It is currently Tue Dec 12, 2017 3:26 am

All times are UTC - 8 hours [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 78 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3  Next
Author Message
PostPosted: Fri Nov 08, 2013 4:00 am 
Offline
Suave, Contemptuous, Lexian
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jan 29, 2010 6:35 pm
Posts: 337
Couple years ago, I worked at a post house that threw ALL its effort and energy into 3D TV! as the wave of the future. The tech guys and salespeople got it in their head that not only was 3D television and BluRay the wave of the future, but that audiences would want STATE OF THE ART FLYING SUBTITLES on their screens, and that 3D channels and Blu were gonna be the biggest shit EVER.

Wonder how that turned out for them.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Nov 08, 2013 6:27 am 
Offline
Moderator
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2010 1:20 pm
Posts: 7601
Lex wrote:
Couple years ago, I worked at a post house that threw ALL its effort and energy into 3D TV! as the wave of the future. The tech guys and salespeople got it in their head that not only was 3D television and BluRay the wave of the future, but that audiences would want STATE OF THE ART FLYING SUBTITLES on their screens, and that 3D channels and Blu were gonna be the biggest shit EVER.

Wonder how that turned out for them.

Also a couple of years ago, I was offered a job at a large production company on the West Coast - for the exact same reason (editing 3D, color correction for 3D, 2D->3D conversions, etc). I passed*, and a friend of mine (already living in Pasadena) took the job instead. He was laid off 12 months later.

*mainly because fuck 3D.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Jan 08, 2014 3:45 pm 
Offline
Moderator
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2010 1:20 pm
Posts: 7601
Vizio announced (at CES this week) that their new lineup of TVs will no longer include any 3D functionality. Instead, the company is focusing on 4K TVs. No surprise at all. Starting price is $999 for a 50" 60hz 4K set, which is a very good price.

The only downside is that 4K standards haven't been finalized yet - so if you buy this TV, and a new 4K format comes out next week, chances are this TV won't play it. Vizio is assuming you will only ever use Netflix to view 4K content. That's because Netflix has just ended 3D support as well, and has finally started beta-testing 4K streams. All upcoming Netflix original shows will be streamed in 4K, and will require a minimum 11Mbit bandwidth (and optimally 15.4Mbit).

BTW, 4K is actually 2160p (double the vertical resolution of 1080p).


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Jan 08, 2014 6:29 pm 
Offline
Cavity

Joined: Sun Jan 24, 2010 8:47 pm
Posts: 466
Isn't 60Hz fairly low and will show significant blur during action?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Jan 08, 2014 7:40 pm 
Offline
Moderator
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2010 1:20 pm
Posts: 7601
The Hz should be double whatever the frame rate is. So, for most films, 48-60Hz is optimal. 120Hz is great for PC games and true video shot at 60fps. 120Hz @ 2160p won't be affordable for a long while (Dell and ASUS are selling 27" and 39" 120Hz 2160p monitors, but they are - obviously - out of the price range for most people, and not designed for living rooms).

All plasma TVs are rated at 60Hz. They are covered with stickers that say 600Hz, but that's because certain brick & mortar stores were pushing the 120Hz features on LCD TVs, and this was a marketing response to that. Plasma TVs derive this huge number from 60Hz x 10, since there are 10 things happening at once (1 Hz = 1 field, and there are 10 subfields doing something at any given time). It's like saying a $50 stereo has a 500 Watts of power, by just adding up the watts from one speaker (let's say 50 Watts, usually measured at 1 Ohm - so really 6 Watts), and multiplying it by the amount of speakers. Marketing bullshit works like a charm. And most consumers don't care - they just want something with a big number on it.

The reason LCDs have blur, has nothing to do with the Hz, but "g-g" redraw rate, which is measured in milliseconds (and this value can be written down as Hz, hence the intentional confusion). For CRT and plasma TVs, that redraw rate is between 0 and 1 ms (and not worth mentioning). For LCDs, it's anywhere between 8 and 20 ms (in other words, it takes 8-20 times longer to draw an entire frame of video). The reason for the range, is because there are 4 or 5 different types of LCD panels in use today (IPS, PVA, MVA, TN, and IPS-e are the common types used in TV and computer monitors), and each has a fixed redraw capability.

