Panel Makers to Shift Focus to 8K LCD in 2019

Shadowed

Limp Gawd
Joined
Mar 21, 2018
Messages
506
I am still waiting for a 5040x3840 21:9 panel @ 144hz or higher. 4k144hz adoption is way too slow and we need a new cable standard. DP 1.4 was obsolete out of the gate.
 

Dekoth-E-

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Mar 23, 2010
Messages
7,599
That seems nuts to me.

I have a 65'" 1080p plasma Panasonic TV, and we sit 10-12 feet away (any closer would induce the neck-ache experience of the miserable first row seats at a movie theater)

At this range, I don't see any reason to even upgrade to 4k. 1080p is plenty.

Seems nuts and smells like bullshit. Unless he has a super shitty "4k" tv that isn't really 4k, or has bionic eyes, there is no way he can see pixels in that small of a 4k display.
 

nilepez

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Jan 21, 2005
Messages
11,820
That seems nuts to me.

I have a 65'" 1080p plasma Panasonic TV, and we sit 10-12 feet away (any closer would induce the neck-ache experience of the miserable first row seats at a movie theater)

At this range, I don't see any reason to even upgrade to 4k. 1080p is plenty.
My TV is about 3' off the ground. I don't even like being 10' away from an 80" tv and I get neck strain if I have to look up too long, but I don't.
 

nilepez

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Jan 21, 2005
Messages
11,820
Seems nuts and smells like bullshit. Unless he has a super shitty "4k" tv that isn't really 4k, or has bionic eyes, there is no way he can see pixels in that small of a 4k display.
Guess I have bionic eyes. from 6' away I can see pixels on static images, which means there's room for improvement. Obviously if you sit from 10' away it doesn't matter. I can't sit that close if other people are watching, but if I'm by myself, I move the chair up.
 

Uvaman2

2[H]4U
Joined
Jan 4, 2016
Messages
3,143
Go
Guess I have bionic eyes. from 6' away I can see pixels on static images, which means there's room for improvement. Obviously if you sit from 10' away it doesn't matter. I can't sit that close if other people are watching, but if I'm by myself, I move the chair up.
You sure you see pixels and not pixelation?
 

Uvaman2

2[H]4U
Joined
Jan 4, 2016
Messages
3,143
4k has been such bull, i purchased my TV , not at the beginning but its been a while since I had it... Got my 4k blue ray, and my high speed cable and all that jazz.. everything is shit, everything is shit 4k. I am so pissed you wouldn't believe. Streaming 4k is a massive hit to data caps, but who cares? Other than 4k sample videos, nothing I have seen has been better than than well executed 1080p. I guess the only really sharp 4k Blu-ray i saw was the meg.. and that was a terrible movie i didn't finish.. 8k TVs whatever the hell for? Sure 8k TV panels, smaller pixels, but why bother with 8k processing, and whatever.. there will be no contents for a decade at least. When good 4k content is as abundant as dvd content then think about 8k... Hell, when good 1080p is as available as dvds are it was then we should have started with the 4k bull... There isn't enough good sharp contents, its just not there yet.. let alone 4k, whatever the hell 8k.
 
D

Deleted member 243478

Guest
Just give us OLED monitors FFS... no one cares about 8K. Let alone display connectors and hardware to drive it properly.
 

Dekoth-E-

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Mar 23, 2010
Messages
7,599
Guess I have bionic eyes. from 6' away I can see pixels on static images, which means there's room for improvement. Obviously if you sit from 10' away it doesn't matter. I can't sit that close if other people are watching, but if I'm by myself, I move the chair up.
You are seeing pixelation from poor compression or poor rendering. You are most definitely not seeing individual pixels. It's damn near impossible to see individual pixels on a sub 55" 1080p display much less more than double that density.
 

funkydmunky

2[H]4U
Joined
Aug 28, 2008
Messages
2,786
For fucks sake, this is the [H]? My Dad told me there was no reason to ever go beyond a few MB, (big at the time of the conversation) of space, because no one could ever use that much space, ever. Let's all be happy companies are pushing for the pinnacle. Why the sarcasm and thumbs down? I don't plan on buying an 8k tv...………...but at least I'll have that choice when they exist
We are [Hard not tupid. We are about pushing real tech to the limits and not fanboying the future. Trust me we are all in on 8K, but not before it is technically feasible and realistic for the consumer. Are you going to buy a shinny 8K GPU for $5000 because it is new? No developer is supporting it, so why?
Future proofing you say. Ugh....save your monies for the future silly. It will be half price then!
 

