High Def Forum
Thank you for visiting. This is our website archive. Please visit our main website by clicking the logo above.

Is 4K really marketable?

iDarren
08-08-2013, 06:18 AM
After all 1080p has not been the world changer they hoped for. Modestly successful yes, but not the mega boom they wanted.

What can be different about 4K?

HD Goofnut
08-08-2013, 07:21 AM
After all 1080p has not been the world changer they hoped for. Modestly successful yes, but not the mega boom they wanted.

What can be different about 4K?

Most definitely, but since it will cater to people with 60" or larger displays and will contain new specs that require new equipment it will be a nice market. My estimation would be something around the size of the Laserdisc market or maybe a few percent higher.

rbinck
08-08-2013, 08:04 AM
Modestly successful? How did you come to that conclusion?

RBTO
08-08-2013, 09:33 AM
4k will definitely be marketable or the market research people wouldn't have given it the go-ahead for the companies jumping into that pond. However, that being said, I believe its marketability will be limited to certain venues, rather than the mainstream public, at least in the near (and maybe not so near) future. Considering that every piece of equipment would need replacement (sat receivers, BD players, displays, AVRs, and streaming devices), few regular HT enthusiasts will be willing to invest up front. Likewise, unless the display is very large, little gain in image quality will be seen in return (not true when HD came into being).

Still, car companies like Mazerati have done good business, even though owners are not exactly mainstream, and there will be plenty of buyers for 4k as well. Visited any friends that are in the Bel-air circuit, lately?

iDarren
08-09-2013, 06:06 AM
True about marketing it at the HIGH END market, but I see it in the regular electronic store brochures a lot lately, and it seems to be a push at the general public.

iDarren
08-09-2013, 06:07 AM
Modestly successful? How did you come to that conclusion?

Not as big as the studios wanted.

jkkyler
08-09-2013, 06:21 AM
Not as big as the studios wanted.


WTF do the studios care about 1080p? Studios are making movies on film which exceeds 1080p (closer to 4k). They would be more interested in the success of blu-ray than 1080p- two very separate issues. The people who care about 1080p are tv manufacturers and they are sellng a $#!&-ton of them, especially since the digital transition.

rbinck
08-09-2013, 08:36 AM
Not as big as the studios wanted.
Nothing is as big as the studios want.
WTF do the studios care about 1080p? Studios are making movies on film which exceeds 1080p (closer to 4k). They would be more interested in the success of blu-ray than 1080p- two very separate issues. The people who care about 1080p are tv manufacturers and they are sellng a $#!&-ton of them, especially since the digital transition.
That is my opinion as well. As far as I know, 1080p sets have been wildly successful. Way better than any other new tech launch. They even make 1080p sets in small sizes where 720p would be as good or better.

morriscroy
08-09-2013, 10:59 AM
Not as big as the studios wanted.

What would be "big enough" for the studios?

(ie. Besides an absolute worldwide dictatorship run only by them, and nobody else :haha: ).

Echo13
08-09-2013, 06:16 PM
4K displays sure.

4K movies. Probably not.

iDarren
08-10-2013, 07:41 AM
WTF do the studios care about 1080p? Studios are making movies on film which exceeds 1080p (closer to 4k). They would be more interested in the success of blu-ray than 1080p- two very separate issues. The people who care about 1080p are tv manufacturers and they are sellng a $#!&-ton of them, especially since the digital transition.

Sorry for any confusion - I meant BD.

iDarren
08-10-2013, 07:42 AM
4K displays sure.

4K movies. Probably not.

Do you think there can be much 4K content?

dsskid
08-10-2013, 10:27 AM
IMO, 4K will be successful in the projector market. Not so much for flat panel displays. I saw the 55"(?) Sony at Roberts store during the shootout, with a 4k loop from Sony, and was underwhelmed. From normal seating distances, there was very little difference.

mytime
08-10-2013, 12:38 PM
IMO, 4K will be successful in the projector market. Not so much for flat panel displays. I saw the 55"(?) Sony at Roberts store during the shootout, with a 4k loop from Sony, and was underwhelmed. From normal seating distances, there was very little difference.

Yep. Would have to be a very big screen to able to appreciate it from a reasonable distance. I know I will probably buy when prices come down.

heolongvan
08-11-2013, 10:22 AM
Likewise, unless the display is very large, little gain in image quality will be seen in return before HDhttp://goo.gl/lce6Z:what:

RBTO
08-11-2013, 05:58 PM
Check out the CarltonBale chart and you can see when 4k kicks in. It's when your screen diagonal in inches is about 8 times greater (or more) than the viewing distance in feet.

http://heredago.files.wordpress.com/2012/03/resolution_chart.png

bruceames
08-11-2013, 08:37 PM
Assuming 4k supports deep color then you won't need a bigger display to appreciate that.

Lee Stewart
08-18-2013, 03:12 PM
IMO . . . 4K will not be a success . . . as far as being a real money maker. It will cater to less than 5% of the market . . . if that. It really isn't a "wiz-bang" "market changing" product.

It isn't a mass market product. It will be worse than current 3DTV because the average person . . . the group which drives the mass martket, won't see any difference that they would be willing to pay for.

They (the CEMs) have a better shot with Autostereoscopic 3DTV: no glasses 3D. THAT would be an excellent use of a 4K panel due to the necessary drop in resolution from what the native resolution of the panel is. But not, again IMO, for 4KTV.

bruceames
08-18-2013, 05:50 PM
I don't think it will much of a success either, Lee.

I hear though that 4ktv makes 3D look much better. More so than the perceived difference in upscaled BD, so it's possible that 4k TVs could reenergize the 3D market.

Lee Stewart
08-19-2013, 11:50 AM
I don't think it will much of a success either, Lee.

I hear though that 4ktv makes 3D look much better. More so than the perceived difference in upscaled BD, so it's possible that 4k TVs could reenergize the 3D market.

A 4K panel will give Passive (polarized glasses) 3DTVs a boost because they lose 50% of their Vertical Resolution. So instead of 1920x540P per image (2; L & R) with an HDTV, it will be 3840x1080P per image with a 4K Passive 3DTV.

Everyone who really knows about 4K also knows that it is nothing more than a "middle step" until Super Hi Vision (32MP per image) is released, sometime in the next 5 to 7 years. THAT will be a "wiz-bang" product.

RBTO
08-22-2013, 01:26 PM
Assuming 4k supports deep color then you won't need a bigger display to appreciate that.

Actually, we're talking UHD here and not 4K (a motion picture standard). UHD is likely (not in stone yet) going to use 10 bit 4:2:2 color with a slightly expanded gamut (compared to HD) so there won't be any great gains there either. I agree with what you and Lee are saying 100% - Limited audience for UHD.

quad4.0
08-23-2013, 12:39 PM
Be clear on the format-evidenly there is confusion on the whole idea, there are 2 one is 4-k and there is UHD. 2 different formats.

Lee Stewart
08-23-2013, 01:44 PM
Be clear on the format-evidenly there is confusion on the whole idea, there are 2 one is 4-k and there is UHD. 2 different formats.

And that is the fault of the CEMs . . . that they have choosen to give the moniker of "Ultra High Defintion" to the 3840x2160 format. And to confuse people even more, the SAME moniker is also used for 7680x4320. That too is called Ultra High Definition.

And just to clarify why Hollywood uses "4K" is simply the aspect ratio. Consumer "X"HD is 1.78, while Hollywood uses 1.85. So their Hort. Res. is 4096 instead of 3840 . . . something the human eye is not capable of differentiating.

morriscroy
08-23-2013, 01:59 PM
What is the highest resolution the naked human eye can discern, which doesn't involve using a microscope?

Lee Stewart
08-24-2013, 11:05 AM
What is the highest resolution the naked human eye can discern, which doesn't involve using a microscope?

576 Megapixels

http://hugofdestruction.deviantart.com/journal/Your-Eye-s-quot-megapixel-quot-Resolution-214149706

Echo13
09-08-2013, 06:17 PM
I think 4K will have a chance since it seems to be coming out at the same time as some very exciting new display technologies. We got autostereoscopic 3Dtvs and Laser projectors. Laser projectors especially I think the masses will gobble up when the technology gets cheaper(its about $8000 right now)

morriscroy
10-24-2013, 07:54 AM
Fox insiders skeptical of 4K.

http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/behind-screen/smpte-fox-exec-seeing-no-649952


Fox Sports vp field operations Jerry Steinberg says Ultra HD broadcasting is a “monumental task with not a lot of return.”

Underscoring the hesitance that many professionals are feeling about Ultra HD TV, Fox Sports vp of field operations Jerry Steinberg asserted that he doesn’t see 4K broadcasting in Fox’s near future.

“We have no interest into doing 4K [four times the resolution of today’s HD] telecasts or moving 4K signals to living rooms,” the exec said Monday at the Society of Motion Picture and Television Engineers conference at Loews Hollywood Hotel. “We spent millions going to HD and never got an extra dime from advertisers. … It seems today [4K broadcasting] is a monumental task with not a lot of return.”

That view was echoed on another panel by Bryan Burns, president and CEO of Forward Direction Group, who is an ESPN alum and was involved in its HD and 3D efforts. Burns believes that for 4K to have any chance in broadcast production, the “key component” is that it would need to be an incremental expense. “Who makes money [in 4K]? I don’t think broadcasters,” he admitted.

Some in the consumer electronics community say the upconversion capabilities found in many 4K displays will help the market by giving consumers a taste of higher resolution broadcasting. To this point, Burns said, “I hope we don't hear [stakeholders say] that, 'if there was only more 4K content [it would take off].’ If there’s a chip that upconverts everything for you, it makes it harder for producers to invest in creating the [native] content.”

Steinberg noted that Fox is among the broadcasters that have tapped 4K cameras for certain HD sports coverage. Here, the resolution is high enough that the broadcaster is able to extract a portion of a frame, for instance, to zoom in to show a key play, and broadcast it in HD. “We were able to tell the story with clarity,” he said. “This Super Bowl, I would probably have six 4K cameras.”

But in considering a move to 4K broadcasting, which is four times the resolution of today’s HD, broadcasters are also paying attention to what might be on the horizon.

Japanese public broadcaster NHK is already showing 8K, which is 16 times that of HD. This prompted Burns to ask: “How soon is that going to come? A word of caution.”

Before this session wrapped, the audience members were asked who they believe stands to make money in 4K.

By a show of hands, plenty said it was set makers and the retailers.

But few raised their hands when asked if there were opportunities to make money for production, postproduction, networks or the studios.

bruceames
10-24-2013, 04:57 PM
It took several years before HD content finally followed the rollout of HDTVs. I don't think this time will be any different. I can understand though that content distributors are getting the smaller end of the profits, compared to TV manufacturers and retailers. But eventually there will be 4k content to match the sets being sold, once you get past a certain saturation level.

But I think for the most part the content will be theatrical movies, and remain on a digital level. Highly unlikely to come to Blu-ray anytime soon, if ever. Look at what Blu-ray accomplished. After 7 1/2 years, it still only has a 30% optical disc market share and not only that, sales have peaked and are starting to decline. That's not very encouraging for those considering to release 4K on physical media.

morriscroy
10-24-2013, 08:13 PM
But I think for the most part the content will be theatrical movies, and remain on a digital level.

In other words: watered down Netflix 4K ? :banghead:

morriscroy
10-24-2013, 08:42 PM
Look at what Blu-ray accomplished. After 7 1/2 years, it still only has a 30% optical disc market share and not only that, sales have peaked and are starting to decline. That's not very encouraging for those considering to release 4K on physical media.

After 6-7 years, the milestone is blurays becoming dollar store fodder.

Kinda amusing reading through the threads of dollar store bluray finds on other message boards.

morriscroy
10-24-2013, 09:02 PM
Another disappointing milestone for bluray: BD-rom burner drives have not become a generic "standard" on low end desktop computers.

For that matter, also Microsoft Windows not supporting bluray playback straight out of the box at all, whether Windows Vista, 7, or 8.

(Purportedly Microsoft has removed default dvd playback in Windows 8).

bruceames
10-24-2013, 09:09 PM
In other words: watered down Netflix 4K ? :banghead:

Well yeah, that and downloads onto special players with hard drives. The 4k ownership model will be downloads, which can be just as high as quality as disc (although it may take forever to complete the download).

bruceames
10-24-2013, 09:12 PM
After 6-7 years, the milestone is blurays becoming dollar store fodder.

Kinda amusing reading through the threads of dollar store bluray finds on other message boards.

Catalog is pretty much dead on Blu-ray. Sure, stuff like The Little Mermaid does well, but that's because it's Disney and even their well is running dry.

Really the only thing the keep Blu-ray going is new theatrical releases. And once those go first to digital then it won't even have that advantage.

morriscroy
10-24-2013, 09:22 PM
Really the only thing the keep Blu-ray going is new theatrical releases. And once those go first to digital then it won't even have that advantage.

For the most part. At this point, I wonder how much of the remaining disc purchases is from the hardcore types now, and not the casual crowd.

I wonder how many of the casual movie viewers, now just resort to watching vod on the cable service, instead of of buying or renting optical discs. This is what my local friends and acquaintances do these days. (Especially considering there are really no more video stores nearby, other than a red box at a few grocery stores).

morriscroy
10-24-2013, 09:48 PM
The 4k ownership model will be downloads, which can be just as high as quality as disc (although it may take forever to complete the download).

I don't know how much I will latch on to 4K downloads.

I don't know how others may feel about this, but psychologically I always felt that something on a factory pressed optical disc had more "value" than the equivalent in the form of a pure digital download. (Whether a music album, movie, software, video game, etc ...). Even if this is technically false.

I don't know if this type of thinking is from being "brain damaged" and/or getting old. :rolleyes:

bruceames
10-24-2013, 10:19 PM
I don't know how much I will latch on to 4K downloads.

I don't know how others may feel about this, but psychologically I always felt that something on a factory pressed optical disc had more "value" than the equivalent in the form of a pure digital download. (Whether a music album, movie, software, video game, etc ...). Even if this is technically false.

I don't know if this type of thinking is from being "brain damaged" and/or getting old. :rolleyes:

I would much rather have it on disc too. Not only because it is attached to something "physical" (including the accompanying packaging), but also because one has more control. You can play it without logging on to the internet and entering a password to get permission.

But since I discovered the wonderful world of "ISOs", having the content on a hard drive is more convenient. In the end, for me it comes down to quality. I'd rather "own" a download that has better PQ, then own a disc with lesser PQ. ie, 4k downloads > 2k discs.

bruceames
10-24-2013, 10:21 PM
For the most part. At this point, I wonder how much of the remaining disc purchases is from the hardcore types now, and not the casual crowd.

I wonder how many of the casual movie viewers, now just resort to watching vod on the cable service, instead of of buying or renting optical discs. This is what my local friends and acquaintances do these days. (Especially considering there are really no more video stores nearby, other than a red box at a few grocery stores).

Still lots of people buying discs. The numbers continue to decline, but the rate is relatively slow. Old habits die hard I guess.

morriscroy
10-24-2013, 10:36 PM
Still lots of people buying discs. The numbers continue to decline, but the rate is relatively slow. Old habits die hard I guess.

(Offtopic).

For a bluray selling 1 million copies, this would mean approximately 1 out of every 316 people in America buying a copy. (Assuming a population estimate of approximately 316 million).

http://www.census.gov/popclock/

In a large city like NYC with a population of approximately 8,336,697, this would mean approximately 26,381 being sold in NYC.

http://quickfacts.census.gov/qfd/states/36/3651000.html


Hmmm ....

morriscroy
10-24-2013, 11:27 PM
In the end, for me it comes down to quality. I'd rather "own" a download that has better PQ, then own a disc with lesser PQ. ie, 4k downloads > 2k discs.

My thinking on this issue is somewhat warped and mixed.

More prevalent today especially, is the issue of hd downloads vs dvd. The sad fact is that many television shows are not available on bluray, but may exist as hd downloads (such as on amazon). On physical discs, such tv shows may only be available on dvd.

At the present time my preference is to buy the dvd version, even if the hd downloads are the same price or less than the dvd version.

Despite being familiar with playing videos on the computer, at the present time I am still very reluctant about buying video file downloads (from amazon or any other vendor). Psychologically I would rather buy the dvd version, instead of buying the better quality hd download. :gamer :helpme

leevitalone
10-25-2013, 10:17 AM
4k tv's are being sold, but-there are 2 formats, UHD and 4k. Ther may be a format war coming.
http://www.techradar.com/us/news/home-cinema/high-definition/ultra-hd-everything-you-need-to-know-about-4k-tv-1048954

bruceames
10-25-2013, 10:27 AM
Psychologically I would rather buy the dvd version, instead of buying the better quality hd download. :gamer :helpme

Personally I just can't buy something knowing that there's a better version available. It's tough for me to watch something too, knowing that it's second best. Better to have it on disc, but for me the end all be all is the PQ.

morriscroy
10-25-2013, 10:35 AM
4k tv's are being sold, but-there are 2 formats, UHD and 4k. Ther may be a format war coming.
http://www.techradar.com/us/news/home-cinema/high-definition/ultra-hd-everything-you-need-to-know-about-4k-tv-1048954



What would be amusing is if the video gamers and/or pornography industry, ends up de facto deciding whether UHD or 4K becomes the market "standard". :haha:

:lol:;):D

leevitalone
10-25-2013, 01:41 PM
Personally I just can't buy something knowing that there's a better version available. It's tough for me to watch something too, knowing that it's second best. Better to have it on disc, but for me the end all be all is the PQ.

I'm that way with music-after high resolution 96/24 you just can't go backwards, same with dvd's and BD.

morriscroy
10-25-2013, 02:02 PM
I'm that way with music-after high resolution 96/24 you just can't go backwards, same with dvd's and BD.

I'm somewhat mixed and conflicted on this issue, especially when it comes to audio.

The sort of stuff I listened to regularly, were typically produced and engineered by guys who were totally incompetent and/or they deliberately sabotaged everything to make the album sound like complete shit.

Back in the day, I use to put a lot of effort into finding some optimum settings on parametric equalizers (and some graphic ones too) to reduce the shittiness of the sound from poorly produced albums. (Whether on vinyl or cd). This had to be done for each album individually, and the eq settings were rarely ever identical. In practice, it wasn't much more than "polishing a turd".

Fast forward to the present, I largely don't give a damn anymore about audio quality beyond cd quality. (There was hardly anything released on dvd-audio or sacd that was of interest to me).

These days I'm perfectly fine with listening to the music straight off of youtube or other lossy online sources.

Even for crappy produced albums from back in the day that I use to spend hours and hours "cleaning up" the sound with parametric eqs, these days I just listen to them in all their "glorious" default shitty sound quality without any eq. :rolleyes:

morriscroy
10-25-2013, 02:10 PM
For these crappy sounding albums produced by really incompetent engineers and/or deliberately sabotaged, I highly doubt they will sound any better on dvd-audio, sacd, bluray-audio, etc ...

I suspect for any of these crappy sounding albums to sound any better, it would require going back into the studio and re-mixing all the songs again from scratch with a competent producer who actually gives a damn and knows what they're doing.

morriscroy
10-26-2013, 12:31 PM
Personally I just can't buy something knowing that there's a better version available. It's tough for me to watch something too, knowing that it's second best. Better to have it on disc, but for me the end all be all is the PQ.

Most likely I'll eventually come around to digital downloads for movies and tv episodes.

Though for me it will most likely have very little to do with PQ, and more to do with convenience. (Improved PQ will just be a "bonus" byproduct for me).

For example, these days I find it is easier to just listen to a song on youtube (if available), than searching through my music cd collection for the cd and ripping it to the computer.

In principle I can rip my entire music cd collection to a large hard drive. But these days I don't bother anymore. Easier to just find and listen to a particular song on youtube.

The only times I bother ripping a music cd to the computer these days, is when I want to listen to an entire album from start to finish and/or if the song is not available on youtube.


Maybe one day it will eventually become easier to just download or stream an episode or movie, than searching through my collection for the dvd/bluray and ripping it to the hard drive.

Lee Stewart
10-29-2013, 10:20 AM
4k tv's are being sold, but-there are 2 formats, UHD and 4k. Ther may be a format war coming.
http://www.techradar.com/us/news/home-cinema/high-definition/ultra-hd-everything-you-need-to-know-about-4k-tv-1048954

Nope - no format war . . . sorry :lol:

UHD and 4K are two different formats for two different applications:

UHD - for consumers. Aspect Ratio of 1.78

4K - for professionals (Hollywood). Aspect Ratio of 1.85

morriscroy
12-30-2013, 09:45 PM
Heh.

Why Hollywood Should Worry About Samsung’s 110-Inch TV

Electronics manufacturers are sure to set off a new tech trend of mega-TVs that will encourage more consumers to stay at home

http://variety.com/2013/digital/news/why-hollywood-should-worry-about-samsungs-110-inch-tv-1201012532/

Lee Stewart
12-30-2013, 10:44 PM
Heh.

Why Hollywood Should Worry About Samsung’s 110-Inch TV

Electronics manufacturers are sure to set off a new tech trend of mega-TVs that will encourage more consumers to stay at home

http://variety.com/2013/digital/news/why-hollywood-should-worry-about-samsungs-110-inch-tv-1201012532/

2013 was the best year ever for Hollywood BO. It beat 2012 though not by much.

bruceames
12-31-2013, 12:05 AM
2013 was the best year ever for Hollywood BO. It beat 2012 though not by much.

Yep. Box office revenue keeps going up every year, while home video revenue goes down. Certainly no sign yet of consumers abandoning the tradition of going out to see a movie.

iDarren
12-31-2013, 01:52 AM
I went to see the latest Hobbit 3D with friends. The picture was dark and dull. Must have been running the lamp low? We were dissappointed, but I was thinking this will look good on BD.

morriscroy
12-31-2013, 08:16 AM
Yep. Box office revenue keeps going up every year

In nominal or inflation adjusted dollars?

jkkyler
12-31-2013, 10:09 AM
Yep. Box office revenue keeps going up every year, while home video revenue goes down. Certainly no sign yet of consumers abandoning the tradition of going out to see a movie.

I must be the exception, I see maybe 2 movies a year at the box office and even then it is at the months later 'Dollar Theater' where I pay $1-$3 based on weekday/weekend/matinee. But probably watch 4-6 movies per week at home.

For me seeing at home on large HD screen (I do have a HD projector and 100+ screen but often watch on 50' plasma as well) with a top-notch surround system beats the theater any day on a number of levels

bruceames
12-31-2013, 10:41 AM
In nominal or inflation adjusted dollars?

Nominal. Not sure what it would be adjusted for inflation.

bruceames
12-31-2013, 10:44 AM
I must be the exception, I see maybe 2 movies a year at the box office and even then it is at the months later 'Dollar Theater' where I pay $1-$3 based on weekday/weekend/matinee. But probably watch 4-6 movies per week at home.

For me seeing at home on large HD screen (I do have a HD projector and 100+ screen but often watch on 50' plasma as well) with a top-notch surround system beats the theater any day on a number of levels

Yeah same here, I rarely go to the movies. But keep in mind that theaters aren't just about watching a movie but rather a way to socialize. It's more a young person's activity (dating, hanging out) or a family outing.

TowerGrove
01-02-2014, 02:14 PM
Yep. Box office revenue keeps going up every year, [B]while home video revenue goes down. [B] Certainly no sign yet of consumers abandoning the tradition of going out to see a movie.

Is home video revenue really going down? When you add in EST from the likes of UV, Digital HD etc I have been reading total home video spending for the year 2013 will be on the plus side. This isnt a "physical media world" only anymore and I wonder when the totals each week will include physical and digital sales. BTW...Happy New Year Bruce!

morriscroy
01-03-2014, 01:03 AM
Hmmm ....

Google offering a royalty-free codec VP9 alternative to HEVC for uhd/4k (via youtube).

http://variety.com/2014/digital/news/youtubes-ultra-hd-strategy-could-ignite-battle-over-4k-video-delivery-tech-1201021367/
http://news.cnet.com/8301-1023_3-57616481-93/youtube-2014-is-the-year-of-the-high-def-stream/
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/VP9

bruceames
01-03-2014, 09:18 AM
Is home video revenue really going down? When you add in EST from the likes of UV, Digital HD etc I have been reading total home video spending for the year 2013 will be on the plus side. This isnt a "physical media world" only anymore and I wonder when the totals each week will include physical and digital sales. BTW...Happy New Year Bruce!

Yes, even with EST, sell through revenue for home video is down 2.5% for the year so far (through the first 9 months per DEG). Last year it was down 2.9%.

Not a whole lot, though, as EST is really starting to grow now, up about 50% for the year. At that rate of growth it should surpass Blu-ray's contribution in a few years, since Blu-ray's revenue is starting to flatten out.

Happy New Year to you too! :hithere:

morriscroy
01-10-2014, 05:13 PM
Heh.

http://finance.yahoo.com/news/netflix-app-stream-4k-tvs-004625677.html
http://www.nbcnews.com/technology/netflix-app-stream-4k-new-tvs-immediately-2D11897506


Netflix app to stream 4K on new TVs immediately

Netflix 4K streaming will work on new Ultra HD TVs from Sony, LG, Samsung, Vizio upon purchase

LAS VEGAS (AP) -- Netflix says video streaming of its programming in ultra-high definition will work for buyers of new UHD sets from Sony, LG, Samsung, Vizio and others upon purchase.

That's because Ultra HD models from those makers will include the Netflix app and chips that decode signals in the so-called High Efficiency Video Coding standard, or HEVC.

The chip is required to decode signals that Netflix Inc. will compress by more than 100 times and squeeze through the Internet at a speed of 15.6 megabits per second. That's a download speed widely available from Internet providers in the U.S.

When the sets go on sale in the next few months, Netflix will be ready with Ultra HD programming, including some nature documentaries and the second season of its original series, "House of Cards." Ultra HD streaming will be part of the standard Netflix streaming price of $8 a month, the company said.

Netflix showed off streaming in Ultra HD, or 4K, on the sidelines of the International CES gadget show this week. The format has four times as many pixels as standard HD and vastly improves the clarity of larger screens that measure 60 or more inches diagonally. Netflix videos that are available in the sharper format are labeled with the "Ultra HD 4K" symbol.

The picture was crisp on a large Sony Bravia screen when running off hotel Internet that was boosted to 50 Mbps, and didn't seem to take any longer than standard Netflix video to load.

Neil Hunt, Netflix's chief product officer, said the company was in a "unique place" by being able to order original programming in 4K and then being able to deliver it to the small group of early adopters while the format is still in its early stages.

"People are recognizing that disc formats are yesterday's solution," Hunt said.

Because of the cost challenges of making a new disc format or upgrading TV production facilities for small audiences, most content early on "is bound to be Internet-delivered," he said.


:banghead:

Ray Von Geezer
01-11-2014, 08:22 AM
Samsung says 125 gigabyte Blu-ray disks are on the way (http://www.theaustralian.com.au/technology/special-reports/samsung-says-125-gigabyte-bluray-disks-are-on-the-way/story-fnkygzoc-1226797125793)


BLU-RAY disks with a huge 100-125 gigabyte capacity for storing ultra-high definition movies are likely to be available this year, Samsung has revealed.

At the Consumer Electronics Show this year, manufacturers including Samsung, Sony and LG have been showing off their latest ultra-high definition TVs.

These TVs have razor-sharp screens with four times the resolution of typical 1080p high definition, flat screen TVs in Australian homes. However problems remain before the so-called 4K format is viable.

