4k Ultra HD (3840 x 2160) 50" TV for £900!!! Yes It's True.
Discussion
Yep, you heard right. That's possibly gonna be a game changer 
http://www.gizmodo.co.uk/2013/04/seiki-50-inch-4k-...
The Chinese are coming!
http://www.gizmodo.co.uk/2013/04/seiki-50-inch-4k-...
The Chinese are coming!
The next generation of video codecs aims to have double the quality for the same bandwidth, so it shouldn't actually increase bandwidth too much.
The main problem with 4k is the enormous impact it has on production. It immediately sets every bit of video editing equipment back several years, just when we've finally got a grip on HD! I mean, imagine the storage requirements for a raw 4k video file.
How close would you have to be to the telly to notice, I wonder.
The main problem with 4k is the enormous impact it has on production. It immediately sets every bit of video editing equipment back several years, just when we've finally got a grip on HD! I mean, imagine the storage requirements for a raw 4k video file.
How close would you have to be to the telly to notice, I wonder.
te.scorp said:
What format is that for 1080p? Blu-ray afaik uses around 30mbps.
It's just massively compressed. I believe satellite compression is lower still than the 8 Mb/s quoted. 32 Meg for 4K isn't bad, but you're going to struggle to do that and record any other channel simultaneously at current distribution rates.As said though, new compression formats are improving things, although to my eyes, the HD mpeg2 compression even at 19.5 mB/s (on some kit we use) still has noticeable compression artefacts.
RedLeicester said:
Uncompressed 4K is around 3.8gbps, or circa 480mpbs.
Streaming a compressed feed from Apple or Netflix et al you'd be looking at around 28gb per hour. Which is a lot.
When the 4k streams start they will probably be using the new H265 video format which can apparently compress video to half the file size of H264 with no noticeable loss in quality. Bandwidth requirements will not go up.Streaming a compressed feed from Apple or Netflix et al you'd be looking at around 28gb per hour. Which is a lot.
durbster said:
When the 4k streams start they will probably be using the new H265 video format which can apparently compress video to half the file size of H264 with no noticeable loss in quality. Bandwidth requirements will not go up.
Splended. 280mbps then. 
Oh and it's closer to 30% than 50.
durbster said:
When the 4k streams start they will probably be using the new H265 video format which can apparently compress video to half the file size of H264 with no noticeable loss in quality. Bandwidth requirements will not go up.
They'd have to halve it again to keep the bandwidth the same?0000 said:
They'd have to halve it again to keep the bandwidth the same?
Oh yeah, good point.Man maths at work.
Edit: Hang about, 4k is the width unlike 1080 which is height so the resolution on this TV is double HD, not quadruple - 3840 x 2160 - so I think I was right in the first place.
Edit 2: Maths is really not my strong point.
Edited by durbster on Thursday 18th April 12:30
durbster said:
Oh yeah, good point.Man maths at work.
Edit: Hang about, 4k is the width unlike 1080 which is height so the resolution on this TV is double HD, not quadruple - 3840 x 2160 - so I think I was right in the first place.
Edited by durbster on Thursday 18th April 11:50
scorp said:
durbster said:
Oh yeah, good point.Man maths at work.
Edit: Hang about, 4k is the width unlike 1080 which is height so the resolution on this TV is double HD, not quadruple - 3840 x 2160 - so I think I was right in the first place.
Edited by durbster on Thursday 18th April 11:50
scorp said:
3840x2160 is 4x larger than 1920x1080.
Of course, I'm a dunce and I should know better. I did exactly the same thing recently when somebody asked me to produce a print thing at 25% of A1, so I simply divided the width by .25.
This is why I work in the digital world and not the physical.
Gassing Station | Home Cinema & Hi-Fi | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff