8K discussion thread

[Robert Zohn]

Regarding our 2020 TV Shootout 4K/8K comparison, if the 8K TV have a clear win and some if not most of that comes from either better panel hardware or enhanced proprietary video processing so be it.

[PaulGo]

Robert what about this concern - 8K TVs use much more energy than 4K TVs (which is detrimental to the environment).

8K TV Energy & Netflix 4K Streaming ‘A Real Concern’
The 65″ 8K model uses more than double the amount of energy as Samsung’s Series 7 65″ 4K TV, which received a five-star energy rating.

https://www.channelnews.com.au/exclu...concern-in-oz/

[Penton-Man]

Originally Posted by Robert Zohn

@Penton-Man, thanks for reposting the photos showing one of my meetings with Florian and Claudio, two of my favorite celebrity video experts.

Well, we agree on the first item on Michael's list. 8K resolution by itself is not a significant improved visual experience in typical viewing conditions. But the visual advantages of 8K can easily be seen and enjoyed at further distances then the eye chart for 20/20 vision would lead you to believe.

Regarding the rest of Michael's comments, I would suggest he read up on Florian Friedrich's research on the value and visual benefits of 8K resolution.

In other words, Michael’s study, as thee old saying goes, couldn’t see the forest (value of 8K TVs) for the trees (singularly examining 8K with regards to human visual acuity)?

Hey, but he’s a professional video expert too!....and somewhat of a celebrity video expect at that - https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/be...ew-tvs-1267374

[Geoff D]

Originally Posted by Robert Zohn

The best way I can describe the higher resolution display improves the visual image here's what I see when I compare the current best 4K and 8K TVs side-by-side with various content.

The higher resolution gives the image a more natural film look and any anomalies in the image with the tiny 8K pixel structure, which is 1/4 of the size of 4K pixels that are also more tightly packed gives the overall image a cleaner look that is definitely more pleasing to my eyes and all if not most who view our showroom display wall of the best TVs currently available.

At 7ft from a 65" 4K I cannot see the pixels as it is, nor is aliasing a problem unless the content actually has problems with aliasing. This talk of 8K being "cleaner" and "more silent" (as Florian puts it) sounds a lot like the kind of hot air I spew in the 4K threads about why a certain UHD looks betterer than a BD, there's nothing truly scientific about this at all.

I mean, I first bought a 4K TV for much the same reasons why people are buying 8Ks, there was no 4K content as such yet with upscaled 1080p it still looked "cleaner" and smoother in the gradations with less visible pixels than a 1080p TV - but the point is that it still does all of that stuff, it's not turned to shite overnight. And I'm not paying the better part of ten grand just to do that upgrade dance all over again.

[JohnAV]

Originally Posted by Robert Zohn

Regarding our 2020 TV Shootout 4K/8K comparison, if the 8K TV have a clear win and some if not most of that comes from either better panel hardware or enhanced proprietary video processing so be it.

Devils advocate perspective.
Whats a clear win anyway? If you have to have a huge display to see the differences you are already distancing yourself from most consumers. I even at this point in time think buying a 85" 8K TV with first generation consumer grade 8K cameras is akin to someone driving a race car on the freeway.

Interesting enough I hail from a gamers perspective, I can see increased detail from computers becoming more capable of sustained real time visual simulations becoming more fluid, the more pleasing and realistic appearance of using a lot more antialiasing. I am used to see very high resolutions from couple feet away on 4K screens. It's all about what works well enough at so many fps that I have no lag and the game reacts as fast as I do. Going to 8K resolution doesn't mean that games will be better from it unless you are using larger displays. But with a environment where you want to concentrate on everything how does huge displays and the greatly increased cost associated with them win anyone over. Obviously if you edited CAD/CAE/photography or video most industrial applications are on similar screens as gamers normally utilize.

Naturally I see a video performance progression, the real question is even if you gather a bunch of video calibration parties together and make a claim that large 8K displays look better than large 4K displays what value is that really? Not like we can see the microscopic detail differences during normal usage because our eyes are constantly wandering because the screen size is too big for the way our eyes work with computer based content.

Just take this as other thoughts to consider rather than just what is the best TV display. It's the practicality and usefulness that is what most of us are after not just the latest and greatest.

[Robert Zohn]

At our TV Shootouts we have our panel of video experts plus the 10+ professional video judges and a large crowd of serious video enthusiasts. This group of about 100 knowledgeable folks will be the judges of how they see the differences between the best 4K and the best 8K TVs.

