Is 4k it..or is there more?

[nikon76]

Is 4k all that is being pushed or are the collectors and HD aficionados going to be pushing for 6k, 8k, 15k? WTF? When will it be good enough? All joking aside, I am looking for some technical information that will set the record straight for "when is enough enough"? What can properly capture and display 35mm, 70mm film and what is the ceiling resolution?

Is 1080p good enough? Is 4k the limit? What could 8k do for us, speaking in terms of resolution? Would it be overkill? Let's mix and match original formats with K resolutions and see what sticks...

[jtu128]

There is always more...

[Eny-]

Originally Posted by nikon76

Is 4k all that is being pushed or are the collectors and HD aficionados going to be pushing for 6k, 8k, 15k? WTF? When will it be good enough? All joking aside, I am looking for some technical information that will set the record straight for "when is enough enough"? What can properly capture and display 35mm, 70mm film and what is the ceiling resolution?

Is 1080p good enough? Is 4k the limit? What could 8k do for us, speaking in terms of resolution? Would it be overkill? Let's mix and match original formats with K resolutions and see what sticks...

I don't believe in a new home video format. 4K will be as good as it gets.

1) Most movies are shot digital and still finished in 2K or 4K masters (still mostly 2K)

2) Only 70mm film translates as 8K.

3) 4K remasters are expensive and with the lower interest in physical home market, studios won't invest in true 4K transfer, more so if we talk about 8K.

[bruceames]

Actually 4k resolution is overkill for most people. The real upgrades to UHD Blu-ray are the wider color gamut, color density, and of course dynamic range. There is a lot more to PQ than just pixels.

[78deluxe]

Originally Posted by bruceames

Actually 4k resolution is overkill for most people. The real upgrades to UHD Blu-ray are the wider color gamut, color density, and of course dynamic range. There is a lot more to PQ than just pixels.

This is the correct answer.

Most movie theatres have been projecting 1080P on the "big screen" for years.

1080P itself is good enough for home viewing on sub 100 inch screens at the proper viewing distances.

You can see the difference in 4K when you sit too close to the screen and cover more of your periphery with a screen than you should.

It is the things UHD brings other than the resolution that are more noticeable.

[20th Century Boy]

Yeah, what they said.

4k is pretty much a 2k upscale with marketing behind it. And 8k and beyond on anything less than a movie theater screen is ludicrous. There's other stuff like HDR, which I won't touch unless the film was shot with that in mind.

So for this home video aficionado 1080p (hopefully sourced from 4k remasters where applicable) is as good as it gets. Aint wastin' money for upscales.


All that said, doesn't mean marketers won't keep pushin' up grades. They can never leave well enough alone.

[PenguinMaster]

8K could certainly happen at some point but 99.99% of movies currently in existence wouldn't benefit from it. Decades from now there may be plenty of movies filmed and mastered in 8K or higher but it won't happen anytime soon.

[ol_Dut]

4k, 16k, 32k, it's all a lot of hoopla. Blu-ray is as far down this road I am going to go. With dvd still the dominant home format, anything past blu-ray seems like it's targeting a really small market.

[TM2-Megatron]

There will probably be future standards and resolutions for film presentations, but I think UHD is probably as good as it will get for home media. A good UHD transfer today will give us a presentation that's actually superior to the vast majority of theatrical presentations today, and better than many movies (from the digital era, anyway) are even capable of. Films shot in the film era can be scanned at resolutions higher than 4K, but the benefit would be marginal.

I think instead they'll focus on increasing the color gamut. First we'll get displays capable of 100% of Rec. 2020, and sometime after that they'll start trying for screens that can display 100% of the colors the human eye is capable of seeing. That will benefit home presentation far more than increasing the resolution beyond UHD.

[1234567?]

I'll chime, 8k, 16k, 32k, are real possibility's. Of course on a 70 ft plus size screen.
In 30 years we could have bigger screens in home requiring 8k to enjoy.
The human eye can catch so much resolution. If you sit 1 foot away of course you can notice more detail of native 8k. 10 feet away that resolution drops, that's why bigger screens are needed. So I imagine sometime there will be a push for something new and bigger always.

