Is 8k for home cinema absolutely pointless?

5punk3monk3y said:
I have the luxury of having an XF90 FALD here and an Oled B7 for normal SDR viewing the XF90 is great but HDR content the Oled blows it out the water every time.
Click to expand...

Nice sounds like your happy with your OLED. Not been my experience in that it such a white wash. But then again I don't have same TV's you mentioned so my experience is likely very different.

Troezar said:
Interesting alternative viewpoint. I had discounted everything outside of OLED but as you say brightness is a major factor with HDR. I can probably hold on a few more years, by then, hopefully, the choice will be clearer.
Click to expand...

To be clear, I think OLED is the way to go on balance. However there are aspects of QLED that are also attractive and for myself do enjoy using both depending on what I am doing. its why I cannot wait to see something like Micro-LEDs (granted not there yet) bring together the black's of OLED but colour volume / brightness of of QLEDs.
 
I have a Panasonic 902B (FALD TV, pretty high end at the time second only to the ZD9) and my OLEDs comfortably beat it.
The FALD TVs, definitely in HDR content, are quite stressed. They struggle to control the backlight, colour, specular highlights and keep things dark in challenging scenes at the same time.
Whilst for OLEDs, its just flawless and business as usual.

The distinct two advantages I find with FALDs are:
1. no ABL
2. no risk of burn-in.
 
Samsung is still struggling to find a suitable replacement for QLED.

MicroLED is a abject failure

Samsung is going into QD-OLED production but it still won't get as bright as QLED and burn in might still happen

So now they're investing another billion into another new tech called QNED - this takes the same structure as QD OLED but replaces the blue OLED later with Quantum nano layer that produces light. This tries to alleviate the negatives of QD OLED without resorting to full MicroLED
 
Watched a video regarding 8K the other day.

They played a clip just under 4 mins long and it weighed in at 9Gb. They also said it could have done with being recorded at a higher bit rate due to artefacts.

Think we’ve got a while to go before 8K is even remotely viable in the UK.
 
HRL said:
Watched a video regarding 8K the other day.

They played a clip just under 4 mins long and it weighed in at 9Gb. They also said it could have done with being recorded at a higher bit rate due to artefacts.

Think we’ve got a while to go before 8K is even remotely viable in the UK.
Click to expand...

or they could just compress using h265.

the 4k movie rips i have are around 4GB for a full movie sometimes 5GB and they look infinitely clearer than netflix doesn't seem to be compressed at all. h265 is very very efficient twice as efficient as any other codec at minimum.
 
You must be compromising on the audio or something.

I’ve got 1080P rips that are over 10Gb, never mind 4K.
 
HRL said:
You must be compromising on the audio or something.

I’ve got 1080P rips that are over 10Gb, never mind 4K.
Click to expand...

Yes what's a Blu-ray film, 50GB? Are the discs that inefficient? Audioholics think that physical media offers the best quality. So far I think I would agree with them.
 
HRL said:
You must be compromising on the audio or something.

I’ve got 1080P rips that are over 10Gb, never mind 4K.
Click to expand...

nah most of the crap you don't need. one language in 7.1.4, no subs, and just the movie.

remove all the languages and remove all the extras. a movie doesn't need to be huge.

to test it out i even downloaded movies that were 15GB in h265 and you couldn't tell from a normal viewing distance and my eyesight is perfect.

i can tell netflix looks terrible now but these rips are very clear.
 
Even now quite a number of new films are upscaled from 2k to 4k for 4k blu-rays. At least for now I do think there is enough in place to see how 8k would 'take off' for home cinema.
 
XeNoNF50 said:
Even now quite a number of new films are upscaled from 2k to 4k for 4k blu-rays. At least for now I do think there is enough in place to see how 8k would 'take off' for home cinema.
Click to expand...

That's right, at least half, if not more of AAA Hollywood films are still currently filmed using 2k cameras.

Which means that most Bluray movies are not native 4k, they just upscaled
 
8K is pointless. TV manufacturers should be focussing on delivering the best possible picture quality at 4K (OLED like deep blacks, LCD brightness, no blooming, ghosting, panel uniformity issues, and no burn in). Instead 8K is being forced when cable TV barely even covers 1080p.

Furthermore the graphical power to run 4K is already demanding enough for video games. Samsung botched their 4K lineup in an effort to push 8K TVs - which aren't actually that good in the first place.
 
iamtheoneneo said:
Most CGI is 2K, and the entire movie gets downsampled to 2k for the work and then upscaled again to 4k for the finish. Some of these movies are being shot in 6k only to be absolutely destroyed in post, hell some very popular movies arent even being shot in 4k to begin with but 3.2K on ALEXA XT's
Click to expand...

Sorry that i haven't read the whole thread. But this is the main reason that 4K is going to remain niche for the foreseeable future. Ironically the movies that benefit from 4K the most are old ones filmed on 70/65mm like 2001 or Lawrence of Arabia as long as they have a good transfer. Anything post 1990 will only have an incremental improvement and most of the time are difficult to tell the difference from 1080p in terms of detail level. Personally i find HDR overdone and in a lot of cases, it's like that they crank up the contrast and colour saturation. And that's me on a calibrated LG OLED E6 with a Panasonic 820 4K player! So i have pretty good equipment

The biggest difference i've seen is on consoles, games do look a lot better on the PS4pro and XB1X
 
The way I see it without the source material it's pointless, when 8K eventually does become mainstream TV technology will probably be a lot better and you'll be looking to upgrade anyway.
 
Grim5 said:
Netflix is back to 4K for me, not that it ever needed to be slowed down we have a ton of spare bandwidth
Click to expand...
The problem was most likely not that you had a ton of spare bandwidth but netflix

I looked a few days ago and movies on Netflix where still at half bitrate
They where always displayed at 4k but there bitrate was halved
 
chaparral said:
The problem was most likely not that you had a ton of spare bandwidth but netflix

I looked a few days ago and movies on Netflix where still at half bitrate
They where always displayed at 4k but there bitrate was halved
Click to expand...

how do I check the bit rate?

it sucks if that's the case, Netflix 4K didn't have a very high but rate to begin with
 
All of my films are 30-70gb depending on the film. I don't see a point in compromising on quality. Most films I only watch once, and I want to watch it in the best possible way.

Lion King and most films which star Scarlett Johansson as the lead have incredibly sharpness and clarity which need to be watched at reference level detail.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom