It's about time the electronics industry as a whole realises that innovation for the sake of innovation is rarely a good thing

There’s no 8k content, and only recently do standard connectors support 8k at high refresh rates.  There’s barely any *actual* 4K content you can consume.

Real innovation:

Gaming was supposed to be one of the best drivers for 8K adoption.

Whu? Where 4k still struggles with GPU power? And for next to no benefit?

I want a dumb tv with the price and and specs of a smart tv. Less is more

4k is enough, 60fps is enough, no smart or AI stuff is perfectly fine... What about reducing the energy consumption? That's an innovation I want.

OLED and 4k is where it's at.

Fuck. Now instead of each new generation of TVs being slightly higher in resolution some god damn business tech executive is going to focus on some god damn bullshit to try and change or add which is going be absolutely fucking ridiculous or pointless and annoying like AI television shit or TV gaming or fuck my life. Smart TVs are bad enough but they can't help themselves they need to change or add shit all the fucking time to "INNOVATE!!!" and show stockholder value. Resolution was something easy and time consuming but we can't rely on that keeping them from fucking TV up any more.

They showed Skyfall on 70ft IMAX screens, and that film was shot 2880 x 1200. Its not all about the pixel count.

Theres a ton of other things I want my TV to do before more pixels. Actual functional software would be nice, better tracking on high speed shots (in particular sweeping landscapes or reticles in video games) higher frame rates and variable frame rate content, make the actual using of the tv, things like changing inputs or channels faster, oh man so much more. Anything but more pixels.

Meanwhile I'm still at 1080p and most content I watch not even that.

All we want is a clear picture and no ads.

Yeh, do: 60fps, 30 bit color... and I guess HDR? Do things that people can actually appreciate. And do them in the way that utilises the new tech. 60fps looks completely different from 24fps... Work with that, it's a new media format. Express your talent

For the majority of people a 1080p60 with a high bitrate and 10+ bit color space will look absolutely perfect. Some can pixel peep and tell, but more people still struggle seeing when the aspect ratio is wrong on their TV.

TV manufacturers salivated at the idea of TV resolution, hoping desperately to turn the TV market into something like the PC market, in that you have to upgrade every 5ish years to stay on top of technology and use the latest stuff to artificially increase sales beyond what their already abysmal build qualities provide them. I'm glad the plan is failing spectacularly. Hopefully this forces them to think more about *quality* and start focusing on TVs that actually last now... You know, like we used to have 30 years ago.

Even if it was, the streamings everyone's using crush down the bitrate so bad it'd barely look better than 4k anyway.

That's because the answer isn't higher resolutions, it was legally enforcing h.265 to be open source. Now the solution is AV1, but video codecs shouldn't be locked down like that. To act like that was ever in favor of "protecting the sciences" is a fucking joke.

4k is a little much for me.

Working in entertainment and broadcasting, you learn barely half of Americans have a 4K tv and it’s under half worldwide. Marketing makes you think that “everyone is doing it”

Plot twist: because all we need is 16K.

At a certain point yours eyes can't tell much difference. It is like music, people would obsess over tweaking their stereo systems to the point where I doubt you could physically tell the difference, it was mostly imagined. Huge tvs also require big rooms to make the viewing angle work. Not everyone has a room they work in. Apartments are especially too small for huge tvs.

High bitrate 1080p > mid/low bitrate 4k and 8k.

I've never felt the need to go 4k either. I'm totally content to buy 1080p 144hz+ monitors for $100.

Most developing countries have cheap 1080p TVs right now, but others are still using CRTs, and still others are watching on their phones (like some of my poorer relatives who do get their entertainment fix through their phones while the big TVs in their living rooms rarely gets turned on).

The University of Cambridge’s display resolution calculator, which is based on a study from researchers at the university’s Department of Computer Science and Technology and Meta, funded by Meta, and published in Nature in October, suggests that your eyes can only make use of 8K resolution on a 50-inch screen if you’re viewing it from a distance of 1 meter (3.3 feet) or less. Similarly, you would have to be sitting pretty close (2–3 meters/6.6–9.8 feet) to an 80-inch or 100-inch TV for 8K resolution to be beneficial. The findings are similar to those from RTINGs.com.

This is known since at least 2010, because our eyes are limited in optical resolution and in how big a surface we see.

What's interesting to me is that film is roughly, perceptually around 8K. However, very very few people have cinema-sized screens in their home, so what's the point if it's "only" even 80 inches? I think giant 8K monitors are still useful for productivity, but only for a small number of people. I personally like having multiple monitors over one big one.

The only real innovation after 1080p for TV was HDR, sound stuff, 60-120hz, and upscaling to 4k.

What about 12K?

8K is theoretically good as “spare resolution,” for instance running variable resolution in games and scaling everything to it, displaying photos with less scaling for better sharpness, clearer text rendering, less flickering, stuff like that. It’s not worth paying for. Mostly. But maybe some day it will be cheap enough to just “include” with little extra cost, kinda like how 4K TVs or 1440p monitors are cheap now.

Yeahhhhh 8K is going to be pretty far off considering we still get 1080p "enhanced" trash with YoutubeTV for sports games. It looks like ass on my good, 4K TV. I can't imagine that on an 8K display. Though some sports - like the Unrivaled games on HBO - are of a higher quality, you just don't get that everywhere. And that's just sports. Couple that with the fact that some people still have data caps, and I just don't see widespread adoption any time soon.

Maybe they should stop forcing this antiquated TV License scam. For those who don't know, the UK pushes for a TV License to watch Live TV though most people don't watch BBC anymore. Though I bet they will try to find a way to include Netflix and more in the TV License. EDIT: I agree the BBC should be funded though they are not a perfect entity and state controlled media is very bad especially for journalism. I think they are going about advertising the license in the wrong way and there is a lot of evidence of harassment from letters and visits to get a tv license even if you don't have a tv!

We didn't even need 4k yet

Also, we haven’t even got HDR figured out. I’m still struggling to export some of my older RAWs to HDR. Heck, Lemmy doesn’t support JPEG XL, AVIF, TIFF, HEIF, nothing, so I couldn’t even post them here anyway. And even then, they’d probably only render right in Safari.

I don't even have 4K. My main TV is still 1080p and my monitors are 2K.

Getting rid of my tv was the best thing I did for myself. That’s the future. Removing and reducing all screen time.

Next big technological innovation will be good looking and fast working e- ink TVs.

Make a TV that can accurately reproduce really high contrast ratios and don't put any pointless software on it. Display the image from the source with as much fidelity as possible, supporting all modern display technology like VRR. That's all I want from a display.

Honestly, we have way more work to do when it comes to brightness, contrast, and colour. I'd rather a 1080p screen that has OLED infinite contrast and over 1000 nits of sustained brightness to be fully viewable during the day, over a resolution bump.

My vision is failing faster than resolutions are improving and most of the time I can't even tell the difference between 4k and 1080p. More interested in higher FPS content becoming more commonplace.

For movies, look up what Alexa Mini's can do. The very recent past dominant Mini had a 3424x2202 resolution. Most movies shot digitally (most in the last like 20 years) were shot at below 4k. Many had special effects done at 1080p. When movie theaters switched to digital projection, most used 2048x1080 projectors and the shift towards 4k projectors wasn't that long ago. The Alexa Mini LF can do 4448x3096. The Sony Venice 8k camera is a few years old only. There's a huge amount of loyalty to Arri, particularly the lenses. Panasonic and Z-Cam have 8k cameras. But like Arri, I'd bet most filmmakers would choose the 4k/6k cameras Even the ones that opt for the 8k cameras, there very likely would be lower resolution cameras in use as well like the Alexa Mini or a 4k/6k Z-Cam or like a Sony FX3. Including most nature documentaries. Unless it's just wide canvases, you're not going to be mounting the 8k cinema cameras all over the place like you would cheaper small cameras like an FX3. Plus stuff like shooting at 240fps 12bit color for slow motion playback. I'm betting that none of the cinema cameras support that at 8k. So back down to probably 1080p. Don't know the status of 4k240 out there. That's a lot of bandwidth, storage, processing power, and cooling needed Then there's 70mm filming. The vast majority of productions cannot do that. There's a lot of unused footage that goes into filmmaking. If you look at the size of a roll of 70mm film used for projecting a feature length film, it's huge. It's boutique equipment. There's not a ton of cinema 70mm cameras and lenses to rent. Camera operators. Labs to get them scanned for digital editing. 70mm will always be limited in adoption especially now that digital is the dominant form of cinematography So 8k will for many many years be the land of upscaling and for native, old video games. Videos, I guess two 8k60 cameras rigged together for VR will lead the way along with an occasional movie/documentary. No guarantees that the movie theater will show it in 8k though. It's taken a very long time for 4k projection to approach standard for theaters in places like the US let alone poorer countries or countries with less mega theater chains that could more comfortably afford the upgrade

No shit, we literally can't see it. Inb4 the 144 Hz acolytes get their panties in a twist

I could use an 8k 42” OLED monitor for work. I’d need a 130” TV for 8k to be noticeable given the distance I sit from the TV.

I bought one on the premise of both PS5 and Xbox Series X releasing 8K content. We got: The Touryst - Not a bad game, but not needing 8K either. https://youtu.be/DNGA_XnWVMg Ori and the Will of the Wisps supported 6K, GREAT game. https://youtu.be/4nUYBcp_WP0 On the PS5 Pro (through PSSR upscaling) F1 24 (at 60 FPS) Gran Turismo 7 (at 60 FPS) No Man’s Sky (at 30 FPS) Pure Pool Pro (at 30 FPS with ray tracing) [REDACTED] (at 60 FPS) The Callisto Protocol (at 30 FPS with ray tracing) And that's it...

I had an upgrade plan for my PC that involved a step up to a 4k monitor, but when the time came, it was hard enough just finding a 4k monitor with decent specs that I stopped to really think about whether I would really benefit from it. I already knew I didn't *need* it, but I realized that I wouldn't even really gain anything from it. I already used the UI scaling with the one 4k monitor I had at work, so that was a wash. And for games, I didn't really have any times when I wished the resolution was higher than the 1440p I was already using, but I did have times when I wished it would generate the frames faster or more consistently. Part of the change was a new GPU to handle 4k better (they were supposed to justify each other), but I ended up just getting an ultrawide 1440p monitor instead. I don't think I'll ever bother with higher than 4k for TV or 1440p for PC.

Well, when NFL broadcasts on 720 or 1080i, an 8k tv isn't going to make that look better. Even a prime subscription only gets you 4k.

Innovate only when it's necessary. In the meantime, perfect what exists.

I have bad eye sight, but also 8k probably never need to be a thing on a tv, more impressive for stuff thats closer to our eyes like VR headsets probably.

How close are we to the games industry finally giving up the ghost and walking away from VR?

I can't stand watching things in 4k. It looks so fake to me. Edit: well, fuck me for voicing my personal preferences.

Yeah, we’ve gone as far as we need to in the flashy boom boom section of entertainment. Good characters, good writing, and fun gameplay were always the cornerstones of good movies and video games.

I mean at least not until we all have 150" TV's. Makes sense for movie theatres though.