|
|
Post by Bonzo on Feb 16, 2016 14:46:40 GMT -5
A good friend of mine who attends the NAB show each year in Vegas says 4K is passe, and 8K is now where it's at! 8K will again be a sales tool more than anything. Humongous theater screens use 4K. The resolution of 8K will literally mean nothing to the average Joe because the human eye won't be able to see the difference on a typical house hold TV. Until wives/ladies/women don't mind having entire walls as TV's in their spaces, it's going to be more hype than anything. |
|
guitarforlife
Sensei
Just another busy day in Northern Wisconsin.
Posts: 947
|
Post by guitarforlife on Feb 16, 2016 15:24:15 GMT -5
We should stop lying to ourselves. Once we all get a 4K displays and players we will buy 4K favorites to enjoy. Just wait until the first 4K re-release review gushing over PQ and we will buy.  Not this guy, I have over 6000 titles now I'm OUT. Besides, just due to storage space I have been streaming for quite sometime. |
|
|
|
Post by teaman on Feb 16, 2016 15:37:33 GMT -5
We should stop lying to ourselves. Once we all get a 4K displays and players we will buy 4K favorites to enjoy. Just wait until the first 4K re-release review gushing over PQ and we will buy. Not this guy, I have over 6000 titles now I'm OUT. Besides, just due to storage space I have been streaming for quite sometime. I second the "not for me" sentiments. With a house full of Panasonic Plasma televisions putting out 1080P and over 1000 titles I can not even fathom going to 4K. |
|
|
|
Post by restless on Feb 16, 2016 16:00:32 GMT -5
I will be buying "some" 4K BluRay , if they are really exceptional.
What I am seeing now, is the upscale from 1080P to the LG OLED TV is excellent. Not sure how much better native 4K will be, but will find out when AMAZON finally ships the 4K player/movies in March.
I too started with BetaMax (skipped VHS as much as possible), did the Laserdisc, then DVD and BluRay. The Laserdisc had similar problems that the 4K BluRay may have. Not enough content. Although I did manage to collect about 100 or so titles.
With DVD, they had the content, and now 1080p content is readily available.
From what I have seen of streaming, I can do without it. Takes too long, not that great, and 4k is missing any decent audio and the picture is not that much better than a 1080P BluRay.
But to each his own.
The change from 4k OLED from 1080P LCD was considerable!!
But I still enjoy watching movies on my Sony Projector at 130" image.
1080P is great for that, and no doubt 4K might be better, but NOT for $24k for a new projector.
|
|
|
|
Post by copperpipe on Feb 16, 2016 17:44:43 GMT -5
I will be buying "some" 4K BluRay , if they are really exceptional. What I am seeing now, is the upscale from 1080P to the LG OLED TV is excellent. Not sure how much better native 4K will be, but will find out when AMAZON finally ships the 4K player/movies in March. I too started with BetaMax (skipped VHS as much as possible), did the Laserdisc, then DVD and BluRay. The Laserdisc had similar problems that the 4K BluRay may have. Not enough content. Although I did manage to collect about 100 or so titles. With DVD, they had the content, and now 1080p content is readily available. From what I have seen of streaming, I can do without it. Takes too long, not that great, and 4k is missing any decent audio and the picture is not that much better than a 1080P BluRay. But to each his own. The change from 4k OLED from 1080P LCD was considerable!! But I still enjoy watching movies on my Sony Projector at 130" image. 1080P is great for that, and no doubt 4K might be better, but NOT for $24k for a new projector. Yup I don't buy that whole "your eyes can't see it" thing. Maybe I just have young eyes, but the difference is night and day in the best buy where I see these 4k displays sitting next to the 1080's. Combine it with new lighting technology (oled) and there is even more reason to upgrade. The LG 4k oled Tv that I've seen is stunning. If you sit 50 feet away from your display, ok, might not get anything out of that, but some of us don't have all that much room. Only reason I haven't bought one yet is because my current display works fine. But I will buy 4k discs when they come out, and like a few others, re-purchase some of my favourites. Saying you won't upgrade from 1080p is like saying you won't upgrade your computer or computer software. I wish you the best of luck with that  |
|
|
|
Post by Porscheguy on Feb 16, 2016 18:30:03 GMT -5
It never ends.. Preplanned obsolescence. It's all a big game...
