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.
>>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.
>>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.
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.
A lot of the programming smells like week old fish.
How about ultra-low-definition? So it wouldn’t show stuff like the flies crawling on Obama’s face?
Sorry, HD shows me enough pimples and clogged pores now, don’t need it any clearer...thanks anyway.
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 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”?
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.
>>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.
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.
Marginal difference is NOT worth the price.
Just like 3D TV, no market for it.....
Yipeeeee!
Comedy fecal crap in HHD?
I wish I had a chance to visit Japan some day, especially their improved version of Disneyland.
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.
my eyes aren’t that good.
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.
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.
Dude, you’re obsolete, dude!
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.