LCD TV manufacturers have done a decent job faking the reduction of this amount, by using backlight scanning (a technique they borrowed from 100-year-old film projectors) which doubles the perceived frames/second. That's not to be confused with the "120/240Hz" Bullshit mode, which creates artificial frames out of thin air (and has nothing to do with Hz or refresh - there's a chip in the TV adding completely made up image data in between existing frames).

I'm not sure what the current refresh rate of OLED monitors is, but it was closer to plasma a few years ago - right when Sony threw in the towel, and decided LCD was more profitable. Canon and Toshiba's long-canceled SETV was also identical to plasma and CRT in this department.

If you take a basic electronics class at any community college, you will learn - very quickly - that all the numbers and stickers on consumer electronics are bullshit. Also, you'll learn how to fix shit. I highly recommend it.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Jan 08, 2014 8:03 pm 
Offline
Cavity

Joined: Sun Jan 24, 2010 8:47 pm
Posts: 466
So, no?
:wink:


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Jan 08, 2014 8:20 pm 
Offline
Moderator
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2010 1:20 pm
Posts: 7601
If you're someone selling TVs at Best Buy, you are going to have a very hard time selling someone on 60hz 2160p, when you sold that same person on 240Hz 1080p 2 years ago. Because the only answer to the question "isn't 60hz slower?" is "um, no, sorry?"


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Jan 09, 2014 9:31 am 
Offline
Moderator
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2010 2:18 pm
Posts: 351
Chris Knight wrote:
The only downside is that 4K standards haven't been finalized yet - so if you buy this TV, and a new 4K format comes out next week, chances are this TV won't play it. Vizio is assuming you will only ever use Netflix to view 4K content. That's because Netflix has just ended 3D support as well, and has finally started beta-testing 4K streams. All upcoming Netflix original shows will be streamed in 4K, and will require a minimum 11Mbit bandwidth (and optimally 15.4Mbit).


And who's to say that with Vizio getting behind Netflix that those two combined will help dictate what 4K becomes. We all know many people are using that for their media and not Blu, Satellite or Cable. With the affordability of Vizio and Netflix combined they may be on the forefront of dictating the standard. That's a much better combination than the HD-DVD Blu-Ray wars of a few years ago.

_________________
"You know Xam really is a better name than Pender." - John Carter


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Jan 09, 2014 10:36 am 
Offline
Moderator
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2010 1:20 pm
Posts: 7601
I agree. Vizio sells the most TVs in the US, and Netflix is certainly the most popular video streaming service. It would be stupid for companies not to adhere to whatever standard Netflix adopts.

I will say, as a video professional, that regular HD standards have spoiled me. MP4 standardized consumer and professional video, and the formats were interchangeable (for the most part). 4K is going back to the NTSC days, where professional video uses a completely different format than what consumers will see (even the resolution is different - professional 4k is wider than 16:9 - 4096 x 2160, or an AR of 1:9)


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Jan 09, 2014 2:36 pm 
Offline
Canyon
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jan 27, 2010 10:15 am
Posts: 1779
Location: Tolland, CT
4K Blu-ray (real 4K, not just 4K-mastered) is on the way.

http://www.digitalbits.com/columns/my-two-cents/010914_1300

And so it begins...

_________________
"You know the best thing about necrophilia? You don't have to bring flowers. They're usually already there." -- George Carlin


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Jan 09, 2014 5:00 pm 
Offline
Moderator

Joined: Fri Jan 22, 2010 1:36 am
Posts: 3734
Location: Hamburg, Deutschland
The only thing that can "begin" after HD is... glassless-3D.

_________________
"When I was a kid I always thought Chewy and Lando were brothers."


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re:
PostPosted: Thu Jan 09, 2014 5:42 pm 
Offline
Moderator
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2010 1:20 pm
Posts: 7601
Riedenschneider wrote:
The only thing that can "begin" after HD is... glassless-3D.