nilepez

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Jan 21, 2005
Messages
11,820
You are seeing pixelation from poor compression or poor rendering. You are most definitely not seeing individual pixels. It's damn near impossible to see individual pixels on a sub 55" 1080p display much less more than double that density.
It's actually from about 5' and mostly with solid colors. If I go 4' then I see individual pixels even on movies. Obviously this isn't how I watch a movie (though I could be very happy to watch from about 4' with a 65", but it'd require moving surround speakers around at that point. I will also add that the pixels are obviously smaller than on a 2k set and it's nowhere near as bad as what I recall from Plasma screens, which I could always see pixels on and is why I never liked them, despite the love most give them).

Bottom line is 8k will increase acuity. Do not get me wrong. I love 4k (and IMNSHO it's way WAY better to look at than 2k), but I can see why 8K will eventually provide a better image and that will be especially true on large screens. But as someone above pointed out, if you're watching for 10' away, it's probably irrelevant.
My parents have a 2k 80 or 85" screen and I don't think there'd be much of a difference from where they sit by going to 4k) But when I visit if I watch something after they go to bed, I'm moving a chair up 6 or 7'. I like the screen to fill my FoV. I got that from going to so many movies at the Galaxy Theater in Dallas which has 2 75' screens. They just need to upgrade to state of the art laser projectors (esp on screen 9, which seems to be worse than screen 5).

Anyway, the complaints are pointless. 8K is the future and will likely be the norm in 8 years or less, regardless of what broadcasters do. Hopefully they'll have 8K disks, since compression on streaming sites do a piss poor job with low light scenes. The C8 does much better than I've seen on other sets, but I still see mosquito noise that I don't see on 4k disks (or even most blu rays as I recall, though haven't watched one recently)
 

nilepez

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Jan 21, 2005
Messages
11,820
We are [Hard not tupid. We are about pushing real tech to the limits and not fanboying the future. Trust me we are all in on 8K, but not before it is technically feasible and realistic for the consumer. Are you going to buy a shinny 8K GPU for $5000 because it is new? No developer is supporting it, so why?
Future proofing you say. Ugh....save your monies for the future silly. It will be half price then!
What are you going on about?

This is not about you playing games. It sounds like they're concentrating on 80"+ TVs. Not sure why so many are talking about gaming. It's not what these are for. I doubt anyone droppign 25 grand (or more) on one of these is doing so to game. And as it says these will represent a minuscule percent of the total sales...not unlike 4k 6 years ago.
 

nilepez

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Jan 21, 2005
Messages
11,820
Go
You sure you see pixels and not pixelation?
I can see pixels, but just barely at 5-6'. A bit closer and I can see all the pixels. I realize my eyes are pretty good for my age, but I'm surprised others have never noticed this. Next time I go in Best Buy, I'm going to find a 55" to see if I can walk up and see them, since Dekoth-e said it's near impossible to see them on those.

FWIW, I can remember thinking my 24" 1200p monitor had no pixels...until I got this one then all I saw was big ugly pixels. ;)
 

funkydmunky

2[H]4U
Joined
Aug 28, 2008
Messages
2,786
What are you going on about?

This is not about you playing games. It sounds like they're concentrating on 80"+ TVs. Not sure why so many are talking about gaming. It's not what these are for. I doubt anyone droppign 25 grand (or more) on one of these is doing so to game. And as it says these will represent a minuscule percent of the total sales...not unlike 4k 6 years ago.
I used gaming as a parallel use scenario, not current gaming. Not sure what your getting freaked out about.
 

BSmith

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Nov 9, 2017
Messages
1,323
Good luck. I'm still rocking a 1080p 60" TV. For my main TV. I don't see the need for 4k at couch distances, let alone 8k.

Yep, except mine is 55". Have you seen 4K streaming video? I have and it sucks.

I think I still have my streaming setting at 720p to reduce artifacting and buffering.
 

Armenius

Fully [H]
Joined
Jan 28, 2014
Messages
28,995
wow, most movies are not even done in 4K let alone 8K
This surprised the hell out of me to learn that more and more movies are being filmed digitally at DCI 2K and then upscaled. Ready Player One is a recent high profile example. Were we not all pissed off at George Lucas for doing this to Episodes 1-3 of Star Wars?

