4k resolution coming

[Shifty Geezer]

My main issue with 4k is that it may blur all my non 4k viewing experiences. Right now I have native 1:1 mode set on my tv so it passes through 1920x1080 signals untouched. Means that my pc gaming which is all native 1920x1080 looks stunning, my 1080i Directv gets just a simple de-interlace then passes fresh to the tv so it also looks good, and my 1920x1080 Blu-ray movies likewise also pass through untouched and look awesome. The situation right now is ideal basically. If I switch to a 4k tv then that all comes to an end since all my signals will then get "various processing" applied to them to make them match the TV's resolution. So yeah any4k source I had would look great, but then the remaining 99% of my viewing would look not as good as it did on my 1080p tv.

At the same FOV it shouldn't make a difference as 4k is a uniform doubling in both dimensions, so no irregular interpolation as you get with 720p>1080p. And if you have the 4k screen occupying a larger FOV, it'll look smoother than the same 1080p would at that FOV. That's kinda the point of 4k, and there'll always be a compromise stretching lower resolution content over a larger area. The only true native alternative would be to display the 1080p material in a letterbox at native resolution. I'm pretty sure everyone prefers SDTV content scaled up to fit their TV rather than displayed as a small, pixel-perfect window, and I'm sure the same applies to anyone buying a great big 4k TV. 1080p content on 4k won't be as sharp as 4k movies, but it'll be prettier and more comfortable that sitting real close to a 1080p screen.

 

[Silent_Buddha]

I'm pretty sure everyone prefers SDTV content scaled up to fit their TV rather than displayed as a small, pixel-perfect window, and I'm sure the same applies to anyone buying a great big 4k TV

Not me. /shudder.

I cringe everytime I go over to someone's house that does that and immediately see fat bloated images of people. Ugh.

I prefer letterboxing on the sides in this case.

Unless you mean scaled as in keeping the correct ratio but just making sure the vertical height is maximized...versus filling/fitting the screen.

Regards,
SB

 

[Shifty Geezer]

Not me. /shudder.

I cringe everytime I go over to someone's house that does that and immediately see fat bloated images of people. Ugh.

I prefer letterboxing on the sides in this case.

Unless you mean scaled as in keeping the correct ratio but just making sure the vertical height is maximized...versus filling/fitting the screen.

Yeah. I don't mean stretching a 4:3 source to 16:9. That's just rubbish (but so many peopl do that! Or have various other stretch and fill modes pulling the image in all sorts of awkward directions). But no-one who's replaced a 22" CRT wants to see a 22" image on their new 32+" TV. Nor do they want to see pixelated images; my 720p (768p native) Sammy does an amazing job upscaling SD content. When media is paused you can see all the pixels, big chunky blocks of Lego. But when playing, the interpolation is surprisingly good, filling the screen with something soft but very watchable considering the lack of detail in the low resolution source.

A 4k screen is going to occupy a wide FOV, and will need to upscale, but 1080p to 4k (2160p) should remain very crisp. And anyone wanting that screen to look exactly as crisp as the 1080p set it replaces need only move further back to get the same FOV.

 

[joker454]

I don't see this as an issue. At any screen size and viewing distance where a 4k TV's "blurring" of a 1080p image would be apparent, I would expect that the larger pixels of the 1080p display would be just as damaging to apparent image quality.

I dunno I can't see that being the case, if you can spot one then you can spot the other. In other words if you can't spot an upscale blur then I'd wager you probably can't spot the improvement from 4k resolution anyways so why bother. Likewise if you can see improvement from 4k resolution then I'd also wager that you will notice upscale degradation on 1080p content.

At the same FOV it shouldn't make a difference as 4k is a uniform doubling in both dimensions, so no irregular interpolation as you get with 720p>1080p.

In theory that could be true but we don't know what kind of image mangling (or "improvements" in marketing speak) they will do to the image. I agree that upscale can be done very well like how the PS3 upscales dvd's, but the history of tv upscaler quality does not fill me with confidence as they are typically somewhere between bad and appalling.

 

[V3]

I expect VR headsets to be far more relevant.

Don't VR headsets need 4k res more than your typical 60" HDTV because the screens are so much closer to your eyes ? And VR headset for gaming needs 180 degrees FOV, so 4k will surely help.

 

[mrcorbo]

I dunno I can't see that being the case, if you can spot one then you can spot the other. In other words if you can't spot an upscale blur then I'd wager you probably can't spot the improvement from 4k resolution anyways so why bother. Likewise if you can see improvement from 4k resolution then I'd also wager that you will notice upscale degradation on 1080p content.

That is exactly my point, actually. And as Shifty said, scaling 1080p to 4k should just be a matter of representing each 1080p source pixel as four 4k display pixels. However....

In theory that could be true but we don't know what kind of image mangling (or "improvements" in marketing speak) they will do to the image. I agree that upscale can be done very well like how the PS3 upscales dvd's, but the history of tv upscaler quality does not fill me with confidence as they are typically somewhere between bad and appalling.

