4K Blu-ray content on the horizon?

[Anthony P]

Originally Posted by Terjyn

And it's hilarious that your examples basically prove what I said, that "TVs" won't be 80+" standard, or fail to address how it's still a form-factor issue in the shutter concept. Just because it's a shutter doesn't mean I magically get more space in my room for it.

I think he fails in explaining it, but I agree with him. I just made a post on the other 4k thread so I hope you don't mind if I copy it

[Show spoiler]

Originally Posted by ZoetMB

Also, after the splurge of McMansions, homes are getting smaller again, not larger, so the potential market for very large screen sizes, especially in cities, is not that great.

I don't get the connection. Do you think in order to properly watch a movie you need a mcmansion? this is what THX has to say about screen size to distance
http://www.thx.com/consumer/home-ent...r/hdtv-set-up/

Originally Posted by THX

How do you calculate the best seat-to-screen distance for a plasma, LCD TV or projection screen? Divide the size of your screen by .84 (screen size is measured diagonally). For example, a 65-inch TV divided by .84 equals a 77-inch viewing distance (6.5 feet).

now I am not saying their metric is the only one (personaly I would say with today’s tech you can easily go to just 1x screen width and with 4k even easier) but THX is a respectable organisation in the field and since they neither manufacture nor sell TVs it is not about getting people to pay more for larger displays. So are you saying that someone needs a McMansion in order to have a room where their head is 77" from their TV (after all I think you would agree that a 65" TV is much larger then the norm), just to put it in perspective a twin/double bed is 75" and a queen, king is 80" so if you have a bed and it is not from one wall to the other you can definitely have a large screen. But my guess is most people sit at around 10' plus from the display and that would mean 8.4' screen (or ~100" diagonal)

If you look at most new apartments being build in Manhattan, for example, most of the architecture is floor-to-ceiling windows of continuous glass in much of the apartment. There's actually very little wall space and very little space that can be dedicated to a screen of any size, never mind a screen larger than 65".

I don't see how that is relevant or makes any sense, you can have a display in front of windows, or even in the middle of a room, for example, one of my friends has an apartment in Ottawa windows on two of the sides over looking the river and parliament (gorgeous view), he wanted to enjoy it so the seats face the windows, he has blinds and a screen, when he is not watching TV or wants to enjoy the view it is all open and he can sit out enjoy the view and almost think he is in the country at night when wanting to watch TV he closes the blinds and pulls down the screen and turns on the projector.

An other example is my sister, her basement is an open floor plan, part of it is a gym with exercise equipment and part of it is a play room for the kids, between the two she has a 42" TV on a swivel stand, if the kids want to watch something while playing the TV faces that way, if someone wants to watch something while exercising they rotate the TV 180 degrees and they can watch something while exercising.

I really don't get why windows or open floor plan means someone can't have a TV in their home.

the reality is that most people can enjoy the big screen instead of the little screen experience at home and I have never heard of anyone that decided to go with a smaller screen because the previous one was too big. The reality is that in the 30's a TV was on average around 11" and since then the sizes have kept on growing with every passing decade and there is no sign that it will stop. The excuses given for why "people won't have big screens" do appear to be mired in what they have and use now. You said "doesn't mean I magically get more space in my room for it." but where is the space needed? it is not for how far one sits (i.e. I can't sit 30' from the TV- since you can most likely sit as far from the TV as you do know but just enjoy it more because it fills more of your vision) and if one day, for example, there is cheap roll up OLED, then placing it probably won't be much of an issue either. Now if the issue is "TV", then let's call it a display. Traditionally a TV is a display with a TV tuner and a Monitor is a display without one, and for this discussion it does not matter.

[ZoetMB]

Originally Posted by ZoetMB

Also, after the splurge of McMansions, homes are getting smaller again, not larger, so the potential market for very large screen sizes, especially in cities, is not that great.

If you look at most new apartments being build in Manhattan, for example, most of the architecture is floor-to-ceiling windows of continuous glass in much of the apartment. There's actually very little wall space and very little space that can be dedicated to a screen of any size, never mind a screen larger than 65". In fact, there's very little room for bookcases, so these apartments are really being designed with a portable, virtual world in mind.

