New H.265 twice as efficient as H.264!

[DenonCI]

My personal issue with 4K is that the majority of the people in a home environment sit too far away from their displays for 1080p, yet alone 4K. They will get no perceived benefit from the upgrade. I do see a benefit on the studio side though because 1080p (or 2K if you prefer), has less resolution than 35mm film and 4K is an upgrade in that realm. On the personal side, I'd prefer to see 10 or 12 bit color versus higher resolution because I think the overall benefits are better.

[Tech-UK]

Yeah, 4:2:2 10/12-bit interests me more than increase in resolution.

[Penton-Man]

Originally Posted by DenonCI

My personal issue with 4K is that the majority of the people in a home environment sit too far away from their displays for 1080p, yet alone 4K. They will get no perceived benefit from the upgrade. I do see a benefit on the studio side though because 1080p (or 2K if you prefer), has less resolution than 35mm film and 4K is an upgrade in that realm. On the personal side, I'd prefer to see 10 or 12 bit color versus higher resolution because I think the overall benefits are better.

Personally, when I was in college I saw little (or no) perceived value in having to take some required ‘core courses’ in order to qualify for admission into graduate school because they wouldn’t help me that much in pursuit of that advanced doctorate degree. The admissions officers (the *determining power*) of all the grad schools didn’t really care what I personally preferred though.

At the very least, it is hoped that 4K (over time, meaning years) will drive the sales of cheaper, larger flat panel displays, which is itself is a good thing because bigger and cheaper is always better and the added ‘largeness’ should also serve to more ‘value’ being had at ‘typical’ viewing distances. Regardless of whether or not that ultimately comes to fruition, I know you’ve been away from the forum for quite some time now so I’ll post an exchange that Kris and I previously had on *the value* of 4K.

Originally Posted by Kris Deering

I agree Penton, lots of stuff out there that would be far more intriguing and obvious than 4K, which to me is a buzz number like 240Hz and all that crap was.

I had a chance to go and visit Brightside in Vancouver Canada years ago before Dolby bought them out and took over their HDR work. I saw the early prototypes of Dolby's HDR LCD display and the difference HDR and near infinite contrast does to a display is amazing.

Originally Posted by Penton-Man

Well, I don’t mean to be totally dismissive of the ‘4K’ movement because for one, I am a 4K advocate and secondly, I understand that consumer electronics companies live for/depend upon year-to-year sales to make everything work on their end and honestly, no fault to marketing folk……for engineers, 4K has been the far easier to build and bring to market than the other enhancements (WCG, HDR, HFR) which I’ve elaborated upon in past pages.

The BIG plan has always been to sell 4K and then augment it with enhancements as they became available.

There are strict scientific methodology studies (reproducible results by other investigating labs) which have actually graded the value of 4K vs. HFR vs. HDR as seen on 55-56” flat panels at a 9ft. screen to eye distance. The results of which indicate the later two parameters offer relatively more of an increase in picture quality as compared to simply boosting spatial resolution. To my knowledge no scientific study (published or unpublished) has compared the value of 4K 8-bit vs 1080p 10-bit or WCG (wide color gamut encoded) source material displayed on 4K vs 1080p monitors.

As an aside, not you Denon but, there are those on the *lecture/blogger circuit* who actually enjoy teasing apart the relative merit of 4K vs. other UHD parameters in an attempt to drive the direction of ‘Beyond HD’ consumer viewing in the home by shaming the consumer electronics display manufacturers into doing what they (the lecturers) want to be worked on from a ‘purist engineering perspective standpoint’ (i.e. concentrate on other UHD parameters and just leave spatial resolution alone at the 1080 level). Good luck with that antagonistic strategy.

I prefer the power-holding entities who are actual stakeholders in Beyond HD to work with each other in terms of mutual concessions and compromises rather than the ‘shaming strategy’. I think that eventually a reasonable combination (if only in a step-wise fashion) can be settled upon where we can progress beyond the specs of what we currently watch at home now. You’ll note there is no 1080p spatial resolution option listed in the highly regarded B.T. 2020 -
http://www.itu.int/dms_pubrec/itu-r/...8-I!!PDF-E.pdf