I think a lot of the "so what" reactions to 4K are attributed to sources that are upconverted and/or are not shot with true 4K cameras. The Masters streamed in 4k this past spring was truly awesome and a definite difference from 1080i on my 65" LG OLED from 6' viewing
4k only satellite service
- Thread starter tiemyshew
- Start date
- Latest activity Latest activity:
- Replies 27
- Views 10K
Yeah you can a difference in 4K but it always depends on the content and your TV. 4K movies looks really good but some look better than others depends on the studio. As far as streaming goes there are some things that look good on Netflix and Amazon but there are some really nice 4K videos on Youtube as well that you can really tell the difference as as well.
Yep. I believe it's the HDR and WCG that makes the difference, not the resolution. Now, if only everybody would agree to play by the same rules.
That's the wonderful thing about standards- there are so many of them!
That's the wonderful thing about standards- there are so many of them!
I tried HDR on the Phillips tv I had for a month last December. It made everything look very garish and unnatural in appearance. Between that and the brightness sensor keeping the picture to dark, no matter what I did, I ended up sending it back to Sears where I bought it. I then went to Walmart and bought a Vizio 4K hdtv with No HDR feature. I prefer the more stable colors with out the circus color look.
That's the problem. It's not HDR. It's that is isn't quite standardized and consistently implemented. Still a few bugs in the system.
- Nov 29, 2003
- 14,371
- 18,474
Except not one broadcaster ( Cable or OTA ) is offering their channels in 4K and there is not even rumors of them going 4K.
The future of 4K is already here and it is online, heck the only way you can get true 1080P from the channel providers is on their apps via devices like the Roku.
