Oh noes teh sky is falling!

[Anthony P]

Originally Posted by Cevolution

slick1ru2 doesn't think we need 8K remember.

I know, he also does not think we need 1080

why should I care what he thinks we need?

[Anthony P]

Originally Posted by slick1ru2

Actually most don't think you don't need what you can't see. If there is no difference or a barely discernible difference, why chuck out a perfectly good technology?

are you a Mormon riding your horse and buggy because it was perfectly good technology?

Just so the electronics companies can make more money off us?

won't your TV ever brake we are talking 20-30 maybe even 40+ years in the future if you believe 50GB in less the 25 milliseconds to your home.

That I can tell the difference is bull.

you should get your eyes checked, any human being with close to 20/20 vision can.

Do it in a double blind study and report back.

you do realize double blind test does not mean someone blind in both eyes since if that is your measuring stick then I can understand why you would believe it does not make a difference.

[punkguy03]

Originally Posted by Anthony P

are you a Mormon riding your horse and buggy because it was perfectly good technology?

Not to turn this into a religion thing, but mormons don't ride horse and buggies. My family is mormon and that comment is a little uncalled for. I think maybe you are thinking of the Amish.

[Anthony P]

Originally Posted by punkguy03

Not to turn this into a religion thing, but mormons don't ride horse and buggies. My family is mormon and that comment is a little uncalled for. I think maybe you are thinking of the Amish.

Yup, meant Amish, my apology

[punkguy03]

Originally Posted by Anthony P

Yup, meant Amish, my apology

No problem there are so many different religions, sometimes it is hard to remember which ones are which.

[slick1ru2]

Originally Posted by Cevolution

Oh you're 1 of those, I suppose u buy your groceries in bulk too so u can save a whole 50 cents. I couldn't careless about $3000 I spent 10 years ago, life is about enjoying yourself and buying what u want if it makes u happy, as long as u can afford it. People lose more money trading in a car they have owned for a few years to buy a new 1, than they do on electronics. We lose money on almost every purchase we make so why does it matter as electronic equipment is no different? Besides based on the quality of some of today's gear, a lot of it won't last more than 10 years anyway.

I seem to know more than u about my country so far, how did I avoid the fiber optics issue? Yes it's happening and all Australians know it, but the question is when, it certainly won't be finished by the time u think the future will be here. If u actually did some proper research then u would know that Internet Service Providers here which offer unlimited services cost $70-$80 plus a month, which is just unaffordable for a lot of people. Maybe I am biased against it, but u are clearly biased for it, so what's your point? U seem to put a lot of trust in everything u read, but an intelligent person knows that u don't believe everything u read.

There's one born every minute. 3D is a fad pushed out by the electronics industry because prices have gone so low on HD TVs. You want to waste your money on useless crap, go for it.

[slick1ru2]

Originally Posted by Anthony P

Netflix is not that great either. The issue is that it is a good price at the moment, if you rent BDs then it is included for free and if you don't it is under 8$ and you can watch as many movies as you want in a month. That is why they feal a need to say how it is "great" even though it is not as good as BD. If it was realy about quality and "convenience" then they would not be talking of Netflix but Vudu which has the best PQ available, but that is not a cheap rental plan.

Not that there is anything wrong with being cheap and preferring $ in pocket then quality but there is something wrong with the BS that it looks great when it does not.

NetFlix has double digit growth and in the U.S. 1/3 of the Internet traffic is NetFlix. BTW, in Canada NetFlix doesn't stream 1080p so again, you have no idea of the PQ. Obviously many in the U.S. do though.

All the asinine cracks about PQ and streaming. It sounds like you guys are too cheap to play for a decent connection is the real issue. Are you saving up for your 4K TVs? I know dial up is cheap but don't think because you have it that the rest of us do.

And to say that I don't care about PQ is just being rude. I spent 25 years in medical imaging. The point of my job was to obtain the highest quality possible image for medical diagnosis. I had college courses on image quality and my hobby was high end photography.

[Show spoiler]

[Show spoiler]

[Show spoiler]

[Show spoiler]

[Show spoiler]

[Cevolution]

Originally Posted by slick1ru2

There's one born every minute. 3D is a fad pushed out by the electronics industry because prices have gone so low on HD TVs. You want to waste your money on useless crap, go for it.

By the sounds of it u don't own nice things (boat, cars, bikes, furniture etc) and would rather be frugal and save every penny u have. Its funny sometimes listening to people who think everything is a conspiracy and a rip off, I'll keep enjoying my 3 ply toilet paper and u can just enjoy your 1 ply.

