Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Japan to Promote Ultra High-Def TV
tvpredictions.com ^ | October 28, 2010 | Philip Swann

Posted on 10/31/2010 5:41:05 PM PDT by Las Vegas Dave

Japanese broadcaster NHK is planning public displays of its Ultra High-Definition TV system which supposedly offers a picture 16 times clearer than today's HDTVs.

That's according to an article by The Hollywood Reporter.

However, before you get too excited, the publication adds that it could be 2020 before you see UHDTV in anyone's living room.

Still, NHK says it will shoot some of the 2012 London Olympics in the format and then transmit the images to public displays in Japan, the United Kingdom and the United States.

The Hollywood Reporter writes that the ultra-clear picture delivers detail so precise that it almost appears three-dimensional. The format offers 8K resolution; 7,680 horizontal pixels x 4,320 vertical pixels, says the publication. Today's HDTVs deliver about 2,000 horizontal pixels.

One obstacle in UHDTV's way: To display the ultra-clear image, sets should be in the 80-90 inch range.


TOPICS: TV/Movies
KEYWORDS: hdtv; uhdtv
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-82 next last

1 posted on 10/31/2010 5:41:09 PM PDT by Las Vegas Dave
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: ADemocratNoMore; advertising guy; aft_lizard; AJMaXx; Alice in Wonderland; american colleen; ...
Pinging the HDTV list..
HDTV pings!

2 posted on 10/31/2010 5:42:29 PM PDT by Las Vegas Dave (To anger a Conservative, tell him a lie. To anger a Liberal, tell him the truth.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Las Vegas Dave
What???

Now I have to go out and spend another 2000 bucks on a big screen TV!

3 posted on 10/31/2010 5:42:49 PM PDT by Texas Eagle (If it wasn't for double-standards, Liberals would have no standards at all -- Texas Eagle)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Las Vegas Dave

Overkill. Most HD sports programs are actually broadcast in 720.


4 posted on 10/31/2010 5:44:15 PM PDT by Inyo-Mono (Had God not driven man from the Garden of Eden the Sierra Club surely would have.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Las Vegas Dave

I still have a tube TV.

Amazingly, I can see and enjoy the broadcast images thereupon.

The distance from 99.95% quality and 99.999% to get the HD stuff is pretty small — much less the 99.99999% suggested by the technology in the OP.


5 posted on 10/31/2010 5:45:02 PM PDT by freedumb2003 (The TOTUS-Reader: omnipotence at home, impotence abroad (Weekly Standard))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Las Vegas Dave
...still waiting for Smell-O-Vision
6 posted on 10/31/2010 5:45:42 PM PDT by Tainan (Cogito, ergo conservatus - Domari Nolo)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Las Vegas Dave
At a certain point, increases in "resolution" are irrelevant.

If all you want to do with a camera, for instance, is make 4"x5" prints, a few megapixels is adequate.

Higher resolution TV is only relevant if you want a screen the size of your wall. A 32" screen it 1080i is about as hi-def as you're going to get.

A 55" screen at the same resolution is not nearly as clear, but 2160i would be.

7 posted on 10/31/2010 5:47:49 PM PDT by E. Pluribus Unum ("The only stable state is one in which all men are equal before the law." -- Aristotle)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: freedumb2003
I still have a tube TV.

Amazingly, I can see and enjoy the broadcast images thereupon.

The distance from 99.95% quality and 99.999% to get the HD stuff is pretty small

Not exactly sure how you came up with your percentages, but to suggest that there isn't much difference between standard-def and high-def television is a bit absurd.

8 posted on 10/31/2010 5:49:13 PM PDT by Junior_G (Funny how liberals' love affair with Muslims began on 9/11)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Las Vegas Dave

Ha ha, I still haven’t bought a HDTV — I gave my space on the technology treadmill to somebody else a long long time ago.

It helps my wallet that nobody yet has actually built an HDTV where the frames always update properly. I can’t stand seeing a close-up where every part of the face changes expression independently over eight or nine frames.


9 posted on 10/31/2010 5:49:51 PM PDT by jiggyboy (Ten per cent of poll respondents are either lying or insane)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Texas Eagle

$2000 in 2020?

More like $60,000 + obamataxes, may get you closer to ownership.

Remember when plasma TV’s first arrived on the market, they were close to $12,000, (but dropped in price very quickly).


10 posted on 10/31/2010 5:51:20 PM PDT by Las Vegas Dave (To anger a Conservative, tell him a lie. To anger a Liberal, tell him the truth.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Inyo-Mono

Exactly. I’ll stick with what I have.


11 posted on 10/31/2010 5:52:02 PM PDT by rbg81 (When you see Obama, shout: "DO YOUR JOB!!")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Las Vegas Dave

The real purpose would be to get expensive film out of motion picture production.


12 posted on 10/31/2010 5:53:21 PM PDT by MindBender26 (Fighting the "con" in Conservatism on FR since 1998.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Las Vegas Dave

Great, we get to see even more wrinkles, blackheads and wild hairs on newscasters’ faces than with HDTV.

Short of some revolution in content, I fail to see the value of the expenditure.


13 posted on 10/31/2010 5:53:23 PM PDT by RegulatorCountry
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Las Vegas Dave

This is going to put a lot of newscasters with acne out of work forever.


14 posted on 10/31/2010 5:53:40 PM PDT by dr_who
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Las Vegas Dave

A lot of people’s vision (mine included) is not good enough to appreciate such ultra-high resolution.


15 posted on 10/31/2010 5:57:46 PM PDT by luvbach1 (Stop Barry now. He can't help himself.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Las Vegas Dave

8K?!


16 posted on 10/31/2010 5:59:50 PM PDT by Future Snake Eater ("Get out of the boat and walk on the water with us!”--Sen. Joe Biden)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Las Vegas Dave
The average human eye does not have the resolving power to take full advantage of the iPhone4 display. The application for UHD would necessarily be similar to IMAX, where the eye can roam around the image. Film IMAX is equivalent to UHD, about 7,000 pixels horizontal at 48fps, which is eqiivalent to about 60p digital.

So I think that this is a limited market, just as IMAX is/was. We'll be wearing HD glasses a decade before we'll be watching UHD.

17 posted on 10/31/2010 6:00:24 PM PDT by Kennard (io)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Las Vegas Dave
The Hollywood Reporter writes that the ultra-clear picture delivers detail so precise that it almost appears three-dimensional.

It would probably be better than what passes for 3d today. However, true HD content today looks almost 3d.

18 posted on 10/31/2010 6:02:15 PM PDT by Moonman62 (Half of all Americans are above average.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: freedumb2003

I have a 13” color set from 1978 (complete with tuner dials) that I use sometimes. Got it from a thrift store some years ago. It’s fun to hook the digital cable box up to it and watch football.

Nothing against HDTV, but I still wish manufacturers hadn’t discontinued CRT TVs. They didn’t want to spend the money to put digital tuners in them (now a requirement).


19 posted on 10/31/2010 6:02:55 PM PDT by Strk321
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Junior_G

>>Not exactly sure how you came up with your percentages, but to suggest that there isn’t much difference between standard-def and high-def television is a bit absurd.<<

“Absurd” is a bit over the top. I assure you my enjoyment of what I watch is excellent. So you posit a difference without a distinction. The measure of the experience is the enjoyment factor. If I enjoy the content then I am missing nothing.


20 posted on 10/31/2010 6:03:41 PM PDT by freedumb2003 (The TOTUS-Reader: omnipotence at home, impotence abroad (Weekly Standard))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Junior_G
I guess it's a case of eye of the beholder.


21 posted on 10/31/2010 6:04:37 PM PDT by GreenAccord (Bakon Akbar!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Strk321

>>Nothing against HDTV, but I still wish manufacturers hadn’t discontinued CRT TVs. They didn’t want to spend the money to put digital tuners in them (now a requirement).<<

I gave all my old portable tube TVs to relatives in Mexico. I did buy a HD receiver and a small portable HD TV just in case of emergency.

I understand why the FCC did what it did — those fat broadband frequencies were just begging for re-purposing. But it is and was a it of a pain in the tucas.


22 posted on 10/31/2010 6:08:47 PM PDT by freedumb2003 (The TOTUS-Reader: omnipotence at home, impotence abroad (Weekly Standard))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: Kennard

>>So I think that this is a limited market, just as IMAX is/was. We’ll be wearing HD glasses a decade before we’ll be watching UHD.<<

Next up: Direct access jacks behind our ears a’la The Matrix.


23 posted on 10/31/2010 6:10:23 PM PDT by freedumb2003 (The TOTUS-Reader: omnipotence at home, impotence abroad (Weekly Standard))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: Las Vegas Dave
To display the ultra-clear image, sets should be in the 80-90 inch range.

Bzzzt. Logic error. Why? Are pixels a minimum size? It's really a matter of data bandwidth limitations. Try downloading an 1080p movie. Now imagine a 4320p. It'll take a week.

24 posted on 10/31/2010 6:11:24 PM PDT by Clock King (Ellisworth Toohey was right: My head's gonna explode.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Tainan

A lot of the programming smells like week old fish.


25 posted on 10/31/2010 6:14:45 PM PDT by hoosierham (Waddaya mean Freedom isn't free ?;will you take a credit card?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Las Vegas Dave

How about ultra-low-definition? So it wouldn’t show stuff like the flies crawling on Obama’s face?


26 posted on 10/31/2010 6:15:42 PM PDT by Hardraade (I want gigaton warheads now!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Las Vegas Dave

Sorry, HD shows me enough pimples and clogged pores now, don’t need it any clearer...thanks anyway.


27 posted on 10/31/2010 6:21:19 PM PDT by FrankR (November 2nd is NOT an election - it's a RESTRAINING ORDER.....VOTE!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Las Vegas Dave

A technology post on FR always brings out the Luddites in droves, especially if it’s about TV, computers or cell phones. This one does not disappoint.


28 posted on 10/31/2010 6:28:11 PM PDT by MCH
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: freedumb2003

I hate my HDTV. Its too clear. It makes every show look like it was filmed on home video cameras. It takes the warm golden color richness of movies like Harry Potter or Indiana Jones and makes them look like the video quality of Soap Operas.

Best way to describe it is like the over bright lighting in an old K-Mart or discount store with cheap white tile floors compared to the warmth of a soft light, hardwood floor Macy’s.

Couldn’t they just make my tube TV thin and 55”?


29 posted on 10/31/2010 6:30:12 PM PDT by icwhatudo ("laws requiring compulsory abortion could be sustained under the existing Constitution"Obama Adviser)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: freedumb2003
I still have a tube TV. Amazingly, I can see and enjoy the broadcast images thereupon.

I felt like you until a few years ago - and now I wish I had switched sooner. Go to Walmart or COSTCO - and get a Vizio ... they're cheap - and it's time. You'll love it.

30 posted on 10/31/2010 6:33:17 PM PDT by GOPJ ('Power abdicates only under the stress of counter-power." Martin Buber /a Tea-nami's coming..)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: MCH

>>A technology post on FR always brings out the Luddites in droves, especially if it’s about TV, computers or cell phones. This one does not disappoint.<<

I have Slingboxes on both my DVRs and have watched TV from 30,000 feet (GOGO Inflight) as well as from countries all over the planet (UDP — what’s not to like?).

Most FReepers don’t even understand, much less have, such technology.


31 posted on 10/31/2010 6:38:56 PM PDT by freedumb2003 (The TOTUS-Reader: omnipotence at home, impotence abroad (Weekly Standard))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: Kennard

Back thirty years ago, I was an audiophile, and we were all in this pissing match on who had the best THD (Total Harmonic distortion). Finally realized that once you got to a certain level the ear couldn’t discern the difference. Looks like the same kind of deal.


32 posted on 10/31/2010 6:46:40 PM PDT by catfish1957 (Hey algore...You'll have to pry the steering wheel of my 317 HP V8 truck from my cold dead hands)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: Las Vegas Dave

Marginal difference is NOT worth the price.

Just like 3D TV, no market for it.....


33 posted on 10/31/2010 6:49:11 PM PDT by G Larry (When you're "RIGHT" you don't look for ways to compromise!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: G Larry

Yipeeeee!
Comedy fecal crap in HHD?


34 posted on 10/31/2010 7:00:09 PM PDT by Leo Carpathian (fffffFRrrreeeeepppeeee-ssed!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: Las Vegas Dave
I wish I had a chance to visit Japan some day, especially their improved version of Disneyland.
35 posted on 10/31/2010 7:03:21 PM PDT by Eye of Unk (If your enemy is quick to anger, seek to irritate him. Sun Tzu, The Art of War.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Las Vegas Dave

I stopped into Best Buy a couple of weeks ago to checkout the new 3D TV’s. Pretty freaking cool! However having to wear the glasses sucks, especially since they didn’t come with the TV and prices for the glasses alone started at $150 each.

From what the salesman was telling me, that particular technology was already dead with new models now coming out that don’t require the glasses.

Since I’m not a big sports watcher I think I’ll wait till more channels broadcast in 3D other than ESPN.


36 posted on 10/31/2010 7:03:35 PM PDT by diverteach (D.C. has become Jonestown.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Las Vegas Dave

my eyes aren’t that good.


37 posted on 10/31/2010 7:03:44 PM PDT by Figment ("A communist is someone who reads Marx.An anti-communist is someone who understands Marx" R Reagan)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: freedumb2003

Oh, I would take NTSC artifacts (dot crawl and color bleed) any day over MPEG artifacts and signal breakup. The analog signals would fade, but they didn’t freeze and the sound didn’t cut out. The main advantage of digital TV is that it frees up bandwidth for HD transmission. HDTVs are also poor at handling standard-definition stuff unless you get an expensive upscaler box.

If you still want a traditional TV, you can try and get ahold of a CRT security monitor. There are still loads of them around and they’re basically just TVs without a tuner.


38 posted on 10/31/2010 7:05:05 PM PDT by Strk321
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: G Larry
Marginal difference is NOT worth the price.
Just like 3D TV, no market for it.....

Agree with the 3D TV. But like the article says, if you have a really big 70"+ screen, this would make a noticeable difference. For the vast majority of smaller screens, not so much.

