Reply

4K/UHD really isn't much better than HD.

Reply
First Assistant Director
Posts: 2,335
Post 61 of 222
778 Views

Re: 4K/UHD really isn't much better than HD.

The Bahrain F1 night race  was stunning in UHD

(get your TV’s calibrated)

BT Ultra Infinity. Apple Time Capsule. Sky Q 2TB watching UHD through a LG OLED55B7 and listening through a soundbox. Multiroom with 2 miniboxes
Boom Operator
Posts: 13
Post 62 of 222
749 Views

Re: 4K/UHD really isn't much better than HD.

Yes I agree todays race was stunning in UHD

Sky Q 2TB + Mini, Samsung Q7C QLED tv
Boom Operator
Posts: 81
Post 63 of 222
733 Views

Re: 4K/UHD really isn't much better than HD.

Agreed. Looked ace. Love a good patronising, “get your TV calibrated comment” Smiley Very Happy

Researcher
Posts: 8
Post 64 of 222
639 Views

Re: 4K/UHD really isn't much better than HD.

You are completely correct,  dealing with Gaming  PC monitors of all kinds which have so many different resolutions most deal price TV s are not 4K per se but UHD, lots of company jargon is put out there which attracts customers like the TV i own the beautiful sounding 65” curved SUHD, people were like “oh my god SUHD super ultra HD” ermmm no the S stands for the series 7-9 it’s the S series that’s it and curved doesn’t do anything in fact if you sat infront of my curved you wouldn’t even know it was curved unless you saw it from the side.  So my point is so much jargon fight through it and get to the nitty-gritty  that’s why I will not by the new Samsung atmos bar for £1299 because it sounds great but there is far better for the price out there.

Sky Q 2TB
Samsung 65” curved 9 series SUHD
Av Yamaha 7.1 DTX, Atmos running through Acoustics 3050 speakers
Sky fibre Pro 72MB
Oracle
Posts: 8,391
Post 65 of 222
613 Views

Re: 4K/UHD really isn't much better than HD.

@Jamcam11 Little clarification 4K is a cinema resolution of 4096x2160 pixels which does not fit the standard 16x9 format of TV screens so ALL UHD TVs have screens which display 3840x2160 pixels. Video material is mastered in UHD not 4K. It is not true to say UHD is a lower standard than 4K just it is a different shape for a different market. Vertical pixel count is identical.

 

You are correct though TV manufacturers seem too use misleading terms like S-UHD (and QLED) from Samsung but they are not alone see this page from rtings the US review site on claimed refresh rates https://www.rtings.com/tv/learn/fake-refresh-rates-samsung-clear-motion-rate-vs-sony-motionflow-vs-l... where Sony seem to invent multiples at random - by the way in Europe they are multiples of 50 not 60 as shown. 

 

==========================


Oracles are customers and people too.
Director of Photography
Posts: 3,246
Post 66 of 222
563 Views

Re: 4K/UHD really isn't much better than HD.

My complaint hasn't been about the F1 which was good but I would not say 'stunning' where compared to UHD from other sources.

It is mainly the UHD football which usually does not look good - and they seem to have regular audio issues too.

The Astra promo channels have had some football coverage on it and that is excellent - even though the SkyQ box so we know it is not the tv or SkyQ box.


@skinner1965wrote:

The Bahrain F1 night race  was stunning in UHD

(get your TV’s calibrated)


 

================================================
SkyQ Silver bundle (V2 with UHD + two minis) using VirginMedia Vivid 350 (350/20mb).

Camera Operator
Posts: 366
Post 67 of 222
521 Views

Re: 4K/UHD really isn't much better than HD.

@ozsat .A post produced demo designed to be shown in brightly lit stores, is a lot different to a live broadcast.

First Assistant Director
Posts: 2,335
Post 68 of 222
518 Views

Re: 4K/UHD really isn't much better than HD.


@ozsatwrote:

My complaint hasn't been about the F1 which was good but I would not say 'stunning' where compared to UHD from other sources.

It is mainly the UHD football which usually does not look good - and they seem to have regular audio issues too.

The Astra promo channels have had some football coverage on it and that is excellent - even though the SkyQ box so we know it is not the tv or SkyQ box.


@skinner1965wrote:

The Bahrain F1 night race  was stunning in UHD

(get your TV’s calibrated)


 


It’s exactly what it says it is. Promo. 

Its not a live broadcast 

BT Ultra Infinity. Apple Time Capsule. Sky Q 2TB watching UHD through a LG OLED55B7 and listening through a soundbox. Multiroom with 2 miniboxes
Director of Photography
Posts: 3,246
Post 69 of 222
513 Views

Re: 4K/UHD really isn't much better than HD.

That doesn't explain why live football on BT UHD looks so much better than Sky's UHD football,  or even why Sky's F1 looks much football than Sky's football. @skinner1965


@NewtonBoywrote:

@ozsat .A post produced demo designed to be shown in brightly lit stores, is a lot different to a live broadcast.


 

================================================
SkyQ Silver bundle (V2 with UHD + two minis) using VirginMedia Vivid 350 (350/20mb).

Researcher
Posts: 8
Post 70 of 222
447 Views

Re: 4K/UHD really isn't much better than HD.

I thought that was common knowledge to most people that your 4k tv isnt 4k resolution. 4k was only intended for cinema screens not for piddily tv’s for your lounge, 4k was a retailer usage jargon to get people to buy, so no clarification needed here. 

Sky Q 2TB
Samsung 65” curved 9 series SUHD
Av Yamaha 7.1 DTX, Atmos running through Acoustics 3050 speakers
Sky fibre Pro 72MB
Sound Designer
Posts: 98
Post 71 of 222
429 Views

Re: 4K/UHD really isn't much better than HD.


@Jamcam11wrote:

I thought that was common knowledge to most people that your 4k tv isnt 4k resolution. 4k was only intended for cinema screens not for piddily tv’s for your lounge, 4k was a retailer usage jargon to get people to buy, so no clarification needed here. 


What are you talking about? DCI 4K is 4096x2160, 4K UHD (what the TV uses) is 3840x2160. The reason for the difference is purely aspect ratio incompatibility. Manufacterers could quite easily produce screens at 4096x2160 at the same price point, but it just wouldn't play ball with everything we watch given almost all content is set up for a 16:9 ratio and not a 256:135 ratio like DCI 4K uses.

 

In short, what you have on your TV absolutely IS 4K. There is no marketing jargon going on here, there is a very good technical reason why it cannot be 4096x2160. 

Boom Operator
Posts: 28
Post 72 of 222
404 Views

Re: 4K/UHD really isn't much better than HD.

That doesn't explain why live fooball on my BT Sport 4K is so much better quality then the live football on my Sky Sports UHD ????

It is Sky not using enough bandwidth


@skinner1965wrote:


 


It’s exactly what it says it is. Promo.
Its not a live broadcast 

 

Sound Designer
Posts: 98
Post 73 of 222
390 Views

Re: 4K/UHD really isn't much better than HD.

@Ant+Man+99 out of interest, is that something you've compared on the same TV or? How are you sure BT is superior?

Boom Operator
Posts: 28
Post 74 of 222
381 Views

Re: 4K/UHD really isn't much better than HD.

We have both here on the same tv and for the football is clearer and more defined on BT.

The F1 looks good on Sky it is just the footballdoesn't look that good.


@Nevlolwrote:

@Ant+Man+99 out of interest, is that something you've compared on the same TV or? How are you sure BT is superior?


 

Director of Photography
Posts: 3,246
Post 75 of 222
373 Views

Re: 4K/UHD really isn't much better than HD.

Same as we see here. Perhaps BT is 4K throughout and Sky's football is still UHD but not 4K.


@Ant+Man+99wrote:

We have both here on the same tv and for the football is clearer and more defined on BT.

The F1 looks good on Sky it is just the footballdoesn't look that good.


@Nevlolwrote:

@Ant+Man+99 out of interest, is that something you've compared on the same TV or? How are you sure BT is superior?


 


 

================================================
SkyQ Silver bundle (V2 with UHD + two minis) using VirginMedia Vivid 350 (350/20mb).

Reply