[slick1ru2]

Originally Posted by Cevolution

By the sounds of it u don't own nice things (boat, cars, bikes, furniture etc) and would rather be frugal and save every penny u have. Its funny sometimes listening to people who think everything is a conspiracy and a rip off, I'll keep enjoying my 3 ply toilet paper and u can just enjoy your 1 ply.

This comes from the guy who talks about people can't affort $79 or $8o/month internet. Tell people their 1080p TV needs to be replaced with a TV that costs as much as their car, for a standard that has no physical media made for it and no TV channel broadcasts in. Good luck.

My first HDTV was about 7 years ago, a Hitachi Ultravision 57S700, reviewed as one of the best HDTVs at the time. I subscribed to two satellite companies because one only had a couple HD channels and the other had the most HD channels of any company at the time, Voom. I had a Yamaha 5.1 surround, a Samsung DVD-HD931 (probably the best upconverting DVD player at the time with the Faroudja technology) and even a DVI switch to change between the Voom STB and Samsung DVD player. Cheap? Frugal? You got the wrong guy. Wasting money though I don't do. 4k is being pushed by the companies with passive 3D glasses because only half the 1080p resolution is displayed at a time. 3D is a fad to many and 4k being needed by 3D is a main reason companies want it to get away from active shutter. No thanks.

And do you think I take those photos with a disposable camera? I have thousands of dollars in camera equipment. Can you read my signature? I have three HD TVs and three PS3s, one for each. I've owned two boats, this was the last one.



Let me repeat for you. The optimal size for a 4K TV is 25 feet. Do you have 25 feet for a TV??? Or do you have to have what people perceive is the best? Do you drink designer water? Wear designer clothes? I don't need a status symbol to tell me what to wear or watch.

The optimal size for a 4K TV is 25 feet.

The optimal size for a 4K TV is 25 feet.

The optimal size for a 4K TV is 25 feet.

The optimal size for a 4K TV is 25 feet.

The optimal size for a 4K TV is 25 feet.

[Terjyn]

Originally Posted by slick1ru2

And to say that I don't care about PQ is just being rude.

But you DON'T care about PQ. You keep saying you can't tell the difference, so it doesn't matter.

How is it rude to point out something you yourself say, repeatedly?

[Terjyn]

Originally Posted by slick1ru2

This comes from the guy who talks about people can't affort $79 or $8o/month internet. Do you think I take those photos with a disposable camera. Can you read my signature?

Let me repeat for you. The optimal size for a 4K TV is 25 feet. Do you have 25 feet for a TV??? Or do you have to have what people perceive is the best? Do you drink designer water? Wear designer clothes? I don't need a status symbol to tell me what to wear or watch.

The optimal size for a 4K TV is 25 feet.

The optimal size for a 4K TV is 25 feet.

The optimal size for a 4K TV is 25 feet.

The optimal size for a 4K TV is 25 feet.

The optimal size for a 4K TV is 25 feet.

You are officially being purposely obtuse, or have no idea what you are referring to.

There is no such thing as an "optimal size" for a TV. Saying it 6 times doesn't help your case in any way whatsoever.

[slick1ru2]

Originally Posted by Terjyn

You are officially being purposely obtuse, or have no idea what you are referring to.

There is no such thing as an "optimal size" for a TV. Saying it 6 times doesn't help your case in any way whatsoever.

That's what the industry engineers say is the optimal size, Google it. And I am saying YOU can't tell the difference in a double blind study at a normal viewing distance on an average sized 46-55" TV. Or if you could it would be so minimal, you couldn't tell which is which. You have human eyes, just like everyone else.


As it turns out the drive for 4k is because passive glasses 3D displays half the pixels at a time compared to active shutter. Many feel 3D is a fad. Now its driving 4k. Yet another reason to not need it.

Articles that say the optimal screen size for a 4k TV is 25 feet. That came from an engineer. Unlike where your info comes from, an opinion.

http://heronfidelity.com/news/beyond-1080p/ About why 4k is being pushed.


http://techgreatest.com/2010/07/10/y...w-supports-4k/

http://techtrickz.com/audio-and-vide...el-at-youtube/

http://www.zdnet.com/blog/google/you...o-we-care/2277

http://www.worldtvpc.com/blog/whats-...video-streams/

http://news.consumerreports.org/elec...y-12-2010.html

[Cevolution]

Originally Posted by slick1ru2

This comes from the guy who talks about people can't affort $79 or $8o/month internet. Tell people their 1080p TV needs to be replaced with a TV that costs as much as their car, for a standard that has no physical media made for it and no TV channel broadcasts in. Good luck.

And do you think I take those photos with a disposable camera? I have thousands of dollars in camera equipment. Can you read my signature? I have three HD TVs and three PS3s, one for each. I've owned two boats, this was the last one.