39 posted on 10/31/2010 7:05:38 PM PDT by MCH
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: Las Vegas Dave

Dude, you’re obsolete, dude!


40 posted on 10/31/2010 7:06:00 PM PDT by Revolting cat! (Let us prey!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Las Vegas Dave; maikeru; Dr. Marten; Eric in the Ozarks; Al Gator; snowsislander; sushiman; ...
Ugh, NHK, the "PBS" of Japan that attempts to charge individual users door-to-door for receiving reception. Aside from Sumo and Okasaasan to Issho (Together with Mom) if you have small kids, it's mostly boring old folk TV. "Ultra" HDTV via NHK sounds like gee-whiz technology funded by the Japanese Govt that well-connected private sector companies (Sony, Toshiba, Matsushita, etc) will get to sell to consumers with little else to do in their rabbit hutches.

日本*ピング* (kono risuto ni hairitai ka detai wo shirasete kudasai : let me know if you want on or off this list)

41 posted on 10/31/2010 7:08:43 PM PDT by DTogo (High time to bring back the Sons of Liberty !!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: icwhatudo

Wouldn’t work. Due to the limitations of glass-blowing, the biggest size you can make a CRT is 40”.

Can’t really make them slimmer, either. Bigger CRT TVs (above 19”) all used 100-degree picture tubes to cut down on bulk, but then the edge of the screen blurs because the electron beam travels at a more shallow angle than on 90-degree tubes.

Toshiba briefly (around 2007) had an ultra-short CRT TV with a 115-degree tube, but the picture quality was not very good and it was quickly discontinued.


42 posted on 10/31/2010 7:24:12 PM PDT by Strk321
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: Tainan

You sure? Much of what passes for comedy these days are fart and body odor jokes.


43 posted on 10/31/2010 7:30:38 PM PDT by Blood of Tyrants (Islam is the religion of Satan and Mohammed was his minion.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: E. Pluribus Unum
It has nothing to do with the size of the image. What matters is the ratio of distance between viewer and screen to the size of the screen. At HD 1080p resolution, you can comfortably sit about 1:1 ratio from the screen. Try holding that 4x5 picture closer than 6 inches from your eye and you'll see the pixels. Sit closer than 5 feet away from a 60” screen and the pixel structure is distracting. Right now I'm sitting 10 feet away from my 120” 1080p TV. Sitting closer than 10 feet would expose the pixel structure. This UHDTV would allow for a more immersive viewing experience, where I'd be able to use a larger screen and actually have to turn my head to follow the action on the screen.
44 posted on 10/31/2010 7:35:41 PM PDT by Kellis91789 (There's a reason the mascot of the Democratic Party is a jackass.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Kellis91789
This UHDTV would allow for a more immersive viewing experience, where I'd be able to use a larger screen and actually have to turn my head to follow the action on the screen.

Drugs would do the same thing.

At a certain point, it IS the same thing.

45 posted on 10/31/2010 7:38:25 PM PDT by E. Pluribus Unum ("The only stable state is one in which all men are equal before the law." -- Aristotle)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: Las Vegas Dave
If they have this on Ultra HD, I am definitely getting one !


46 posted on 10/31/2010 7:42:41 PM PDT by greatdefender (If You Want Peace.....Prepare For War)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: freedumb2003
Most FReepers don’t even understand, much less have, such technology.

You better never need an MRI, cuz if you can't understand the technology, you won't be allowed to use it.

47 posted on 10/31/2010 7:54:59 PM PDT by Publius6961 ("In 1964 the War on Poverty Began --- Poverty won.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: Las Vegas Dave

Crap, does this mean I’ll have to buy another converter box for my 1982 Zenith?


48 posted on 10/31/2010 8:01:27 PM PDT by Nowhere Man (General James Mattoon Scott, where are you when we need you? We need a regime change.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Publius6961

>>You better never need an MRI, cuz if you can’t understand the technology, you won’t be allowed to use it.<<

Ooff — had one a few weeks ago.. oh man, it doesn’t matter whether I understand it or not, it really sucks! I was creating code in my head and praying it would end soon — eyes tightly closed and breathing measured.

Everyone I know who has had an MRI has had the same claustrophobic reaction. And I hear tell the so-called “open air” MRI isn’t much better.

I was just reacting to the “Luddite” remark — we all bend technology to our will, but where we draw the lines is as varied as shells on the beach.

:)


49 posted on 10/31/2010 8:06:12 PM PDT by freedumb2003 (The TOTUS-Reader: omnipotence at home, impotence abroad (Weekly Standard))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 47 | View Replies]

To: greatdefender

I just grabbed my 3D glasses to take a closer look at your post!


50 posted on 10/31/2010 8:07:42 PM PDT by freedumb2003 (The TOTUS-Reader: omnipotence at home, impotence abroad (Weekly Standard))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-82 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson