TVs themselves might disappear in 10 years.
TV kills the Radio star
Internet kills TV
Welcome to our community
Be a part of something great, join today!
A Response To Jim Jannard and 1080P
- Thread starter Steve Sherrick
- Start date
TVs themselves might disappear in 10 years.
TV kills the Radio star
Internet kills TV
LUIS ALBERTO CABRERA
Well-known member
And you are right!
Gunleik Groven
REDuser Sponsor
TVs themselves might disappear in 10 years.
TV kills the Radio star
Internet kills TV
You might be right.
one of many things of which I am uncertain... -
Michael Shilnov
Active member
I am also willing to make a very large cash bet that you are not using 576x720 PAL to tweak your RED footage in post, just for delivery :wink: How much were you thinking by the way?
Another thing I always found bizzare (to say the least) is when people buy xx" plasmas only to watch SD programming uprezed by whatever does the math inside HDTVs, with terrible compression artefacts from the satelite or cable send and, to top it all off, messed up pixel aspect ratio. I've seen some people's jaws almost literaly hit the floor when I fed a 1080p signal into their flatscreens.
You could be right about 10 years, unless a big consumer brand, like Nintendo, starts selling or bundling 4K screens to grab a tasty market segment. It is a possibility at least, right? Or, once again, if RED makes a sub-10K 4K screen :001_tt1: Someone here pointed out that the new twist in the consumer screen universe, with small 300 dpi screens making their way into the industry faster than ever, could lead to a whole lot of other things and consumer 4K could well be something we see readily availiable in the next few years.
Antony M
Well-known member
- Joined
- Jul 24, 2009
- Messages
- 782
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 0
- Location
- Sussex, England & Sachsen, Germany
Correct.
I always like to use highest res and largest bit depth I can when "tweaking".
But my point is that for delivery, if anything I see the requirement by "the general public" going to LOWER-res not higher-res.
A previous post on this thread made reference to audio.
Most audio sales these days are mp3, which is lower quality than CDs.
People nowadays seem more concerned about convenience than quality.
But maybe things are different over in the USA. I never understand Americans
- Thread starter
- #246
Steve Sherrick
Well-known member
I've followed up my response to the 1080P article with one about the future of media in the home. It can be found here.
Make sure to read that article from 1912. Very interesting.
Make sure to read that article from 1912. Very interesting.
Michael Shilnov
Active member
I'd also say quantity over quality. Someone must have said that before, of course.
As for the public demand of low-res I would say true and not true. Audio realm is dominated by mp3s, true, but I think many of us here can attest to a relatively large segment that goes lossless (e.g. flac) whenever possible. I would estimate this mp3/losless ratio to equal roughly the PC/Mac users ratio, perhaps a few years back though
Then again, 44.1 kHz/16 bit audio (which is the CD) is also much of a rudiment, a fossilized footprint of the industry. 96kHz/24 bit audio does make quite a difference even on consumer equipment and there are no obstacles in terms of storage (just use a DVD), but those few that attempted to release their material on HQ audio-DVDs (whatever they were called) met with a wall of consumer ignorance, of course, plus the industry would never justify the shift it ever was even proposed. Then yes, a lot of people (or even a vast majority of them) is perfectly fine with watching streaming online video in 360p, yet people shooting events often explicitly emphasize that their cams are "HD", which does reflect a growing public demand for specifically HD-footage (because it is "what their plasmas are made to show").
Michael Shilnov
Active member
Very interesting indeed. I think someone worked out a paradigm that sci-fi/fantasy writers tend to predict technological development by 50 years, or something like that. The submarines, the telephone and the telegraph, the space travel, the Internet (I still can't believe you have to capitalize that now), touchscreen devices and videocalling on Skype were all there before any tech guy could say that this is where we are heading and give an explanation as of how and why. So perhaps it is those working in the sci-fi genre that could eventually have a better shot at what the future holds in terms of media/technology than us, battling over pixel counts and bit depths. So it could well be that the future has no screens at all, just interactive 3D projections.
