First thing to understand is that there is no 4k content.  There isn't even much 2k content.  Your bluray player is already sending out heavily compressed images, the streaming stuff online isn't even laughably close, using high compression and low color depth to fake a high resolution.

Uncompressed 1080p 8 bit video wouldn't even run on a gigabit internet connection, requiring over a terabyte to store a 2 hour movie.  Blurays are running more than 20-1 reduction, with a great deal of image quality reduction along side what lossless compression can be done.  4k takes four times as much, and that's just at 24fps.

4k blurays are supposed to top out around 128Mbits per second to do 3840x2160 at 10 bits per color, instead of the 5Gbits+ it would take to do that raw.  Lossless compression wouldn't get you anywhere near that reduction level. 

So, the question is how much do you really want to blow the money.   4k blurays will be higher fidelity than blurays, but it's still going to be a premium for something that doesn't truly exist.

I believe as far as the 4k - 3840x2160 thing goes, that makes sense. If you were to take 4 1920x1080 (current HD) monitors and stack them 2 x 2, that would give you a resolution of 3840x2160. Meaning, calling it 4k is probably just a nominal number.

My experience when I was forced to shop a couple of months ago was that 4K TVs display HD content about as well as HD TVs display SD content. In other words, lousy. I want to enjoy my movies, TV, etc. that I'm throwing at my TV. 4K is for when my next TV dies (knocking on wood) IF the content's being delivered.

Just my $.02!

Listen to psychoak ...

I should add...the last 'real' improvement to TVs was the change from Cathode Ray to LCD [and many even debate that].

ALL since has been an attempt by Manufacturers to continue the sales upsurge spawned by the LCD uptake.

That includes...4K...3D...curved screens [good grief]...ad nauseum.

Bottom line...they just want your money....

Jafo

reply 5

I should add...the last 'real' improvement to TVs was the change from Cathode Ray to LCD [and many even debate that].

ALL since has been an attempt by Manufacturers to continue the sales upsurge spawned by the LCD uptake.

That includes...4K...3D...curved screens [good grief]...ad nauseum.

Bottom line...they just want your money....

My 65" 3D Smart TV is 4K and the picture is clearer/crisper than that of my 55" HDTV because it upscales content to suit the default resolution.  That's not to say it is natural 4K, but it is improved some.  Naturally, you're not going to get 4K content from a 480p video file, cos you don't make a silk purse from a sow's ear, but it is more watchable IMO.

As for those 'curved screens', what a waste of time and money.  I saw one on display at JB Hi-Fi when I purchased my 65", and really, I could see no real difference when viewing from a regular position/distance.  Yeah, the top and bottom bezels are noticeably 'bent' if you pat attention, but there is no difference if you just focus on the picture. 

Nope, I wouldn't spend the extra bucks to get one.  In fact, it didn't cost me an arm and a leg to get the 65"  While most are $5000 and upwards, mine cost just $1579 on special.  It's a Soniq, not a well known brand, but I've had 3 Soniq TVs in the past and all have served me well.  In fact, I still have one of them, the 55", which is 6 years old and still in perfect working order.  My daughter has another, a 32" that's 7 years old and still working perfectly.  I gave my sister another 32" that's also still running fine.

Thanks for the replies guys 

About the curved screens, yea, I've seen an advert that essentially says that because our eyes are curved then curved screens provides a more realistic experience! I don't even know where to begin with that one lol!

I think I'd probably prefer flat, although if I had the choice to make it curve when I want, like that obscenely priced LG OLED model then I'd be fine with that as long as I'm not paying stupid money for something that seems gimmicky to me.

Thanks for your input Psychok, from what you wrote it seems like we're a very long way off from transmitting 4K content from solid media like a bluray let alone across any significant distance. Do you think raw data like what you described will ever be available? Or is it just not worth it?

Like starkers (you're not one of those guys that sits naked in front of their computer are you? ) I've given away my TV so I could do with a new one.

About whether or not I want to blow the money, well I'll see if I can get a good deal on a 4K TV and then wait and see what the future brings; I may upgrade again. Maybe I should spend more of my budget on the surround sound/AV receiver setup? what do you guys think? Any suggestions? 

Curved screens do have an advantage, but they don't work because they're a brain dead application.

Particularly true for LCD's, when you're watching a TV from an angle, you get a color shift, there is the glare issue as well, but that can be mitigated.  Color shift happens across the screen because you see it from different angles, this problem is magnified as the size of the screen increases relative to your viewing distance.  A curved screen negates the left/right color shift, which is most of the problem in a wide screen display, and makes the viewing angle exactly the same, from one point in the room of course.  From everywhere else, it's just worse.  Where a curved screen would actually be useful is if you had an entire room that was essentially a tv, but we're not talking 65 inches in a typical living room, you'd need a TV that small in a small bedroom for it to be useful.

As far as the input goes, disk media is problematic.  I expect things to go to flash or something new, you simply can't put terabytes of information on plastic and read it with a laser, imperfections in manufacturing already result in a lot of unreadable blurays.  For the internet, I don't expect lossless media to ever exist, but at the rate of growth it's not unreasonable to expect 4k bluray quality in another ten years.

What psychoak means in the comment above....is that curved screens are only good for people who live lonely, sad lives on their own...

There is only one 'sweet spot' where the viewing quality is improved. All other viewing positions are actually worse...

Ah I see, I thought OLED was supposed to eliminate, or at least drastically reduce colour shift? Aren't they supposed to provide a uniform viewing experience from many angles? (I'm talking about a flat OLED screen here)

I'm very interested to see in what direction this technology goes and what is used if they don't use flash.  

Off topic, 'Li-Fi' is supposed to be the next big thing for wireless data transmission, not sure if that will help with transmitting the terabytes of information needed for true 4K though.

Jafo

reply 9

What psychoak means in the comment above....is that curved screens are only good for people who live lonely, sad lives on their own...

 

There is only one 'sweet spot' where the viewing quality is improved. All other viewing positions are actually worse...

lol

So glad I opted for the flat screen, then... wouldn't want to be another statistic in that demographic.

Yeah, that's why I did dead centre about 9 feet away from the screen.  From there I get optimum viewing and fewer peripheral distractions.  I had to experiment a bit to find the best position....

... and once I'd found it, everything got nailed down to ensure its permanence. 

Yeah, sometimes!  However, I face the webcam the opposite way and put on my tinfoil hat so's nobody can read my mind to find out that I'm nekkid.  Nope, there ain't gonna be any naked images of me going viral and breaking the internet... and believe me, they WOULD break it.  I have enough shattered bathroom mirrors to attest to that fact.

And to think, I once was God's gift to women.

OLED's are vastly superior, they do not get rid of color shift entirely however.  Color shift comes from two sources, the glass/plastic surface, and the design of the actual pixels.

Pixels are designed two ways, stacked, and single layer.  Single layer pixels are 3 part, or however many colors there are, and greatly reduce the clarity one can achieve because of the added space they take up.  Any high resolution endeavor is going to be stacked, red/blue/green for instance.  The color you see will change significantly because the further back colors can't show up as well from angles.  How thin these layers are reduces how much shift you get.  A cheaply made TV is almost entirely opaque from the sides, the color shift can be massive, to the point where simply viewing it from a reasonable distance results in a significant blue tint at the corners, or whatever color is on top.  The good ones have very little color shift, so much so that unless you have an extremely large device, you wont notice it unless you walk to another spot in the room to compare against.  Once you curve the device though, anyone not in that sweet spot is potentially viewing the tv from radically different angles, and the shift will be quite obvious.

The surface can do quite a bit of shift as well, glass is not perfectly clear, neither is plastic, you'll get a bit of blue shift no matter how fantastic the material.  Supposedly, quality OLED color shifts are undetectable up to thirty degrees, but these are the same scientific findings that say we can't tell the difference between 60Hz and 120Hz...

Re: Curved screens.

I read an article a couple years ago when the curved OLEDs first appeared (back when they were like $10-20,000+) which stated that the reason they made them curved to begin with was that was cheaper/easier to do at the time, it may even have implied it was the only way they could make them at that time. Now, they wouldn't tell the general public this information, so instead the spin doctor marketing went to work, and played it off as if curved TVs were the new "thing you had to have."

Now I don't know if that article was surmising that or actually had facts to back it up, so take that as you will.

Some years ago there was a thing called Cinerama, which was a circus type tent with a cinema inside instead. It had a curved screen that was floor to ceiling and wrapped around the side walls.  The sound system was also all around.... above and below the seating, with 360 degree surround sound from all sides.  It possibly was inspiration for this curved TV craze... to make the viewing experience more immersive, given that 3D television didn't take off as well as initially hoped.

A very good thread.  I'll stick with my Panasonic 65 inch, 3d Plasma tv till it dies.  Hope that won't be for a long time.

Jafo

reply 9

What psychoak means in the comment above....is that curved screens are only good for people who live lonely, sad lives on their own...

 

There is only one 'sweet spot' where the viewing quality is improved. All other viewing positions are actually worse...

Thanks for all the info. Well now my decision is made for me. Guess it's time for a curved screen.

Yeah, sometimes!  However, I face the webcam the opposite way and put on my tinfoil hat so's nobody can read my mind to find out that I'm nekkid.  Nope, there ain't gonna be any naked images of me going viral and breaking the internet... and believe me, they WOULD break it.  I have enough shattered bathroom mirrors to attest to that fact.

And to think, I once was God's gift to women.
[/quote]

Ah so you were once a 'good listener' and were 'understanding' 

Jafo

reply 5

I should add...the last 'real' improvement to TVs was the change from Cathode Ray to LCD [and many even debate that].

ALL since has been an attempt by Manufacturers to continue the sales upsurge spawned by the LCD uptake.

That includes...4K...3D...curved screens [good grief]...ad nauseum.

Bottom line...they just want your money....

True, it's always about the money, but surely LCD is much better on the eyes than CRT? Wouldn't that have been considered a significant improvement and worth the money at the time?

I guess what is classed as a 'real' improvement to TVs is subjective, but I think that once LG sorts out its manufacturing process, the cost of OLED panels should come down significantly, maybe even as early as next year, and they will finally be at a reasonable price. That combined with the fact that OLED displays are more energy efficient and have fewer parts than current LCD/LED displays i.e. just the OLED layer and the surface layer if I understand correctly, it should make for a compelling case that TV technology has improved. (whether or not it's a significant improvement; well now that's up for debate   )

Anyway, based on what Psychok said, it looks like 4K TVs/monitors are way ahead of true, uncompressed, 4K content unfortunately.

Yes, that's what I said...it was the last 'real' improvement.

LCDs are typically an improvement in heat emission...energy consumption...resource use - everything is 'greener'.

True image clarity can be better achieved with a CRT but as with Audiophiles' preference for vinyl and 'gas' amplifiers...most people won't even notice [or care]...

BTW...in the mid 70's I got my first 'digital' watch... it was LED...LCDs didn't exist yet in 'mainstream'.

I still have it...and it still works 40 years later...

Gas amplifier?  Solid state and vacuum tube amps are the only ones I've seen anyone using for music applications.

OLED's are getting closer to CRT quality, they should have black levels and contrast more in line with my defunct NEC Multisync FP2141SB soon...  Oh how I miss it.

LCD is much easier on the eyes, but it's not a better image.  The problem with CRT is eye fatigue from the refresh rate, it can have absolutely amazing image clarity.  They also don't have artifacts from motion the same way.  Typical LCD's are limited to 256 shades, with the bottom being a very dark grey, and the top being a very light grey, but all grey.  Achieving white results in over saturation, getting black requires dimming the display to where it's unusable.  Irregularities in the pallet, as a result of these shade limitations, result in wrong colors, as well as imperfections creating image irregularities.  When you see a rainbow colored bit of text for instance.  CRT's have infinite shades, color is limited only by the input you can provide it, contrast is far beyond the pittances we have in LCD.