8K discussion thread

[Auditor55]

Truth be told, 8K is planned obsolescence. I believe they already had these 8K TV's ready when 4K TV's were first introduced to the market. The next will be 16K because they know that the letter "K" sells.

[Auditor55]

Originally Posted by Bluyoda

Pretty much sums up my views. It's just so utterly pointless, and even counterproductive IMHO. The distances mentioned here are a bit extreme, but overall, that's it.
What do you think?:

: DO YOU NEED AN 8K TV? | 8K TVS EXPLAINED - YouTube

My main question is: How bad do Blu-rays look on an 8k TV?

Who would you accept as an authority on this subject? Someone that you regard as credible, a TV salesmen or someone with advanced knowledge and experience on human visual acuity?

[Hindustani]

I could clearly see 4K to 8K difference on 65 inch OLED and 65 inch LED.

I was at the best buy recently, the second I looked at ultra crystal clear image quality, i new i was looking at 8K. i just could not see the corners of pixels at all.

[JohnAV]

Originally Posted by Auditor55

Truth be told, 8K is planned obsolescence. I believe they already had these 8K TV's ready when 4K TV's were first introduced to the market. The next will be 16K because they know that the letter "K" sells.

There was some discussion online that 4K and 8K panels ended up being about the same cost at some point in time. That might have been against LCD/LED technology, not OLED. But we are at a point where not everything is ready. Example- built in ATSC 3.0 tuners will be more in 2021 TVs then opting for the few 2020 models that get it.

The first HDMI 2.1 AVRs are coming late this year. I am just seeing certain things like AVRs have their 2018 models go to 2020 or 2021 models before replacement models appear. Did people not notice this and complain? IMAX enhanced was a distraction.

The same with UHD BD players, where manufactuers will announce the successor models only when technology warrants a new model. Yes like AVRs players are no longer a annual revision. See new models at IFA Berlin where they were first shown, same with AVR's. CEDIA also is a product release event.

This rush to supporting 8K has caused a lot of headaches for the rest of industry, even with 8K tv's that are still barely into their second year of sales.

Think about that last comment, anyone remember how bad it was when 4K TV's came out the first ? Yeah you got a lot of the same pessimism going on.

Remember CNET's Geoffrey Morrison Jan 2013 article update Why Ultra HD 4K TVs are still stupid

Its like all the tech pessimists are plagiarizing his 2013 thoughts here in 2020. Its all about the same thoughts that he thought about originally for the 1/18/2013 article. His last update to the same article was this:

Update: November 22, 2015

A lot has changed in the nearly three years since I first wrote this article. Prices have fallen, new technologies have come out, and there's more (though still not a lot) of 4K content. Today, the best TVs on the market have local dimming, HDR, and Wide Color Gamut... and they also happen to be 4K. Even the best mid-range televisions are 4K. So at this point, if you want a TV that looks good in general, it's going to have Ultra HD resolution (with some exceptions).

So for all to behold, 4K TVs are no longer stupid, and here's why (i.e. read that article first before you comment).

The same will happen with 8K, it takes time. Yes lots of time for all the pieces to be in play as well as prices to fall!

[sapiendut]

Have you seen it in action yourself, Auditor55? No? Then don’t comment.

[Bluyoda]

Originally Posted by Auditor55

Stop being so easily swallowed up by marketing propaganda. I doubt very very seriously any improvements like upscaling has anything to do with 8K resolution.

I am not. Of course, I will have to see a direct test with my very eyes, before I make any judgement.
The problem is that that's usually quite difficult to do, since it's a quite eleborate undertaking, and few, if any, would be willing to that for demonstartion purposes.
I can't even get the staff to play a UHD on an OLED of my choice. They only have USB sticks connected...

Originally Posted by Auditor55

Who would you accept as an authority on this subject? Someone that you regard as credible, a TV salesmen or someone with advanced knowledge and experience on human visual acuity?

That's a realy head-scratcher, mate.

[Penton-Man]

Originally Posted by Auditor55

Who would you accept as an authority on this subject? Someone that you regard as credible, a TV salesmen or someone with advanced knowledge and experience on human visual acuity?

Unless you’re referring to that misinformed presenter in the films@home YouTube video posted on the last page, seems to me the TV salesmen and "someone with advanced knowledge and experience on human visual acuity” are all on the same page, or at least giving the benefit of the doubt to the salesmen and women until proven otherwise.

Since you’re a fan, has Ray Soneira done any side-by-side 4K/8K tv evaluations?

