TheBlackDisc Posted May 29, 2023 Share Posted May 29, 2023 (edited) https://www.tomsguide.com/news/if-this-is-the-worlds-first-16k-tv-i-dont-want-it Edited May 29, 2023 by TheBlackDisc 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Whites Posted May 30, 2023 Share Posted May 30, 2023 As the article says it isn't that great, but I guess the manufacturers are always trying to achieve higher resolution etc. I still don't know anyone with an 8k television and have a couple of friends with plain old hd. It would be interesting to know what current owners think of their 8k tvs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cwt Posted May 31, 2023 Share Posted May 31, 2023 19 hours ago, Whites said: ll don't know anyone with an 8k television and have a couple of friends with plain old hd. It would be interesting to know what current owners think of their 8k tvs. Depends on what sort of compression the video has and its resolution . Low res stuff like a mp4 h264 file will not look as good as a 1080p h264 file as the tv will have to interpolate many more pixels .A 4k tv will have an easier time upscaling lower resolutions as the 8k tv has to do a lot more "guesswork'" to match the native resolution of the screen .. Its all marketing as you need a giant screen or projector to discern those extra pixels . Much rather have a good colour gamut and HDR than resolution Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MLXXX Posted May 31, 2023 Share Posted May 31, 2023 There are two major issues to my mind: The dearth of video footage available in 8K (let alone 16K) The subtlety of the improvement in visible detail of high resolutions unless the screen is huge I enjoy 4K video on my 75 inch TV screen but it's a fairly subtle improvement in detail over 1080p. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MLXXX Posted May 31, 2023 Share Posted May 31, 2023 10 hours ago, cwt said: Low res stuff like a mp4 h264 file will not look as good as a 1080p h264 file as the tv will have to interpolate many more pixels .A 4k tv will have an easier time upscaling lower resolutions as the 8k tv has to do a lot more "guesswork'" to match the native resolution of the screen .. Today with high-end TVs we routinely expect sophisticated detail enhancement algorithms, control over motion smoothing, and effective optimisations for HDR. Upscaling from a lower source resolution is only one of many tasks a processing engine may be called on to carry out. We could reasonably expect an 8K TV made in 2023 to come with a very powerful graphics engine. Of course some manufacturers may skimp on processing power and features. * * * As for the 16K screen linked to in the opening post, the native contrast of 1200:1 indicates the screen is by no means up to normal standards. It's a curiosity, impressive for its overall size and pixel density, but not a screen suitable for serious videophile viewing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheBlackDisc Posted May 31, 2023 Author Share Posted May 31, 2023 (edited) 3 hours ago, MLXXX said: As for the 16K screen linked to in the opening post, the native contrast of 1200:1 indicates the screen is by no means up to normal standards. It's a curiosity, impressive for its overall size and pixel density, but not a screen suitable for serious videophile viewing. It’s a commercial display, so designed to show adds etc where people will walk right up to it. It’s just the first one - the first few are rarely amazing. Edited May 31, 2023 by TheBlackDisc 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cwt Posted June 1, 2023 Share Posted June 1, 2023 (edited) 12 hours ago, MLXXX said: Today with high-end TVs we routinely expect sophisticated detail enhancement algorithms, control over motion smoothing, and effective optimisations for HDR. Upscaling from a lower source resolution is only one of many tasks a processing engine may be called on to carry out. We could reasonably expect an 8K TV made in 2023 to come with a very powerful graphics engine. Of course some manufacturers may skimp on processing power and features. Was more going to the point of a low res video vs a high res one on that tv however good its processor is ie if downloading a file I aim for a minimum of 720p on my 4k ; 480p looks like doodoo Quote Size definitely matters. If the source is 'poor' then it arguably looks worse the bigger the screen size. 420p content looks every bit as good, if not better, on my partner's £500 40" Samsung than it does on my 65" OLED. Edited June 1, 2023 by cwt Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MLXXX Posted June 1, 2023 Share Posted June 1, 2023 @cwt, yes a bigger screen will allow a lack of resolution to become more noticeable and give a soft effect, and conversely a small screen can make low-res material look surprisingly sharp. 30 minutes ago, cwt said: Was more going to the point of a low res video vs a high res one on that tv however good its processor is ie if downloading a file I aim for a minimum of 720p on my 4k ; 480p looks like doodoo Yes I agree, 720p is not bad at all. It falls under the classification "HD". 1080p is better and is called "FHD" (full high-definition). 480p is noticeably soft unless on a small screen or viewed from far away. The difference between 1080p and 2160p (UHD) is surprisingly subtle I find. It can manifest in the richness of the colour as well as in the picture detail. [I find that the result from HDR depends a lot on the display device and how the video was shot and mastered. Directors can often side-step the need for HDR by shooting scenes in lighting that avoids extremes.] 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts