8K discussion thread

[Tok]

Originally Posted by SeeMoreDigital

Indeed, it was much the same time from DVD to 2K Blu-ray...

We lived with low resolution analog TV for well over 50 years. VHS was introduced in the 1970s and it took 20 years for another format to overthrow it. DVD was always meant to be a stopgap format. Problem is now the tech is moving so fast. HD even thoug around from the late 90s it took 10 years to fully supplant analog SD TV.

Really HD had only been the dominant format for 12-15 years and it’s already being replaced for 4K since many displays have been supporting it since the early 2010s.

Now we have people demanding 8K when the broadcast groups haven’t even started 4K regularly and there’s still a lot of content that hasn’t even been mastered at 4K. 4K really didn’t do much for the average viewer until HDR and colorspace improvements were implemented.

8K is pretty much a pipe dream for the foreseeable future.

[NDcowboy]

Just give me a modern 1080p Plasma with 4K inputs, WCG and HDR.

[unberechenbar]

I'll be impressed if TV is ever available in 4K over-the-air. By that time most people will probably have 8K sets.

[SeeMoreDigital]

Originally Posted by Tok

We lived with low resolution analog TV for well over 50 years. VHS was introduced in the 1970s and it took 20 years for another format to overthrow it. DVD was always meant to be a stopgap format. Problem is now the tech is moving so fast. HD even thoug around from the late 90s it took 10 years to fully supplant analog SD TV.

I'm surprised that TV manufacturers still offer analogue tuners and composite/component video inputs on 4K displays let alone 8K displays

Legacy what?

[Tok]

Originally Posted by SeeMoreDigital

I'm surprised that TV manufacturers still offer analogue tuners and composite/component video inputs on 4K displays let alone 8K displays

Legacy what?

Especially considering it’s been almost a decade since the content makers and providers have essentially locked down the analog loophole on everything except SD content.

[Geoff D]

Has every country around the world switched to digital-only OTA broadcasts? That's not rhetori-snark but a genuine question, because I don't know.

[sapiendut]

Originally Posted by Geoff D

Has every country around the world switched to digital-only OTA broadcasts? That's not rhetori-snark but a genuine question, because I don't know.

Indonesia definitely hasn’t. I think parts of India hasn’t either.

[Geoff D]

That goes some way to explaining the presence of analogue tuners then. As for legacy analogue inputs, some people may still have old gear they want to hook up.

[MechaGodzilla]

Originally Posted by Geoff D

As for legacy analogue inputs, some people may still have old gear they want to hook up.

Hasn't stopped Sony for example from getting rid of component inputs on their higher-end tellies.

Not that I'm personally crying over it since there are easy (if relatively expensive) solutions that produce superior results anyway.

[Fendergopher]

Originally Posted by MechaGodzilla

Hasn't stopped Sony for example from getting rid of component inputs on their higher-end tellies.

Not that I'm personally crying over it since there are easy (if relatively expensive) solutions that produce superior results anyway.

Yeah units like the Retrotink are really good for older analog hardware on modern displays. If I still had my VHS collection I might be rocking one just for the fun of it.

[SeeMoreDigital]

Originally Posted by Geoff D

Has every country around the world switched to digital-only OTA broadcasts? That's not rhetori-snark but a genuine question, because I don't know.

This is also why TV manufacturers create/offer slightly different spec TV's for each market...

[Geoff D]

Originally Posted by MechaGodzilla

Hasn't stopped Sony for example from getting rid of component inputs on their higher-end tellies.

Not that I'm personally crying over it since there are easy (if relatively expensive) solutions that produce superior results anyway.

You’re right, Sony started stripping out those connectors years ago, first supplying an adaptor with the relevant sockets on it and then just phasing them out completely. Though they do still retain a composite in via the 3.5mm socket on the side.

Originally Posted by SeeMoreDigital

This is also why TV manufacturers create/offer slightly different spec TV's for each market...

Sure, they can’t put a different tuner in there for each and every country/territory especially when it comes to things like digital and 50Hz - 60Hz differences. But as analogue is so much ‘simpler’ a technology and is still used in some places they’d rather have it and not need it instead of needing it and not having it.

[lgans316]

I think in 2-3 years time, we will see 8K streaming gaining some traction but in order for 8K to succeed, the content creators must start shooting in 8K and finishing in 8K.

Also consumers must be having 75=+ inches displays sitting at a reasonable distance to benefit from 8K.

Remember, most folks are struggling to find differences between HD Dolby Vision and 4K Dolby Vision streams on Netflix from a reasonable viewing distance because HDR is acting like a red herring.

[MechaGodzilla]

Originally Posted by Fendergopher

Yeah units like the Retrotink are really good for older analog hardware on modern displays. If I still had my VHS collection I might be rocking one just for the fun of it.

The Retrotink 5X-Pro is looking a mighty fine little device. I've been thinking about picking one up in time.

Originally Posted by Geoff D

You’re right, Sony started stripping out those connectors years ago, first supplying an adaptor with the relevant sockets on it and then just phasing them out completely. Though they do still retain a composite in via the 3.5mm socket on the side.

