[Naman_dhingra]

The much awaited 84" ultra HD TV's from LG and Sony are finally launched in india. It is being said that they are using the same tech and panel as well. both are using passive tech and are prized at almost the same price. so Taking these factors into considerations, Which brand, do you think will lead the market.

[LincolnSpector]

4K in the home is absurd at the moment--expensive and of questionable value. I don't see it becoming a major player for years to come.

Considering that, it's impossible to say which brand will lead the market. My advice: Don't buy it.

Lincoln

[LiveBrianD]

True. Like anyone else, people with too much money will buy it first, and it'll eventually trickle down to a more affordable level.

I would like to see this kind of resolution on desktop displays though. Why do the Nexus 10 (2560x1600!!!) and the iPad (2048x1536) have higher resolutions than even high-end laptops? Ughh...

[LincolnSpector]

LiveBrianD, on 13 December 2012 - 09:07 AM, said:

True. Like anyone else, people with too much money will buy it first, and it'll eventually trickle down to a more affordable level.

Technologies don't always trickle down. Sometimes they just die.

OTOH, if I had too much money, I'd buy the Red 4K projector. Of course, if I had way, way, way too much money, I'd buy and restore an old movie palace.

Lincoln

[coastie65]

LiveBrianD, on 13 December 2012 - 09:07 AM, said:

True. Like anyone else, people with too much money will buy it first, and it'll eventually trickle down to a more affordable level.

I would like to see this kind of resolution on desktop displays though. Why do the Nexus 10 (2560x1600!!!) and the iPad (2048x1536) have higher resolutions than even high-end laptops? Ughh...

If it being introduced in India, not the best place to find people with too much money.

[LiveBrianD]

LincolnSpector, on 14 December 2012 - 09:22 AM, said:

LiveBrianD, on 13 December 2012 - 09:07 AM, said:

True. Like anyone else, people with too much money will buy it first, and it'll eventually trickle down to a more affordable level.

Technologies don't always trickle down. Sometimes they just die.

OTOH, if I had too much money, I'd buy the Red 4K projector. Of course, if I had way, way, way too much money, I'd buy and restore an old movie palace.

Lincoln

And if you had way, way, way, way, way too much money, you'd buy a movie studio so you can get 4K films produced for all this, right?

This post has been edited by LiveBrianD: 14 December 2012 - 01:44 PM

[Naman_dhingra]

LincolnSpector, on 13 December 2012 - 09:00 AM, said:

4K in the home is absurd at the moment--expensive and of questionable value. I don't see it becoming a major player for years to come.

Considering that, it's impossible to say which brand will lead the market. My advice: Don't buy it.

Lincoln

Yeah, I do agree that 4K is not at all suitable for home as per now as there are no 4K contents. by the way I heard that LG and Sony both have some resolution upscaler feature in their TV's which will enhance the low resolution image to high resolution. so Is feature worth the use?

[waldojim]

You cannot magically create content that doesn't exist. Meaning, that even on current TV's, rescaling the image is nothing more than distorting the image. Until you can find 4k content, the system to play them back isn't worth it.

[Naman_dhingra]

Well, I agree with you about the lack of 4k contents and the worth of Resolution upscaler. The content to be upgraded highly depends on the original content and should be of a high resolution so that one gets a clear and sharp image after being upgraded. 4K resolution is getting implemented on a regular basis in commercial digital cinema where more films are shot in 4K.

[LincolnSpector]

LiveBrianD, on 14 December 2012 - 01:44 PM, said:

And if you had way, way, way, way, way too much money, you'd buy a movie studio so you can get 4K films produced for all this, right?

Nah. I'd just buy their old libraries and make sure the old movies are properly preserved and made commercially available--on film AND digitally.

Lincoln

[LincolnSpector]

Naman_dhingra, on 27 December 2012 - 02:32 AM, said:

Well, I agree with you about the lack of 4k contents and the worth of Resolution upscaler. The content to be upgraded highly depends on the original content and should be of a high resolution so that one gets a clear and sharp image after being upgraded. 4K resolution is getting implemented on a regular basis in commercial digital cinema where more films are shot in 4K.

Most theatrical films today are shot in either 4K or 35mm film (which has 4K-level resolution in the negative). But they're usually projected theatrically in 2K--even on 4K projectors.

With digital as well as analog, you want a source with higher resolution than the projected image. For instance, it's generally assumed that you need 4K to properly scan a 35mm negative. But 2K is more than sufficient to outdo a typical 35mm print. Compare a Blu-ray made from a 2K scan to one made from a 4K scan, and the difference is huge (and Blu-ray is a 2K technology).


Lincoln

[Naman_dhingra]

At the CES,LG announced an agreement with Korean terrestrial broadcaster KBS for the creation of 4K Ultra HD content. This may be a small step towards the creation of 4K content but as said that every step counts..Hope to hear something like this from sony as well.