[steve1971]

I'm already at the point to where "enough is enough" with no upgrades planed except for the addition of a subwoofer. My top of the line 2014 Sony 55inch W900A is still running as strong and looks as good as it ever has so there is no upgrades there. I'm running a 7.2 surround sound system so I am all good there as well. I have zero interest in 4K/HDR or the possible fourth coming 8K format so 1080p Blu ray is it for me. Anything else is over kill as some call it. Now down the road if and when I do get another tv it will be OLED or a projection system but that's year's down the road or until my W900A burn's itself out which knock on wood doesnt happen for a long while. So I am at the point where enough is enough except when it come's to movie buying.

[Yungheat]

Originally Posted by steve1971

I'm already at the point to where "enough is enough" with no upgrades planed except for the addition of a subwoofer. My top of the line 2014 Sony 55inch W900A is still running as strong and looks as good as it ever has so there is no upgrades there. I'm running a 7.2 surround sound system so I am all good there as well. I have zero interest in 4K/HDR or the possible fourth coming 8K format so 1080p Blu ray is it for me. Anything else is over kill as some call it. Now down the road if and when I do get another tv it will be OLED or a projection system but that's year's down the road or until my W900A burn's itself out which knock on wood doesnt happen for a long while. So I am at the point where enough is enough except when it come's to movie buying.

I agree with you 100% my Sony 65 w850a is imo better than some 4K TV's I've seen I hope it last a long time but like you Steve I don't give into the 4K hype I have a Samsung 55 4K in my bedroom and my Sony produces better PQ

[nikon76]

Yeah, as far as color reproduction and all of the expansion supposedly inherent in 4k and up, I could care less, myself. I'm more apt to be watching films that were shot on film, and if they are digitally captured and more modern, they are always freaking muted in post to be dreary, anyway so...I think I'll stick with 1080p. Even on my 40" display, all I have to do is pretend I'm in the back row of the theater and it's good to go. Best seat in the house when I'm out, which is rare these days anyway since all movies are cgi superhero garbage with no more cerebral or charismatic screenplays happening. 1080p, "SWEETBERRY WINE!"

[78deluxe]

Originally Posted by 1234567?

I'll chime, 8k, 16k, 32k, are real possibility's. Of course on a 70 ft plus size screen.
In 30 years we could have bigger screens in home requiring 8k to enjoy.
The human eye can catch so much resolution. If you sit 1 foot away of course you can notice more detail of native 8k. 10 feet away that resolution drops, that's why bigger screens are needed. So I imagine sometime there will be a push for something new and bigger always.

So in 30 years are homes are going to be larger? That is the only justification for higher resolution, sitting in front of a larger screen farther away.

4K projectors with a 120 inch screen are already way larger than 99.9% of home theaters can handle with the proper viewing distance.

Sitting 4 feet away from a 65 inch tv does not allow you to see the entire image clearly, your vision cannot have all of the screen in focus.

[Ggould1975]

I'm at that point as well where enough is enough. If I ever had to replace my tv then I will just go out and get whatever tv I want and like. I have had my 55 inch LED Sony tv for almost 5 yrs now and I still love it and works really well. No upgrading at all for me either like others have said. I'm at the point in my life where what I got is good enough and bluray itself has a long way to go and seems to be doing well for the most part since it has come out. As for 4k I could care less really.

[flyry]

Originally Posted by ol_Dut

4k, 16k, 32k, it's all a lot of hoopla. Blu-ray is as far down this road I am going to go. With dvd still the dominant home format, anything past blu-ray seems like it's targeting a really small market.

I just don't understand how people catch watch HD cable on their large TVs and then watch a 20 year tech/quality for movies on DVD.

How do they not see the difference?

Makes no sense to me

[Krelldog1977]

Originally Posted by ol_Dut

4k, 16k, 32k, it's all a lot of hoopla. Blu-ray is as far down this road I am going to go. With dvd still the dominant home format, anything past blu-ray seems like it's targeting a really small market.

IMHO,
Many will go no further than Blu-ray, and if they have the hardware, 4k will be used for special releases, and for those seeking the very very best in visual entertainment.