Originally Posted by Anthony P

I don't get the connection. Do you think in order to properly watch a movie you need a mcmansion? this is what THX has to say about screen size to distance
http://www.thx.com/consumer/home-ent...r/hdtv-set-up/

Who said anything about "properly"? If you don't have wall space, you can't really have a very large-screen TV no matter what you want. I've been in several brand new million dollar NYC apartments and there's no place for a very large TV. About the best they can do is a 32" sitting on a dresser in a bedroom.

I was in a small house in Woodstock, NY last week and the only place where even a 50" could have gone is blocked by a heating stove. They've got a tiny TV (probably 22" or smaller) in the kitchen and that's the only TV in the house.

It's not a matter of what's proper or what's wanted, but what's practical. If it doesn't fit, it doesn't fit. And that's aside from the generation of people who are perfectly happy watching TV on their computer, iPad or even their phone screen.

[Anthony P]

Originally Posted by ZoetMB

Who said anything about "properly"? If you don't have wall space, you can't really have a very large-screen TV no matter what you want. I've been in several brand new million dollar NYC apartments and there's no place for a very large TV. About the best they can do is a 32" sitting on a dresser in a bedroom.

I was in a small house in Woodstock, NY last week and the only place where even a 50" could have gone is blocked by a heating stove. They've got a tiny TV (probably 22" or smaller) in the kitchen and that's the only TV in the house.

It's not a matter of what's proper or what's wanted, but what's practical. If it doesn't fit, it doesn't fit.

why did you not quote everything. I already replied to all this garbage in the previous post. Post a floor plan of the Woodstock plan and I am sure I could find a way for them to have a much bigger screen in the home if they wanted to.

And that's aside from the generation of people who are perfectly happy watching TV on their computer, iPad or even their phone screen.

there is no such generation. Don't get me wrong, there are kids that are happy watching on PC, ipad or phone in many situations. But sooner or later they will grow up and then they will have a home and family and need something big enough so that they can share it together and with friends comfortably. You can’t look at teens or early 20’s and pretend it means anything anyone that is 30+ knows that, when you are young what you care for (independence and high risk tolerance) fade away once you become more mature.

[Steedeel]

Originally Posted by ZoetMB

Who said anything about "properly"? If you don't have wall space, you can't really have a very large-screen TV no matter what you want. I've been in several brand new million dollar NYC apartments and there's no place for a very large TV. About the best they can do is a 32" sitting on a dresser in a bedroom.

I was in a small house in Woodstock, NY last week and the only place where even a 50" could have gone is blocked by a heating stove. They've got a tiny TV (probably 22" or smaller) in the kitchen and that's the only TV in the house.

It's not a matter of what's proper or what's wanted, but what's practical. If it doesn't fit, it doesn't fit. And that's aside from the generation of people who are perfectly happy watching TV on their computer, iPad or even their phone screen.

If the day comes when film and tv is solely consumed on mobiles the film industry will be dead as far as i am concerned.

Zoe, i am glad i live in England if that is the case. Every single one of my friends has a lounge/living room big enough for at least 46 inch tv. most of them have enough space for a monster tv (a couple of them have 50 inch screens, me included.) Even our apartments have ample space for a decent set-up. Also, kids are staying with their parents for longer now because of the recession. Houses are going to need to be big and not smaller as you claim. Finally, younger people may well watch their iphones and ipads or laptops. however, they will one day maybe marry and trust me, the big tv will come into play then. Unless we are talking sport, for most couples tv watching is a shared experience, you cannot have that with a phone or tablet. you just cannot.

[ole geezer]

Originally Posted by Steedeel

If the day comes when film and tv is solely consumed on mobiles the film industry will be dead as far as i am concerned...

Speaking of screen sizes...

Unit sales of 3DTVs increased more than 100% during the five-week winter retail holiday period ending Dec. 24, according to new data from The NPD Group. While 3D movies remain a mainstay at the box office, 3D consumption in the home has been sluggish due in part to premium prices on 3DTVs, limited content availability and requisite eyewear, among other issues.

