Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

Register 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 :)

Why 4K TVs are stupid

This guy is clueless, just like the legion of people who told us 1080p was "not necessary." Sit two feet in front of a 35" 4K OLED monitor playing 4K footage and then tell me it's "not needed". Also wait until home displays fill the wall.
 
As I have said for years, 4K monitors will be the vanguard. That's where you can see the rubber meeting the road.

Last NAB, I had a chance to see the Sony 40" OLED 4K monitor. I was scraping my jaw off the floor.
 
Tom Lowe said:
This guy is clueless, just like the legion of people who told us 1080p was "not necessary."
Click to expand...
There's a huge difference between standard-def 525 and HD 1080. Not nearly as great going to 4K.

But (playing devil's advocate), the CNet critic is off-base, since he admits he didn't have any 4K content for his evaluation. When and if 4K content is widely available, that would level the playing field. The writer also concedes that with a really big screen (over 7 feet), if you sit close, you could see the difference.

Still: I still say that the HD most people see at home is barely HD, it's often highly compressed, and all the important parts of the picture beyond resolution aren't taken into consideration.
 
Marc Wielage said:
There's a huge difference between standard-def 525 and HD 1080. Not nearly as great going to 4K.
Click to expand...

Isn't the resolution gain from 1920 to 4K almost exactly the same as DVD to 1080p, if not more?
 
Bill Goehring said:
http://reviews.cnet.com/8301-33199_7-57366319-221/why-4k-tvs-are-stupid/?ttag=fbw

Previous Home Entertainment magazine chief editor Geoffrey Morrison is calling bullshit
on 4K TV displays in a c/net opinion piece.
Click to expand...

Bill,Morrison is not using that kind of a language (b.s) and if you really read the article he is mentioning 4k is a cinema standard and expressing his opinions about 4k tv nothing bad at all ,I can't say b.s like you said clear out and loud because your name is Bill and my name is Denizhan....
 
Marc Wielage said:
There's a huge difference between standard-def 525 and HD 1080. Not nearly as great going to 4K.
Click to expand...

You'll still be able see a big difference. I have a friend who swore up and down that there wasn't a big difference between DVD and Bluray, came over one night and I happened to be watching the same movie on Bluray he'd just finished on DVD. "Holy shit your TV looks way better than mine." and that was 720 to 1080 - 1080 to 4K is huge compared to that.

...and for the record I think Bluray was an unnecessary step between DVD and 4K.
 
The title of the article..."Why 4K TVs are stupid", is silly.

I wonder if he wrote "Why 70mm Films are stupid."

Or "Why IMAX Films are stupid."

I worked for SHOWSCAN in the late 80's and it sure wasn't stupid.

Theaters are now in HOMES....so a TV room in the year 2012 can be rather large,
or at minimum have a large screen.

4K is awesome! (oh, I mean Quad HD)
 
Denizhan Nacar said:
Bill,Morrison is not using that kind of a language (b.s) and if you really read the article he is mentioning 4k is a cinema standard and expressing his opinions about 4k tv nothing bad at all ,I can't say b.s like you said clear out and loud because your name is Bill and my name is Denizhan....
Click to expand...

Sorry if I offended you, Denizhan. "Calling bullshit" is merely a colloquial expression meaning that the writer doesn't believe what he calls industry "marketing and hype" in the article. Also, I was careful to say that he is talking specifically about TV, which, in this context, means a display, not a home projector, which he allows might have advantages with 4K and not theatrical projection, which he sees as being required for adequate quality.
 
Denizhan Nacar said:
Theaters are now in Homes...That's the problem my friend and if you really read the article instead of the title he is trying to make a point ...
Click to expand...

Hey Denizhan, that is a great avatar, my friend.
 
QUOTE: "So that's the advantage of 4K: you can sit way closer to your television (which no one will)"

In Japan the average living room (that is if you have a dedicated one) is like 4x5 m - sitting close to TV is inevitable...

QUOTE: "...or you can get a way bigger television (also unlikely)"

Average TV size in 60's...

00D3AA4D5E084B48817609C155518A90.jpg


Average TV size today...

TooBigTv.jpg


OK, I am exaggerating, but you catch my drift...
 
Tom Lowe said:
Hey Denizhan, that is a great avatar, my friend.
Click to expand...

That is the work of the great Nick Brandt, after he stop making videos and films for wildlife photography.
 
Peter beat me to it. I have a 14 foot wide wall in my studio/manroom. It has a 55" 1080 display on the wall (which is the upgrade from my 42" plasma which looked like a postage stamp to me when I hung it there several years ago.)

I have a projector that is 1080 and that is going to project onto a 10' screen. (diaganal)

That is nice but I have built the entire thing to allow a "TV" screen that is up to 14 feet wide in that space. I will maybe sit a little further back than 10' just due to not wanting to have to "tennis match" my head to see a movie but OMG, I will have a huge 4K TV someday.

The articles writer may not have been looking at some of the 4K I have seen where I was convinced I could get up and walk out into the picture.

That has not happened with 1080 for me, ever.

Bring it on!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top