But with flat screens getting larger and lighter (on the wallet as well ), the market for 4k will slowly grow, and not ultimately fail in my view. If I had a 72" or 80"+ screen I'd be more interested in 4k than now.....but that won't be for quite some time...
enjoy what u got! things are ever evolving in this arena...

[Dwayne]

Originally Posted by nikon76

Is 4k all that is being pushed or are the collectors and HD aficionados going to be pushing for 6k, 8k, 15k? WTF? When will it be good enough? All joking aside, I am looking for some technical information that will set the record straight for "when is enough enough"? What can properly capture and display 35mm, 70mm film and what is the ceiling resolution?

Is 1080p good enough? Is 4k the limit? What could 8k do for us, speaking in terms of resolution? Would it be overkill? Let's mix and match original formats with K resolutions and see what sticks...

Rest assured that 4K is not the end for video. 8K already exist, and thing's will get much better as time goes on, however for now, the majority of people including myself are very content with thing's as they are. The people that are consumed with keeping up with the newest and latest gear has alway's been a small niche, and this will never change. The majority of us would make the move to 4K audio/video home theater gear if the price was affordable, but it has never been cheap to enjoy the movie theater experience in our home's, so it come's down to what is practical and affordable, without going overboard .

[Anthony P]

Originally Posted by nikon76

Is 4k all that is being pushed or are the collectors and HD aficionados going to be pushing for 6k, 8k, 15k? WTF? When will it be good enough?

For me it will never be good enough, video, audio or anything else (3D, motion....). why shouldn't technology improve? Why accept mediocrity?

All joking aside, I am looking for some technical information that will set the record straight for "when is enough enough"? What can properly capture and display 35mm, 70mm film and what is the ceiling resolution?

There is no definitive answer.
1)film:
-- a)film is a piece of plastic with a coating that creates the image, so depending on the chemicals used for the coating the image could be grainier or finer and more detailed.
-- b) film can and does degrade, so how many times it was shown and how it was maintained when not shown (temperature and humidity controlled room?) will affect the final picture quality
-- c) film is copied. The original negative comes from the camera, they use light and the negative to make a positive on a new film but because of b) then then use that positive to make negatives & positives..... so it is a lot like a photocopy of a photocopy of a ..... So like with photocopies if you have the original negative you will have the most detail, while the one that was shown in theatres and is several generations off will have less detail to start off with.

2)what is the question?
this might seem odd (especially as point #2) but digital (resolution as discussed here) is made up of squares, film is not, so no matter the digital resolution it will never be a perfect match to the film, it is like asking how small will the squares need to be to make a circle, the smaller the squares the closer you will get but it will never be a perfect match because squares don't have curbs. So it is about close enough so that it does not matter or close enough because we don't need the detail in the artefacts. And then we need to ask "what does it mean to be close enough?"

now some people use http://www.motionfx.gr/files/35mm_re...on_english.pdf or similar too say
35mm is a bit over 5k ( page 5 neg) others use it to say around 4k (page 5 release print/answer print) others will look at part 5 and say the highest (average) observed in any one point of one of the theatres was 875 (just over 2k) and say 4K is needed, others will say that is the highest and barely over 2k so 2k is good enough.

But as it says in the beginning

It is important to underline that the tests were not conceived as a research project intended to measure the ultimate resolution possible of the 35mm cinema film system nor to predict what could be achieved with developmental equipment, film stocks, processing, or projectors.

3) why does film matter?

I am not being facetious, many great films have been made on film, but even if there was a definitive answer "film =Xk" won't you want to watch the newest movies? what if it was shot on a camera that has resolution Z>X, wouldn't it be worth while having Z resolution at home for the films that are shot on Z? I often watch and re-watch old favourites, but I also watch some of the good films that come out every year and just because last month I re-watched Metropolis (1927 silent movie shot in b&w 4:3) does not mean that I would want my system to be limited to that.


PS there is also more than just resolution

[Bugg]

Unfortunately that new 64K MegaVideoVision edition of Predator will still have a ton of DNR.