use case for 8000 pixels?
>>107770411more than 4000 innit
>>1077704112x resolution on 27+ inch displays
insanely expensive and only benefits ultra retarded shit like looking at a 100 inch tv from less than 1m away
the real answer is that there is basically no 8k content since filming, storing, editing and exporting ANYTHING in 8k is a massive pain in the ass
>>107770388There's literally no use case for consumers. You'd have to have a TV the size of your entire wall AND sit close to it to discern the difference to 4K. Also, there's no proper video content and no gaming hardware that plays modern games in 8K with acceptable FPS. So yeah, they overshot the goal.
>>107770526>>107770550>>107770465More resolution is for fidelity in typefaces and interfaces. For movies there's almost no difference from 2k to 4k.
>>107770388gaynigger regulations
>no difference
>>107770582hmmm
>>107770582Also the picture on the left looks shaky not low resolution
>>107770388>Most people's internet connections can barely handle 4k streaming, 8k is out of the question>8k films/media would have insane file sizes even with compression>Videogame consoles can't even render games natively at 1080p>The best GPU on the market could maybe run a sidescroller indie shit at 8k, but anything more would end up being a choppy mess.>Only a handful of 8k tvs on the market and even fewer 8k monitors.>4k adoption has been painfully slow and most media still defaults to 1080p even though 4k has been around for more than a decade.Not happening anytime soon. With the rising cost of storage, GPUS, and all things electronic, 8k is essentially a pipedream at this point and time.
>>107770590https://youtu.be/wi8CM6WuW9Y?si=LxWhthKvNdb1hNMd&t=424
>>107770567what fucking viewing distance do you need to be at to even see that detail?a 100 inch 8k screen at 1m distance achieves 80 ppd
>>107770550Never ever improve!!Retard.We need to go even higher I want minimum 32K resolution for a 30" monitor. I don't want to be able to discern a pixel at all. And I don't give a single shit about "consumer content".
>>107770567Even in gaming I notice very little difference in 2k to 4k
>>107770582both of those just look like my 1080p monitor.
>>107770645>1080p monitorYou can get those in New Deli?
>>107770607there's clearly camera shake, not the resolution drop. >>107770618>what fucking viewing distance do you need to be at to even see that detail?>a 100 inch 8k screen at 1m distance achieves 80 ppdJuat like with smaller screens. An arms reach. 27" is good at 5k. 32-42 are good at 8k. >>107770625Gaming is a tad different. Movies have 'built in' anti-aliasing from the lens. But yeah, in motion it's more or less similar.
>>107770661idk I got mine at goodwill
>>107770606>>4k adoption has been painfully slowto be fair, in the last 5 years you had to go out of your way to get a 1080p tv instead of a 4k one, 1080p monitors are definitely still alive and kicking but when it comes to tvs 4k is basically the norm these days
any 8k porn?
>>107770388Anything beyond sdtv is a meme.
>>1077703888K is still expensive and most people are fucking broke
>>107770447soul/souless
goyim sex
>>107770742technically yes, but this is in VR which means 4k per eye. The original video is shot in 16K, but current VR can't support that.
whats the point of those retarded fucking captchas ? beaten with literal opencv
>>107770742it does exist but you have to dig pretty deep to find it
>>107770691They have Goodwill in New Deli? Wow impressive
>>107770915>modern digital slop in 8KI yawn>actual 8K movies from original 35mm film reelsthat's the first thing I hear that makes 8K at least somewhat interestingunless your movie has no CGI shots it's going to take ages until modern 8K slop even makes sense, current movies render CGI slop at 2K resulting in some garbage upscale to even 4K
>>107770388No one cares because the eye can't see pixels density higher than 720p
>>107770623There was a study recently that calculated what resolution and size any screen should be to fully use human eye's resolution.There's no use for 8k at less than 100", literally. Your eyes cannot see the difference biologically. But yeah, call ME the retard.
>>107770948>t. posting with my 10 year old 720p chinkphone
>>107770388It's too many pixels
>>107770388It turns out that 8K isn't an upgrade for the typical TV viewer (see black circle in picrel).
>>107770915is that a fucking coaxial cable coming out of that 8K digital camera?!
>>107770388There's absolutely no point to 8k for the consumer market.Might as well bake an upscaler in the display itself instead of trying to push out that resolution like a fucking absolute mentally challenged retard..
>>107770997>2k (1440p)disregarded your shit chart
>>1077703885090 barely hits 60 FPS @ 4k on modern games WITH DLSSQ, can't even hit 40FPS on Wukong with RTX @ 4k, $5k GPU btw.Movies are barely 1080p and still 24 FPS & BluRay is barely 4k noise-filled garbage.
>>107771013why are you surprised?
>>107770411Integer scale of 1080p, 2K and 4K
>>107771050For technology that only appeals to the "newer is better" idiots, it's hilarious that they are relying on 150+ year old technology.
>>107770944>>>actual 8K movies from original 35mm film reels>that's the first thing I hear that makes 8K at least somewhat interestingMost old and even contemporary lenses lack resolution power to even resolve 4k let alone 8k
>>107770411>>1077703888k is good for an actual gigantic theater experience. Not for casual use of course. Poorfags wouldn't understand though.
>>107771111It's a cable. We still use cables.
>>107771142Use case of a single copper wire being used in current year?
>>107771190getting electrons from some place to another place
>>107771244That's so last century. We use photons now.
>>107770728Yes, 4K TVs are ubiquitous. But actual 4K content? Not so much. Even last years Super Bowl was still produced at 1080p and then upscaled.
>>107771385Who cares about some content? Laptops have amazing screens, phones have amazing screens and desktops stuck with 1440p.
>>107771190if you don't like 8K SDI via coax, I doubt you'll like the cable box you expect to receive 8K (+ internet, yadda) on much either.
>>107771013>is that a fucking coaxial cable coming out of that 8K digital camera?!>>107771111>>107771050>>107771190>>107771293It's an SDI cable with BNC connector. It uses bayonet interface and can be cut to any length on set. It carries a shitton of video and audio information. And yes, it's a coaxial cable.
>>12718168grabbing captcha dataset cuz im so jewish
>>107770388No practical use case.Meme resolution.But in all seriousness, "economically" too soon for this?
>>107771190serial data transmission comes to mind
>>107771419Are you retarded? You can connect whatever screen you want to a desktop, even an 8K TV. If you're still stuck with a 1440p screen, that's a (you) problem, even 4K monitors are really cheap these days.
>>107771599There are like 6 high resolution displays on the market that is fine to run at 2x scaling, smartass.
>>107770582one has added motion blur the other doesnt
>>1077710412K and 1440p are interchangeable terms, you idiot
>>107772920Except they're not you absolute moron. 2k = 2000p1440 = 1440pFucking dunce.
>>107773104>2k = 2000pKs are about the long side. 2k is 2048×1080 in movie terms.
>>107773192So 2k is even better than 1440p
>>107773104>>107773219Human hallucination. In monitor/TV terms, it's a synonym for 1440p. Film and VR use the term differently.
>>107770388Enjoying this thread rn on my 8k 3d hdr dobly vison curved display TV
