Netyaroze said: Soundwave said: I think people are also generally done with discs. Streaming is taking over or buying/renting movies off their cable box. With Blu-Ray I re-bought a lot of my favorite movies to have them in HD, but with 4K, I'm not triple dipping for the same movies in moderately better looking format. Enough's enough, and I'm a huge movie buff, but I barely watch all the Blu-Ray movies I have as is and have dramatically stopped buying new movies because I know I can access them on Netflix or my cable service. And streaming is going to be 720p/1080p for a long, long time IMO, same with cable service. I don't think there will be a mainstream game console that runs actual 4K games any time before 2020 either. Playstation 5 is a long ways away. So good luck waiting for that unless you are a PC gamer willing to spend $2000+ on a PC rig and then hook that up to your TV. Generally too I think people are getting sick of TV manufacturers telling them they have to switch to something new every few years too. I just don't think there's a big apetite here for this. If it's something you can slap into a $1000 LCD set almost like a bonus, great, but otherwise I don't think most people really give a rats arse. From what I saw it's just not enough of a "wow" factor the first time you see it. TV manufacturers offer options for people that can afford it and care. You most certainly don't have to get a 4k TV Set right now. You are not in the market yet and nobody tells you what to do, so no reason to be upset about it. 4k will catch on its always like that before something new comes. Its an option and it will be a standard in the future. 1080p had no wow factor over 720p either so I don't see your point. Its a noticeable improvment thats enough.

I don't think it will catch on as a primary feature, it's going to be recieved as a dud from the general market, just like 3DTV before it.

Soundwave said: I think people are also generally done with discs. Streaming is taking over or buying/renting movies off their cable box. With Blu-Ray I re-bought a lot of my favorite movies to have them in HD, but with 4K, I'm not triple dipping for the same movies in moderately better looking format. Enough's enough, and I'm a huge movie buff, but I barely watch all the Blu-Ray movies I have as is and have dramatically stopped buying new movies because I know I can access them on Netflix or my cable service. And streaming is going to be 720p/1080p for a long, long time IMO, same with cable service. I don't think there will be a mainstream game console that runs actual 4K games any time before 2020 either. Playstation 5 is a long ways away. So good luck waiting for that unless you are a PC gamer willing to spend $2000+ on a PC rig and then hook that up to your TV. Generally too I think people are getting sick of TV manufacturers telling them they have to switch to something new every few years too. I just don't think there's a big apetite here for this. If it's something you can slap into a $1000 LCD set almost like a bonus, great, but otherwise I don't think most people really give a rats arse. From what I saw it's just not enough of a "wow" factor the first time you see it.

Well I can see disc still buying a small amount of disc for collection sake. But yeah streaming will most likely only drastically reduce the disc market to the point where hardly ever get sold, and they will only sale what little amount for people collecting them as a collection, like Venture Brothers DVDs. And I can see disc rent going away more & more and someday completely gone.

If I had the money, and do not need it for something important, I would buy that TV.

It's cool but there's no compatibility, if you buy one of these sets the only things you can watch I'm 4k are the few preloaded videos and there won't be any compatibility for a few more years, but the £4,000 one does look nice but I wouldn't pay that much for a tv

Soundwave said: Netyaroze said: Soundwave said: I think people are also generally done with discs. Streaming is taking over or buying/renting movies off their cable box. With Blu-Ray I re-bought a lot of my favorite movies to have them in HD, but with 4K, I'm not triple dipping for the same movies in moderately better looking format. Enough's enough, and I'm a huge movie buff, but I barely watch all the Blu-Ray movies I have as is and have dramatically stopped buying new movies because I know I can access them on Netflix or my cable service. And streaming is going to be 720p/1080p for a long, long time IMO, same with cable service. I don't think there will be a mainstream game console that runs actual 4K games any time before 2020 either. Playstation 5 is a long ways away. So good luck waiting for that unless you are a PC gamer willing to spend $2000+ on a PC rig and then hook that up to your TV. Generally too I think people are getting sick of TV manufacturers telling them they have to switch to something new every few years too. I just don't think there's a big apetite here for this. If it's something you can slap into a $1000 LCD set almost like a bonus, great, but otherwise I don't think most people really give a rats arse. From what I saw it's just not enough of a "wow" factor the first time you see it. TV manufacturers offer options for people that can afford it and care. You most certainly don't have to get a 4k TV Set right now. You are not in the market yet and nobody tells you what to do, so no reason to be upset about it. 4k will catch on its always like that before something new comes. Its an option and it will be a standard in the future. 1080p had no wow factor over 720p either so I don't see your point. Its a noticeable improvment thats enough.  I don't think it will catch on as a primary feature, it's going to be recieved as a dud from the general market, just like 3DTV before it.

3D TVs have sold much more during same point in life spam then HD TVs have.

Just compare first year sales of both.

Also compare second year sales. And third year sales and you get the idea.

Not that many people see a 2D only movie in theaters anymore. But there are around 70 3D movies this year when there was only 45 3D movies last year. The 3D movies always shatter the 2D movies practically every single time in the theaters.

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/thread.php?id=154457

People don't care that today's movies are recorded entirely in HD.

Kaizar said: SnakeDrake said: I love going to sony style. You can invite your friends to sit on their big sofa and watch the movie their showing with their 50-60 inc tv with surround sound. Glad to see someone else is a fan of 3D sound (surround sound). Even when I only bring up how awesome 3D (Surround Sound) is, there would still be people saying crap about surround sound (3D sound) even, and how its not needed, but by that logic Color is not needed & audio is not needed because we can read & 3D (stereoscopic) is not needed be ause know one wants an image that looks as solid as things feel according to the haters.

lol i didn't know it was call 3D sound XD, but I like it cause not only is it crystal clear it gives out sounds that you can even feel. If only i had a big enough room or money or neighbours living 1 feet away from me.

Well there is a simple reason for that.. There is almost no 4K content.. No tv show is shot in 4K.. The max old movies can do with converting film is 3.6K but you would have to find a very good percerved copy of the film.. Most would get to 3K.. New films arent shot 4K except some Red one and IMAX films.. But i do have to say.. i have seen 4K shot footage on 4K screens and its beautiful.. The amount of details is amazing and makes it more lifelike.. That said it will take some time before enough 4K content is created to justify a 4K TV

Soundwave said: I don't think it will catch on as a primary feature, it's going to be recieved as a dud from the general market, just like 3DTV before it.

It took decades to go from 480p to 720p and it took years for 1080p to become a mass market thing. 3D is a couple of years old and slowly becomes a standard. I don't see how 3D is a dud every TV has 3D if its a better model just the low end doesn't have it.

January 2005 Panasonic unveils first 1080p TV

August 2012 Sony unveils first 4k TV

Now its almost impossible NOT to buy 1080p it took 7-8  years for 1080p to get there. 3D is 4 years old. in 3 years 3D will be standard its already becoming normal to own a 3D TV.

In 7-8 years 4k will be as normal as 1080p today. And maybe even faster.  Technological development speeds up it gets faster and faster. So 3D failing means it was not as fast adopted as hoped but back in the last century the pace of technological advancements was snail pace compared to today.

So even if 4k fails that just means 4k fails according to the newest expectations. Back in 1960 3D TV adoption rate would be considered a unprecedented success. If the adoption of 4k is slower than 1080p it fails but its probably going as fast if not faster.And even if 4k fails that just means its going to be standard 2023 instead of 2020. But I guess 4k will be standard before this decade is over.

 

I don't think 4K will "fail", it will eventually just become so cheap that it'll be adopted into budget and low budget sets.

But it's not going to be anything like the SD to HD switch, where the difference was massively obvious and people had to have it.

I think most "average joes" are simply not going to care about 4K.

4K as a resolution really is a weird sticking point for a TV anyway. It's noticable in a PC monitor because you're sitting close to the screen and it's good for movies that are projected onto a 50 foot screen ... but on normal sized "large" LCD sitting at a normal 6-10 feet away from the screen, the impact of the image really isn't all that great.

It's better sure, but it's not like "OHMYGAWDTHISISSOMUCHBETTER!" type thing, lol.

I gotta be honest from my viewing experience, if you didn't tell me that TV I was watching was a 4K set, I never probably would've known. It just looked like a pretty nice 1080p set from the demo I watched.

Soundwave said: I don't think 4K will "fail", it will eventually just become so cheap that it'll be adopted into budget and low budget sets. But it's not going to be anything like the SD to HD switch, where the difference was massively obvious and people had to have it. I think most "average joes" are simply not going to care about 4K. 4K as a resolution really is a weird sticking point for a TV anyway. It's noticable in a PC monitor because you're sitting close to the screen and it's good for movies that are projected onto a 50 foot screen ... but on normal sized "large" LCD sitting at a normal 6-10 feet away from the screen, the impact of the image really isn't all that great. It's better sure, but it's not like "OHMYGAWDTHISISSOMUCHBETTER!" type thing, lol. I gotta be honest from my viewing experience, if you didn't tell me that TV I was watching was a 4K set, I never probably would've known. It just looked like a pretty nice 1080p set from the demo I watched.

You saw it with the 84 inch Sony right ? If you would run a 1080p 84 Inch TV next to it the difference would be massive. 1080p at that size looks pretty bad a 720p 42 Inch TV looks much better than a 1080p 84 inch TV thats almost SD quality if you sit within 3meter. That it looked like a nice 1080p is a great accomplishment for a 84 inch screen. 1080p Beamer look like crap tbh because it feels like SD for the size that its usually using.

4k offers alot of advantages for TVs (especially glassless/cinema 3D and 60inch+ TVs) or PC user sitting very close to the Screen will feel it.alot.

It is drastically better in some cases but a 42 inch 1080p TV already has the same pixel density per inch as a 84inch 4k TV. The point of 4k is not losing quality if you go bigger or closer.