That said, 3DTVs accounted for one in five dollars spent on TVs during the holidays – underscored by the fact that sales of big screen TVs, 50 inches or bigger, increased more than 32%. One in six flat panel TVs sold were above 50 inches, with screen size considered a prerequisite for 3D viewing....

http://www.homemediamagazine.com/3d/...cket-100-26053

[ZoetMB]

Originally Posted by ole geezer

Speaking of screen sizes...

Unit sales of 3DTVs increased more than 100% during the five-week winter retail holiday period ending Dec. 24, according to new data from The NPD Group. While 3D movies remain a mainstay at the box office, 3D consumption in the home has been sluggish due in part to premium prices on 3DTVs, limited content availability and requisite eyewear, among other issues.

That said, 3DTVs accounted for one in five dollars spent on TVs during the holidays – underscored by the fact that sales of big screen TVs, 50 inches or bigger, increased more than 32%. One in six flat panel TVs sold were above 50 inches, with screen size considered a prerequisite for 3D viewing....

http://www.homemediamagazine.com/3d/...cket-100-26053

The 3D aspect of this is meaningless. I bought a new 55" TV this year and it happens to be 3D, but I don't watch any 3D on it - I don't even have any glasses. My brother bought a 55" and he did happen to get 5 pairs of glasses and he says he enjoys the 3D, but there are only two real tests:
- how many people bought the TV because it had 3D?
- how many 3D Blu-rays are being sold?
Furthermore only 20% of dollars was spent on 3D screens, which of course means that 80% wasn't. I'd say that's a pretty poor showing.

As far as large screen sizes are concerned, look at the last sentence. Only 1 in 6 panels sold were above 50". That's less than 17%. Even though I'm the one who argued that houses are getting smaller and apartments are gaining window space and losing wall space, so they can't handle large screens, even I would have thought that large screen share was greater than 17%.

[ole geezer]

Originally Posted by ZoetMB

The 3D aspect of this is meaningless. I bought a new 55" TV this year and it happens to be 3D, but I don't watch any 3D on it - I don't even have any glasses. My brother bought a 55" and he did happen to get 5 pairs of glasses and he says he enjoys the 3D, but there are only two real tests:
- how many people bought the TV because it had 3D?
- how many 3D Blu-rays are being sold?
Furthermore only 20% of dollars was spent on 3D screens, which of course means that 80% wasn't. I'd say that's a pretty poor showing.

I'd say it's a bloody miracle considering the scarcity of content. Kinda reminds me of the good ole HDTV days back in 2001 when my favorite program was the HD demo loop off my satellite service because other HD programming was almost non existent.

I do think it's significant that 3D sets have come down in price to the point where non 3D users such as yourself can get it as a bonus.

As far as large screen sizes are concerned, look at the last sentence. Only 1 in 6 panels sold were above 50". That's less than 17%. Even though I'm the one who argued that houses are getting smaller and apartments are gaining window space and losing wall space, so they can't handle large screens, even I would have thought that large screen share was greater than 17%.

Well...I've been using a large spare bedroom as a HT for the past 7 years and I swear by 9 foot wide screens.

Anyway, It's possible for anyone using a 720p 3D projector ($650) and a 3D Blu ray player ($90) along with shutter 3D glasses to get into wall size 3DTV these days. Man...that's the only way to fly.

[HD Goofnut]

Looks like 4K BDs are coming in 2013.
http://www.pocket-lint.com/news/4381...n-blu-ray-2013

[Anthony P]

Originally Posted by ZoetMB

The 3D aspect of this is meaningless. I bought a new 55" TV this year and it happens to be 3D, but I don't watch any 3D on it - I don't even have any glasses. My brother bought a 55" and he did happen to get 5 pairs of glasses and he says he enjoys the 3D, but there are only two real tests:
- how many people bought the TV because it had 3D?
- how many 3D Blu-rays are being sold?
Furthermore only 20% of dollars was spent on 3D screens, which of course means that 80% wasn't. I'd say that's a pretty poor showing.

