This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
A buddy of mine worked in a theatre and told me that the film's were all 1080P. I called bullshit. Those screens were huge they were clearly 4K. He showed me the reel and yup he was right.
If theatres don't even bother with 4K, your TV doesn't need 8K.
Actual film doesn't work like that (35mm or 70mm IMAX for example), but you are correct that most cinemas these days are digital and they use "1080p" (more accurately DCI 2K which is 2048×1080 when the aspect ratio is 1.90:1). There are a few that do 4K, but overall not that many.
The main reason that's enough for cinema though is that those "1080p" films are like 500GB with very little compression displayed through a DLP projector, so they look a heck of a lot better than showing a blu-ray through a massive TV with palm sized pixels.
Also you're quite far away from the screen so even if it's bigger you don't need as much resolution.
Optical has built-in upscaling. No AI bullshit needed.
HDMI is the proprietary monopoly scam. It is added to devices by the owning members of the scam. Display Port is the open source free equivalent standard that the educated consumer goes looking for.
Problem is, very few things output or input DP.
HDMI, for better or worse, seems to be ubiquitous.
A lot of laptops nowadays output video over usb c, in most cases they use DisplayPort alt mode, which as the name implies is just DisplayPort.
That doesn’t solve the issue of every x in 1 dongle only having HDMI or TVs only having HDMI inputs
Just for the record, the HDMI consortium can place their mouths on my genitals and consume my waste
My next TV purchase will be based on which models have Display Port.
...And which don't have smart features, but that's a given.
That's going to be harder and harder to find.
The transformation into crochety old man is complete. This AI being shoehorned into everything can get off my damn lawn too.
This is different from the old man angry at change meme. The change isn't the problem; personally I like change and seeing evolutionary and revolutionary improvements.
The problem is that so many of these changes are for the benefit of the corporations involved in the product at the expense of anyone who ends up using it or is near enough to be affected collaterally.
The idea of a smart TV is nice. Except they put the underpowered hardware in it that struggles to display a menu. Maybe because of all the data it is gathering and sending home or the time it spends making sure the latest ads are downloaded.
Smart appliances are also a nice idea. Except most just want to connect to some proprietary web service so they can middle man every interaction to sell your data or a subscription.
A smart car also sounds cool. Except they are also designed to just make more money either via more expensive repairs, possibly even forced to go through a manufacturer approved mechanic because they use security features to protect them from competition, or by the usual selling your data and ads. Oh and also they can save money by sticking a bunch of controls into the software and not needing to make physical buttons. Also they save even more by also using underpowered hardware and probably not even bothering with UX design. Maybe even deliberately because bad experiences can be upsellers. Oh they also want to sell subscriptions to whatever they can, including to things that don't even benefit from going through their services.
It's all just rent seeking.
Sounds like a growing market to me...
No TVs have DP, and the largest monitors you can find now are below 55". I wish you luck.
I got a new Android TV for offline use. Most people say you get an OK experience if you don't connect the TV into a network.
The biggest remaining annoyance is that it takes 45 seconds to cold-start. Almost as if it's booting an OS desgined for a phone or something.
That's just a commercial display. Most commercial displays don't have an OS and require a separate device for showing video like an Nvidia Shield, PC, etc.
The keyword is digital signage display/television.
I haven't even gotten on the 4k bandwagon yet. I fully expected to by now, but then again, my eyes aren't getting any better and 1080p content still looks... fine.
A few weeks ago I watched Ladyhawk on a 13" TV with a built in VHS player. I realized that my brain didn't care about the quality as soon as I started paying attention to the content. I still like my 1080p but there's definitely massively diminishing returns after that.
I have a 4k TV. I don't think I've ever actually watched something on it in 4k because finding the content isn't worth the effort.
1080p is fine, but I really like the colors of HDR. I am NOT a fan of the higher refresh rate for movies though.
I couldn't care less about 8k since I can't even see streaming 4k content without using a platform infested with DRM.
Allow me to introduce you to Stremio + Torrentio + Real-Debrid.
Got any of that juicy 8k content?
No? Because noone does and noone cares.
There are 8K cameras, but the only reason to use them is to create stabilized 4K content.
I doubt the general public cares about or can even tell the difference from 4k to 8k. Not to mention the amount of bandwidth that will be required.
This exaxt comment could have been for 1080 to 4K. That said 4k has had a lot less fanfare to HD.
Not really.
Sorry but no way native 8k is going mainstream any time soon. 4k is genuinely better looking over 1080p but 8k to 4k is not much of a difference for the relative increase in requirements.
I expect the content delivery companies to do something stupid again with 8k (like when they rolled out 4K), and totally nerf the bitrate and encoding quality, making it look worse than a properly encoded high bitrate 720p/1080p file.
The HDMI standard needs to declare cable bankruptcy and start over with a new port design. We all have way too many HDMI cables supporting 23 years of standards. There is nothing in the specification to clearly label, across brands, what type of hdmi specification is supported by the cable or port.
Also, the DRM baked into the specification is such bullshit.
Also, the DRM baked into the specification is such bullshit.
That's the one thing they have absolutely no interest in getting rid of. They'll change everything about the spec, including the connector, but that part's staying in.
They need to switch to fiber optic or a simple coaxial cable (like SDI) with BNC connectors. That would end this madness with long cables being outrageous, and the connectors being flimsy.
They also need to separate audio back out into its own thing.
Ehh, can I get the Basic Low Speed HDMI Cable with Wifi?
"...whenever we have 8K TVs and content."
The TVs exist, but there won't be content for years and years. Companies barely stream usable 4K right now.
Yeah but you’ll want full gold plating and nitrogen-infused insulation for the best picture.
Somebody - probably those guys thinking how they'll sell more stuff, - is operating in reality where "you can, but you shouldn't" can't be said in human languages.
I've been reminiscing parts of my childhood where I'd watch a lot of karate matches and try to repeat moves (I know it sounds stupid). The fights, the lights, the room, my grandma, the summer evening outside matter in these memories. Not how much logical dots there were on that goddamn screen.
One of the most depressing things about now is how, even compared to 10 years ago, people are thinking not about new things to do with tech, but about doing old things with more resources wasted, because that's apparently better.
1920x1080 seems an overshoot sometimes. 8K - why the hell? And with more expensive shorter less reliable cables, other things equal.
I guess hoping for cheap thin LPD displays is useless.
Good thing the word Premium® is there to let me know it’s a high quality product!
"Ultra96" sounds like it could have been a codename for the Nintendo 64.
At what point do we just declare that the screens they try and sell are pushing for higher resolution than real life?
I believe 4K is already basically there. I have a 50" 4K (2160p) that I sit 9 feet away from and based on the Nvidia PPD calculator, that makes for 168ppd, and according to that page 150ppd is around the upper limit of human vision. Apple's "retina" displays target around 50-60ppd (varies based on assumed viewing distance), which is what most people seem to consider "average eye visual acuity". Imo 4K / 150ppd is more than enough.
Great! Now they can sell my grandma an HDMI cable in 50 installments!
