4k TV on the way....

This is why I am saying 4k should hit computers before televisions. Make it small Imac style 30in monitors where we see the content through streaming 4k (Youtube, vimeo and such). To think that broadcast is going to re-vamp to 4K within this year is like I and many think, CRAZY. AMC channel just added an HD 1080 feed like 3 months ago. 4K and cameras that capture it are good for one thing, the movie theatre. DO yourself a favor and online search the prices of just a 30in 4k monitor.
But then on the other hand, go ahead. Release 4K TV's. It will make a 120in. 1080p set go down in price. ANd while the retard consumer buys their 47in. 4k set to watch maybe a handful of content, I'll be upgrading my 82in. 1080p set to the 120in. version and watching The Walking Dead on AMC's NEW 1080 feed.
Have at it, be my guest. 1080p is plenty detailed. It would be funny to see Channel 4 news saying, "Broadcasted in ultra definition" so you can watch weather reports in 4K. Hell, 70% of commercials I see are SD. And if they are presented in HD, they are usually 720.
As for consumerism, Sears and Kmart are going to be shutting down 150 stores due to the holidays performance. Best Buy keeps shutting stores down. Inflation is on the rise. 4K TV's will be the last thing on a persons mind come this time next year. You're better off buying guns, gold, and booze. This spring should be interesting.
 
daveswan said:
Normal visual acuity is reckoned to be 1 minute of arc, therefore a 1920 pixel display could subtend 32 deg before pixels become individually noticeable. For a 4k (4096 pixel) display this becomes a little over 68 deg. Diagonal being a bit more. I invite people to put in their viewing distance and see what size comes out. simple trig will give you both the horizontal and diagonal sizes.

As a side note, the "normal" lens for photography / cine is generally reckoned to be equal to the diagonal of the frame, giving, very approximately 1 radian angle, say 57-58 deg, hence the 4k display given above will subtend rather more than the "normal" field of view.

Make of that what you will.

But yeah, food, warmth, and housing rate a heck of a lot higher than even HD
Click to expand...

Listening to some people, tomorrow they will see in the infra red and ultraviolet spectrum. The geeky side of it which is quite absurd. It is like the comic or science fiction guy (I like science fiction) who thinks that they could be super hero but can't ride a bike for 5 minute because they are always behind their TV of computer. I was shock when I learn that I was watching 2k movies on the big screen, I thought it was much higher, but reality is different, me and my eyes can't see much higher. Guess I am no superman like some, snif, snif.

Some of the richest nations are collapsing and people think that people will rush to buy 4k TV. The next consumer thing will be... Is my neighbor having some meat today, if he does, I will buy one piece tomorrow, to show him that I can have some meat also.
 
I can see infrared.
I'm just sayin'.:evil:


I think cameras and TV sets with more dynamic range is were the focus should be like the 2K 14 stops of DR Alexa.

I'm not convinced more pixels will mean a better image.
I'm not sure if we need [If I need] a 80 plus inch TV with an “average” image versus a 47 inch 1080 TV which can display true colors and all the HDR we could dream of or see.

Will these 4k sets offer more range or just a larger image....


I want quality first. The carrot.
Size will come. The horse.
 
It took a decade for HD to really be adopted in a meaningful way, and that's with an entirely new technology accompanying it (flat panel televisions). We STILL haven't reached a point where HD is ubiquitous, and probably won't for some time. 4k for consumers is destined to be dead in the water.

The audio analogy is a good one. It's very easy to demonstrate the benefit of CDs over cassettes, both in terms of convenience and fidelity. It's likewise very easy to demonstrate the same advantages of HD and flat panel sets over standard definition CRTs. It is, however, very difficult to demonstrate any worthwhile improvement in SACDs or DVD-Audio over the standard CD in terms of convenience/functionality OR fidelity. Even most recording engineers don't bat anywhere near 1.000 in double blind comparisons between redbook (16-bit, 44.1kHz) audio and higher bitrates/sampling rates.

We're in the same boat with 4k. Even if we don't take into account the massive expense of converting our broadcast system over to 4k, the burden on local affiliates and independent content producers (many of whom only recently made the switch to HD), the increased post expenses for all but the highest end of the industry, the shift to new cable and interconnection standards, the increased processing demands for video games and set-top-boxes, and all of the other headaches that another massive technological shift in broadcast standards would bring (right on the heels of HD no less), coupled with difficult economic times and downwards trends in discretionary spending, it still won't succeed because it simply isn't better enough for the consumer at television sizes.

