The rise of the 4K TV(updated)

[shapeshifter]

I agree. Metryq. That's why I used terms like, 'blowing smoke and 'gimmicky'.

I also agree with you about OLED in clothing as being the coming new frontier. Moving, walking billboards everywhere, what's not to like? All my OLED clothing will be broadcasting Trek content!

 

[Metryq]

^ Do you suppose a person might get arrested for playing "nude" imagery on their OLED clothing? No doubt there will be "Predator" dynamic camouflage fans, too.

 

[MacLeod]

It seems likely that, as happened with 480i TVs, all TVs will simply become 4K and manufacturers will just stop making 1080p TVs. We are no doubt several years off from that, but it seems the likely outcome.

On the plus side, this means PC monitor resolutions will rebound from what is basically a dark age of shitty resolutions right now.

A would perhaps say a decade or so away before 4K TV's overtake current HD TV's.

 

[Captrek]

It seems likely that, as happened with 480i TVs, all TVs will simply become 4K and manufacturers will just stop making 1080p TVs. We are no doubt several years off from that, but it seems the likely outcome.

On the plus side, this means PC monitor resolutions will rebound from what is basically a dark age of shitty resolutions right now.

A would perhaps say a decade or so away before 4K TV's overtake current HD TV's.

A decade from now we may be looking at something much cooler than 4K.

 

[sojourner]

Holographic tv is always 10 years away. Just like fusion power is always 20 years away.

 

[RAMA]

I love new technology but I think they are pushing this way too soon.

Even this isnt a problem. There are sub $500 and sub $400 models that are less than 39" and from what I understand, the upscaling technology is excellet on most 4K tvs! Your 1080ps should look great. DVDs are another story, they really are obsolete anyway.

At 39", the human eye isn't going to be able to discern the difference between 1080p and 4K.

Possibly, but trust me I've seen more than one demo now, and at 50+ inches, it's very discernable.

It seems likely that, as happened with 480i TVs, all TVs will simply become 4K and manufacturers will just stop making 1080p TVs. We are no doubt several years off from that, but it seems the likely outcome.

On the plus side, this means PC monitor resolutions will rebound from what is basically a dark age of shitty resolutions right now.

A would perhaps say a decade or so away before 4K TV's overtake current HD TV's.

It doesn't have to overtake it to be useful or popular.

 

[FPAlpha]

Even this isnt a problem. There are sub $500 and sub $400 models that are less than 39" and from what I understand, the upscaling technology is excellet on most 4K tvs! Your 1080ps should look great. DVDs are another story, they really are obsolete anyway.

I can't afford to replace my DVDs, and they're not obsolete, as they are still being sold in huge numbers. VHS? Yeah, that's obsolete, but DVDs are still current media.

I simply don't think there's yet enough 1080p media to justify another technological jump. No one broadcasts in 1080p, my cable company doesn't send a 1080p signal to my house. Video game consoles still have trouble outputting games in 1080p/60.

It has only been about ten-years since the switchover from NTSC. I doubt broadcasters and cable companies are prepared to pay up again for 4K broadcast equipment.

This feels a lot like 3D. TV manufacturers trying to drive new sales. But they don't have the programming or equipment to back it up. Heck, the Xbox One and PS4 both have just launched and will be around for six or seven years before the next consoles hit.

http://www.techradar.com/us/news/te...king-to-the-playstation-4-or-xbox-one-1219888

Early talk about a 4K expansion of the brand's Video Unlimited streaming service has so far come to naught, and Netflix 4K is certainly not heading to either console.

The streaming VoD service, which will debut on 2014 4K UHD screens from Samsung, LG, Sony and Visio, requires a hardware HEVC h.265 decoder to work, something missing from both consoles.

This pretty much sums it up. It'll be several years before first 4k sources appear to get the full effect but even then the human eye won't notice a difference from 1080p to 4K.

Personally if i wanted to buy i'd go for a better screen technology like OLED to get a better picture. You will gain a far better picture quality with this new tech than just upping the resolution capability for which there is no source currently.

 

[Amaris]

That's why I laugh about the curved TVs which are being pushed now.

Yeah, I don't get the curved screen thing. Why would I want a tv with a purposely reduced viewing angle?

Yes, indeed. For home viewing purposes, it's just a gimmick. Now, if you own a large theatre, with a 50 ft screen, then sure, curve that puppy, but a home TV isn't going to curve enough to offer benefits, and will instead offer nothing more than viewing trouble.

