I don't doubt that.  I just think it might be too soon to upgrade again even if this would be two years out.  Not to mention 3D didn't exaxtly light the world on fire either.  It's like: "upgrade to HD", then "upgrade to HD + 3D", and now "upgrade to super HD".  I just think it might be a bit much.  And Sony's TV business hasn't been doing too well and I don't think this will catch on as fast as they would need it to.

Oh I agree, I and many other people will be sticking with 1080p for a long time. It doesn't mean that SONY shouldn't include 4k resolution support in the PS4, it's just an optional upgrade for the home cinema enthusiasts. Making the PS4 support a 4k resolution output will not cost SONY a great deal of money, it was likely expected because of how powerful next gen consoles will be.

Most people bought their HDTV because it was an inexpensive large flat-screen TV, not because it was HD ...

One of the primary reasons why HDTV was so slow to be adopted, and was consistently slower than industry/analyst projections, was that consumers who didn't own HDTVs and view HD content on their TV didn't care about HDTV. It was only after large flat screen TVs became inexpensive, most of these TVs were HD, and cable companies offered HD content in their basic packages that people started caring about HD.

I'm skipping the HD + 3D upgrade, I'll wait for 4K. That is much more up my alley.
I've had an HD ready tv in '02, HD tv cable box since '03, 1080p tv since '06, an upgrade in 3 years to 2160p sounds about right.

Hopefully 4K tv will light a fire under the cable companies asses to up there crappy 6-7 mbps mpeg2 1080i broadcasts. The best picture quality I've had in the passed 2 years was when the cable went out and we could pick up 1 analog channel by aerial. Not as sharp when standing still but rock steady during flashes and high speed action.

Yes the common story on the web is that 35mm equals 4K but what people don't tell or know is that it's only on if the full frame of 36mm x 24 mm is used...
no movie have used that cause of aspect ratio and soundtrack stored :


above is the full 36mm x 24mm frame... as you can see the ratio in which movies are recorded aren't using the full frame..
You can ask any DCP converter that also depending on the ISO value a 35mm will result in 2.5K to 3.2K movies... which is awesome for bluray at 1080p but not 4K. sure you can scan them on 4K or even 8K and upscale it..  but the source material isn't shot in that..

Whats the point? Not everyone uses a friggin 80 inch oled.

Plus people cant even tell the difference between 1080p and 720p... Or people just dont care...

So it's only 4k if it uses an aspect ratio close to 4:3 that covers the whole film? And the film won't have a horizontal resolution equivelant to around 3840? The resolution is still much higher than 1080p and closer to 4k and I've heard that it can vary throughout a film, so wouldn't it still benefit from being remastered at that resolution? I've also heard that any IMAX film will have more quality than 4k.

Well IMAX is a different story that's a 70mm film and the resolution would be much greater then 4k.. thing is that it's incredible expensive..
And no the horizontal resolution equalivant wouldn't be 3840 cause.. older 35mm film has up to 3000 lines while newer 35mm film can have in excess of 4000 lines.. only movies shot at Super 35mm could come close to 3840.. most movies also have the soundtrack on it so even when you have a newer 35mm film it cuts a lot of lines..

But the normal film the resolution is much higher than 1080p but since the old movies are already having a lot of trouble getting a good 1080p version (original Star Wars) because of the quality of the 35mm reels.. they used chemical, so over time it will be affected and degrade the image quality..
So it's a bit tricky to remaster old movies to 4k movies.. and probably a more costly thing then 2k..

but you are right if you had a fresh super 35mm completly uneffected by time it would be benefitial to remaster them at 4K...

So IMAX is expensive, but many recent films have still used it right and would benefit from being remastered at 4k? What would the horizontal resolution be of a film from the 60's and a film from the 00's, complete with the soundtrack? You said it wouldn't come close to 3840, but wouldn't anything over 3000, still closer to 4k than 1080p, still be worth the remaster?

As for films degrading over time, how easy is it to restore them? After seeing how great the Bond films looked in 1080p, I assumed that anything from the 80's or later wouldn't have suffered enough for it not to be worth remastering in 4k.

Sorry for all the questions, I don't know much about film.

EDIT: I see why you mentioned Super 35 and posted those pictures because the soundtrack is missing on that one.

no many recent films are upscaled to IMAX.. they have a new technique for that.. a few films like the Dark Knight Rises are actually also shot with IMAX Cameras..

Well depending on the aspect ratio it determines the horizontal resolution: let's take widescreen as an example
on a newer 35mm with 4000 lines the aspect ratio and soundtrack will give you a screen resolution of ~3100 lines so 3k..
the newer 35mm with finer grain (better detail, more lines) are from the 1980.
So a pre 1980 film with around 3000 lines using the widescreen aspect ration would be around ~2400 lines.. so closer to 2k..

a 4K scan can capture more stuff then a 2K scan, but it isn't really necessary cause as you can see there isn't actually that more information on the original film.. the danger here is that the movie gets upscaled to 4K it can give you actually a worse image quality then 2K..
Last month we had HD commercial, 1080p, upscaled to 4K for use in cinema... which didn't go to wel cause the colors and image blurred out...
So with a 35mm the same will happen but less drastic then my HD commercial.. upscaling film is never a good thing..

As for films degrading over time, how easy is it to restore them? well you can't restore them when you scan them... now the trick is to find the best copy out there with the least wear, scratches, dust, light exposure, etc..  all of that effect the quality.. you can only clean the 35mm but not repair scratches, burn marks, light exposure..  most of the time the 1st master film will have wear and tear because of the process making copies of it.. that's why some movies take a long time to have a blu ray version.. finding source material they can scan in can be difficult.. the older the movie, how harder it gets.. after they film is scanned they can make digitally repairs.. but not everything..

I do think 4K is the future, with 4K videocamera's but it will take time...