If a movie was filmed on good old 35mm it could at least be transferred to digital at 6-12K depending on the film's resolving resolution.
 

Uvaman2

2[H]4U
Joined
Jan 4, 2016
Messages
3,143
wow, most movies are not even done in 4K let alone 8K
Good god .. the state of affairs is absurd.
( And yes you are correct, though at some point in the process the might have had 4k contents for many movies and just dumped it.. might be doing that still.)
http://4k.com/news/20-years-movie-titles-filmed-4k-nobody-bothered-save/

Meh, whatever.. i have my 4k sample videos I guess
(Yes im pathetic at some point i burned some 4k sample content... I had to see if my tv was broken or the Blu-ray was shit of something... Nope, its just that most contents is Garbage and my 4k capabilities are basically wasted)
 
Last edited:

Uvaman2

2[H]4U
Joined
Jan 4, 2016
Messages
3,143
This surprised the hell out of me to learn that more and more movies are being filmed digitally at DCI 2K and then upscaled. Ready Player One is a recent high profile example. Were we not all pissed off at George Lucas for doing this to Episodes 1-3 of Star Wars?

If a movie was filmed on good old 35mm it could at least be transferred to digital at 6-12K depending on the film's resolving resolution.
Awesome!/s
25k to 100k$ for 4k or more res cameras can't be a burden to Hollywood productions.. it just can't... Jeez... Must be something of not having to deal with images that are too clear, or some crap.
 
Last edited:

dgz

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Feb 15, 2010
Messages
5,838
I am still waiting for a 5040x3840 21:9 panel @ 144hz or higher. 4k144hz adoption is way too slow and we need a new cable standard. DP 1.4 was obsolete out of the gate.

We were held back by HDMI. They've made their first actual leap for the first time with v2.1 allowing 4k/8k @ 120. It was especially irritating back when TV manufacturers started to slap 300 and more Hz on their sets that only accepted 60 Hz input.
 

Kdawg

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Aug 12, 2017
Messages
1,106
you can never have too many pixels.

43" 8k would be nice, if I could have one for $250, and use the same amount of power.

If they wanna build it, I'm not stopping anyone.

my 43" 4k tv monitor doesn't have the sharpest text, so 8k would definitely help.
 

Sycraft

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Nov 9, 2006
Messages
4,997
you can never have too many pixels.

You can though. The problem is that they aren't free, in any sense of the word. Putting more pixels on a display costs more money. Less pixels is always going to cost less money. Now it may reach a point where it doesn't matter much in the final price of the product, but it'll always be cheaper. Likewise more pixels costs more bandwidth to display and interconnect bandwidth is a big deal these days. It is getting harder and harder to build simple, cheap, interconnects to do the high speeds we want. 8k takes literally 4x the bandwidth of 4k. So if you have an interconnect that'll do 4k@120fps it can only do 8k@30fps. It means that rez and framerate are often at odds. Along those lines for computers there is rendering power. Both rasterization and raytracing are usually limited by how many pixels per second they can push. You can spend those however you want but the more per frame, the less frames you get. So going super high rez can mean low framerates.

I don't hate the idea of high rez displays, but higher rez for its own sake isn't a good idea. 4k for TVs really is enough for all but the most extreme edge cases. Let's stop worrying about more pixels and start worrying about higher frame rate, better color depth, and so on since those will make a much bigger difference in viewing.
 

dgz

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Feb 15, 2010
Messages
5,838
This surprised the hell out of me to learn that more and more movies are being filmed digitally at DCI 2K and then upscaled. Ready Player One is a recent high profile example. Were we not all pissed off at George Lucas for doing this to Episodes 1-3 of Star Wars?

If a movie was filmed on good old 35mm it could at least be transferred to digital at 6-12K depending on the film's resolving resolution.

Would you say RPO looked impressive? I didn't see it in the theater.
 

Krenum

Fully [H]
Joined
Apr 29, 2005
Messages
18,485
This is obviously for the Asian market. Broadcast TV and Cable barley broadcast a 720p/1080i signal here in America. We seriously need to get with the times here in the US regarding that type of infrastructure.
 