 

[Relayer1]

It seems likely that, as happened with 480i TVs, all TVs will simply become 4K and manufacturers will just stop making 1080p TVs. We are no doubt several years off from that, but it seems the likely outcome.

On the plus side, this means PC monitor resolutions will rebound from what is basically a dark age of shitty resolutions right now.

A would perhaps say a decade or so away before 4K TV's overtake current HD TV's.

A decade from now we may be looking at something much cooler than 4K.

Am I the only one who thought of a thirty something guy with a beard wearing a white dress and repeating 'Help me Obi Wan, you're our only hope' ?

 

[Captrek]

A would perhaps say a decade or so away before 4K TV's overtake current HD TV's.

A decade from now we may be looking at something much cooler than 4K.

Am I the only one who thought of a thirty something guy with a beard wearing a white dress and repeating 'Help me Obi Wan, you're our only hope' ?

Of course you are, you ignoramus. The rest of us remember the quote correctly.

Not exactly what you were describing, but handy:

And, of course, TTIUW:

 

[ngc7293]

This pretty much sums it up. It'll be several years before first 4k sources appear to get the full effect but even then the human eye won't notice a difference from 1080p to 4K.

Personally if i wanted to buy i'd go for a better screen technology like OLED to get a better picture. You will gain a far better picture quality with this new tech than just upping the resolution capability for which there is no source currently.

If the human eye can't tell the difference then why don't manufacturers concentrate on quality? My brother went through a couple of large flat screen TVs. The good old CRT TVs lasted forerver.

 

[Captrek]

This pretty much sums it up. It'll be several years before first 4k sources appear to get the full effect but even then the human eye won't notice a difference from 1080p to 4K.

Personally if i wanted to buy i'd go for a better screen technology like OLED to get a better picture. You will gain a far better picture quality with this new tech than just upping the resolution capability for which there is no source currently.

If the human eye can't tell the difference then why don't manufacturers concentrate on quality? My brother went through a couple of large flat screen TVs. The good old CRT TVs lasted forerver.

Plasma sets are always going to wear out. It's the nature of the technology. But I think new LCD sets these days are much more durable than they used to be. I don't know much about OLED.

 

[shapeshifter]

^ Do you suppose a person might get arrested for playing "nude" imagery on their OLED clothing? No doubt there will be "Predator" dynamic camouflage fans, too.

Public nudity laws should remain in effect, what people display on them in the privacy of their own homes though... ;-)

I'm pretty sure *insert applicable branch of the US Gov* has already perfected this tech for camouflage.

 

[LOKAI of CHERON]

Plasma sets are always going to wear out. It's the nature of the technology. But I think new LCD sets these days are much more durable than they used to be. I don't know much about OLED.

All current display technology is subject to aging. Plasma and modern LCD are pretty much on a par. From the research I've done, OLED is some way behind in terms of longevity. They also have a known problem with blue pixels aging considerably faster than the red and green, which may cause signifcant problems with colour rendition after a relatively short time. Manufacturers are working on it.

I lament Panasonic's decision to end production of Plasma display's, which IMHO, are streets ahead of even the best LCD's.

 

[GalaxyX]

People are still in the belief that "Plasmas will acquire burn-in", which probably doesn't help sales at all.

I've had my 51" plasma for 2 years now and it's still as bright as the day I bought it. That's with it getting 3hr use daily on average.

You will notice the difference between 4K and 1080p on a TV 50" or bigger if you sit close to it, like 5-6 feet away. If you get something bigger than 70" then 4K will become indispensable.

 

[LOKAI of CHERON]

People are still in the belief that "Plasmas will acquire burn-in", which probably doesn't help sales at all.

I've had my 51" plasma for 2 years now and it's still as bright as the day I bought it. That's with it getting 3hr use daily on average.

You will notice the difference between 4K and 1080p on a TV 50" or bigger if you sit close to it, like 5-6 feet away. If you get something bigger than 70" then 4K will become indispensable.

You'd have to be quite reckless to achieve permanent burn-in on a Panny plasma - video games on "Vivid" mode (don't use this people) for hours and hours etc. Calibrate your set and watch a regular diet of varying aspect ratios - and you don't even have to think about burn/uneven phosphor aging.

Panny's are rated at approximately 80,000 to 100,000 hours to half brightness. Most consumers will change their sets long, long before that.

 

[FPAlpha]

This pretty much sums it up. It'll be several years before first 4k sources appear to get the full effect but even then the human eye won't notice a difference from 1080p to 4K.

Personally if i wanted to buy i'd go for a better screen technology like OLED to get a better picture. You will gain a far better picture quality with this new tech than just upping the resolution capability for which there is no source currently.

