Ultra high definition beyond Blu Ray and 1080p

[Chris D]

We've discussed this a bit here in the forum, but I don't think we have a dedicated thread for it.

As many know, and we saw coming as a natural technology progression, we have to evolve beyond today's mainstream "high definition" of up to 1080p, to higher resolution. One term used is "2K4K" resolution for the next step, or "Ultra HD", and displays are already being produced with this higher resolution specs. But, of course, you have to have native source material to truly take advantage of the resolution.

We've discussed here "Red Ray" technology, which based on what I'd read, I really thought that was going to become the replacement for BD at the higher resolution. But now today I read this article:

http://www.foxnews.com/tech/2013/07/29/sony-panasonic-plan-300gb-successor-to-blu-ray/?test=latestnews

Not sure if this would just be a "BD 2.0" kind of thing, with the higher capacity. Or whether this will be the higher resolution. But with a release of 2015, why not go up to the higher resolution? The market is certainly ready for it.

[Hdale85]

They actually don't need higher capacity for 4k content, the current blu-rays we have will handle it just fine, and players could even get a firmware update to support the new 4k discs. Chances are mfg's would take this opportunity to instead release brand new players though to get some more hardware out the door.

[John Holmes]

Sounds like a good time for a new connector.

[Hdale85]

Well HDMI 1.4 is limited in bandwidth unfortunately which makes 4k above 30 hz pretty much impossible without using dual HDMI connections and stuff which gets complicated. HDMI 2.0 is supposed to fix this though.

[Lex]

I saw a 4K set at Best Buy, the 65" Sony. It was stunning picture quality. But of course, without a source for it, it's a giant paperweight. It will have to have some good upconversion as well to handle 1080p for other sources. But whatever they do, when 4K is ready for primetime, we need the players ready as well, otherwise, Iam not going to bite. Ultimately, I want to see 4K projectors as well, and the source material and players. Then I'm all over it! Well, when the prices stabilize.

[Hdale85]

4k Projectors are already coming down in price as well. Honestly I think we have maybe one more production cycle before we see budget 4k projectors in the 2k range, and high end ones in the 5k range along with direct view displays as well.

[mjb]

Well HDMI 1.4 is limited in bandwidth unfortunately which makes 4k above 30 hz pretty much impossible without using dual HDMI connections and stuff which gets complicated. HDMI 2.0 is supposed to fix this though.

I hope this doesn't mean we'll suffer years of compatibility "handshake problems" like we did with HDMI 1.

[mjb]

I saw a 4K set at Best Buy, the 65" Sony. It was stunning picture quality. But of course, without a source for it, it's a giant paperweight. It will have to have some good upconversion as well to handle 1080p for other sources. But whatever they do, when 4K is ready for primetime, we need the players ready as well, otherwise, Iam not going to bite. Ultimately, I want to see 4K projectors as well, and the source material and players. Then I'm all over it! Well, when the prices stabilize.

I agree, the Sony 65" 4K set looks totally awesome - and yes, I think 4K is ready for primetime. Although, 8k (120fps @ 7680 x 4320) is coming soon... agghhh!

[Burke Strickland]

It's not going anywhere if it doesn't have 3D, right? Isn't that the "must have" big thing to revolutionize home video? That's a joke.

Ultra High Def will progress or fail based on whether consumers see enough value to warrant buying new equipment to accomodate it. So far, not there yet, for me anyway.

[Hdale85]

8k is a very long ways off, and I think consumers see value in high resolution displays with all the Retina and high resolution tablets and phones.

[Lex]

it is my understanding, that 3D has been dying a slow death. In short, consumers don't place it high in their must haves for purchasing a new television because: 1. source materials is few and far in between, (ESPN is killing their 3D network, is my understanding.) 2. People don't want to wear the glasses 3. they are more concerned about every day quality I think than preparing to watch 2 movies in a month if they are lucky.

4K will have such graphic definition, that it will appear almost 3D like when the source material supports it, without being candied up 3D. 8K? Whoa, let's get through 4K before we have upgraditis!

Dougie, I can wait a generation more for 2K 4Ks, lol. People are like, huh? What the hell is he talking about. Low content gold? At least get 14 karat, you know?

But seriously, I do see the 4K projector as something that will bring HD on the front projection screen to the next level. Whatever is missing from 1080P, should be there with 4K. I was watching my 1080P projector today some, and it was pretty good, only compromises color saturation at times mostly, and blackest blacks of course. I was showing an old friend what it was like, and he was pretty impressed, and he has a 65-70" plasma at home.