Let me repeat for you. The optimal size for a 4K TV is 25 feet. Do you have 25 feet for a TV??? Or do you have to have what people perceive is the best? Do you drink designer water? Wear designer clothes? I don't need a status symbol to tell me what to wear or watch.

The optimal size for a 4K TV is 25 feet.

The optimal size for a 4K TV is 25 feet.

The optimal size for a 4K TV is 25 feet.

The optimal size for a 4K TV is 25 feet.

The optimal size for a 4K TV is 25 feet.

You have double standards in your argument, because on 1 hand u are talking about what streaming and the internet will be like 10 years from now, and in the other hand u are using the value of what an 8k display would cost by today's standard implying that they will cost the same in 10 years time. Things get cheaper as u know, and if u think an 8k display will cost just as much as a car does in another 10 years, then all I'm going to say in return about that is a quote from the show Just Shoot Me "Donnie says vacuum".

I wasn't referring to myself when I said most people can't afford $70-$80 plus a month for internet access, I was referring to most families here who have to worry about the next interest rate rise on their home loan and rises in the costs of living etc (for example all of our electricity bills will be increasing by about $400 a quarter due to our government introducing a new carbon tax, so that's $1600 a year extra struggling Australian families have to find), who simply can't afford that kind of money.

The link u posted up before with a list of companies was not what u think it was and proves u know nothing about Australia's infrastructure, for a starters 4 of them are the same company. Telstra T-box (which is only new and is a streaming service but is very expensive and quite poor quality), Bigpond movies and tv (which is just Telstra's standard internet service), foxtel (which is our cable tv network) and foxtel on the xbox 360 (which is just regular channel viewing from foxtel and is very poor quality), they are all owned by Telstra who are the most expensive company in Australia, and up until last year was owned by our Government.

Itunes is crap as we all already know, Tivo here is different to Tivo in the U.S, its just a PVR box which can only record from our free to air channels. Freeview is just the name of our free to air channels which we see on our tv's. TPG is 1 of our many Internet Service Providers (which is the company I'm about to change to for my internet), and any streaming from it is also very poor.

[slick1ru2]

Originally Posted by Cevolution

You have double standards in your argument, because on 1 hand u are talking about what streaming and the internet will be like 10 years from now, and in the other hand u are using the value of what an 8k display would cost by today's standard implying that they will cost the same in 10 years time. Things get cheaper as u know, and if u think an 8k display will cost just as much as a car does in another 10 years, then all I'm going to say in return about that is a quote from the show Just Shoot Me "Donnie says vacuum".

I wasn't referring to myself when I said most people can't afford $70-$80 plus a month for internet access, I was referring to most families here who have to worry about the next interest rate rise on their home loan and rises in the costs of living etc (for example all of our electricity bills will be increasing by about $400 a quarter due to our government introducing a new carbon tax, so that's $1600 a year extra struggling Australian families have to find), who simply can't afford that kind of money.

The link u posted up before with a list of companies was not what u think it was and proves u know nothing about Australia's infrastructure, for a starters 4 of them are the same company. Telstra T-box (which is only new and is a streaming service but is very expensive), Bigpond movies and tv (which is just Telstra's standard internet service), foxtel (which is our cable tv network) and foxtel on the xbox 360 (which is just regular channel viewing from foxtel and is very poor quality), they are all owned by Telstra who are the most expensive company in Australia, and up until last year was owned by our Government.

Itunes is crap as we all already know, Tivo here is different to Tivo in the U.S, its just a PVR box which can only record from our free to air channels. Freeview is just the name of our free to air channels which we see on our tv's. TPG is 1 of our many Internet Service Providers (which is the company I'm about to change to for my internet), and any streaming from it is also very poor.

The link I posted was Wikipedia. If its wrong, by all means go and edit it.

Again, you say families are struggling in Australia, can't afford cable but you think they should buy ,wait, now you want 8K TVs? Why stop at 8K TVs? What about holigram decks like from Star Trek TNG? You call me delusional?

And lets go back to double standards. You can afford fast internet, many can't. So only a few will have these 8K TVs right? And how many movies are going to be made for this new technology only a few have? And how many channels will be broadcasting in 8K? None.

[slick1ru2]

I think what a poster said on a hi-fi tech forum about 4k and 8k TVs sums it up nicely.

Diminishing returns has called......says hi.

[Cevolution]

Originally Posted by slick1ru2

The link I posted was Wikipedia. If its wrong, by all means go and edit it.

Again, you say families are struggling in Australia, can't afford cable but you think they should buy ,wait, now you want 8K TVs? Why stop at 8K TVs? What about holigram decks like from Star Trek TNG?

