Does this article about 8K HDR TVs with glasses-free 3D hold any water to it at all?

[edisonprime]

3D could yet make a comeback worthy of Dracula. Could it be driven by 8K HDR? [opinion]

Although the first couple times I read the article, I thought it probably was legit, but I later figured I probably was hoping against hope. I would LOVE to see such a device that has 8K HDR plus 3D in it. I would love to see 3D in a higher than regular HD resolution to it. Yes, I have a 4K active 3D TV (but no HDR sadly), and yes I know it would upscale it to a 4K picture. And yes I even know that 4K passive 3D TV still upscale it to a greater than HD picture. But I would love to see 3D in TRUE 4K, and even hopefully HDR as well. Although I would definitely even love an 8K HDR active 3D TV so I could watch 3D in 8K HDR (in either both upscaled or actual), I know that the general public HATED the 3D glasses, so I know that would be too much for me to ask to get the full resolution with the active glasses (and I know the active glasses were especially hated), so glasses-free would be a great compromise.. But still, it would be a higher resolution for 3D on any TV than any other method (it possibly could be greater than 4K HDR resolution). And yes, even though it's not that big of a deal for me, in some ways I would love the glasses-free aspect as well. I have also heard some say that with the new Avatar movies coming out in the next few years, I heard that this could make it possible to have a 8K HDR glasses-free 3D TV come (as James Cameron even talked about those movies playing in 3D in glasses-free 3D theaters). But like I originally said, I have my doubts. Anyways, I'd like to read from the other posters here, and read from some MORE INFORMED POSTERS on the subject, as I believe that at least a few of you would know light-years ahead of me.

 

[harshness]

I think it is unlikely that 3D TVs will make a comeback in the foreseeable future. The last time around, people bought TVs on the promise of content but the content wasn't nearly what was hoped in terms of both quality and quantity of titles.

To date, the glasses free 3D TVs have been relatively tiny (Sony's was 24") so I expect that a similarly configured 8K big-screen TV will be prohibitively expensive and won't sell in enough volume to convince the movie production houses to even re-release in 4K 3D. I'm assuming most existing 3D titles were probably shot/rendered in HD at best given that they were typically displayed in 1K resolution by the 3D TVs of the day.

 

[navychop]

I read similar 3D claims for 4K/UHD HDR/DV. Never happened. Never displayed, AFAIK.

Sure “8K” offers more of a chance of delivering glasses free 3D. But I doubt “8K” will become widespread (video quality improvement undetectable by the human eye in home size TVs), much less any version of “8K” 3D.

Another Smell-O-Vision.

It’s dead, Jim.

 

[KE4EST]

I would not hold my breath. Navy is right, it is dead.

 

[edisonprime]

I would not hold my breath. Navy is right, it is dead.

I don’t know if that’s completely true what he said. 3D or not, I see 8K HDR as inevitable once the costs get lower. They already have some on the market but they’re worth a fortune.


Sent from my iPhone using SatelliteGuys

 

[edisonprime]

I think it is unlikely that 3D TVs will make a comeback in the foreseeable future. The last time around, people bought TVs on the promise of content but the content wasn't nearly what was hoped in terms of both quality and quantity of titles.

To date, the glasses free 3D TVs have been relatively tiny (Sony's was 24") so I expect that a similarly configured 8K big-screen TV will be prohibitively expensive and won't sell in enough volume to convince the movie production houses to even re-release in 4K 3D. I'm assuming most existing 3D titles were probably shot/rendered in HD at best given that they were typically displayed in 1K resolution by the 3D TVs of the day.

Don’t interpret this as me saying that 3D TVs will come back because I have my doubts, but I have seen videos on YouTube about glasses-free 3D TVs that were like 55, 65, 75, 85 inches, and so on. I’ve seen videos that some were 4K and later 8K. But for all of those they were several years ago, so like I said, I have my doubts of 3D TVs returning, regardless of the 3D format.


