• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

What will be the "end-game" resolution for home entertainment?

What will be the end-game resolution for home entertainment?

  • 4K

    Votes: 44 23.9%
  • 8K

    Votes: 29 15.8%
  • 16K

    Votes: 10 5.4%
  • It will never stop increasing, human greed has no limits.

    Votes: 101 54.9%

  • Total voters
    184

angrod14

Member
The push for higher resolutions in movies, games, etc. has been the standard since the introduction of high-def tech. First with HD-Ready content (720p), then with Full HD (1080p), now with 4K and there are already 8K TVs in the market, but with practically zero content to showcase.

This never-ending increase in resolution acts as a direct limitation for game improvement in other areas (performance, ray-tracing, etc) since devs have to utilize much of the power to simply render more pixels. In fact, it could be said that it's one of the main reasons why graphical improvement is getting smaller each generation.

However, there's certainly a limitation in how much detail the human eye can see, and how much the TV panels can grow until they can't fit into a home anymore. IMAX 70mm resolution can go up to 18K, but we're talking about material that's meant to be showcased in 18 by 24m screens. And let's not even go into how expensive is to produce films at that quality. In fact, most movies even today are finished in 2K.

I think 120 inch with 8K content is the max we will see in the realm of traditional (physical) TV panels. But I think we will see technology that will no longer require a panel per se, but act as a sort of ultra high-tech projector that can cover a whole wall. Obviously projectors already exist but they're not attractive to the average consumer and the image quality is certainly lower than what you get with OLEDs. I think that will change in the future once that panels peak in size and res.

This is interesting because the day manufacurers stop playing the one-upmanship game with resolution and we settle for a final one, is the day the games will be able to truly go above and beyond in graphical fidelity instead of wasting resources in more pixels.
 
Last edited:

Clear

CliffyB's Cock Holster
4K is actually excessive for the overwhelming majority of legacy content in existence.

I'd also argue that in the vast majority of cases the value of super high definition and visual fidelity isn't especially significant to audiences. There's a big difference between documentaries and soap operas for instance.
 

StreetsofBeige

Gold Member
I don't really think most people care past 1080p. Heck, I really don't.
I dont think a lot of people care about audio either past CD quality stereos and home theatre systems everyone got in the 90s.

Heck, pretty sure DVDs destroyed BR and 4k discs combined and DVDs I think are only 480p or 720p. An article I just saw on Google says DVDs outsold BR again just recently.
 

T4keD0wN

Member
Once we have 500ppi screens they have my permission to stop. Resolution by itself is irrelevant.
 
Last edited:

Sonik

Member
8k sounds completely moronic and I doubt even people with perfect vision would be able to see the difference.
 

lachesis

Member
I think of the whole medium of "screen" itself may become thing of the past. It may become something 360 degree full holographic experience, perhaps sent directly into brain for whatever method.
 

FeralEcho

Member
Isn't there going to be a point where the human eye can perceive no higher a resolution?

That's when it'll probably shift to stuff like hologram screens and then it'll start all over again, higher and higher resolution versions of that.
There's also a point where the human hand can no longer hold all the moneys yet corporations still can't stop aiming for higher targets and mo money mo problems....Human greed is incurable,same with res and anything else... If its possible it will be done regardless whether its needed or not.
 

Soodanim

Member
I can't imagine 8k being exceeded for a very long time if at all, given the requirements of getting that sort of data to consumers.

Streaming it will be a nightmare, and discs will need to be huge to carry it the traditional way.

Even if you get it to consumers, the display size needed for it to make any difference will need ti be larger than most people can both afford and physically accommodate.

This applies to 8k too, really. Everything about it is just too prohibitive.
 

kurisu_1974

Member
It will always be a lie. 1080p is compressed 1080p streaming, 4k isn't 4k, it's compressed 4k. And we will get fake 8k also.

How much fake depends on what internet speeds can provide.

Like you said, when you are streaming. That's why physical media is still superior.
 

Mr Reasonable

Completely Unreasonable
Some sort of touring theatre company that sends actors to your home who perform plays etc. For you while you browse the internet on your phone and then once the room has fallen silent for a minute, you pretend you've been watching and then stand and applaud.
 

Chittagong

Gold Member
I hope it will cap at 4K. Once you see films in uncompressed 4K, like with a Kaleidescape system, you will be convinced it’s enough. Compared to it, the Netflix and Apple TV “4K” looks like a badly compressed gif.
 

RJMacready73

Simps for Amouranth
I hope it will cap at 4K. Once you see films in uncompressed 4K, like with a Kaleidescape system, you will be convinced it’s enough. Compared to it, the Netflix and Apple TV “4K” looks like a badly compressed gif.
Bit hyperbolic tbf, I've watched some amazingly good 4K HDR streams on my OLED and the picture looks incredible, I also have 4K Discs which look slightly better, remember we're watching these screens from our sofas FFS, we're not Digital Foundry pixel counting from 6" away.

Imo uncompressed 4K is perfectly fine, 8k is a waste of bandwidth and ain't nobody buying 8K discs and those that bought 8K TVs well your the sort that would buy magic beans
 

Husky

THE Prey 2 fanatic
I feel like the urge to "disrupt" will always result in unexpected changes. We might start using a new digital technology that doesn't exactly use "pixels," but with levels of resolution that we could still compare to pixels.
I think the photos taken with Lytro's light field cameras needed to be converted to pixel-based image formats, but from what I gather, they kind of killed themselves with an over-ambitious project. An interesting watch:


We'll also continue increasing color depth, we'll stop using 8-bit BT.709 color or any other current color standards.
 

DonkeyPunchJr

World’s Biggest Weeb
Now that we have AI based upscaling for games, 8K doesn’t seem like such a crazy idea. I wonder if some kind of AI based video decompression could do the same for video
 

64bitmodels

Reverse groomer.
It'll stop at some point.

Remember when PCs and game consoles promoted max number of colours that can be displayed? I dont think they've promoted that since the late 90s.
the game consoles and videocards stopped promoting that, but the TVs picked up the slack. hence the obsession with OLED and HDR in recent years
 
I hope it will cap at 4K. Once you see films in uncompressed 4K, like with a Kaleidescape system, you will be convinced it’s enough. Compared to it, the Netflix and Apple TV “4K” looks like a badly compressed gif.
It's ironic that you single Apple TV out here when they are the only streaming provider who offers up to 80 Mbps 4K streams. Netflix et. al top out way lower. 4K UHD Blu-ray goes to 144 Mbps but that usually includes lossless audio tracks. I have found Apple TV 4K streams to be so close to 4K UHD Blu-ray that it's almost transparent at normal viewing distances.
 
Last edited:

AV

We ain't outta here in ten minutes, we won't need no rocket to fly through space
It's already plateauing. There is almost no point in 8K displays unless it's enormous or you're sitting way too close, and people know it. 4K discs are an incredibly niche thing and are the only way to even get something close to true 4K. Everyone else is happy with what Netflix shits out.

It'll be some insane incomprehensible technology that does away with the concept of resolution altogether. Humans don't see in pixels.
 

Majormaxxx

Member
My TV is 49 inch. I have to sit at less than 7-8 feet in order to start caring about the difference between 4k and 1080p.

I don't see the point of higher than 4k.

If you have a 100 inch TV, you still need to sit at 7 feet to see the 8k pixels. But at this distance the screen is too wide and too high.
 

SF Kosmo

Al Jazeera Special Reporter
When you look at the utter lack of content for 8K, it does seem like we've maxed out what people really care about or are willing to pay a premium for.

Eventually we might see 8K catch on, but it's hard to see a big push to go beyond, and if we do, I imagine upscaling will be a bigger focus than native content.
 

angrod14

Member
It's ironic that you single Apple TV out here when they are the only streaming provider who offers up to 80 Mbps 4K streams. Netflix et. al top out way lower. 4K UHD Blu-ray goes to 144 Mbps but that usually includes lossless audio tracks. I have found Apple TV 4K streams to be so close to 4K UHD Blu-ray that it's almost transparent at normal viewing distances.
Apple iTunes movies are top of the line when it comes to streaming quality. I tested comparisons by myself with UHD movies and their Apple 4K counterparts, and while there is certainly a little bit of extra detail on the disc, it's not something you're going to notice unless you are viewing both sources side by side. The biggest difference is the sound, which is highly superior on disc.

All things considered, I moved from blu-rays to iTunes. I don't care much about having the "best sound" and the plastic cases were already starting to pile up too much.
 
Last edited:

kruis

Exposing the sinister cartel of retailers who allow companies to pay for advertising space.
4K will be the highest resolution for consumer TVs for a long time. 8K is overkill. There's no content in 8K because so few movies are shot in that resiIt's much more effective to pour money in better AI upscaling tech for 4K streams than to switch to 8K.
 

intbal

Member
This.

They will find something else to sell.
They'll have to.
Otherwise people will just keep the TVs they buy for ten years and the manufacturers will go out of business.

I'm actually hoping they go back to including powerful front facing speakers in the body of the TV. I never mount anything on a wall. I have no need for a 10mm display. Make mine as thick as necessary to include large speaker enclosures and a nuclear plant-draining amplifier.
 

jshackles

Gentlemen, we can rebuild it. We have the capability to make the world's first enhanced store. Steam will be that store. Better than it was before.
Think bigger.

Fully Immersive VR
This. Resolution matters so much more when you're looking at screens that are centimeters away from your eyes. 4K YouTube videos on my Quest 3 still look very pixelated to me, but the same videos look crisp and clear on my TV (which I'm several meters away from). The Quest 3 has 2,064 x 2,208 pixels per eye. Seems like a lot, but they've got a ways to go.
 

clem84

Gold Member
I remember a Linus Tech tips episode where they were asking members of their team to look at a monitor and guess if the game was running in 1440 or 4K. Half of them had a very hard time guessing correctly, and these are tech guys. I think anything beyond 4K is a complete waste. To me 4K is it.

For VR, yeah different story.
 
Last edited:

Aces High

Gold Member
8k TVs have too high energy consumption so they're banned in Europe.

Doubt we'll go higher than 4k as long as this ban is in place.
 
Top Bottom