[Penton-Man]

Originally Posted by JohnAV

Remember CNET's Geoffrey Morrison Jan 2013 article update Why Ultra HD 4K TVs are still stupid

Its like all the tech pessimists are plagiarizing his 2013 thoughts here in 2020. Its all about the same thoughts that he thought about originally for the 1/18/2013 article.

We do remember, back when some of us had more energy to rebut reporters and their followers with more advanced information…..https://forum.blu-ray.com/showthread...ty#post7124133

Originally Posted by JohnAV

His last update to the same article was this: Update: November 22, 2015...."So for all to behold, 4K TVs are no longer stupid, and here's why".....
The same will happen with 8K, it takes time. Yes lots of time for all the pieces to be in play as well as prices to fall!

So, you’re telling me we can *look forward to* at least 2 more years of 4K vs. 8K *debate*. God help us.

[Penton-Man]

Originally Posted by Bluyoda

That's a realy head-scratcher, mate.

Here I thought you little creatures were all wise and dated the movie stars.
To me, it’s a simple bifurcating decision tree as to purchasing or not -

if you need a new TV, get a quality (not all AI upscaling implementations are equal ) 8K tv. On the other hand, unless you are an avid videophile that constantly desires the latest and greatest and/or is well endowed with disposable income…..wait. At this point, thee only truly thought-provoking thing regards accuracy to creative intent, i.e. this finding –

“Park said her observers were convinced that a woman's face in one of the test images was brighter and redder in 8K than in 4K, but measurements showed the images to have the same color and luminance."

as expressed here - https://www.displaydaily.com/article...an-just-pixels.

[Robert Zohn]

8K TVs are higher priced then 4K versions, but if the manufacturers put the same video processors and panel advancements into the 4K modes they would also be priced higher then the current 4K flagship series.

With that said 8K TVs would still be higher priced as the 8K panel modules cost more to produce, but as the volume ramps up we'll see prices of 8K TVs come down.

A good example will be Sony's new 2020 8K Z8H series that will be available in 75" and 85". These new premium 8K TVs will launch with nicely reduced prices and attract a larger market share.

[frogmort]

I for one welcome our new maxi-pixel overlords. Every time they come out with some new fangled thingy, there is at least some residual drip-down, right? I would love to get a decent 4K projector (3D capable, as most PJ's are), and 16K is gonna make them decent 4K PJ's absolutely plummet in price, right? I hope.

[JohnAV]

Originally Posted by Penton-Man

We do remember, back when some of us had more energy to rebut reporters and their followers with more advanced information…..https://forum.blu-ray.com/showthread...ty#post7124133

So, you’re telling me we can *look forward to* at least 2 more years of 4K vs. 8K *debate*. God help us.

Since I was associated with media progression through many years a rather interesting article by Geoffrey was Can Ultra HD '4K' Really Help The TV Industry?, this was contributed to Forbes.

Will Ultra HD create the sort of TV-buying boom we had in the mid-2000’s? Not likely. The step from 1080p to “2160p” is not nearly as big of a jump as SD to HD, nor is it as big of a physical change as from the big and bulky “tube” TVs of yore to any flat panel.

When, or if, we get to a point where HD is retired (like SD has been) and everything is Ultra HD, this new technology will be as cheap as HDTVs are now, if not cheaper. Then we'll be excited about the next big thing.

Even though Geoffrey wrote some pessimistic articles, he still saw the writing on the wall back in summer of 2013.

So yeah at very least we are stuck with same old debate for a couple of years. .

[DJR662]

Originally Posted by JohnAV

Since I was associated with media progression through many years a rather interesting article by Geoffrey was Can Ultra HD '4K' Really Help The TV Industry?, this was contributed to Forbes.

Even though Geoffrey wrote some pessimistic articles, he still saw the writing on the wall back in summer of 2013.

So yeah at very least we are stuck with same old debate for a couple of years. .

Except with 4K, there were two big and very important differences:

1. HDR/WCG
2. Ultra HD Blu-ray format


What does 8K bring along that will make as much of an impact and has the same importance for picture quality like HDR/WCG does?

Further more, and almost equally important (for me at least), there is and most probably will never be 8K movie content on a physical 8K disc format.

So IMO this is not the same thing this time...

Therefore, like I said before, I wish they would have brought back passive 3D for the next generations of 8K TVs, which then could be used with excisting 3D Blu-rays. Now that would really add something to the table!

