Sharp Demos World’s First 85-inch 8K4K Display
Sharp is sporting an 85-inch 8K4K display at IFA 2011, but don't expect market saturation until after 2020.
Now that 1080p HDTVs are saturating the market at a comfortable level (financially), what's next for the general consumer? Graphics so sharp and life-like that eyes will melt and brains will suddenly ignite into flames? No, try jacking up the resolution to 7680 x 4320 (33 million color dots), or 8K4K, like Sharp has done with an 85-inch display it's currently showcasing at IFA 2011 in Berlin.
While many home theater junkies my simply drop in giddy delight at the sight of such a monstrous display, Sharp points out in the video below that currently there's no content to support an 8K4K display. As it stands now, Sharp had to use a special camera in order to capture compatible footage, and supposedly a special "recorder" to store the footage and pipe it to the display. Unfortunately, Sharp wouldn’t specify the actual size of the stored video files -- we can only imagine.
Trusted Reviews, which got an up-close-and-personal view of the 8K4K screen, had this to say about the viewing experience:
"The quality of the native 8k4k material on Sharp's screen almost defies description. You could see levels of detail in people's faces, the ground, the tree, or actually any part of the image that the event being shown felt so tangible you felt you could just step forward and join the madness. Never before, in other words, has the idea of HDTV giving you a 'window on the world' been so accurately realized."
So when will consumers begin to see 8K4K HDTVs roll out to retail shelves? Given that the market is still living in a 1080p world, it may be a long, long time. Various reports indicate that experimental broadcasting on 8K4K content won't even begin until 2020.
- L.A. Noire Developer Enters Administration
- HTC Intros Monstrous 4.7-inch Titan Powered by WP7.5
- Lenovo Announces a $199 Ideapad tablet
- Norton Facebook Scanner Now Supports Likejacking
- 4-Port Adapter Shoots 500Mbps Over Electrical Lines
- RIM's 64GB PlayBook Gets $150 Price Cut at Best Buy
- VIDEO: Various Sights & Sounds from Call of Duty XP
- San Francisco Police Say No Records of Missing iPhone
- Battery Tech Generates Electricity Using Vibrations
- Spider Combines Laptop, Tablet, Phone, Handheld
- New Alloy Produces Hydrogen Using Sunlight
- Skypump Concept Charges Your EV With Wind, Solar
- Google Turns Logo into Queen Music Video
- Get Your Own Turbine-powered Batmobile for $620,000
- Panasonic, IOC to Deliver Live 3D Olympics Broadcast
- Five Essential Ways to Save the BlackBerry
- Microsoft Envisions a World Without Flash, Plugins
- Amazon Kindle Tablet Handled, Previewed by TechCrunch
- Galaxy Tab 7.7 Pulled from IFA Following Apple Injunction
Great even higher resolution when we cant even get decent 1080p programing. I wonder if apple will try to patent this?
OMFG... this coming decade is looking better all the time. I'm pretty sure this is somewhere around the resolution set for the next HD standard. It's awesome to see an actual prototype out.
hey, that's sharp
I don't mind waiting; 2020 shouldn't be too long after (or before) I could care for such resolutions. Either way, it sounds awesome.
The problem will be storage for 4320p video. Squeezing down 1080p video onto a 25 gb disk is something of a stretch, so I don't expect this to hit the market until holographic storage becomes cheaper (read: most of the patents expire).
*goes to empty out life savings*
Display dimension is: 216cm diagonal (188cm horizontal and 106cm vertical), pixel size about 0.24mm. Excellent!
Surprised nobody has mention porn yet....
More serious, I would love this but I don't think we would actually see something like it make a dent on the market for at least 20 years. It took a long time for people to embrace HDTV and it will take at least about the same time for people to want to switch their HDTV's to a new format.
by the time it comes out, my eyes wont be able to see the difference.
Finally, this would help bump the resolution of desktop monitors who have been held back by TVs and their restrictive standards.
Its ridiculous. The high def TV shows look awful, cause people are bloody ugly. Why the hell do I want to see Tom Cruise's zits at a retarded resolution? So I can see which ones are ready to pop?
Its a waste of money. Its a parallel to the megapixel race in cameras. Its not the resolution that matters, its the quality of the image. WOrk on making everything look amazing, then worry about higher res.
This is cool and all but half of my 50+ cable HD channels are compressed even at 720p or at best 1080i. 1080p has been out for almost what 10 years now and there are so many channels not even close to it. I cant see this taking off by 2020 but there is always hope. Question is how many people will still be using older analog tvs by even then lol.
Finally, this would help bump the resolution of desktop monitors who have been held back by TVs and their restrictive standards.
I bumped up my desktop monitor to 2560 x 1600p couple years ago and never looked back, 1080p is so yesterday.
Whats the video input though? If you could hook up dual dvi or triple dvi and run it like an eyefinity setup for gaming it would be so epic.
The problem will be storage for 4320p video. Squeezing down 1080p video onto a 25 gb disk is something of a stretch, so I don't expect this to hit the market until holographic storage becomes cheaper (read: most of the patents expire).
actualy its not even hard, sure its hard if you dont compress it, but even at a compression that takes 30 min down to about 1gb, its hard to notice the drop in quality.
Finally, this would help bump the resolution of desktop monitors who have been held back by TVs and their restrictive standards.
um no... you are just wrong...
we can use tvs as monitors, so thats what most are made to be, a tv/monitor.
i got a 1920x1200 with a tv tuner, and if you want you can get a 2560x1600, but thay cost allot.
the fact is that single cards struggle at 2560x1600, and even if they can play it, its at lesser graphical settings.
you wont see a jump from 1080p to anything higher until mid range cards can handle the higher resolution, at least on basic levels.
Its ridiculous. The high def TV shows look awful, cause people are bloody ugly. Why the hell do I want to see Tom Cruise's zits at a retarded resolution? So I can see which ones are ready to pop?Its a waste of money. Its a parallel to the megapixel race in cameras. Its not the resolution that matters, its the quality of the image. WOrk on making everything look amazing, then worry about higher res.
megapixle race had some merits, but once they went into the 12 megapixle area, going any higher there would have been stupid. now its about better lenses and better sensors, once we can get slr quality on consumer cameras, the mp race will go on a bit more.
-------------------
you know i'm surprised NO ONE has mentioned this yet, at 5-10 feet away, will i see all that detail? at 15 feet away, will it look any better than 1080p?
dont get me wrong, i believe that consumers need 4k, but thats it. you really dont need more unless you are using a theater projector and are going on a 100 foot screen.
The Human eye is 124 MegaPixel..... I want 1:1 screens. K Thx
alidan has got to be the biggest idiot ive seen post in a comments section all fucking week.The fact is that if this 90345739825x353535325 screen is still just a shitty 6-bit display, then its still just a shitty 6-bit display, regardless of size. Even 8 bits isnt amazing, but it more than likely that this screen is just another POS low color poser.
Some places saying it is 10-bit and supports 22.2 channel sound.
can someone tell me where im wrong in what i say? id love that to be pointed out by someone who didnt just make an account and post... well, the style of message that gartfer posted.
The difference between 720p and 1080p was only slightly noticeable to me. 16x 1080p will mean nothing to me I've got to assume.
8K4K ??? Isn't this standard called SHV? (Super-Hi-Vision) ...by some other Japanese company and possibly broadcaster NHK?
Now imagine watching 3D porn on this thing... the future sounds awesome...
Imagine gaming on this screen! An SLI with 4 GTX 590s or 6990s? Lol we'd need mega full tower cases to start with
Hollywood already shoots in 8k. This is basically what we get in the cinema today ,but in the home by 2020.
Imagine what cinema will be like in 2020?
I believe this technology will become mainstream before that for true 4k 3D at home, so we can watch all those rubbish Imax movies.
Its all about making us want crap we dont need!
1920x1080 is perfectly fine for me for my movies, I just sit back, relax and enjoy.
My gaming however, the more pixels the better. I ran a multi monitor set-up with 7 million pixels before (until my adapter died), and it was awesome. 33 million pixels? BRING IT ON!
2048x1152 wasn't enough for my PC, and then 3456x2048 still wasn't enough.
Maybe I could just settle with 5x 2560x1600, all lined up in portrait mode? 8000x2560 does sound satisfying, if only there weren't those damned black edges.
Good luck streaming this online. Looks like the optical media isn't going anywhere. They should combine that stone tech with holographic disk tech.
megapixle race had some merits, but once they went into the 12 megapixle area, going any higher there would have been stupid. now its about better lenses and better sensors, once we can get slr quality on consumer cameras, the mp race will go on a bit more
Nope. After 5+ megapixels (actually even 3 is arguable) it made no sense whatsoever on pathetic 2-3mm lens.
I have a MITSUBISHI WD-82838 82" 3D HOME CINEMA TV that's just stunning for games or video of any kind, a huge leap from the first black and white 17" TV I watched when I was a kid in 1950.
... and coming 2020, there would be 2PB (petabytes) hard drive to store 100 films with 8k4k resolution...
Am I really the only one thinking: What's the framerate?
SuperDuperMegaAwesome resolution means absolutely nothing it still gets choppy when something moves.
If we could just get some more fluidity (and better cared for content releases), I could live with 1920x1080p for a looong time.
Am I really the only one thinking: What's the framerate?SuperDuperMegaAwesome resolution means absolutely nothing it still gets choppy when something moves.If we could just get some more fluidity (and better cared for content releases), I could live with 1920x1080p for a looong time.
Peter Jackson is filming The Hobbit in 60fps so that should help, as soon as one person does it all the rest will follow shortly behind.
Seeing higher pixel density in TVs is great, if only because it means companies (may) FINALLY start making computer monitors with higher pixel density. The standard has been 1920x1200 or 1920x1080 @ 24'' and 1680x1050 or 1440x900 @ 22'' for ages. That's still far too low for my tastes, at 24'' resolution really should be at least 2560x1600 or higher, especially considering that many laptop panels are already sharper than that.
A 40'' television that only reaches 1920x1080 looks pretty bad if you use it for anything but watching video/tv shows, especially if you sit closer than a few feet away. At that size, 3840x2160 should be the minimum, not above the top of the line. I guess we just have to wait for cost to come down enough that companies can't use the "its cheaper" excuse to not produce a single product that uses technology that's been around for years. Sure, the brand-new games out there would be impossible to run at super high resolutions, but games that are even two or three years old would run flawlessly, and higher resolutions are always better for office work.