8K discussion thread

[Modren]

Originally Posted by apollo828

I really doubt that. You can't get around the fact that my pixels require more rendering time. I think it's only been in the past couple of years that we've seen 4K DIs become relatively standard in the industry. Even then, there's loads of material out there that's finished at 2K, mainly indie productions, quite a few TV shows, etc. Are there even decent 8K cameras used by Hollywood? Last I heard, 6K is about as high as they get, and even then, not everybody uses those cameras.

RED has had cameras capable of 8K for a while now, but even then they get downsampled to 4K or even 2K resolutions. Getting 8K versions of movies shot on those cameras would require going back to the raw camera files and upscaling any visual effects, but that's assuming said files still exist (not a guarantee, especially years down the road) and that the filmmakers didn't crop in from the full frame of the sensor.

[stvn1974]

Just think of how James Cameron can ruin his films even more in 8K.

[Dragun]

Originally Posted by Modren

RED has had cameras capable of 8K for a while now, but even then they get downsampled to 4K or even 2K resolutions. Getting 8K versions of movies shot on those cameras would require going back to the raw camera files and upscaling any visual effects, but that's assuming said files still exist (not a guarantee, especially years down the road) and that the filmmakers didn't crop in from the full frame of the sensor.

They would most likely upscale 2K and 4K masters to 8K, like how 2K masters are often upscaled to 4K for UHD. 8K rebuilds are going to be, at most, as likely as 4K rebuilds are for films with 2K masters.

65/70mm films could be presented in true 8K, and eventually I'm sure some digital films will be natively finished in 8K.

[Robert Zohn]

Several studios and well respected Cinematographers are shooting in native 8K.

Also several new professional native 8K cameras have recently launched and are being purchased by studios and cinematographers.

[Modren]

Originally Posted by Robert Zohn

Several studios and well respected Cinematographers are shooting in native 8K.

Also several new professional native 8K cameras have recently launched and are being purchased by studios and cinematographers.

Yes, but then the final DI is just 4K or even 2K. The source resolution is barely relevant when the film itself, with all the editing and color grading and visual effects, only exists at a lower resolution. 8K DIs require exponentially more storage and computational power, and that drives up budget for, from a studio's perspective, not that much benefit. There's no mainstream distribution system for 8K content and no guarantee that there will be in the future. Why bother with 8K now when 4K is the standard, many people are watching on sub-4K devices like phones, and the source files probably aren't in 8K either? RED isn't the dominant camera provider for Hollywood films, Arri is, and their highest-resolution is only 6.5K.

[apollo828]

Yep. That and there's the question of how the raw footage actually looks. 8K for the sake of 8K wouldn't work for me if the picture looked awful compared to a great 4K camera. That's the domain of cinematographers, of course. I'm just saying raw numbers aren't everything.

[Bernardo A.]

Originally Posted by Modren

RED has had cameras capable of 8K for a while now, but even then they get downsampled to 4K or even 2K resolutions. Getting 8K versions of movies shot on those cameras would require going back to the raw camera files and upscaling any visual effects, but that's assuming said files still exist (not a guarantee, especially years down the road) and that the filmmakers didn't crop in from the full frame of the sensor.

And they are noticeably inferior to Arri cameras, which have much lower resolution.

[jabba359]

Originally Posted by Modren

RED isn't the dominant camera provider for Hollywood films, Arri is, and their highest-resolution is only 6.5K.

And even that 6.5K Arri is the Alexa 65, which hardly any productions shoot on. Most shoot some variation of the Alexa Mini/SXT (3.4K), LF/Mini LF (4.5K), or Alexa 35 (4.6K).

Sony's Venice 2 is very popular right now and has an 8.6K sensor option. The RED Raptor isn't nearly as popular, but has a much improved sensor/color science over RED's previous offerings. I know RED doesn't have quite the status of Arri and Sony (and I personally hate their "military bro" marketing), but the Raptor sensor is actually pretty dang nice and REDs tend to find their way onto lots of lower budget movies (owner/ops) and plenty of prestige TV. And RED does have some high profile fans (Fincher, Bay, Wachowskis, etc) and does get used on bigger budgeted projects (GotG 3, The Sandman, Queen's Gambit, etc.).

I get what you're saying about the Arri dominance with lower res cameras, but there are very good 8K+ cameras that top cinematographers and directors are using on their projects, even though they could afford/choose whatever camera system they wanted.

[Robert Zohn]

Better not tell Phil Holland, (very well respected Hollywood professional Cinematographer who specializes in 4K and Native 8K)

Heres' his review of RED's V-Raptor [X] Native 8K Professional camera. Red was just purchased by Nikon.

https://www.phfx.com/articles/RED_V-...ngePlusExtras/

Also know that Amazon Prime joined the 8K Association and they are paying a lot of money to be a member and support the 8K Association. Also know that the new ATSC 3.0, aka Next Gen TV's specifications support Native 8K resolution with all of the HDR features.

Almost everyone said the same things about 4K when it came out, but it soon became the very popular standard for all streaming and Blu-ray content.

Finally, 8K has several very nice enhancements that go beyond the resolution alone. 400% more RGB pixels renders a brighter picture with more color. And the smaller pixels with better pixel density renders smoother overall images and curved and round images have better smoothness that can be seen even at normal viewing distances.

