Convince me that 8k will be a thing
>>101910947It will never be. The vast majority of consumers are watching streamed 1080p video at awful bitrates. DVDs are still outselling blurays. The regular consumer does not give a single shit about even 4k, let alone 8k.As for the enthusiast, we're already running into all sorts of trouble with remastering film content to 4k, and 8k would be even worse.Besides not like anyone's gonna ever own a TV big enough for it make a difference anyways. Already consumers have mostly stuck with the 55" models as bigger ones are difficult to get in and out of the house. Consumer-grade projectors are never gonna be able to take any meaningful advantage of 8k either due to simple physics.
>>101911032>watching streamed 1080pover the air is still 720p and it looks ass on most 4ktv's lmao, we have literally gone backwards
>>101910947I believe 8K is the end goal like 64-bit for the console race.Tv brands will stop and go back to simpler branding.
>>101910947It'll most likely be a thing *one* day, but in the near future it's just not happening. If you look at worldwide statistics, the vast majority of people are still using 720p and 1080p monitors. And even if you only look at first world countries, the vast majority of people are using 1080p, with only a tiny minority using 1440p+, and an even tinier almost nonexistant minority using 4K. The reality is that if you are like one meter away from the screen 1080p, 1440p are both great, while 4K is perfect luxury. 8K just has no place in the world for anyone except for schizos. It also comes with most videos and streaming sites still only supporting 720p/1080p/1440p
>>101910947Necessary resolution is a result of screen size and viewing distance, nothing else.
My personal sweet spot is 1920x1200 on 24" monitors. Higher resolutions mean more computing power needed, more heat produced, more stressed hardware, higher electricity bills.I literally don't need any more for being productive and hobby uses but I also don't want anything less anymore. Literal perfection for me.
>>101911032you forgot to say "in my shithole country "here in the west we've had 4k60 streaming for close to a decade.
>>101910947It will be a thing, just a thing that will be in the luxury large (75"+) TV space only for a very long time.
>>101914440Just because it's available doesn't mean people actually bother with it
>>101914350I wish they still actively made nice 1920x1200 monitors for regular consumers.
>>101910947There are a few separate questions here:>A: will 8K TVs become as commonplace as 4K TVs are today?>B: will 8K content become widely available, especially at bitrates that make it worthwhile?>C: assuming realistic screen sizes, viewing distances, and eyesight, can a significant number of people tell the difference?I suspect the answers to B and C are "no, it's too expensive relative to any benefit" and "not really".Despite that, I think the answer to A is probably yes. When it became cheap enough to produce 4K panels, manufacturers started including them even in lower-end or smaller sets and now only extreme budget options are lower than 4K.Once the economics of 8K production make sense, we'll see it everywhere whether content is available or not. Bigger numbers = better and "our new 8K TV can show 4x the detail of our 4K competitors".
>>101911032>55"my local tv stores now put 65" and 75" models on prominent display, and relegate the 55" models to the back of the store.
>>101910947Maybe in 20 years. 4K is still the digital cinema standard for screens measured in feet. By the time it does roll around.
>>101914440>shithole countrykek. eastern europe watches 4K WEB-DLs because everyone has GPON and even women have tracker accounts.
>>101910947The Paris Olympics' closing ceremony was shot in 8K, 3hours for 110GB, that's 82 Mb/sno way it's going to become popular anytime soon
>>101910947Content providers will market it as better than 4k and increase subscription costs for 8k content (may not actually stream in 8k depending on your connection)
>>101910947It will be because they need to sell new models. Not that it is needed at all.
>>10191435027" 1440p is the sweet spot, more real state, no scaling needed. Somewhat easy for drive if you are not a poorfag.
>>101910947It will be in like 5 years when prices for 8k tv's and monitors go down in price just like what happened with 4k
>>101910947It already is a thing, just incredibly niche.
>>101910947Who's paying for bandwidth even if the infrastructure allows?
>>101914440>america isn't in the westThat's news to me
Our 4k online content has less bitrate than 1080p blueray lol
>>101911032>DVDs are still outselling bluraysbullshit
>>101910947Is there even any noticeable difference between 4k and 8k on anything but an absolutely absurdly large 100"+ screen? The diffference between 1080p and 4k was already extremely minor on anything smaller than 75"
Unless there gonna be a physical format or DRMfree downloads for such media I just don't care. Everything seems to be going backwards.Dissapointing the first TV I bought myself may as well last my lifetime and still be considered high end, well it'll brake 1000 times til then because nothings made to last anymore but point stands.I guess its partially a good thing we reached perfection but its also incredibly boring to live In the age of permanent stagnation.
>>101910947Internet speeds will never support it anytime soon, 4K streaming is still horrendous now. Most people don't notice resolution differences unless there's a direct comparison in front of them still. Screens would have to be even crazier large to discern between the already dense PPI of 4K displays.4K is still largely a meme but has its place, 8K is to just throw money away since it vastly overshoots what raw film captures which 4K nearly attains. Or tty sure 5K captures everything film does so maybe we'll see that in more commercial displays in the future.
>>101910947>Convince me that 8k will be a thingwhy?
>>101916280>more real state, no scaling neededExactly, 1440p scales way better for most other older resolutions than 1080p and 4K. I hope to see this become the new 1080p
>>101916024Thats nothing, recording a 10 hr playthrough with ShadowPlay on all settings maxed at 1440p (H264 VBR up ~120Mbps) is ~500GBA 20TB HDD is $500, in a world where a pocket netbook surveillance device goes for $1000 and sells very well theres 0 reason why anyone should accept their video at lower than 4KBD quality.>>101917185HDDVD shits all over any official digital movie distribution to day, just think about that for a second. Tech innovation is not only dead, its going backwards fast, and apparently they want us to think that's a good thing an pay endless subscription for the inferior nothing.>>101917277They are, blind boomers still buy them, they can't tell the difference. Also good BD players start at $300+ and PC drives $100, DVD became much cheaper than that even before BD, DVD is everywhere, BD is very much still a niche, well physical in general is today and high quality physical is an even smaller niche within.
>>101910947I recently bought a 4k monitor and I love it, I also have a home NAS and the thought of downloading content in 4k makes me grimace at the amount of storage space it's going to take. 10gb per TV episode, 40gb+ for a movie, thankfully I mostly watch anime and that's only in 1080p so I don't feel that compulsion yet
>>101917915>Thats nothing, recording a 10 hr playthrough with ShadowPlay on all settings maxed at 1440p (H264 VBR up ~120Mbps) is ~500GB>A 20TB HDD is $500, in a world where a pocket netbook surveillance device goes for $1000 and sells very well theres 0 reason why anyone should accept their video at lower than 4KBD quality.That's nothing though, 400 hours at 1440p is so little let alone if you made that 4k. People will absolutely compromise
>>101912717The quality of digital tv goes down over time as they reduce the bitrate to cram more channels in. In some cases the effective resolution has dropped below SD quality.
>>101910947100% will be. Curved 8k is going to be insane for software development.I will give away my 4 vertical 2560x1440 monitors at that point.
The human eye can't see beyond 240p
