TV manufacturers salivated at the idea of TV resolution, hoping desperately to turn the TV market into something like the PC market, in that you have to upgrade every 5ish years to stay on top of technology and use the latest stuff to artificially increase sales beyond what their already abysmal build qualities provide them.
I’m glad the plan is failing spectacularly.
Hopefully this forces them to think more about quality and start focusing on TVs that actually last now… You know, like we used to have 30 years ago.
Pfff, they’ve just turned to adware-laden boxes. Next they’ll make up some BS about requiring the device to be Internet connected so you can’t disable ads too easily.
That’s a big part of enshitification: maximizing profit at the sacrifice of product quality. All of those pro-capitalist folk want you to believe the market will correct itself. The problem is when the entire market is dominated by this mentality and anyone (doing anything different) tries to enter that market is snuffed out immediately. None of the major brands will stray from this model because they are completely and hopelessly servant to the shareholder, and all that matters to them is maximizing profits at any cost. Yay enshitification!
I have an fairly high end TV and honestly I don’t know what the point is because there is virtually no content that’s available for it.
Pretty much none of the streaming services go beyond 4K and often they’re at 1080p and I have to upscale to 4K. Consoles also don’t go above that 4k and again often in fact don’t even hit that.
start focusing on TVs that actually last now…
That only makes their “people need to refresh their sets for our bottom line” even worse for them.
BTW, 30 years ago TVs were expensive and still failed. There was a viable TV repair industry because it was worth spending the money to repair and easier to repair.
Anecdotally, my Plasma and my LCDs have been more problem free than when my family had CRT TVs back in the day.
Yeah, exactly. TVs were better back then. they were more durable (The Wiimote accidents would never send a CRT to the dump), and actually repairable.
and they lasted decades. Hell, I’ve seen people find CRT TVs found abandoned in fields for years and bring them back with minimal effort.
as long as the tube/neck of a CRT is intact, it will run/be repairable.
Yeah, we’ve gone as far as we need to in the flashy boom boom section of entertainment. Good characters, good writing, and fun gameplay were always the cornerstones of good movies and video games.
Gaming was supposed to be one of the best drivers for 8K adoption.
Whu? Where 4k still struggles with GPU power? And for next to no benefit?
FR. What distance and size do I need to be able to actually see the difference between 1080p and 4K? Cuz my current setup does not allow me to notice anything but the massive reduction in performance, unless it’s a 2D game and then everything becomes too tiny to effectively play the game.
It’s very noticeable at the DPI of a 27" screen from arms’ length. Or maybe not if you can’t see very well. But on a TV from 10 feet away, I dunno if I could differentiate 1440p from 4K personally.
I have 27 inch 2k monitors at work, and it’s already enough
27" 2K is a good DPI. I personally only went up to 4K 27" because I also wanted OLED, and the 2K OLED panel I was using had some noticeable text fringing because of the subpixel layout. At 4K it’s not noticeable anymore.
For PC you can actually see the benefit between 4K and lower resolutions.
It’s for TV where it’s likely useless to have 8K
I am on a PC… You mean a smaller monitor closer to my face?
Yes, that’s what I am saying, for a monitor you can easily see the difference between 4K and lower. While for a tv if I remember correctly for a 55’ over 2 meters and something from the TV you can’t tell the difference between 4k and 1080p
It’s about 60”. That’s the point where we noticed pixels at 1080P. HDR is more important.
I’m using a 60 inch tv as a monitor to my desktop - I sit in front of it at a distance of about 2m. It feels really nice to have stuff in 4k, so it’s always 4k except the games that are too tough for my 2060 super to give me 60p.
4k is noticeable in a standard pc.
I recently bought a 1440p screen (for productivity, not gaming) and I can fit so much more UI with the same visual fidelity compared to 1080p. Of course, the screen needs to be physically bigger in order for the text to be the same size.
So if 1080p->1440p is noticeable, 1080p->4k must be too.
