Slashdot Mirror


The Trouble With 4K TV

An anonymous reader sends this quote from an article about the difficulties in bringing so-called '4K resolution' video — 3840x2160 — to consumers. "Though 4K resolutions represent the next step in high-definition video, standards for the format have yet to emerge and no one’s really figured out how to distribute video, with its massive file footprint, efficiently and cost effectively. How exactly does one distribute files that can run to hundreds of gigabytes? ... Given that uncompressed 4K footage has a bit-rate of about 600MB/s, and even the fastest solid-state drives operate at only about 500MB/s, compression isn’t merely likely, it’s necessary. ... Kotsaftis says manufacturers will probably begin shipping and promoting larger TVs. 'In coming years, 50-inch or 55-inch screens will have become the sort of standard that 40-inch TVs are now. To exploit 4K, you need a larger form factor. You’re just not going to notice enough of a difference on smaller screens.' The same quality/convenience argument leads him to believe that physical media for 4K content will struggle to gain traction among consumers. '4K implies going back to physical media. Even over the Internet, it’s going to require massive files and, given the choice, most people would happily settle for a 720p or 1080p file anyway.'"

4 of 442 comments (clear)

  1. cable and sat don't have the bandwidth for it by Joe_Dragon · · Score: 5, Insightful

    cable and sat don't have the bandwidth for it and that's on the broadcast side.

    Maybe 1-2 channels but most cable systems are loaded with sd channels and old mpeg2 HD boxes.

    Sat has moved to all mepg 4 HD but stills has lots of SD boxes out there as well.

  2. Mis-guided claims.. by thesupraman · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Much of the bandwidth/media etc claims are rubbish. 4k has (approximately) 4 time the pixels of standard full HD, so at most a given
    format will increase by 4 times, HOWEVER, most lossy compression methods (for example AVC/MPEG4) on real footage scale better
    than linear with pixel count, as detail becomes more repeated at higher resolutions, so a more likely estimate for such formats is
    2 times, which is not crazy (blueray for example can already delivery that for many movies if needed). newer compression methods are
    coming on line that can deliver close to double the compression for equivalent quality, meaning we end up back to normal HD data sizes.

    Is it needed? thats a whole different story, with the size of living rooms/available and comfortable wall space for screen, etc it is pretty
    marginal, but trying to use raw uncompressed bitrates as a scare tactic is rubbish.

    Their raw figures are of course not even right as they seem to be assuming 444/12bit storage, which would be rather rare in real life, 422 10 bit
    would be MUCH more common, and most workflows would actually use comrpessed storage (as they do now for HD.).

  3. Who cares, this is not the important point! by SomeKDEUser · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The important point is that at last, there'll be computer screens with non-stupid resolutions again! They took my 1920x1200 away, and though I would prefer 3840x2400, I can live with 3840x2160.

    At least resolutions are going up again.

  4. What is the issue? by Gription · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The article proclaims FUD. This is just silliness. The data requirements ARE NOT 600mbps just as 1080p's data requirements are not 150mbps.

    Digital television is ALWAYS compressed.

    It will require 4 times the data throughput as it is only 4 times as many pixels. Period. There isn't a downside. If it is only getting a 1080p signal then it will be at least that good and you know that they will have a lot of processing to anti alias the upscaled image. It will probably really help on 3D movies where they are cheesing out by cutting the vertical resolution in half.
    The only issue will be getting the infrastructure caught up with it. The cable companies may have a problem but if they don't take care of it they will go the way of the buggy whip because the Internet and Netflix will scale to take care of it.

    The only real issue that 4K may have is if it makes enough visual difference that anyone will care enough to pay the premium. I really think the only place it will really noticeably shine is 3D. We will just need to see how fast meaningful 3D content becomes available. And with the limitations on how much 3D content you should reasonably watch in a day that will slow the "need" for it.