I think 8k has a use, just not in consumer televisions for things like Netflix or gaming. 8k’s real use is most likely in the medical field where high high high high detail is extremely important.
Big Surprise—Nobody Wants 8K TVs
Submitted 3 days ago by TheImpressiveX@lemmy.today to technology@lemmy.world
https://www.howtogeek.com/big-surprisenobody-wants-8k-tvs/
Comments
Sunflier@lemmy.world 2 days ago
vacuumflower@lemmy.sdf.org 2 days ago
How high detail if 300 dpi is already almost impossible to separate into dots for a human eye?
Sunflier@lemmy.world 2 days ago
Some surgeries don’t open someone completely up and rely on imaging machines (like when they put a stint in a heart). Also some surgeries are done remotely. So high detail can be important.
yogurtwrong@lemmy.world 2 days ago
Why would the medical field need 8k screens? They can just zoom in on a lower res display y’know? Nobody is looking at a screen with a magnifying glass
I think a possible application for 8k displays is the huge displays where viewer is extremely close to the display. But that would still just be the same pixel density as a lower res display.
Another are I think high pixel density might be useful for is patterning. Like PCB manufacturing and other photoresist stuff. But that’s problem already solved by much cheaper technologies
Sunflier@lemmy.world 2 days ago
Why would the medical field need 8k screens?
I’d rather the doctor performing life-saving surgery not have screen resolution being an inhibition.
UnrepententProcrastinator@lemmy.ca 2 days ago
I work in construction and the “digital” plan table has a resolution issue.
Wolf@lemmy.today 1 day ago
I would love to have an 8K TV or monitor if I had an internet connection up to the task and enough content in 8K to make it worth it, or If I had a PC powerful enough to run games smoothly in that resolution.
I think it’s silly to say ‘nobody wants this’ when the infrastructure for it isn’t even close to adequate.
I will admit that there is diminishing returns now, going from 4K to 8K was less impressive than FHD to 4K and I imagine that 8K will probably be where it stops, at least for anything that can reasonably fit in a house.
etchinghillside@reddthat.com 3 days ago
I work off metered data. I’m happy with 360p.
LifeInMultipleChoice@lemmy.world 3 days ago
There was a while that I exclusively used apps where I could lower the bitrate of music I listened to. Because I’m not rocking crazy good headsets and such for when I needed it, and I really saw to reason to use up larger amounts of data when I was listening to music over the sound of a lawnmower walking around the yard for an hour. If I was going to leave music on and not have wifi, it just didn’t seem worth it.
etchinghillside@reddthat.com 3 days ago
Yup - not a solution for everyone but there are typically Quality Of Service (QOS) services on routers that will do something similar - where it will target a certain threshold.
TORFdot0@lemmy.world 3 days ago
I would be fine with an 8k TV if there was 8k content and they were affordable. I haven’t purchased a TV in over a decade however and my TVs all work fine so I’m not even in the market
Imgonnatrythis@sh.itjust.works 3 days ago
I still sometimes have hiccups with streaming 4k content. I’d rather save bandwidth than stream 8k.
Until the pipelines are bigger or compression algorithms improve, I’d rather pause at 4k.
glibg@lemmy.ca 2 days ago
Here I am still downloading the 720p versions of movies and not minding at all. If I want hyper resolution imagery I just go outside.
drmoose@lemmy.world 2 days ago
Watching 720p on anything bigfer than a phone screen is crazy tho
altphoto@lemmy.today 2 days ago
Dude, everything used to be black and white and staticky. Resolution was in electron lines lol.
CmdrShepard49@sh.itjust.works 2 days ago
I download movies in 1080p but TV shows are almost always 720p unless its something visually stunning which could go up to 4k.
DarkSideOfTheMoon@lemmy.world 1 day ago
Even 4K is not yet easily available . I mean except from AppleTV plus that all content is 4K and it’s part of basic subscription, every other streaming charges much more for 4K content, most people don’t want to pay more every month for 4K
So 8K is just a distant reality that content makers are not really wanting to happen
MDCCCLV@lemmy.ca 1 day ago
We’re still limited by what the HDMI and DP cables can throughput so it’s not like 8k tvs are even ready. Nobody wants an 8k tv if the cables can’t even transmit full fat uncompressed signal.
DarkSideOfTheMoon@lemmy.world 1 day ago
Wait HDMI 2.1 does not support uncompressed 8K? How much data rate you need for 8K?
IAmNorRealTakeYourMeds@lemmy.world 1 day ago
4k is really cheap now.
having said that, I have a4k TV and practically only use 1080p for everything.
videogames? performance mode
movies/tv/YouTube? 1080p for better buffering.
Resplendent606@piefed.social 3 days ago
I'm happy with 1080p content. I have a 4k TV and from the couch I can't see a difference. I would be perfectly happy with a bargain 4k TV, bigger the better.
acosmichippo@lemmy.world 3 days ago
it depends on how big your tv is in your field of view, so a function of size and distance. and obviously how good your vision is.
IsoKiero@sopuli.xyz 3 days ago
My TV is also 4K but my amplifier which eats all the inputs can only do 1080p. 4k quality on that 65" is better, but not by that much that I’d throw 500+€ for a new amp since the current one works just fine and it fulfils all my needs on a TV/media set.
reddig33@lemmy.world 3 days ago
Maybe if they add 3D, people will buy them!
/s
wildbus8979@sh.itjust.works 3 days ago
Forget 3D, I want smellovision!
radix@lemmy.world 3 days ago
Well they say all new tech is driven by the porn industry, so, um…
CarbonIceDragon@pawb.social 3 days ago
Tbf one if the use cases for display technologies with high pixel density is vr headsets.
Tarquinn2049@lemmy.world 3 days ago
Yeah, very much looking forward to headsets with 8k panels. Most are up to 4k, and it’s getting pretty good. If it stays at 4k for a bit, that would be fine. But it’s definitely an area where 8k will still be a very noticeable upgrade.
sharkfucker420@lemmy.ml 2 days ago
Who is out here filming at that resolution anyway? Cannot fathom the file sizes of anything made for these TVs
umbraroze@slrpnk.net 2 days ago
A lot of people are filming in 6K or 8K, but only because it gives them more editing leeway when the final video is delivered in 4K.
elucubra@sopuli.xyz 2 days ago
Higher res matters when filming, because you can reframe scenes in editing without losing resolution when downscaling the final result.
Sunflier@lemmy.world 2 days ago
I think that resolution materially benefits the medical field rather than the entertainment business.
Blackmist@feddit.uk 2 days ago
Yeah, no shit. The only possible use is gaming, and even PC owners have been upscaling for some time now.
The only case where you might even notice a difference by going to 8K resolution is high end VR, but that’s no reason to have 8K in a TV.
Even 4K is overkill for most movies. The HDR is the selling point there, which I’ll admit looks nice.
sunbeam60@lemmy.ml 2 days ago
Agree that it’s HDR, not actually resolution that makes that much difference.
Blackmist@feddit.uk 2 days ago
That and the motion smoothing that looks really good on the display videos in the shop where it’s always splashing paint, or dripping honey, or tracking shots of trees, but it makes movies and TV shows look terrible, like the behind the scenes footage before they put all the effects in.
trougnouf@lemmy.world 2 days ago
It’s useful in photography. 8K is 33 megapixels, which some modern cameras can exceed (whereas 4K is 8 megapixels which every camera exceeds).
Obi@sopuli.xyz 2 days ago
Not really, there isn’t much of a point in viewing your images at native resolution while editing. In fact in lightroom when you’re viewing the entire image you’re always looking at downscaled version anyway for performance reasons and need to punch in to see actual pixel level detail.
fuzzywombat@lemmy.world 1 day ago
What’s your opinion on using 8K TV as a monitor?
ThePantser@sh.itjust.works 3 days ago
8K content is too storage hungry. My pirate ship is already bursting at the seams with some 4K but mostly 1080. I have 130TB of media, if it was in 8K I would need a water cooled server farm.
That’s the REAL reason for lack of 8K interest, the pirates are not demanding it. Not until 100TB drives are available for a reasonable price.
borari@lemmy.dbzer0.com 3 days ago
Wait what? Are you implying that if there was demand for 8k content, then pirates would make it available? The content has to exist in order for pirates to release it.
