Concern over 4k and replacing

[Steedeel]

I find it odd that so many people are anti-4k. Especially on a forum that is all about high quality home entertainment. Maybe most of you guys have given up the ghost and accepted streaming as the next frontier. Get ready for the race to the bottom.

[Jegærn]

"sigh"

I just can`t understand the "digital download" hype that everyone thinks is the future
It takes 40 minutes today to download a 2gb game from Ps3 Store!?!?! And I have 100mbit internet access. How are they planning to release 50gb movies for streaming/downloading in the near future?!?!

They have to make a compromise.....And that will be picture and audio quality suffering!

The day they can offer me a 100% bluray quality download in about 30 minutes, I will download movies....but we ALL know that won`t happen anytime soon

I`m stickin to my physical collection.....I want to "OWN" my movies...not STREAM or "rent" them on netflix....

Føck the digital age!

[Steedeel]

Originally Posted by Jegærn

"sigh"

I just can`t understand the "digital download" hype that everyone thinks is the future
It takes 40 minutes today to download a 2gb game from Ps3 Store!?!?! And I have 100mbit internet access. How are they planning to release 50gb movies for streaming/downloading in the near future?!?!

They have to make a compromise.....And that will be picture and audio quality suffering!

The day they can offer me a 100% bluray quality download in about 30 minutes, I will download movies....but we ALL know that won`t happen anytime soon

I`m stickin to my physical collection.....I want to "OWN" my movies...not STREAM or "rent" them on netflix....

Føck the digital age!

Bravo! Bluray is going nowhere. Streaming is just a cable replacement (eventually)

[Spooked]

Originally Posted by PopcornBandit

Were you worried about the next format when you were collecting DVD's? I'm guessing not, so why worry about it now?

Because now he's got a wall full of 800 movies (give or take) and is probably running out of room.

(Well, that and he's probably reflecting on how much money he's spent on the aforementioned wall of movies... Well, I know I would be, lol.)

[mredman]

Originally Posted by Steedeel

Bravo! Bluray is going nowhere. Streaming is just a cable replacement (eventually)

exactly not to mention if all went digital then people would just download from the net illegally and studios would lose billions of dollars on the movie industry

[bluknight1]

Considering that there are many who do not even acknowledge Blu-ray, 4k won't take off for a while if at all. The companies behind it are rushing it out the door to try to make a buck, just like 3D was rushed a few years back before Blu-ray had completely reached a saturation level worthy of it. I as a consumer am not willing to keep upgrading at such a fast pace. Heck, there's a lot of content that still hasn't made its way to blu-ray yet. So the studios don't need to rush to adopt 4k. I will, however, say that classic film restorations need to be done at a minimum of 4k resolution (not a crap 2k scan or a 4k scan with a 2k workflow) to get the maximum out of the source and to future-proof them for the 4k market when/if that takes off.

[steve1971]

Originally Posted by Steelmaker

I wouldn't waste my time (and money) on it honestly. Unless you plan on displaying movies on a VERY large screen, 4K is a complete waste of time for 99.9% of the people out there with home theaters. I have watched 4K on a 60" display and at normal viewing distances, the difference between it and 1080p is extremely small! It's nowhere near the jump from DVD to Blu Ray. 4K is going to be a niche market. The order of diminishing returns is too great for it to take off like DVD and even blu ray have.

Damn Steelmaker you hit the nail right on the head and I couldn't have said it better then you did.

[Steedeel]

Originally Posted by steve1971

Damn Steelmaker you hit the nail right on the head and I couldn't have said it better then you did.

I'm guessing there will be a big difference in quality.

[Steelmaker]

Originally Posted by Steedeel

I'm guessing there will be a big difference in quality.

You would guess wrong and anyone who claims otherwise would be a victim of the "placebo effect."

Like I've said, I've watched varying 4K content running on Sony's latest 4K set (I think it was 60" or somewhere in that neighborhood) at a distance of about 10 feet. I've gone back and forth, watching 4K content to watching 1080p blu ray. The differences are so minimal that I had a VERY hard time seeing the advantage. Finally the ONLY thing I could conclude was that up close you could see the improvement in pixel count on the 4K set but it wasn't anything jaw dropping. At normal viewing distances both pictures look virtually the same to me.

The only way I see 4K TV's becoming popular is if it by default becomes the spiritual successor to 1080p sets where 4K is all you can buy. If given the choice, I honestly don't see how anyone would pay so much more for a TV that clearly has no distinct advantage over the much more affordable 1080p choices.

[mjbethancourt]

I will join the chorus:
4k is Laserdisc: great for some people, irrelevant for most. The market is years away from being ready for another full-on format shift, consumer attitudes are not up for it, too many people only just barely got that big screen LED and BD collection that they've wanted for five years but couldn't afford due to the world's economy being in the toilet. There will always be a steady stream of newer, better stuff, but most of it does not take off.

