4K?

You came to off topic and you're concerned about disinformation?  Lol.

timdiggerm said:

Is this thread official?

 Is it labeled official?

I guess if the other 4k thread is labeled "official" when it's clearly not, then this one must be.

ElectricTriangle said:

There is no official disk based media for 4k yet. The "mastered in 4k" refers to how they were scanned; they are 1080p disks. I  think Netflix offers a tiny bit of content in 4k, but there is no way you can get that on a"somewhat crappy internet connection."

Just don't get a 4k TV.

 well what is the difference between a blu ray that is "mastered in 4k" and on that isn't?  There many blu-rays in which the movie was transfered to 4k or originally filmed in 4k like the last 2 episodes of the PT and put on blu ray that aren't labeled "mastered in 4k.  What's the difference?

huh, I could have sworn they shot in 4k.  Oh well, I guess I was mistaken.

The "mastered in 4k" blurays are just a marketing thing. They are NOT actually 4k resolution. They are 1080p just like any other bluray. The 4k tag is specifically referring to the fact that the film was scanned at 4k prior and then that master was scaled down to 1080p and put on bluray. 4k discs and 4k players do not exist yet. At least, not in a form available to purchase by normal consumers.

As for 4k TV's, unless you're buying a REALLY REALLY REALLY huge tv, you probably don't have the eyesight to actually take advantage of the difference. And by huge, I mean so big it won't fit in most people's houses. Like, movie theater sized screen big.

There are other things that are actually far more important than pure resolution in determining over all picture quality. These include black levels, actual demonstrated contrast ratio (not the gimmicky number they list on the box), color reproduction, and motion reproduction. There's a guy on another forum I frequent who works in the home video industry and he's posted links to various industry shoot out tests done for professionals showing this. One test even showed that the vast majority of people will tell you a higher contrast 480p image with good black levels is higher resolution than a low contrast 1080p image with crappy more-gray-than-black black levels. In other words, they actually perceived the lower resolution image as having more detail than the higher resolution because the other factors were actually more important than the resolution. The industry has just latched on to the resolution number because it's easy to explain and market. Now, that's not to say resolution isn't important, it's just that it's not the MOST important aspect of determining over all picture quality.

Personally, I would hunt down the biggest Panasonic or Samsung 1080p plasma I could find before they become impossible to get. Panasonic hasn't made them for at least a year now, maybe more. And Samsung is winding down production if they haven't stopped altogether already. But as of a few months ago you could still get samsungs new in the store. For Panasonic you'll probably have to find one on the aftermarket. Personally I think Panasonic plasmas are a little better than samsungs but they both consistently score very highly in professional reviews.

It's sad to see them not being produced any more because plasmas still consistently deliver the absolute best picture quality of any modern display technology. The only thing that can really compete with plasma technology is OLED, but it's still crazy expensive right now. CRT was also as good or better than plasma, but you're talking about a tv that weighs hundreds of pounds (no exaggeration!) for something like a 60 inch tv. And I don't think they even ever made CRTs that big. I think the biggest were in the 30 to 40 inch range.

canofhumdingers said:
There are other things that are actually far more important than pure resolution in determining over all picture quality. These include black levels, actual demonstrated contrast ratio (not the gimmicky number they list on the box), color reproduction, and motion reproduction. There's a guy on another forum I frequent who works in the home video industry and he's posted links to various industry shoot out tests done for professionals showing this. One test even showed that the vast majority of people will tell you a higher contrast 480p image with good black levels is higher resolution than a low contrast 1080p image with crappy more-gray-than-black black levels.

I would like to see this 480p image that is claimed to be higher resolution than a 1080p, I am not sure I am getting this.   But I said I am no expert, I will trust that it is so.

ok, but is it possible when he said  a higher contrast 480p image with good black levels is higher resolution" he meant high detail or picture quality and not resolution?  I thought by definition 1080p was higher resolution than 480p.

Warbler said:

ok, but is it possible when he said  a higher contrast 480p image with good black levels is higher resolution" he meant high detail or picture quality and not resolution?  I thought by definition 1080p was higher resolution than 480p.

 Warbler, he said that people in a survey thought that the 480p image was higher resolution than the 1080p image, not that it was higher resolution.

oh.

Neglify said:

Let me know when 19K TVs are on sale.

 That's a lot of TVs.  Let me know when you find a store that big.

I think it makes sense that eventually all TVs will be 4K (why not have them at the highest resolution noticeable by the human eye), but I agree they're not that big of a deal and I don't see them becoming the next big thing like HD TVs were. I'm just waiting for when they have become so prominent that I can get one for a low price.