Stuart English
Red Team
Future distribution models
Future distribution models
Good stuff Steve. Although we could be well on the way to relying on IP technology by then, bandwidth is still bandwidth i.e. it's finite ... so I expect that we'll still see recognizable "broadcast" patterns in the IP distribution model, rather than a VOD free for all.
Future distribution models
Good stuff Steve. Although we could be well on the way to relying on IP technology by then, bandwidth is still bandwidth i.e. it's finite ... so I expect that we'll still see recognizable "broadcast" patterns in the IP distribution model, rather than a VOD free for all.
paulherrin
Well-known member
Steve you make some excellent points. Very well articulated, with superb sources.
But I think we're looking very narrowly at this. We're predicting what we already see. I wonder what those things are that hide in our peripherals... the things we can't see... not just yet.
But I think we're looking very narrowly at this. We're predicting what we already see. I wonder what those things are that hide in our peripherals... the things we can't see... not just yet.
- Thread starter
- #251
Steve Sherrick
Well-known member
One way to get higher quality down relatively small pipes is to optimize the codecs. Hmm...wonder if there is a company out there that might have influence in that area.
But yeah, this is one of the challenges. Hopefully we can meet these challenges here in the U.S. Internet connection speed is just one area where we are lagging behind the rest of the pack. We have fallen behind in a lot of areas as well, including education. But that's for another article.
- Thread starter
- #252
Steve Sherrick
Well-known member
What's hiding in our peripheral are the visionaries. You can make a solid argument that one of them resides on this forum. Without him, we're probably not seeing digital cinema cameras at these price points for several years. And I think he has more up his sleeve.
Think about Apple. Go back ten, fifteen years and try to predict their path. In some ways you can see them being in the position they are now, because they were always on the forefront of personal computing innovation. Look at their tagline - think different. But could you predict exactly how dominant and mainstream some of their products would become? Probably not.
Are we in for surprises, a completely different way of doing things, ways we haven't even thought of? Maybe. Staying inside the box for a moment, and based on current trends, it seems logical that the convergence of computers and what we now consider television will happen in the near future. Again, we're speaking about the mainstream here, when the majority of homes experience media this way. To put this in perspective, have a look at this article.
Getting back to the original topic of the thread for a moment, based on that LA Times article, one might ask how does Jim expect 4K to make it into people's homes when broadcasters and content providers can't even get quality HD to the 56% of American homes that have HDTVs. As I said, I believe Jim has a few tricks up his sleeve. Yes, broadcast television is a way bigger mountain to move than the movie industry. Has he backed down from a challenge yet? Pay attention to another statistic in that article. HDTV is one of the most quickly adopted consumer technologies of the past twenty years. So as slow as the technology was to get to market, once it was there and it was affordable, consumers did respond. Two things RED has done well - bring cutting edge technology to market quickly (despite what some people may think, RED brought their camera technology to market relatively quickly) and they have made it affordable. Now apply that to consumer products.
Honestly, I have no idea what RED has planned. I just have a gut feeling that Jim will approach the distribution side like he did the camera side. And we all know how that turned out.
paulherrin
Well-known member
"eventually, all things merge into one, and a river runs through it"
thanks for the links. i think you're right on with the merging of the internet and broadcast... it's happening, it has to happen. how that will all take shape over the next few years... i don't know. there are a lot of clocks preparing to strike at the same time. faster connections, internet distribution, optimized compression codecs, better capturing devices, better displays, etc.
on top of all of that... look at the culture shift our country has been going through recently (past 100 years, past 50 years, past 10 years). there's something about the turn of the century that generates change. and this time it was a millennium that we're just getting into. maybe i'm wrong... but i think this country, and this world system are seeking major changes. culture is the thing that will drive all of this - what we value as a people. the most advanced cultures have embraced art and technology for absolutely different reasons than we do today. i hope we can gravitate back in that direction.
