Donn · January 16th, 2008, 12:01 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by George Ellis

EVERYTHING is an interim solution. That is all. ;)

Yep, that was just a joke. I remembered reading a post from Jim Jannard where he said 1080 was just an interim resolution on the path to 4k - that was the first thing that popped in my head when I saw the article.

Joe Busch · January 16th, 2008, 02:11 AM

http://lousyhero.com/blaze/uhd.jpg

Real example ;)

Heath McKnight · January 16th, 2008, 09:34 AM

I'm getting to that point of caring more about camera latitude and features than I am with resolution. For example, does a 10 megapixel point-and-shoot consumer digital camera take a better picture, quality-wise, than a 6.1 mp Nikon D40 or Pentax K100D Super? (Of course, the shooter plays the biggest role.)

Of course not, it's apples and oranges, and resolution isn't always the key. Check out Ken Rockwell's thoughts on resolution--it can be applied to digital video and cinema.

heath

Eric Stemen · January 16th, 2008, 02:18 PM

I completely agree with you Heath. But most consumers only know how to compare megapixles and have no idea about dynamic range....If they did, I think Fuji would be a much more popular company for their digital cameras.

January 15th, 2008, 11:25 AM	#1
Evan Donn Major Player Join Date: Feb 2006 Location: Philadelphia Posts: 795	4k is just an interim resolution... Here comes Super Hi-Vision (someone better come up with a better name for this): http://www.engadget.com/2008/01/14/3...on-the-air-in/ 7,680x4,320 and 22.2 channel surround - the new broadcast standard in Japan for 2015. __________________ My latest short documentary: "Four Pauls: Bring the Hat Back!"

January 15th, 2008, 11:41 AM	#3
Ethan Cooper Trustee Join Date: Dec 2003 Location: Houma, La. Posts: 1,400 Images: 5	resolution isn't everything Guys, I saw this at NAB last year and I wasn't impressed. I'm not sure how great the latitude was, it had a VERY videoish feel to it and sorta reminded me of video from the early 90's but at super high resolution. It just didn't feel organic or warm in any way shape or form and left me wondering, "wow, what's the big deal?". I think what we'll see in the coming years is camera resolution far out stripping typical in-home displays. People can't afford to upgrade to the latest and greatest displays every 2 or 3 years to keep up with shooting resolutions, and what about delivery? How are you going to pipe that much information over existing networks, and where are you going to get the funding to establish new networks that can handle the load? *EDIT* And with the increasing pace of the expansion of technology, EVERYTHING is an intermediate solution. __________________ ∅ -Ethan Cooper

January 15th, 2008, 11:59 AM	#6
Ethan Cooper Trustee Join Date: Dec 2003 Location: Houma, La. Posts: 1,400 Images: 5	The gear they were shooting this stuff with was nuts... the surround sound mic system looked like a huge spider with microphone arms.... or maybe more like a retro satellite with all these mics sticking out of it. The camera was huge. It looked like a 1950's studio camera. It was a large metal box with, gosh, I don't know, like 20 or more SDI cables coming off the back of it and running into a small fridge sized box of drives. It's not exactly a portable or pretty system. All the specs I've given were for illustrative purposes only, don't quote me on the number of connections and such. __________________ ∅ -Ethan Cooper

January 15th, 2008, 12:23 PM	#7
Jon Fairhurst Inner Circle Join Date: May 2006 Location: Camas, WA, USA Posts: 5,513	I saw the technology demos from NHK at the previous two NABs. Imagine looking at your computer monitor with a detailed image of Google Earth. Now step back. It covers the entire (very large) wall with no loss of detail at any point. The feeling I got was one of sensory overload. Everywhere you look there is detail. It's like playing "Where's Waldo?" There is a reason why filmmakers like the shallow DOF of 35mm film for the big screen. You can focus the attention on one face or one object. The rest of the scene blurs into the subconscious. NHK has made a great technical achievement. Now the artists and audience need to figure out how to best use it. __________________ Jon Fairhurst

January 15th, 2008, 12:26 PM	#8
Ocean Zen Regular Crew Join Date: Jan 2008 Location: Brighton, UK Posts: 43	Wow that's a lot of pixels __________________ MySpace/Escapee Planes

January 15th, 2008, 11:40 AM	#2
Bill Koehler Major Player Join Date: May 2007 Location: Alpharetta, Georgia, USA Posts: 760	Read the article...the compression codec will have to be amazing or the majors, ABC, CBS, and NBC, will be reduced to one channel each, Over The Air Broadcast. OK, maybe two channels ;-) More realistically, I would put this under the 'To much, to soon' file. 1. The bandwidth requirements are going to be high. 2. The upgrade costs for production, distribution, and broadcast will be high. These folks haven't even finished the transition to 1080 HD! 3. The consumer is just getting used to 1080 HD. To obsolete them this fast... This goes under the upgrade cycles are getting to crazy fast for even the end user to keep up with.

January 15th, 2008, 11:47 AM	#4
Don Blish Major Player Join Date: Oct 2003 Location: Portland OR Posts: 227	I echo the "too much too soon". Its similar to the Japanese/NHK 1100 line TV in 1969. It took 30 years for technology to make it practical, an then the underlying tech was unrecognizable.

January 15th, 2008, 02:23 PM	#9
Eric Stemen Major Player Join Date: May 2004 Location: Louisville, KY Posts: 378	I think manufacturers should concentrate more on dynamic range/latitude, lower light, and maybe 3D before upping the resolution more.

January 15th, 2008, 02:41 PM	#10
David Parks Major Player Join Date: Feb 2006 Location: Houston Posts: 789	This is a ways off. I saw HD analog 1080i in a Sony booth at NAB in 1986. Didn't shoot HD until 2003, 17 years later. Manufacturers are always showing proof of concepts. Doesn't mean that it is coming out next year or even in 5 years. So 4k is still the next step. You might see 8K, 7.5k or whatever 10 or 15 years from now. You might see it when we land on the moon again around 2018 or 2020. Cheers. __________________ David Parks: DP/Editor: Jacobs Aerospace at NASA Johnson Space Center https://www.youtube.com/user/JacobsESCG

January 15th, 2008, 05:06 PM	#11
George Ellis Trustee Join Date: Feb 2004 Location: Suwanee, GA Posts: 1,241	Just for the record, I have been in technology for 20+ years. EVERYTHING is an interim solution. That is all. ;)

January 16th, 2008, 02:11 AM	#13
Joe Busch Major Player Join Date: Feb 2007 Location: Sammamish, WA Posts: 398	http://lousyhero.com/blaze/uhd.jpg Real example ;)

January 16th, 2008, 09:34 AM	#14
Heath McKnight MPS Digital Studios Join Date: Apr 2003 Location: Palm Beach County, Florida Posts: 8,531	I'm getting to that point of caring more about camera latitude and features than I am with resolution. For example, does a 10 megapixel point-and-shoot consumer digital camera take a better picture, quality-wise, than a 6.1 mp Nikon D40 or Pentax K100D Super? (Of course, the shooter plays the biggest role.) Of course not, it's apples and oranges, and resolution isn't always the key. Check out Ken Rockwell's thoughts on resolution--it can be applied to digital video and cinema. heath __________________ My Final Cut Pro X blog

January 16th, 2008, 02:18 PM	#15
Eric Stemen Major Player Join Date: May 2004 Location: Louisville, KY Posts: 378	I completely agree with you Heath. But most consumers only know how to compare megapixles and have no idea about dynamic range....If they did, I think Fuji would be a much more popular company for their digital cameras.