And an expensive one...
|
|
|
|
Post by Bonzo on Feb 16, 2016 18:43:08 GMT -5
Yup I don't buy that whole "your eyes can't see it" thing. Maybe I just have young eyes, but the difference is night and day in the best buy where I see these 4k displays sitting next to the 1080's. Anyone who really knows anything about TV's knows that comparing them in the environment of a Best Buy is an absolute joke. Can't be done. Between the TV's being all adjusted wrong and the various poor lighting situations, it's impossible. Even the world's best TV's don't show themselves there. You are comparing apples to oranges. I've talked about the why's etc on this topic about 25 times now and I'm done with it for now. I'll just say that TV's are not nearly like speakers where personal tastes mean everything. Professional reviews mean a ton when it comes to displays. If you think you are better than the trained experts that have been doing this sort of thing for years, more power to you. |
|
|
|
Post by 509Paul on Feb 16, 2016 19:00:04 GMT -5
At this point I don't know that I am interested in 4K unless I was getting a huge screen where more resolution mattered. Any new TV these days is likely to be 4K but my next purchase will be for the OLED technology and the 4K part will be about as unimportant as 3D. Wait, does 3D even exist anymore...? Perhaps seeing a good 4K demo might change my mind but 1080p looks really good on Bluray.
|
|
|
|
Post by supermac on Feb 16, 2016 19:55:01 GMT -5
4K; 8K; 16K - no matter -- don't forget it all is still measured by 20/20 vision. |
|
|
|
Post by Axis on Feb 16, 2016 19:55:59 GMT -5
4K; 8K; 16K - no matter -- don't forget it all is still measured by 20/20 vision. I think I am out of calibration.  |
|
|
|
Post by copperpipe on Feb 16, 2016 21:08:52 GMT -5
Yup I don't buy that whole "your eyes can't see it" thing. Maybe I just have young eyes, but the difference is night and day in the best buy where I see these 4k displays sitting next to the 1080's. Anyone who really knows anything about TV's knows that comparing them in the environment of a Best Buy is an absolute joke. Can't be done. Between the TV's being all adjusted wrong and the various poor lighting situations, it's impossible. Even the world's best TV's don't show themselves there. You are comparing apples to oranges. I've talked about the why's etc on this topic about 25 times now and I'm done with it for now. I'll just say that TV's are not nearly like speakers where personal tastes mean everything. Professional reviews mean a ton when it comes to displays. If you think you are better than the trained experts that have been doing this sort of thing for years, more power to you. I'm talking about resolution mostly; how clear the images are. Yes the tv's are often not calibrated correctly and some are horridly bright or setup with poor contrast etc. Good thing it's not rocket science to adjust them (which I've done before). It's also not rocket science to see the stunning difference in resolution. And if you had done a 10 second google search you could see that the LG 4k oled tv's are quite well reviewed. The interesting thing which proves my point is that you don't need a review to know this. Walk through the store and _everyone_ can tell the difference. In the end though, my point remains; you cannot NOT upgrade to 4k or better in the future. It's like saying you're going to hang onto your copy of windows 98 or windows 7 for years to come. I'm not saying everyone is going to go out and repurchase their entire library over in higher resolution, but we're all going to get there and much farther past 4k in the years ahead. Unless you plan on never watching any new releases. |
|
|
|
Post by Bonzo on Feb 16, 2016 21:46:19 GMT -5
I'm talking about resolution mostly; how clear the images are. Yes the tv's are often not calibrated correctly and some are horridly bright or setup with poor contrast etc. Good thing it's not rocket science to adjust them (which I've done before). It's also not rocket science to see the stunning difference in resolution. And if you had done a 10 second google search you could see that the LG 4k oled tv's are quite well reviewed. The interesting thing which proves my point is that you don't need a review to know this. Walk through the store and _everyone_ can tell the difference. . The resolution itself is precisely what you CAN'T see, at least from a normal 8-12 feet difference of most homes. Now if you plan to sit 4 feet from a 65" screen, then yeah, sure, maybe. But from 10 feet, no. Ask the real pros and they will tell you what I'm saying. Using Thomas Norton as just one example, he just did a review of a new expensive Visio and says exactly that. I'm on my phone right now or I'd try to attach a link. He says he will be reviewing the new LG OLED next, so we will see what he has to say on that. But I'd be willing to guess that the OLED tech is far better than the old LCD, and THAT is what you are seeing rather than 4K resolution. The better black levels alone will give the entire image more perceived resolution, pop, and realism. Plasma was a better format than LCD. LCD 4k