One is the lack of movie content in the new ultra-high definition or 4K format; another is not having a way of conveying 4k content to users: 4K movies can require more than 100GB of storage - which is far in excess of the 25 GB capacity of a single layer Blu-ray disk and the 4.7GB available on a DVD.

Streaming content is one option, and manufacturers are forging agreements with movie houses to offer it over the internet. Successfully streaming 4K content however will depend on the quality of internet connections, available bandwidth and domestic account download limits.

Another way is for movie rental stores and 4K TV manufacturers to make content available the old fashioned way - on Blu-ray disks.

Vice-president for consumer electronics at Samsung Australia Philip Newton told The Australian today that Samsung had the technology in place to produce high-capacity four-layer Blu-ray disks for distributing 4K movies.

Mr Newton said he expected theses disks would become available "by the end of the year". He said it also would not be a problem for Samsung to make available players than can read four-layer Blu-ray disks.

Mr Newton said the optical technology needed for making and reading four-layer disks had been available "for years". He said the hold-up was over manufacturers settling on standards for storing electronic content.

He said industry was keen to avoid another Betamax-VHS style format fracas. In the late 1970s and 1980s Sony, the proponent of Betamax, and JVC, which promoted VHS, went head-to-head in a bruising format battle that ended in 1988 when Sony conceded defeat.

In the case of 4K content, issues such as the preferred codes used for compressing movies needed to be sorted out wit H265 and Google's VP9 rival contenders.

Mr Newton said the 4k format standard "is still in a state of flux" but four-layer Blu-ray disks would emerge "once everyone is on the same page".

"Except for the standard, it's good to go," Mr Newton told The Australian.

Each layer of a BluRay disk typically holds 25GB of content, so a four-layer disk should hold a 100GB movie.

In the meantime, Samsung this year will offer 5 4K-format Hollywood movies and 3 4K documentaries to customers who buy new ultra-high definition TVs to be available in Australia from April-May this year.

By year's end, Samsung will have supplied customers with 20 4K movies and 30 documentaries provided on 3.5-inch hard drives.

Other TV manufacturers are understood to be gearing to supply four-layer BlueRay disks also. In Germany, Singulus Technologies last year said it had production-tested Blu-ray disks with a 100GB capacity.

Blu-ray format standards are established by the Bu-ray Disk Association.

The fact they still don't have a disk standard is indication they've dropped the ball I reckon, but on the other hand is Netflix going to be able to satisfy quality focused early adopters?

Ray Von

Echo13
01-11-2014, 09:16 AM
Netflix and Youtube may be the only places to get 4K. And last I heard Netflix 4K will cap out at 15Mbps which is like HDDVD level 1080p.
Looks like Broadcasters wont be jumping on the 4K bandwagon for awhile, which isnt surprising since theyre barely on the 1080p wagon.
"Bored" and "desperate" were words used by some executives at TV networks, marketers and media agencies on the show floor this week to explain why TV makers like Samsung and LG are making a big push into improving the resolution of the living room screen. While the ultra high-definition screens pack four times the resolution of current HD TVs, they only look noticeably different on larger sets. And the business case for adopting the new standard is still a ways off.

"It's the very early days," said Scott Teissler, exec VP-chief technology officer and chief digital strategy officer at Turner Broadcasting System. "The video quality is impressive but the business economics and technical delivery of 4K files and signals need to be solved before this can be scaled across the industry."
http://adage.com/article/consumer-electronics-show/tv-execs-tempering-excitement-4k/291013/

GizmoDVD
01-11-2014, 11:20 PM
Apparently all Blu-rays exceed 15MBPs. Also, HD DVD died 6 years ago. Get over it.

Echo13
01-12-2014, 12:58 AM
Apparently all Blu-rays exceed 15MBPs. Also, HD DVD died 6 years ago. Get over it.Apparently Im not the one that needs to get over it. What a random comment to make lol.

GizmoDVD
01-12-2014, 11:01 AM
Apparently Im not the one that needs to get over it. What a random comment to make lol.

I'm not the one bringing up "cap out at 15Mbps which is like HDDVD level 1080p." like you are. That's baiting at it's worst bt you knew that.

It's sad you still can't get over this 6 years later. Plenty of Blu-rays are under 15Mbps, probably even more now that they have been bargain bin fodder sticking 4 movies on a single disc.

But it's cool, cause it's Blu-ray.

morriscroy
01-12-2014, 11:11 AM
I'm not the one bringing up "cap out at 15Mbps which is like HDDVD level 1080p." like you are. That's baiting at it's worst bt you knew that.

It's sad you still can't get over this 6 years later. Plenty of Blu-rays are under 15Mbps, probably even more now that they have been bargain bin fodder sticking 4 movies on a single disc.

Or when they cram 5 or 6 episodes (of 40-45 minutes length each) onto one bluray disc at 40 to 45 gigabytes capacity (or less).

Warner is famous for doing this in their tv on bluray releases.

morriscroy
01-12-2014, 11:12 AM
Especially considering that Warner is also the "king" of tv on bluray. :banghead: :haha:

Echo13
01-12-2014, 12:37 PM
I'm not the one bringing up "cap out at 15Mbps which is like HDDVD level 1080p." like you are. That's baiting at it's worst bt you knew that.

It's sad you still can't get over this 6 years later. Plenty of Blu-rays are under 15Mbps, probably even more now that they have been bargain bin fodder sticking 4 movies on a single disc.

But it's cool, cause it's Blu-ray.The format war is over so who the heck am I baiting? This isnt about BD vs HDDVD. My only point is that a 4K format shouldnt have the same bit rate as blu ray, let alone a format technically worse than blu ray.

Since you brought it up why are you complaining anyways. HDDVD fans used to champion low bitrate saying its because VC-1 was so efficient and didnt need anymore. The I am Legend release is a perfect example.

GizmoDVD
01-12-2014, 01:12 PM
The format war is over so who the heck am I baiting? This isnt about BD vs HDDVD. My only point is that a 4K format shouldnt have the same bit rate as blu ray, let alone a format technically worse than blu ray.

Since you brought it up why are you complaining anyways. HDDVD fans used to champion low bitrate saying its because VC-1 was so efficient and didnt need anymore. The I am Legend release is a perfect example.

You specifically said Hd DVD, not blu-ray.

You. Bait.

Echo13
01-12-2014, 06:01 PM
You specifically said Hd DVD, not blu-ray.

You. Bait.Apparently. Bait for suckers and I caught one.

Note to self, HDDVD is not allowed to be mentioned in this forum.

Lee Stewart
01-12-2014, 07:28 PM
Apparently. Bait for suckers and I caught one.

Note to self, HDDVD is not allowed to be mentioned in this forum.

Oh, it's allowed . . . but at least get your facts right. HDDVD had a data rate of 36 Mbps.

With the use of H.265 or V9, data rates don't have to be huge because they are so efficient.

HD Goofnut
01-13-2014, 06:07 AM
I turn away for a few days and the BS just starts running rampant.

morriscroy
01-13-2014, 08:03 AM
I turn away for a few days and the BS just starts running rampant.

The nature of lightly moderated (or unmoderated) message boards. :p

bruceames
01-13-2014, 09:19 AM
I don't believe in heavy-handed moderation. Besides, I don't see anything here...

Obviously bit rates need to be much higher for 4k, but it's a myth that there is a linear correlation between bit rate and PQ. After a certain point you can't improve the PQ no matter how many more bits you throw at it.

morriscroy
01-13-2014, 05:42 PM
Heh.

Wonder if this will make a huge difference for 4K/UHD. :rolleyes:

(Links might not be safe for work).

http://www.nbcnews.com/technology/close-very-personal-4k-porn-becoming-reality-2D11915330
http://blogs.wsj.com/digits/2014/01/11/naughty-america-in-ultra-high-definition/
http://jezebel.com/youre-getting-super-high-def-porn-whether-you-like-it-1500443692


Naughty America, a maker of pornographic films, is spending hundreds of thousands of dollars to shoot all of its adult entertainment material in ultra-high-definition.

...

For littler guys like Naughty America, a privately-held company based in San Diego, the intent is there too. But jumping into 4K is no minor undertaking.

In an interview on the sidelines of CES, Andreas Hronopoulos, the company’s 31-year-old chief executive, said Naughty America’s investment in creating 4K content was its biggest ever in technology — and definitely big enough to sink the company, should the format fail to take off.

Unlike with previous technologies, Mr. Hronopoulos says the barriers to entry with 4K are high for his company and many of its competitors.

Shooting and storing new content in UHD is a daunting task for a smaller outfit; a 30-minute video can take up one terabyte of memory, which needs to be backed up and accessible on servers, he said. That doesn’t come cheap.

Nor do new, fancy editing machines tailored for 4K content, like Apple Inc.'s new Mac Pro, which is necessary to ensure the color correction necessary to make the footage “pop,” as Mr. Hronopoulos puts it.

In spite of the costs, Mr. Hronopoulos is convinced that the investment will be worth it, because 4K hits at one of the most important selling points for his clientele: giving viewers the ability to feel like they’re really there.

“Yes, you need a lot of computing power,” he says. But given the demands of his customers, he added, “the closer we can come to making it feel like you’re there, the more successful we are.”

For access to the 4K content, Mr. Hronopoulos plans to charge $10 a month on top of the regular $24.95 monthly subscription for regular high definition. (Those who don’t want to upgrade can continue to access new content in regular high-def.)

