Angelus Errare
Banned
Poor Toshiba, they've had a 4K TV out for a year and they go unnoticed, Sony announces their 4K TV and the tech industry is set ablaze with both negative and positive news/opinions.
-
Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!
The future is here: Sony 4K TV to cost $25,000
- Thread starter Nibel
- Start date
Goodness gracious. There is a huge market for 4k just like there was for 1080p. Your posts just smack of I can't afford it so its not needed. Adults base their purchases on price. When these sets hit sub 4k price point they will start to move. At 2k they hit mainstream which should happen in 4 years or so. Which would be perfect since most people will be ready to upgrade their 4-7 year old HDTVs.
How?
All of this TV talk makes me excited about CES.
I kinda wish people stopped focusing on these mega-huge TVs and focused more on computer displays, instead :-/
I guess it's understandable, though, since most consumers (even the high-end ones) tend to buy those really cheap TN panels, it seems.
I kinda wish people stopped focusing on these mega-huge TVs and focused more on computer displays, instead :-/
I guess it's understandable, though, since most consumers (even the high-end ones) tend to buy those really cheap TN panels, it seems.
4K will be noticeable Im assuming, but you dont necessarily need to upgrade your movie collection. You dont need to have 4K movie content to take advantage of 4K displays. This is like saying the Star Wars prequels or Avatar wont look better on 4K displays since they were shot in 2K/1080p.
The Spoony Hou
Member
Flame Lord
Member
So I hear that you can't really tell 1080p from 720p if the TV is to small, so what size would be optimal for 4K resolution?
Kung Fu Grip
Banned
He said if your TV is 40" to 50" movies or whatever will look perfect. Which it does, no pixel space(or i should say less), less noise, sharper etc. You then said you actually see the pixels and lower resolution on your projector, which is funny because you said the picture is superior than on your 60" TV, in turn agreeing than 1080p on small TV's look good.
Canis lupus
Member
It seems that the Koreans from the OLED group are afraid of the Japanese 4K group, latest news is that LG and Sammy both lost confidence in the oled tech and are looking for 4K. They finally discovered what Sony did years ago, very poor yield on big size OLEDs.
Pretty much this 4k won't make any impact till it is about the same cost as a regular HDTV. There just is going to be very few sources of 4k for a very long time. Especially with streaming and digital content making head way daily. I am sure ISPs will be so willing to let people download 100-200 gig movies/TV shows for 4k TVs. People are not even willing to a premium for bluray right now.
People who are into this kind of tech forget the biggest reason HDTVs made headway. Form factor plain and simple people were more than willing to ditch those huge CRTs once prices got reasonable. They wanted thinner and larger TVs plain and simple.
I'm not agreeing with him. A 50" 1080p TV may have good IQ but the picture is way too small, therefore it is far from a "perfect" viewing experience. Why should we just settle with small 50" TVs when 100" is so much better? We need 4K to get the full benefit of such large screens. Why are people so against technology advancing?
KojiKnight
Member
100-200gig movies? Even using existing codecs, you wouldn't expect 4k to be more than 4x 2k. With newer codecs being planned for the time 4k comes out, it'll likely be closer to only 2x or so.
Which is a DAMN shame. OLED was the stepping stone before we had rollable, printable, displays. There are just too many drawbacks.
I really hope the rumored 200 GB Bluray Disc is on the cards. This way a movie could clock in with 4K resolution, 3D, and 48FPS.
KojiKnight
Member
You think Sony is going to release a single disk with all of those features when they could sell them seperately as "special editions" and the like?
4K 3D and 4K 2d have to be seperate discs. So it will be just like current gen bluray lol.
Mattlikewhoa
Member
I don't think a lot of people will be on board till they see it in person. I've seen a demo of the Sony VW1000 (true 4K projector) and JVC's lite version. The content was mixed between bluray, true 4K, and HD broadcasts.
There's an incredibly natural detail, with added sharpness. The first thing I had noticed was the impressive amount of detail, with out the digital noise. I liked it so much I ended up with the cheaper 4K "lite" e-shift option through JVC.
Again, after seeing the demo (a few times) I could see the difference. Now at the price point, it was not worth it (to me) to invest $17K for owning one in my setup.
I will buy one for sure once it's below the $10,000 price point.
There's an incredibly natural detail, with added sharpness. The first thing I had noticed was the impressive amount of detail, with out the digital noise. I liked it so much I ended up with the cheaper 4K "lite" e-shift option through JVC.
Again, after seeing the demo (a few times) I could see the difference. Now at the price point, it was not worth it (to me) to invest $17K for owning one in my setup.
I will buy one for sure once it's below the $10,000 price point.
LiveFromKyoto
Member
Most of the world's population don't live in airplane hangars.
Kung Fu Grip
Banned
I agree with you. lol.
I'm not against the tech moving forward. Check my post from the last few pages.
But, i'm also being realistic about this stuff.
EDIT- What size is your screen for your projector?
EDIT- Oh. 100" you would benefit alot from 4K.
Aquavelvaman
Banned
A little over $4,000 per k.
AstroNut325
Member
Because you don't need to live in airplane hangers to get a 100+ inch screen. My buddy use to rent a 8 ft by 9ft room. He always played games and movies on a front projector setup with a screen close to 100 inches.
KojiKnight
Member
Maybe it's just me... maybe I'm crazy... but I honestly can't see ever getting/enjoying a screen over 50". I'd either have to move the couch back a ton to see everything, or else I'd be playing mind sweeper with every television show and movie I watch.
And again, since I don't plan on getting that close to my screen so the added resolution won't likely do me much good on the smaller screen either.
In short, I don't plan on turning my house into a theatre. That's what theatres are for.
And again, since I don't plan on getting that close to my screen so the added resolution won't likely do me much good on the smaller screen either.
In short, I don't plan on turning my house into a theatre. That's what theatres are for.
Fucking listen. 4K will NOT greatly benefit the average person who is content with the average sized TV and average viewing distance. That is what he/she was saying.
rod furlong
Member
UI text of PS4 games must be illegible at 1080p or less in order to pass cert.
Standards are changing. The average tv size is 3 times what it used to be. When I was 18 40" was amazing. Now 50" is average and cheap. By the time these go mainstream 80" will be a social norm and not a big deal. Also we will have 4k playback capable consoles by then in millions of homes.
Kazuma Kiryu
Member
Gentleman Jack
Member
Bold prediction that video game consoles will be selling millions by the time 80" 4K displays become common in average-income homes.
People used to be content with 30" TVs
scytheavatar
Member
If 4K will have four times the pixels of full HD will that mean video game development costs on it will balloon 4 times? Or will it be more than that?
1st Course
Member
I'm surprised no one mentioned this point until now, just from a simple search apparently large TVs (50''+) represent just a small fraction of TV sales in general:
I think Sony and the other players will find a very hard time convincing consumers once again to upgrade, specially considering that a large resolution like 4K require a large display as well to be noticeable.
Broken Hope
Member
They won't look better, that's like saying DVD's look better on huge HDTV's or older generation consoles look better on today's HDTV's, it's not possible for a lower res source to look better on a higher res screen than a lower res screen.
Upgrade the TV size then. It doesn't have to be 4K. People don't even sit close enough to enjoy 1080p fully, let alone 4K.
And when I say "people," I mean the typical average Joe who will decide if 4K becomes a huge hit.
AstroNut325
Member
Look at the trend. What tv sizes are showing growth in a continuous manner year over year? And then compare that to the numbers of the early 2000s where most TVs sold were much smaller than today.
Your chart actually shows that in the last eight years in the UK sales of 33" to 42" TVs have increased by more than eight times and sales of 43"+ TVs have increased by more than 10x. TVs smaller than 33" have gone from making up over 95% of the market to less than 65%!
Furthermore, I am sure that if we were looking at the data for the US it would be even more skewed towards bigger sizes.
Your data certainly shows that the trend is for consumers to demand ever larger TVs.
This is incorrect. DVDs certainly look far better on HDTVs than SDTVs.
A lot of it has to do with the quality of scaling. From a recent review of the new Sony 4K Home theater projector:
http://www.projectorreviews.com/sony/vpl-vw1000es/index.php
JordanN
Banned
Resolution doesn't cost money unless you're a developer who makes 2D games (where sprite quality becomes important).
I'd like to see it mapped against average price-per-inch before drawing any conclusions. My holiday travels have been dominated by large televisions running SD content. It drives me nuts.
As far as price-per-inch goes, does it really matter? People want bigger TVs and manufacturers know that and that is why price-per-inch has steadily dropped and sales of large TVs have increased. The two work together.. I was responding to someone who was skeptical that there was consumer demand for larger televisions.
Regarding, SD on big TVs that is indeed a travesty. I was very happy to see that my parents had the Panasonic plasma I bought them last Christmas connected to a DirecTV HD Reciever by an HDMI cable with the mirrored SD channels removed from their guide. The really seem to love watching HD nature shows and sports.
My Aunt and Uncle on the other hand watch SD on a 60" Samsung and claim they saw no difference when they tried HD Cable. I almost threw up.
*cough*textures*cough*
AstroNut325
Member
Most gaming assets are designed and constructed at very high resolution and fidelity.
Crownjo
Member
Ahem..
http://www.displaysearchblog.com/2012/12/korean-panel-makers-change-tv-priorities-oled-vs-4kx2k/
Also... Hisense will have a 50" Ultra HDTV.
http://hdguru.com/hisense-targets-the-us-hdtv-market/8853/
O wait LG too.
http://www.flatpanelshd.com/news.php?subaction=showfull&id=1356589634
Since they are just adding "retina" levels of definition for very large screens, I'll bet in just a few years everyone will offer a 4K TV for a few grand.
Crownjo
Member
How much you think that 55" LG Ultra HDTV will cost?
Canis lupus
Member
What has your comment to do with what I said? They seem to say the exact same thing I said save for the hisense link.
You're assuming all things will be equal. It's hoped that Rec 2020 will be used.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rec._2020
Higher bit-depth, less chroma sub-sampling, higher framerates, etc. will all add to the size. h.265 will help though.
As though 4k is somehow a Sony-only endeavor? lol gtfo
I disagree. Many people, general folks, don't see the difference between 720 and 1080P. Also many folks don't care about Blu-Ray.
People are happy that TV's have come down in price and 4K alone, I don't think there is a huge market for it at all. Most don't care they just want cheaper TV's
Crownjo
Member
I don't think the koreans were scared. They had too much faith in OLED and it has too many problems with the panels and hardware.
I kinda wish they improve LCD more by reducing input lag and other issues.