still has many of the same old problems. They didn't just go away like magic. Very true. I'd actually expect that by next Christmas the majority of TVs will be 4K regardless. Just like the whole 3d thing. But what my point is, is that if you already have a good quality set, like a Samsung or Panny plasma, then upgrading just for the sake of upgrading is not gaining you much if anything. Of course if you own something small or not so great, or the old set broke, then by all means, for sure I would say get a 4K set. But I would also say that 2016 is a bad year to upgrade if you don't have to. There are lots of issues still working themselves out and prices are still coming down. I would strongly suggest waiting until 2017 or even later if you can help it and/ or aren't made of money. As for what comes after 4k in terms of a physical format, there may be one, but i strongly think it would be a niche product much like the laser disc. For the vast majority of homes, 8k resolution itself would mean jack schiit. |
|
cawgijoe
Emo VIPs 
"We made too many of the wrong mistakes." - Yogi Berra
Posts: 4,914
|
Post by cawgijoe on Feb 17, 2016 6:54:49 GMT -5
Those who think you can't see the difference in quality between 1080p and a native 4K source from 10-12 feet away from a 65" screen are completely wrong.
How do I know this? By watching on my new Samsung 65" 4K set everyday. I can pull up native 4K content off of yutube on this set. I sit about 11 feet away. The picture is incredible and easily distinguishable from an OTA or Directv 1080i broadcast picture as well as a bluray 1080p picture.
Should you upgrade for the sake of upgrading? Probably too early as content is still in its infancy. The reason I bought a new set was mine died and I saw no point in staying with 1080p when the prices on sets are so good and the current tech is going to 4K.
I agree with copperpipe and I don't have young eyes.
|
|
|
|
Post by copperpipe on Feb 17, 2016 9:14:51 GMT -5
Those who think you can't see the difference in quality between 1080p and a native 4K source from 10-12 feet away from a 65" screen are completely wrong. How do I know this? By watching on my new Samsung 65" 4K set everyday. I can pull up native 4K content off of yutube on this set. I sit about 11 feet away. The picture is incredible and easily distinguishable from an OTA or Directv 1080i broadcast picture as well as a bluray 1080p picture. Should you upgrade for the sake of upgrading? Probably too early as content is still in its infancy. The reason I bought a new set was mine died and I saw no point in staying with 1080p when the prices on sets are so good and the current tech is going to 4K. I agree with copperpipe and I don't have young eyes. And the bigger the set, the more visible the difference is. I sit 5 feet away from a 27 inch computer screen with 1080p resolution when watching movies and I can still spot the pixel effect. (I have anti aliasing turned off btw, my eyes go nuts and I get a headache with any kind of font blurring / aliasing applied). I can only imagine how visible that pixel effect must be at 10 feet in front of a 50 inch. |
|
|
|
Post by Bonzo on Feb 17, 2016 10:01:36 GMT -5
Those who think you can't see the difference in quality between 1080p and a native 4K source from 10-12 feet away from a 65" screen are completely wrong. So all the professionally trained experts and scientific people and eye professionals are all wrong, and you are right?  We are to listen to some Joe on an internet forum instead of known professionals?  You guys go your way, and I'll go mine. |
|
|
|
Post by Bonzo on Feb 17, 2016 10:14:57 GMT -5
I can only imagine how visible that pixel effect must be at 10 feet in front of a 50 inch. Well considering you can't see pixels from 10 feet on a 50" set, I'd say, not much. So you can't be referring to the screen door effect. That's not to say that the picture can't look "mosquitoy" and not perfectly smooth etc. Perhaps this is what you are referring to? A shimmering effect that makes the pixels seem like they are alive in some way, which is most noticeable on large solid color non-moving areas. Or are you referring to the "jaggies?" This is obviously an issue that higher resolution could potentially help. But, both issues are much less (or even non-existent) if you have good calibrated TV. I do not have these issues on my Panny ZT. The newer sets you are looking at are simply better sets in these regards. Some of the same reasons why Plasma's looked better than LCD's. Black level is probably the biggest difference you are actually seeing, which makes everything look more crisp, snappy, 3D, and real, because a lot of these new UHD sets are fully local dimming. I am not denying you are not seeing differences, but what I'm trying to a say, for one more time, is that the resolution itself is not the only factor, nor is it the main factor. |
|
|
|
Post by 509Paul on Feb 17, 2016 10:57:34 GMT -5
That ZT plasma is a tough one to beat for picture quality and I am envious of you having one. I would like to see that set compared to panasonics new OLED to see how much of a difference the blacks are.