As far as large screen sizes are concerned, look at the last sentence. Only 1 in 6 panels sold were above 50". That's less than 17%. Even though I'm the one who argued that houses are getting smaller and apartments are gaining window space and losing wall space, so they can't handle large screens, even I would have thought that large screen share was greater than 17%.

you are missing some key points

1) in a long and bad recession 17% market share is good for a luxury item.

2) the article mentioned TV sales, and TV does not include FP sales and every FP will be used for 50+" image so the % of displays >50" will actually be much higher. my guess 2 and even 3x as high once FP is factored in

3) this % would be important if everyone has 1 TV and we assume a fair sample (no reason not to suppose the latter part but the first is obviously wrong) but the reality is that most people tend to have multiple sets and those sets will tend to be different sizes. In Sept. Canada went digital OTA, my dad replaced his old EDTV in the kitchen with an HDTV that was <50" does that tell anyone what he has? no because the TV in the Den did not need replacing and it was 60". My guess everyone with at least one display that is over 50" will also have one display that is under 50". So % of TV sold will always tend to up-play smaller sets (i.e. if Joe buys a big screen, then obviously Joe has a big screen , he is calculated as a big screen owner and the conversation is moot, but if Joe buys a small screen, none of us can know if Joe has a big screen or not at home already.)

4) space and size owned are two different topics. Even if we had a correct ratio of households with >50" and<50" that still would not tell us if the person could have a larger screen or not in their home which is the discussion when you say they can't have a big screen. There are many reasons to buy smaller then what you can (how much money a person has to spend, what they consider important, how knowledgeable they are......)


PS also you quoted the article but yet you missed the most important part in your zeal to support your point "the fact that sales of big screen TVs, 50 inches or bigger, increased more than 32%"

which shows that even though houses are not getting bigger TVs are. And in a discussion of the future that growth is much more important than the size of TV they have today. Let’s face it in order to have a 4k display that will mean they will need to buy a new one.

[ZoetMB]

Originally Posted by Anthony P

PS also you quoted the article but yet you missed the most important part in your zeal to support your point "the fact that sales of big screen TVs, 50 inches or bigger, increased more than 32%"

.

That's because an increase of 32% means nothing when you're starting out with a small number. This reminds me of people who push vinyl LP. Sales of vinyl increased in 2011 by 36% and fans use this to argue that "vinyl is coming back". But it's still only 0.2% of all music units and 1.2% of all music long-form units. It's a rounding error. (And I'm a vinyl fan - still have 400 vinyl albums in my living room. But facts are facts.)

Furthermore, it was a biased article written more like a press release than researched journalism that emphasized a number representing a minority as a majority. Sets over 50" being 17% of the market is nothing to brag about. (To tell you the truth, I don't even believe that number is possible. I believe it has to be a larger percentage of HD sales. Unless computer monitors are being counted in that number, driving down the average size.)

But even though I think the market share of sets over 50" is actually larger than that article indicated, I still don't believe that the market for really large sizes 65" and above is going to be a large market for all the reasons I indicated. Even if the economy was better, I don't think it's going to be a large market. Having said that, I still support the development of 4K technology for the home.

[Steedeel]

Originally Posted by ZoetMB

Who said anything about "properly"? If you don't have wall space, you can't really have a very large-screen TV no matter what you want. I've been in several brand new million dollar NYC apartments and there's no place for a very large TV. About the best they can do is a 32" sitting on a dresser in a bedroom.

I was in a small house in Woodstock, NY last week and the only place where even a 50" could have gone is blocked by a heating stove. They've got a tiny TV (probably 22" or smaller) in the kitchen and that's the only TV in the house.

It's not a matter of what's proper or what's wanted, but what's practical. If it doesn't fit, it doesn't fit. And that's aside from the generation of people who are perfectly happy watching TV on their computer, iPad or even their phone screen.

I have just looked at some of the places you mentioned with floor to ceiling windows in various areas through NewYork. 90 percent of them had ample space for a large tv and the brochures even advertised 200 channel cable services. There was even considerable sized book shelves!