Uvaman2

2[H]4U
Joined
Jan 4, 2016
Messages
3,143
I can see pixels, but just barely at 5-6'. A bit closer and I can see all the pixels. I realize my eyes are pretty good for my age, but I'm surprised others have never noticed this. Next time I go in Best Buy, I'm going to find a 55" to see if I can walk up and see them, since Dekoth-e said it's near impossible to see them on those.

FWIW, I can remember thinking my 24" 1200p monitor had no pixels...until I got this one then all I saw was big ugly pixels. ;)
I can see the pixels in my 4k 65inch panel, but its like at 6 INCHES away, and with some effort.. they are very tiny, squared and seem very close together.. . Honestly while not interested in arguing or pissing you off, I find it hard to believe you can see individual pixels at 5 feet away.. I still think you are seeing something else... Individual pixels have been fairly hard to see for a while, Im surprised I still can unaided in my 4k tv (I cant see pixels unaided in my decent but lowish end cellphone)... If i am making you unsure you can really see individual pixels, take a magnifying glass and check it out really close, there is always a water drop in the screen, but its not always shaped well enough... All that said, yeah you could have way above average human vision, some people are different, no argument there.
 

homernoy

Limp Gawd
Joined
Jan 31, 2007
Messages
439
We are [Hard not tupid. We are about pushing real tech to the limits and not fanboying the future. Trust me we are all in on 8K, but not before it is technically feasible and realistic for the consumer. Are you going to buy a shinny 8K GPU for $5000 because it is new? No developer is supporting it, so why?
Future proofing you say. Ugh....save your monies for the future silly. It will be half price then!

Every technological milestone has to start somewhere...…….. so why not get started now?
 

nilepez

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Jan 21, 2005
Messages
11,820
I can see the pixels in my 4k 65inch panel, but its like at 6 INCHES away, and with some effort.. they are very tiny, squared and seem very close together.. . Honestly while not interested in arguing or pissing you off, I find it hard to believe you can see individual pixels at 5 feet away.. I still think you are seeing something else... Individual pixels have been fairly hard to see for a while, Im surprised I still can unaided in my 4k tv (I cant see pixels unaided in my decent but lowish end cellphone)... If i am making you unsure you can really see individual pixels, take a magnifying glass and check it out really close, there is always a water drop in the screen, but its not always shaped well enough... All that said, yeah you could have way above average human vision, some people are different, no argument there.
From ~3' I can see an array of pixels (and i saw the same thing when I went into Best Buy today) At 5-6' I start noticing them (mostly on solid backgrounds or white text). As for my vision, I think they're better than most in their 50s, but my eyes aren't even close to where they were 10 or 15 years ago, much less when I was 25.

Bottom line is that I can see 8K improving things.

And to put this in perspective, here are the PPI for the monitors/TV I own, as well as 2 8k sets.
my 1200p Dell monitor was 94.34 PPI
My 27" 5k Monitor is 217.57 PPI
My 65" 4k TV is 67.78 PPI
A 65" 8k TV would be 135.56 PPI
An 80" 8K TV would be 110.15 PPI

I could definitely notice pixels on the Dell from 3' away (though in fairness the coating on the screen may have made it worse) and the DPI was 40% greater than a 65" 4k TV. I can only go buy what I own and my phone (4xx PPI) and my 5k monitor are the only ones where pixels are invisible.

Finally, i'm not sure what you mean by a water drop in the screen Is it a literal drop of water?
 

Uvaman2

2[H]4U
Joined
Jan 4, 2016
Messages
3,143
From ~3' I can see an array of pixels (and i saw the same thing when I went into Best Buy today) At 5-6' I start noticing them (mostly on solid backgrounds or white text). As for my vision, I think they're better than most in their 50s, but my eyes aren't even close to where they were 10 or 15 years ago, much less when I was 25.

Bottom line is that I can see 8K improving things.

And to put this in perspective, here are the PPI for the monitors/TV I own, as well as 2 8k sets.
my 1200p Dell monitor was 94.34 PPI
My 27" 5k Monitor is 217.57 PPI
My 65" 4k TV is 67.78 PPI
A 65" 8k TV would be 135.56 PPI
An 80" 8K TV would be 110.15 PPI

I could definitely notice pixels on the Dell from 3' away (though in fairness the coating on the screen may have made it worse) and the DPI was 40% greater than a 65" 4k TV. I can only go buy what I own and my phone (4xx PPI) and my 5k monitor are the only ones where pixels are invisible.

