Consumers cannot tell difference 8k vs. 4k (3 Viewers)

[TJPC]

I was at the George Eastman nitrate festival.

 

[Rob W]

I've seen nitrate at both George Eastman and The Egyptian in Hollywood, and I think part of the issue is that neither venue uses the old carbon arc projector lighting nitrate prints were timed for, rather than the newer Xenon lamps currently in use today.

 

[Clinton McClure]

I was at the George Eastman nitrate festival.

My mind went elsewhere when I read this. I was thinking you went to something akin to Burning Man.

 

[Blackscreen]

I can see some benefit in shooting in 8k but 8k TVs are pointless or even a negative. It's yet another format released with no content support and even greater scaling artifacts to deal with.

We only just started getting 4k content... Now even that has to be upscaled... Not in my living room!

There are so many more important factors to image quality than the number of dots on-screen. Doubling the frame-rate, for example, would deliver a far more noticeable improvement than going from 4k to 8k.

They spread this film-grain nonsense every time a new format comes out. I remember reading that 4k pixels matched film grain size and the same with 2k. Your average 35mm print was way better in peoples memories than in reality....

 

[Winston T. Boogie]

But this one goes to 8, that's 4 more K.

 

[Blackscreen]

But this one goes to 8, that's 4 more K.

View attachment 70334

That's what manufacturers rely on to make people continually "upgrade" their display hardware.

I think it's great. The more that average Joes go nuts buying extra Ks, the more awesome bargains there are for me on uber high end used 4k and 1080p kit.