If you follow the recommended viewing distance of 1.5x the picture height for viewing a 4K TV with 4K content that would be about 5' from a 77" TV. At 5' from a 77" TV you have a nice experience for gaming, movies or sports and you would not move your eyes to follow the action. I understand that in some twitch games and possibly some action screens in a movie you may move your eyes to follow the action, but that is not going to happen with most content or most scenes with any content.

One more item to remember and this is just one element of the image quality, 8K TVs have the best in class video processing with very good motion resolution so if that along with all of the other image enhancement that only 8K TVs have, e.g 4x the resolution of 4K helps differentiate the video performance of 8K TVs over 4K... so be it.

[Robert Zohn]

Originally Posted by Penton-Man

In other words, Michael’s study, as thee old saying goes, couldn’t see the forest (value of 8K TVs) for the trees (singularly examining 8K with regards to human visual acuity)?

Hey, but he’s a professional video expert too!....and somewhat of a celebrity video expect at that - https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/be...ew-tvs-1267374

Some of Michael Zink's native 8K content came from Stacy Spears. Stacy is participating in our 2020 TV Shootout Evaluation as our key presenter and he is creating our native 8K and 4K test patterns and video content for our 8K vs. 4K comparison that will feature the best in class 8K and 4K TVs.

Other differences between Michael's study is that he used only one TV, LG's 88" 8K OLED TV for his perceptual tests of 4K vs 8K. I would expect the same results; the 8K content looks slightly better vs the 4K content on the same 8K TV. I suggest that's because of the excellent video processing so when LG's Z9 88" 8K OLED gets a beautiful 4K signal it does a great job of up-converting it to 8K. My perceptual evaluation of 4K vs 8K will be displayed on the best 8K TV vs. the best 4K TV.

I see Michael's study proving two things, 1st is that LG's 8K TV does an excellent job up-converting 4K content to 8K (something I've been saying throughout this and other threads) and 2nd is that with 20/20 vision you can see a moderate advantage from the increased resolution.

My study will be focused on the perceived differences of the overall picture quality of the best 4K TV compared to the best 8K TV.

[Lee A Stewart]

The relationship between resolution and viewing distance has always been a determining factor.

I remember standing on line in the lobby of the Equitable Life building in NYC to see a demo (this was 30 years ago) of super high resolution done by Evans and Sutherland on a 20" monitor. As the line kept moving forward I noticed everyone was doing the same thing; touching the front glass of the monitor. When it came to my turn, I saw a wine glass half full of wine. It looked so real that I reached forward to try to grab it and of course was stopped by the glass of the monitor. Before I had to leave the line I asked the E&S engineer if anyone just looked at it. He laughed and said no - everyone tried to grab it. That's what they found when they created the snippet so that's what they brought to NYC as the demo.

Can you imagine 8K VR glasses showing 8K content? Content like 1952's THIS IS CINERAMA.

[Penton-Man]

Originally Posted by Robert Zohn

...My study will be focused on the perceived differences of the overall picture quality of the best 4K TV compared to the best 8K TV.

yes, determining overall picture quality is a good thing, as I mentioned to someone else last month -

Originally Posted by Penton-Man

Instead of investigators......confining themselves solely to considering the parameter of “detail”, they’ve examined and tested observers for their take on other factors of overall picture quality obtained with higher pixel density displays (8K) which gets into perceptual and cognitive factors previously given not much attention. Read a professional peer-reviewed journal like last month’s Journal of Information Display or a prior SID Technical Digest from last year.

[JohnAV]

Originally Posted by Robert Zohn

If you follow the recommended viewing distance of 1.5x the picture height for viewing a 4K TV with 4K content that would be about 5' from a 77" TV. At 5' from a 77" TV you have a nice experience for gaming, movies or sports and you would not move your eyes to follow the action. I understand that in some twitch games and possibly some action screens in a movie you may move your eyes to follow the action, but that is not going to happen with most content or most scenes with any content.

It will be some time before PC gamers get into 8K anyway,

But one point you are mistaken on is that unlike the console games where things hop around or you control a car driving down streets, most PC games are examples where your eyes are rapidly studying the entire situation, shifting attention to different areas all the time.

Even though this is not one of the games I usually participate, BlizzardActivision Starcraft II is a good example of where you are constantly shifting your view to look in detail then closely to compete against anther player. Look at this below say at about 8 minutes into the game.

StarCraft 2: The BEST Pro Match Of 2019! - YouTube

Obviously some play certain games on large TVs.

[Robert Zohn]

We agree ^^ and I said the same in my post that you quoted above. However, with the vast majority of content all top experts agree that the best viewing distance is 1.5x the picture height so a 77" TV is best viewed at 5' from the screen.

