Page 8 of 22 FirstFirst ... 45678910111218 ... LastLast
Results 71 to 80 of 213
  1. Collapse Details
    #71
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    Ypsilanti MI
    Posts
    846
    Default
    Quote Originally Posted by Barry_Green View Post
    I think some straw men must have wandered into the discussion...

    Who's resisting anything? The discussion I was involved in was "will 1080p gear be obsolete by the end of 2013"? Surely you would agree that that's a laughable notion, right?

    I was one of the earliest 4K adopters. I bought one of the first Red Ones. I am one of those guys on the very top of the geek pyramid. But just because *I* might want something, doesn't blind me to what the market as a whole wants. The market, as a whole, has resoundingly rejected 3D in the home. And they have repeatedly resoundingly rejected innovations that were solely differentiated from what they currently had by being "better". And that's back when the mass market had disposable income and could consider such purchases.

    Today the average household is has a lot less true net worth, a lot less disposable income, and the prospect of tax changes coming to the US in 2013 mean that there's likely to be even substantially less income available to them to spend on some fancy new TV. The way I see it, the average house is going to hold on to their current car for a few extra years because they can't afford a new one. And they're going to hold on to their current television because they certainly won't have several thousand dollars to spend on some bigscreen. The average house is going to be more concerned about making the mortgage or rent payment, than in keeping up with the Joneses.

    Will we someday have 8K displays? Sure. Within this decade? Very doubtful.

    That's not "resistance", that's just simple observation of consumer behavior and awareness of the current economic situation.
    One of the best, most real world posts made on this site. Points to two simple facts, A) that the people here aren't the target audience for these sets; that regulars here -almost by definition - will know more about TV then 99% of the general population ever will. And B), Thus, it's all about the average Joe. And the "average Joe" just bought all new tech (in their minds) to replace tech that had lasted nearly 80 years. Everything from the Berlin Olympics in 1936 to President Kennedy getting murdered to landing on the moon to the Superbowl 4 years ago - were all broadcast in SD. In other words, not only does 720/1080 look great compared with the vast history of television so far, it's also - in the entire history of TV - is practically brand new tech.

    Here's the thing - I don't think any one here is saying that 4K, or 10K or 100K isn't coming down the line. Heck, in a hundred years TVs will look a million times better then real life. Probably be 3D too - It will happen, eventually. But that wasn't the question. It was about next year.... And in the next year - and I'd argue for much longer then that - there would appear to almost no real world demand for such high resolutions.
    John Vincent
    Evil Genius Entertainment.com


    Reply With Quote
     

  2. Collapse Details
    #72
    Default
    Answering the original question of the thread, no, HD is not dead. I love the idea of shooting mainly in 4k because it gives interesting options in post (reframing, stabilising, vfx...) as long as the final delivery is in HD or 2K and I can see many of us ditching our current HD cameras in the next 2-4 years (though HD cameras will still be perfectly usable). But at a consumer level HD will be around for quite some time (I hope so!).

    I agree with Barry. Whilst I'd love to have a 120" display, the reality is I could't house one in their current form. Most people around the developed world live in 2-4 bedroom flats and space is confined - even if you've managed to convince your wife about it, such TV wouldn't really fit and I don't want to live in a space dominated by huge, heavy flat panel (I agree with the wife on this one). Until they manage to make them lighter and 'rollable' like a blind, I can't really see the point of 4K and 8K displays, and the technology is not quite there yet. And I am putting 4k in the same bag as 8K, because I can't see the point in swapping my current 50" for a stupidly expensive 4K TV of similar size.

    Dreaming on, once they've cracked lightweight flexible OLED technology, some will probably have more than one big panel - one for viewing films in glorious 4-8K, one for displaying art, one to make a room with no windows more lively by having a beautiful landscape from wall to wall...


    Reply With Quote
     

  3. Collapse Details
    #73
    Senior Member legrevedotcom's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    Copenhagen
    Posts
    1,639
    Default
    http://nofilmschool.com/2012/11/sony...(NoFilmSchool)

    They even have material (entertainment) ready to ship to the 4K products.

    Sony's on.... great move. Now... let the storm pass, and the price will lower. I remain on the side of "the death of HD". Follow or get left behind.... and we're not talking 120" displays.... 84" will do for now and in time they could probably be smaller still with a replacement product for the Retina type displays.


    Reply With Quote
     

  4. Collapse Details
    #74
    Bronze Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Posts
    2,415
    Default
    It is fun to see all this bulls*%t said by Barry to be nodded by others just because he is who he is.

    Guys, 3D was not and is not a flop. I can assure you as I am familiar exactly with customer side of this.

    4K will be available in VERY near future. With monitors, TVs and even tablets (what could play 4K) available in 2013 and cameras annouced in 2013.

    And consumers will buy them happily despite accelerating collapse of US and EU economies.


    Reply With Quote
     

  5. Collapse Details
    #75
    Bronze Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Austin, TX
    Posts
    4,641
    Default
    Quote Originally Posted by Vitaliy Kiselev View Post
    Guys, 3D was not and is not a flop. I can assure you as I am familiar exactly with customer side of this.
    "I know 80% of all the consumers out there and they love 3D TV!"