Like I said, 2D things it is noticable only because it makes everything smaller (there is more space because the elements inside that space are smaller). However movies and 3D games? No difference.
Even going from 640x480 to 1024x768 makes a noticeable size difference with the 2D elements of a UI.
Introducing the new DLSS 9, were we upscale 720p to 8k. Looks better than native, pinky swear.
Pretty sure my GPU could run 4k Rimworld, just play good games instead of AAA games.
I dunno. Oxygen Not Included looks crisp on a 4K monitor. And it makes my job easier, being able to have an absolute tonne of code on-screen and readable. I reckon I could probably use an 8K monitor for those things.
Yeah, I generally have FSR running on any 3D game made in about the last decade - even if I can run it at 4K at a reasonable framerate, my computer fans start to sound like a hoover and the whole room starts warming up. But upscaling seems a better solution than having separate monitors for work and play.
Yeah, can’t run it, Internet too slow to steam it
What’s dumb is that 3D failed because of lack of resolution and brightness, and now we have more pixels than we can handle and screens so bright they can hurt to look at. PS3 had a couple games that showed different screens to two players wearing 3D glasses. I’d love to see full screen couch coop games with modern tech. 8K isn’t solving any problems.
Screen dimming is technically possible over HDMI/Displayport no idea why its not properly supported and integrated into monitors, graphics drivers, windows and Linux. KDE shows dimming for monitors sometimes? Don’t know of that is software or real hardware dimming though.
I’m talking about brightness in context of 3d. KDE uses DDE with USB connected monitors which is the same thing as using a button to lower brightness.
It’s real hardware dimming.
Nice thought so but wasn’t sure.
3D failed for the exact same reason VR is failing now. Nobody wants to wear headsets at home.
But VR can do a lot of cool things, 3d… not so much.
Nobody wants to wear headsets at home.
Or anywhere, really. AR/XR glasses are a big improvement, but can still be clunky.
Or bring on the neural shunt. Not so fast, Elon. It’s not for your purposes. It’s for mine. And I can’t see who I could trust with direct connections to my brain… But once I plugged in, I love Amazon, and you should subscribe!
8k would be cool to display lots of windows at the same time but fairly useless for gaming.
Everything above 1440p isn’t offering any display space. I have a 4K monitor but 150% DPI is needed to make things big enough to work with.
I’m using a 5k by 1200 monitor and it’s awesome with Kde. I suppose it would be equally great with other interfaces.
With 100% DPI?
Sure, native resolution, no zoom, it’s fine.
Not so on my laptop with an insane resolution of like 2k by 3k on a 13 or 14 inch screen though.
What do you mean 2k by 3k? And 5k by 1200? 4K is a resolution of 3840 × 2160. 1440p is normally 2560 × 1440.
My 4K monitor ( 3840 × 2160) is 27 inches and with 100% DPI is not usable. Resolution is 4K only bigger UI. (150%, which is as if I had 1440p).
The 5k monitor is a 49 inch model from MSI. The laptop is a compact model from Lenovo, a Yoga Pro something or other. Not sure what its resolution is (3k something by 2k something from what I remember), just that it’s needlessly high for its screen size, requiring UI scaling.
I had an upgrade plan for my PC that involved a step up to a 4k monitor, but when the time came, it was hard enough just finding a 4k monitor with decent specs that I stopped to really think about whether I would really benefit from it. I already knew I didn’t need it, but I realized that I wouldn’t even really gain anything from it. I already used the UI scaling with the one 4k monitor I had at work, so that was a wash. And for games, I didn’t really have any times when I wished the resolution was higher than the 1440p I was already using, but I did have times when I wished it would generate the frames faster or more consistently.
Part of the change was a new GPU to handle 4k better (they were supposed to justify each other), but I ended up just getting an ultrawide 1440p monitor instead.
I don’t think I’ll ever bother with higher than 4k for TV or 1440p for PC.
Fuck.
Now instead of each new generation of TVs being slightly higher in resolution some god damn business tech executive is going to focus on some god damn bullshit to try and change or add which is going be absolutely fucking ridiculous or pointless and annoying like AI television shit or TV gaming or fuck my life. Smart TVs are bad enough but they can’t help themselves they need to change or add shit all the fucking time to “INNOVATE!!!” and show stockholder value.
Resolution was something easy and time consuming but we can’t rely on that keeping them from fucking TV up any more.
They showed Skyfall on 70ft IMAX screens, and that film was shot 2880 x 1200. Its not all about the pixel count.
Where are those numbers from? They disagree with https://shotonwhat.com/skyfall-2012 . The IMAX release was done as a film print, which likely wasn’t made from the regular HD cut.
DP Roger Deakins has a forum on his site where he answers these sorts of questions. The Arri Alexa Studio was essentially developed for him, as he prefers an optical VF. It has an academy gate, and Deakins favours spherical lenses rather than anamorphic so we simply take the width of the sensor and crop down to 2.40:1 aspect ratio to get the quoted dimensions. Your link quotes the capture resolution, which will have some excess compared to the finished material.
This was put through the DI process and at a later stage IMAX DNR’d a blow-up to 15/70mm.
I want a dumb tv with the price and and specs of a smart tv. Less is more
My LG C3 not connected to internet and using an HTPC and Nvidia shield is working great so far.
I fucking love my C3. Also not connected to the internet. It’s gorgeous.
I don’t know why more people don’t do this. Don’t connect the TV to the Internet. Ever. Do updates using a flash drive if you must and connect whatever flavor streaming box you like. The TVs and their dumb os get slow and shitty anyway so why fuck around with it? Lol.
Ppl spend so much time fucking around with Android slop boxes and I’m just like…how is using a full fat linux desktop PC under the TV with a wireless trackpad keyboard clunky? Set display scale to 200%, install Stremio, and now you can game and shitpost on your couch too as a bonus.
You would likely have to pay more since they aren’t getting to sell your information.
*you would have to pay more because major companies know they can charge more. There isn’t a limited amount of profit a company wants to mae, and then they pick a price from that, they price it as high as the market will bear.
I second this.
The TV industry can crash and burn otherwise.
Realistically, not only do I not want an 8k tv, but I might not get a tv at all, if I had to do it today. We rarely watch tv anymore. The brainrot is the same but we’re much more likely to use individual screens
I just recently found out about Thomson’s “Easy TVs” LINK
Actual dumb TVs, with a good range on inputs and at a cheap price, they seem to be aimed at hotels and such.
The downside is that they only do 1080p at 40" or 43" but the appeal of getting one before they disappear from the market is strong (also I don’t have any 4k media in my library so my worry is more about future proofing than any current necessity)
What you’re looking for are commercial screens. They’re a bit more expensive for a comparable panel, as they are intended for 24/7 use- but are about as dumb as they get nowadays.
A bit more expensive? I was about to get a smart tv for like 800 bucks. The same equivalent dumb tv wpuld have been a few thousand dollars and Best Buy said they would only sell it to business accounts which was infuriating to read.
This isn’t a peasant TV. And it doesn’t even have any tracking, I am not sure a pleb can even legally own these. Sorry, but you have to be a wealthy person who watches CP to have it in your home.
OLED and 4k is where it’s at.
Hell, OLED and high bitrate 1080 is probably good enough for me for the rest of my life.
Same, I have a 55" OLED and I game in 1080p. 4K looks a bit crisper, but my video card doesn’t like me when we do that.
Shitrate 4k and 1080p are all you get on streaming platforms. Hard to get good quality bitrates outside of I guess bluray and piracy.
And piracy gets them from Bluray.
Now that that’s dying I’m afraid we’re gonna be stuck with streaming bitrates.