[Chris D]

I personally don't think that 3D is going to die, because it's not necessarily a proprietary format or anything, like HD-DVD. It's just an added feature. But it certainly hasn't taken off like the industry hoped, and it's not going to. If people buy a new TV, I think the industry will just bundle in 3D capability on most or even all of them. Some material will probably be offered in 3D, and personally, I'll keep buying new movie discs with the additional 3D disc. But because the MATERIAL is proprietary/exclusionary, it's definitely not going to become the only thing offered. i.e. if Disney released "Monsters University" ONLY in 3D, sales would be abysmal. Because of production cost, studios might stop producing movies in 3D, but I'm guessing that won't happen.

Now, 4K won't be as big as the release of BD, but I do think it'll be significant enough to have people buy into it. We're just seeing diminishing value of performance improvement. Even when DVD was invented, it took what, 10-15 years(?) before sales of DVD's surpassed videotapes? And DVD was a big boon to the industry, selling new TV's and players. Then BD was big, but not as big as DVD, selling new HDTV's and players. 3D hasn't been anywhere comparable, because it's a gimmicky feature, not an evolutionary step. 4K will be, but will not be as big as BD, much less DVD.

[Hdale85]

DVD wasn't as big of an improvement on quality as BD was though, DVD just went from an interlaced video to progressive so it was more sharp. I don't know I think people are starting to care about resolution a lot and I'm with you Doug I can wait another generation and be very happy to purchase a mid-range 4k display. Tons of new hardware is starting to support 4k upscaling and what not so even if content is a bit slow to release (which I don't think it will be) it'll be ok.

[Chris D]

Yeah, there's certainly several aspects to the upgrade of formats. The invent of DVD wasn't really about more resolution, it was about going digital, the way cassettes went to CD. In fact, we even already had digital with laserdisc, it just wasn't made mainstream! Potentially partially because of the disc size. That's another aspect--convenience of the media, which is why many people nowadays are going to MP3 and streaming video, often giving it a higher priority than A/V quality. Then there's other consequences, like having to rewind VHS tapes when they're done.

[Lex]

Hey People, this is not a moderator only discussion, come join in our topics folks!!!

Actually Dougie, DVD did introduce the first component video used feeds I believe, that jacked the signal to a possible 480P, over 220 for standard "yellow" video, and 280 for S-Video. So, the real improvement was for much more than just 480i to 480p. I am pretty sure I remember this correctly. DVD was actually HUGE, except over Laser disc, that was the best we had, I think it was the only thing that ever used component video besides DVD. Please correct me if I am wrong, old timers... I never did LD. I waited for DVD.

Chris, you make valid points, in fact manufacturers have opted to throw it in as a "feature" to lure prospective buyers. Maybe it will maintain a limited market, I hope it does. but I do believe ESPN is yanking 3d sports network. I know I read that, unless they have changed their tune.

I agree 4K won't be as big as BD or DVD, and it will be more a "I'll upgrade to that, the next time I need a new set, type thing. I will upgrade for it eventually, but not at 6500 for a 65".

[madmac]

I'm actually very happy with my 1080P set. When it poops out, I'll probably buy a 1080P LED set. Has to be 60" or better though. My current set is 60" and once you have that, you can't go back!. Might even do 70" if the price is right.

[impala454]

I agree with Doug. I wouldn't really bother with it until it's time for a new TV. Which, with how well my old DLP is lasting, hopefully will be a long time! I'm really happy with the picture. Have seen some 4K TVs at Fry's and they do look pretty awesome though. I'm curious to see what upconverted BDs would look like on a 4K TV in comparison to a 1080p TV.

[BWLover]

I feel the same way. My pioneer plasma is doing quite well. I started another thread on getting it calibrated (never have). In my mind, get it calibrated, enjoy it for a few more years, then go 4k. When prices come down and native content is released is when I'll switch. I wonder if netflix down the line will stream 4k? They have "Super HD" which I believe is a hyped way of saying 1080p? What was their max resolution before? 1080i?


Sent from my iPhone using the Tapatalk app

[madmac]

I feel the same way. My pioneer plasma is doing quite well. I started another thread on getting it calibrated (never have). In my mind, get it calibrated, enjoy it for a few more years, then go 4k. When prices come down and native content is released is when I'll switch. I wonder if netflix down the line will stream 4k? They have "Super HD" which I believe is a hyped way of saying 1080p? What was their max resolution before? 1080i?