Overzealous image "enhancement" is a real concern, but then it's just a matter of being picky about your purchasing choice. If I can't turn those enhancements off, I won't buy the set. With my HTPC, I take the scaling out of the display (and even my video card's) hands and do it in software via the madVR renderer. This allows me control over the algorithms being used to scale and I can make the sharpening vs. artifacting tradeoff according to my tastes.

 

[Simon F]

Never mind home 4K res displays....

.... I want to connect a computer game up to the London {O|Para}lympic stadium seat lighting!

(Great closing ceremony last night, BYW)

 

[-tkf-]

Okay then, i had the pleasure of watching the new Sony 4K Bravia in action today, it was showing a 50MBIT satellite stream based on F65 recordings...

I am used to sitting very close to a 110 inch projected image, which by all accounts does give me a cinema like experience at home.

Screw that, this was a almost a window to where ever the recordings was from, you can place you seat so close to this screen that if you have old eyes you might need to put on your reading glasses..

I have seen the future and it's 4K, so, sure, we wont see 4K games, or rather they will be limited to certain genres, but whoa, they will look good, and the added bonus of a 4K blu-ray would be very welcome.

As a sidenote, there were a lot of HEVC realtime demos running around the stands, including 4K demos with everything from 12Mbit to 4Mbit. The screens were a bit to small to really judge them (classic trick) but it looked promising, the picture only suffered mild softness.

 

[mrcorbo]

Okay then, i had the pleasure of watching the new Sony 4K Bravia in action today, it was showing a 50MBIT satellite stream based on F65 recordings...

I am used to sitting very close to a 110 inch projected image, which by all accounts does give me a cinema like experience at home.

Screw that, this was a almost a window to where ever the recordings was from, you can place you seat so close to this screen that if you have old eyes you might need to put on your reading glasses..

I have seen the future and it's 4K, so, sure, we wont see 4K games, or rather they will be limited to certain genres, but whoa, they will look good, and the added bonus of a 4K blu-ray would be very welcome.

As a sidenote, there were a lot of HEVC realtime demos running around the stands, including 4K demos with everything from 12Mbit to 4Mbit. The screens were a bit to small to really judge them (classic trick) but it looked promising, the picture only suffered mild softness.

OK, I admit it. I'm a bit jealous. Sounds like a good day.

Still, at this point 4K is something the industry wants to sell me more than something I actually care about. Give me better contrast, better color reproduction and lower input latency (for gaming) so we can render our current content in the maximum possible fidelity. THEN talk to me about the benefits of 4K.

 

[tuna]

OK, I admit it. I'm a bit jealous. Sounds like a good day.

Still, at this point 4K is something the industry wants to sell me more than something I actually care about. Give me better contrast, better color reproduction and lower input latency (for gaming) so we can render our current content in the maximum possible fidelity. THEN talk to me about the benefits of 4K.

It is not like those things are mutually exclusive. Also, are not the things you mentioned available today?

 

[mrcorbo]

It is not like those things are mutually exclusive. Also, are not the things you mentioned available today?

They don't have to be, but if I were to replace any of my existing TVs with 4k TVs it would be because those TVs offered those other improvements, not because of 4k. That is unless along with 4k they also start pumping out big (like 65"+) panels at cheaper price points, which, from the perspective of the manufacturers would be counterproductive.

And as far as those things being available today? Not to the degree that I would like. I'm really pulling for OLED, but I'm concerned with the problems they seem to be having bringing the tech to market. If I were to replace my 1080p plasma, it would be for an OLED.

I also would really like to see the industry standardize a protocol for a source device to request a "minimal processing path" from downstream devices for dealing with latency-critical media (pretty much games, I guess). This would be automatic and transparent to the user (no more fiddling with "game modes" or using special inputs). THAT would sell me a new TV, receiver, etc.

 

[tuna]

I also would really like to see the industry standardize a protocol for a source device to request a "minimal processing path" from downstream devices for dealing with latency-critical media (pretty much games, I guess). This would be automatic and transparent to the user (no more fiddling with "game modes" or using special inputs). THAT would sell me a new TV, receiver, etc.

This would be really nice! Sony should work on this!

 

[Babel-17]

http://www.timescapes.org/4k/default.aspx

What does it look like?

Click the images to your right (warning - large files!)
If it's not filling the whole screen many times, your browser might be reducing it to fit. Try to select View > Actual Size - or on a phone, just keep zooming in.
What is TimeScapes?

TimeScapes is the debut film from Tom Lowe, an award winning photographer who is renowned for his astro-photography and time-lapse photography. Watch the trailers, read the story.
How do I watch TimeScapes in 4K?

You can like our facebook and if we come to a theatre near you, we'll let you know.
If you want to watch at home, Sony and other manufacturers have released 4K home projectors, and every major TV manufacturer is about to release a 4K television. If you have a 4K home theatre, and specialist equipment for your computer (such as RAID hard drives and 4K video cards), you can buy TimeScapes 4K here.

Well, it's nice to see both hardware and content coming along.