Finally, i'm not sure what you mean by a water drop in the screen Is it a literal drop of water?
Yes, literal drop of water, sometimes is magnifies nicely the pixels.
Huh, its funny as we discuss , I am learning to see pixels from father away: if you put something solid and curved on top of my computer monitor you can see them more clearly around the object from farther (like 3 feet actually)... So its a brain thing mostly I think, the disruption of the object stops my brain from blending them together at 2 to 4 pixels near the object (not just the one right next to the object, but a little more). Seems your brain can unblend the whole thing no problem. Interesting... And now you ruined screens for me forever hehehe.
 

Joust

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Nov 30, 2017
Messages
5,016
I'm sorry. I thought this was [H]ardforum. Seems I mistakenly found my way into the [C:\]omplacent forum.
 

nilepez

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Jan 21, 2005
Messages
11,820
Yes, literal drop of water, sometimes is magnifies nicely the pixels.
Huh, its funny as we discuss , I am learning to see pixels from father away: if you put something solid and curved on top of my computer monitor you can see them more clearly around the object from farther (like 3 feet actually)... So its a brain thing mostly I think, the disruption of the object stops my brain from blending them together at 2 to 4 pixels near the object (not just the one right next to the object, but a little more). Seems your brain can unblend the whole thing no problem. Interesting... And now you ruined screens for me forever hehehe.

I thought you were saying there's a drop of water in every panel ;) Let me be clear what I'm seeing is a very minor perception of what I believe is called the screen door effect (but again only when there are static images....largely white backgrounds), but from 5 or 6' it's not exactly that I see individual pixels, but I perceive something is off and when I move a foot or 2 closer it's clear that it's pixels what I perceive. But I think 4k looks great.
I'm just arguing that 8k may look better. If I could get a ticket to CES (and a decently priced flight/hotel), I'd go to Vegas and report back. But for now, I don't get why anyone here cares. This is just the first commercial TVs. It'll be years before anyone other than wealthy early adopters buy one of these...and I'm sure they'll replace that 8k panel at least 1 or 2 times before I by an 8k TV.


Sorry I ruined your TV for you....you'll get over soon enough (esp if you're not sitting within 6' of your TV and I don't know anyone else that sits this close to a TV this big, but everyone should ;) )
 

nilepez

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Jan 21, 2005
Messages
11,820
FYI, LG announced their new TVs yesterday. All units apparently support HDMI 2.1. The 8k unit is an 88" OLED as well as a 75" LCD. I assume it will be 15 grand for the OLED, but no prices were announced
Oh and the headline is that it supports both Google and Alexa. Not a big deal to me, but maybe if I was using the echo for more than really simple stuff I'd feel differently.

https://www.theverge.com/circuitbre...9-tv-hdmi-2-1-8k-alexa-google-assistant-thinq
 
Joined
Dec 7, 2010
Messages
1,005
I'd prefer they focus on panel consistency/yield/quality -- but of course that won't generate social-media buzzwords like "8K ULTRA-MEGA-HD!!!1"
 

Uvaman2

2[H]4U
Joined
Jan 4, 2016
Messages
3,143
FYI, LG announced their new TVs yesterday. All units apparently support HDMI 2.1. The 8k unit is an 88" OLED as well as a 75" LCD. I assume it will be 15 grand for the OLED, but no prices were announced
Oh and the headline is that it supports both Google and Alexa. Not a big deal to me, but maybe if I was using the echo for more than really simple stuff I'd feel differently.

https://www.theverge.com/circuitbre...9-tv-hdmi-2-1-8k-alexa-google-assistant-thinq
I keep my 'smart ass' TV sans connection, heck if I need yet another device hacked or infected.. that is what the Roku "4K" is for.
Plus now it would be recording you, awesome! /s
 

nilepez

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Jan 21, 2005
Messages
11,820
I keep my 'smart ass' TV sans connection, heck if I need yet another device hacked or infected.. that is what the Roku "4K" is for.
Plus now it would be recording you, awesome! /s
I don't see how tha'ts specific to my post. There are no smart features in this device that aren't in current TVs from various companies and even for LG, Google Assistant was already there...it's just a different option.
 
Top