Sent from my iPhone using SatelliteGuys

 

[FTA4PA]

There was mention of this at CES back in 2015 but haven't heard anything since.

Hands On With Samsung's 110-inch 8K Glasses-Free 3D TV (My Head Hurts)

A glimpse of the future of TV, or a descent into AV madness?

www.forbes.com

 

[harshness]

I don’t know if that’s completely true what he said. 3D or not, I see 8K HDR as inevitable once the costs get lower.

In terms of content, 4K isn't really here yet so I think it is pretty unlikely that 8K will be something everyone will want anytime in the next 10 years or more. 8K currently appeals to those who have been falsely convinced that they're future proofing their TV purchase. It is likely that none of the 8K TVs that are available today will survive until there's sufficient 8K content available to get excited about. The fact that most current films are being shot to 4K at best means there's not any hope of scanning film or getting native resolution video. The best hope will be scanning older film-based films and anything that gets shot from here on out in 8K or better (unlikely, I think as the movie theaters seem to be favoring more smaller screens).

3D seems to make a short-lived comeback every 35 years or so so keep your eyes peeled in the 2040s. Of course by then, the youth of today will still be watching content on their phones and tablets and direct view televisions will quite possibly be a faded memory.

 

[edisonprime]

In terms of content, 4K isn't really here yet so I think it is pretty unlikely that 8K will be something everyone will want anytime in the next 10 years or more. 8K currently appeals to those who have been falsely convinced that they're future proofing their TV purchase. It is likely that none of the 8K TVs that are available today will survive until there's sufficient 8K content available to get excited about. The fact that most current films are being shot to 4K at best means there's not any hope of scanning film or getting native resolution video. The best hope will be scanning older film-based films and anything that gets shot from here on out in 8K or better (unlikely, I think as the movie theaters seem to be favoring more smaller screens).

3D seems to make a short-lived comeback every 35 years or so so keep your eyes peeled in the 2040s. Of course by then, the youth of today will still be watching content on their phones and tablets and direct view televisions will quite possibly be a faded memory.

Actually for the most part I agree with you.


Sent from my iPhone using SatelliteGuys

 

[Jhon69]

Having an 8K UHDTV is just like having a 4K UHDTV anything you watch through the TV is upscaled to 8K.
To me it just makes sense unless you have unlimited funds to pay for the bandwith that a 8K movie would use when it might become available.

 

[Jhon69]

If my 2015 Vizio 4K UHDTV ever takes a dump I will be looking real hard at TCL 8K Mini Led Vidrian Roku TV it is suppose to be out at the end of 2020.
Of course I would recommend getting the extra warranty,that's what I always do.

 

[harshness]

If my 2015 Vizio 4K UHDTV ever takes a dump I will be looking real hard at TCL 8K Mini Led Vidrian Roku TV it is suppose to be out at the end of 2020.

I'd wait and see if the technical specifications translate into a great picture. Sometimes bleeding edge is just bloody.

 

[Bruce]

In terms of content, 4K isn't really here yet so I think it is pretty unlikely that 8K will be something everyone will want anytime in the next 10 years or more.

Disagree strongly with 4K and content, there is tons of it, just not on Traditional Providers.

That is one of the reasons why those type of services are growing.

There are, of course, more reasons why Traditional Providers are slowly dying then just not offering 4K.

 

[harshness]

Disagree strongly with 4K and content, there is tons of it, just not on Traditional Providers.

Relative to the number of titles, 4K makes up a rather small portion of what's currently available. The premium movie channels offer some of their exclusive content in 4K but most isn't. Same with Amazon Prime and Netflix. The percentage is very low.

Sports-wise, the 4K options are knife-edge thin. The broadcast TV networks haven't taken to 4K in any meaningful way.

Unless all you watch is blockbuster movies and "original programming" streaming content, 4K is most certainly not available by the ton.