4k acquisition is a GREAT thing for those with the budgets, schedules, and post resources to handle it. Unfortunately I think that market is shrinking if anything, not growing. The credo of the day is "faster and cheaper", not "better".
 
stefancolson said:
4k acquisition is a GREAT thing for those with the budgets, schedules, and post resources to handle it. Unfortunately I think that market is shrinking if anything, not growing. The credo of the day is "faster and cheaper", not "better".
Click to expand...

But what has happened in the last 2 years? Technology is subject to The Law of Accelerating Returns. What is a decade to progress? Just look at home computers in relation to chip speed. We have Video cards that are faster and more powerful today, than the processor in your brand new computer from two years ago. Scarlet package is a little over 15k. Sony F3 13,960.00 body only. Hey, I still shoot with a 5D, but shooting on a used kitted out Red is cheap, and buying a Scarlett is cheap for 4k acquisition. Look, all these guys are playing with funny money anyway, and the reality is that all of these signals are going to be (if not already) delivered over Fiber that already in the ground. How does your Internet provider keep increasing your bandwidth without laying new fiber? I watched OC48 pipelines drop from 100k a month to 10k? Why? Proliferation and advancement in router and switch technology. If its one thing I've learned is that you can't count another mans money, and I'm sure that just like on the internet side of things, these companies are already prepped and ready for the next stage. I worked for Broadwing (now Level 3) which was so far ahead of the game from a Broadband/Media perspective, as well as Comcast as a network engineer. They are not even using an 1/8th of the available resources to ensure they can deliver whatever consumer demand requires. See you guys are still thinking "Broadcast" as in traditional delivery, your cable is delivered via Fiber over Cisco switches that can handle damn near anything you can throw at them. You think Motorola is gonna miss out on revenue by not having a digital box that can handle 4k? I think the real issue is that many of us (myself included) are not ready to make the financial leap to 4k cameras. It is not in my budget, but hopefully there will be a Canon 5d for this very next step in the movie making revolution.
 
If the FCC mandates 4K broadcast like HD. Local broadcast/cable companies are in big trouble. The economy really did a number on them and having to buy all new transmition equipment and upgrades will be a mess. This game is for theaters and high dollar home big screen/projectors.
 
Erik Naso said:
If the FCC mandates 4K broadcast like HD. Local broadcast/cable companies are in big trouble. The economy really did a number on them and having to buy all new transmition equipment and upgrades will be a mess. This game is for theaters and high dollar home big screen/projectors.
Click to expand...

It'll be at least another 10 years before that happens.
 
cinebuddy said:
I worked for Broadwing (now Level 3) which was so far ahead of the game from a Broadband/Media perspective, as well as Comcast as a network engineer. They are not even using an 1/8th of the available resources to ensure they can deliver whatever consumer demand requires. See you guys are still thinking "Broadcast" as in traditional delivery, your cable is delivered via Fiber over Cisco switches that can handle damn near anything you can throw at them.
Click to expand...
It doesn't matter if the internet companies are prepared to deliver 4K. What matters is a large group of consumers willing to pony up the additional cash for the bigger pipe and the display. That group is nonexistent - lack of consumer demand will kill any chance of consumer delivery. 4K will thrive in theatre, medical, industrial and other applications. I don't think it has much of a chance in the home.
 
milksac said:
It doesn't matter if the internet companies are prepared to deliver 4K. What matters is a large group of consumers willing to pony up the additional cash for the bigger pipe and the display. That group is nonexistent - lack of consumer demand will kill any chance of consumer delivery. 4K will thrive in theatre, medical, industrial and other applications. I don't think it has much of a chance in the home.
Click to expand...

Predicting the future is never easy, and I won't make a gamble either way ... but I note that the market for high-end products works better when those products can still serve as 'regular' devices; 3D ready televisions work just fine as HDTVs, and the minor or even non-existent extra cost makes choosing '3D ready' easy enough; the realities of production may drive the market -- early HDTV sets were oddball pixel dimensions, and paying extra for 1920x1080 may have discouraged many ... but at this point, the manufacturers don't make the oddball specs, and 1920x1080 is 'the norm'. Which is by way of saying that if the top-end consumer market moves to 4k displays because a) the buyer is future proofed and b) the manufacturers only build them that way -- we may see more 4k sets than readers are predicting. Something similar is happening with DVD players -- now that BluRay players are routinely under $100 and occasionally only $50 ... why replace your broken/aging/tired DVD player with anything else? Even if you never own a BluRay disc, you can still play your DVDs, and you're protected from a future that may only see a BluRay for something you want. And at what point will the brand names simply stop offering DVD players -- BluRay or nothing. Though much is made about the decline in CD sales, in truth DVD sales are still strong, though off their peak. Strong enough to still measure billions of dollars annually, even at the now typical under $10 price. Walmart sells BluRays in the hundreds of thousands, at prices typically under $20 -- and though more users may chose streaming or on-line sourcing, there are still hundreds of millions of hard copy purchases annually. My point is, even a market that is in decline can still be a substantial market.