I wouldn't be making any money for my time if I editing wikipedia so someone else who has nothing better to do can do it (maybe u should do it lol), I actually find it amusing that so many people put so much trust in wikipedia when it's quite often out of date info.

Plenty of Australians can afford a few thousand dollars at some point during any given year, and when they can they quite often want to treat themselves to something for all their hard work (that could be a holiday, a tv or anything else for that matter), but people certainly aren't going to save it for the purpose of signing on to a new internet contract just for streaming and so they can afford to pay the bill every month. Most people can afford a 1 off amount for a $3000 tv, but a lot can't commit to an internet contract for 12-24 months for $80 a month when they don't know what their financial situation will be like in another 6 months time.

[slick1ru2]

Originally Posted by Cevolution

You are the most immature 40 something year old person I have ever spoken to. I wouldn't be making any money for my time if I editing wikipedia so someone else who has nothing better to do can do it, I actually find it amusing that so many people put so much trust in wikipedia when it's quite often out of date info.

Plenty of Australians can afford a few thousand dollars at some point during any given year, and when they can they quite often want to treat themselves to something for all their hard work, that could be a holiday, a tv or anything else for that matter, but people certainly aren't going to save it for the purpose of signing on to a new internet contract just so they can afford to pay the bill every month. It's not about how a person can afford a 1 off amount for a $3000 tv, but rather is about them having to commit to a contract for 12-24 months when they don't know what their financial situation will be like in another 6 months time.

You do realize that more people have SD then HD TVs and many feel that HD and Blu-ray is a fad right? It took about a decade to switch over to digital OTA here in the States after geez, 50-60 years of the old standard. Do you think that is going to be dropped again, anything soon?

People don't get paid for Wikipedia, that's true. They donate their time. Wikipedia is a project for humanity, that is what its for, but you may be too immature to realize that right now. There is a lot more going on in the world then making sure you can watch movies in native resolution. Can you even fathom the amount of resources not using a physical media like DVD or Blu-ray would save in precious resources? Those discs are produced in the billions and moved all over the planet. And they are thrown out each year in the millions, sitting in landfills. Do you know it will take decades for Japan to clean up from this year's disaster? Sony alone lost billions from it. Just Sony. And Japan, where much of today's electronics comes from, just had a major part of its electrical grid permanently removed. You can't just add a major power plant overnight. But anyway, you keep thinking those 8K TVs are coming in the next few years.

[Ragnarok]

Originally Posted by slick1ru2

Put it this way. Here in Atlanta, the bandwidth is such that Fox is stunning. I am getting 99% signal strength. Its one of the best OTA signals here. What you get from Direct or I get from Dish is a significantly lower bit rate signal with much more compression. When I DVR a movie from Dish its 3-4 GB. OTA its 8-11GB.

I was getting ESPN Gameplan on Dish. HORRID picture since its all the poorest quality SD. Streaming off ESPN3.com is a MUCH better picture without all the artifacts IF you have a good enough connection. They are both SD but the feed is DVD quality, the feed off the satellite is like VHS quality.

That's why you think fox is great.

It's a shame for you guys being stuck with mpeg2, It's would be a nightmare to go mpeg4 now.

We have MBAFF mpeg4/avc on broadcasts here, which is great because it tries to save bandwidth by only using interlacing on a macro-block by macro-block basis. But it also means we didn't have HDTV until 2005.

Ether way the main reason Interlacing V progressive doesn't make a huge difference with sport is down to current cameras still being lame at capturing motion. most of the bluing you see comes from the cameras not the encoding.

I still find it bizarre that unless you have FIOS there, on cable/satellite you getting channels re-encoded from an already well compressed feed. It's as if very few people give a crap about quality there!

Last time a saw an English premier league match in ESPN2 HD on some crappy cable company I thought, Damn, I've seen SD pictures nearly as good as this back home.

For Anthony P, Interlacing, Yes I know all about that and you haven't mentioned a thing I don't already know, and Yes, no processing however good ( even VA) will managed to recover all the information in the picture lost in the interlacing process, but it does a mighty fine job ( except for the most eagle eye'd ) except on some test patterns that prove the point.
Yes, I'll maintain Interlacing is still a stupid evil for the HD age when most TV's are Natively progressive! You don't see many HD CRT's about any more.

[bhampton]

My Blu Rays will still be here when I'm gone.

Someone's going to have to divide them up or something.

-Brian

[doctorsteve]

Originally Posted by bhampton

My Blu Rays will still be here when I'm gone.

Someone's going to have to divide them up or something.

-Brian

Well, if you're going to give them away later - you might as well give them to me now...





SEEN AT WALGREENS: "Get your hi-def video transfered to a Blu-ray disc!"

I figure, if walgreens has Blu burners, Blu is penetrating pretty well...

Doc