Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

Log in
  • Hey all, just changed over the backend after 15 years I figured time to give it a bit of an update, its probably gonna be a bit weird for most of you and i am sure there is a few bugs to work out but it should kinda work the same as before... hopefully :)

4K? How about 85" 8K??

J

Justin Harrison

Banned
Joined
Apr 14, 2009
Messages
321
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Age
43
Location
LA & NY
Website
www.justharrison.com
I'm skeptical that audiences will be demanding even 4K at the screen sizes most people have in their homes, but I would LOVE to see 8K projection at the theaters!
 
The problem with 6K, 8K, etc, is that you will immediately have to throw out 100 years worth of filmed entertainment, which will NEVER scan at 6K or 8K.

In theory, a film like "The Godfather" could be remastered and scanned to 4k. Not so at 6k or 8K.
 
and let's face it, postpro- storage and vfx don't match pretty well right now due to costs , especially pipelines must be prepared and no one is actually doing it recently (until a very , very few perhaps, and probably these get sponsored to push it.....
 
Tom Lowe said:
The problem with 6K, 8K, etc, is that you will immediately have to throw out 100 years worth of filmed entertainment, which will NEVER scan at 6K or 8K.

In theory, a film like "The Godfather" could be remastered and scanned to 4k. Not so at 6k or 8K.
Click to expand...

Well, it shouldn't look any worse than it did on a big movie screen - which wasn't so bad, and presumably pretty good since it is scaling an image designed for a 40 foot screen down to a six foot screen. The fact that most people will sit closer offsets that somewhat, but I really don't think that slightly less resolution on a classic movie will require it to be "thrown out". Presumably for classic movies like the Godfather the studio could do an uprezzed version with a good post production setup so that it won't need to be abused by whatever on-the-fly uprezzing would happen at the TV.

A lot of people, but maybe not most, would be able to tell the difference between a 720P and 1080P version if they were shown side by side, but I'm not so sure they could if they had to walk between rooms. It's hard to find any research on the JND for modern video (Just Noticeable Difference - usually defined as where two signals [in our case picture with differences in resolution] - are compared - more than 50 percent of people will pick the one that is actually sharper) - but this typically takes an increase of 30 to 50 % for side by side comparison.

So you probably have to jump from 4 to 8K just to get a significant increase in perceived quality.

In short I think the increased resolution will make a big difference for when these sets are used for picture walls or things like your timescapes, but won't matter nearly as much for motion pictures that have action, drama or story as a big component.


Tonaci Tran said:
It is annoying for me to see Sharp doing an 8k panel just to show off. How many 8k cameras are there?
Lets see boatloads of 4k panels first... then we'll talk 8k. hehe
Click to expand...

These companies know that there are highend customers that will pay a hefty premium to be on the cutting edge. And that funds development, so I salute any efforts to push the envelope.
 
Tonaci Tran said:
It is annoying for me to see Sharp doing an 8k panel just to show off. How many 8k cameras are there?
Lets see boatloads of 4k panels first... then we'll talk 8k. hehe
Click to expand...

Were you annoyed when RED decided to make an affordable 4k Camera in the midst of HDV? I wasn't! I see your point, but I'm all for the show-offs and advancements in technology well before we are ready for it.
 
Tonaci Tran said:
It is annoying for me to see Sharp doing an 8k panel just to show off. How many 8k cameras are there?
Lets see boatloads of 4k panels first... then we'll talk 8k. hehe
Click to expand...


i think ... 2

the NHK, and f65.

but either way, it's all built just to show off future prospects. sort of like "the car of the future" back 40 years ago. basically showing more and more, how 4k here and now, and getting closer to be with the masses.

and i'm still waiting on my flying car : \
 
Don't get me wrong, I'm down for envelope pushing for sure.. thats why am I here. I want all the res...higher the better.
I guess i wish consumer 4k panels would just come sooner so I can afford one. =)
 
Tom.Wong said:
i think ... 2

the NHK, and f65.

but either way, it's all built just to show off future prospects. sort of like "the car of the future" back 40 years ago. basically showing more and more, how 4k here and now, and getting closer to be with the masses.

and i'm still waiting on my flying car : \
Click to expand...

Yeah I have heard about the NHK...but that is like proto land...as for the f65..i don't think it outputs an 8k image. 8k panels need an 8k image.
 
The key point here is that once you move past 4K, you simply cannot put out decades worth of Hollywood movies at a "native" format higher than 4K. You will simply be up-rezzing. At 4K, at least you can make the argument that the footage is scanned to and finished at 4K for viewing on a 4K display. Not so with a 8K. Every single major film made up until this point would have to be "up-rezzed" for the 8K display. This point is absolutely crucial in understanding how these technologies will unfold.
 
Tonaci Tran said:
It is annoying for me to see Sharp doing an 8k panel just to show off. How many 8k cameras are there?
Lets see boatloads of 4k panels first... then we'll talk 8k. hehe
Click to expand...

The Sharp 8K TV's are not just for show off. These prototype panels (and 8K CMOS cameras by JVC I believe)are built for the 8K test broadcast NHK and BBC will do from the London Summer Olympics 2012.
The 8K TV's are expected to be commercial available in five years. By then they may have migrated to OLED.

Tom.Wong said:
the NHK, and f65.
Click to expand...

The Sony F65 is not a 8K camera, it output 4K.
 
I think Red has stated that 4K is a traditional film resolution replacement.

I am fully supportive of 8K and higher resolution DSMC cameras,
which Red is supposed to sell THIS YEAR (Yeah Baby!)

Also, I see no reason why 4K content can't scale well to 8K since that's what
is being done to HD to view in 4K.

At 8K and above resolution, every frame is potentially a masterpiece
worthy of being displayed on your wall, why wouldn't you want it?
 
Last edited:
Iannis Holwech said:
The Sharp 8K TV's are not just for show off. These prototype panels (and 8K CMOS cameras by JVC I believe)are built for the 8K test broadcast NHK and BBC will do from the London Summer Olympics 2012.
The 8K TV's are expected to be commercial available in five years. By then they may have migrated to OLED.

The Sony F65 is not a 8K camera, it output 4K.
Click to expand...
8k test broadcast...interesting.
 
N.D. Paolo said:
I think Red has stated that 4K is a traditional film resolution replacement.

I am fully supportive of 8K and higher resolution DSMC cameras,
which Red is supposed to sell THIS YEAR (Yeah!)

Also, I see no reason why 4K content can't scale well to 8K since that's what
is being done to HD to view in 4K.

At 8K and above resolution, every frame is potentially a masterpiece
worthy of being displayed on your wall, why wouldn't you want it?
Click to expand...

I think we all want the highest res. Reality is though, 4k is just beginning to break in finally..so I would like to see far more 4k displays. 4k pipelines haven't even been put in place for broadcast that I know of yet... so this talk of 8k broadcast tests is interesting.
 
Discussing Sharp on REDuser . . . shouldn't we close this and suggest DVXuser?
 
Well I don't think this would be any worse than watching SD content on an HD screen. I mean it's not like you're seeing real quality loss by seeing it on a bigger/better screen. Especially if i'm sitting on the otherside of the room.

I think that these would have a lot of use as digital portraits when they aren't playing films, load up good scans of your favorite paintings and posters and have it cycle through cool stuff you like. There is plenty of really high-res still photography that could be shown near natively on this.
 
Tom Lowe said:
The key point here is that once you move past 4K, you simply cannot put out decades worth of Hollywood movies at a "native" format higher than 4K. You will simply be up-rezzing. At 4K, at least you can make the argument that the footage is scanned to and finished at 4K for viewing on a 4K display. Not so with a 8K. Every single major film made up until this point would have to be "up-rezzed" for the 8K display. This point is absolutely crucial in understanding how these technologies will unfold.
Click to expand...

I understand all of that except why it is crucial? They are still going to look good, just not AS good, but it won't be a "wow that looks like crap" jarring difference.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top