|
|
|
|
Post by Bonzo on Feb 17, 2016 11:22:06 GMT -5
I would like to see that set compared to panasonics new OLED to see how much of a difference the blacks are. Thomas Norton from S&V Magazine said he was doing an up and coming review of one of the new LG OLEDs (don't recall the model number). He will surely compare the 2 sets side by side for direct comparison, so we'll see. My bet is on the LG for sure. I feel like OLED will basically be the next generation Plasma's of the world, but only time will tell for sure. Hopefully they don't go the way of the Dodo like Plasma's did due to the general consumer population's ignorance. Note: I saw one of the first LG OLED's at Best Buy last year, at it looked horrible. Between the store environment and the TV itself set on what must have been "super vibrant" mode, everything looked like totally fake plastic with overdone childish looking colors. |
|
|
|
Post by 509Paul on Feb 17, 2016 11:31:26 GMT -5
Note: I saw one of the first LG OLED's at Best Buy last year, at it looked horrible. Between the store environment and the TV itself set on what must have been "super vibrant" mode, everything looked like totally fake plastic with overdone childish looking colors. I saw the same thing at Huppins (Onecall.com) last time I was in there and wanted to check out a OLED display. It was the worst looking display in the store because of what ever mode they had set it on. The picture actually hurt my eyes because of how bright and fake looking all the colors were. I wish a place like that would calibrate the displays for the environment you are viewing them in to actually emphasize real picture quality. |
|
|
|
Post by copperpipe on Feb 17, 2016 12:19:52 GMT -5
I can only imagine how visible that pixel effect must be at 10 feet in front of a 50 inch. Well considering you can't see pixels from 10 feet on a 50" set, I'd say, not much. So you can't be referring to the screen door effect. That's not to say that the picture can't look "mosquitoy" and not perfectly smooth etc. Perhaps this is what you are referring to? A shimmering effect that makes the pixels seem like they are alive in some way, which is most noticeable on large solid color non-moving areas. Or are you referring to the "jaggies?" This is obviously an issue that higher resolution could potentially help. But, both issues are much less (or even non-existent) if you have good calibrated TV. I do not have these issues on my Panny ZT. The newer sets you are looking at are simply better sets in these regards. Some of the same reasons why Plasma's looked better than LCD's. Black level is probably the biggest difference you are actually seeing, which makes everything look more crisp, snappy, 3D, and real, because a lot of these new UHD sets are fully local dimming. I am not denying you are not seeing differences, but what I'm trying to a say, for one more time, is that the resolution itself is not the only factor, nor is it the main factor. I'm going to say that I really don't know what it is about that particular unit. Maybe it's a combination of factors, I don't know enough of the science behind it to say for certain. But many of the "you can't tell the difference" advocates are going off of DPI's that are accurate for those with 20/20 vision, which is not perfect vision. You can definitely have better than 20/20 (even elderly folk can still have 20/20 vision). Second thing, people have tested this, an interesting test here shows people overwhelmingly noting the difference on a 55 inch tv from 9 feet away. This is just the first test I found online, I'm sure we can both find tests that prove both my view and yours, but at least admit there is no firm answer on this. I, however, will definitely be buying a 4k display as soon as it fits my budget. www.hdtvtest.co.uk/news/4k-resolution-201312153517.htm |
|
