Benefits of 8K capture are all the same as 4K capture, you can do a lot of interesting things, especially when your output is a lower resolution. The downsides of 8K capture are of course the overwhelmingly large storage requirements. Broadcasting 8K really only requires the very best of codecs to get the bandwidth down to near tolerable, h.265, VP9, etc. might be able to do this with enough quality that the viewer won't see the compression. But the big question will be, do we need this many pixels? I guess we'll find out during the 2020 Olympics (or before).
Is 8K the reason why the US is reluctant to upgrade the infrastructure?
- Thread starter lonewolf2koc@hotmail.com
- Start date
adkimery
Veteran
Ah, I think I follow you. Are you saying it's not much of a factor in the overall market place because you don't think OTA is much of a factor in the overall marketplace?
The differences between 720p and 1080p aren't apparent in your average living room setup in the US (average TV size is too small for the average viewing distance) but that hasn't impeded the advancement of 1080p. Electronics makers like 4K because it gives them a chance to convince consumers that they need new cameras, new phones, new TVs, etc.,. For reasons already stated I'm doubtful about 4K OTA broadcasts but 4K streaming is already here (as are 4K Blu-ray players and 4K Blu-ray movies). Eventually these companies will just stop making HD TVs the same way they stopped making SD TVs.
-Andrew
combatentropy
Veteran
That's me!
As far as 8K goes, I'm still waiting for a camera with decent 2K (global shutter, 10 bit, 4:2:2, 60 fps) with decent ergonomics for a decent price (the Digital Bolex and the Ursa Mini 4K come close).
j1clark@ucsd.edu
Veteran
What hasn't been mentioned is while the more recent ATSC spec has UHD... the FCC in the US is now auctioning off more spectrum, and 'encouraging' broadcasters to share 'channels'... so you could very well see 4K of something being broadcast... but it will be 4 sub channels of 1960x1080, if not more subchannels of lesser resolution and higher compression all around.
j1clark@ucsd.edu
Veteran
Yes for 'capture'... I'd rather the direction be deeper bit depth, and higher sampling in R/B... higher than 24 fps is not a big thing with me... just drops the effective exposure a stop or so... so need more light, or better low light response...
Not sure how well a 4K upconvert of standard DVDs would go . . . 
(If they're well-encoded, they look pretty good in 1080p with a good player.)
(If they're well-encoded, they look pretty good in 1080p with a good player.)
In my opinion, the HD cable signal (1080i / 720p) I get from Time Warner Cable is barely better than SD quality, albeit full wide-screen, due to the terrible compression.
I would much rather see improved compression on the HD signal before they go upgrading to an even more compressed 4K signal.
I get better HD picture quality from Netflix Instant on the same cable line.
adkimery
Veteran
Just to be the contrarian...
I have TWC and the main channels look fine to me (no noticeable macroblocking) but the second tier channels can look iffy. I have some friends in the Midwest with U-verse though and it's like watching TV through two screen doors. Seems like IQ can change depending on what area you are in. I haven't seen DirecTV in ages so I can't comment firsthand on its IQ.It isn't so much macro-blocking / artifacts that bother me with TWC (though those issues do pop-up a lot), but the image is noticeably softer than I can get from Netflix, which is coming through the internet on the same cable line.Just to be the contrarian...
Patryk_Rebisz
Veteran
Someone donated 42 inch plasma TV to us (which we soon found out is only SD). At the very same time my brother got himself 65 inch 4k TV. We both put our screens in comparably sized smallish living rooms. When you sit around 10ft from the screen guess which one looks better? Almost everything but very crisp 2k footage looks like crap on my bro's TV. Of course it's not TV's fault but the distance from it. In such a small room 4k 65 inch TV is simply an overkill. That said i can see 4k and 8k being the future of "living walls" when proper 4k or 8k signal is being fed to it.
Patryk_Rebisz
Veteran
Oh, and that Sony paper linked to above is total BS.
I had my doc screened at everything from small to HUGE theater screens and every single time it looked fantastic (and it was shot on measly 7d).
I had my doc screened at everything from small to HUGE theater screens and every single time it looked fantastic (and it was shot on measly 7d).
j1clark@ucsd.edu
Veteran
I was very impressed with my Blackmagic Pocket captured film, being presented on a big theater screen for a fest a few months ago... The sensor is Super 16mm sized... and a mere 1920x1080 in pixel resolution...