I can download a remux of the 4K Lawrence of Arabia transfer because it was filmed in 70mm and the studio transferred it at 4K. It’s 70mm film, so it’s ~8-12K equivalent, but to actually get that resolution they would have to scan that film at that resolution, then go through the whole video workflow, color correction, whatever tf idk I’m not a video engineer, at that resolution, and render out the final version at that resolution.
Pirates aren’t doing that, they’re ripping physical or digital releases. And there’s no point in downloading an 8K upscale of a 4K release, just let your TV or your Shield or Infuse handle the upscaling.
ThePantser@sh.itjust.works 3 days ago
I am saying that the ability to store the content is needed before people will be able to make the demand for it. So take streaming platforms for instance. They won’t want to build more server farms and instead just upgrade what they have. So once 100TB drives are readily available they will start upgrading and then influence the media companies to start scanning at 8k. The people scanning the damn movies will need to store it too. You know whoever is the first to start offering the content be it Netflix or Disney will start a chain reaction and then 8k will take off but I’m sure it will be a slower build up compared to 4k.
WhatAmLemmy@lemmy.world 3 days ago
The real reason for lack of interest is streaming quality of 4k has been getting worse for years, and is still like 1/10th the quality of 4k BluRay, with enormous levels of compression and artifacts.
8k requires 4x the data. We all know that means every subscription would charge at least 2x more to maintain profit margins of unlimited growth for vulture capitalism, and they’d skimp on the extra data too; leaving users with nothing better than the current 4k.
ThePantser@sh.itjust.works 3 days ago
That’s true, and to add to that, most mobile phone and many land Internet based connections are not unlimited and have caps. Nobody wants to stream a few 8k movies and use up their entire monthly cap in one shot.
-speaking as a US user, many countries offer unlimited as standard but not the evil empire.
pastermil@sh.itjust.works 2 days ago
I got a 4k monitor, and I could barely tell the difference with 1080p
stevedice@sh.itjust.works 2 days ago
Do you play games? If so, do you really not see the jaggies?
SaharaMaleikuhm@feddit.org 2 days ago
Same. Now I’ve connected my Steam Deck to it, but set the resolution to 1080p. All I ever do on it is watch YouTube and Twitch anyways.
cupcakezealot@piefed.blahaj.zone 3 days ago
probably because i dont even care about 1080p tvs. they all look the same.
Ileftreddit@lemmy.world 2 days ago
Well the good thing is info storage cost and processing power tends to increase over time, so that’s one side of their argument handled; and things tend to keep progressing technologically over time, so I’d assume 8k would eventually replace 4k, and so on and so on; but the human eye does have a limit to what it can resolve- so at some point 2d images will probably just be as good as we need them to be
Inucune@lemmy.world 2 days ago
8k is going to be for things like billboards, movies, and jumbotron-scale applications.
Wispy2891@lemmy.world 1 day ago
I’d buy a 8k TV, provided that it has no smarts, no WiFi, no TV tuner and its price isn’t over 5% than a 4k TV
bufalo1973@europe.pub 1 day ago
So an 8K monitor.
Wispy2891@lemmy.world 1 day ago
Somehow when it’s called a “monitor” it quadruples the price.
I can’t really accept that a basic 4k 27" monitor without even speakers costs the same of a 4k 65" TV with HDR, deeper blacks, WiFi and a whole spyware operating system
Gerudo@lemmy.zip 3 days ago
How about uncompressed 4k before going to even more compression 8k. I have seen uncompressed 8k content on an 8k TV. I couldn’t tell the difference between it and a good quality 4k picture, and I’m admittedly a quality snob. I can tell the difference in 1080 vs 4k pretty easily even on cheap tvs, it’s just virtually non existent at 8k vs 4k in tv sizes up to 80 inch beyond viewing inches away from the screen.
Hexagon@feddit.it 3 days ago
That would be… (checks math)… about 5.972 Gbps of bandwidth, assuming just non-HDR content and 30 fps. Probably impossible for most people.
Less compression could make sense, but literally no compression would be a colossal waste of bandwidth and storage.
Gerudo@lemmy.zip 3 days ago
Maybe that’s the point I meant to make clearer. 8k, even compressed would take more bandwidth, or it’s going to be compressed so much that it totally defeats the purpose of 8k content.
RustyShackleford@lemmy.zip 3 days ago
I like how the article immediately tries placing the blame on the consumer. When in reality it’s the companies putting the cart before the horse and then being shocked when it doesn’t work out.
interdimensionalmeme@lemmy.ml 3 days ago
Hopefully, just all 4K panels get replaced with 8K panels and it doesn’t cost anything extra and in like 5 years when the rest of the technology catches up and especially video bitrates are increased then the transition can happen seamlessly but we’re not going to pay for it’s, it’s just going to have to be a free upgrade. This is really the last doubling we need for the human vision system and it is already pretty far into the diminishing returns aspects. Since we are going to need 8K for VR that doesn’t suck, might as well make that the standard for the next century and we won’t ever have to bother with 16K panels
SharkAttak@kbin.melroy.org 3 days ago
"How come they don't fall for 'bigger number better' anymore?"
Junkers_Klunker@feddit.dk 3 days ago
I still use a ten year old 1080p Sony TV, and I’ve yet to see a new <$1k TV with a nicer picture than what I have. Granted I don’t really consume any higher resolution content anyway 🤷♂️
ShellMonkey@lemmy.socdojo.com 3 days ago
It’s been observed that the porn industry is often one of the first adapters of new media tech before they become commonplace, but I’m not sure some things need to be shown in that high a resolution.
acosmichippo@lemmy.world 3 days ago
i heard the same comment about 1080p and 4k porn but here we are.
ShellMonkey@lemmy.socdojo.com 3 days ago
Maybe people will be satisfied when they can put their TV under a microscope to determine the actor’s sperm count…
frezik@lemmy.blahaj.zone 3 days ago
It’s not even really true; it’s a salacious fact that was passed around and everyone agreed. For example, there’s no real evidence that VHS won over Betamax because of porn. Everyone accepted that fact uncritically.
TheBat@lemmy.world 3 days ago
If porn industry had used Betamax, it would’ve been renamed to Chadmax. Except for cuck porn. 📠
Arcane2077@sh.itjust.works 2 days ago
Nobody will ever need an 8K TV, but 8K content would be nice on a (purely theoretical atm) pleasant to use head mounted display, one day
Kolanaki@pawb.social 3 days ago
I can’t even see the difference between 1080p and 4k.
MonkderVierte@lemmy.zip 2 days ago
And of course the comment section with “16k around the coner, progress doesn’t stop”.
ScoffingLizard@lemmy.dbzer0.com 2 days ago
I can not tell the improvement since 1080P. Are these TVs letting us see into the future?
FreedomAdvocate@lemmy.net.au 3 days ago
I want 8K TVs, but only when there’s abundant native 8K content to watch on it - otherwise there is no point.
Coskii@lemmy.blahaj.zone 2 days ago
I hear anything at or above 8k resolution negates the need for anti aliasing entirely… But I feel that my pc would would be running at or around 10-15 fps for most games I would care about anti aliasing on.
Nice in theory, definitely can’t handle that many pixels in reality.
arararagi@ani.social 2 days ago
2tb drives aren’t as cheap as I would hope
M0oP0o@mander.xyz 2 days ago
Oh but what if it was in 3D!
Remember that time?
harcesz@szmer.info 3 days ago
Yeah, and 640kb RAM Ought to be Enough for Anyone.
ShittyBeatlesFCPres@lemmy.world 3 days ago
I’d buy one if it came with every David Attenborough (or similar) nature documentary included. I don’t need 8k for games or movies or anything else but I’ll watch the shit out of whatever high budget nature documentaries are produced and put my nose against the screen to see the critter details.
derry@midwest.social 2 days ago
4k ought to be enough for anybody
sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works 2 days ago
1080p is enough for anybody, 4k is fun sometimes though.
derry@midwest.social 2 days ago
I was goofing on the old legend of Bill Gates saying "640K ought to be enough for anybody.” which is questionable he said it, but that’s for another thread, another time.
pogmommy@lemmy.ml 2 days ago
The only time I care enough about higher than 1080p displays is on my computer monitors so I can multitask on one display without UI elements getting mangled. If I’m playing a game or watching a video, I really can’t tell between 1080 and 4k
OozingPositron@feddit.cl 2 days ago
Antialiasing is still absolute trash.