Results 1 to 9 of 9
  1. #1
    TheDickWard is offline HDD Contributor
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Posts
    2,281

    Default The First UHDTV Channel Launches in Europe

    The new satellite channel is delivered at 40Mbps and is transmitting now.

    http://www.engadget.com/2013/01/14/f...live-in-europe

  2. #2
    Spader is offline Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Posts
    735

    Default

    Seems such a waste of effort, especially since it will still have to broadcast in 50hz so will have 4% PAL speed up in films and American content.

  3. #3
    Mace_Freley is offline Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    53

    Default

    I'm not sure about compression, broadcast, etc. But I am certain that I have some Blus that run at 40Mbps, so isn't this more like the first true 1080p broadcast? Just curious.

  4. #4
    slimdude is offline Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Posts
    161

    Default

    The biggest obstacle of this 4K niche market technology, is the UHDTV itself! Who's going to pay an arm, leg, and a foot to watch television. 4K technology is not for the average Joe Six Pack, it's catered to the middle, and high class society, who can afford to invest in 4K. If I could afford to buy an UHDTV, I still wouldn't buy one. I'm content with my current Panasonic 58" 1080p HDTV, and it looks absolutely beautiful. 4K, I can strictly do without!

  5. #5
    Krawk's Avatar
    Krawk is offline Super-Duper Mod
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Maine
    Posts
    11,536

    Default

    At least this is a start. I have seen standard HD 1080P run at 144 Mbps and it almost looks like a window to the world. Seeing 8x the resolution at a mere 40Mbps, will have to see it first to comment. Even with my experiments with encoders such as Handbrake, if you have the right settings it could look fantastic.

  6. #6
    reidw is offline Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Posts
    340

    Default

    @slimdude: Your views would have been the same for HD just over a decade ago. At that time you would have said that you were happy with your 32 inch CRT. Now you've got a 58 inch Panasonic. That would have been unthinkable for most of us a decade or so ago. It took time but eventually HD TVs came down in price to the point where they are today; maybe not yet fully accepted but getting close to mainstream. 4K/UHDTV will likely follow the same path towards acceptance. If there is any thing that might hinder its growth it's the need for a very large screen to appreciate it. Such screens are just not practical in many of our homes and they'd never pass the WAF. Nevertheless you are wrong to rule it out so categorically. Look at where we've come so far.

  7. #7
    slimdude is offline Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Posts
    161

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by reidw View Post
    @slimdude: Your views would have been the same for HD just over a decade ago. At that time you would have said that you were happy with your 32 inch CRT. Now you've got a 58 inch Panasonic. That would have been unthinkable for most of us a decade or so ago. It took time but eventually HD TVs came down in price to the point where they are today; maybe not yet fully accepted but getting close to mainstream. 4K/UHDTV will likely follow the same path towards acceptance. If there is any thing that might hinder its growth it's the need for a very large screen to appreciate it. Such screens are just not practical in many of our homes and they'd never pass the WAF. Nevertheless you are wrong to rule it out so categorically. Look at where we've come so far.
    I doubt very much, if 4K will ever become equivalently acceptable to consumers in the home theater market in the likeness of standard 1080p. HD and 3D technology is still growing... 4K will always be a niche market! Now who's going to pay 25 grand for a TV, and especially without any 4K content to utilize it in the U.S? Spending $25,000.00 for 4K vs $ 800.00 for 1080p, is a no brainer! If anybody willing to invest in a 4K UHDTV, is a fool. Even years later, when prices are reduced to 15 to 10 grand, nobody is going to spend that kind of money, just to watch TV, when you can buy a very nice 1080p HDTV for $800.00.
    Last edited by slimdude; 01-15-2013 at 03:35 PM.

  8. #8
    RBTO is offline Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Idaho
    Posts
    27

    Default

    Right now, that could play into the European version of the "Bel Air Circuit" which delivers first run movies in the US for the well-to-do (same day as they're released). Otherwise, good luck with that since the average person couldn't afford the service, nor use the 4k signal. That will change, but for now, it's mostly fluff for the rich and a test bed for 4k satellite TV.

  9. #9
    gravis778's Avatar
    gravis778 is offline Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Arlington, Texas
    Posts
    1,635

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by slimdude View Post
    I doubt very much, if 4K will ever become equivalently acceptable to consumers in the home theater market in the likeness of standard 1080p. HD and 3D technology is still growing... 4K will always be a niche market! Now who's going to pay 25 grand for a TV, and especially without any 4K content to utilize it in the U.S? Spending $25,000.00 for 4K vs $ 800.00 for 1080p, is a no brainer! If anybody willing to invest in a 4K UHDTV, is a fool. Even years later, when prices are reduced to 15 to 10 grand, nobody is going to spend that kind of money, just to watch TV, when you can buy a very nice 1080p HDTV for $800.00.
    This is very short sited. My uncle bought a 55" projection HDTV around 2000 and paid about $15 grand for it, and then had to buy a $700 tuner to pick up HD content (there was pretty much Jay Leno and HDNet (this was before they really went to satelite, and were doing test broadcasts OTA in my area, so there was about 2-3 hours of material a day on it). The projection TV was so big that my uncle had to specially plan his room for it.

    At this time, most people had only 20-27 inch televisions, in entertainment centers where you would close the doors over them when not in use, sometimes tucked away into corners. Videophiles may have had larger tube televisions, or in some cases, projectors or projection televisions (niche markets). Hardly no content existed in 720p or 1080i, sets were expensive and bulky, and the television was normally something that people had tucked away somewhere.

    Now people have 40" to 60" televisions in their living rooms, prominately on display instead of tucked away, have HD broadcast sources, have Blu-Ray players. Televisions have tuners built in, and you can get a 50" for around $500 now at Wally World. HDTVs have been out now for 15 years (first HD sets became commercially available in 1998). In 10-15 years, it is perfectly reasonable to think that people could have 80"-120" sets in their living rooms, taking up a wall, picking up 80" 4k televisions at WalMart or Amazon for $500. I am not saying that it WILL happen and that everyone will have an 80" or larger televsion, but it is not unreasonable to expect this.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  


Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO 3.5.1 PL1