Here's my comment on the exception for fast moving content:

Originally Posted by Robert Zohn> I understand that in some twitch games and possibly some action screens in a movie you may move your eyes to follow the action, but that is not going to happen with most content or most scenes with any content.


.

[ray0414]

something amazing posted on twitter by a fellow member(Petri Teittinen). He has tested and confirmed that the results at times "is a miracle" he said. ill be purchasing this program soon to test my old home videos that i "wish" would have been filmed in higher resolution at the time.

Topaz Labs has released a highly sophisticated AI based Upscaling program, that can upscale your videos up to 8k! the results are astonishing. theres also a free 30 day trial.

check out his twitter posts and picture comparisons here:

https://twitter.com/pteittinen/statu...679523329?s=20

Here is the product page with a bunch of videos showing the before/after. Some amazing VOODOO going on here and we can only hope that 1 day this type of upscaling will actually become automatic when uploading videos online to places like youtube.


https://topazlabs.com/video-enhance-ai/

"Until now, there was no way to perfectly recreate a high-resolution video from low-resolution footage. From old home movies to low-quality SD to DVD quality and more, Video Enhance AI will transform your videos into clean upscaled footage up to 8K resolution."j


heres there promotional video using a swipe method:

https://vimeo.com/390998890

[LordoftheRings]

Originally Posted by Robert Zohn

We agree ^^ and I said the same in my post that you quoted above. However, with the vast majority of content all top experts agree that the best viewing distance is 1.5x the picture height so a 77" TV is best viewed at 5' from the screen.

Five feet from a 77" screen, yes for video expert reviewers calibrators professional making a living ...

For normal families living in normal homes with one or two videophiles perhaps living in that household with a dark theater room or @ night with all windows closed in the family entertaining room, ten feet or around (say between eight and twelve feet) is probably what 99.9999999999999% of people buying that screen (consumers, TV purchasers, TV watchers, news watchers, sports watchers, Disney+ watchers, Netflix watchers, movie watchers, DVD watchers, Blu-ray watchers, 4K UHD watchers, streaming watchers, ... all type of regular normal watchers) sit @.



• https://www.sony.ca/en/electronics/t...xbr-z9g-series

[Robert Zohn]

@LordoftheRings I agree with you and JohnAV. However, the 1.5 x picture heights is the recommended viewing distance for everyone to watch a 4K TV w/4K content playing. It's verifiable on many well respected video experts, here's just one that's actually on Sony's website.

Now even I don't recommend for most folks to buy a TV as large as what's recommended as the accepted industry standard for the best viewing experience, but it is 1.5x the picture height, which is 5' from a 77" TV. One of my TVs and more often Cinema's we design and build for our clients have the 1.5x the picture height of the 2.40:1 CinemaScope screen.

[Robert Zohn]

Just wanted to add this to the above post without editing it.

The 1.5x picture height for 4K content on a 4K display is mostly based on at what distance do you need to be at so you can't see the pixel structure, which is important for a natural organic look without the grid of a digitized image. However, it's also for the viewer to get a more immersive experience that works well when you are watching a favorite movie and want to have the hyper focused "In Movie Experience"

[LordoftheRings]

I went to see 1917 @ the IMAX theater. I invited my friend who turned 80; that was for his birthday.
We arrived @ the theater where you purchase your tickets, in advance so I can buy him lunch/dinner before the movie starts.
The computer shows all seats (white) with only two yellow ones in the middle.
I asked the ticket master what are those and why they are yellow.
He said those two seats are the best seats.
I asked him if they were taken, he said no that we were the two first ones to purchase our tickets (a good hour in advance). I said I'm buying two tickets for those two yellow seats...$35 cash.

We went to eat and came back after to watch 1917 (IMAX) from those two best yellow seats, as shown in the computer's screen.
I had a very good time...visually and auditory. My friend (80) had to put earplugs and duck in one of the explosions, reaching for cover.

This simple story to say that with a big 8K screen it could be overwhelming for many to sit in the best seat of the house. For hardcore film aficionados no problemo, for the normal population it's a no go, like watching Joker soon after seeing Gone With the Wind on the big screen @ 1.5x the screen's height.

Just saying Robert.
And you can call me Bob (I'm another Robert too).

[Robert Zohn]

Glad you had that experience and yes it's not for everyone, but I do firmly believe that most folks can quickly get accustomed to the 1.5x the picture height viewing for good native 4K content displayed and a 4K display.

It's possible that some the issue with your friend needing ear plugs may be related to his age and not having the time to get accustomed to the experience of an action IMAX movie with Atmos audio.

