A Response To Jim Jannard and 1080P

[Tom Lowe]

4K in the home? Sorry, I really don't see it, and certainly not until the 3D rollout either proves successful or dies. My opinion, and I'm just as entitled to it as you are to yours. But let's check back in about 4 years and see who was right.

Okay, let's check back in on this thread later. In the meantime, is there anything preventing a 4K LCD from displaying 3D?

 

[Peter Strietmann]

In the near future... the same companies that told you 1080P "was good enough" will release 4K cameras and tell you a new story. Mark my words.

Jim

No truer words have ever been spoken.

Thank you Mr Jannard. Merry Xmas!

 

[Rudi Herbert]

Detlev,

Mike Most can be a bit acerbic at times, although I frankly find him restrained and utterly respectful of people that go toe to toe with him and who challenge him in areas where he is far more experienced than those calling him out. If you've ever watch any American TV series, chances are you've probably seen something color graded by M Most, he is an industry veteran and I, for one, try and learn from his posts as much as I can, whether they contradict my dreams and desires, because people like him don't express opinions without bases.

I love Tom, and his enthusiasm, and I love all those who enthusiastically support the oncoming 4K wave, but I have to roll my eyes every time I hear about 4K being "around the corner". If it takes 5-7 years to go around that corner, then yes, absolutely. A few rich people and a ton of avid gamers do not make "the population", and although I have no doubt that 4K content will be available VERY soon for those few who can enjoy it, it will remain an option for some for a long while. Likely, there will be games released in 4K along with their "normal" versions, just as there will be discs or downloads of movies in 4K as well as in 1080p. With many movies being shot on RED and with most film originated scans now going routinely to 4K, it would seem logical that studios, producers and even resourceful indies would not make 4K versions of their work available. And theaters with 4K projectors will likely soon be offered 4K versions just as theaters with 2K projectors will continue to show 2K material. With acquisition becoming more routine thanks to RED and final distribution, especially through highly efficient compressed formats like RED RAY, not requiring much more storage than current 1080 material, then the limitations for the AVAILABILITY of 4K material will disappear very soon, I would say within 1-2 years. however, the number of people who will be able to avail themselves of such material will remain low, very low, for a while.
I remember when the first 50" Pioneer plasma debuted at $10K about 10 years ago or so. It had made a lot of waves at every show but the sales numbers were a whole other story altogether. Just because there will be a few 4K displays at trade shows soon, both at astronomical prices and monstrous sizes (which is not, ironically, a plus for a lot of people) does not mean those displays will fly off the shelves when they finally come to Best Buy. Just because it make sense for a certain trend to become the next evolutionary step does not mean it will happen at the speed we feel it should, and history is rooted in reality. 1080p projectors are now finally selling for under $2K, really good ones, and I can tell you that for each projector sold, around 100 000 TV sets are sold, if not more, so if even high end HD does not make sense for most people, for whatever reasons and whether they are wrong or stupid or not, we should expect them all to suddenly jump at the chance to buy 4K displays for tens of thousands of dollars to enjoy a format that, for the majority of them, makes no difference over HD, or not enough difference? Are we talking about the same people that don't mind watching pirated crap off the internet at unbearable quality instead of going to the cinemas or renting a BluRay or even a DVD? Come on....

 

[M Most]

Okay, let's check back in on this thread later. In the meantime, is there anything preventing a 4K LCD from displaying 3D?

Nothing other than the ability to scale material that's considerably less than 4K (since there is no available 4K 3D material at this point in time) and the ability to refresh the screen at a refresh rate required by the particular 3D system and either sync it with active glasses (which would retain the resolution) or display the two eyes on sequential lines (halving the resolution in the process and defeating the point of the system in the first place), which depending on the frame rate of the particular material could be anywhere from about 96fps (double flash, 2x24 images) to 360fps (triple flash, 2x60 images). Depending on the technology and how the full 4K image is architected within that technology (in theatrical projectors it's currently 4 "stitched" panels, each representing approximately 1 HD frame, all fed simultaneously and reintegrated by the projector), the refresh rate may or may not be an issue. Displaying 3D using current techniques is really just a matter of increased refresh rates combined with a delivery system (currently glasses) that separates the two images that are being fed sequentially. The only system that does this differently at the moment is the Sony/RealD system that "splits" the 4K imager into 2 2K imagers and projects the two images with no temporal displacement. For that to work as a 4K system would require 8K imaging chips, something Sony to my knowledge does not currently manufacture. One of the promises of 4K DLP technology is the ability to deliver true 4K stereoscopic projection using the same triple flash approach the 2K systems use now, only with chips that have 4 times the number of micromirrors.

Of course, future technology could be developed for LCD that could act much as a RealD Z-screen does now, changing the polarization of the image being emitted from the screen to allow for image separation by the glasses. That technology does not currently exist as far as I know, the only passive technology for LCD screens at the moment is based on lenticular surfaces, which, again, halves the vertical resolution.

 

[Detlev Eller]

Rudi,

i acknowledge your comments about M.s style ...

I must say, i have stopped watching TV probably in the late 80ties -
And have always refused to work for TV stations in the nineties during the video post production revolution ...

I did a lot of color grading work for blue chip companies.
I was going against the quantel henry at the time - with a little secret weapon called AE, that few people had heard of. I have won projects all over the place.

By 2002, i had met with the AE team at ADOBE as well as the top management of "Deutsche Telekom" and Foundry networks ... to create a massive system for realtime rendering of motion graphics - and open up the "last mile" for cheap!

That did not happen as fast as needed and shortly thereafter ... a complete new technology came along that uses the GPU to render things .... (as seen in APPLE Motion). I remember sitting in the shake user group in LA, the evening before they announced Motion at Siggraph and was one of the first in line to buy my package.

I´ve always stayed low, under the radar.

Guess, i know two cents about something and can deliver results.
M. has chosen a style of communication, in regards to me posting ... that is little productive.

I haven chosen to respond to and contribute to this fine community ....

I love movies. I love independence. I love RED.
Thats it.

 

[Gunleik Groven]

Why "nope" ... ?

Because not one single piece of the infrastructure, except for capture, is generally available.

I am not saying "impossible", "but generally available".

As one of the "early adopters" it is kind of logical that I think 4k for cinematic release is a natural and not too far away reality. It is here already sort-of-ish. But I see that it gains traction and eventually will take over for 2k.

If Jim had said "1080 for the big screen was a mistake" I would have agreed, allthough I don't agree that compromises are allways mistakes... Compromises can also be a way to actually get things done, rather than wait and never get things out of the door.

Here we are a nation of about 5 mill, and 4k projection is all over the place by now. But there isn't a lot of 4k contenet - even for the big screen yet.

And this is in a relatively rich society (norway).
HDTV (here) is 720 p50. Totally in sync with the Eurovision plan for this...

Last year I was in Iraq, and they were happily pushing 16:9 CRT TV's as diligently as the shop on the corner is pushing 3D TV's here.
You need technology and infrastructure to trickle down to many enough for this to happen.

For 4k at home to happen, there is a whole infrastructure that have to be in place.
I am not saying it is not possible now, though.

I guess the Rocket is capable of Redcode RGB playback (as it is suposed to be capable of encoding it), that means that with the right firmware and codecs available, and an SRX I could screen 4k delivered over the net NOW.

Sure.

But that goes not further than a proof of concept.

I like that concept, for sure and think that for some segments, this will be a reality shortly.

I think it may take some more time before it is a general available solution...

There are these challenges (just to get started)

Post pipelines
Codecs, encoders and decoders.
Transmition hubs (for broadcast)
Panels or projectors.

My belief is thus:
4k widely at home:

Not for a while.
That doesn't mean I am against it... -

For Cinematic release:
I think 4k is a good thing for cinematic releases that will distinguish them in a positive way from the "home Cinemas" for quite a while and will spread quickly, as soon as the post pipelines are viable economically.

As I rather like the "Theatre" experience, I mostly think of that as a good and discerning thing...

 

[Bryce O]

Actually I think that 4k is the mistake of the future. I believe we need 500k to really view content accurately. People need to be more forward thinking than 4k. Why do people have such a hard time viewing the future-future?

I also believe cars were a mistake. They pollute to much and are too slow. We should have gone from horses to flying repulsion-crafts that run on sub-atomic negative energy. Why weren't people like Henry Ford more forward thinking? ...wasting our time with internal combustion. pshhh.

War is also a mistake. We should have gone straight to a 'type-1 society'. Why is everyone such an idiot?

 

[Sanjin Jukic]

I just read in latest HD Magazine Digital Edition Online
that soon coming Holographic 3D:

The Ultimate 3D

Holographic 3D Will Be With Us In Two Years –
Read How It Works and How You Shoot For It

"DoP and steadicam operator Paul ‘Felix’ Forrest has
spent a long time looking at this technology as it would
impact on cinematography. He explains the basics.
“Having spent a considerable amount of time with
H3D and its creators it has gradually dawned on me that
with such an incredible display technology, the prospects
are that we will have to ‘finesse’ our shooting styles to
really make the most of it.
“One of the most dramatic changes H3D brings about
that ‘scene scale’ is accurate. Parallax can always be
adjusted with H3D display as long as the original
scale proportions are maintained. Remembering
also that parallax is the strongest depth cue, you can
see that convergence still has a major role to play
in capturing usable images. So, we can shoot with
fixed convergence, as long as we have, and maintain
the original scale proportions, we can adjust parallax
to ensure a comfortable viewing experience for all
scene points.
So, if you can shoot with fixed convergence, where
do you converge? Well this is the point at which
another key difference is introduced. If you imagine
the H3D display as a ‘window’ onto your 3D scene,
it is likely much of the action will occur behind the
screen but with real depth (just like looking out of
a window in the real world!). Therefore the most
appropriate point for convergence is on the display
plane (or zero/neutral parallax). Once again, ‘scene
scale’ is critically important: knowing the total depth
of a scene and which part of this scene will be behind
the display will help set convergence for that scene.
Once set for that scene, it shouldn’t be necessary to
adjust it again, even when zooming in/out (as long
as the original scale proportions are maintained,
parallax can be adjusted).
The clue to why this is less critical is that
convergence in Stereoscopic 3D is used to indicate
a ‘level of depth’. With H3D, the level of depth is
‘chosen’ by the viewer as they naturally select a
scene point in the scene on which to focus. The
eyes, then, very naturally converge and focus
on the same point (hence no headaches and
no depth cue mismatch). This doesn’t mean it
isn’t possible to create parallax errors (or painful
divergence!) but the discipline here is to ensure
that the maximum distance of a scene is always
identified and in playback that maximum parallax
means that at infinity, your eyes are parallel. This
additional information needs to be captured at the
point of acquisition for the content (whilst complex
algorithms can make a good job of recreating it,
the workload could be considerable)."


LINK>>>

 

[Michael Millichamp]

I don't understand people who think 4k in homes isn't possible. There are so many advances in technology every second of the day that we can't even comprehend. To assume that we are going to be at a stand still at a certain point in quality is kind of ignorant.

I don't mean to offend anyone in this, just saying that right now in our time, technology isn't slowing down.

 

[Lee Fingersh]

The above delivery services are nothing any decent person ever would even contemplate projecting on a 40 foot screen and charging people for... i have a really hard time watching them even on a 80" display at home.

The vast majority of people don't have, nor will ever have, 80 inch displays at home. For that to happen, we need two things - a quantum leap in display efficiency (OLED, perhaps), and people willing to alter the design of their homes to accommodate a screen of that size. Enthusiasts - no problem. The general public? I'm somewhat dubious that this will happen in the next decade.

 

[Detlev Eller]

Gunleik,

sounds like an "order of things" problem.
here is the roadmap, as i see it:

1. RED is now accepted technology
2. The most prominent hollywood super productions use / will use EPIC
3. Software = content is then available
4. Hardware diffusion follows software (content) availabilty.
4. (i simulate) ... the 4k/5K experience is far superior than anything seen before.
5. Entertainment providers (as in distributors and theaters) will want to have a market advantage
6. Smaller providers (as in local theater chains) will not want to be left in the dusk.
7. New independent providers (art house theaters) are showcasing pictures made from a new league of independent filmmakers ... shooting EPIC
8. ... program of such may be changing on a daily basis!
9. Old school distribution picks up ....
10. Everything else is history

11. Cinematic Culture: Reinvented.


P.S:
there may be some minor steps missing, feel free to add, if you think this is to simplistic ....lol :sifone:


P.S.S:

... there will be a parallel development in the consumer market that probably follows theaters.
I would not have imagined to download 800MB software updates over the net from my current location ... now i do ... and i am on youtube diggin knowledge so many MBs a day ...

 

[Lee Fingersh]

I don't understand people who think 4k in homes isn't possible. There are so many advances in technology every second of the day that we can't even comprehend. To assume that we are going to be at a stand still at a certain point in quality is kind of ignorant.

I don't mean to offend anyone in this, just saying that right now in our time, technology isn't slowing down.

It's not a technology problem, it's an architectural/design preference problem. I have a 9-speaker system in my living room. I love it. It's quite "in your face". What do a lot of people actually want? The Bose wave radio, despite the fact that it stinks. Why? Because they don't want to see technology in their living rooms. Why? I don't know why as I think they're nuts, but that's how it is. A display of sufficient size that 4k actually matters? It's going to dominate a room visually, and I think a lot of people really don't want that. Again, I think they're nuts, but that's how it is.

 

[David Mullen ASC]

The debate isn't over what's possible, the issue is what's probable within a time-span of a couple of years. Eventually, anything is possible. As usual, we are mainly arguing over timelines, the technology is not really the main hurdle for a faster conversion to / adoption of 4K for home use. There are other factors in play that don't necessarily conform to Moore's Law.

 

[Stuart English]

4K applications

4K applications

I don't understand people who think 4k in homes isn't possible.

I concur. Now add simulation, training, retail and outdoor advertising, business communications etc. 4K is a much broader business than just Digital Cinema.

Look at what the press releases from JVC, Epson etc are saying about the targeted applications for the 4K projection display panels that they are creating.

As all of these applications leverage the same building blocks, costs can fall, leading rapid price reduction, and hence greater demand / applicability...


Lots of opportunities here ...

 

[Gunleik Groven]

The debate isn't over what's possible, the issue is what's probable within a time-span of a couple of years. Eventually, anything is possible. As usual, we are mainly arguing over timelines, the technology is not really the main hurdle for a faster conversion to / adoption of 4K for home use. There are other factors in play that don't necessarily conform to Moore's Law.

Agree

And:

I concur. Now add simulation, training, retail and outdoor advertising, business communications etc. 4K is a much broader business than just Digital Cinema.

Look at what the press releases from JVC, Epson etc are saying about the targeted applications for the 4K projection display panels that they are creating.

As all of these applications leverage the same building blocks, costs can fall, leading rapid price reduction, and hence greater demand / applicability...


Lots of opportunities here ...

Agree.

Especially on the last sentence...

 

[Lee Fingersh]

Let me give you an idea about how clueless the average buying public is about resolution. 15 years ago, I bought an "advanced" laptop with a 1600x1200 screen. 7 years ago, I bought a low-end laptop with a 1920x1200 screen. Now, you need to go quite high-end to even get a 1920x1080 screen, and most laptops are 1366x768 (still called "HD" inexplicably) or 1600x900. 15 years ago when I bought that advanced 1600x1200, I would have predicted that the average screen would be 4k by 5-10 years ago. Alas, no, we're actually going backwards. It's quite maddening.

 

[Gunleik Groven]

I think sports venues is a logical 1st.

I know of huge screens in large Hockey venues being NTSC (because that's what they use in the US...)

Allso other live events like concerts and theatres etc could make good use of 4k now.

 

[Jannard]

The debate isn't over what's possible, the issue is what's probable within a time-span of a couple of years. Eventually, anything is possible. As usual, we are mainly arguing over timelines, the technology is not really the main hurdle for a faster conversion to / adoption of 4K for home use. There are other factors in play that don't necessarily conform to Moore's Law.

David... as usual I agree with you. The 1st obstacle, it seems to me, is the general perception of what is/should be the standard. Once people agree/commit to what something should be, armies are aimed at solving the technical problems.

I'm getting old. I couldn't stand the idea of waiting for the industry to "eventually" get around to moving from 1080P to 4K. I just didn't want to miss the transformation...

Jim

 

[Hrvoje Simic]

Let me give you an idea about how clueless the average buying public is about resolution.

Average public is not the first targeted group. In most cases like these it never is.


Also, cinema is not the deciding factor for 4K deployment.

 

[shashbugu]

I am really looking forward to a Red Ray.