Comparing his customers to sports fans and video gamers who seek out the ultra-realistic fantasy worlds created by video game companies, he added: “Our customers want to get as close to reality as they can get, without reality getting in the way.”

HD Goofnut
01-14-2014, 09:17 AM
I don't believe in heavy-handed moderation. Besides, I don't see anything here...

Obviously bit rates need to be much higher for 4k, but it's a myth that there is a linear correlation between bit rate and PQ. After a certain point you can't improve the PQ no matter how many more bits you throw at it.

:yippee: Many Japanese discs are like this. They have a sky-high bitrate, but a mediocre transfer due to a older/poor master.

Take Throne of Blood for example: http://caps-a-holic.com/hd_vergleiche/multi_comparison.php?&disc1=1140&disc2=3551&hd_multiID=878&action=&x=&y=&art=&image=0&cap1=11000&cap2=32847&lossless=1#auswahl

morriscroy
01-14-2014, 09:27 AM
They have a sky-high bitrate, but a mediocre transfer due to a older/poor master.

(Tangentially).

The Firefly blurays seem to be like this, albeit in a different way.

Huge m2ts files from a lackluster transfer.

morriscroy
01-14-2014, 10:19 AM
It seems like Warner figured out early on that they didn't require excessively high bitrates, file sizes, etc ... for their tv on bluray releases.

(Judging by the PQ reviews of many Warner tv on bluray titles on other web sites).

bruceames
01-14-2014, 11:47 AM
:yippee: Many Japanese discs are like this. They have a sky-high bitrate, but a mediocre transfer due to a older/poor master.

Take Throne of Blood for example: http://caps-a-holic.com/hd_vergleiche/multi_comparison.php?&disc1=1140&disc2=3551&hd_multiID=878&action=&x=&y=&art=&image=0&cap1=11000&cap2=32847&lossless=1#auswahl

Very true. It's rare the case when the PQ is bad because of low bit rate. It's almost always due to the poor master to start with.

For properly encoded Blu-rays, anything over an average of 20 MB/s is overkill, IMO. I don't know what codec Netflix is using, but if it's more advanced than AVC, then perhaps 15 MB/s might not look so bad. I'd be curious to check it out and see whether it looks better than the Blu-ray counterpart.

Lee Stewart
01-14-2014, 11:54 AM
Very true. It's rare the case when the PQ is bad because of low bit rate. It's almost always due to the poor master to start with.

For properly encoded Blu-rays, anything over an average of 20 MB/s is overkill, IMO. I don't know what codec Netflix is using, but if it's more advanced than AVC, then perhaps 15 MB/s might not look so bad. I'd be curious to check it out and see whether it looks better than the Blu-ray counterpart.

There are now 2 advanced codecs. H.265 which is a licensed product and the new V9 which does not require paying a license fee. Because both are so new there have been no real reviews or comparisions. Both were used at CES to show 4K content on UHDTVs.

Ray Von Geezer
01-14-2014, 04:13 PM
There are now 2 advanced codecs. H.265 which is a licensed product and the new V9 which does not require paying a license fee. Because both are so new there have been no real reviews or comparisions. Both were used at CES to show 4K content on UHDTVs.VP9? :)

Extremetech ran an early build test of H.265 and got +40% reductions over H.264, and with very little loss of image quality. That wasn't with 4K content though.

Ray Von

Lee Stewart
01-14-2014, 04:55 PM
VP9? :)

Extremetech ran an early build test of H.265 and got +40% reductions over H.264, and with very little loss of image quality. That wasn't with 4K content though.

Ray VonHi Ray :hithere:

My bad :bowdown: I meant to type VP9

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/VP9

Lee Stewart
01-14-2014, 04:57 PM
H.265 vs VP9: 4K video codecs explained

http://www.trustedreviews.com/opinions/h-265-vs-vp9-4k-video-codes-explained

dsskid
01-23-2014, 01:34 PM
I've seen the Sony 4K being fed a Sony 4K proprietary feed up close, and I was not impressed. I was viewing a 55" display, and had to get as close as 2 feet to see any perceived benefit over 1080P.

I haven't seen a 65" 4K display yet, but I would have to think that you'd have to be somewhere around 4 ft from it. I don't know many people whose room schemes allow them to sit within 4 ft of a display.

My thought is that 4K would be better served with a 110" projection screen in a dedicated HT.

That being said, How much of the market falls within those parameters? That will give you an indication of 4K's potential success.

Much like 3D, it feels like just another gimmick being pushed by the CE industry, in their effort to sell more TVs.

Echo13
01-23-2014, 07:01 PM
I've seen the Sony 4K being fed a Sony 4K proprietary feed up close, and I was not impressed. I was viewing a 55" display, and had to get as close as 2 feet to see any perceived benefit over 1080P.

I haven't seen a 65" 4K display yet, but I would have to think that you'd have to be somewhere around 4 ft from it. I don't know many people whose room schemes allow them to sit within 4 ft of a display.

My thought is that 4K would be better served with a 110" projection screen in a dedicated HT.

That being said, How much of the market falls within those parameters? That will give you an indication of 4K's potential success.

Much like 3D, it feels like just another gimmick being pushed by the CE industry, in their effort to sell more TVs.I think super short throw laser projectors will be the next big revolution in the HT industry. Industry is taking their sweet time in getting the prices down though ($8k for 1080p, $20k for that new 4K Sony)

bob4jh
05-21-2014, 01:55 AM
In my humble opinion, the 1080p has been successful and so will the 4k be.

HiDefRev
05-21-2014, 01:18 PM
In my humble opinion, the 1080p has been successful and so will the 4k be.

Eventually, yes. . :2cents

Lee Stewart
05-21-2014, 01:30 PM
In my humble opinion, the 1080p has been successful and so will the 4k be.

Why?

The difference betweeen SDTV and HDTV is much greater than the difference between HDTV and 4KTV. The only way you can truly appreciate 4KTV is with a big screen - 55" and larger and you have to sit very close to your display. About half the recommended distance for HDTV.

You believe Joe Q. Public is going to do that?

4KTV will be nothing more than a niche product. Like 3DTV is today.

There is plenty of life left in HDTV. All they have to do is improve the Color Gamut (10 or 12bit) and go to High Dynamic Range. Adding those two features to HDTV will blow 4KTV away.

Malanthius
05-21-2014, 06:59 PM
4K will look great! But like you said Lee. It will be niche. If Bluray couldn't get the masses on board, 4k can forget it.

Why?

The difference betweeen SDTV and HDTV is much greater than the difference between HDTV and 4KTV. The only way you can truly appreciate 4KTV is with a big screen - 55" and larger and you have to sit very close to your display. About half the recommended distance for HDTV.

You believe Joe Q. Public is going to do that?

4KTV will be nothing more than a niche product. Like 3DTV is today.

There is plenty of life left in HDTV. All they have to do is improve the Color Gamut (10 or 12bit) and go to High Dynamic Range. Adding those two features to HDTV will blow 4KTV away.

morriscroy
05-21-2014, 07:03 PM
What would be amusing is if something more advanced leapfrogs over 4k, 8k, etc ... and becomes heavily mainstream.

For example, something like holodeck porno movies. :rolleyes:

bruceames
05-21-2014, 08:07 PM
HDTV was niche when it came out, and in 5-6 years 4k will be the norm, which means Joe Public will be buying it by default like they do HDTVs now.

The fact that prices are coming down so quickly and that Sony has abandoned OLED R&D in favor of 4K is a strong endorsement of its future.

Lee Stewart
05-21-2014, 09:21 PM
HDTV was niche when it came out, and in 5-6 years 4k will be the norm, which means Joe Public will be buying it by default like they do HDTVs now.

The fact that prices are coming down so quickly and that Sony has abandoned OLED R&D in favor of 4K is a strong endorsement of its future.

Except most of the industry executives don't see 4KTV replacing HDTV. They just don't see a big enough difference.

Do you really believe that ALL TV's sold in the near future will be 4KTVs? That is why HDTV is where it is today. The industry standardized on HDTV. The broadcast stations were in it from the very beginning. Read any industry comments lately? They have ZERO incentive to move to 4KTV.

And I bring up the issue of proprietatory 4K software. Something that didn't happen with HDTV. You think THAT is going to help 4KTV to grow? I sure don't.

BTW . . . the reason why Sony abandoned OLED is due to the manufacturing issues. They want something that they can sell today - with a yield rate of greater than 95%. The last number I saw for large screen OLED (55") was 30%. It will take YEARS for OLED to drop down to mass market prices . . . something that Sony can't afford to wait for. Not in the poor shape their TV division is in.

And the problem with 4KTV Bruce is that those in the know expect it to last MAYBE 4 to 7 years. By then 8KTV will be making it's appearance. That just isn't enough time for 4KTV to get a real grip on the market.

As as Mal said . . . almost 8 years after Bluray's into and it has what . . . 30% of the market?

My prediction for 4KTV . . . . it will have 15% of the market by the time 8KTV become available.

bruceames
05-22-2014, 07:38 AM
Except most of the industry executives don't see 4KTV replacing HDTV. They just don't see a big enough difference.

Do you really believe that ALL TV's sold in the near future will be 4KTVs? That is why HDTV is where it is today. The industry standardized on HDTV. The broadcast stations were in it from the very beginning. Read any industry comments lately? They have ZERO incentive to move to 4KTV.

