That's probably similar to what they said about color TV and HDTV!

It isn't, because they didn't have the screen size issues that 4K and 8K will have in most domestic environments. Therein lies the problem but of course, if the costs can be brought down to 2K TV levels people will buy them (and see no more than they see in 2K unless they stick their noses up against the screen).

There are bigger picture quality issues to be solved than spatial resolution, IMO.

4K or 8K for other purposes might work domestically though (digital picture frames, HQ computer monitors etc.) but the number of takers will still be small.

Just seen an ad for a 4k set on my 19" SD telly. Just how do they expect to get across the supreme picture quality when they know that the person seeing the advert won't be able to see what it looks like. The only way I could appreciate it would be to see it on a 4k set that I already owned, therefore making it a pointless exercise.

But if we don't embrace 4K broadcasts in the near future, I can almost guarantee you that there will be people on here voicing their intense jealousy about America and Japan etc having 4K broadcasts!

They don't - the ad will let you know it is available and try and entice you to just splash out and buy one or pop to a shop with one on display to see for yourself.

If an advert had to be able to convey everything then they would never be able to advertise food as how would they convey the taste?

None of those things are elements of 4k though or mutual exclusive to resolutions 4k and above though. There are things which could be done to make our viewing experiance better in a standard home but they don't have the headline making ability of greater resolution (or the wow factor when viewed in a showroom at the perfect distance)

Infact I'm not even sure people want Higher Frame rates based on the opinions of anyone who saw the Hobbit in a higher frame rate. For most content we don't want to feel like we are looking through a window, we want that film effect that is lost in higher frame rates that we are used to and comfortable with

I know plenty of people who are not convinced that current HD is worth the effort and costs, this inc a number of sky customers who will not upgrade to the sky HD service as they claim "its not worth it". Some would also add they would prefer more channels (even in SD) before more existing stuff is converted to HD. Content over quality. This reminds me very much of the situation on Dab digital radio. Can't see 4k taking of in a meaningful way amoungst the masses if this senorio repeats its self.

Agree, if you viewing habits are mostly in SD then it would be pointless investing in 4k, worth looking at though if your viewing is mostly HD/Bluray and have access to Netflix, especially if you are looking to upgrade the TV within the next year, like myself.

To receive 4k online via Netflix customers are going to need about 15mb, so again, this new format will only appeal to those willing to get geared up for it.

Have you seen HFR Tv ???
The BBC R&D demos .. all be it from 5 years ago were seen by many to be more High resolutions
than a UHD1 50 Hz feed at IBC this year
(or HFR and UHD2 resolution from NHK ? )

Have you seen the effect lo lack of Dynamic range on the material that Sky Shot
..... It does not look that good!!!!

And viewing on a wide gamut Screen - like the one from Dolby .....


Put all 4 together and as Hans Hoffmann says in the video "we seek for a big delta of improvement"
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QPrNh...re=c4-overview
and As Chris Johns says

"we need to ensure that the consumer industry does not go too early...
.... deliver too little too quickly"

I would also add that the sound needs to be sorted out as well!!
NHK SHV 22.2 is good and not that difficult to do live but a nightmare to Post produce...

The Hobbit .....
so much of this is the look - and flicker ..

As you know a 24 Hz film has each frame flashed 3 times....

the Hobbit I think was only double flashed ...
and it has some residual flicker and motion Judder (into peripheral vision
from the large screen in the (dark) cinema....)
look at Double flashed 60 Hz and there is a reality to the image.

But then is the look what the director wants artisticly and the audience expects ......

We have the culture of "film look" deliberatly holding down the frame rate in Tv
to get an effect which we think makes it look "classy"
( incidently this is not the same across the world!)
.......will we in 25 years time want the TV look -Interlace etc etc!!!!-)

There is a lot about how we actually see and process images in our brain which is coming to light
- with NHK doing much good work.

And for TV the likelihood of a different grammer for higher static/dynamic resolutions e.g. shot framing
, and then the type of programmes which shows UHDx to its best effect
(Think of Pot Back with colour and helicopters for HD)

but it will take time for all the equipment and systems to be made
, and then come in to everyday use
- including HFR HDR and BT2020 Gamut screens in our homes....
and it needs to be done properly!
(after All IBCs in 1989 and 1990 were "HD IBC")

and finally do we really want reality into our homes ....

(Having seen almost what it can look at I would say yes but it has to look stunningly good-
not just like upscaled 25Hz HD which you can see now on a ""4K"" TV)

Most of the people getting UHD Tv's early on will not be expecting Freeview broadcasts in 4K. I don't think any of them are that naive. The majority of content will be via internet streaming and BD. OK that won't help some people with crap BB, but, that's no reason that the system will fail.
There is a theory that 4K broadcasting may never happen as 8K is an already fairly advanced technology. Broadcasters will think twice about 4K costs then having to upgrade again to 8K, so, wait and go 8K when it happens. The 2020 Tokyo Olympics will be broadcast in 8K by NHK and anyone else capable of it by then.
So the discussion about 4K or 8K via FreeSat/Freeview or even seems to be a bit pointless for early adopters.

I agree ...... But there will not be much full UHD1 Material outside perhaps some films

BUT

HFR and cinema is not to TV Rates,

HDR they have a lead at the moment but looking for 12 Bit to the home
(not 10 bit to cinema or 8 bit in todays TV)

BT 2020 gamut is a lot wider than is used in Digital Cinema.....

ad of course cinemas 4K is not UHD1 - so standards conversion needed! (If not ARCing as well!!!!)

on the other hand .

Look at what NHK are doing now experimentally (Using BBC technology)
to put a UHD pictures in a 6 MHz channel...
and think better channel coding and the Video codec after HEVC..

If you say that HD took from 1990 to say 2002++ for a wide service
(not just a few experimental stations ..and a full production chain)

then UHD2 which was proved to work with the International transmission in 2008
and then last year
- so add 12 years to that and we are looking at a 2020++ launch
and may be before 2025 as a very round number
(If the olympics were not in Tokyo)

I am.

Im sure I asked this question before but can't remember the response ... or I was redirected to something complicated I just about understood.....but doesn't our actual vision of being able to see tv at certain definition stop at some point....also it does depend how good your vision is in the first place...whats the point in buying a big high def tv ... spend the money on a really aceballs holiday instead

Yes to both - but 4K doesn't go that far.

The crucial thing, as I always say, is the viewing distance - if you're not prepared to view from MUCH closer then 4K is likely to be a waste.

The pixels would have to be almost microscopic at that screen size for the whole of the UHD pixels to fit in the screen.

http://www.clarkvision.com/imagedeta...esolution.html

I think I understand....but then we do not see in pixels
I dunno, to be honest the amount of times I see people sitting squashed up in front of huge televisions or them watching them looking upwards at it hung on the wall above a fireplace at an angle.is just silly...its i have a bigger better tv then you - penis size.
Its nice to want tech but ultimately you don't need it..
lets just go play outside instead..jumpers for goal posts..

I've never understood this kind of argument in relation to something like this. Whilst, I agree it is early to be buying a 4K TV, at least the TV could provide great entertainment for several years to come (5 years + easily) regardless of whether you watch in 4K or not, where as a holiday gives you a couple of weeks of fun and that's it. I'd take the TV any day.

Personally, I can't understand the negativity from some people as it isn't affecting their current viewing in anyway, it isn't like current SD/HD transmissions are being taken off air to make way for 4K or anything. Just like current HD sets, everyone will switch at different times when they feel like they will get the optimum use from it, or for the total refuseniks when it is the only option (e.g. when CRTs were no longer sold).

I would very much like to make my next TV a 4K one, though as I just got a new TV last year I hope I won't need another for at least a couple of years by which time hopefully they will be more affordable.

I wouldn't even bet on any electronic store at the Metrocentre having them in. I doubt many people could fit them in their sitting rooms.

I think this will be the case for a lot of people getting them as soon as they become available.

[quote=steven123;69679424]I've never understood this kind of argument in relation to something like this. Whilst, I agree it is early to be buying a 4K TV, at least the TV could provide great entertainment for several years to come (5 years + easily) regardless of whether you watch in 4K or not, where as a holiday gives you a couple of weeks of fun and that's it. I'd take the TV any day.
/QUOTE]

In my opinion I think its a fair comment because how long would it be till the next thing comes out and people wanting that and so on, does shiny new tech make us really happy and for how long?
Also with the amount of tv, advertising, access to streaming services, internet, tablets, smartphones etc doesn't it get a bit too much and that you may want to turn it off.. The way I see it the only way i would invest in a 4K tv is if I spent a huge amount of hours in front of it.
I do like shiny new tech but I never go for the next new big thing, I usually buy it 2nd hand off ebay if I need it.

I'd rather have a fun holiday and have the memories to be honest and actually experience them instead of watching them through a program presented by someone else.

I have virgin, a pc conected to a tv and freesat and the amount of repeats, same shows about "Something Wars, Digging for Gold, pawning second hand stuff, soaps, sport, and the films that come out are generally rubbish, personally I think the current content is not worth thousands for tv never mind if its in high def...

19" TVs are now becoming 1080p (a 2k set).

I see logic these days in having a couple of 22" 4k multi use sets scattered around a room.
I quite imagine that in 12 months + these may be common at £250 or so.

There are at least two massive problems for average Joe - and for the industry in persuading him to upgrade: normal viewing distance in average living rooms; and the compromises required to watch SD TV and HD TV (never mind 4K or 8K TV!) on the same large screen set.

Average viewing distance - about 10 feet - is largely incompatible with watching both SD and full HD on the large screen TV needed to see all the HD detail. You tend to see either too many artifacts on the SD, or too little detail on the HD. 4K would just make the situation worse.

For that reason, I am staying with HD Ready plasma, which produces a nice picture on both, with not too much shock when going from one to the other, at my 10 feet. Beyond 50 inches though would spoil the SD so I'll stick at that, whatever the HD resolution may be in the future. This makes HD (ready) nicely better than the SD, and renders anything beyond 2K pointless (unless accompanied by much higher frame rates and other improvements).

When (if) there are no longer any SD channels or DVDs that I wish to watch, I will think about upgrading.

12 months?? More like 12 years!

There is a glut in manufacture and the Chinese have arrived big but with Innolux only getting $20 per screen panel.

edit - there you go

http://www.taipeitimes.com/News/biz/.../17/2003574660
A 52% increase in 1 month !

"it expected 4K panels to account for half of its total TV panel shipments next year,"

Ah well if they are cheap as chips, they could take off. Pointlessly, like multi-megapixel iPhone photo sensors!

"Buy a 4K TV and upscale your pictures to 4 times the pixels of HD TV!"

"...See no more detail than before but hey, what bragging rights you'll have - almost as good as having a hungry Pit Bull by your side!"