 

[Bruce]

Relative to the number of titles, 4K makes up a rather small portion of what's currently available. The premium movie channels offer some of their exclusive content in 4K but most isn't. Same with Amazon Prime and Netflix. The percentage is very low.

Sports-wise, the 4K options are knife-edge thin. The broadcast TV networks haven't taken to 4K in any meaningful way.

Unless all you watch is blockbuster movies and "original programming" streaming content, 4K is most certainly not available by the ton.

You are correct as far as Traditional Providers go, which the Premium Movie, Broadcast, cable and sports channels are part of, and those channels are slowly dying and ratings are getting less and less a year.

Providers themselves have less and less customers, Dish Satellite Network just a few years ago had roughly 14 million subs, now in the 8 million range, at the rate DirecTV is going, they will not have anyone left in a few years.

Now as far as content in 4K and Netflix goes, the vast majority of their new programming ( and there is a lot of it) is in 4K and has been for more then 8 years, it is obvious they find value to broadcast in 4K and that is part of why their sub numbers are so good,

Heck in their short lifecycle of doing video over the net, they have more subs then HBO, both in the US and worldwide and HBO has been in business more then 40 years.

HBO US-36.3 million
HBO Worldwide-138 million

Netflix US-65 million
NETFLIX Worldwide-190 million

Prime is a little different, while all their new content is in 4K, there is not much of it, they premiere about 2 new seasons a month of 4K, of either new or returning shows, I would think the majority of people who have Prime is because of the shipping, myself included, been great for us during our move.

While Prime does not have a lot in 4K, it is still more then every Traditional Broadcast, Cable, News, Sports Channels combined.

 

[harshness]

You are correct as far as Traditional Providers go, which the Premium Movie, Broadcast, cable and sports channels are part of, and those channels are slowly dying and ratings are getting less and less a year.

While I understand that it is your mission to take pot shots at the incumbent video services at every opportunity, the question is about 4K (and perhaps ultimately 8K) and your reasoning doesn't really support your position on MPVDs or 4K.

If there were a market, there would be a lot more broad content available in 4K regardless of the carrier. The problem starts at the movie and TV production houses that haven't seen fit to make their products available in 4K. While some have embraced 4K, most apparently haven't seen the ongoing value proposition and, perhaps to a greater extent, too many of the newer tentpole movies have been rehashes of older blockbuster movies. Even some of the HDR/WCG content is really styled in the old way with the contrast, tint and grain of old.

It doesn't help 4K's case that a large percentage of the installed base of UHD TVs doesn't correctly handle (or even support) HDR and WCG (IMO where the real benefits of the new technology lie). That the old OLED weenies are holding up the HDR parade with their limited overall brightness doesn't help. For most it isn't all about the blacks (or the bass). It is also a little like 3D all over again where the available content was only in certain genres (animation and CGI-heavy titles).

There's perhaps just enough 4K out there for viewers to get their "fix" but not enough to get the majority to move off the HD dime and the offerings of the various carriers (both MPVD and streaming) largely bears that out.

 

[edisonprime]

I DO happen to see 8K HDR in the popular market in the future, and maybe 3D would at least make a temporary comeback, but that would only happen if it didn’t require the glasses. I know James Cameron wants to have the Avatar sequels play in the theaters in glasses-free 3D.


Sent from my iPhone using SatelliteGuys

 

[harshness]

The big question of 8K is why? How big must the screen be and how close must you be sitting to it to optically discern the higher pixel count? I know I couldn't fit such a screen in my home and if I were sitting that close to the moving wall, I'm pretty sure I would be queasy most of the time. If you think that 8K is going to leap-frog 4K because it is so much better, you're wrong.

3D is mostly a novelty and that's been used up for this iteration. They made the chickens but the chickens turned out to be substantially sterile -- much more for lack of engaging content than the discomfort and inconvenience of 3D glasses. It won't matter how many runs they take at 3D if they can't more than a token gesture of 3D programming.