So after Ultra HD TVs what will come next?

AMKC

Just curious what comes after Ultra to suggest it will be even better when really its just another way of getting more money from you and preventing what is really good enough technology from getting cheaper.
So whats comes after Ultra?
Me I only have a basic HD TV. None of this ultra crap. I am perfectly happy with a HD TV. The HD part is probably not even used that much and I think it is all just a gimmick anyway to make money. I hate HD channels and watch everything on SD channels which to me are perfectly good. I really do not see or hear any difference except one the HD takes up more room to record or even to pause it. If that channel goes HD only then I don't watch it anymore.

Signore Fancy Pants

Super dooper 5K TV's

tylercheribini

The red pill.

CinemaGuy45

https://www.specsavers.ie/offers/free-eye-test-with-prsi?gclid=EAIaIQobChMIvISSxpCT3QIVBbDtCh2zxgFeEAAYASAAEgJVyPD_BwE&gclsrc=aw.ds&dclid=CKvmwMmQk90CFYOv7Qod6pMGxQ

Kevin Finnerty

sugarman wrote: »

Super Ultra High Definition, 8K. It's already a thing.

Haven't they 12k in Japan? Could be wrong.

Wanderer78

CONtravision TV!

Samuel T. Cogley

We might finally get higher framerates than 24FPS. Even when HD was coming out some in the fim industry said we'd be better off using the bandwidth for higher framerates - it's definately the way we should be moving after 4K.

Ghost Train

Infinit-D television

Duckworth_Luas

Hover-TVs

NIMAN

We haven't even got every channel transmitting in HD, let alone 4k.

Absolutely no need for 8k TV.

NOVA MCMXCIV

TV-X. X for 'experience' – then it'll just start all over again.

Noveight

Are there benefits of a curved screen TV? Or just the "we did it to prove we could" type of technology?

Wanderer78

Noveight wrote:

Are there benefits of a curved screen TV? Or just the "we did it to prove we could" type of technology?

Tis all gimmicks

verycool

Videodrome.

AMKC

Noveight wrote: »

Are there benefits of a curved screen TV? Or just the "we did it to prove we could" type of technology?

I think that's exactly all it is.

Anyone want to guess how long before we all have our on in home holodecks

Corb_lund

Ghost Train wrote: »

Infinit-D television

More homosexuals in society than previously thought?

recyclebin

Samuel T. Cogley wrote: »

We might finally get higher framerates than 24FPS. Even when HD was coming out some in the fim industry said we'd be better off using the bandwidth for higher framerates - it's definately the way we should be moving after 4K.

Don't think the human eye can see the difference above 24FPS. Would only be useful for slow motion type stuff.

kerplun k

Even if you could produce an affordable 8k TV, how would you deliver content to it?

Your Face

Bawdy early 20th century vaudeville comedians.

RiderOnTheStorm

Maybe not soon, but I think we will have hologram TV some day. I think it wont look like a tv, but more like a coffee table. You can sit around it (or walk around it) and see a scene from any angle. Think of the " chess" scene in Star Wars. It would be ideal for any field sport. Imagine being able to see sport close up and from any angle, including zoom, replay, freeze frame, rotate scene, etc. Soaps would be good too as they all seem to have set pieces inside a limited number of sets.

Next step ..... Beam the show straight into the brain!

Samuel T. Cogley

recyclebin wrote: »

Don't think the human eye can see the difference above 24FPS. Would only be useful for slow motion type stuff.

Watch 60FPS content on youtube or even better pornhub and tell me you can't see the difference between 24 and 60FPS. Many PC gamers can see the difference between 60 and 144FPS.

One of the reason the picture seems so bad on Sky Sports is 24FPS introduces huge amounts of blur. In films motion blur is used intentionally, but you can;t do post production on a live game.

Samuel T. Cogley

Noveight wrote: »

Are there benefits of a curved screen TV? Or just the "we did it to prove we could" type of technology?

Not to TV's but they're great for ultrawide PC monitors for some applications.

Samuel T. Cogley

RiderOnTheStorm wrote: »

Maybe not soon, but I think we will have hologram TV some day. I think it wont look like a tv, but more like a coffee table. You can sit around it (or walk around it) and see a scene from any angle. Think of the " chess" scene in Star Wars. It would be ideal for any field sport. Imagine being able to see sport close up and from any angle, including zoom, replay, freeze frame, rotate scene, etc. Soaps would be good too as they all seem to have set pieces inside a limited number of sets.

Next step ..... Beam the show straight into the brain!

Ultra short throw projectors already do this to an extent. You cant walk round it but it is a coffee table type device. Displays larger than the device are alreay being worked on for mobile applications.

Frisbees without stilts.

EPAndlee

sugarman wrote: »

Who really watches live TV anymore? It's slowly dying a death as people are streaming content more and more.

I'd only watch sports and both BT & Sky are 4K.

For movies and shows id watch on Netflix & Prime where a lot of the content is 4k.

Xbox One, game in 4K and use it to play back 4K Blu-ray's.

It's becoming the new standard, as will 8k one day. It doesn't happen instantaneous.

I'm the same but if I'm am watching something on TV it has to be atleast HD

scamalert

well its nice see technology moving up but whole 4k crap has been debunked, point is that human eyes can see so much that 4k is overkill in many cases, unless one has screen thats 200 inches big and proper viewing distance, all this 4k ultra hd is just bling bling that people pay for.


one thing thou id rather see oled get cheaper like lg wallpaper tv 10k plus price but at least its like paper on a wall, now thats proper advancement in technology.

mad muffin

AMKC wrote: »

Just curious what comes after Ultra to suggest it will be even better when really its just another way of getting more money from you and preventing what is really good enough technology from getting cheaper.
So whats comes after Ultra?
Me I only have a basic HD TV. None of this ultra crap. I am perfectly happy with a HD TV. The HD part is probably not even used that much and I think it is all just a gimmick anyway to make money. I hate HD channels and watch everything on SD channels which to me are perfectly good. I really do not see or hear any difference except one the HD takes up more room to record or even to pause it. If that channel goes HD only then I don't watch it anymore.

Dafuq? This got to be a piss take?


Anyway lg just introduced its 8k 88 inch oled.

I have an lg 4K oled 55C7 when Harvey Norman were selling them for €1589. Is there a huge difference between 1080P and 2160P probably not. But where the 4K panels come into their own is, 10bit colour processing and HDR. Of course oled is just PHWOAR!

Netflix in 2160P and Dolby Vision is just mmm mmm mmm…

Telford and Expertarw actually selling them at the moment for €1549 wow!!

mdwexford

AMKC wrote: »

Just curious what comes after Ultra to suggest it will be even better when really its just another way of getting more money from you and preventing what is really good enough technology from getting cheaper.
So whats comes after Ultra?
Me I only have a basic HD TV. None of this ultra crap. I am perfectly happy with a HD TV. The HD part is probably not even used that much and I think it is all just a gimmick anyway to make money. I hate HD channels and watch everything on SD channels which to me are perfectly good. I really do not see or hear any difference except one the HD takes up more room to record or even to pause it. If that channel goes HD only then I don't watch it anymore.

You sound like a five year old. One that can't see properly at that.

NIMAN

EPAndlee wrote: »

I'm the same but if I'm am watching something on TV it has to be atleast HD

Quality of content is surely more important than quality of picture.

No point having 8k technology and watching Can't Pay We'll Take It Away on it.

I'd be more than happy with HD, it does the job for me for now. As long as there is plenty of good stuff to watch on it.

the_syco

recyclebin wrote: »

Don't think the human eye can see the difference above 24FPS. Would only be useful for slow motion type stuff.

Unless your gaming. Then you'll need high FPS or you'll get ghosting.

AMKC wrote: »

Me I only have a basic HD TV.

How big is your TV? Under 46" 720p will do you. Over 46", and you may need 1080p. Also, "HD ready" are usually only 720p. So when you say "basic HD", do you mean actual HD, or not HD?



I'v edited the above picture to draw the line at 7.5 feet away from the TV, as that's where most people sit.

For example, a screen over 60" will need 4k.

Of course, IMO, gaming monitors are different, as you need a higher resolution to enable you to see more on the screen.

prinzeugen

sugarman wrote: »

Who really watches live TV anymore? It's slowly dying a death as people are streaming content more and more.

I'd only watch sports and both BT & Sky are 4K.

For movies and shows id watch on Netflix & Prime where a lot of the content is 4k.

Xbox One, game in 4K and use it to play back 4K Blu-ray's.

It's becoming the new standard, as will 8k one day. It doesn't happen instantaneous.

The people who watch live TV are the ones that watched a series when they were originally aired and now own it on dvd, don't watch sports and don't play xbox all day long.

These are the same people that don't go into meltdown mode when the internet connection goes.

lertsnim

recyclebin wrote: »

Don't think the human eye can see the difference above 24FPS. Would only be useful for slow motion type stuff.

Perhaps your eyes can't but mine do.

Guy:Incognito

NIMAN wrote: »

We haven't even got every channel transmitting in HD, let alone 4k.

Absolutely no need for 8k TV.

You wash your mouth out. There's always a need for shiny stuff.

Arrival

recyclebin wrote: »

Don't think the human eye can see the difference above 24FPS. Would only be useful for slow motion type stuff.

...oh my God...lmfao. How can people so ignorant on certain topics try to speak about those topics as if they're well informed? It's honestly baffling. Just don't add to conversations about things you are unaware about, it's okay to not have an opinion on everything and prevents you looking like this

GhostyMcGhost

Noveight wrote: »

Are there benefits of a curved screen TV?

If you live in a lighthouse, you can wall mount it

Arrival

kerplun k wrote: »

Even if you could produce an affordable 8k TV, how would you deliver content to it?

Once upon a time sceptics were asking this very same question about 1080p...and then 4K...and now 8K...

Franz Von Peppercorn

Arrival wrote: »

Once upon a time sceptics were asking this very same question about 1080p...and then 4K...and now 8K...

Yes but there comes a time when these advance are useless as the brain can’t see a difference. I can see a difference between SD and HD (and 1080 vs 720 too) on my 49 inch TV.

Maybe I’d see the difference between 4K and 8K but doubt it’s worth it.

As for frame rates we can see differences up to 120+ for individual images (ie a picture flashed on screen) but not for images tied together.

The human eye blurs fast motion anyway so I don’t think a fast game of hurling is ever not going to blur, for us. If it didn’t it would look weird.

( 24fps is about where we see the animation in a movie as not being static images one after the other. It’s the minimum rate. )

dotsman

As already mentioned, 8K is next (and 16K after that). 8K is already around, but a long time away from being affordable. Whether they will be suitable for living rooms is the big question, but will definitely be huge for events, and advertising (i.e. instead of a window with mannequins, the front of a shop will just be one giant TV show crystal clear movie clips of models wearing the various fashion items etc). As another example, U2's tv screen for the Joshua Tree concerts last year was 8K. And was a massive difference compared to Popmart.

I moved to a 4K HDR tv earlier this year and the difference from HD is huge. Unfortunately, content is limited, but improving by the day. Will get a 4K bluray player later this year and then will be sorted (they are slowly dropping in price).

Haven't really watched SD in years other than the odd upscaled old tv show. All movies and most TV shows would be in HD - have over 300 Blurays, about 30 box sets on my Plex Server (mostly HD) and Netflix.

Arrival

dotsman wrote: »

As already mentioned, 8K is next (and 16K after that). 8K is already around, but a long time away from being affordable. Whether they will be suitable for living rooms is the big question, but will definitely be huge for events, and advertising (i.e. instead of a window with mannequins, the front of a shop will just be one giant TV show crystal clear movie clips of models wearing the various fashion items etc). As another example, U2's tv screen for the Joshua Tree concerts last year was 8K. And was a massive difference compared to Popmart.

I moved to a 4K HDR tv earlier this year and the difference from HD is huge. Unfortunately, content is limited, but improving by the day. Will get a 4K bluray player later this year and then will be sorted (they are slowly dropping in price).

Haven't really watched SD in years other than the odd upscaled old tv show. All movies and most TV shows would be in HD - have over 300 Blurays, about 30 box sets on my Plex Server (mostly HD) and Netflix.

Get an Xbox One S, cheapest option for a 4K BD player

dotsman

Arrival wrote: »

Get an Xbox One S, cheapest option for a 4K BD player

I was thinking about that, but can't see myself ever playing x box games, so no real advantage there, and I'd be just left with a large white box sticking out (tv stand, tv etc are all black). To be honest, it's not the cost of the player (they are already dropping in price - decent ones available for €200 and falling), it's the price of the discs - they are also dropping, but have a bit more to go before I would start buying (I wouldn't spend more than €15 on a movie, and ideally only €10)

Agent Coulson

Holodecks.

kerplun k

Arrival wrote: »

Once upon a time sceptics were asking this very same question about 1080p...and then 4K...and now 8K...

Not really a skeptic, just genuinely curious. I’m not sure it would be possible to deliver using your tv standard set up,

Even over a streaming platform, would it be possible to broadcast a live event in 8k with the average speeds in Ireland?

Wanderer78

kerplun k wrote:

Even over a streaming platform, would it be possible to broadcast a live event in 8k with the average speeds in Ireland?

What's driving this ever increasing 'need' of increasing resolution, it's hardly marketing, is it?

kerplun k

Wanderer78 wrote: »

What's driving this ever increasing 'need' of increasing resolution, it's hardly marketing, is it?

Human nature.

Wanderer78

kerplun k wrote:

Human nature.

Human created nature maybe, via the concept of marketing?

AdamB

Back to a retro cathode ray ultra high definition box but it will be CRUHD

dotsman

kerplun k wrote: »

Not really a skeptic, just genuinely curious. I’m not sure it would be possible to deliver using your tv standard set up,

Even over a streaming platform, would it be possible to broadcast a live event in 8k with the average speeds in Ireland?

10 years ago, single digit broadband speeds and 4.7GB DVD discs were the norm.

Today, most people have 70Mbps+ broadband speeds and use 25-50GB Bluray discs (or 100GB 4K Bluray discs).

By the time 8K becomes a "thing", both broadband speeds and disc capacity will be far superior to today.

Wanderer78

dotsman wrote: »

10 years ago, single digit broadband speeds and 4.7GB DVD discs were the norm.

Today, most people have 70Mbps+ broadband speeds and use 25-50GB Bluray discs (or 100GB 4K Bluray discs).

By the time 8K becomes a "thing", both broadband speeds and disc capacity will be far superior to today.

do they really?

JoeA3

If someone can't tell the difference between SD and 1080 HD, they need an eye exam. Or at the very least, they should check if their TV is actually HD capable and their source really is HD. I've seen people with full HD screens feeding it with analogue sources (e.g. video through SCART) and moaning that the picture "isn't great"!

There is a very significant difference in picture quality going from SD to genuine 1080 HD.

From HD to 4k, not so much imo...

AMKC

mad muffin wrote: »

Dafuq? This got to be a piss take?


Anyway lg just introduced its 8k 88 inch oled.

I have an lg 4K oled 55C7 when Harvey Norman were selling them for €1589. Is there a huge difference between 1080P and 2160P probably not. But where the 4K panels come into their own is, 10bit colour processing and HDR. Of course oled is just PHWOAR!

Netflix in 2160P and Dolby Vision is just mmm mmm mmm…

Telford and Expertarw actually selling them at the moment for €1549 wow!!

You would want to be crazy or have more money than sense to pay that kind of money for a TV .

the_syco wrote: »

Unless your gaming. Then you'll need high FPS or you'll get ghosting.


How big is your TV? Under 46" 720p will do you. Over 46", and you may need 1080p. Also, "HD ready" are usually only 720p. So when you say "basic HD", do you mean actual HD, or not HD?



I'v edited the above picture to draw the line at 7.5 feet away from the TV, as that's where most people sit.

For example, a screen over 60" will need 4k.

Of course, IMO, gaming monitors are different, as you need a higher resolution to enable you to see more on the screen.

How big is your TV? Under 46"

Its a 32'' TV. Am planning on upgrading to a 46 or 50'' around that size sometime. Missed out on a great deal in Lidl not so long ago. They had 43'' TVs for 250 euro.

prinzeugen wrote: »

The people who watch live TV are the ones that watched a series when they were originally aired and now own it on dvd, don't watch sports and don't play xbox all day long.

These are the same people that don't go into meltdown mode when the internet connection goes.

I doubt that applies to everyone. I watch some live TV but most of the TV I watch is recorded. I used to buy box sets, DVD's etc but rarely buy them anymore not because I don't want too. I just I like deals and will only buy if they are on deal.

GhostyMcGhost wrote: »

If you live in a lighthouse, you can wall mount it

LOL

JoeA3 wrote: »

If someone can't tell the difference between SD and 1080 HD, they need an eye exam. Or at the very least, they should check if their TV is actually HD capable and their source really is HD. I've seen people with full HD screens feeding it with analogue sources (e.g. video through SCART) and moaning that the picture "isn't great"!

There is a very significant difference in picture quality going from SD to genuine 1080 HD.

From HD to 4k, not so much imo...

Yes my TV is a HD TV and I have HD cable connected to my HD TV box and my eyes are good. I got them checked recently. I still think its all a fad and a way of just getting more money off people. SD is perfect. I am perfectly happy watch SD TV.

dotsman

Wanderer78 wrote: »

do they really?

Other than some rural locations, I would assume that, in 2018, most homes in the country have access to decent broadband. Certainly all urban locations and large towns (and probably some villages?)