[Geoff D]

Yeah, there's no new angle here.. On the face of it, we're in the same situation as with 4K some 7 or 8 years ago. I mean, I bought my first 4K TV in 2013 because it gave as good a picture as anything I'd seen up to that point and the 3D was amazing, the actual 4K content part was secondary. My next TV will probably be an 8K solely by virtue of it having become ubiquitous in the large screen premium display market by the time my ZD9 dies, but I'm not doing it for the sake of it no matter how intelligent the upscaling is (nay, needs to be) or how redder people's faces look. There's no extra 'hook' here that's reeling me in, unlike the 3D on the first 4K TV I bought.

[moreorless]

I'm guessing part of the appeal of 8K might well be displaying photography/art. Right now photographic prints with a good source can display significantly more detail than 4K when you get to a decent size display.

[DJR662]

Originally Posted by Geoff D

Yeah, there's no new angle here.. On the face of it, we're in the same situation as with 4K some 7 or 8 years ago. I mean, I bought my first 4K TV in 2013 because it gave as good a picture as anything I'd seen up to that point and the 3D was amazing, the actual 4K content part was secondary. My next TV will probably be an 8K solely by virtue of it having become ubiquitous in the large screen premium display market by the time my ZD9 dies, but I'm not doing it for the sake of it no matter how intelligent the upscaling is (nay, needs to be) or how redder people's faces look. There's no extra 'hook' here that's reeling me in, unlike the 3D on the first 4K TV I bought.

I didn't care for 4K until HDR/WCG became a thing and when the UHD format was announced. That's when I starting to think "okay, now we're getting somewhere". Prior to that I had zero interest in upgrading to a 4K TV while there was no actual 4K movie content on physical media available. All of the mentioning about the upscaling being such a great feature went right past me. Perhaps if I knew then about the passive 3D on one of the Sony's 4K TVs around that time, I would have bought one just for that.

Btw I did some searching and came across the X900A. I think that's the only passive 3D TV Sony has ever made?

[Geoff D]

That's the one I had in 55". Flawed half-rez 3D, but still amazing. They did one or two 1080p passive models as well, at least in the UK.

[Penton-Man]

Originally Posted by JohnAV

Since I was associated with media progression through many years a rather interesting article by Geoffrey was Can Ultra HD '4K' Really Help The TV Industry?, this was contributed to Forbes.

Even though Geoffrey wrote some pessimistic articles, he still saw the writing on the wall back in summer of 2013.

Well yeah, but I wasn’t correcting his predications as to eventual adoption of 4K tvs to where they were no longer niche and would become more ubiquitous, I was correcting his science, and regarding that I see that hyperlink in my old post from 2013 is no longer viable, so this should work to explain the difference between resolution acuity and Snellen acuity (which is what Geoffrey M. was basing his assertions upon) - https://wenku.baidu.com/view/79565f2...bf78a551b.html

Predictions as to eventual timing of significant adoption (over niche product status) aside, I think there are, and will be, many skeptics that continue to believe there is no difference between 4K and 8K tvs in picture quality at normal viewing distances until they’ve viewed enough varied content with their own eyes with these new TVs set up side-by-side….which is why these resolution debates started up in the first place be it with HD vs 4K or now with 4K vs 8K televisions, just look back at the past few pages in the debate with Blu-rayNut51.

[Penton-Man]

Originally Posted by DJR662

Except with 4K, there were two big and very important differences:

1. HDR/WCG
2. Ultra HD Blu-ray format

What does 8K bring along that will make as much of an impact and has the same importance for picture quality like HDR/WCG does?

So, have we all moved past the previous position asserted by some folks on this and other forums/websites that there will be no difference in picture quality between 4K and 8K tvs to -> -> will 8K have “the same importance for picture quality like HDR/WCG does” meaning that 4K (UHD) had over HD?

And we’ve progressed to considering market adoption rates and personal decisions based upon each individual’s wants and needs? Of course, the bottom line is whether the increase in picture quality with 8K tvs (I’d imagine some would say marginal….others like Robert, claim significant) is enough to justify their higher price now compared to 4K tvs. I’m sure that quite a lot of you wouldn’t pay what I pay for a better tasting bottle of wine.

[Penton-Man]

Originally Posted by Geoff D

I'm not doing it for the sake of....or how redder people's faces look.

I know you don’t but the thought of that apparent difference in 4K and 8K images will/or should cause concern amongst developers like Mike Zink and Annie Chang devoted to the challenge of ensuring perceptual fidelity as most lately touted at CES - https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/be...ew-tvs-1267374

and covered on too many other websites to name, not to mention some hobbyists and calibrators that continually blabber on about how important it is to them to achieving accuracy to creative intent with this or that TV or this or that player with this or that HDR format.