 

[wco81]

The TV manufacturers want 4K but the key is whether the content owners want to release 4K at this time.

Supposedly, for Blu-Ray, a lot of film masters were scanned in at 4K resolution. Also, presumably those filmmakers who chose to use digital instead of film in recent years had access to 4k tool chain?

If Blu-Ray sales are still increasing, if at a very slow rate but still increasing, the studios may not be in a hurry to release 4K content.

OTOH, 4K content may justify the continuance of packaged media business at a time when everyone is pushing for online distribution.

 

[-tkf-]

The TV manufacturers want 4K but the key is whether the content owners want to release 4K at this time.

Supposedly, for Blu-Ray, a lot of film masters were scanned in at 4K resolution. Also, presumably those filmmakers who chose to use digital instead of film in recent years had access to 4k tool chain?

If Blu-Ray sales are still increasing, if at a very slow rate but still increasing, the studios may not be in a hurry to release 4K content.

OTOH, 4K content may justify the continuance of packaged media business at a time when everyone is pushing for online distribution.

From what i see around these parts, Blu-Ray disc prices are slowly but surely coming under pressure, and prices are dropping (slowly). If the industry gets a chance to produce new "highend" discs and earn some extra money they will do it.

But i think that 4K will become yet another Checkmark on the streaming services, the HEVC demos i saw at IBC were (as i mentioned) done in 4K, it was like a giant Deja-Vu from when VC-1 and AVC was all over the place, just another codec and with HD being the new SD

 

[user542745831]

a 4K-capable latest/fastest GPU such as ATI 7970 and Nvidia 680, you can then play many of the latest big high-end games that thus render the full 3840x2160 of the game at 30fps

Well..., especially see the highlighted (bolded/underlined) parts in the following quote:

http://www.unrealengine.com/files/misc/The_Technology_Behind_the_Elemental_Demo_16x9_(2).pdf

Elemental demo

• GDC 2012 demo behind closed doors
• Demonstrate and drive development of Unreal® Engine 4
• NVIDIA® Kepler GK104 (GTX 680)
• Direct3D® 11
• No preprocessing
• Real-time
  • 30 fps
  • FXAA
  • 1080p at 90%

 

[MarkoIt]

Ultrahigh resolution will be needed for bigger display. I think in the future we will have bigger screen. The average screen size has grown a lot in the past 2 decades and i think it will still grow more for achieving the ultimate movie experience. Also, OLED should resolve most of the picture quality problems of plasma and lcd. The improvements on image quality on each generation may be so little thats producers will need new features for pushing the display in the market. Bigger screen for less money seems a good way to do it.

 

[Sigfried1977]

Supposedly, for Blu-Ray, a lot of film masters were scanned in at 4K resolution. Also, presumably those filmmakers who chose to use digital instead of film in recent years had access to 4k tool chain?

The thing is that a 4K scan doesn't necessarily mean you get a full 4K resolution worth of detail. There are plenty of Blu Rays out there - even recent ones - which you could downscale to 720p and no-one would know the difference. The detail simply wasn't there in the first place.
It's probably a nice thing for documentaries which mostly use slow camera movements, but throw in a bit of action, color-grade the shit out of it and maybe even use a bleach-bypass process and all that excess resolution becomes pointless.

I agree fully with mrcorbo: there are more pressing issues with current panel technology left to solve than a resolution "deficit".

 

[-tkf-]

The thing is that a 4K scan doesn't necessarily mean you get a full 4K resolution worth of detail. There are plenty of Blu Rays out there - even recent ones - which you could downscale to 720p and no-one would know the difference. The detail simply wasn't there in the first place.
It's probably a nice thing for documentaries which mostly use slow camera movements, but throw in a bit of action, color-grade the shit out of it and maybe even use a bleach-bypass process and all that excess resolution becomes pointless.

I agree fully with mrcorbo: there are more pressing issues with current panel technology left to solve than a resolution "deficit".

True..
The footage i saw was shot with a F65 http://pro.sony.com/bbsc/ssr/show-highend/resource.solutions.bbsccms-assets-show-highend-F65.shtml Which by all means is meant to be a Hollywood Camera. And it's not every movie and every scene that is color graded to hell and back, those that keeps it within limits should not hurt the 4K resolution.

But it's pretty obvious that as resolution improves, the demands on the original source rises. And that will thin out the real killers at 4K, especially older catalog titles. But new films should benefit and will benefit with the onslaught of new Cameras that just keeps on coming and improving.

 

[Shifty Geezer]

DOF means parts of the content are blurred, although whatever you're focussed at should be in focus. Any movement of the subject will introduce blur larger than a 4k pixel. Any motion of the camera will introduce blur larger than a 4k pixel. So short of static photos, 4k 's benefits should be very limited. That's why lots of folk can't tell the difference between 720p and 1080p movies - the actual difference on screen is very little. Of course for games it could be different with perfect pixels, except by the time 4k becomes commonplace I'm sure devs will be implementing photography effects like DOF and motion blur pretty universally.