World's First 4K Content System with Sony's Ultra HDTV

[SteelCity1981]

Ultra High Def TV's are coming and yet many broadcast stations and cable providers still broadcast their signals in 1080i , let alone 720p or 1080p for that matter. At this rate boradcast stations and cable providers won't support Ultra high Def until 2025 lol.

 

[kinggraves]

[citation][nom]TruthSirTruth[/nom]Who exactly are these TVs aimed for?[/citation]

Rappers.

Hey Sony, could you be a bit more specific on how your "content delivery system" works, because it sounds like you're being intentionally vague. Not like Sony is a company known for breaking promises and misleading their customers, but you know, just to be sure. I can't imagine it's going to be streamed, that's going to eat up some bandwidth.

Enjoy that wait for any nonSony content to be in 4k guys. Networks still are dragging their feet making HD a standard.

 

[alidan]

[citation][nom]A Bad Day[/nom]Uh, multimonitor setup?On serious note, I would prefer one 4k res monitor than four 1k res monitors. Less software issues and looking at the bezels.[/citation]
a 4k computer monitor would have to start at about 48 inches, you ever use a 48 inch tv as a monitor like you do a 24 inch?

if you shrank the 4k down, the ui would need to be larger, and it would kill off the advantage you get from a productivity standpoint.

------------

do you need a 4k monitor to edit 4k footage... so im guessing everyone who edits has a spare monitor just to see the video while it plays? no...

they look at it on a 1080p (probably 2560x1600 if they are really editing 4k, they have money for the better monitors) and watching it. if need be they zoom in to see it in full 1:1

 

[gti88]

EIZO already has 4K monitor for content makers.

 

[ronch79]

There comes a point when a certain technology (say, computing or display tech) is simply good enough for most folks and they won't pay megabucks more for a benefit that they'll hardly notice or care about. Take sound cards for example. Sure, there are still folks to care about having the best audio quality, but for 99% of people, integrated audio is just fine.

 

[bentonsl_2010]

[citation][nom]gti88[/nom]EIZO already has 4K monitor for content makers.[/citation]

This is correct. I believe is the FDH3601 model

However it cost 30k and its a 36.4 inch monitor so have fun with that.

 

[hannibal]

Upscaling is just fine at this moment! Sooner or later there will be real 4K content and in future 8K and so on... So there will allways be needs for high quality upscalers as the TV-monitors develop. Full HD was extremely expensive in the beginning... in few years 4K is standard Walmart stuff ;-)

 

[anti-painkilla]

[citation][nom]kinggraves[/nom]Rappers.Hey Sony, could you be a bit more specific on how your "content delivery system" works, because it sounds like you're being intentionally vague. [/citation]

I would assume you would have a Sony account and get emailed with new releases and can order through your account. I am more interested whether they will courier the disc to you or you will download it. Hopefully you have a fast enough internet connection so it is faster to download that it is to courier.

 

[clonazepam]

Can you play Crysis on it?

 

[Vladislaus]

[citation][nom]drwho1[/nom]how long until 4K becomes obsolete and 8K is officially unveil as "the next best thing" on TV?after all we have heard of 8K for a long time now.... still 4K is finally beginning to appear.(at a ludicrous price of course)I give it 5 years before it starts making a dent in the market at a more decent and close to earth price.[/citation]
8K on TVs make absolutely no sense. I mean, if this screen was 8K people with 20/20 eye sight wouldn't notice the pixels at 74 cm. Since no one sits that close to a TV it's irrelevant, and the added bandwidth would be a waste.

 

[billgatez]

90% of the videos will be upscaled blue rays. Sony will most likely charge a ridiculous price for this. Tho if you are buying a tv like this it wont matter.

 

[demonhorde665]

[citation][nom]dark_knight33[/nom]Technology is finally progressing to irrelvancy:[/citation]


i agree , 4k images are pointless unles your plan is to glue your face to the screen of a 70+ inch tv. I have a 42 inch lg , and my usual viewing distance is about 4-5 ft and the thing looks just fine , these a-- hats pushing for 4k tv's is rediculous , and really it's judt a means for them to force consumer's into buying new products . old CRT TV's had thr longest turn around ever my grand mother still has her old set from the 60's and i'm sure more than a few corperate scum suckers are biting their nails off over this fact.

 

[clonazepam]

[citation][nom]demonhorde665[/nom]i agree , 4k images are pointless unles your plan is to glue your face to the screen of a 70+ inch tv. I have a 42 inch lg , and my usual viewing distance is about 4-5 ft and the thing looks just fine , these a-- hats pushing for 4k tv's is rediculous , and really it's judt a means for them to force consumer's into buying new products . old CRT TV's had thr longest turn around ever my grand mother still has her old set from the 60's and i'm sure more than a few corperate scum suckers are biting their nails off over this fact.[/citation]

Well it could have a positive influence on other markets. Advances in storage tech, to produce smaller, lighter, and higher capacity devices to accommodate 4K material. Trickle down economics doesn't work, but "trickle down technology" (trademark pending) does. I can think of many ways people will benefit from readily available 4K tech, without specifically purchasing a 4K tv or a 4K blu-ray player, etc.

 

[stevo777]

Since Sony seems so bent on pushing 4K, I wouldn't be surprised to see them attempt to make the PS4 4K friendly. At the least, they'll probably have a 4K Blu-ray player with it.

 

[darkavenger123]

Err...upscaling??? I don't believe in upscaling....you can't make something out of nothing. Without mass source contents in 4K format, there is no point having a 4K TV....and frankly unless you aim to have very huge screen, common TV size like 32"- 40"++ does not need 4K TV. FullHD standard is just taking off now....it'll probably take another 10=15 years for the next transition...look at how long the SD format got stuck...what...50 years???

 

[alidan]

[citation][nom]Vladislaus[/nom]8K on TVs make absolutely no sense. I mean, if this screen was 8K people with 20/20 eye sight wouldn't notice the pixels at 74 cm. Since no one sits that close to a TV it's irrelevant, and the added bandwidth would be a waste.[/citation]

got to love that one person who downvoted it because they have no idea how the human eye works.

fun fact, most living rooms dont even need higher than 720p, and im talking about you own a home living room, not i rent an apartment living room... but that said, if you rent an apartment ods are you aren't getting a 50+inch tv and again, 720p may be all you need at your screen size.

fact is, to even see all the detail of 1080p at about 10 feet (seating in my home is 7-15 feet way from the screen, you need an 85 inch + tv. to even crack into what you need to see 4k, you would be in the 120-150inch range.

there is a reason that people use projectors for 4, and 8k, and not a monitor.

inc downvotes because people constantly think "more resolution = must have and always better" when in reality you will most likely never see the benefits of the higher resoultion in a real world setting.

im not saying there is no real world setting for those higher resolutions, just none that people would commonly have in their homes.

 

[alidan]

[citation][nom]demonhorde665[/nom]i agree , 4k images are pointless unles your plan is to glue your face to the screen of a 70+ inch tv. I have a 42 inch lg , and my usual viewing distance is about 4-5 ft and the thing looks just fine , these a-- hats pushing for 4k tv's is rediculous , and really it's judt a means for them to force consumer's into buying new products . old CRT TV's had thr longest turn around ever my grand mother still has her old set from the 60's and i'm sure more than a few corperate scum suckers are biting their nails off over this fact.[/citation]

they were built to last, and for their sizes they were great, but using a 60 inch rear projection and haveing a 32 inch, they were painfully low resolution... however with 1920x1080, even on out current 52 inch lcd, even sting close to it, the resolution isn't painful.

had a crt for 20 years, and only gave it up with it stopped working. still used it for light gun games.

 

[clonazepam]

My DVD movies look a lot better upscaled to the 46" 1080p tv I have. It used to be really annoying to see all those blocks in darker areas, and gradients that should have been much smoother. When I view blu-ray movies, I can still see a bit of that, but just barely. I definitely would NOT purchase one of those 70+ inch televisions right now because it would become more obvious. I had custom lasik awhile back so I have a known to be good 20/15 vision. I suspect some people will be wowed and some will be 'meh' but that's usually what happens with any tech.

 

[danwat1234]

Imagine when 3D 4K pocket camcorders come out in a few years, that'll be crazy! Better have a thick internet pipe to upload that to youtube

 

[clonazepam]

[citation][nom]danwat1234[/nom]Imagine when 3D 4K pocket camcorders come out in a few years, that'll be crazy! Better have a thick internet pipe to upload that to youtube[/citation]
lol no more daily videos, everyone spends a day to make it, and another day to upload hah