When 4k or better does become the mass-market standard (in 7-10 years, is my guess), I will be glad that the bulk of my BD collection is 20th century classics that will never need an upgrade. For the majority of my collection, the BD format has enough "headroom" to reveal the limitations of the source prints or their scans. How much more "grain" do I need to see on Casablanca?

[Steedeel]

Originally Posted by Steelmaker

You would guess wrong and anyone who claims otherwise would be a victim of the "placebo effect."

Like I've said, I've watched varying 4K content running on Sony's latest 4K set (I think it was 60" or somewhere in that neighborhood) at a distance of about 10 feet. I've gone back and forth, watching 4K content to watching 1080p blu ray. The differences are so minimal that I had a VERY hard time seeing the advantage. Finally the ONLY thing I could conclude was that up close you could see the improvement in pixel count on the 4K set but it wasn't anything jaw dropping. At normal viewing distances both pictures look virtually the same to me.

The only way I see 4K TV's becoming popular is if it by default becomes the spiritual successor to 1080p sets where 4K is all you can buy. If given the choice, I honestly don't see how anyone would pay so much more for a TV that clearly has no distinct advantage over the much more affordable 1080p choices.

We will see.

[bobbydrugar]

You want a spiritual successor well Here you go. If you had an average user at a big box store looking at that 4K Ultra High Definition TV at under a $1000 and the 50" Panny Plasma at $700 for a measly 1080P HD which one seems more appealing to Joe six pack?

It's unfortunately the way of things in that the old often has to make way for the new.

Don't get me wrong I will likely not be upgrading my current Blu-Ray's to 4K versions probably ever (since 1080P up-scaled on the better 4K T.V.'s will be completely indistinguishable from native 4K minus the expanded color gamut which most will not notice) but as new films come out in the future as native 4k releases I would have no problem buying them.

P.S. I will not be looking at a 4K set until it is 4K, 240Hz or better native refresh, OLED at 65-70", and less than $3000. Oh and there will need to be a delivery mechanism for the content like HDMI 2.0 with a BDXL or Better drive system.

Thanks,
T

[lobosrul]

Originally Posted by bobbydrugar

You want a spiritual successor well Here you go. If you had an average user at a big box store looking at that 4K Ultra High Definition TV at under a $1000 and the 50" Panny Plasma at $700 for a measly 1080P HD which one seems more appealing to Joe six pack?

It's unfortunately the way of things in that the old often has to make way for the new.

Don't get me wrong I will likely not be upgrading my current Blu-Ray's to 4K versions probably ever (since 1080P up-scaled on the better 4K T.V.'s will be completely indistinguishable from native 4K minus the expanded color gamut which most will not notice) but as new films come out in the future as native 4k releases I would have no problem buying them.

P.S. I will not be looking at a 4K set until it is 4K, 240Hz or better native refresh, OLED at 65-70", and less than $3000. Oh and there will need to be a delivery mechanism for the content like HDMI 2.0 with a BDXL or Better drive system.

Thanks,
T

If you think that sub $1000 4k TV has anywhere near as good PQ than the best 1080p sets, you are loopy in the head.

I agree completely with your "postscript". I'd just add a 3d system that doesn't require glasses.

[bobbydrugar]

I don't but joe six pack listening to the best buy sales person will think so. Also to be fair the best 1080p sets are nowhere near that price tag in that size.

T

[jlk5844]

Maybe they should scan in 8K. They did it with Baraka and Samsara (even though they're currently downscaled to 1080p). Imagine seeing those in full 8K. That would be amazing.

[mjbethancourt]

Originally Posted by jlk5844

Maybe they should scan in 8K. They did it with Baraka and Samsara (even though they're currently downscaled to 1080p). Imagine seeing those in full 8K. That would be amazing.

On new films in the future, they will; but there would be no point doing so with back-catalog. Baraka and Samsara are on ultimate-quality 70mm, they are an exception. An 8k scan is not going to change a middling 35mm film into an Imax spectacle. Also, that stuff costs money. It's been hard enough getting studios to shell out to make 2k scans of catalog titles for BDs that are only going to sell a few thousand copies, it's just not going to happen for 4k or 8k.

[mrr1]

I am never going to have a giant projector screen or anything, so 4K would be a useless upgrade for me.

[John Floyd]

deleted by JF

[Steedeel]

Originally Posted by John Floyd

I was at Fry's over the weekend as was looking at the 65 " 4K Sony for kicks. Sure it looks good, but not THAT good to justify the price. Some guy was actually buying one while I was there. But if he has the $$$ to blow on it...well...good for him if it makes him happy.
I'm done with buying new technology like this right when it hits the market. I learned my lesson buying a Phillips 1080 42" tv back in 2005 for 2 thousand! I still regret that purchase to this very day - $$$ completely wasted. Sure I was one of the first to have a flat screen, but so what!!!

To me, the quality difference is not huge between 4K and 1080P. For me, 1080P suits me just fine.

What was it displaying? Let's wait until true 4k makes our jaws drop.

[John Floyd]

deleted by JF