The TV industry concedes that the future may not be in 8K
arstechnica.com
The TV industry concedes that the future may not be in 8K
1–10 of 79 posts
Re: The TV industry concedes that the future may not be in 8K
#2Gee, who could have foreseen that?
I mean my local cable TV is sending crap that's way worse than 720p YouTube videos and most people don't care at all.
I guess the primary benefit of an 8k display is that stuck or dead pixels are much less annoying than on a 4k panel of the same size.
I'm fine with 4k for my living room. Give me more HDR, less chroma subsampling and less banding.
Re: The TV industry concedes that the future may not be in 8K
#3Previously: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46841265
Re: The TV industry concedes that the future may not be in 8K
#4Not enough content for it
Re: The TV industry concedes that the future may not be in 8K
#5> Gaming was supposed to be one of the best drivers for 8K adoption.
While the step from 1080p 1440p to 4K is a visible difference, I don't think going from 4K to 8K would be a visible since the pixels are already invisible at 4K.
However the framerate drop would be very noticeable...
OTOH, afaik for VR headsets you may want higher resolutions still due to the much larger field of vision
Re: The TV industry concedes that the future may not be in 8K
#6I had just recently been thinking of buying an 8K television to mount on the wall of my office to use as a huge monitor. Has anyone done this? Any recommended models?
Re: The TV industry concedes that the future may not be in 8K
#7640K ought to be enough.
Re: The TV industry concedes that the future may not be in 8K
#8> Gaming was supposed to be one of the best drivers for 8K adoption. While the step from 1080p 1440p to 4K is a visible difference, I don't think going from 4K to 8K would be a visible since the pixels are already invisible at 4K. However the framerate drop would be very noticeable... OTOH, afaik for VR headsets you may want higher resolutions still due to the much larger field of vision
> While the step from 1080p 1440p to 4K is a visible difference
I even doubt that. My experience is, on a 65" TV, 4K pixels become indistinguishable from 1080p beyond 3 meters. I even tested that with friends on the Mandalorian show, we couldn't tell 4K or 1080p apart. So I just don't bother with 4K anymore.
Of course YMMV if you have a bigger screen, or a smaller room.
Re: The TV industry concedes that the future may not be in 8K
#9We were talking about TVs recently in the office and pretty much everyone agreed that even 4K is overkill for most TVs at a reasonable viewing distance.
I got a 65inch TV recently, and up close HD looks pretty bad, but at about 3m away it's fine.
Re: The TV industry concedes that the future may not be in 8K
#10> Gaming was supposed to be one of the best drivers for 8K adoption. While the step from 1080p 1440p to 4K is a visible difference, I don't think going from 4K to 8K would be a visible since the pixels are already invisible at 4K. However the framerate drop would be very noticeable... OTOH, afaik for VR headsets you may want higher resolutions still due to the much larger field of vision
> While the step from 1080p 1440p to 4K is a visible difference I even doubt that. My experience is, on a 65" TV, 4K pixels become indistinguishable from 1080p beyond 3 meters. I even tested that with friends on the Mandalorian show, we couldn't tell 4K or 1080p apart. So I just don't bother with 4K anymore. Of course YMMV if you have a bigger screen, or a smaller room.
there are so many tricks you can do as well, resolution was never really the issue, sharpness and fidelity isn't the same as charming and aesthetically pleasing