So let's imagine I'm outfitting my rec room sometime in the spring of 2013 -- I have a few extra dollars in hand, as travel south for vacation was forestalled by the exchange rate (we're just dreaming here -- I have no reason to predict the collapse of the dollar) ... and I find that my preferred manufacturer is only offering the newest, biggest 96" screen in 4k resolution. Price is good -- comparable to the $3,000 I paid for a 46" set back in 2008 when inflation is factored in -- and I can still watch my old DVDs, my aging BluRays, all the 1080 channels offered by my cable company (a couple of hundred on the service I have in 2012) ... and my 100Mb/s internet connection promises to make watching streaming films from that high-end specialty movie supplier in Los Angeles a real if occasional treat.

If the 4k set wasn't backward compatible, if it wasn't a desirable high-end product, if it didn't offer some level of upgrade from what I have, my dreaming wouldn't be so rosy. But it strikes me it is rather like the top end speaker for your audio system -- not everyone can justify the cost, even those that do justify the cost may be unable to find source material to truly test its limits ... but they still sell, and they still impress me.

Just sayin'

Cheers,
GB
 
milksac said:
It doesn't matter if the internet companies are prepared to deliver 4K. What matters is a large group of consumers willing to pony up the additional cash for the bigger pipe and the display. That group is nonexistent - lack of consumer demand will kill any chance of consumer delivery. 4K will thrive in theatre, medical, industrial and other applications. I don't think it has much of a chance in the home.
Click to expand...
The pipe is already there. Our provider just upped our speed for "free". Its not just the internet that is delivered over this fiber but your cable signal as well. Why? Because Fiber offers as much bandwidth as your hardware can stomach. So the back end is nothing but switches that have these enormous back planes that are ready for whatever new gigabit card these companies can come up with. Phone lines/cell lines/internet/cable all on the same switch broken out to different cards on virtual ports (3000 phone numbers on one port that is a T3 equivalent). The cable companies love to make it sound so hard to change their system, but it ain't, its a good way to justify raising the price of their services. I've worked in these rooms where this stuff gets done, hunted down miles of cable, and configured more routers and switches at Comcast than I care to remember.....wait....momentarily nauseous at the memories.

The consumer demand will be there believe it. You can't think like a camera dude, you have to think like a particular type of a buyer. I keep reading this sentiment where no one is spending money. The economy is so bad this that and a third, but on Christmas eve people were camped out for the new Michael Jordan shoes priced at $260 a pair. Customers rioted and fought and some people were killed over a sneaker with the moniker of a retired ball player! Oh yeah, same thing happened last Christmas. Americans spend money period. We consume. You may not consume as much but don't confuse the way we think as techies with the masses. Whenever I think a business is doing something dumb I step back and think if I was so damned smart then it would be my business to make the smart decision for in the first place.
 
cinebuddy said:
The consumer demand will be there believe it.
Click to expand...

For 4K TVs? Over the next 12 months? No, I don't believe it. For all the reasons I've already said, and also because television ownership in general is declining:

http://insidetv.ew.com/2011/11/30/tv-ownership-declines/

I don't see a scenario where there's anything but slight, if any, consumer penetration of 4K TVs over the next year. There are always early adopters, but like HDTV, only very few in the beginning. Heck, I was one of the earliest HDTV adopters and I'm as much a gearhead as anyone else, and I have no great need to rush out and buy a 4K TV.
 
4K is a pipe dream at the moment. Not going to happen in the cable and broadcast world for many many years. Noone is even mentioning it let alone the capacity to produce and distribute it. Ask the guy that designs the systems.......
 
DadinWestchester said:
4K is a pipe dream at the moment. Not going to happen in the cable and broadcast world for many many years. Noone is even mentioning it let alone the capacity to produce and distribute it. Ask the guy that designs the systems.......
Click to expand...
What guy? How can you say that no one is mentioning it. Seriously, that is a huge blanket statement that suggest someone here has a roadmap provided by Time-Warner/Insight/Comcast/ATT. If companies like LG are investing in the technology, then it is coming sooner than later. In the same article there is a reference to 4k projectors coming in Feburary.

David I agree not in 12 months.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top