[LordoftheRings]

He's a long range TV watcher, his wife too...and their friends.
Let say it's an habit more than his age.

People sitting closer, are on average younger, kids.

My friend's main issue was when he had to duck! Indeed, the explosion in the tunnel...boobietrap activated by a rat. The sound mix was phenomenal, and with a beautiful music score.
For this particular film (1917) the IMAX experience I found personally enriching, satisfying, very.

I was a bit surprised @ the Oscars ... but I'm happy.

* He didn't say anything about being closer to the screen than usual, but I know he prefers sitting farther than we were that day. That, was my fault. Normally he would have preferred sitting roughly six to eight rows behind, more eight than six.

Anyway, 1917 would have been great to be the first ever 8K Blu-ray release, just for the kick of it.
Upscaled to 8K from 4K would do.

[Lee A Stewart]

NHK to cover Olympics in 8K

Japan’s public broadcaster NHK says it will provide widespread coverage of the Tokyo Olympic Games and the Paralympics in 8K.

The Olympic Games broadcasts in 8K will cover seven events, including the opening and closing ceremonies, swimming, football, judo, and athletics, and the Paralympic Games will cover four events, including the opening and closing ceremonies and also swimming and athletics.

This is the first time the Paralympics will be covered in 8K.
In addition, at the opening and closing ceremonies of both the Olympic and Paralympic Games, helicopters equipped with 8K cameras will be used to broadcast live images above Japan’s National Stadium. This is the first attempt to broadcast 8K video live from a helicopter, says NHK.

The schedule means that on every day of the Tokyo Games there will be 8K transmissions.

https://advanced-television.com/2020...lympics-in-8k/

[JohnAV]

8K vs 4K TVs: Double-blind study by Warner Bros. et al reveals most consumers can’t tell the difference - Techhive - Scott Wilkinson - 2/28/20

In a recent double-blind study by some of the major names in the industry, the results indicated few people could tell the difference beyond 8K being (on average) “marginally slightly better.” As TechHive points out, the test involved taking a selection of 8K clips and comparing them to the same clips after downscaling to 4K and upscaling back to 8K. While the upscaling might raise some questions, this was done to ensure the experiment was not impacted by other technical issues, such as the display the clips were randomly being played on. In total, 139 people took part in the study with their visual acuity measured to rule out any significant differences in vision.

Content selection and preparation

A total of seven clips were prepared, each in native 8K and about 10 seconds long with no compression. Two clips from Warner Bros.’ Dunkirk (8K scans of 70mm film) included a closeup on a character and a wide shot of the beach. Animated clips from Pixar’s Brave and A Bug’s Life were rendered in 8K for this study. And two clips from the Amazon live-action series The Tick—one in a cave and the other in a spaceship—were shot in 8K on a Red digital-cinema camera, as was a clip of nature footage shot by Stacey Spears.

All seven clips were also natively HDR and encoded in HDR10.

Each clip was also downscaled to 4K using the industry-standard Nuke post-production software. Then, the 4K clips were “upscaled” back to 8K using the Nuke cubic filter, which basically duplicates each pixel four times with just a bit of smoothing so the final image is effectively 4K within an 8K “container.”

Conclusions

Of course, Zink and his colleagues drew several conclusions from these results. For one thing, increasing spatial resolution from 4K to 8K under typical viewing conditions does not result in a significant visual improvement. Also, a perceptual difference is somewhat dependent on content; in particular, ratings for the clips from Stacey Spears’ nature footage leaned a bit more toward 8K than the others, possibly because it has lots of high-frequency detail.

Perhaps most important, a perceptual difference is dependent on visual acuity and seating distance. Participants with 20/10 acuity in the front row confidently rated the 8K versions of A Bug’s Life and the nature footage higher than the other clips. An ancillary conclusion was that the ITU might want to revise its recommendations about viewing distance to include viewers with 20/10 or 20/15 visual acuity.

One thing the study didn’t address is whether the display technology has any effect on the ability to discern 8K. Would the results be any different if the display were an 8K LCD TV rather than an OLED? I suspect not, but it would require a different study to determine objectively.

This study supports the notion that 8K is only marginally better than 4K in terms of perceived detail—and only with good visual acuity at a relatively close distance from the screen. Otherwise, 4K offers as much detail as the vast majority of consumers can perceive. Even so, I’m sure that TV manufacturers will continue to make 8K TVs and migrate that resolution down into their mid-range models, just as they did when 4K TVs first came out, though I doubt that studios will create much content in native 8K any time soon. So, it all comes down to how well 8K TVs upscale lower resolutions. Perhaps that could be the subject of another study.

See the article for more details.