Discussion Topic: 4K and 3-D Consumer Displays are Coming. Is This a Good Thing?
You may have noticed that there are several 3-D movies being advertised as coming to your theaters soon. They seem mostly to be animated films, or movies that have a lot of CG environments, but it won’t be long before we get conventional movies that are shot in 3-D. This means the Blu-ray discs will have 3-D versions, and already there are some that come with red/blue glasses in the package so you can watch them in 3-D. A few new HDTVs have a port for a special device that transmits signals to polarized glasses, making the left eye and right eye lens alternating light and dark in synchrony with the movie. We obtained one of these HDTVs (rear projector), but have yet to see the 3-D device that is supposed to connect to it, so I can’t complete the review.
We also are getting reports that 4K displays (approximately 4 thousand pixels wide instead of 1,920) may be shown at this year’s CES, in preparation for release as consumer products within a year.
Well, we are just now getting all of our new DVD players with HDMI v1.3a output, receivers with HDMI inputs, and displays that will show 1080p. It’s all starting to work properly.
Is this a good time to introduce so much new technology in the HDTV arena?
Where is the 4K bandwidth going to come from? It has 4 times as many pixels as 1,920 x 1,080. Satellite and Cable are already crammed to the top with channels, most of which are not high def, and the compression is so high, the images are really not all that great. Way, way too many artifacts.
Blu-ray discs would not hold an entire 4K movie, so new technology has to be developed with more storage.
The HDMI jacks in our receivers would probably not accept the high bit rate needed for 4K movie discs.
And what about the signal that has to accompany the audio and video on HDMI that goes from the player to the receiver to the flat panel display to trigger the 3-D transmitter to our polarized viewing glasses? How much are you willing to spend to buy a full set of those glasses so your family can all watch the movie in 3-D? Are you like so many of us that recently purchased a flat panel HDTV because the price finally came within reach of our budgets? Are you ready to toss that one out for a new 4K HDTV that shows 3-D movies in the near future? Are you prepared to deal with the glitches that will certainly occur with such a big change in the technology?
I think like many issues in life, we are charging ahead to new technology before the old technology works.
January 6th, 2009 at 6:09 pm
HDTV is great for home theaters. 4K is for big screens with scores of people viewing it.
Plus 4k and 3D is a response to the HD at home. Theaters have to have better and different technology or they will be truly out of business.
But no I don’t think we need 4k at home.
January 6th, 2009 at 7:42 pm
As far as the 3D goes, I recently saw Bolt in 3D at the theater. I went in with the idea that it would be somewhat gimmicky, as I had felt the 3D pieces from Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix were. However, I exited the theater with a totally different attitude. The 3D presentation was spectacular, and truly added a dimension (no pun intended) to the experience. It just worked so well. This very well may have been due to the fact that it was an animated film, but I will say this, I will actually go out of my way to see all of the upcoming animated films in 3D rather than in the normal format. Adding this to the home experience, in my opinion, would be a welcome development in the world of home theater.
January 7th, 2009 at 4:02 am
There will always be those that want the latest cutting edge technology, but the vast majority of the consumer marketplace will be unwilling and/or slow to respond to the ever increasing speed of technological change. The A/V field is always changing. The minute “something new” hits the market, the developers are already working on Rev. 2.0…it’s what drives the economy. Do we need 4K? No. Do we WANT 4K? Probably. I for one, am completely contented with what I have…
…for now.
January 7th, 2009 at 5:56 am
I bought by wife the 3-D Polar Express BD for Christmas this year and it was a little bit of a dissapointment. First this movie wasn’t filmed with the intention of being displayed in 3-D, so the effects are subtle (nothing like Disney, MGM or Sea World’s displays), plus I had technical difficulties with my paper glasses not playing nice with my real glasses, so, I wasn’t sold. I did, however, attend Mitsubishi’s 3-D demo trailer at Bjorn’s Electronics in San Antonio last spring(?) complete with their 3-D DLP, transmitter and more expensive glasses and it was something to behold (maybe not quite as good as the theme parks, but 80% as good). The material was filmed with the intention of being displayed in 3-D and they had devices that were designed to do just that. My advice…if you want 3-D, buy yourself a Samsung or Mitsubishi DLP and all the accessories and enjoy, but don’t bother with the lame-o attempt at 3-D by studios just to make an extra $5 off of you if you don’t have the right equipment.
Second, bring on the 4K projectors! I think 4K is overkill in anything smaller than 120 inches (I haven’t done the math, just a guess), heck, 1080p is overkill for most flat panel sizes unless you sit close enough to use the top of the TV for a coaster. (the 32in 1080p kills me!). Also, we can use the same medium of BD. A normal 1080 BD only takes up 15-20GB (all the rest is fluff) and several major manufacturers have already come out with their 100GB Blu-ray players and media. This will be like the hard drive race, 5 years from now they’ll have a 1-TB Blu-ray that will hold multiple 4k movies, but for now 100GB is plenty for 1 movie and will be available to the public before any 4k content of any substantial variety.
January 7th, 2009 at 6:37 am
Anyone who’s seen 3D at DisneyWorld will know why its appealing. That said, the quality today of 3D at home is pretty poor (in my experience) - but if (or when) technology is able to deliver a DisneyWorld experience in the comfort of your own home for a reasonable cost..
As for 4K displays - having a 1080p system now, I look forward to 4k displays. Consider how many consumers are using HDTV displays with DVD (not Bluray) - and how good those displays look. Having more pixels than the source isn’t a bad thing. For any display which has registration/convergence issues - having 4k means that there is more (electronic) adjustment possible to compensate for these issue. As well, 4k displays will help push 1080p systems even lower in price. Many computer displays are only now catching up to 1080p - and most computer users crave more resolution / screen real-estate.
So while 3D is clearly not about to happen anytime soon - I think investment in the technology makes sense. We’ll hopefully see local digital cinemas enabled first (giving us a new reason to go to the movies), somewhat closely followed by expensive consumer systems. 3D is the next level of immersion.
There is no doubt in my mind that 4K displays are of great value - even without a new source format.
January 7th, 2009 at 9:11 pm
Red/Green 3D is the simplest to distribute but of course technically inferior to other forms. One of the main issues is the loss of colour in the viewed image. I would suggest an improvement would be to use the color Code 3D. It has the same technical simplicity as the Red/Green system but the added benefit of improved colour viewing. I have used it for 3D still photography with excellent results (more for depth perception - not pop out the screen type 3D that Dolby Digital cinema can give you)
For further info see http://www.colorcode3d.com/
January 9th, 2009 at 10:48 am
I haven’t seen any of the more recent 3D demos, so I can’t really offer my opinion yet.
As for 4K resolution, while I am all for technological advances, I would really like to see 1080i/P successfully implemented before moving on to the next big thing. HDTV has been around for almost 10 years now and and we still have barely 10% of all programming in HD. Blu-ray hasn’t even come close to 25% market penetration yet. Even if 4K displays become available next year, there will be no sources that can drive them. Maybe there will be downloadable movies in the 4K format, but imagine trying to download a 100Gb file on a 10Mbit/s broadband line. Even if blu-ray gets moved to 100Gb capacity, odds are that none of our existing players would be able to handle it (not even the PS3).
I do agree with some of the other posters here who stated that 4K really would benefit large projection screens, but the resolution advantages would be lost on probably 90% of all viewers with smaller TVs or those who sit beyond a certain distance from their screen. Those of you with 4K projectors would be forced to watch mostly upconverted 1080P. As most of us have learned, even the best upconverted DVDs look nowhere near as good as blu-ray.
While there is no doubt that 4K is “better” than 1080P, I just don’t think the market is ready for it yet. While hobbyists like us will gladly make the jump (and almost definitely get burned in the process), the mass market is definitely not ready for a new display standard and the mass market is what determines success or failure for a new format/technology.
January 11th, 2009 at 4:14 pm
Let me start by saying I’m a huge proponent of HD video to the tune of 1080p front projection, and Blu-ray on an 84″ screen. However, I will also say the benefits of 4K for typical consumers or even avid videophiles is marginal at best. Given perfect vision, the distance at which 1080p can be fully resolved for a 120″ screen is 15.6 ft. Once you increase the resolution up to 4K, the distance drops to 7.8 ft for a 120″ screen. While you should still be able to view the entire screen without moving your head, a good portion of the viewing will necessarily be with your peripheral vision, which would negate the benefits of the elevated resolution.
3D, on the other hand, has great potential. The greatest barrier to widespread acceptance, in my opinion, is the requirement for glasses.
January 13th, 2009 at 5:27 am
@Tyler
8× Blu-ray drives have been out for some time now. If 1080p will run on 1×, I imagine 4K will run on 8×. Yes, some players (likely including the currently-2× PS3) won’t be able to play it, but for them, there are always hybrid discs (although I’m still waiting for those to come out for DVD/Blu-ray…).
As far as peripheral vision goes, how about using a lower resolution towards the edges?
In the end, though, I don’t think 4K displays will catch on. Everybody who would be interested in 4K already has 1080p, and the advantage isn’t enough to invest in new displays. I’m much more interested in 48-bit color.
PS: Did you know NHK is working on 8K for Japanese broadcast by 1015?