as per 4k distribution and RED's involvement... i have a funny feeling we will see some things happen. i can't say i've ever really been taken aback by HD, possibly because it's typically not, or possibly because I'd seen better at the theatre and right on my computer screen. When I first saw 4k, I was literally blown away. Like 70mm blown away. And I have a feeling the public will be able to see the significant difference between what we've been calling HD and what actually is - because there IS a significant difference.
thanks for the links. i think you're right on with the merging of the internet and broadcast... it's happening, it has to happen. how that will all take shape over the next few years... i don't know. there are a lot of clocks preparing to strike at the same time. faster connections, internet distribution, optimized compression codecs, better capturing devices, better displays, etc.
on top of all of that... look at the culture shift our country has been going through recently (past 100 years, past 50 years, past 10 years). there's something about the turn of the century that generates change. and this time it was a millennium that we're just getting into. maybe i'm wrong... but i think this country, and this world system are seeking major changes. culture is the thing that will drive all of this - what we value as a people. the most advanced cultures have embraced art and technology for absolutely different reasons than we do today. i hope we can gravitate back in that direction.
as per 4k distribution and RED's involvement... i have a funny feeling we will see some things happen. i can't say i've ever really been taken aback by HD, possibly because it's typically not, or possibly because I'd seen better at the theatre and right on my computer screen. When I first saw 4k, I was literally blown away. Like 70mm blown away. And I have a feeling the public will be able to see the significant difference between what we've been calling HD and what actually is - because there IS a significant difference.
Tom Lowe
Well-known member
- Joined
- Jan 5, 2007
- Messages
- 8,520
- Reaction score
- 1
- Points
- 0
I don't even have cable anymore. I "watch" everything on computers now. I download and stream content and occasionally buy a Bluray or something like that. Even if I invest in a nice projector and screen, the media will mostly be playing off a computer.
I watched a movie tonight... on my laptop.
I watched a movie tonight... on my laptop.
Marc Wielage
Well-known member
I agree 100% with that. The physical realities of dealing with a pure 4K workflow from start to finish are astronomically slow and difficult at the present. Unless Red has a way to speed up servers, render farms, VFX workstations, and color-correction, 4K is not going to suddenly take over the post industry overnight. I have no problem dealing with 4K for origination, and one can make a good point that a 4K camera downrezzed to 2K looks better than a 2K image, all things being equal.
The other important issue to consider is that 2K -> 4K uprezzing goes on all the time in LA post. Granted, it's not a pure 4K process, and there ain't no such thing as a free lunch, but the pictures can be visibly sharper going this route after processing.
You make the assumption that Sony Pictures will pay the money to go back and redo all 1000 visual effects and all the color-correction in that picture in 4K. That would take a lot of time and money to do. It's theoretically possible, but I'd be surprised if it would happen, even for a movie that's made close to $200 million.
I can think of quite a few major TV series that were shot on film then edited on standard-def videotape. And now, the studios are balking at spending the money rescanning all the film and reassembling the shows in high-def. That's very cheap and easy compared to 4K -- and they don't want to spend this money, except in rare cases like Seinfeld, where the series made a billion dollars.
Too often, the studios' point of view is, "what we have is good enough." I don't always like that opinion, but I understand it when the client has limitations in time and budget.
Sony and WB are already remastering films in their library in 4k.
I haven't had cable or TV for two years.
I know a couple of people who don't have cable anymore and just do netflix, etc.
What's happening to magazines is going to start to impact TV and movies.
When the desktop computer monitor is 4K everything else becomes
insuffient. I've used a 4k 56" monitor as a computer monitor and it
truly is the next leap. It's like monitor crack.
Gunleik Groven
REDuser Sponsor
What monitor is that Deanan?
- Thread starter
- #259
Steve Sherrick
Well-known member
We have basic cable. I never watch it. When we had all cable channels, I'd watch it occasionally, mostly for sports. Now I live on Netflix, watch shows online. I watch more content now than I have over the past 10 years on cable.
- Thread starter
- #260