- cross-posted to:
- technology@lemmy.world
- cross-posted to:
- technology@lemmy.world
You must log in or register to comment.
A buddy of mine worked in a theatre and told me that the film’s were all 1080P. I called bullshit. Those screens were huge they were clearly 4K. He showed me the reel and yup he was right.
If theatres don’t even bother with 4K, your TV doesn’t need 8K.
Actual film doesn’t work like that (35mm or 70mm IMAX for example), but you are correct that most cinemas these days are digital and they use “1080p” (more accurately DCI 2K which is 2048×1080 when the aspect ratio is 1.90:1). There are a few that do 4K, but overall not that many.
The main reason that’s enough for cinema though is that those “1080p” films are like 500GB with very little compression displayed through a DLP projector, so they look a heck of a lot better than showing a blu-ray through a massive TV with palm sized pixels.
Got any of that juicy 8k content?
No? Because noone does and noone cares.
My next TV purchase will be based on which models have Display Port.
…And which don’t have smart features, but that’s a given.
That’s going to be harder and harder to find.
The transformation into crochety old man is complete. This AI being shoehorned into everything can get off my damn lawn too.
I got a new Android TV for offline use. Most people say you get an OK experience if you don’t connect the TV into a network.
The biggest remaining annoyance is that it takes 45 seconds to cold-start. Almost as if it’s booting an OS desgined for a phone or something.
That’s just a commercial display. Most commercial displays don’t have an OS and require a separate device for showing video like an Nvidia Shield, PC, etc.
Is DVI completely out of the picture? I hate the connector, but I’ve had a lot of issues with DP, mainly around Linux support and multi-monitor setups.
I was kinda hoping USB-C/4/Thunderbolt would step into this space and normalize chaining and small connectors, but all of those monitors are stupidly expensive.
DVI isn’t capable of the bandwidth needed for higher resolutions. Even dual link maxes at about 8 Gbps and 2560x1600 @ 60Hz. This new HDMI spec is 96 Gbps for reference.
Ironically though HDMI is pin compatible with DVI and you could output HDMI to a DVI monitor with just a simple HDMI to DVI cable, or vice versa. I know a lot of people who like DP bit in order to convert you need active circuitry and that can impact quality if you don’t have native DP on both ends.
I was going to ask, but I just looked it up: it looks as if USB-4 has enough bandwidth to drive dual 4k monitors at 120Hz (and docks exist that support this).
USB4 uses something called DP-Alt where it’s actually DisplayPort over USB exactly what you’re looking for. I have a portable USB-C monitor that runs powered and video over a single connection
At what point do we just declare that the screens they try and sell are pushing for higher resolution than real life?
I believe 4K is already basically there. I have a 50" 4K (2160p) that I sit 9 feet away from and based on the Nvidia PPD calculator, that makes for 168ppd, and according to that page 150ppd is around the upper limit of human vision. Apple’s “retina” displays target around 50-60ppd (varies based on assumed viewing distance), which is what most people seem to consider “average eye visual acuity”. Imo 4K / 150ppd is more than enough.
According to this calculator, my 65" 4k setup is around 100ppd.
I find that anything with a higher density than that (e.g. sitting further away, or replacing it with an 8k screen of same size) requires scaling up text and wasting a lot of pixels when rendering other things.
So yeah, I think 8k is a total waste if you’re not targeting a much higher fov, at which point a curved screen would probably be better.
I haven’t even gotten on the 4k bandwagon yet. I fully expected to by now, but then again, my eyes aren’t getting any better and 1080p content still looks… fine.
A few weeks ago I watched Ladyhawk on a 13" TV with a built in VHS player. I realized that my brain didn’t care about the quality as soon as I started paying attention to the content. I still like my 1080p but there’s definitely massively diminishing returns after that.
I have a 4k TV. I don’t think I’ve ever actually watched something on it in 4k because finding the content isn’t worth the effort.
“Ultra96” sounds like it could have been a codename for the Nintendo 64.
Or the GameCube…or an add-on to the N64.
The N64’s codename was the Ultra 64 afterall!
I couldn’t care less about 8k since I can’t even see streaming 4k content without using a platform infested with DRM.
“…whenever we have 8K TVs and content.”
The TVs exist, but there won’t be content for years and years. Companies barely stream usable 4K right now.
I think there are less 8k TVs now than 4 years ago. Some lessons were learned
Because the bitrate over streaming is garbage. Get physical media if you want good 4k.
Frankly get physical media as a fuck you to the parasites.
Paying for streaming is a fool errand, you are funding the enemy.
Physical at least gives you some property right.
Meh. Wake me up when the HDMI consortium requires vibranium cables. Ending forever audio lag AND frame skip.
Just for the record, the HDMI consortium can place their mouths on my genitals and consume my waste
I don’t want Digital Restrictions Management in my cables.
Them: 8K!
Me: Whatever.
One day I might care about 4k, but it hasn’t happened yet. So I really can’t muster a shit to give about 8k.
HDMI is the proprietary monopoly scam. It is added to devices by the owning members of the scam. Display Port is the open source free equivalent standard that the educated consumer goes looking for.
Thank you, I did find myself thinking theres a reason why I have the DP cables for my PC monitors which don’t seem to have an issue running high resolutions… But then I’m not running 8k on anything so I wasn’t really sure about that
Problem is, very few things output or input DP.
HDMI, for better or worse, seems to be ubiquitous.
A lot of laptops nowadays output video over usb c, in most cases they use DisplayPort alt mode, which as the name implies is just DisplayPort.
That doesn’t solve the issue of every x in 1 dongle only having HDMI or TVs only having HDMI inputs
I hear ya.
But for example do modern set top boxes, blue ray etc. have DP?
Give it a few years and most people won’t have those devices anymore. Hell, we might already be there. If sony wasnt a founder of HDMI, TVs everywhere would probably use DP already
So here’s what we do to fix that situation: don’t buy those things
🧠🤯
Tell me where I can buy a 65-80" 4K 144Hz HDR OLED with a DP port for under $2K, and I’ll gladly ditch HDMI for good.
There are no TVs with displayport outside the commercial space, let alone one with your seriously specific requirements. Were you trying to trick someone into being your personal shopper?
No; I’m happy with my 65" 4K 144Hz HDR OLED with an HDMI port. Won’t be replacing it until I can buy a 1000Hz panel and finally be done with motion blur for good.
Somebody - probably those guys thinking how they’ll sell more stuff, - is operating in reality where “you can, but you shouldn’t” can’t be said in human languages.
I’ve been reminiscing parts of my childhood where I’d watch a lot of karate matches and try to repeat moves (I know it sounds stupid). The fights, the lights, the room, my grandma, the summer evening outside matter in these memories. Not how much logical dots there were on that goddamn screen.
One of the most depressing things about now is how, even compared to 10 years ago, people are thinking not about new things to do with tech, but about doing old things with more resources wasted, because that’s apparently better.
1920x1080 seems an overshoot sometimes. 8K - why the hell? And with more expensive shorter less reliable cables, other things equal.
I guess hoping for cheap thin LPD displays is useless.
Resolutions higher than fullHD are useful not only for TV in front of your sofa. You need 8k (and even higher) to VR-helmets. Also there already are cinemas with giant displays instead of projectors. Don’t be a retrograde.
The HDMI standard needs to declare cable bankruptcy and start over with a new port design. We all have way too many HDMI cables supporting 23 years of standards. There is nothing in the specification to clearly label, across brands, what type of hdmi specification is supported by the cable or port.
Also, the DRM baked into the specification is such bullshit.
Also, the DRM baked into the specification is such bullshit.
That’s the one thing they have absolutely no interest in getting rid of. They’ll change everything about the spec, including the connector, but that part’s staying in.
That’s why I added it as an addendum. Even sourcing HDMI cables without HDCP is getting very very rare.
TBF, I will say I’ve never been hit by HDCP. I’m not sure I’d recognize it. Then again, I don’t try to copy video from over a display cable; it just seems like adding an unnecessary middleman. But I oppose it in principle.
Edit: “born” -> “hit”. WTF
HDCP and media production are often at odds with each other. It is broad overreach of content protection. It is super frustrating.