If the human eye can't tell the difference then why don't manufacturers concentrate on quality? My brother went through a couple of large flat screen TVs. The good old CRT TVs lasted forerver.

They do but having a new buzzword is going to draw more buyers thinking they need to have the technology now because 4000 is at least 4x better than 1080. 3D didn't work out as much as they had hoped so they came up with something new to sell.

 

[GalaxyX]

This pretty much sums it up. It'll be several years before first 4k sources appear to get the full effect but even then the human eye won't notice a difference from 1080p to 4K.

Personally if i wanted to buy i'd go for a better screen technology like OLED to get a better picture. You will gain a far better picture quality with this new tech than just upping the resolution capability for which there is no source currently.

If the human eye can't tell the difference then why don't manufacturers concentrate on quality? My brother went through a couple of large flat screen TVs. The good old CRT TVs lasted forerver.

They do but having a new buzzword is going to draw more buyers thinking they need to have the technology now because 4000 is at least 4x better than 1080. 3D didn't work out as much as they had hoped so they came up with something new to sell.

They are idiots.

For one:

A. Wearing the 3D glasses is a pain in the ass.

However,

B. People would be willing to put up with it if the 3D was any good. Most movies do 3D post processing, in essence making it into gimmicky "diorama" style scenes, and not "true 3D" as your eyes would see it. The human brain is not stupid, it can tell that type of 3D is "fake", and gets annoying very quickly.

And also: C. Most 3D glasses dim the light coming from your display. On a Plasma this is killer because Plasmas are already dimmer than LED panels. But even owners of bright LED's don't want to stick dimming filters in front of their eyes.

 

[Robert Comsol]

People would be willing to put up with it if the 3D was any good. Most movies do 3D post processing, in essence making it into gimmicky "diorama" style scenes, and not "true 3D" as your eyes would see it. The human brain is not stupid, it can tell that type of 3D is "fake", and gets annoying very quickly.

Yes, after 200 yards or something like that our field of stereoscopic vision ends, so if you like looking at breathtaking landscapes these will inevitably have to be 2D.

Reminds me of the SW (New Hope opening scene) demo I saw. Although our viewpoint was a good mile from Vader's Star Destroyer (1 mile long) that thing looked 3D - and inevitably like a model suspended in front of the viewer.

Most 3D glasses dim the light coming from your display. On a Plasma this is killer because Plasmas are already dimmer than LED panels. But even owners of bright LED's don't want to stick dimming filters in front of their eyes.

And that also reduces picture resolution or visibility. When I first watched "Tron Legacy" in 3D I couldn't see which book the Olivia Wilde character was holding. In brighter 2D the title "Myterious Island" became visible.

Just wondering how 4K affects LG's polarized 3D glasses. Resolution used to be an issue here, theoretically with 4K LG displays should enable 3D in FullHD?!

Bob

 

[GalaxyX]

People would be willing to put up with it if the 3D was any good. Most movies do 3D post processing, in essence making it into gimmicky "diorama" style scenes, and not "true 3D" as your eyes would see it. The human brain is not stupid, it can tell that type of 3D is "fake", and gets annoying very quickly.

Yes, after 200 yards or something like that our field of stereoscopic vision ends, so if you like looking at breathtaking landscapes these will inevitably have to be 2D.

Reminds me of the SW (New Hope opening scene) demo I saw. Although our viewpoint was a good mile from Vader's Star Destroyer (1 mile long) that thing looked 3D - and inevitably like a model suspended in front of the viewer.

Most 3D glasses dim the light coming from your display. On a Plasma this is killer because Plasmas are already dimmer than LED panels. But even owners of bright LED's don't want to stick dimming filters in front of their eyes.

And that also reduces picture resolution or visibility. When I first watched "Tron Legacy" in 3D I couldn't see which book the Olivia Wilde character was holding. In brighter 2D the title "Myterious Island" became visible.

Just wondering how 4K affects LG's polarized 3D glasses. Resolution used to be an issue here, theoretically with 4K LG displays should enable 3D in FullHD?!

Bob

Pretty much man.

I think even on 4K panels, the same issues will remain with current 3D technology.

I have a 3D plasma, and I thought Thor looked really good in certain scenes in 3D, but there really hasn't been a new movie that uses the technology in a satisfying way.

I'm told Avatar is supposed to be incredible 3D. I saw the non-3D version and the story was so mind-numbingly stupid, I have no desire to see it again, 3D or no 3D.