Indeed, the 2017 'E' series was the last that supported component. The higher-end LCDs of that year - X940E, X930E and X900E (obviously XE94, XE93 and XE90 to us Yoorupeans) - all featured component inputs. Looking it up just now, the A1E OLED on the other hand was a sign of things to come as it didn't have any such connectors. The following year, they got rid of the component input completely on all their 2018 'F' premium sets.

I remember there was a fairly significant negative reaction to that at the time, when Sony stopped supporting component. Again though, speaking for myself I'm not bothered as there are some very neat little gadgets out there that do a bang-up job if you want to hook up older equipment - be it LD/VHS/whatever players or video game consoles - to a modern 4K TV.

[Geoff D]

Originally Posted by lgans316

I think in 2-3 years time, we will see 8K streaming gaining some traction but in order for 8K to succeed, the content creators must start shooting in 8K and finishing in 8K.

Also consumers must be having 75=+ inches displays sitting at a reasonable distance to benefit from 8K.

Remember, most folks are struggling to find differences between HD Dolby Vision and 4K Dolby Vision streams on Netflix from a reasonable viewing distance because HDR is acting like a red herring.

That does show why the move to HDR was so important though in terms of differentiating one format from another, because resolution alone was simply not enough given the smaller screen sizes in most homes and/or the sometimes vast seating distances that people sit from them, thus rendering resolution moot. (Same with other things like compression, someone kept on at me in the Halloween UHD thread but then it's revealed they're seated at almost twice the viewing distance I am from my TV (they're at 12 feet from a 65", I'm at 7ft from the same size) so it's no ****ing wonder they see nothing wrong!)

Same will apply to 8K, as even when they start to finish out to that resolution it'll make sod all difference to the average sized-screen seen at the average viewing distance, and it certainly won't matter when watching on a phone. And as HDR isn't going to be any different for 8K as a delivery format i.e. there's no HDR 2: HDR Harder then people could be looking at a 2K HDR stream and an 8K HDR stream and seeing no material difference.

This is why 8K is on a hiding to nothing, I mean I've no doubt whatsoever that 8K content will follow (though not on disc ) because the streamers will use it as a means to one-up theatrical movies which are still routinely finished in 2K, never mind 4K, but it's going to be about as useless as it gets for 99.9% of people. They'll feel better for having it as that's what FOMO does, but it really will be the 'Emperor's New Clothes' of video formats.

Yes, people said/are still saying that about 4K but it's the HDR that made the biggest difference, for better or worse, and as 8K as a delivery format is still carrying the same HDR specs (do we need more than 10k nits and BT.2020 colour?) then it comes right back around to squaring the resolution question with screen size & viewing distance.

[Anthony P]

Originally Posted by Geoff D

I'm not sure we even went "too fast" to 4K from HD, because as mr roboto mk.2 keeps saying it took ten years from Blu to UHD. The main problems are that HD media itself didn't take off because the average person didn't give a shit about higher quality (and still doesn't) and they'd just spent a lot of money replacing their VHS collections with DVDs, they weren't happy about doing it again just a few years later (as it wasn't until the early 2000s that DVD became as ubiquitous as it did). The format war didn't help either, that put a lot of doubt in people's minds.

So Blu never took over for a variety of reasons and UHD was always going to be further 'specialised' even if physical media was still the dominant force in the home video arena, which it isn't. So that means in all probability that 8K disc is simply never gonna happen. As a means of conveying a signal then 8K is already part of the display/interconnect ecosystem, with 10K and 16K in there as well on the interconnect side, but we've reached the end for disc.

did not mean to imply that it was unique to UHD.

We are like shooting fish in a barrel, we constantly upgrade equipment and re-buy content because it might give us a slightly better presentation. I am sure I am not the only one that bought for example the DVD and then bought the super bit and then BD and then "mastered in 4k". I tried to wait to buy a BD player until there were more manufacturers but eventually gave up and bought the Samsung because I could not force myself to wait any longer.

But we are not anywhere near normal.

I think most people don't want to buy TVs 9or the content every year or even 2-3 years. Most none AV geeks want to buy a TV and keep it more then a decade, the same way I have always felt about cars and I now feel about PCs (when I used to game on PCs I used to buy new often and constantly upgrading components in it but eventually I had enough of that and just decided to game on consoles that mean stability for a few years and the power I am typing on now I bought and is almost 100% original Dec 2011)


Let's take fictional Joe, in 2005 he re-placed his TV with a new flat SDTV, it stopped working today, why would he have run out to replace his DVD player with BD or UHD BD to connect it to the SDTV? Today he goes to buy a new TV SDTV is out of the question but it might be 8k, 4k or HD depending on the size he wants. Maybe he will decide to buy a new player to match the resolution but he could decide to keep using his existing DVD player.

the discussion started with NHK, they do broadcasting standards, it has nothing to do with BD or UHD BD or... but it is the same boat they need to test, com up with new standards then convince the broadcasters to adopt the new standard update their equipment and start using it, then need to be a few steps in front BUT if they see it the same way that too short a cycle (next gen is coming out "too fast") breads apathy in most people because they don't feel like keeping up. Then it explains why they also appear to be trying to slow things down.

[Anthony P]

Originally Posted by Misioon_Odisea

What's with the rush and hurry of some people here wanting and needing 8K Blu-ray right now?

simple I consider time very important. If I will sit for 2h to watch a filmi I want it to be the best A/V performance possible. 8K will have benefits over 4k the same way 4k did over HD and HD over SD and..... Don't get me wrong there is more to a film then just video and there is more to video then just resolution but I just don't get how someone can have an issue with people that hope and can't wait for something better.

[HDTV1080P]

Originally Posted by lgans316

I think in 2-3 years time, we will see 8K streaming gaining some traction but in order for 8K to succeed, the content creators must start shooting in 8K and finishing in 8K.

Also consumers must be having 75=+ inches displays sitting at a reasonable distance to benefit from 8K.

Remember, most folks are struggling to find differences between HD Dolby Vision and 4K Dolby Vision streams on Netflix from a reasonable viewing distance because HDR is acting like a red herring.

One day in the future humans might have huge wall style flat panels that are like 150 inches to 300 inches in screen size. Watch the extended cut to the fictional movie called Avatar sometime, and the fictional character Jack Sully appears to be living in an extremely small low income apartment and he has a huge screen on the wall that does everything from watching the news to personal computer. His bed is like 3 feet away. With a 16K resolution or 32K resolution flat panel one could comfortability sit 2 to 5 feet away from the screen. The more resolution and quality of the screen the closer one can sit to the screen without seeing imperfections. There have been several futuristic movies showing huge wall screens that take up the enire wall in a small, medium, or large living area. If the quality of the image and sound gets to be good enough, then watching a documentary on the ocean will make one feel like they really are on the ocean. I really liked the extended scene with Jack Sully in his low quality apartment having this awesome high-end huge screen that covered the entire wall and he is only a few feet from the screen. That would be cool one day if everyone regardless of their income level could afford a 150-300 inch screen that covered the entire wall area.

[nick4Knight]

Originally Posted by HDTV1080P

That would be cool one day if everyone regardless of their income level could afford a 150-300 inch screen that covered the entire wall area.

The concept is called "abundance" and it's a future in which AI and robotics make everything dirt cheap to manufacture and so everyone can afford it for pennies of their salary (or universal income) compared to now. So even if you live like that character in terms of SPACE the appointments within are at such a high level.

In terms of global hunger we are reaching abundance. There is enough food produced to feed everyone nutritious options; getting it to them? The crux and only remaining barrier. And that will scale to technology as time goes.

These screens you referenced will not cost money, really. They'll be factored into technological amenities portion of a salary or UBI. That's best its been described that I've seen.

Some of us may not see it. This is 15+ years away. 15 at the very very most optimistic and you'd imagine quantum computing would have to be cracked within 10 to see that timeline.

Probly 25-30 is more realistic. Maybe as much as 50.

[Anthony P]

Originally Posted by HDTV1080P

One day in the future humans might have huge wall style flat panels that are like 150 inches to 300 inches in screen size. Watch the extended cut to the fictional movie called Avatar sometime, and the fictional character Jack Sully appears to be living in an extremely small low income apartment and he has a huge screen on the wall that does everything from watching the news to personal computer. His bed is like 3 feet away. With a 16K resolution or 32K resolution flat panel one could comfortability sit 2 to 5 feet away from the screen. The more resolution and quality of the screen the closer one can sit to the screen without seeing imperfections. There have been several futuristic movies showing huge wall screens that take up the enire wall in a small, medium, or large living area. If the quality of the image and sound gets to be good enough, then watching a documentary on the ocean will make one feel like they really are on the ocean. I really liked the extended scene with Jack Sully in his low quality apartment having this awesome high-end huge screen that covered the entire wall and he is only a few feet from the screen. That would be cool one day if everyone regardless of their income level could afford a 150-300 inch screen that covered the entire wall area.

Originally Posted by nick4Knight

The concept is called "abundance" and it's a future in which AI and robotics make everything dirt cheap to manufacture and so everyone can afford it for pennies of their salary (or universal income) compared to now. So even if you live like that character in terms of SPACE the appointments within are at such a high level.

In terms of global hunger we are reaching abundance. There is enough food produced to feed everyone nutritious options; getting it to them? The crux and only remaining barrier. And that will scale to technology as time goes.

These screens you referenced will not cost money, really. They'll be factored into technological amenities portion of a salary or UBI. That's best its been described that I've seen.

Some of us may not see it. This is 15+ years away. 15 at the very very most optimistic and you'd imagine quantum computing would have to be cracked within 10 to see that timeline.

Probly 25-30 is more realistic. Maybe as much as 50.

Obviously tech can be all over the place, and there are some cool ones in the future (so I get what you are talking about). But almost anyone in almost any environment can have a huge screen today and for the past several decades. It is called a projector