Finally, I shot my son's wedding in Native 8K with a mirrorless SLR (when Covid was at it's worst time) in our backyard with a small group of 24 closest friend and immediate family.

When we played it back on Sony's 85" Z9K and later on JVC's NZ9 with a 135" screen the image quality was so stunning and like nothing we had ever seen before.

So not only do you get the very best panel and processor when you buy any 8K TV you also enjoy all of the picture quality advantages I listed above and if you are interested in photography and buy one of the many choices of professional quality, but consumer grade Mirrorless SLR cameras you can create your own Native 8K HDR content.

Even Samsung cell phones have Native 8K cameras built in.

[Geoff D]

That's the point, 4K soon took over (ish) but 8K has been a thing for years and shows no signs of penetrating significantly into the consumer TV market, it's stalled and for good reason: it's fookin useless. I could not care less about what people shoot with an 8K phone on their own time, if people want to buy an 8K TV just to watch their home videos then fine, for everyone else: meh. Yes the same arguments were said over and over about 4K but the point is that it still offered benefits that HD could not, chiefly HDR, and there is no such extra advancement for 8K as a format. It's just more pixels and given that the viewing distance that most people sit from is hard enough to discern 4K resolution then 8K is just gonna be beyond useless.

As for professional capture 8K has been around for years but it's not a predominant finishing medium, that's the point. 8K is used more for framing overshoot and general oversampling of the final 2K/4K output. I do think we'll see more 8K (and higher!) finishes in years to come, Fincher did the Se7en remaster at 8K and for streaming it'll be easy to deploy whereas for disc it's a non-starter.

8K isn't going anywhere but nor is it going to dominate the years ahead, it'll just kinda be there.

[Robert Zohn]

When you see LG's Z3 8K OLED TV, Sony's Z9K, and Samsung's new QN900D 8K QD MiniLED TV in person with FHD/SDR and any 4K HDR content you will see the overall picture quality enhancements vs. all other premium 4K TVs.

[PeterTHX]

Has there even been an 8K DI???

[Geoff D]

Originally Posted by Robert Zohn

When you see LG's Z3 8K OLED TV, Sony's Z9K, and Samsung's new QN900D 8K QD MiniLED TV in person with FHD/SDR and any 4K HDR content you will see the overall picture quality enhancements vs. all other premium 4K TVs.

Right...and how much of that is down to the underlying display tech itself (processing, panels, backlighting etc) and how much is down to it *just* having 8K pixels? That's a rhetorical question BTW as the 8K thing is utterly incidental to the overall performance of those sets. 8K is practically vapourware at this point, for at least when 4K appeared there were avenues to obtain pre-recorded 4K material right from the start, albeit in the form of technological esoterica like the Sony 4K media players they were supplying with their own TVs, and Samsung did the same thing with that hard drive they were giving out. Where's all that stuff for 8K?

They don't even need to resort to silly external boxes any more, it could simply be streamed to the TV via whatever service but there's bugger all out there. Sony pushed 4K hard as they had a vested interest in both technology and content, same with 3D too, but with 8K they don't give a flying XXXX despite still owning all that content and still having 8K TVs to sell. If distributors can't supply 8K content then what point is there in chasing after all dem pixels for the sake of them? Hint: it's not to watch home movies, and never has been. 8K is for the poseurs, people who are technologically illiterate and financially incontinent. A salesman's dream, in other words

[Robert Zohn]

Yes, you are correct that the picture quality enhancements on 8K TVs vs, all 4K TVs is due to the 400% more RGB pixels and the smaller and more densely populated pixels as well as the TV's enhanced 8K processor that is designed to focus on the best possible upscaling.

No salesmanship ever in anything I say.

[PeterTHX]

There isn't even an 8K TV in this year's Sony lineup.

The Z9K is a 2022 model.

[apollo828]

Right. That and, frankly, many of us will probably never get to experience these TV sets that will supposedly blow our minds. I'm certainly not in the market for a $10-20+K TV. (Even $5K is too much if it's going to be based around a feature that might see regular use one day.) Good for those who can afford it and whose passion lies in the latest & greatest AV tech. I'll reassess sometime around 2030, when I assume 8K will be at least somewhat affordable and there will hopefully be some way to watch native 8K films that aren't terribly bit-starved.

[Robert Zohn]

Thankfully their are several very excellent TV choices under $5,000.

Tell us your seating distance, the ambient light of the room in the daytime, and the majority of content you like to watch and we'll give you several best TVs choices for your use-case.

[R3P0]

Originally Posted by sapiendut

The world doesn’t revolve around sports.

For Broadcast it does look at the numbers sir

European Football Championship 450 Million Viewers
Superbowl gets 130 million views
NFL Games in US get between 15-45 million viewers

Show me 1 TV Show aside from the conclusion of Mash and Cheers that comes close to this number

[mrtickleuk]

Originally Posted by PeterTHX

There isn't even an 8K TV in this year's Sony lineup.

The Z9K is a 2022 model.

Is another way of putting that: "Sony dropped 8K after 2022"?

[PeterTHX]

Originally Posted by mrtickleuk

Is another way of putting that: "Sony dropped 8K after 2022"?

Unless they announce something soon I'm guessing that's it from them.