4k TV on the way....

This is why Canon missed the boat to me on the C300 no matter how good the picture is. 4k sooner than later it seems.
 
No doubt ultra HD is coming. But go and talk to some actors about how they feel about it. Every blemish will stand out and they had a hard enough time with 1080. Go ahead and drop your money being first to buy a 4K TV. You won't be able to watch anything on it for some time to come.
 
dustylense said:
No doubt ultra HD is coming. But go and talk to some actors about how they feel about it. Every blemish will stand out and they had a hard enough time with 1080. Go ahead and drop your money being first to buy a 4K TV. You won't be able to watch anything on it for some time to come.
Click to expand...

I'm a believer in the idea that it's the flaws that make something truly beautiful (like natural diamonds which are still sought out for their beauty even though we can make perfect artificial diamonds). I'm not the only one...

http://michaelcioni.tumblr.com/

Ian says to me “magazines have convinced a lot of people that good skin tone is about concealing of detail…sometimes to the point of a blatant blur. But beauty in faces shouldn’t be concealing, rather revealing.” Ian goes on, “When I work on a film, I challenge concealment (in a sense) by attempting to reveal everything in detail.” Ian doesn’t mean he wants to show off wrinkles or scars, but the more you see of someones true face, the more their face can be read thus the more realistic or perhaps better they look.
So Ian then plays a few scenes that demonstrate this very well. In reel 8 (about 2 hours into GDT) there are some good examples of this technique through a few shots of extreme closeups. These shots are truly full screen faces on their sides-to which Ian spent a lot of time massaging this sequence to pull as much color and separation as he could. Ian said to me “When you at your hand you will see the real nuances of what makes up true skin tone. Human skin has yellow, red, green, blue, brown and subtle colors in-between. I worked hard to isolate this outer-beauty and brought out as much of these subtleties as I could and let the millions of colors in their faces reveal exactly who they are.”
Click to expand...
 
It took what, 10 to 20 years form the first hd tv sets for it to become mainstream, so I can't see it becoming mainstream in the next 10 to 20 years. Most people are now migrating to the larger 50/60 inch screen and at normal viewing distance I personally can't see any pixel. From SD to HD there is quite a difference, but from 1080p to 4k the difference will be minimal if any for 99% of the viewers. So 4k in cinema, ok... may be, but in the home it will take a lot, a lot of time for any sort of adoption. In the world we are going into, food, health and shelter, will be much more important than 4k. Even now, I am always seeing people not noticing any difference from SD to Hd on there TV set and more so I get crazy when the 4/3 SD signal is streched into the 16.9 one. This is to tell you how the normal viewer perspective. Another example of what I call good enough, is the music industry, after all the criticism the CD got, who would have guess that in the 2011 the standard hifi audio format would be the highly compressed mp3. So yes for the geeky ones, 4k in the living room, but reality is far far from it for the vast majority.

P.s I always say that to my clients when I photograph that these cameras are not meant for human beings, because they are so sharp. I always prefer to use softer lens and add a little blur to the face texture if need be. I always come out with a A+. It is only the amateur photog that show there super sharp portrait, I always pity their wife and relatives, "hey honey look at the detail, you can see every pore of your skin... no its not the surface of the moon", for some artistic reason you might want some hard and sharp look, but for 90% of situation a soft human skin is much better.
 
Last edited:
My DVD collection far out numbers my Blu-Rays.


I think it will come down to price.
If 4K sets cost the same as 1080 sets or maybe few hundreds more then I think people will buy them because we have been taught that bigger is better. More is good. Even if there is little 4k content people will buy them if the price is right but I doubt a desire for more definition is driving the march/push to 4k TV sets.


Cable companies whine about true 1080 and internet providers are looking for more way to cap data limits.


3D did not pan out so the new buzz will be 4K.


I'm all for 4k in and 2k or 1080 out but at this point I have to agree that 4k for the masses will not happen in a few years.
It will take some changes beyond cameras and TV's.
 
Danielvilliers said:
Most people are now migrating to the larger 50/60 inch screen and at normal viewing distance I personally can't see any pixel. From SD to HD there is quite a difference, but from 1080p to 4k the difference will be minimal if any for 99% of the viewers.
Click to expand...

This. I don't think a lot of people realize there is a plateau with resolution based on viewing distance and screen size. 4K as a delivery format makes more sense for cinema.


dustylense said:
No doubt ultra HD is coming. But go and talk to some actors about how they feel about it. Every blemish will stand out and they had a hard enough time with 1080.
Click to expand...

How was shooting film any different?
 
4K picture.... and still nothing good to watch! :happy:

(I don't think even 4K can make 'Jersey Shore', 'Finding Bigfoot' or 'The Housewives of Whatever' watchable)
 
Danielvilliers said:
... from 1080p to 4k the difference will be minimal if any for 99% of the viewers. So 4k in cinema, ok... may be, but in the home it will take a lot, a lot of time for any sort of adoption... after all the criticism the CD got, who would have guess that in the 2011 the standard hifi audio format would be the highly compressed mp3. So yes for the geeky ones, 4k in the living room, but reality is far far from it for the vast majority.
Click to expand...
Yup. Excellent point on mp3.... industry pundits often get things horribly wrong because they think about the technology and forget the human factor. Easy usually wins.

Hidef1080 said:
I'm all for 4k in and 2k or 1080 out ...
Click to expand...

Agreed. But at least you'll have a monitoring solution for the 4k in...

I think the real effect of this will be to increase the pull for 4k in cinemas. If 4k is perceived as "awesome" because the Bill Gates' of the world are buying these TVs, then people will be more likely to pay attention to 4k in the cinema. Which in turn will drive more 4k content. And in turn hopefully more (and cheaper, reliable) 4k cameras.
 
I finally bought an HD TV about 6 months ago.
We are JUST now reaching the point where the majority of households have HD TVs, but the majority still doesn't watch HD programming on them. I don't. I have Blu Ray player I bought for exhibiting my films in Blu ray, but it's not hooked up to the TV because I don't own any Blu rays. I also don't pay the extra for HD cable signal (and neither do most people who own HD TVs).
 
DVD players are red-rays. Prep the Violet-rays.

There's a point of diminishing returns where more is only marginally better. 4K may be better for screens of very large size, but for the size of screen most people are actually going to want, 1080 is more than adequate. 4K won't add much.

Most people don't really want anything bigger than 60" or so. Even that gets to be a little big.
 
Time will tell. It only took 3 years for the 5d to turn our industry on its head. Technology takes quantum leaps that are never based on how long it took for the last innovation to take hold.
 
4K TV is a tough sell to consumers, since the first of anything (first HD televisions, first 3d televisions, etc) are always very very expensive (compared to when the technology has settled)... and there isn't anything to watch in 4k yet. Nothing. Not one video format, not one cable channel. Nothing.

Hard sell.

I don't doubt the future is > 1080... but selling them now seems a bit quick out of the gate.
 
A great and very successful business man once told me that the real trick in marketing a product is giving the salesman something, anything, to point at, that makes it seam different or better. Sure 99% of consumers won't be able to tell the difference if they were doing a side-by-side of an 1080p vs 4k tv, but if that salesman at Best Buy can say, "This one is only 1080, BUT THAT ONE IS 4K!" Believe me, the customer will believe s/he sees the difference.... Same reason we think that the exact same wine in a bottle with a $90 label is better than the same wine with a $10 label.
 
All that sells units is convenince and lowprice.

Mp3 is easer than carrying CD's. DVD is more convenient to use than VHS. Yea, bluray looks good, but at 60" 4k won't be too big of an improvement. 4K projectors in home theatre will be a big deal however.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top