And I bring up the issue of proprietatory 4K software. Something that didn't happen with HDTV. You think THAT is going to help 4KTV to grow? I sure don't.

BTW . . . the reason why Sony abandoned OLED is due to the manufacturing issues. They want something that they can sell today - with a yield rate of greater than 95%. The last number I saw for large screen OLED (55") was 30%. It will take YEARS for OLED to drop down to mass market prices . . . something that Sony can't afford to wait for. Not in the poor shape their TV division is in.

And the problem with 4KTV Bruce is that those in the know expect it to last MAYBE 4 to 7 years. By then 8KTV will be making it's appearance. That just isn't enough time for 4KTV to get a real grip on the market.

As as Mal said . . . almost 8 years after Bluray's into and it has what . . . 30% of the market?

My prediction for 4KTV . . . . it will have 15% of the market by the time 8KTV become available.

Hi Lee, 8k may be on the way, but 4k prices are dropping like a rock. That's always a good sign.

I think you know that you can enjoy passive 3D in full 1080p on a 4k set? ;) I know I will be after I buy me Sony XBR-65X900A today. :banana: :cool:

Mal is right. Blu-ray hasn't taken off like HDTV did. So we'll see who's right in 5-6 years when the first 8k sets come on the market. It'll certainly be more than 50% 4k by then. :2cents

Lee Stewart
05-22-2014, 08:09 AM
Hi Lee, 8k may be on the way, but 4k prices are dropping like a rock. That's always a good sign.

I think you know that you can enjoy passive 3D in full 1080p on a 4k set? ;) I know I will be after I buy me Sony XBR-65X900A today. :banana: :cool:

Mal is right. Blu-ray hasn't taken off like HDTV did. So we'll see who's right in 5-6 years when the first 8k sets come on the market. It'll certainly be more than 50% 4k by then. :2cents

What % of all TV sales are 50" or greater?

Will Joe Public re-arrange his living room so that his couch is 4-5' away from his display (today the average is still 9' . . . too far away from a 55" display to appreciate 4K resolution)?

What software is in 3D now besides Bluray?

Is Joe Public REALLY interested in higher resolution? (BD has proved he isn't so far BTW)

When will CBS, NBC, ABC and Fox begin 4K transmissions?

Some questions for you Bruce . . . :hithere:

bruceames
05-22-2014, 08:27 AM
What % of all TV sales are 50" or greater?

Will Joe Public re-arrange his living room so that his couch is 4-5' away from his display (today the average is still 9' . . . too far away from a 55" display to appreciate 4K resolution)?

What software is in 3D now besides Bluray?

Is Joe Public REALLY interested in higher resolution? (BD has proved he isn't so far BTW)

When will CBS, NBC, ABC and Fox begin 4K transmissions?

Some questions for you Bruce . . . :hithere:

I don't know what percentage sold are over 50", but I do know that average TV sizes are getting bigger every year.


Who cares about the broadcast stations, they're becoming dinosaurs. They're not interested in keeping up with the times because they're too worried about paying their bills. Anyway 4k will be a streaming/download format. Besides, there's upscaling and full 1080p passive 3D. :banana: Upscaling is what helps make DVD stay so successful today. ;)

I have a question for you. Why do you think 4k is just a stepping stone for this glorious 8k, when you think consumers won't be interested in higher resolution? Sounds a little contradictory to me. Why will they be interested in 8k but not 4k?

ImRizzo
05-22-2014, 08:46 AM
I don't know what percentage sold are over 50", but I do know that average TV sizes are getting bigger every year.


Who cares about the broadcast stations, they're becoming dinosaurs. They're not interested in keeping up with the times because they're too worried about paying their bills. Anyway 4k will be a streaming/download format. Besides, there's upscaling and full 1080p passive 3D. :banana: Upscaling is what helps make DVD stay so successful today. ;)

I have a question for you. Why do you think 4k is just a stepping stone for this glorious 8k, when you think consumers won't be interested in higher resolution? Sounds a little contradictory to me. Why will they be interested in 8k but not 4k?

I'm anxiously looking forward to this years shootout, it should be interesting and hopefully enlightening and informative, without the sales hype.

bruceames
05-22-2014, 09:41 AM
I'm anxiously looking forward to this years shootout, it should be interesting and hopefully enlightening and informative, without the sales hype.


Well it looks like plasmas are on the way out, with Panasonic now out of the picture. I've been a huge Panny plasma fan for many years, and I was going to buy the 65" VT60 last fall, but changed my mind because I wanted to wait for a good 4k model. Now you can't even buy the VT60 new for less than an arm and a half a leg, at least a far as I know.

Hopefully I'll like my new Sony XBR. The upscaling is supposed to be very good, black levels respectable, and it has awesome 3D. Besides, this TV is for my living room where there is usually light, so I could never take advantage of the black levels fully anyway.

ImRizzo
05-22-2014, 10:05 AM
Sony Store now showing for $3799.
http://store.sony.com/65-class-64.5-diag-xbr-4k-ultra-hd-tv-zid27-XBR65X900A/cat-27-catid-All-XBR-Series-TVs

Nice set some find the speakers obtrusive ?? I feel it lends to the contemporary
statement. besides it finally allows you to watch 'simple TV' without surround system up & running. Their sound got very good ratings/reviews.

bruceames
05-22-2014, 10:28 AM
Sony Store now showing for $3799.
http://store.sony.com/65-class-64.5-diag-xbr-4k-ultra-hd-tv-zid27-XBR65X900A/cat-27-catid-All-XBR-Series-TVs

Nice set some find the speakers obtrusive ?? I feel it lends to the contemporary
statement. besides it finally allows you to watch 'simple TV' without surround system up & running. Their sound got very good ratings/reviews.

Best Buy down the street has it in stock for $3499, so I'm going to pick it up after work. :banana: I would have preferred to get a plasma, but I guess it's time to move on. :what:

I'm kinda mixed about the side speakers, as it makes it a little wider than I want it to be. But my sound system in the LR is FAR from ideal (major speaker placement issues and an outdated system), so I'm sure my wife and kid will like it as the Xb1 and cable box are not connected to my sound system and the TV will sound much better.

Lee Stewart
05-22-2014, 01:18 PM
I don't know what percentage sold are over 50", but I do know that average TV sizes are getting bigger every year.

OK - easier question for you . . . what's the price of a 60" LCD HDTV versus the price of a 55" LCD 4KTV?

Who cares about the broadcast stations, they're becoming dinosaurs. They're not interested in keeping up with the times because they're too worried about paying their bills. Anyway 4k will be a streaming/download format. Besides, there's upscaling and full 1080p passive 3D. :banana: Upscaling is what helps make DVD stay so successful today. ;)


You are out of touch Bruce. 2013 was a record year for advertising spent on the major networks.

3DTV has one foot in the grave. It is no longer a consideration of the buying public. Only about 20% of all TVs sold in 2013 had a 3D feature.

Upscaling did work for DVD . . . as a sub for HD content which has been available in a miriad of choices for some time. There is very little 4K content and again you have that issue of proprietary content providers.

I have a question for you. Why do you think 4k is just a stepping stone for this glorious 8k, when you think consumers won't be interested in higher resolution? Sounds a little contradictory to me. Why will they be interested in 8k but not 4k?

When you know there is something on the horizon in the not too distant future how willing are you to commit to the latest and greatest? There is nothing nor will there be anything beyond 8KTV. Not for consumers at least.

4KTV will be nothing more than a footnote in the history of television. Like EDTV, only a bit more popular.

morriscroy
05-22-2014, 04:02 PM
As tempting 4K (or better) screens might be, at the present time I'm taking a wait and see approach.

If I were to eventually get a 4K (or better) screen, most likely it would also involve getting a new computer and graphics card which can also handle 4K (or better) resolution video without dropping frames.

ImRizzo
05-22-2014, 05:41 PM
I'm still holding out for Full OLED panels.

I'm still not completely sold on 4K and as long as my panels are still peak performers I'm in no rush to shop. I'm willing to wait till the dust settles. In read Various new model owner's threads on other forum are not 100% positive thread is about
AVS's official-sony-x9-xbr-55x900a-xbr-65x900a-owners-thread

my personal apprehension is the Edge lighting's ability to project across a 65" panel for even lighting

bruceames
05-23-2014, 09:18 AM
OK - easier question for you . . . what's the price of a 60" LCD HDTV versus the price of a 55" LCD 4KTV?

Quite a bit I suppose, but back at you: how fast are 4k prices dropping compared to 1080p? ;)



You are out of touch Bruce. 2013 was a record year for advertising spent on the major networks.

Hmm...so record low ratings while having record high ad revenue? Does not compute. :error


3DTV has one foot in the grave. It is no longer a consideration of the buying public. Only about 20% of all TVs sold in 2013 had a 3D feature.

So you're no longer a proponent of 3D? When did you jump off that bandwagon?

I realize it's doing poorly, but like I said 4k will bring out the best of active (1080p) and passive (brighter picture and no crosstalk) 3D. I'm not very optimistic that it will take that foot out of the grave though (you still have to use glasses, which is a sticking point for many), but 4k will clearly offer a far better picture nonetheless.


Upscaling did work for DVD . . . as a sub for HD content which has been available in a miriad of choices for some time. There is very little 4K content and again you have that issue of proprietary content providers.

How long were HDTVs out before HD became widely available? It was just a couple of channels on Directv and elsewhere. 4k content is going to be pretty much restricted to internet sources, streaming and downloading. The studios are not interested in a 4k physical format and I don't blame them. But just the upscaling and 3D capabilities of 4kTVs make it worth the investment. The actual content is a bonus.


When you know there is something on the horizon in the not too distant future how willing are you to commit to the latest and greatest? There is nothing nor will there be anything beyond 8KTV. Not for consumers at least.

So it's common knowledge for Joe Public that 8k is in the not to distant future? Everybody is going to just "wait for 8k"?

The only real "commitment" to 4k is if you buy 4k movies. The 4kTV is going to work no matter what and will upscale Blu-ray movies just fine, and when 8k comes along that person can decide to upgrade or not. You know how the waiting game works Lee, go ahead and wait for 8k, but I've already waited 4 years to buy a TV and life is short and I don't want to "upgrade" to another 1080p set. :2cents


4KTV will be nothing more than a footnote in the history of television. Like EDTV, only a bit more popular.

I guess we'll see.

bruceames
05-23-2014, 09:23 AM
I'm still holding out for Full OLED panels.

I'm still not completely sold on 4K and as long as my panels are still peak performers I'm in no rush to shop. I'm willing to wait till the dust settles. In read Various new model owner's threads on other forum are not 100% positive thread is about
AVS's official-sony-x9-xbr-55x900a-xbr-65x900a-owners-thread

my personal apprehension is the Edge lighting's ability to project across a 65" panel for even lighting

The downside is clearly the wide viewing angle, but who watches movies at wide viewing angles?

ImRizzo
05-23-2014, 10:14 AM
The downside is clearly the wide viewing angle, but who watches movies at wide viewing angles?

My feelings exactly, I do most of my viewing 1-3 people so everyone is within good viewing angle and if not then "Shut fuk up and sit down" kinda attitude helps (it's built in with me, being from Brooklyn,NY) LOL

Lee Stewart
05-23-2014, 11:33 AM
Quite a bit I suppose, but back at you: how fast are 4k prices dropping compared to 1080p? ;)

LOL - dropping prices can mean no one is interested in buying them. It also means they were set artifically high to begin with to take advantage of latest and greats buyers got to have it now attitude - unfortunately - not enough of them.

Hmm...so record low ratings while having record high ad revenue? Does not compute. :error


Your source for this ratings info is?

So you're no longer a proponent of 3D? When did you jump off that bandwagon?

My own personal feelings about 3D are not involved in my awareness of how much it has failed as a TV format.

I realize it's doing poorly, but like I said 4k will bring out the best of active (1080p) and passive (brighter picture and no crosstalk) 3D. I'm not very optimistic that it will take that foot out of the grave though (you still have to use glasses, which is a sticking point for many), but 4k will clearly offer a far better picture nonetheless.

Won't make a difference. The glasses are the big putoff for 3D and real good no glasses 3D is still years away from being perfected. LOL - that is something 8K will definitely solve.

How long were HDTVs out before HD became widely available? It was just a couple of channels on Directv and elsewhere. 4k content is going to be pretty much restricted to internet sources, streaming and downloading. The studios are not interested in a 4k physical format and I don't blame them. But just the upscaling and 3D capabilities of 4kTVs make it worth the investment. The actual content is a bonus.

HDTVs came out only a few months before HD broadcasts began in some major cities. The networks were broadcasting HD before DirecTV BTW.

Do people really buy a next generation format expensive TV so they can use it to upscale an old gen format? And again - 3D is dying. You may think that 4K content is a bonus for a 4KTV. IMO - very few will agree with you. Remember this motto . . . . "content is king." So where is the 4K content?

So it's common knowledge for Joe Public that 8k is in the not to distant future? Everybody is going to just "wait for 8k"?

Yes - Joe is aware of 8K. The media played it up from the London games where millions saw it. Did you forget about the Bell Curve Bruce - the Early Adopters are the life blood for new format. They keep it alive long enough for Joe to get into it and the EAs aren't buying 4KTVs in droves.

The only real "commitment" to 4k is if you buy 4k movies. The 4kTV is going to work no matter what and will upscale Blu-ray movies just fine, and when 8k comes along that person can decide to upgrade or not. You know how the waiting game works Lee, go ahead and wait for 8k, but I've already waited 4 years to buy a TV and life is short and I don't want to "upgrade" to another 1080p set. :2cents

That's the difference between I guess. Your opinion on the 4K issue is based on your personal desire. Mine on the other hand is based on what the industry is saying and doing.

TV sales are way down. 3DTV failed to ignite the markt. Now it's 4KTV's turn. And again - no content - no success. Content is just not coming fast enough into the market.

I guess we'll see.

Yep. But again it's not that hard to predict . . . especially with the failure of Bluray. At this time 4KTV is just more resolution - not enough to make it wantable.

ImRizzo
05-23-2014, 03:05 PM
But something that must also be taken into the mix PLASMA is dead and Newbie buyers will be led by the nose to just what they need to be "up to speed" not everyone will delve into the pro's & con's unfortunately.
According to Robert at ValueElectronic's, he is quite impressed by the progress in just 1 yr. into a new technology great picture blks and outstanding colors.

ImRizzo
05-23-2014, 03:11 PM
my apprehensions is still off-axis and "CURVED" screens .......WHY ? WTF !
Who ever asked the manufacturers to curve the screen. I partake in product surveys and always inc my personal wants/needs for consideration. But I just can't envision someone suggesting 'here's a great idea can you bend the picture' ?

Lee Stewart
05-23-2014, 04:58 PM
my apprehensions is still off-axis and "CURVED" screens .......WHY ? WTF !
Who ever asked the manufacturers to curve the screen. I partake in product surveys and always inc my personal wants/needs for consideration. But I just can't envision someone suggesting 'here's a great idea can you bend the picture' ?

Something new . . . what a TV manufacturer thinks will motivate well to do buyers to step up.

It comes from the original Cinerama movie format - deeply curved screen. It improves edge brightness and uniform brightness thoughout the image. Not sure either would apply to a 55 or 65 inch display.

Lee Stewart
05-23-2014, 05:00 PM
But something that must also be taken into the mix PLASMA is dead and Newbie buyers will be led by the nose to just what they need to be "up to speed" not everyone will delve into the pro's & con's unfortunately.
According to Robert at ValueElectronic's, he is quite impressed by the progress in just 1 yr. into a new technology great picture blks and outstanding colors.

Just imagine if he wasn't impressed . . . Then what would he crow about?

ImRizzo
05-23-2014, 05:39 PM
Just imagine if he wasn't impressed . . . Then what would he crow about?

Cynical, no ?

bruceames
05-23-2014, 11:36 PM
LOL - dropping prices can mean no one is interested in buying them. It also means they were set artifically high to begin with to take advantage of latest and greats buyers got to have it now attitude - unfortunately - not enough of them.

HDTV prices were dropping like a rock as well. We have new players like Panasonic coming into the market and Sony dropping OLED to focus on 4k. Doesn't sound like dropping prices are a result of a failed product.



Your source for this ratings info is?

You're out of touch if you think broadcast TV is not a dying market.



My own personal feelings about 3D are not involved in my awareness of how much it has failed as a TV format.

What are your personal feelings? A few years ago they totally colored your perspective on 3D. Now they don't?



Won't make a difference. The glasses are the big putoff for 3D and real good no glasses 3D is still years away from being perfected. LOL - that is something 8K will definitely solve.

You don't know what 8K will solve. It's still years away from coming to the market, and when it does, it will be very expensive.


HDTVs came out only a few months before HD broadcasts began in some major cities. The networks were broadcasting HD before DirecTV BTW.

OK, but you sidestepped my point.


Do people really buy a next generation format expensive TV so they can use it to upscale an old gen format? And again - 3D is dying. You may think that 4K content is a bonus for a 4KTV. IMO - very few will agree with you. Remember this motto . . . . "content is king." So where is the 4K content?

Funny you dump on 4k when it makes 3D look absolutely unbelievable, as after all, you were one of 3D's biggest fans. The 3D on my set looks jaw-dropping. If 3D had looked this good 4 years ago it definitely would have taken off.



Yes - Joe is aware of 8K. The media played it up from the London games where millions saw it. Did you forget about the Bell Curve Bruce - the Early Adopters are the life blood for new format. They keep it alive long enough for Joe to get into it and the EAs aren't buying 4KTVs in droves.

No Joe is not aware and if he was, he wouldn't give a crap because he's not going to let a tech that would even be on the market for 5 years affect his buying decisions.



That's the difference between I guess. Your opinion on the 4K issue is based on your personal desire. Mine on the other hand is based on what the industry is saying and doing.

Don't flatter yourself. Everyone's personal desire and situation biases their perspective on the industry. You are not an exception.


TV sales are way down. 3DTV failed to ignite the markt. Now it's 4KTV's turn. And again - no content - no success. Content is just not coming fast enough into the market.

4k won't reignite sales like HDTV did, but it won't be a failure either. Technology moves forward, 4k has 4 times the resolution as 1080p and slowly but surely they will be replacing 1080p sets on the market. Content will come, and as always, will follow after display adoption. And as I said, there wasn't much 720p content on the market at this point in time in HDTV's history either.



