8K discussion thread

[Agent Kay]

Originally Posted by JohnAV

This reviewer commented that he really doesn't expect anyone be able to tell the difference between 4k and 8K unless your looking at a set above 100"

Samsung Q900R 8K QLED TV First Look at IFA 2018 - YouTube

Engadget knows little

[LordoftheRings]

Everyone have announced 8K TVs...Sharp, TCL, Samsung, Sony, LG, Panasonic, ...

Vizio, Toshiba, Hitachi, Sanyo, Magnavox, Western Electric, RCA Victor, Emerson, Admiral, ...?
They'll all join in too.

Even JVC front projector...native 4K with 8K e-shift.

Goodwill and Salvation Army stores now accept your old 4K TVs.

[jimdigriz.]

Originally Posted by Agent Kay

Engadget knows little

As its often hard to see the difference between a UHD and a Bluray (although the habit of UHD being upscaled 2k doesn't help) I would think the review is pretty accurate. The release of 8k seems a bit early when you consider that 4k still only occupies a tiny slice of the market.

[HeavyHitter]

Originally Posted by Agent Kay

They do, but this is about eshift and even with native
Nothing touches Sony

The problem is the Sonys cannot even resolve true 4K unless you enter the service menu and disengage the zone controls. And even then, the difference between a Sony and JVC eshift (which does around 3K) is very subtle and hard to tell from normal seating positions. The JVC contrast and blacks also crush Sony. The Sony's also lack decent wide color gamut coverage. I could have easily bought a Sony 4K unit instead, but preferred the JVC. However, JVC has a lineup of new native 4K units coming for 2019.

[mzupeman]

Personally, I think 8K is a really strange thing to push on consumers for their home theaters.

When it comes to movies, when talking about film, 35mm equates to something like 6K. Digitally, I believe theaters project at no more than 4K. A lot of films are finished with a 2K DI and a lot of special effects are finished at 2K as well. And all that stuff looks good enough for us on the big screen. 4K isn't even really possible natively for video gaming either unless you have a really beefy computer, and in order to push 8K natively you'd have to take a time machine to the future.

I've seen a lot of conversation about how upscaling on an 8K set should look great, but again, I see no need to do that when most mainstream film wouldn't even take advantage of that. This just seems like the hardware makers are trying to find new crap to sell the people that are willing to buy it. Unless filming and screening in 8K become the new norm, I sincerely hope that 8K never takes off. I don't ever want to have to be forced into buying a screen I'd likely never take real advantage of.

But of course, the good news is that the more 8K tech enters the playing field, the better 4K tv model prices will be.

[Penton-Man]

Originally Posted by Penton-Man

....8K feed (with the caveat that acquisition and display are in 120fps for the needed temporal resolution to compensate for the boost in spatial resolution

To be clear, the need for higher frame rate (like 120fps) with increased (like 8K) spatial resolution content if one desires to image people or objects moving….

[peterv]

So what shutter speed is going to be needed to arrive at acceptable/useful 8K resolution?
And would going for 96 fps not mean that just now that most cameramen are getting used to shoot at base ISO 800, exposures are going to lose 2 stops? That’s a lot of (pricey) light on a filmset.

[Agent Kay]

Originally Posted by HeavyHitter

The problem is the Sonys cannot even resolve true 4K unless you enter the service menu and disengage the zone controls. And even then, the difference between a Sony and JVC eshift (which does around 3K) is very subtle and hard to tell from normal seating positions. The JVC contrast and blacks also crush Sony. The Sony's also lack decent wide color gamut coverage. I could have easily bought a Sony 4K unit instead, but preferred the JVC. However, JVC has a lineup of new native 4K units coming for 2019.

Disagree totally, but you picked yours and it's fine you like it

[HeavyHitter]

Originally Posted by Agent Kay

Disagree totally, but you picked yours and it's fine you like it

What do you disagree with? Do you actually have a lot of experience with front projection and THESE projectors, or are you just arm-chair talking because you like Sony so much as a brand? The Sonys are good, but WAY overpriced from what they offer. I couldn't justify the compromises.

• The fact is the JVCs get usually 60,000:1 to 100,000:1 native contrast (with some iris closure) in a typical set-up where as the Sonys are around 15-20,000:1 although sometimes even less (like the 885 laser unit).
  
• The Sonys can only do 87% DCI where as the mid and upper JVCs do 98-99%.
  
• E-shift 4/5 resolve close to 3K and JVC uses an all glass lens; Sony uses plastic lenses. Again, the Sonys cannot resolve full pixel 4K without the service menu adjustment but that can lead into uniformity issues too. People at this event with blind A/B comparisons could not distinguish between eshift and Sony 4K.
  
• The Sonys have undefeatable noise reduction and built-in posterization issues.

Maybe we can bring Kris Deering into this discussion to validate what I am saying because he has done VAST A/B comparisons between properly set-up Sonys and JVCs.

[Agent Kay]

Originally Posted by HeavyHitter

What do you disagree with? Do you actually have a lot of experience with front projection and THESE projectors, or are you just arm-chair talking because you like Sony so much as a brand? The Sonys are good, but WAY overpriced from what they offer. I couldn't justify the compromises.

• The fact is the JVCs get usually 60,000:1 to 100,000:1 native contrast (with some iris closure) in a typical set-up where as the Sonys are around 15-20,000:1 although sometimes even less (like the 885 laser unit).
  
• The Sonys can only do 87% DCI where as the mid and upper JVCs do 98-99%.
  
• E-shift 4/5 resolve close to 3K and JVC uses an all glass lens; Sony uses plastic lenses. Again, the Sonys cannot resolve full pixel 4K without the service menu adjustment but that can lead into uniformity issues too. People at this event with blind A/B comparisons could not distinguish between eshift and Sony 4K.
  
• The Sonys have undefeatable noise reduction and built-in posterization issues.

Maybe we can bring Kris Deering into this discussion to validate what I am saying because he has done VAST A/B comparisons between properly set-up Sonys and JVCs.

I have seen them both first hand.
I know someone that went from the JVC to a Sony and have seen them in person a great many times.
I am not sure why you are pushing this more, I said I disagree and you are fine to be happy with your purchase.
Why does everyone need to pick a fight and have a need to be right and justify their purchases??
People don't always agree, it's a shame you don't like that.

[LordoftheRings]

8K is good, real good...it'll make prices for 4K OLED more affordable.
I hope everyone buy an 8K TV, so that the poor can afford OLED 4K; good for the economy, good for world trade, good for NAFTA, good for you, me and them.

▪ https://ca.finance.yahoo.com/news/fo...200652488.html
▪ https://www.techradar.com/news/the-b...ed-at-ifa-2018

[LordoftheRings]

Originally Posted by Agent Kay

I have seen them both first hand.
I know someone that went from the JVC to a Sony and have seen them in person a great many times.
I am not sure why you are pushing this more, I said I disagree and you are fine to be happy with your purchase.
Why does everyone need to pick a fight and have a need to be right and justify their purchases??
People don't always agree, it's a shame you don't like that.

It seems that JVC is gaining ground in the 4K front projector territory.
Sony is good too, but JVC seems to be more popular overall in the North American market.

For Europe, France, UK, Germany, Italy, India, China, South Korea, Japan, ...etc., I just don't know.

This is only an overall business view, from Consumer Reports, CNet and TechRadar.
People read those articles and spread the news on projector forums, video magazines, Forbes, Cosmopolitan, the New York Reporter, Variety, Slash magazine, AV forums, Blu-ray dot com, and the other small places with tons of video dealers...mainly JVC bunches.

[LordoftheRings]

Sony is more competitive in the TV market; LED and OLED tvs.
So watch for them new 8K Sony TVs.

[HeavyHitter]

Originally Posted by Agent Kay

I have seen them both first hand.
I know someone that went from the JVC to a Sony and have seen them in person a great many times.
I am not sure why you are pushing this more, I said I disagree and you are fine to be happy with your purchase.
Why does everyone need to pick a fight and have a need to be right and justify their purchases??
People don't always agree, it's a shame you don't like that.

Nothing wrong with preferences, but you said "nothing touches Sony" which I had to call BS on, but I also presented a number of data points where the Sony is lacking. These comparisons also have to be done in black pit rooms (black carpet, walls, etc.) with proper calibration, but the data is what it is.

The prior Sonys also had major issues with engine block deterioration (not all different from their SXRD RPTVs). Time will tell if their latest units have this corrected.

[Penton-Man]

Originally Posted by peterv

So what shutter speed is going to be needed to arrive at acceptable/useful 8K resolution?
And would going for 96 fps not mean that just now that most cameramen are getting used to shoot at base ISO 800, exposures are going to lose 2 stops? That’s a lot of (pricey) light on a filmset.

Well movies are a whole different ballgame as compared to striving to capture sports in the most crystal clear fashion possible. As for narrative motion pictures, directors and their DPs are often motivated by ‘stylistic’ choices which essentially involves blurring the image from which the capability of cameras and more importantly, really sharp lenses at traditional frame rate (24 fps) are able to provide anyway these days even without 8K 120fps considerations. So, I’m not so sure that getting the most clarity out of their movie at 8K acquisition and exhibition will even be a concern to most filmmakers who by nature are more artsy-fartsy in their storytelling than clinical.

With regards to sports like soccer and ‘what shutter speed is going to be needed to arrive at acceptable/useful 8K resolution?’, well, testing by NHK and BBC concluded that ~1/300 of a second shutter was needed to stop motion blurring. For practical purposes, 100/120 fps was deemed acceptable. As to lighting issues, (and the soccer guys here may well be much more familiar with the stadiums especially in the lower leagues in the UK and Europe than me), but if the stadium doesn’t have modern LED lighting then capturing and displaying 100fps will be challenged by flicker.

[Penton-Man]

Originally Posted by HeavyHitter

Maybe we can bring Kris Deering into this discussion to validate what I am saying because he has done VAST A/B comparisons between properly set-up Sonys and JVCs.

If memory serves, Kris is commissioned to do the calibration of the projector in the Harman booth at CEDIA. Some say he might be biased toward JVC, but I believe he is honest and fair minded in his assessment of hardware. Plus, he and I share a certain hardware camaraderie - https://forum.blu-ray.com/showthread...y#post10107534

Meaning, old dirt bike riders tell no lies.

[DIY_HD]

While 8K may seem a bit unnecessary, I think it will allow us to have larger screens without a loss of detail and sharpness. Imagine a standard definition image (640x480) stretched onto a 75" screen. Not a pretty picture. Now imagine a wall-size image in 8K. Personally, I'm waiting for 16K before I do my next upgrade.
And after I have the 4th wall and ceiling screens installed, I'll add the smell and vibration generators. (I stole this idea from Ray Bradbury. He wrote this in a short story called The Veldt. You may have read it in his anthology The Illustrated Man.)
Anyway, I think in order to go bigger, we will need higher resolution as well as the other things that y'all have mentioned. If you build it, content will follow.

[Staying Salty]

https://www.whathifi.com/news/tcl-ri...-8k-ai-qled-tv

The 8K QLED TV comes in just one size: 75in. It uses a Quantum Dot display with wide colour gamut and 1000-nit peak brightness, and features 832 local dimming zones designed to allow for precise backlight control.

On paper at least, the numbers look good to make the most out of HDR content, of which the 8K TV supports HDR10 and Dolby Vision flavours.

I am assuming that the current HDR flavor support will also appear on the 8K models for all brands.

[Agent Kay]

Originally Posted by Staying Salty

https://www.whathifi.com/news/tcl-ri...-8k-ai-qled-tv



I am assuming that the current HDR flavor support will also appear on the 8K models for all brands.

What hifi are worse than engadget, the Samsung does not support DV the LG does tho

[Shin sam]

Find out the maximum line resolution the human eye can see. Find out the maximum colour spectrum the human eye can see. Do that, then leave it.