I guess we should buy more Blu-rays. But I don’t have a good space to library all of them… wait a sec… I have an idea…
bluray and piracy
I feel like that was implied in my comment ;-)
I never choose higher bitrate releases. IDK why exactly. When you search for a movie and there’s a half dozen releases, you choose the groups you know, and the number of seeders, and usually end up with a 2gb to 4gb release size. The bitrate doesn’t really factor into my decision, partly I suppose because it’s always “good enough”, and partly because it’s not a reliable indicator of image quality anyway.
Once I upgraded to a 4k tv I started pulling 4K HDR versions. It can be hard to know how good the quality will be between 5GB, 10GB, 25GB and 50GB movies, because there are many substandard releases out there. Especially true with older content.
Newer stuff can make a difference, but let’s be realistic. It costs nothing to just download a few versions and see. :)
That’s kind of my point though.
I just don’t care enough about the quality.
I’d be surprised if the average person can differentiate 720p and 4k
Depends on the screen size and distance.
At a typical screen size and distance
I mean that’s vague.
I’d say it depends on the content too. On a computer monitor at typical size/distance? Yeah probably. Small text will look much much better.
I don’t think so. Average TV size: 40-50"? Average distance: 6 feet?
To be fair, recall how microscopic TVs used to be not so long ago.
I legitimately cannot tell the difference between 1080 and 4k, however I do wear glasses.
But 720 feels like garbage to me.
Wasn’t speaking about you.
People tend to forget bitrate when talking about image quality, and arguably it’s even more important than resolution. Even a 480p video can look great at a small screen if encoded with a good bitrate, and even a 4k video can look like shit if encoded with too low bitrate
I love OLED and can’t go back, hoping that we enter uniform OLED adoption at some point. I’d like to see them focus on lowering the price and raising the longevity of OLED displays. Doubt it on that first one though. Kind of a tangent but I also want to see what the future of e-ink displays are, especially with better colors and refresh rate.
I’ve steered away from OLED thus far due to concerns about burn-in. It just isn’t something I want to have to deal with.
It’s bad enough that I need to worry about write cycles on SSDs, but the advantage over HDDs is so overwhelming that I deal with it.
Longevity is a very important criteria for me, as I tend to upgrade infrequently and buy near top of the line for its time.
Mini LED is the way to go for longevity imo.
My OLED is going on 8 years now and it has no signs of burn in. I don’t watch TV with permanent station logos though, if that is something that your OLED would have to withstand
I play Guild Wars 2, and I’m worried if I bought an OLED I would end up with the UI permanently burned in. The technology just doesn’t seem compatible with games that feature a persistent UI.
future of e-ink displays
Call me batshit insane, I want them to figure out dual stack displays.
OLED for watching, E-Ink for showing art when the TV is off like Samsung’s ‘Frame TV’, but lower in power consumption and more life-like, both in the same TV set.
It’s about time the electronics industry as a whole realises that innovation for the sake of innovation is rarely a good thing
FireWire got killed too soon.
Wha?
AFAIK FireWire is part of the Thunderbolt protocol, you can get FireWire 800 to Thunderbolt adapters. Apple even used to sell one.
Apple killed Firewire 4 years before Lightning came along.
??? My 2012 MacBook Pro had FireWire, that’s the year Lightning came out…
Apple announced it was moving away from Firewire in 2008
Too right, brother
it was way too ahead of its time.
Look, we can’t have TVs that last 15 years anymore!
We need to keep people buying every year or two. Otherwise line not go up! Don’t you understand that this is about protecting The Economy?!
Boomers economic policy is like if Issac Newton saw an apple falling from a tree, and came to the conclusion it would always accelerate at the same speed no matter what, even though the ground with the entire ass planet behind it is right fucking there.
Numbers can not constantly go up, it’s just that’s what was happening their whole lives and they can’t accept that their childhoods was a blip and not how things always were and always will be.
They just can’t wrap their heads around it. They have such shit tier empathy they can’t comprehend that they’re an exception.
To be fair Boomers didn’t create this economic policy. Their parents elected Nixon, who broke the Bretton Woods agreement “temporarily”, and then we adopted Keynesian macroeconomic policy afterwards to justify it.
Inb4 someone regurgitates a defense of this “boomer” policy and proves that it’s not just them and never was. It’s always been the rich and the their loyal servants.
A large number of the problems we currently face and will in the future come down to boomers being worse than their predecessors at grasping, understanding, and accepting their own impermanence and unimportance on the grand stage of reality.
Most of them need to have a series of existential crises or maybe read some fucking Satre so they can stop with the Me generation bullshit. It’s wild that the first generation to do LSD in mass is somehow the one that needs to experience ego death the most
It’s wild that the first generation to do LSD in mass
I want to say hippies were less than 1% of that generation, but for some reason I think it was recorded as 2-3% which would be a gross over-estimate.
But for every hippie you think of sticking daisies in rifles, there was 100 spitting on Black kids for going to the school they were legally required to go to.
It would be like if in 2080 they think we’re all catboys with blue hair and 37 facial piercings.
Sure, those people exist as a fringe demographic, but they’re not the norm.
Bmost hippies had more issues with peers their own age than their parents age, that part of the folk tale gets left out tho, because the people who want us to think they were hippies and “grew out of it” were the ones beating hippies for being different.
All they were ever trying to do was lie to younger generations in the hopes they’d confirm to decades old social norms. Like, it’s weird how many people still don’t understand the boomers just lie about shit instinctively. They grew up in a world filled with lead and are literally incapable of caring about logical inconsistencies. They want younger generations to think they were cool, so they just fucking lied about what they were like as a generation.
If you ever run into a real deal old hippie some day, ask them what the majority of people their age was like back then.
We traded 3D tv’s, which are amazing if you watch the right stuff, for 8k…
8k is great, but we need media in 8k to go with it.
It’s not even innovation, per say. It’s just Big Number Go Up.
Nobody seems to want to make a TV that makes watching TV more pleasant. They just want to turn these things into giant bespoke advertising billboards in your living room.
Show me the TV manufacturer who includes an onboard ad blocker. That’s some fucking innovation.
The galaxy brain move is buying an old dumb tv for a pittance and use it for watching Jellyfin/Plex/stream from a browser with uBlock Origin/DNS filtering – all running on some relative’s “obsolete” smart toaster from last year that they happily gift you because “the new version’s bagel mode IS LIT – pun intended – but it needs the 128 gb DDR7 ram of the new model, can barely toast on the old one any more”.
You can’t really find a dumb TV anymore. I might see how big of a monkey I can find when I’m ready to upgrade, but I doubt I’ll find one big enough and cheap enough.
I hooked my computer up to the HDMI and have used that as my primary interface.
It’s not perfect, but it screens out 95% of bullshit
That doesn’t, unless you’ve blocked your TV from network access, because they use ACR - Automated Content Recognition - that literally scans what is being displayed over your hdmi port and then sells it off to advertisers.
I think you missed the part where the TV doesn’t have access to the network.
They can connect to open WiFi spots and just ignore the fact that you didn’t connect it.
And wait, no you’re thinking of a different thread. This thread mentioned no such thing.
Just don’t give the TV your wifi password, boom dumb TV.
That won’t save you anymore. My boss bought a smallish smart TV in contravention of my explicit instructions for use as a CCTV monitor because it was “cheap.” It nags you on power up with a popup whining about not being able to access the internet, and if you don’t feed it your Wifi password it will subsequently display that same popup every 30 minutes or so requiring you to dismiss it again. And again. And again. Apparently the play is to just annoy you into caving and letting it access your network.
Instead I packed it up and returned it. Fuck that.
If you are at a business you should have an access point or router that is capable of blocking specific devices from WAN access. But I would create a new segmented network, block that network from WAN access entirely, put it on its own VLAN, and then connect the TV to that network.
I’d assume it nags whenever it can’t connect to the home server, and just says “network”.
So when they go out of business any remaining units will nag forever.
You can use your router or access point tools to check what address it’s trying to resolve and then set up a redirect to a device that can respond with a fake response.
I think this just comes down to human nature. Give people (engineers, execs) a metric that looks like a good proxy for performance and they will overcommit on that metric as it is a safer bet than thinking outside the box. I think the incremental improvements in deep learning with all those benchmarks are a similar situation.
There’s no 8k content, and only recently do standard connectors support 8k at high refresh rates.
There’s barely any actual 4K content you can consume.
There’s barely any actual 4K content you can consume.
Ironically there actually is if you bother pirating content because that’s the only crowd that will share full 4k Dolby Vision + Dolby Atmos/DTS-X BluRay rips.
Aside from that though, even 4k gaming is a struggle because GPU vendors went into the deep end of frame generation, which also coincidentally is the same mistake lots of TV OEMs already made.
There’s barely any actual 4K content you can consume.
Honestly a little surprised the IMAX guys didn’t start churning out 4k+ content given that they’ve been in the business forever.
But I guess “IMAX in your living room” isn’t as sexy when the screen is 60" rather than 60’
They don’t want IMAX in your living room, they want IMAX in the IMAX theater, where you pay a premium for their service.
You don’t even need IMAX for 4K; ordinary 35mm film can normal scan to a nice 4K video. Films shot on the 65mm IMAX cameras would probably make good 8K content, but most of that was educational films, not what most people apparently want to watch all the time.
The digital IMAX projections were actually a step backwards in resolution.
IMAX is a mess. They can’t even figure out a consistent aspect ratio, so most of the content shot on IMAX is cropped after delivery.
IMAX film is equivalent to 12K. Their digital laser projectors are only 4K.
Films shot on the 65mm IMAX cameras would probably make good 8K content
So there’s still hope that they might release The Last Buffalo in 8k 3D sometime in the future? Got it. :)
Films shot on the 65mm IMAX cameras would probably make good 8K content, but most of that was educational films, not what most people apparently want to watch all the time.
Sure. But the cameras exist. You can use them for other stuff.
Hateful Eight was filmed in 70mm, and while it wasn’t Tarantino’s best work it certainly looked nice.
65mm is a gulf from 15/65 though. Much harder to shoot in IMAX format.
IMAX is 4K or less content. Its edge is special projection that can look good and brighter on huge screens.
Only imax film prints are significantly better than anything else
There is a lot 4K to consume now. That was the reality 5 years ago (even 4K exists more than 10). I would say 4K is becoming slowly the new FHD, but very very slowly.
The problem is that there is a lot low quality 4K, because of bandwidth, size etc.
I feel like most streaming platforms plan lock it and still compress it to crap though.
There’s barely any actual 4K content you can consume
I feel like that’s not true. But you’ve gotta try. If you’re streaming it, chances are it’s not really any better. 4K Bluray (or rips of them…) though? Yeah it’s good. And since film actually has 8K+ resolution old movies can be rescanned into high resolution if the original film exists.
Supposedly Sony Pictures Core is one streaming service that can push nearly 4K Bluray bitrates… but you’ve gotta have really good internet. Like pulling 50-80GB in the span of a movie runtime.
Not true on paper but true in practice. Most people don’t buy/use Blurays (or any other physical media) anymore to the point that retailers aren’t even bothering to stock them on the shelves these days. Their days are certainly numbered and then all we’ll be left with is low quality 4k streaming.
You’re probably aware of this since you mentioned bitrate, but a lot of 4K streaming services use bitrates that are too low to capture much more detail at 4K compared to a lower resolution. A lot of games will recommend/effectively require upscaling (DLSS/FSR/XeSS) to achieve good performance at 4K. All of this is still maybe better than 1440p, but it shows 4K is still kind of hard to make full use of.
I wish they didn’t feel the need to fake it with upscaling. In my experience upscaling looks like shit every time, whether it’s a video or game. Most of the time a good 1080p video with good bit rate will look way better than a 4k upscale.
For video, bitrate is definitely king. 4K high bitrate just gets insanely large. I opt for 1080p bluray quality when available over 4K usually. I looked into AI upscaling for video recently and it can be pretty good, but it’s a technology that changes fast so I’d rather store the original resolution and upscale in real time later (if at all).
For games, I find even FSR2 upscaling from 1440p to 2160p is excellent as long as it’s implemented properly (i.e. scaling the 3D world and not the UI), and FSR3/4 even better.
I’ve got a nice 4k mini LED tv with a 4k Blu-ray player and there’s plenty of excellent 4k content but it’s a niche market because most people aren’t using physical media for movies. 4k streaming is garbage compared to UHD Blu-ray.
Preach. I got gifted a 4k bluray player and was absolutely blown away by how good it looks compared to streaming.
Which makes sense because even 1080p streaming is garbage compared to blu-ray.
People really need to understand a lot of what “smart” TVs do is upscale the “4k” signal to something actually resembling real 4k.
Like how some 4k torrents are 3GB, and then a 1080p of the same movie is 20gb.
It’s “worse” resolution, but it looks miles better because it’s upscaling real 1080 to 4k instead of taking existing shitty 4k and trying to make it look better without just juicing the resolution.
So we don’t need 8k.content for 8k.tvs to be an incentive. We need real 4k media, then 8ks TV would show a real improvement.
Yeah, you’re talking about bitrate. A lot of the 4k content is encoded using more efficient codecs, but if it’s sourced from the streaming services the bitrate is so abysmal it’s usually a tossup between the 1080p or 4k stream. At least the 4k usually has hdr these days which is appreciable.
Yeah most of the time I don’t give a fuck about 4k. It’s HDR I’m after.
Yeah. A 1080p Bluray clocks in around 20GB. A 4K bluray is 60-80GB.
If you’re downloading something smaller it’s probably lower quality
Well, when NFL broadcasts on 720 or 1080i, an 8k tv isn’t going to make that look better. Even a prime subscription only gets you 4k.
There’s no difference between 4k broadcast on 4k tv vs. 8k broadcast on 8k tv.
Except for you knowing the numbers and being able to brag to your friends about your 8k tv
We didn’t even need 4k yet
Depends on your screen size and distance. It can be a small but noticeable jump.
Nah. On larger screens it’s good to have
At a certain point yours eyes can’t tell much difference. It is like music, people would obsess over tweaking their stereo systems to the point where I doubt you could physically tell the difference, it was mostly imagined.
Huge tvs also require big rooms to make the viewing angle work. Not everyone has a room they work in. Apartments are especially too small for huge tvs.
The coathanger experiment should have been the coffin lid on all the audiophile/overpriced super ultra premium cable bullshit.
I never knew about this but it’s hilarious: https://www.soundguys.com/cable-myths-reviving-the-coathanger-test-23553/
The only real innovation after 1080p for TV was HDR, sound stuff, 60-120hz, and upscaling to 4k.
You missed the 3D which came and went because nothing really supported it.
Only time I used 3D on my TV was playing Black Ops split-screen, where both players got the full screen, which was pretty neat.
Also, we haven’t even got HDR figured out.
I’m still struggling to export some of my older RAWs to HDR. Heck, Lemmy doesn’t support JPEG XL, AVIF, TIFF, HEIF, nothing, so I couldn’t even post them here anyway. And even then, they’d probably only render right in Safari.
If you’re talking browsers it’s poor. But HDR on displays is very much figured out and none of the randomness that you get with SDR with user varied gamma, colorspace, and brightness. (That doesn’t stop manufacturers still borking things with Vivid Mode though).
You can pack HDR in JPG/PNG/WebP or anything that supports a ICC and Chrome will display it. The actual formats that support HDR directly are PNG (with cICP) and AVIF and JpegXL.
Your best bet is use avifenc and translate your HDR file. But note that servers may take your image and break it when rescaling.
Best single source for this info is probably: https://gregbenzphotography.com/hdr/
