Ultra High Definition Television

[tilallr1]

At the end of the day, the human eye can only perceive the difference to a degree. From what I have read and seen, you need at least a +100" screen sitting at normal viewing distances to see the difference between HD and UHD. Since that doesn't fit the majority of individuals, nor will it ever, I doubt that this technology will ever become mainstream. Eventually it will, but I give it 20+ years.

Here is the chart I reference:



But it is beautiful to see that they are still improving the technology.

[rlf3911]

Display technology > our eyes. 1080p will be fine for many years to come. Why would I buy a new TV with higher resolution, just to have to sit 5 feet closer to notice any difference?

[bkbluray]

LOL I still don't have a big enough TV to fully appreciate the benefit of 1080p, so there's no way I'm getting this for a LONG time.

Unbelievable picture though!

[victorvondoom88]

Originally Posted by tilallr1

At the end of the day, the human eye can only perceive the difference to a degree. From what I have read and seen, you need at least a +100" screen sitting at normal viewing distances to see the difference between HD and UHD. Since that doesn't fit the majority of individuals, nor will it ever, I doubt that this technology will ever become mainstream. Eventually it will, but I give it 20+ years.

Here is the chart I reference:



But it is beautiful to see that they are still improving the technology.

Sweet I'm all set then 12' from 120" screen

[tilallr1]

Originally Posted by victorvondoom88

Sweet I'm all set then 12' from 120" screen

Yes you would see the difference with a upgrade to UHD.

[bageleaterkkjji]

Who in the hell sits 5 feet from the tv then has 3x the space behind them ....have you ever walked into a house with the couch right infront of the tv and a big area behind it?

[Blu-ray Fanatic]

Originally Posted by bageleaterkkjji

Who in the hell sits 5 feet from the tv then has 3x the space behind them ....have you ever walked into a house with the couch right infront of the tv and a big area behind it?

Al Bundy?

[linkgx1]

Originally Posted by bageleaterkkjji

who in the hell sits 5 feet from the tv then has 3x the space behind them ....have you ever walked into a house with the couch right infront of the tv and a big area behind it?

mah house.

[simple man]

Originally Posted by bageleaterkkjji

Who in the hell sits 5 feet from the tv then has 3x the space behind them ....have you ever walked into a house with the couch right infront of the tv and a big area behind it?

PAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

[nathan_393]

They supposedly want to get this into homes by 2016-2020, according to Wikipedia (which I'll take with a grain of salt if anybody can tell me differently). But to me, this also indicates a new non-Blu technology (unless they manage to make a several-TB Blu-ray disc somehow). It'd be a whole new thing to buy into again, and from what other people have displayed online, it's probably not going to make a difference for 99% of people who aren't sitting 1.5 feet away from a computer monitor.

So why do this? That's what confuses me. I mean, I'm all for better technology, but we have a long way to go before LED technology sorts out some of its major kinks and a very long way to go before 3D becomes even a feasible option for the majority of consumers imo. What's with the electronic companies' rushes to get new tech out to us so quickly?

[SkillzthatKillz]

Originally Posted by nathan_393

They supposedly want to get this into homes by 2016-2020, according to Wikipedia (which I'll take with a grain of salt if anybody can tell me differently). But to me, this also indicates a new non-Blu technology (unless they manage to make a several-TB Blu-ray disc somehow). It'd be a whole new thing to buy into again, and from what other people have displayed online, it's probably not going to make a difference for 99% of people who aren't sitting 1.5 feet away from a computer monitor.

So why do this? That's what confuses me. I mean, I'm all for better technology, but we have a long way to go before LED technology sorts out some of its major kinks and a very long way to go before 3D becomes even a feasible option for the majority of consumers imo. What's with the electronic companies' rushes to get new tech out to us so quickly?

To keep guys like us buying new tv's every 5-10 years

[4K2K]

Originally Posted by victorvondoom88

Sweet I'm all set then 12' from 120" screen

Originally Posted by tilallr1

Yes you would see the difference with a upgrade to UHD.

Yes, you would see a difference (if you were watching UHD content), but you probably wouldn't be able to resolve any more than 2560x1440 res. I calculate that to resolve 2560x1440 res on a 120" screen, with 20:20 vision you'd need to be a maximum of 11.77 feet away.

Super Hi-Vision / UHD is 7680x4320 res. With a 120" screen at that resolution, if you wanted to fully resolve all the pixels, I think you'd need to be no more than 3.92 feet away.

[Petra_Kalbrain]

Ultra HDTV will only be useful if you build an ACTUAL COMMERCIAL THEATRE inside your house. At the average 50" TV size, there would be extremely negligible difference in image quality.

Where it might come in handy is in 3D rendering on smaller "big" screens.

[4K2K]

Originally Posted by Petra_Kalbrain

Ultra HDTV will only be useful if you build an ACTUAL COMMERCIAL THEATRE inside your house. At the average 50" TV size, there would be extremely negligible difference in image quality.

Where it might come in handy is in 3D rendering on smaller "big" screens.

Super-HiVision/UHDTV is 7680x4320 at 60 fps (and they're saying they might want to increase it above 60 fps). I don't think any actual commercial digital theatre can do that. But yes, projectors would be better if you wanted full res (and/or if they can make them big enough & cheap - OLED or something like - FOLED).

[linkgx1]

Originally Posted by Petra_Kalbrain

Ultra HDTV will only be useful if you build an ACTUAL COMMERCIAL THEATRE inside your house. At the average 50" TV size, there would be extremely negligible difference in image quality.

Where it might come in handy is in 3D rendering on smaller "big" screens.

Wait, then why is it that I can see differences in quality on my computer monitor? Even @ higher resolutions.

[aardvark77]

Uh, maybe because you're sitting 18" away?

[victorvondoom88]

Originally Posted by 4K2K

Yes, you would see a difference (if you were watching UHD content), but you probably wouldn't be able to resolve any more than 2560x1440 res. I calculate that to resolve 2560x1440 res on a 120" screen, with 20:20 vision you'd need to be a maximum of 11.77 feet away.

Super Hi-Vision / UHD is 7680x4320 res. With a 120" screen at that resolution, if you wanted to fully resolve all the pixels, I think you'd need to be no more than 3.92 feet away.

I can sit as close as 8' no problem. It's pretty intense that close and I prefer at least 10-12'. 11.77 feet is damn near 12' ~3" difference. I think I'd be okay and my vision is a hair better than 20:20 with my glasses.

[Steedeel]

Originally Posted by tilallr1

At the end of the day, the human eye can only perceive the difference to a degree. From what I have read and seen, you need at least a +100" screen sitting at normal viewing distances to see the difference between HD and UHD. Since that doesn't fit the majority of individuals, nor will it ever, I doubt that this technology will ever become mainstream. Eventually it will, but I give it 20+ years.

Here is the chart I reference:



But it is beautiful to see that they are still improving the technology.

Well, it is a push for the big screen tv to stay relevant and if 4k is a flop, we may be seeing the dying days of the big screen tv in the next ten years or so as more of the younger gen use tablets and smartphones. Personally, I hope 4k rescues the tv market as the consequences are too much for this film fan to bare!

[Blu-Dog]

Originally Posted by Steedeel

Well, it is a push for the big screen tv to stay relevant and if 4k is a flop, we may be seeing the dying days of the big screen tv in the next ten years or so as more of the younger gen use tablets and smartphones. Personally, I hope 4k rescues the tv market as the consequences are too much for this film fan to bare!

4K is not the issue. Price is the issue. Lunatics are trying to sell an 84" television for over $30,000 dollars, and that's not trying to save a market.

No one is using phones or tablets to watch movies by choice. It's a cheap alternative for people without a place of their own to view content. As long as the same people who market a big screen are making more money with small screens, you have this issue.

Saving a market means paying too much, for too little.

[gothic_hobbit]

I will wait for 8k.