Yep. But again it's not that hard to predict . . . especially with the failure of Bluray. At this time 4KTV is just more resolution - not enough to make it wantable.

Blu-ray hasn't failed. Where did you read that? 3D Blu-ray may be failing, but not Blu-ray 2D. Maybe the wish is further than the thought in this case? ;)

bruceames
05-23-2014, 11:46 PM
But something that must also be taken into the mix PLASMA is dead and Newbie buyers will be led by the nose to just what they need to be "up to speed" not everyone will delve into the pro's & con's unfortunately.
According to Robert at ValueElectronic's, he is quite impressed by the progress in just 1 yr. into a new technology great picture blks and outstanding colors.

Sony's latest 4K sets have made a lot of progress and it will only get better. They are the leader in 4ktv and now it shows.

Good point though about plasma fans needing somewhere to go. I think a lot of them will adapt 4K when the time comes. If they still made plasmas I just might have bought the VT60 instead, so there you go.

But I'm so glad I got this set. The picture is absolutely gorgeous, and I still haven't even calibrated it yet.

morriscroy
05-24-2014, 07:46 AM
A recent article on these issues.

http://www.cnet.com/news/why-are-sony-and-samsung-keeping-4k-content-to-themselves/

bruceames
05-24-2014, 08:15 AM
A recent article on these issues.

http://www.cnet.com/news/why-are-sony-and-samsung-keeping-4k-content-to-themselves/

I guess they're using it the same way they used 3D exclusives like Avatar. But we've heard these same complaints 15 years ago when HDTVs were in their early years. It's the chicken and egg theory and no one is going to invest a lot in content if there are no displays to watch it on.

In any case UV is developing a 4k format and that could be the standard in the future. I'm not optimistic about 4k Blu-ray but I've love to see it.

bruceames
05-24-2014, 08:27 AM
Best Buy just lowered the price of the XBR65X900A another $200 to $3299, so I'll stop by there today to get my $200 + tax retroactive price adjustment. :cool:

morriscroy
05-24-2014, 08:49 AM
I guess they're using it the same way they used 3D exclusives like Avatar. But we've heard these same complaints 15 years ago when HDTVs were in their early years. It's the chicken and egg theory and no one is going to invest a lot in content if there are no displays to watch it on.

One possible way around the tv/movie content "chicken or the egg" problem, is if the next revision of the xbox one or ps4 can play in 4K native resolutions on existing Sony and Samsung 4k screens.

In such a scenario, the video gamers may be buying 4k screens as upgrades.

Lee Stewart
05-24-2014, 08:50 AM
I guess they're using it the same way they used 3D exclusives like Avatar. But we've heard these same complaints 15 years ago when HDTVs were in their early years. It's the chicken and egg theory and no one is going to invest a lot in content if there are no displays to watch it on.

You are twisting what the author wrote Bruce. Better read the article again. ALL HD content worked on ALL HDTVs. That isn't the case with 4K content.

In any case UV is developing a 4k format and that could be the standard in the future. I'm not optimistic about 4k Blu-ray but I've love to see it.

Under what standards?

bruceames
05-24-2014, 05:50 PM
You are twisting what the author wrote Bruce. Better read the article again. ALL HD content worked on ALL HDTVs. That isn't the case with 4K content.

I understood that part. It's a shame they are going proprietary for now, but it's a different world than it was 15 years ago. At least you have the option to purchase a movie or rent it, which wasn't the case back then. You just had a few HD channels that you had to watch live. But Sony has a movie studio under their belt and they're not about to share it with Samsung or Panasonic. The other studios are just sitting back and waiting to see how it unfolds. I don't think they're in any hurry to crank out 4k movies, and the only strong motivation I can think of would be to use as a Trojan Horse for Digital HD. But right now there's not much of a market for them to be concerned about.



Under what standards?

I guess we'll know when/if they introduce it. Hopefully it won't be as compromised as HD UV is now, relatively speaking.

bruceames
05-24-2014, 05:54 PM
One possible way around the tv/movie content "chicken or the egg" problem, is if the next revision of the xbox one or ps4 can play in 4K native resolutions on existing Sony and Samsung 4k screens.

In such a scenario, the video gamers may be buying 4k screens as upgrades.

You mean streaming 4K?

morriscroy
05-24-2014, 05:58 PM
You mean streaming 4K?

No.

More like playing Halo, Assassin's Creed, Grand Theft Auto, etc ... in native 4k resolution.

bruceames
05-24-2014, 06:26 PM
No.

More like playing Halo, Assassin's Creed, Grand Theft Auto, etc ... in native 4k resolution.

No, that's not gonna happen ever. The consoles barely have enough processing power for 1080p60. In fact most games on the the XB1 are in lower resolution because otherwise it compromises gaming performance too much.

bruceames
05-25-2014, 08:14 AM
I haven't ever shopped for 3D movies until now, and I can clearly see evidence of the format losing popularity. Costco didn't have a single 3D title available, even though they have a whole slew of Disney movies on an endcap and more in the children's movie area. Target only had 2 movies: Gravity and Man of Steel (I picked up Gravity).

I saw plenty at Best Buy though and got a few titles from my price adjustment money. But even so I thought I remember that the 3D section was bigger there before.

ImRizzo
05-25-2014, 09:10 AM
I haven't ever shopped for 3D movies until now, and I can clearly see evidence of the format losing popularity. Costco didn't have a single 3D title available, even though they have a whole slew of Disney movies on an endcap and more in the children's movie area. Target only had 2 movies: Gravity and Man of Steel (I picked up Gravity).


I saw plenty at Best Buy though and got a few titles from my price adjustment money. But even so I thought I remember that the 3D section was bigger there before.

Gravity must be viewed in total darkness for the best 3D viewing it's amazing

bruceames
05-25-2014, 10:25 AM
Gravity must be viewed in total darkness for the best 3D viewing it's amazing

Just finished watching it. Very impressive and 3D would seem to be the only way to watch this. Didn't watch it in darkness though, I'll have to do that next time.

I just sampled a few scenes from Titanic 3D and holy shit this looks goooooood. :eek: I'll have to sit down with the wife I'm sure she'll be very impressed too. The depth and clarity are unbelievable. Looks perfect, wow.

HD Goofnut
06-01-2014, 07:24 AM
Just finished watching it. Very impressive and 3D would seem to be the only way to watch this. Didn't watch it in darkness though, I'll have to do that next time.

I just sampled a few scenes from Titanic 3D and holy shit this looks goooooood. :eek: I'll have to sit down with the wife I'm sure she'll be very impressed too. The depth and clarity are unbelievable. Looks perfect, wow.

Titanic is the only conversion I have seen that looks as good as a natively shot film.

bruceames
06-01-2014, 07:45 AM
Titanic is the only conversion I have seen that looks as good as a natively shot film.

Yeah, they must have put a lot of time and money into achieving that. I watched some of The Wizard of Oz 3D and it doesn't look as good in 3D. Could be the age of the film working against it though.

Got a lot of catching up to do it 3D, just hope they don't pull the plug by the time I do get caught up.

ImRizzo
06-01-2014, 10:55 AM
Yeah, they must have put a lot of time and money into achieving that. I watched some of The Wizard of Oz 3D and it doesn't look as good in 3D. Could be the age of the film working against it though.

Got a lot of catching up to do it 3D, just hope they don't pull the plug by the time I do get caught up.
One of the best 3D movies is gravity but it has to be viewed in total darkness to appreciate it's effects.

HD Goofnut
06-01-2014, 02:39 PM
One of the best 3D movies is gravity but it has to be viewed in total darkness to appreciate it's effects.

TRON: Legacy, The Hobbit films, and The Great Gatsby are also really well done.

ImRizzo
06-01-2014, 03:34 PM
The 3D is enhanced by the darkness it almost creates an infinity appearance.

bruceames
06-01-2014, 08:59 PM
The 3D is enhanced by the darkness it almost creates an infinity appearance.

Are you referring to just Gravity or 3D in general?

I'll probably have to wait until the fall to rewatch Gravity because it doesn't get dark until 9:00 pm and I generally go to bed at around 9:30-10:00.
Wish I had a room where I could force total darkness but that's not the case right now.

ImRizzo
06-01-2014, 09:03 PM
Are you referring to just Gravity or 3D in general?

I'll probably have to wait until the fall to rewatch Gravity because it doesn't get dark until 9:00 pm and I generally go to bed at around 9:30-10:00.
Wish I had a room where I could force total darkness but that's not the case right now.

Gravity, because of the vast black back ground, the picture in a dark room really enhances the full effect of the movie.

bruceames
06-02-2014, 06:35 PM
Ultra HD TV panel shipments are expected to reach 17.83 million units in 2014, up 475% on year, according to Digitimes Research.

The average Ultra HD TV panel size shipped in 2014 is expected to be 50.8-inch, while the average-size LCD TV panel is expected to be 39.8-inch.

Taiwan makers have been responsible for most Ultra HD TV panel shipments in the past but Samsung Display and LG Display are expected to hold almost a 40% share in 2014.

Ultra HD TV panel shipments are expected to reach 72.5 million in 2017, with most 50-inch and above size TVs expected to be Ultra HD, added Digitimes Research.

http://www.digitimes.com/news/a20140529PD216.html?chid=2