8K resolution screens are about to go mainstream
- Thread starter joe1946
- Start date
Pascal Parvex
Well-known member
Bob Loblaw
Active member
Meanwhile, my 1080p Plasma TV still produces a better image than my QLED 4K TV. I even ask people to guess which one is 4K, and they always gravitate to the plasma.
puredrifting
Major Contributor
TVs are one step forward, two steps back. 8K is just a ploy to sell new TVs to consumers who largely cannot tell the difference between 1080 and 8K.
Wonder how many will buy them and will be viewing mostly 720p, if even that quality on them?
One can stream 4K, 5K and 8K already on YouTube. With 8K cameras becoming very affordable - thank Canon for R5 but the latest Samsung phones can do 8K too - there's going to be a deluge of the "pretty pictures in 8K". Right now, it's mostly travel and nature but the transition is well underway.
Run&Gun
Veteran
That one cracks me up, because it really hits home. I’ve been on a kick lately watching Forensic Files, which as a lot of you know, a huge portion of the episodes were shot back in the late 90’s/early 2000’s in SD 4:3. And I’m watching on a 120” 4K projector.
puredrifting
Major Contributor
Just like on our end with the cameras, I can't blame the manufacturers, they have to come up with some gimmick to get consumers into Costco to buy a new TV. Just like the camera companies that have done the same with
unnecessary resolution upgrades (We all know that 12K is the least interesting feature of the new BMD 12K camera!), FF sensors. It's all to move merch and they have to do it to survive.
They have definitely gone down the rabbit hole where the existing tech is so good, there is little reason for consumers or for us pros to upgrade our existing 4K stuff unless they build in a perceived "want/must have" factor. I'd love
to know if any of the universities that teach advanced marketing have done recent case studies about our little industry and how through marketing, our industry has managed to survive in a era of highly diminishing technological returns.
combatentropy
Veteran
In the '90s, when a friend decided to make a go of it as a photographer, she bought a used Mamiya or Hasselblad. I remember thinking it was cool that she could use a camera that was 20-30 years old. Then again, I think it was still $5,000.
Film cameras have run their course, but it was several decades like that, without this current churn. You could buy used and keep using it for 10-20 years. The companies did not seem to be going bankrupt because of this practice. What's different?
puredrifting
Major Contributor
Good question, I don't know the answer. Companies like Sony, Panasonic and Canon are corporate behemoths with huge infrastructure, staff and facilities all over the world,
whereas the Hassleblad and Mamiya of that era were relatively tiny boutique companies with small infrastructure and very limited staff and facilties. That might something to do with it?
But at least Canon was around in that era too, selling film cameras although as I recall, they too were a much smaller beast in that era of the 60s-80s compared to today. Canon shut down
several facilities here in the U.S. this year and last year though, a sign of the times.
Also, in that era, EVERYONE bought film cameras, there was no mobile phone market to decimate the camera market so it was much more like the car companies of the time,
Canon, Nikon, Olympus, Pentax battling it out head to head for the small format market and Hassleblad, Mamiya, Ricoh, Yashica battling it out in the medium format space.
Each one would have to go head to head with their direct competitor ala Ford vs. Chevy where today, every camera company's competition is Apple and Samsung, who aren't
even in the camera business.
Last edited:
A friend mine was an assistant manager in the photo-accessories department of a large retail chain in the early 90's and he told me that margins were super slim on the old film camera bodies. He was maybe 3-4 years away before the early digital 200KP-300KP models appeared on the scene.
But the big deal then were camcorders and Canon's Hi8 were the top of the bunch until one moved into the Betamax pricing.
But the big deal then were camcorders and Canon's Hi8 were the top of the bunch until one moved into the Betamax pricing.
Thomas Smet
Veteran
Title should be "manufacturers are going to try to force feed 8k TVs to make them mainstream".
Has nothing to do with if they actually become mainstream.
I still don't have a 4K TV and still find my 1080p to look pretty darn good. Only reason I'm even remotely considering getting a 4K TV now is because my ex is about to take the TV. I also want HDR for whatever reason if I decide to ever create HDR content of my daughter. I will create 4k videos and I guess it will be good to watch them on a 4k TV but honestly I just don't care about it all that much. I never have a single issue watching HD content at a realistic distance.
Has nothing to do with if they actually become mainstream.
I still don't have a 4K TV and still find my 1080p to look pretty darn good. Only reason I'm even remotely considering getting a 4K TV now is because my ex is about to take the TV. I also want HDR for whatever reason if I decide to ever create HDR content of my daughter. I will create 4k videos and I guess it will be good to watch them on a 4k TV but honestly I just don't care about it all that much. I never have a single issue watching HD content at a realistic distance.
puredrifting
Major Contributor
You nailed it. What choice do they have? It's either this or they die. I even find myself watching less TV on the TV in the other room and more TV on my iMac 27", at times even while working.
I'm old, the next generation of kids are already beginning to look at TVs as antiques, they consume media on their phones and occasionally their laptop. The idea of plopping onto a huge couch and
staring at a huge screen is becoming passé anyway except for us olds or if the young'uns are a sports junkie. it's not how the next generations consume their media.
combatentropy
Veteran
8K may go the way of 3D. Not everything that these manufacturers throw at the wall, sticks.
People will buy whatever is about $500. In time, that may be an 8K TV.
I don't really mind, so long as we are not forced one day to shoot everything in 8K.
---
We are not Luddites. The move from horse to car was disruptive. There were obvious advantages.
Likewise from VHS to DVD. There were many concrete advantages, and resolution was only one of them. DVDs were smaller, slimmer, and you did not have to rewind.
Likewise from SD to HD. Some consumers cocked their head trying to discern DVD and HD, but there was no denying that it was widescreen, not square.
---
But from HD to 4K? For professionals here on this forum, the difference is sometimes invisible. What do you think it is to the consumers?
And now you're talking 8K?
There is no doubt that it is twice the horizontal resolution --- and there will always be that guy that talks about reframing and punching in --- but this is not a disruptive shift, not like before.
If you're being charitable, you would say it is "incremental". If you're being realistic, you would say it is "invisible" or at best, "subconscious".
---
Maybe one day there will be another major disruption, like from horse to car, from VHS to DVD, from film to digital. But it ain't gonna be from 4K to 8K, or from 8K to 16K...
People will buy whatever is about $500. In time, that may be an 8K TV.
I don't really mind, so long as we are not forced one day to shoot everything in 8K.
---
We are not Luddites. The move from horse to car was disruptive. There were obvious advantages.
Likewise from VHS to DVD. There were many concrete advantages, and resolution was only one of them. DVDs were smaller, slimmer, and you did not have to rewind.
Likewise from SD to HD. Some consumers cocked their head trying to discern DVD and HD, but there was no denying that it was widescreen, not square.
---
But from HD to 4K? For professionals here on this forum, the difference is sometimes invisible. What do you think it is to the consumers?
And now you're talking 8K?
There is no doubt that it is twice the horizontal resolution --- and there will always be that guy that talks about reframing and punching in --- but this is not a disruptive shift, not like before.
If you're being charitable, you would say it is "incremental". If you're being realistic, you would say it is "invisible" or at best, "subconscious".
---
Maybe one day there will be another major disruption, like from horse to car, from VHS to DVD, from film to digital. But it ain't gonna be from 4K to 8K, or from 8K to 16K...
Yep. About 10-12 years ago, I pitched the idea of a virtual heads up display to the company that owned Bell Labs (for those of you old enough to know what that was). It was similar to Google glass (long before it came out). The idea was that instead of having to look at a computer, TV, or phone, one had a heads up display visible all around you. One could display as many windows as desired. You could scroll your hand in the air to move screens around and you (or up and down) and could look up/down/left/right to see as many screens as desired. You could surround yourself with screens. Input was to be done by a virtual keyboard where one just typed in the air. A touch screen function would be done by simply moving your finger in the air. The panel I presented it to thought the idea was ok, but wanted to pass it on to Bell Labs. I said no. Either I develop a team to do it or I don't want to take it any further. That was the end of that.
I was happy to see Google glass come along as a first step in the right direction. Obviously, there are issues (technical, commercial, social, or it just sucked) they were not able to resolve.
I'd still like to see us move in that direction. I'd hate to see younger people when they are old and unable to lift their head up due to debilitating neck injuries from looking down at their phones all day.
Just think of the possibilities. We could ignore each other even more. Why, every time a boring person started chatting to you, you could overlay Jackass 3D or cat videos in front of them and nod your head once in a while.
ahalpert
Major Contributor
Maybe it can also make you look like you're interested so you don't have to muster the effort pretending:
In the new season of star trek Discovery, every interface is holographic. And they all have little chest badges that double as holographic projectors and throw a data interface in front of them that they manipulate just as you describe. But it's hard for me to believe that there won't be a direct electrochemical neural interface by that point, which would be much more efficient
Oh, you mean this announcement - http://www.dvxuser.com/V6/showthrea...es-in-2018-over-2017!/page2&highlight=fadumpy
Elcasette would like to have a word with you. And D-VHS. And a DAT. And MiniDisc.
Oh and the target price will be ~ $3,000 for the early adopters and $1,500 for everyone else. Which means, the early adopters can easily grab one for themselves already. All they need is enough bandwidth.
https://www.bestbuy.com/site/tvs/8k...cmcat1552503373763&sp=+currentprice skuidsaas