Sent from my iPhone using the Tapatalk app

You had better have a good internet speed and LOTS of bandwidth to stream super HD via Netflix!!.

[BWLover]

Netflix recommends a connection of "at least 5mb/down". Now I imaging to get a solid, consistent, and reliable 5mb/down the average "connection speed" from the ISP would need to be a 15-20mbps Internet package. I currently have 50 down, which speed tests clocking 45 down and netflix buffers all the way up to "super hd" in about 15-20 seconds. With a 5 down connection yes (according to netflix) you can watch super hd, but god only knows how long it would take to buffer up to that.


Sent from my iPhone using the Tapatalk app

[Hdale85]

Netflix's Super HD is still compressed 720p I believe.

[wkhanna]

Honestly, if it were not for the aspect ratio....I could live quite well with crt.

JMHO ....along with my atrocious eye sight. :lol:

[aud19]

Honestly, if it were not for the aspect ratio....I could live quite well with crt.

JMHO ....along with my atrocious eye sight. :lol:

I've got a 16:9 CRT RPTV.... :scratchhead:

[impala454]

In the HD camera payload I worked on for the ISS, we had a video encoder that required at least 5 Mbps for it's lowest 720p setting. So that sounds about right (that it would be 720p).

[wkhanna]

Dude.....I want your job!

[Hdale85]

Yeah really depends on what their compression rate is, I doubt they actually need 5Mb of actual streaming, but with the other overheads and the chance that you are running during peak hours it's just what they recommend.

[BWLover]

They say "5Mb/s". So that would be (if they typed it correctly) 5 megabits per second. Not megabytes. That page also says that it streams in 1080p. So I think in the days before this "super hd" term was used by netflix, they streamed in 720p/1080i. So if all we need is 5Mb/s for 1080p, we could see a 4K Netflix down the line. Hopefully :-)


Sent from my iPhone using the Tapatalk app

[Kevin D]

Honestly, if it were not for the aspect ratio....I could live quite well with crt.

JMHO ....along with my atrocious eye sight. :lol:

I finally replaced my somewhat trusted 73" CRT. Snagged the last 82" DLP we had since Mitsubishi isn't making them anymore...

I love CRT, but I'll be honest and say that I have been lying to myself for a long time that the 73" still looked good.

Kevin D.

[Hdale85]

They say "5Mb/s". So that would be (if they typed it correctly) 5 megabits per second. Not megabytes. That page also says that it streams in 1080p. So I think in the days before this "super hd" term was used by netflix, they streamed in 720p/1080i. So if all we need is 5Mb/s for 1080p, we could see a 4K Netflix down the line. Hopefully :-)


Sent from my iPhone using the Tapatalk app

Well 1080p isn't always 1080p, they use quite a bit of compression, and I doubt we're seeing anything that resolves close to 1080p really, it might be a bit higher than 720p though.

[Chris D]

I've got a 16:9 CRT RPTV.... :scratchhead:

Jason, is it this model?

[aud19]

Jason, is it this model?

Looks more like this one Chris

[BWLover]

Well 1080p isn't always 1080p, they use quite a bit of compression, and I doubt we're seeing anything that resolves close to 1080p really, it might be a bit higher than 720p though.

Ya I figured it would be compressed. That would be a hell of a lot of data to be streaming completely uncompressed lol. How do they compress it? Is there like a flac type compression for video? Where it would be lossless and once decompressed or decoded or whatever it would end up pixel for pixel the same as the original?


Sent from my iPhone using the Tapatalk app

[Hdale85]

Well that would likely be h.264 as a comparison to FLAC, but what netflix uses is quite lossy. Honestly it really doesn't take THAT much bandwidth for uncompressed 1080p, or at least h.264 1080p or similar especially when you aren't streaming HD audio with it.

[BWLover]

Does Netflix stream hd audio? My rig is 2 channel so I wouldn't have noticed if they did.


Sent from my iPhone using the Tapatalk app

[Hdale85]

It streams Dolby Digital Plus at it's best connection rate.

[BWLover]

DD plus...is that in between regular DD and DD True HD?


Sent from my iPhone using the Tapatalk app

[Hdale85]

Yes it is, it's what Netflix and what not use.

[aud19]

DD plus...is that in between regular DD and DD True HD?


Sent from my iPhone using the Tapatalk app

Yup. It's lossy like traditional DD but higher resolution more akin to TrueHD.

[Chris D]

What they said.

[Dmantis]

I'm in the business and from my experience with my clients, no one is really caring about getting into 4k. Everyone is still buying 1080p sets. Bigger is better is still in full effect.

The new ZT from Panasonic is more rave then anything else.

Personally I have a 60 inch Kuro and I'm still completely happy with it as most sets I see don't even compare still. The ZT panasonic I'd say is something that has caught my eye as I have yet to calibrate one ISF, but tweaking it out of the box is pretty impressive.

I'm no fan of releasing technology without software support. IF I where to buy a 4k set, I would want 4k TV service and 4k devices. Streaming barely gets to 1080p now. They don't even send full bandwidth audio which I feel is just as or IMO more important then video.

[madmac]

I'm in the business and from my experience with my clients, no one is really caring about getting into 4k. Everyone is still buying 1080p sets. Bigger is better is still in full effect.

The new ZT from Panasonic is more rave then anything else.

Personally I have a 60 inch Kuro and I'm still completely happy with it as most sets I see don't even compare still. The ZT panasonic I'd say is something that has caught my eye as I have yet to calibrate one ISF, but tweaking it out of the box is pretty impressive.

I'm no fan of releasing technology without software support. IF I where to buy a 4k set, I would want 4k TV service and 4k devices. Streaming barely gets to 1080p now. They don't even send full bandwidth audio which I feel is just as or IMO more important then video.

I agree completely........

[Hdale85]

I'm in the business and from my experience with my clients, no one is really caring about getting into 4k. Everyone is still buying 1080p sets. Bigger is better is still in full effect.

The new ZT from Panasonic is more rave then anything else.

Personally I have a 60 inch Kuro and I'm still completely happy with it as most sets I see don't even compare still. The ZT panasonic I'd say is something that has caught my eye as I have yet to calibrate one ISF, but tweaking it out of the box is pretty impressive.

I'm no fan of releasing technology without software support. IF I where to buy a 4k set, I would want 4k TV service and 4k devices. Streaming barely gets to 1080p now. They don't even send full bandwidth audio which I feel is just as or IMO more important then video.

The reason no one cares about 4k currently is because the prices are crazy high, in the next year or so we are going to see 4k hit the 3k and under and possibly even 2k and under markets and we will see more interest in them at that point, also there are 4k streaming devices out there already from Sony, and from Red.

[impala454]

How high is this stuff going to reasonably go though? I mean, at what point are we done? I think that point does exist, and I kinda wonder if the electronics industry realized this and are trying to slow things down. Really, if you could wave a magic wand and put a 4K TV in everyone's household, and supply 4K live sports and every movie/tv show ever, why would any consumer purchase another display? Will 8K be next? Here's a question, will we ever see a 8K set in someone's home?

I'm almost 100% positive the computer industry has done this for years. I know back in the late 90s, Intel was clocking down Pentium III chips once mounted in the package because they kept getting cores that were faster than the price point they wanted to sell them at (which is why you could overclock them like crazy with no ill effects). As a business model, if you R&D a chip that's twice as fast as the current fastest chip, then you make a lot more money by gradually introducing and selling all the chips in between first. I wonder if there's not a bit of that going on here too.

[Hdale85]

Well the way Intel hits its price points is by binning, they bin the best dies that come out as their top end CPU's and so on. Sometimes you get a die on a part of the wafer that is better than expected for that price bracket. All generation CPU's are technically built on the same exact wafer, just a matter of where that particular die was on the wafer as to how well it will perform.

I'm not sure we'll ever see 8k in the home? I'm not sure if there is a need? I think where we will see 8k is in movie theaters and professional productions and shows. On the other hand I see plenty of room for 4k in the home, especially when the average size of peoples TV's going up. Once you get past 65" or so you can start to see some degrading of the picture quality unless you sit farther back. Many homes don't really have the seating distance required for a 80-100" TV at 1080p and this is where 4k will improve things greatly. Once again 4k is no big thing really, we've had the technology to produce these displays for quite some time which is why we will see cheap sets so quickly (and already have even with the 50" 4k set that was like 1200).

[Chris D]

At CEDIA, 3D was almost non-existent. I think I saw two 3D TV exhibits in the entire show. 4K was definitely prevalent, though. And it was looking GOOD in several different demonstrations I saw--JVC, Stewart, Sony, and more Some Red Ray material that was pretty darn good on JVC projectors. While 4K isn't as dramatic an improvement over 1080p as 1080p was over 480i, it still is a definite jump, obviously especially on larger screens. I'll worry about beyond 4k when we get to it. As it is, 4k still hasn't been standardized.

Yes, I will buy a 4k TV and projector when they are standardized and reach achievable prices.