Let's just jump ahead - glasses free 3D @ 8K:
http://www.engadget.com/2014/01/08/shar ... -8k-3d-tv/


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Jan 09, 2014 6:08 pm 
Offline
Cavity

Joined: Sun Jan 24, 2010 8:47 pm
Posts: 466
I sent the info you posted a few back, Chris about refresh rates to one of our local video experts. We had a discussion about why we as a company push 120Hz so much (refresh in general vs what you said) He said it's because all of our training material and marketing material FROM THE COMPANIES gear towards refresh.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Jan 09, 2014 7:36 pm 
Offline
Moderator
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2010 1:20 pm
Posts: 7601
It's to distract consumers from shitty contrast ratios, and viewing angles.

"Sure, the blacks aren't black, and if you sit 4 feet to the left of center, you won't see anything, but look: 120Hz! That's twice what you think you're used to!"

I think Sharp claims to have 960Hz on their TVs.

LCDs are so bad, that fake refresh rates are the only thing companies can use to sell them. Check out the marketing materials for Monster HDMI cables. They are chock full of refresh rate certification mumbo jumbo, all designed to convince you that their $50 cable is superior to the identical $5 one on eBay.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Jan 10, 2014 6:48 am 
Offline
Cavity

Joined: Sun Jan 24, 2010 8:47 pm
Posts: 466
LCD's are so bad? Didn't you once talk about how you were really impressed with the 32" Panasonic LCD you bought for your daughter?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Jan 10, 2014 6:52 am 
Offline
Moderator
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2010 1:20 pm
Posts: 7601
Techiedude wrote:
LCD's are so bad? Didn't you once talk about how you were really impressed with the 32" Panasonic LCD you bought for your daughter?

Yes, because I'm genuinely blown away by how far LCD technology has progressed since the early 80s. I'm also genuinely pissed that, within 2 or 3 years, my only choice of what kind of affordable TV I can buy will be between an LCD, and another LCD.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Jan 10, 2014 2:20 pm 
Offline
Canyon
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jan 27, 2010 10:15 am
Posts: 1779
Location: Tolland, CT
Techiedude wrote:
LCD's are so bad?


Anyone who's spent considerable time with a plasma will find that they just can't go back to an LCD (like myself). Great viewing angles and black levels are something that you end up taking for granted when you have them so much that when you switch to LCD, it can be be pretty jarring. There's a stability to a plasma's picture that LCD will just never be able to match (they have a native refresh rate of 600Hz). And the whole thing about plasmas being power hogs is just a myth -- any LCD that's been properly calibrated (that usually means turning that stupid ECO mode off) will pull similar power. So any real advantage of LCD is either pure marketing BS or more marketing BS to cover up for the inherent (and unchangeable) limitations of an LCD panel.

_________________
"You know the best thing about necrophilia? You don't have to bring flowers. They're usually already there." -- George Carlin


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Jan 10, 2014 2:51 pm 
Offline
Moderator
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2010 1:20 pm
Posts: 7601
Downhuman wrote:
they have a native refresh rate of 600Hz

No, they don't. All TVs sold in the US have a "native" refresh rate of 60Hz (and 50Hz in Europe). Read my long-winded reply about refresh rates above.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Jan 10, 2014 3:01 pm 
Offline
Canyon
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jan 27, 2010 10:15 am
Posts: 1779
Location: Tolland, CT
Chris Knight wrote:
Downhuman wrote:
they have a native refresh rate of 600Hz

No, they don't. All TVs sold in the US have a "native" refresh rate of 60Hz (and 50Hz in Europe). Read my long-winded reply about refresh rates above.


I'll take your word for it. I was just noting that plasmas do have a visibly more stable picture than LCD's -- 600hz would have made sense, if it were true.

_________________
"You know the best thing about necrophilia? You don't have to bring flowers. They're usually already there." -- George Carlin


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Jan 15, 2014 1:53 pm 
Offline
Moderator
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2010 8:22 pm
Posts: 2186
Image

_________________
"Abashed the devil stood and felt how awful goodness is and saw Virtue in her shape how lovely: and pined his loss."


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Feb 26, 2014 6:04 pm 
Offline
Cavity

Joined: Sun Jan 24, 2010 8:47 pm
Posts: 466
First client to buy our Sony 4k has faced their biggest problem. Receiving content from Sony to their 4k media server via comcast internet. Each 4k movie from Sony's service downloads, no streaming. And they're 50Gb in size. Each.
When the box is downloading content, his internet is essentially offline to any other access. If even the TV turns on, it gets an "internet disconnected" error. Not sure why, but even if he's just watching regular television it needs a steady internet connection (according to Sony). Sounds like bullshit to me. We have another customer who bought a 4k who only has DSL. I fully expect that one to be returned soon.
Netflix SuperHD streaming required between 12Mbps and 16Mbps for content. The article I read says the average home subscriber only has 7.4Mbps.
4k's came out too soon.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Feb 26, 2014 6:45 pm 
Offline
Moderator

Joined: Fri Jan 22, 2010 1:36 am
Posts: 3734
Location: Hamburg, Deutschland
Any pukings, yet?

Remember, a few years back, when these were first unveiled to the jap public and the story was some people became nauseated and even puked at the sight of 4k's too-vivid glory?

Har har harrr...

_________________
"When I was a kid I always thought Chewy and Lando were brothers."


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Feb 26, 2014 8:15 pm 
Offline
Moderator
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2010 1:20 pm
Posts: 7601
Techiedude wrote:
4k's came out too soon.

It's the perfect time. Most other developed nations mock the broadband speeds available in the US, and the prices paid to get them. The content is clearly here. I downloaded a 20+GB PC game last night, and it took several hours. It should take minutes in 2014. It would take Techie over a month in whatever medieval village he lives in.

There's something very wrong with the internet in the US, and Sony 4K televisions are not to blame.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Feb 26, 2014 8:19 pm 
Offline
Moderator
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2010 1:20 pm
Posts: 7601
Riedenschneider wrote:
Any pukings, yet?

Remember, a few years back, when these were first unveiled to the jap public and the story was some people became nauseated and even puked at the sight of 4k's too-vivid glory?

Har har harrr...


The nausea was actually caused by the refresh rate, something both content providers, and electronics companies have been working on. There's a few PC monitors out now (geared toward gamers), that synchronize the refresh rate (and a few other technical aspects, like field-of-view), based on your distance from the screen. Very cool technology, which will ultimately trickle down to consumer televisions.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Feb 27, 2014 5:45 pm 
Offline
Cavity

Joined: Sun Jan 24, 2010 8:47 pm
Posts: 466
Chris Knight wrote:
Techiedude wrote:
4k's came out too soon.

It's the perfect time. Most other developed nations mock the broadband speeds available in the US, and the prices paid to get them. The content is clearly here. I downloaded a 20+GB PC game last night, and it took several hours. It should take minutes in 2014. It would take Techie over a month in whatever medieval village he lives in.

There's something very wrong with the internet in the US, and Sony 4K televisions are not to blame.

So if you're agreeing with me that there is a big problem with the internet in the US, why are you disagreeing that it's the wrong time for 4k's to come out? And with net-neutrality being struck-down, it's only going to get worse.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Feb 27, 2014 7:50 pm 
Offline
Moderator
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2010 1:20 pm
Posts: 7601
Because if more people get fed up that their 4K streams aren't pixel-perfect, and their 20GB game downloads aren't downloading fast enough, they will complain in larger and larger numbers. It's baffling to me that internet access in the country is as shitty as it is, and vast amounts of people (primarily in the South and Mid-West) don't seem to give a shit. It's like full-screen DVDs all over again.

You wait, when porn goes 4K, people will demand better service from companies like Verizon.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Feb 27, 2014 9:00 pm 
Offline
Moderator
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2010 1:48 pm
Posts: 2083
Location: Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, USA
Porn has gone 4K. Porn is always the first segment of the entertainment industry to take advantage of technological advances.

_________________
"You're totally cute and seem like a nice dude." --crikey


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Feb 27, 2014 9:28 pm 
Offline
Moderator
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2010 1:20 pm
Posts: 7601
It's just fringe/experimental right now (and even then, it's just 4k cameras they are using - the distribution is no higher than 1080p). This is actually one area they are really lagging in, since the ultra-high quality (not unlike HD) reveals far more than most producers want to show.

You can't go to any old porn site and download 4k porn yet. Give it 18 months.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Feb 28, 2014 3:50 am 
Offline
Moderator
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2010 1:48 pm
Posts: 2083
Location: Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, USA
Chris Knight wrote:
You can't go to any old porn site and download 4k porn yet. Give it 18 months.

Except you can. http://naughtyamerica.com

_________________
"You're totally cute and seem like a nice dude." --crikey


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Feb 28, 2014 5:45 am 
Offline
Moderator
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2010 1:20 pm
Posts: 7601
Wow, I'll have to research this...for science...


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Feb 28, 2014 8:47 am 
Offline
Moderator

Joined: Fri Jan 22, 2010 1:36 am
Posts: 3734
Location: Hamburg, Deutschland
Red wrote:
Chris Knight wrote:
You can't go to any old porn site and download 4k porn yet. Give it 18 months.

Except you can. http://naughtyamerica.com


Naughty.

Spoiler: show
Attachment:
vlcsnap-2014-02-28-16h30m42s157.jpg
vlcsnap-2014-02-28-16h30m42s157.jpg [ 2.25 MiB | Viewed 5989 times ]

_________________
"When I was a kid I always thought Chewy and Lando were brothers."


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Feb 28, 2014 9:40 am 
Offline
Black Hole
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2010 1:20 pm
Posts: 9886
Never, ever second guess Red about porn.

Just don't do it.

_________________
"Hitler had a pretty good idea there." - Eric


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Feb 28, 2014 10:01 am 
Offline
Moderator
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2010 1:20 pm
Posts: 7601
NaughtyAmerica has 10 downloadable 4k videos right now. This is still early days, and from an interview with the owner, Andreas Hronopoulos(!), he's in deep shit if the demand for 4k fizzles. I found two other sites offering 4k Porn, but one of them was taking 1080p content, and just resizing it (which is hilarious, because most customers probably wouldn't notice the difference).

So, yeah, give it another 18 months for this to become mainstream (hell, the free streaming sites are still content with 480p or lower).


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Mar 05, 2014 7:55 am 
Offline
Cavity

Joined: Sun Jan 24, 2010 8:47 pm
Posts: 466
Chris Knight wrote:
Because if more people get fed up that their 4K streams aren't pixel-perfect, and their 20GB game downloads aren't downloading fast enough, they will complain in larger and larger numbers. It's baffling to me that internet access in the country is as shitty as it is, and vast amounts of people (primarily in the South and Mid-West) don't seem to give a shit. It's like full-screen DVDs all over again.

You wait, when porn goes 4K, people will demand better service from companies like Verizon.

Years away from happening. It's just getting worse. Until Google rolls out it's internet to all areas we're going to continue to pay high prices for speeds we're only getting half of.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Oct 31, 2014 5:30 am 
Offline
Cavity

Joined: Sun Jan 24, 2010 8:47 pm
Posts: 466
Okay so, if you woddle into Best Buy this holiday season to look at a new television, be prepared for this magic question "How important is picture quality to you on a scale of 1 - 10?".
Of course you'll answer 10, so they'll proceed to take you to the nearest UHD TV for a demo.
Best Buy has made a giant investment in UHD this Christmas, buying millions of dollars of inventory and pushing it as "the best picture available" (Ahem...don't look over at that OLED by-the-way).


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 78 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3  Next

All times are UTC - 8 hours [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
cron
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group