Is 4K a game changer?

[Canada]

Originally Posted by Firecrackker

Are we going to be seeing everything released in 4K? Is there really a huge difference for 50" TVs? I haven't really tried out 4K yet so I was wondering what some of you thought.

Is 4K a game changer, I think it will be being able to get a lot of films shown in the resolution that they were shown in theaters. But 1920x1080 (1080p) is did a lot more to change the game than 3840x2160p (consumer 4K) will.

You won't notice much if any difference on a 50" screen. To see a difference from 8 ft away you would have to get a projector and about 120" screen. That being said I still want 4K Blu ray.

[Dylan34]

I live Houston, one of the largest cities in the states and 4k tvs haven't taken over. There still more 1080p tvs vs 4k tvs. I'm ready for 4k blu-ray so by 2016, that will probably be a different story. 4k will start to out number the 1080p sets.

[Huseyin]

I work in advertising and we rarely receive film footage in 4K to edit, ad my client is a very well known camera manufacturer.
But again it's early days. I think 4K will look good on films being released now but what about Seven Samurai? That is still 4:3 and the more you upscale it the poorer it will look

[Penton-Man]

Originally Posted by Firecrackker

Are we going to be seeing everything released in 4K? Is there really a huge difference for 50" TVs?

For sports, you’ll probably want a larger size in order to take advantage of what 4K capture and delivery can offer…other than solely the increased detail it can provide to the imagery.

Meaning, the combination of a larger panel size along with the greater picture real estate of 4K acquisition for when the cameramen/women shoot at more than a short depth of field will provide a *double wow-ee* effect, like so…https://forum.blu-ray.com/showthread...ine#post914611

I have a friend who attended the FIFA World Cup in Brazil this past summer where he and others (public viewing) watched a match on two 80-ish sized 4K TVs which were set up close to each other. One received the 4K feed whereas the other received the local Globus HD broadcast feed.

The 4K broadcast showed much more picture real estate than the HD broadcast due to a conscious decision by the cameramen to use a wider lens than for the HD capture. Sooo, as viewers, it was easier and much more pleasing to follow the ball and movement of the players over a greater expanse of the field (with the additional plus of greater detail) than for the HD delivered version.

[Teazle]

Originally Posted by Penton-Man

For sports, you’ll probably want a larger size in order to take advantage of what 4K capture and delivery can offer…other than solely the increased detail it can provide to the imagery.

Meaning, the combination of a larger panel size along with the greater picture real estate of 4K acquisition for when the cameramen/women shoot at more than a short depth of field will provide a *double wow-ee* effect, like so…https://forum.blu-ray.com/showthread...ine#post914611

I have a friend who attended the FIFA World Cup in Brazil this past summer where he and others (public viewing) watched a match on two 80-ish sized 4K TVs which were set up close to each other. One received the 4K feed whereas the other received the local Globus HD broadcast feed.

The 4K broadcast showed much more picture real estate than the HD broadcast due to a conscious decision by the cameramen to use a wider lens than for the HD capture. Sooo, as viewers, it was easier and much more pleasing to follow the ball and movement of the players over a greater expanse of the field (with the additional plus of greater detail) than for the HD delivered version.

I want more movies to be shot like this too. More picture, not just the same picture in extra detail. Studio bosses please take note and thank you for reading.

[Suntory_Times]

Originally Posted by Huseyin

I work in advertising and we rarely receive film footage in 4K to edit, ad my client is a very well known camera manufacturer.
But again it's early days. I think 4K will look good on films being released now but what about Seven Samurai? That is still 4:3 and the more you upscale it the poorer it will look

It was shoot on film, doing a scan at a higher resolution will not result in any upscaling, just at some point it will no longer get any more detail then had a lower scan been done. It will not make it look worse though.

[gregmasciola]

Originally Posted by Penton-Man

For sports, you’ll probably want a larger size in order to take advantage of what 4K capture and delivery can offer…other than solely the increased detail it can provide to the imagery.

Meaning, the combination of a larger panel size along with the greater picture real estate of 4K acquisition for when the cameramen/women shoot at more than a short depth of field will provide a *double wow-ee* effect, like so…https://forum.blu-ray.com/showthread...ine#post914611

I have a friend who attended the FIFA World Cup in Brazil this past summer where he and others (public viewing) watched a match on two 80-ish sized 4K TVs which were set up close to each other. One received the 4K feed whereas the other received the local Globus HD broadcast feed.

The 4K broadcast showed much more picture real estate than the HD broadcast due to a conscious decision by the cameramen to use a wider lens than for the HD capture. Sooo, as viewers, it was easier and much more pleasing to follow the ball and movement of the players over a greater expanse of the field (with the additional plus of greater detail) than for the HD delivered version.

All I see when comparing those images is that the 1080p version is cropped with black borders. How exactly does this show the advantages of 4k?

[Penton-Man]

Originally Posted by gregmasciola

All I see when comparing those images is that the 1080p version is cropped with black borders. How exactly does this show the advantages of 4k?

I’m at a loss in the ability to better describe or visually illustrate the implication of optical image size and depth of field to allow for a wider angle of view.

Perhaps if you listen to some of the people involved in another project ( ~ the 2:30 sec. timestamp of the following clip), the concept of larger format (4K) camera using long depth of field lensing will make more sense with the way in which they briefly describe its advantage over HD sensor acquisition and display, without your having had the opportunity to view something like side-by-side 4K and HD feeds like my friend did at the last World Cup, who claimed even with an ~ 25% wider frame, you could still see more detail in the players on the pitch with the 4K delivery pipeline (if one sat close enough to the screen) -

Sony Professional: Bringing live rugby to IBC 2013 in 4K - YouTube

[Anthony P]

Originally Posted by I KEEL YOU

It was the only option because consumers allowed it to be the only option. It's not like there was one day, one certain date where ALL theatres went from 35mm film to digital 2K projectors. If the consumers weren't happy, they would've voted with their wallets and stuck with those theatres that played 35mm film in that transitional period. But 2K was good enough for them.

that makes no sense. Just because you can assume there are options does not mean that they make sense.

Let me go with a simple similar example.

A few weeks ago I went to the theater to watch a film with my friends. We wanted d-box seats but by the time we got an exact count (assigned seating means that we needed to buy the tickets all together) the d-box seats were sold out.

In theory there were options other than just buying other tickets but

Go an other day/time: would mean that my friend that had a sitter for the kids would have to have paid for the sitter a second time, also because of work/vacation/other stuff, finding a new date that suited everyone would not have been easy (there were two weeks of planning for that first date) and even if we did pick an other date there is no guarantee that 1) the movie would still be in the theatre, that it would be in that same room that has d-box seats and that the d-box seats would not be sold out on that date by the time we get tickets

go to a different cinema: luckily I am not in NYC, where I just found out there are no theatres with D-box seats, but even here the theatres with d-box seats are not that close to each other. That is why we wanted to go to the one downtown. The one on the south shore would be near my home, but that would mean over an hour commute for my friend that lives on the north shore and even then there was no guarantee that there were any seats

Your example with salary isn't relevant in this discussion. "Later in life"? What's "later"? Is 8 years enough?

time is irrelevant it can be seconds, for example, one of my friends that went with us to see the film went the next day at the matinee to see it again with d-box seats.

[Kirsty_Mc]

Originally Posted by Penton-Man

I’m at a loss in the ability to better describe or visually illustrate the implication of optical image size and depth of field to allow for a wider angle of view.

Perhaps if you listen to some of the people involved in another project ( ~ the 2:30 sec. timestamp of the following clip), the concept of larger format (4K) camera using long depth of field lensing will make more sense with the way in which they briefly describe its advantage over HD sensor acquisition and display, without your having had the opportunity to view something like side-by-side 4K and HD feeds like my friend did at the last World Cup, who claimed even with an ~ 25% wider frame, you could still see more detail in the players on the pitch with the 4K delivery pipeline (if one sat close enough to the screen) -

Sony Professional: Bringing live rugby to IBC 2013 in 4K - YouTube

That's an excellent article there.

It seems to bear outmy thoughts as regards 4K, don't think of it as home cinema, think of it as home Imax. Buy a bigger screen (I did) in preparation.

Given it was BT trialling this, I wonder if they are going to beat Sky in starting 4Kin the UK? Hope so... If so then this may be one less customer for Sky.

[AgentOrange]

Originally Posted by bertal

There won't be 1080p displays in 2015/2016. Just go into a store, there are more 4k tvs than 1080 tvs.

That's not even remotely true (yet). Maybe it will be that way in 2016.

Hell, I've still NEVER seen a 4K TV at the cheap-o stores like Wal-Mart or Target -not that I would be likely to buy a TV there, but they do have a relatively large amount of TV's on display on not even a single one at 4K.

Best Buy has plenty of 4K options, but it's still at least 10:1 in favor of 1080p sets - and the 4K sets are still mostly in the Magnolia area (with a handful of lower 4K models outside with the 1080P TV's). Other retailers I've seen still have very limited 4K options on display in their stores (TigerDirect, HHGREGG,... and a local chain).

[xander]

4K is absolutely a game changer to the projection screen crowd here with the disposable income to throw thousands of dollars at the format without blinking. To the other 90 percent of us in the general public, it will be barely a ripple.

[bertal]

Originally Posted by AgentOrange

That's not even remotely true (yet). Maybe it will be that way in 2016.

Hell, I've still NEVER seen a 4K TV at the cheap-o stores like Wal-Mart or Target -not that I would be likely to buy a TV there, but they do have a relatively large amount of TV's on display on not even a single one at 4K.

Best Buy has plenty of 4K options, but it's still at least 10:1 in favor of 1080p sets - and the 4K sets are still mostly in the Magnolia area (with a handful of lower 4K models outside with the 1080P TV's). Other retailers I've seen still have very limited 4K options on display in their stores (TigerDirect, HHGREGG,... and a local chain).

Ok, I admit that I exaggerated a little but there are 37 (4k) vs 182 (2k) tvs in the MediaMarkt.hu (the biggest chain in Hungary); however if you go to the store the rate goes up almost up to 50-50, and we talk about a little, poor country. And other people (on other forums) often claim that in their country (USA, UK etc.) the rate is similar.

[Penton-Man]

Watershed event - https://forum.blu-ray.com/showthread...99#post9790444

These debate/opinions by 4K naysayers remind me so much of what we went through in the SD -> HD transition.

[hajiketobu]

i think 4k is totally worth it, even scaled down to 1080p it looks much better/sharper/more detailed than a 1080p source, so there is a win/win even if you have a small screen. For gaming, 4k is a game changer as well, but it also requires decent hardware to still run at high framerate beyond 60 fps. Because 4K at the cost of low fps like 30fps is not really great, but it's always like that. My laptop can run games in 1080p with 30fps but manages 60fps and beyond on 720p. So yeah this is also a matter of taste and personal priorities. It would be great if movies were produced one day in 120fps. I still think 4k@120p is optimal for future home entertainment, for HFR movies, for games and for VR --> Oculus Rift headset but NOT for smartphones lol. I'd be happy to see 2160/120p as a standard in the, hopefully near, future

[tronotized22]

I am very curious to see if 4K will catch on or not. I also am very questioning of the idea that the majority of people seeing 4K will be seeing it in a physical format. No doubt that physical will still exist, but I have doubts that many people will be watching 4K content by putting a disc in a player.

[tronotized22]

Originally Posted by steve1971

Is 4K a game changer? To the few yes to the majority of people such as the general consumer no. I read some posts in this thread where some are calling people idiots for their not so excited views on 4K. Really? To them I say who the hell are YOU to be calling people clueless or idiots? Just because some people are not buying into 4K dont makes them clueless or idiots, they just dont see the benefits of it and nor do I. The only benefit I see in 4K is if you veiw it on a 65inch screen or larger such as a projection system. And I dont buy into the "Oh you can tell the difference between 1080p and 4K on a 55inch screen." When I bought my Sony 55inch W900A they had it sitting next to a 55X900A 4K Sony tv and and my wife and I saw no difference at all, none, and even the sales rep said the same and he suggested if I was interested in 4K to go larger. Well since I have no interest in 4K I bought my W9 and I am glad I did. I am all for advancement in technology but I have to see the benfits of it and if I dont I move on to something else. Yes you see alot of 4K tvs at Best Buys and so fourth but how about Target, Walmart ect? No...you dont. 4K is all the rage right now due to the push of the manufacturers and I saw it with 3D as well and where did that all end up? People can call me an idiot or clueless for not drinking the 4K coolaide all they want but it dont bother me at all and it never will.

I totally agree with you about calling people idiots. Just because someone has a different viewpoint than you doesn't mean that the other person is a idiot or one of the "peasants" who could not possibly understand or comprehend why some people are excited for something.

[Nightopian]

I think 4K will be to Bluray what Bluray was to DVD. Not everyone will upgrade to it, but for those who value the higher resolution and have a 4K display already it will be a natural progression.

For me, my issue is triple dipping. I made the jump to Bluray when I built my theatre room with a projector and was in desperate need of higher resolution than DVD. But with my screen size and viewing distance I am not able to fully resolve the resolution of Bluray and therefore it is perfect for me now and I'm no longer required to upgrade out of necessity.

The other issue is the time it takes to release films on a new format. Bluray has been out for almost 10 years now and it is still missing thousands of titles which are available on DVD. It will take 4K Bluray decades to catch up...and more than likely by that time there will be a different format again. If I decide to buy a new 4K player, I will just stick with the current releases in 4K if anything. I won't backtrack.

[meremortal]

I'd say from a technological standpoint it's a worthwhile progression. We've already seen a number of "mastered in 4k" blu rays that are noticeable improvements even in dithered 1080p form. So there's obviously potential for even greater gains in transparency when viewing an actual UHD blu on a 4k display. And current blu ray buyers could benefit from UHD as well if it means that all titles prepared for UHD will also see a cheaper "mastered in 4k" blu ray alternative. Both camps could arguably benefit here if it means a release is coming from a high quality source.

But a game changer on a mass market consumer scale? I really doubt it. Price is going to be a driving factor and the average person is not going to pay a premium for movies that are available much cheaper on other formats. In other words, it's hard to imagine 4k drumming up enthusiasm beyond diehard AV enthusiasts and the most critical of blu ray consumers. Home theater's still very much alive, but not everyone is picky when it comes to presentation quality. I'd imagine most people are far more interested in the story than how it looks and sounds. Probably the vast majority of consumers are sitting further than ideal seating distances and using the stock tv speakers for audio.

I'm sure there will be a very dedicated and small target audience for UHD who demand the very best in AV at any cost. But how much support it'll draw is up to anyone's guess. Most people will probably see the prices and balk when there are already dvd and blu ray alteratives. And with dvd still the dominant format sales-wise, the margins that UHD can siphon from blu ray may be minimal at best.

[spectre08]

I think 4K will be more of a game changer in the streaming market, because 4K video brings streaming much closer to blu-ray quality, and exceeds it in many instances.

With more people switching to streaming as their primary means of content delivery it'll show a serious improvement over current HD streams.

It's not really fair to compare 4K streaming to physical blu-ray, as they have different capabilities and limitations.

But hopefully UltraHD blu-ray will improve upon it even more so that there is still a physical format that provides the optimal experience.