Jump to content

Close
Photo

Blog Comments - 3D a proven failure, 4K unlikely to succeed - HBO

- - - - -

  • Please log in to reply

#1
Andrew Reid

Posted 26 March 2013 - 05:46 PM

Andrew Reid

    Andrew Reid - British Filmmaker - Editor EOSHD

  • Administrators
  • 4,086 posts
Picture quality - 4K

So what is the future of TV? Well there's a very good chance it isn't 3D or 4K, and that TV panel manufacturers are heading for even tougher times. HBO's CTO (Chief Technology Officer) Bob Zitter is one of the most prominent TV industry voices to voice is belief that 3D and 4K are not suited to home viewing.

His thoughts don't make good reading for Sony, Sharp, Samsung, etc... but is he right?



#2
Bart van der Horst

Posted 26 March 2013 - 06:45 PM

Bart van der Horst

    Newbie

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 8 posts

I think the next step should be to get rid of all 1080i and replace it with 1080p. 

That difference is on your home tv screen very visible. 

More visible then the difference between 1080p and 4k. (on your home tv)

 

The Future is online I agree. Availability, seamless connected to the Tv screen easy to operate, those things are far more paramount and needed then to forcing a Movie theatre resolution into a family home.


  • nahua likes this

#3
Leang

Posted 26 March 2013 - 06:55 PM

Leang

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 290 posts
  • Locationİstanbul

the Japanese and Koreans probably feel sad for the west as they're on a whole different agenda!



#4
johnnymossville

Posted 26 March 2013 - 07:38 PM

johnnymossville

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 192 posts

4k at home would look different than 1080 mostly if you're watching a 60" or larger display.  At most viewing distances they don't look that different.  color, motion and sound would be a bigger factor in viewing pleasure than the increased resolution is.  That doesn't mean I wouldn't want it if the cost was equal to 1080 though. 

 

As for 3D, I'm not a fan at all.  It adds nothing in a good way to the experience for me. 



#5
RobertoSF

Posted 26 March 2013 - 07:48 PM

RobertoSF

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 55 posts
  • LocationSan Francisco

Good to see some sobriety taking hold. Past, present, and future is 24p for me for narrative experiences. Sports, a different beast. HD at 2K is solid for a long time to come. The human eye is very comfortable there. And on-line is only going to get more exciting... for all of us.



#6
Caleb Genheimer

Posted 26 March 2013 - 08:17 PM

Caleb Genheimer

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 265 posts

I call foul. 4K will become standard as technology progresses and the device cost becomes the same price as 1080p. It isn't about wether people see much difference or not, the higher resolution will sell better. And I think 4K is far more obviously a step up in a  home theater situation where people are closer to the screen. I'm not advocating it, but to say we will always be watching TV and home entertainment at 1080p seems wildly ignorant. 4K will catch . . . it is only a question of when.



#7
tony wilson

Posted 26 March 2013 - 09:12 PM

tony wilson

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 493 posts
  • Locationlondon
stanley kubrick,orson welles movies in 2d

ridley scott james cam moron 3d
imagine blade runner in 3d red vision instead of kodak analogue.
no thank you.
marketing money bullshit and satanic corruption tis all.
my children let us all pray..
ohh sweet lord help us.
bury this 3d demon
this 3d bury it deep.
real deep  and let us all stamp the earth down nice a and firm.
let us have nose more bearded twatters from new zealand and his little hobbit munchkin digical plastic pictures.
let the jackson spend his time raping sheep on that pretty isle, rather than offending are eyes with vomit inducing technology.
one more thing lord can you hurt the man that maketh the millions from transformers the one that is known as michael bay.
also what is the point of the man they call shia lebouf and lord donte gert me started on the jj abraham fella.
  • nathanleebush likes this

#8
Lance Bachelder

Posted 26 March 2013 - 09:18 PM

Lance Bachelder

    Newbie

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 2 posts

4K may catch on - in about 25 years... just look at the Redbox Top 20 any given week - there are currently only 3 Blu-rays in the top 20 - Argo, Zero Dark Thirty and Skyfall - which are #1, 2 and 3 via DVD! Outside of those of us who do this for a living, no one really cares about 1080 let alone 4K and are very happy watching standard def DVD's on their HD screens.

 

Almost everyone I know is still watching stretched SD broadcast on their shiny new HD TV even though they're paying for HD! Unless you have DirecTV, the HD channels are still hard to find for John Q. Public and they're not gonna go searching for a 4K channel when it comes available. Sad but true. We're years from the general public fully moving to 1080!

 

That said I do agree with Zitter that 4K is great for acquisition although the majority of feature films and TV are currently using the Alexa which is NOT 4K...


  • nathanleebush likes this

#9
powderbanks

Posted 26 March 2013 - 09:36 PM

powderbanks

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 76 posts
  • Locationnorth carolina

4K may catch on - in about 25 years... just look at the Redbox Top 20 any given week - there are currently only 3 Blu-rays in the top 20 - Argo, Zero Dark Thirty and Skyfall - which are #1, 2 and 3 via DVD! Outside of those of us who do this for a living, no one really cares about 1080 let alone 4K and are very happy watching standard def DVD's on their HD screens.

