LG Announces "Super UHD" TV Lineup (digitaltrends.com)

An anonymous reader writes: LG Electronics will be showing off a new line of 4K Ultra-HD television sets at CES this week and a 98-inch 8K Super UHD giant. Digital Trends reports: "The UH9500 (screen sizes 55-86 inches) UH8500 (screen sizes 55-75 inches) and UH7700 (screen sizes 49-65 inches) share several traits in common. All will offer what LG is calling HDR Plus, which means all of the sets in this series can process and display High Dynamic Range content from a variety of sources, include LG's Color Prime tech for enhanced color brightness. These sets will also apply processing that aims to improve non-HDR content for an HDR-like experience."

Comments

Web OS 3.0

[NotInHere]

Selling spyware as a feature, the sales department should be congratulated. No, the whole industry.

Re:Web OS 3.0

[NotInHere]

Popular news: http://www.tomsguide.com/us/lg...

Geek news: https://hackaday.com/2013/11/2... (also consider the blog entry linked in that story http://doctorbeet.blogspot.co.... )

And this is only about that particular company's products, other smart tvs from other companies spy as well.

Re:Web OS 3.0

[GrumpySteen]

All those links are about previous versions and the information may or may not apply to the 3.0 version. They may have gotten better about respecting consumer privacy or worse. Nobody knows at this point.

Re:Web OS 3.0

[penix1]

They may have gotten better about respecting consumer privacy or worse. Nobody knows at this point.,

There is an old saying: "Fool me once, shame on you! Fool me twice, shame on me!"

Why should anyone trust any corporation that has zero incentive to "do the right thing" in respect to privacy? In fact, they have every incentive to monetize every bit of data they can get on you!

Re:Web OS 3.0

[fahrbot-bot]

There is an old saying: "Fool me once, shame on you! Fool me twice, shame on me!"

Or - and I'm not making this up - as George W. Bush said:

Fool me once, shame on ... shame on you. Fool me... You can't get fooled again!

Re:Web OS 3.0

[strstr]

this article says Samsung TV's are doing the same thing as LG; https://www.schneier.com/blog/archives/2015/02/samsung_televis.html

another article said Vizio TV's do the same thing. http://bgr.com/2015/11/10/vizio-smart-tv-spying/

It's standard for everything, every bit of data, everything your TV does to enable your viewing habits and usage to be monitored and recorded without your consent or knowledge.

It's like Google's and cellphones and telephone and internet. you cannot stop them from doing it unless you cut the Internet cord entirely.

The internet is dangerous because it's being used as a feed into your home and life any time you use it.

Re:Web OS 3.0

[AmiMoJo]

Firewalls in home routers need to get better. My TV is only able to access YouTube and Netflix, and nothing else. Not even the ad severs for YouTube.

Consumers need this level of choice now.

Re:Technical Features Rather Than Content

[known_coward_69]

no one is going to make HDR content if there aren't any devices to watch it same with HD almost 20 years ago. the first HD TV's came out in the late 90's. the big adoption didn't start until around 2002 or 2003 when they fell to $3000 or so for a 40" unit and in the mid 2000's is when the big push of HD content came out

That's great. Now for the really important stuff

[Opportunist]

It's great that we can see in much higher detail now that there's nothing on worth watching.

Wake me when you invent something that makes TV relevant again.

My eyes bleed just thinking about it...

[fuzzyfuzzyfungus]

I'm always up for more resolution; but my eyes are bleeding just imagining what fake-HDR effects are going to look like. More dynamic range is useful; but what horrors are they going to invoke when faking data not specified by the source material to get a 'Best Buy Brite(tm)!' effect that 8 out of 10 focus group participants agreed looked brighter and more vivid than the competitor's image under retail conditions?

Re:Technical Features Rather Than Content

[peragrin]

part of that was HDMI, and part of it is that TV's should last you a decade or more, and the TV manufacturers want you to buy a new tv every 3-4 years.

early HD tv's didn't have HDMI, or only had one HDMI port. so you could watch HD dvd, or HD cable but not both without swapping cables.

in the early 2000's they finally got wise and adjusted the spec to allow tv's to have more than one hdmi input.

Can't wait to see these in public

[BlytheBowman]

Comming to a waiting room near you, thete will be one of these 4k+ TVs on the wall, only they will be connected to a cable or even an OTA digital converter box either which is outputting letter boxed SD which somehow still manages to get cropped by the set, or better yet a 4:3 SD Apicture in Strech-O-Vision! Just like I see most HD sets in public spaces today

Re:Can't wait to see these in public

[BaronM]

Fun fact -- OTA HDTV was for a long time one of the highest (technical) quality sources available. Fairly high-bit-rate MPEG2 can look VERY good, and generally doesn't suffer from the recompression artifacts of a cable or satellite provider working to maximize the number of channels rather than the quality of any particular channel. Yes, a good Blu-ray or stream can provide better quality now, but for a waiting-room situation, OTA HDTV is probably the best bet going.

Not that there will be anything to watch, but at least your daytime TV will only be crappy due to content.

LG Announces "Super UHD" TV

[The Grim Reefer]

The naming for this is getting a little ridiculous. HD I could understand. But then to go to ultra high definition seemed a little silly. Super ultra high definition is a whole lot of silly. I suppose they have to give it some sort of name as most TV's that are being sold as 4K truly aren't. I'm going to stick with my 1080p HD for now. At least until the Extra big ass double plus good venti glorious super ultra high definition televisions are released with 8 billion K resolution. At that point, I'll need to wear a pair of 16 inch telescopes with 750X magnification to truly appreciate the resolution while sitting 10 feet away from it on my couch. Except there won't be any content and everything will have to be unconverted from 1080p blurays that were remastered in 4K.

Re:LG Announces "Super UHD" TV

[Kjella]

DPI is a meaningless measure without viewing distance. Since 20/20 vision means 1 arc minute or 1/60th degree resolution, the maximum field of vision (FOV) the screen should cover is easy to calculate.

For 20/20 vision ("normal" = does not need correction):
1920 pixels * 1/60th degree = 32 degrees
3840 pixels * 1/60th degree = 64 degrees
7680 pixels * 1/60th degree = 128 degrees

If you have 20/20 vision then FullHD at 55" / 7 feet = 31.9 degrees is all you can see. That's a fairly normal couch distance, but 28" / 3.4 feet is much further away from a desktop screen than is normal. A UHD monitor at 28" / 1.7 feet = 61.8 degrees is plenty though.

For 20/16 vision (normal in young and healthy):
1920 pixels * 1/60th degree * 16/20 = 25.6 degrees
3840 pixels * 1/60th degree * 16/20 = 51.2 degrees
7680 pixels * 1/60th degree * 16/20 = 102.4 degrees

If you have 20/16 vision as about 1/3rd of the population does, then UHD at 79" / 6 feet = 51.1 degrees is the limit of your vision. For a monitor 28" / 2.1 feet is slightly on the far side, maybe get a 5K monitor.

For 20/12 vision (the sharp-eyed):
1920 pixels * 1/60th degree * 8/20 = 19.2 degrees
3840 pixels * 1/60th degree * 8/20 = 38.4 degrees
7680 pixels * 1/60th degree * 8/20 = 76.8 degrees

Most people will won't ever see this good in their life ever, rare but also not truly exceptional. With UHD then 65" / 7 feet = 37.3 degrees is their limit, for a monitor 28" / 3 feet is clearly too long. An 8K monitor would actually be useful.

For 20/8 vision (the very, very few):
1920 pixels * 1/60th degree * 12/20 = 12.8 degrees
3840 pixels * 1/60th degree * 12/20 = 25.6 degrees
7680 pixels * 1/60th degree * 12/20 = 51.2 degrees

This is near the true limit of the human eye, there are a few elite baseball players like this. Since they have twice the vision of 20/16s, 8K at 79" / 6 feet = 51.1 degrees is the limit of their vision. For a monitor probably around 10K.

That became a much longer post than I expected...

Re:LG Announces "Super UHD" TV

[AmiMoJo]

It's not just resolution, 8k also ups the frame rate to 120hz and widens the available colour gamut, while also increasing bit depth.

It's important for camera operators and broadcasters too, because unlike 4k it needs a lot of new tech. 8k cameras can't be manually focused, for example. The precision required is too high to do on a little monitor connected to a camera. New broadcast and encoding systems are required too, not just more bandwidth.

I've seen 8k in real life, it's a huge step up from 4k.

11K.

[jpellino]

I'm holding out for 11K.

I dont' care about tv

[epyT-R]

I want 4 or 8k in a 23-24" 16:10 display, 30bit color, great black levels and viewing angles, no input lag (less than 1ms), and little to no motion blur.

The last thing I want is to pay a lot of money to see some shitty reality tv show in bitrate starved 8k instead of bitrate starved 1080i on a 50"+ screen. oh and commercials, the endless commercials...

Re:Technical Features Rather Than Content

[SeaFox]

... the first HD TV's came out in the late 90's...

I'm going to be nit-picky here and point you towards Wikipedia's article on HDTV.

In 1949, France started its transmissions with an 819 lines system (with 737 active lines). The system was monochrome only, and was used only on VHF for the first French TV channel. It was discontinued in 1983.

In 1958, the Soviet Union developed ransformator (Russian: , meaning Transformer), the first high-resolution (definition) television system capable of producing an image composed of 1,125 lines of resolution aimed at providing teleconferencing for military command. It was a research project and the system was never deployed by either the military or consumer broadcasting.

In 1979, the Japanese state broadcaster NHK first developed consumer high-definition television with a 5:3 display aspect ratio.[4] The system, known as Hi-Vision or MUSE after its Multiple sub-Nyquist sampling encoding for encoding the signal, required about twice the bandwidth of the existing NTSC system but provided about four times the resolution (1080i/1125 lines). Satellite test broadcasts started in 1989, with regular testing starting in 1991 and regular broadcasting of BS-9ch commencing on November 25, 1994, which featured commercial and NHK programming.

These are systems dating back to the start of the Korean War pretty much, and are "high definition" resolutions. Regardless of how popular they were (or were not) they existed, and therefore display devices capable of using them also existed. You can discount the first two if you want because they were military applications or false-starters, but the Japanese system was definitely in the consumer market.