    Reply With Quote
     

  6. Collapse Details
    #76
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Long Island
    Posts
    7,447
    Default
    Didn't read everything above..and jumping around here but..

    HD is not going anywhere...and ofcourse 2k/4k will be in consumer cameras next year. That's how it was when HD was coming out and getting popular. Every company and their mothers were producing HD cameras; regardless if they were atrocious and unusable even for the regular joe. Marketing was fresh and fun again because they could now use new terms like "720p" and "Crystal-Clear High Definition". Within the professional industry, you will also continue to see raw cams roll out. It's not like HD will suddenly stop...it's a smooth, slow transition. I'm sure they sill make SD cameras. As far as 3D - I don't know anything about it and I don't even know how long it's been out on the market - consumer or professional - but I would never use it unless I was forced into it. The whole idea of wearing something to watch something just hassles me.


    Reply With Quote
     

  7. Collapse Details
    #77
    Senior Member David W. Jones's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    La Petite Roche
    Posts
    6,768
    Default
    Quote Originally Posted by Vitaliy Kiselev View Post
    It is fun to see all this bulls*%t said by Barry to be nodded by others just because he is who he is.

    Guys, 3D was not and is not a flop. I can assure you as I am familiar exactly with customer side of this.

    4K will be available in VERY near future. With monitors, TVs and even tablets (what could play 4K) available in 2013 and cameras annouced in 2013.

    And consumers will buy them happily despite accelerating collapse of US and EU economies.
    Seriously?

    And if I happen to agree with Barry it's not because of who he is.

    Look we all know 4K monitors, cameras and the like are poping up. FYI I owned one of the first 4K cameras available. But HD is not going to die a painful death in 2013, which in case you missed it it 3 weeks away. And as far as 3D goes, we put a production package together early on along with a demo and nobody in our region bought into doing 3D production so we got rid of everything. We do not have a 3D TV in the house, nor are we concerned with watching 3D content. As a matter of fact, I have only watched 2 3D movies at a theater in the course of my lifetime. I might go see The Hobbit, so let's say 3 3D movies in my lifetime.
    David W. Jones


    Reply With Quote
     

  8. Collapse Details
    #78
    Default
    Canon 5d mark iii can't resolve same number of lines as a sony ex1r yet they are both advertised as being capable of FULL HD. What is exactly FULL HD? We have FULL HD, then we have REAL FULL HD?!

    We are soon in 2013 and we don't even have affordable 1080p 12bit 444 cameras. It's 2K this, 4K that bla bla bla. Color space, bit depth, high frame rates, good codecs? "IT IS 4K! SCREW THE REST!"

    I'd pick a 40" 10bit 100hz lcd over a 60" 8 bit 60hz lcd. I have no place to put that big of a screen anyway. There's difference from display to display. "Oh look, 80" 4k LCD TV, that has no detail in blacks!" :S

    Do you watch 1080p videos on youtube in a small screen? No right? What's the point of having 4k resolution on a 7" screen of a table then? It will be moire all over the place, wrong?

    Resolution rush is all marketing. I demand quality camcorders that's sold for under 5k$ first. 1080p 444 12bit > 4k 420 8bit . MAKE THOSE 1080p CAMERAS!!

    Lastly I'd never buy anything 3d relatedfor home use. If i'm going to look at that screen for long hours, i don't want 3d. period. It may be good in cinema. It's absolutely not functional at home.


    Reply With Quote
     

  9. Collapse Details
    #79
    Bronze Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Austin, TX
    Posts
    4,641
    Default
    Yeah, ex1r777...I'm more interested in 1080p cameras that resolve an actual 1080p amount of detail in their image, and then don't hobble it with a 4:2:0 codec. I don't even need 4:4:4...if we'd just start seeing a move to more cameras with acquisition formats that are around the equivalent to AVC-Intra 100 I'd be happy.


    Reply With Quote
     

  10. Collapse Details
    #80
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Posts
    238
    Default
    I'm all for 4k. Who knows.. we might actually get sharp/full raster 1080p images from DSLR's if they are advertising them at 4k. Based on the fact that the current crop advertise '1080p' but resolve nowhere near that (generalisation, I know some of them like the gh2 come close but still no cigar if you ask me).

    Quote Originally Posted by noirist View Post
    You say that 4k doesn't make sense on an ipad.... I disagree. The Google Nexus 10 tablet already has a 2560x1600 display. The current ipad has a 2048x1536 resolution, but the next version will have higher resolution to beat the Android competition. Within three years the high-end tablets are all going to have 4k resolution. So 1920x1080 is no longer enough resolution for movies, even on tablets.
    Do you even understand the premise behind retina screens? The DPI is so high that pixels are indistinguishable and any improvements on resolution would be literally pointless.


    Reply With Quote
     

Page 8 of 22 FirstFirst ... 45678910111218 ... LastLast

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •