What do you think of 4k

will it replace 1080p?

Other urls found in this thread:

youtu.be/QlAnthLUa5k
twitter.com/SFWRedditImages

eventually, yes. Once the price goes down. Same thing that happened with 1080p vs "standard def"

Is this 1993 again?

meh i dropped some big coin on a 52" lg `1080p 120hz lcd in 2008....its not going anywhere - i am happy with most 720p torrents and i dont stream and i barely have the bandwidth and storage for 1080 let alone 4k... and people thought i was wierd to use a big tv as apc monitor back then, fucking plebs every time

4k is shit, 5k will be better

8K

4K will replace 1080p and 5K will replace 1440p.

1080p still has not replace SDR, At least in most broadcast channels.

>asking in the year of our lord 2017
>will 4k replace 1080p?
lol.

still waiting for oleds

There's really not much to think until the NFL starts broadcasting all their games in 4K. Once that happens then I'll believe we are actually close to it being adopted as a standard.

Only on larger monitors. Once you hit a certain point, you see diminishing returns on improvement in image clarity that don't justify the increased demand on the system

>what do you think of 4k
i think you'll all buy the wrong ppi and then complain about scaling

The Sony A1e is the perfect TV right now. Can't believe it beats my old kuro.

With time it will.

Sure, at some point 1080p TV's won't be sold anymore because they don't make sense.

Moreso in 2020+

Pc 4k and hdr10 is way behind TV's

We will probably go to 8k and and a better hdr standard and just skip 4k as it's almost 4 years old with the only new thing being hdr

Probably, just because they'll eventually kill off production for 1080p. That doesn't mean that there's any reason to get it for a TV, though.

This chart is dumb the main benefits of 4k don't apply to that chart because it's old as fuck and doesn't really make it obvious that 4k Vidya is a huge all the textures lack of alianasing especially in the distance make a massive difference to image quality even downsampled

Maybe try typing that again without making it look like you're drunk and posting on a phone? You know, punctuation and proper grammar?

My dad and I managed to find last years LG OLED 65" for 4000 dollarydoos, transporting it was a bitch since display model and the super fucking thin screen, but it feels worth it

I have wanted an OLED TV for at least 4 years, but there is no way I can justify that price point. Even at the price you paid, that's more than I'm willing to spend on a car.

I have that exact tv, don't think I could go back to 1080p

Fuck off cunt my mum's in the hospital and I'm just on here to distract myself sorry my grammar isn't up to par

majority of TV at 1080p isn't even native 1080p but some upscaled low bitrate trash.

Then maybe don't go making arguments.

Maybe u could succ me off at the next station

sorry to hear about your mum, but being in a faggot infested image board isn't the best way to distract yourself unless you are a faggot yourself.

That was a bigger jump desu.

We went from composite video (most normies used these instead of svideo or component) 480i to 1080p via HDMI.

Can we just talk about 4k?
Bitrate is what matters for video.

4k is being marketed at idiots and when it failed they pulled hdr out of their ass

NFL does 720p60 at the moment, doubt they can push 4k60 so early. That's still down the line.

point is buying a 4k TV is a waste of cash because you won't be getting the best out of it outside blu-ray movies or PC games.

Keep in mind that cable still hasn't caught up to 1080p in most places, and TV manufacturers are already trying to double that resolution.

Also, I have no interest in streaming in 4k. Data speed requirements quintuple from 5mbit/sec to 25 mbit/sec. That's a big increase for not much of a noticeable difference from 10 feet away with a 50 inch TV.

HDR can technically be built into 1080p screens. Only reason they don't is to try and justify 4k.

The fuck you talking about dumbass?

Bluray from DVD was a huge jump. Of course in the beginning the masters weren't great and the encoding was sub-par, but we've reached peak.

4k is definitely coming up next with HEVC to normies. HDR is just a buzzword for 10bit HEVC.

Even HD TV is a huge jump from analog TV (even digital boxes received channels via analog CTV).

>and TV manufacturers are already trying to double that resolution.

>(3840*2160)/(1920*1080)=4
ftfy

That chart isn't really accurate.

4k only looks better because of the expanded color space under hdr10 and better bitrate and compression
I'm talking 1080p to 4k ya numbty
I know but 1080p and 1080i are ancient the latter coming up on 20 years old

I know that the chart is rubbish but i mean is that native 4k cannot be found on normy TV, you need a bluray or a PC game to see real 4k.

I have two of these 4K Sony Android Smart TV's a 69" and 55"
Amazing picture, but Android TV software is buggy as hell.
Also, hanging big ass TV's on the wall is a pain in the ass.

We have some channels broadcasting in 1080 but the only 4k I get in Netflix

What a dogshit chart.

I have both a 1080p tv and 4k tv in the same room, putting a raw 1080 bluray on each theres a clear difference, even at less than 10 feet.

Got a 65"x900c by sony for only 600 bucks, it's got a little light bleed but for the price I have no room to complain.

People also need to take into account some newer TV's upscaling features, and improved motion rate (inb4 plasma).

?
I remember 4k Netflix is like what 50mbit hvec? Obviously above 1080p blueray not as good as 100mbit uhd br

1080p to 4k is still a huge jump if 10bit becomes normalized.

So far we've had 4:2:0 8bit H264, even on Blurays.

Once we go 4:2:2 10bit HEVC we're already reaching decent compression levels from how the source looks.

desu I welcome 4k 10bit, but the retarded internet providers need to loosen up a bit.

Dummy.

>I know but 1080p and 1080i are ancient the latter coming up on 20 years old
Yeah, and 480i was available in the US in 1953, and was more or less unchallenged until 720p, 40-50 years later.

Ausfag here the best we can get is 25-50mbit avg and 100mbit max we're fucked peak speeds drop to 1-10mbit or worse.

But yeah broadband is the only thing holding 4k and hdr10 back for streaming

And 8k will replace 4k

>people buy 4k and 8k for home
>in cinemas we are still stuck with 2k

How do I meme the management into upgrading?

It wasn't though.
Poorfags might of moved from 480i to 1080p.

Most people moved from 480/576i to 720p/1080i via Component Video then eventually to 1080p via HDMI.
1080i to 1080p was a fuckall jump and that's what most people did.

yes, however 8k and 16k are up in the air.

sd was shit,
720p was great but many living rooms are small and you are close to the tv
1080p fixed this, but then tv's got bigger and bigger without costing more
4k will likely be the last resolution people have a legitimate "i'm so close to the screen I still get benefits from higher resolutions".
as beyond this, even for my modest house, 1080p is overkill, in my relatives shoebox apartment 4k is barely useful, you would either need the price of 60-70 inch tvs to hit 500$ for people in apartments, or for my home, you need to make 100-150 inch tvs a viable option, which they aren't.

8k will likely happen, just not for the same reason as 4k. 8k will just be as cheap to make as 4k, and will be a marketing number not a 'OH SHIT YOU NEED THIS NOW' like 4k is as most people even just normal store distance away from a screen cant see the difference between 4 and 8k.

If I am wrong with 8k this will be how 16k is treated if that even happens as a resolution at all.

>Implying the global market cares about what shit speeds an island out in the middle of buttfuck nowhere with fuckall population is getting.
Protip: they don't.

90-120 are the ideal ranges without any scaling

>Most people moved from 480/576i to 720p/1080i via Component Video then eventually to 1080p via HDMI.

I don't know anyone that used Component. S-Video was considered fancy until 32" 1080p LCD TVs hit about 300 bucks when I was in college (and even then, not many people had them for the first couple years).

In 2006, I was the only one who had a non-tube TV in my dorm hall.

i have a 128 (or 120something) - it sucks - have to zoom webpages n shit because fonts but then images goes to shit

not buying anything over 100 again

meh, to me I tend to lean back in my chair and read websites so even the 90's is to small for me to read without any effort, but I zoom in pages 25-75% most of the time just because they are not made for 16:9 ratios so its almost never an issue. thinking back on it, I cant remember a time that something was too small to read comfortably that wasn't also fucked from a programing/ui side.

granted I want 4k 48 inches 91-94ppi, but I will take 37-52 inches (89-120ppi) If its a viable option, but these are tv's and absolute lag is an issue with them.

you fucking faggots you cant even buy a 1080p tv anymore they all produce 4k now

Will we ever come to a point where the concept of pixel itself is replaced by some non-discrete concept for infinite resolution?

On PC ?
No, it'll replace 1440p, which is replacing 1080p. It's not a matter of "if", it's a matter of "when".
Why do you think we have 1080p now ? It replaced previous mainstream "low" resolutions like 1280x1024, which replaced 1024x768, which replaced 800x600, which replaced...

1440p is well on its way to becoming affordable to the mainstream. It's not quite there yet, GTX 1060 and RX 580 aren't very good at 1440p though they'd likely be adequate for most people. I imagine 1440p is gonna become proper mainstream with the next generation of GPUs.

For TVs ?
Good luck finding a modern 1080p TV. They're all 4k now.

This generation upgrade PS4 Pro and Xbox One X already do 4K, it's already here and will be the standard on the next generation of consoles.

Not in my room it won't, as I have a 36" TV and applies, plus I've not even seen a 4K TV under about 45".

43" 4k monitor is perfect, it's like 4x 21" 1080 monitors.

No scaling needed, extreme productivity, very immersive gaming(much more so than ultrawide)

If you want a smaller screen for some games like rts and moba, just run Windowed. If you want the ultra wide experience, just make a broad window.

Im still on 720p sometimes even 480p

I don't think I made a single mention of consoles in my post, user. As I recall though, neither of those actually render gaymez in native 4k, just 1440p.

PCs are usually the more powerful systems, so i doubt that 1440p will be the standard on them when the Xbox One X will be able to do True native 4K.

youtu.be/QlAnthLUa5k

No.
1080p is optimal resolution.
Your eye can't see pixels beyond that.

res like 8k will probably be more relevant in VR goggle type situations where the display is right on your eyes. as per

only if UI elements and text are correspondingly scaled up by 4. If they are not, icons and text will simply be unreadable on 4k screens.

On top of this, 4k, while good for movies, still suffers from the same problems as any other 16:9 resolution: as the text is scaled up, more and more vertical space is hidden because the screen is too wide, and the space on the sides goes completely unused.

We need 5760 x 4320.

That's the idea. You don't want to be seeing individual pixels in your image / text.

humans have not evolved since the chart was made, eyes are still eyes, and what you are mentioning is all shit that you are unable to see at given distances, yea no shit if you look at a scaled up image of 480p 720p 1080p and 4k, the 4k will look better and have more detail, but set a specific size and walk back and now they all kind of look the same.

for gayming it kinda sucks tho

>buy 4k screen
>watch 720p anime on it

This