Skipping 4K and waiting for 8K?

[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.

[Joce]

Is he still waiting for 8K ? Lol

[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.

[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.

[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?

[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.

[WBMakeVMarsMovieNOW]

Originally Posted by TheBondFan

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

the diff between blu-ray and UHD detail is beyond huge.... IF you watching something sourced in ideal fashion (NO 2k DIs, no scans of 35mm prints, no scans of original camera negative for stuff shot on certain stocks and with old, poor lenses banged around but instead shot on good film stock, with lots of care, lots of static scenes and less non-stop action, top quality lenses carefully handled or especially with >4k top line for detail modern video cameras and downscaled to 4k ideally; look at Passengers or 4k DCP of Last Christmas and compare to any 2k DI anything or any 35mm print, WORLD's more detail easily obvious)

heck just look at say the new 8k footage, shot carefully with a good lens from Canon 5R downscaled ideally to 4k and compare to ANY 2k/HD material and it looks world's more detailed, even on a 24" monitor it's worlds better.

and heck compare looking at digital photos on a 24" HD monitor compared to a 24" 4k ones, HUGE, tremendous difference.

[sapiendut]

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

[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.

[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.

[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.

[smithb]

Originally Posted by 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

I do not frequent the 4K forum, but as any active thread this one showed up in the general list of active conversations. I was just curious about the discussion on 8K and decided to see what was being said. And exactly why would you think respondents should be limited to only those that have currently adopted 4K? The title mentions "skipping 4K", which I have currently done but for other reasons that is worth noting when it comes to 8K since they are still valid reasons.

For any new or extension of a technology to succeed it has to have enough marketability to sell it. Based on what some others have said, the succession from DVD to Blu-ray to 4K UHD has shown that an 8K physical disk market is likely to not succeed, even if hardware would like to drive it towards one.

I never stated I couldn't see a difference, but as one who has had a projection system in a dedicated HT since 2004, I should be a prime candidate to perform such an upgrade. I do have 2000+ movies and some 200 TV series. The fact is 98% of my TV collection is DVD, and probably 40% of my movie collection is DVD. These percentages aren't by choice but what the market has made available to me.

Now I am also not in the current market to upgrade catalog titles from the 70's through 90's that have already been upgrade multiple times across formats. The 4K UHD facelift to many of these titles I'm sure is phenomenal. But for me, I'd rather see titles I've never seen or rarely seen then something for the 10th time. Unfortunately, my interests are not what is being sold in 4K. The titles I'm currently buying are just now making their entrance as blu-rays, a 4K UHD release would be way down the road, if ever.

So as an enthusiasts, if I'm not embracing 4K UHD at this time (and I'm sure I'm not alone in my situation) then how are enough ever going to embrace 8K? I've never once stated anything against 4K UHD or those that adopt it. I'm all for technical advancement regardless of whether I take advantage of it. I'm just offering an opinion that hadn't been brought up yet. My apologies if you feel that is barking up the wrong tree.

[Scottishguy]

Agreed UHD Blu-ray is going to have a much much smaller library than it's HD variant.

Aye I count HD Blu-ray and UHD Blu-ray as just being the same thing, just variations. Both are excellent, and I don't grudge settling for an HD Blu-ray most of the time. Provided it has a healthy video bit rate average.

DvD I wonder what's the point in holding onto them. If I'm left with nothing but standard definition, then I can always rent from Amazon Prime.

[Scottishguy]

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.

You do know most OLED TVs will give you the best HD presentation? Not just UHD. So, what's a couple of hundred moneys to get a UHD player?

Hardly a huge investment.