 

Almost everyone I know is still watching stretched SD broadcast on their shiny new HD TV even though they're paying for HD! Unless you have DirecTV, the HD channels are still hard to find for John Q. Public and they're not gonna go searching for a 4K channel when it comes available. Sad but true. We're years from the general public fully moving to 1080!

 

That said I do agree with Zitter that 4K is great for acquisition although the majority of feature films and TV are currently using the Alexa which is NOT 4K...

 

 

most digital 'prints' that are used for projection at movie theatres are 2k even. 4k would be awesome, but unless you have a huge screen, very critical eyes or a massive wallet, doesn't make sense. for streaming 4k content, it's going to take an entire infrastructural overhaul, and fibre is going to be the minimum for sufficient data transfer. that is the biggest problem i see coming



#10
zephyrnoid

Posted 26 March 2013 - 10:18 PM

zephyrnoid

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 162 posts

The Future of Television is BETTER and More ENDURING content :D
2K is plenty if it's good stuff, cheap and readily accessible on multimple devices. The past is Couch Potato TV at any resoluytion and in any dimension. Hey remember when Holographic movies were supposed to become mainstream>
Yes. It's today and we're still way happy with 1080p - 2K
Win Win I say.



#11
shijan

Posted 26 March 2013 - 10:20 PM

shijan

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 66 posts

another proof article for this 4K concept :) 4K_fap.gif



#12
shijan

Posted 26 March 2013 - 10:48 PM

shijan

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 66 posts

And now in 3D of course  :lol:  4Kin3D.gif



#13
/p/

Posted 26 March 2013 - 11:59 PM

/p/

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 303 posts

I wish all cams were world cams and PAL and NTSC would die.



#14
Paul Watt

Posted 27 March 2013 - 12:38 AM

Paul Watt

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 24 posts
  • LocationSquamish, BC

I did check out Sony's new 4K tv a while ago.  It was stunning, and there was a group of guys ogling it.  We started chatting, and it turned out every one of the 7 or so guys standing there worked in the motion picture industry.  A colourist, a couple editors, a dp etc.  It's true that no-one else really seemed to care.  Well, I want one, but truth of the matter is I hardly watch anything on the TV I have, so it would probably be a waste of time.  I'd love to see the World Cup in 4K 3D though.



#15
HurtinMinorKey

Posted 27 March 2013 - 12:52 AM

HurtinMinorKey

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 768 posts
  • LocationCambridge MA, USA

It's just not ready for prime time. One day we'll see something in 3D or VR and say, "Holy Shit".   



#16
powderbanks

Posted 27 March 2013 - 02:24 AM

powderbanks

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 76 posts
  • Locationnorth carolina

It's just not ready for prime time. One day we'll see something in 3D or VR and say, "Holy Shit".   

 

google 'oculus rift.' while i don't see cinema or film really going much further with 3d, for the time being, but it's going to change video games/virtual reality



#17
Franka Mech T. Lieu

Posted 27 March 2013 - 05:04 AM

Franka Mech T. Lieu

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 23 posts

I never think 3D ever got any chance. Until naked eye visual holographic display I guess.

 

But then I digress here, I think 4K is valid in the long term future. The point is the Display will not be just for the Movie / TV viewing anymore in the future it will be an hub for info / interactive visualization, etc in and among the house. Think about it, you are in the kitchen peering through the door at that 4K display with the Recipe when trying to grill the onion while chopping up the carrot, or using that 4K display to read news ( on line news paper ) .. and I forsee integration of mobile device into the chain. The Tablet acting as an visual cue as well as an input device linked to the 4K display ( think browsing your travel photos or editing them ) ... there is much to just the Movie and TV viewing 



#18
mtheory

Posted 27 March 2013 - 07:07 AM

mtheory

    Advanced Member

  • Moderators
  • 274 posts

Content consumption is rapidly moving to mobile, so instead of 3D/4K we need better bandwidth optimization and streaming technologies to make current content delivery faster and easier. The current 480p/720p/1080p system works very well with these varying bandwidth/data package/speed factors.

 

I'm more excited about H.265



#19
ike007

Posted 27 March 2013 - 10:12 AM

ike007

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 39 posts

Here in Tokyo all proper electronic stores (Yodobashi, Bic Camera Labi etc...) sell 4k TV staring at 5/6000 euros for the 50", up to 15000 euros for the Sony 80 something inches.

Although i'm not a fan of these hyper high def TV, for the same reasons as our host has explained, I have to say the the image quality is stunning and I can see the difference from regular 1080p tv, without any effort at a viewing distance between 3 to 5meters.

Then, if they are selling like hot cakes, or they are sitting on the warehouses I have not idea, but they are on display almost everywhere.

The 83 inches Sony is outstanding and I could see advertising agencies and media related business using it for presentations. Photos look as good as on an Eizo monitor, just bigger.



#20
ScreensPro

Posted 27 March 2013 - 10:14 AM

ScreensPro

    Banned

  • Banned
  • PipPipPip
  • 373 posts

The recent launch of 5" 1080p mobile devices shows that the consumer is basically an idiot who equates higher numbers with better quality, even when there is zero visible difference and the videos they consume on said device will mainly be 720p or below anyway.

 

BUT

 

Upgrading your phone, if you are on a contract, is cheap.... and if you are just entering a contract... The price difference between a Galaxy s3 and s4 is minimal.

 

This is the only way 4KTV will take off.... when the price to upgrade is so minimal that you may as well do it.






0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users