Skipping 4K and waiting for 8K?

[Roy_Batty]

Originally Posted by Lee A Stewart

2001: A Space Odyssey’s 8K TV broadcast doesn’t quite go beyond the infinite

https://www.theverge.com/circuitbrea...k-tv-nhk-japan

Reading the Article, it's obvious that this was not an ideal viewing presentation. It would be interesting to view 2001 with a high end 8k projector in better conditions to see if the viewing experience improved.

[Angry Virginian]

Through my years of collecting - VHS, Laser Disc, DVD, HD Blu-ray, 4K Blu-ray, and digitals - one thing that I am sure of is that Hollywood will find a way to milk my money again & again.

[Geoff D]

Originally Posted by theone2610

Hollywood has enough trouble of putting 4k DI to most transfers as it is, much less 8k if ever. Good luck rendering 8k SFX, it'll only take a few decades to complete lol.

They did 8K VFX for some of the IMAX shots in The Dark Knight, that was like 12 years ago (and no they're not still rendering them now ). It's not that 4K, 6K (also common for IMAX) or 8K can't be done, it's that the pressures of turnaround times for most major Hollywood action movies are so tight and as they're dealing with thousands of shots, literally, then 4K just isn't all that feasible.

Where you do see 4K VFX a lot is on streaming, it's one of Netflix's demands that all VFX is 4K, not simply upscaled but true 4K. But there it helps that they don't have to deliver 101 different deliverables for different theatres, they don't have to deal with 3D, they're not wall-to-wall VFX e.g. Daredevil had like a thousand 4K VFX shots spread over an entire season, not just two hours. But there's the rub: because it's all going out on streaming then you've very little chance of getting it on a 4K disc, though Stranger Things has happened, and the same will be true of 8K as I think streaming will be the main platform for such content. But you're not going to have an entire new 8K disc format off the back of Stranger Things season 11, you know?

[Lee A Stewart]

Originally Posted by Roy_Batty

Reading the Article, it's obvious that this was not an ideal viewing presentation. It would be interesting to view 2001 with a high end 8k projector in better conditions to see if the viewing experience improved.

It was the only review I could find. Japanese homes are substantially smaller than USA homes. Not that many projector installations. Were there any consumer 8K projectors at the time of the broadcast?

[Fjodor2000]

Originally Posted by theone2610

Good luck rendering 8k SFX, it'll only take a few decades to complete lol.

Just a matter of $$$. 4x pixels compared to 4K => 4x virtual machines running in the cloud, and then the rendering will take the same time as for 4K.

[Fjodor2000]

Originally Posted by theone2610

Good luck rendering 8k SFX, it'll only take a few decades to complete lol.

Just a matter of $$$. 8K has 4x pixels compared to 4K => 4x virtual machines running in the cloud, and then the rendering will take the same time as for 4K.

[blackadder213]

I have no fantasies of ever having a screen large enough to make 8k justified.

[TheBondFan]

Difference between blu-ray and 4k is not that huge, so imagine difference between 4k and 8k.

[sapiendut]

You find the WCG, HDR, 10-bit in UHD not that huge compared to HD?

[Fjodor2000]

Originally Posted by TheBondFan

Difference between blu-ray and 4k is not that huge, so imagine difference between 4k and 8k.

I think it differs between movies how much it benefits from 4K. Looking at reference quality 4K BD movies such as Lucy (2014) and The Revenant (2015) really shows you what the format is capable of. That not all 4K BD movies reach such video quality is not a fault of the format, but rather a fault of the production or capabilities of the technical equipment used (cameras, film, ...).

To me there is no doubt that well produced 4K BD is a significant video quality improvement over HD BD, even on my 55" TV.

Whether 4K->8K would bring additional improvements in video quality (if the 8K is well produced), I do not know. But I do know that 4K does not provide the same image quality as looking out my window, so surely the human eye must be able to register higher resolution than 4K at normal viewing distances. I.e. improvements in image quality over 4K ought to be technically possible to achieve?

[obmas]

Movies are hardly mastered in native 4K even now. Don't count on actual native 8K content. May as well just buy 4K now, and have an 8K player (when available) do the upscale.

[Fjodor2000]

Originally Posted by obmas

Movies are hardly mastered in native 4K even now. Don't count on actual native 8K content. May as well just buy 4K now, and have an 8K player (when available) do the upscale.

Yes, I think this is a good point.

I.e. for existing movies produced on 35 mm film (which is the overwhelming majority), it's not technically possible to extract more than 4K or perhaps 6K pixels even when produced under ideal conditions using modern cameras and film. Most movies are not produced under such ideal conditions, so the resolution that is possible to extract is then less than 4K. Digital special effects are not rendered above 4K either (unless in exceptional cases). And digitally recorded movies are usually recorded at 4K/6K or below.

=> Conclusion 1: Assuming a 4K BD of an existing movie is well produced, I can safely buy it knowing that any future format will not improve the video quality much. (The best it could improve is likely to reach the same quality as the lossless 4K DI master.)

=>Conclusion 2: However for any future movies, if they are recorded in 8K/16K/... and actually are able to deliver such high resolution, then a future 8K/16K BD format would likely also be able to improve over 4K BD. But this should only be of interest when such movies are actually available. I.e. it should not affect Conclusion 1, i.e. that it is "safe" to buy 4K BD of existing movies without risking having to upgrade to a new 8K BD format of the same movie later to get further video quality improvements.

Having said this, if a 4K BD is not well produced, then that's another story. I.e. a re-mastered or re-encoded new 4K BD can improve over an existing 4K BD. But that does not have to do with 4K vs 8K.

[teddyballgame]

TRU forkay is plenty of information for screens below 80". Resolution is just one aspect of picture quality and 8k is the point of diminishing returns. This "8k" gimmick seems like a marketing pivot because manufacturers have hit a wall when it comes to the maturation of LCD/LED tech. The focus now should be towards better pixels not necessarily just more. Perfect control of luminosity (self emissive or at least a LOT more dimming zones), more nits, color depth, on and on.

[smithb]

Since I have no current need to upgrade to 4K UHD, why would I consider 8K? But, if there is a market to support it, more power to it. I would never question those that desire and can afford continuing progress.

[CHONK!]

I’m skipping driving cars, for the same reason... I’m waiting for Elon’s magnet cars that tunnel travel.

[Roy_Batty]

Originally Posted by TheBondFan

Difference between blu-ray and 4k is not that huge, so imagine difference between 4k and 8k.

Really??.... I suppose it depends on your display. On quite a few 4k uhd's, I own the difference is very noticeable !.

[plissken99]

Originally Posted by Roy_Batty

Really??.... I suppose it depends on your display. On quite a few 4k uhd's, I own the difference is very noticeable !.

Same.. I dare say 1080p to 4K feels like as big a jump as DVD to 1080p, if not bigger.

[smithb]

Originally Posted by CHONK!

I’m skipping driving cars, for the same reason... I’m waiting for Elon’s magnet cars that tunnel travel.

Except, I'm not waiting on anything. I'm enjoying plenty of content that isn't available on 4K UHD. My lack of upgrading is solely based on not being able to justify the hardware expense for what would account to less than 1% of my collection. If that situation ever changes, I will reconsider.

[Joce]

I would not be surprised if 35mm productions could have benefits from a proper 8K restoration. We were saying for years that a 16mm OCN is equivalent to 2K and that any higher scan/restoration would be totally useless... We were totally wrong.

[CHONK!]

Then why are you in the 4K thread of this website, trying to justify your opinion to people who obviously like what 4K UHD has to offer?

If you can’t see the difference, that’s fine. If you can see the difference, but can’t justify the purchase, that’s fine too. But, you’re barking up the wrong tree.

Enjoy your DVDs

Originally Posted by smithb

Except, I'm not waiting on anything. I'm enjoying plenty of content that isn't available on 4K UHD. My lack of upgrading is solely based on not being able to justify the hardware expense for what would account to less than 1% of my collection. If that situation ever changes, I will reconsider.