Upscale everything

I'm over 4k thou used a 4k eyefinity display setup from 2012-2014 and got sick of it. play at 1k now.

>Netflix is 4k

Netflix 4k is 15 megabit, what a joke

>Netflix
I'm sorry but I live a Jewish-free life

If you're watching something lower than 4K, what do you want the TV to do? Show a much smaller picture?

people who say there is no 4k content literaly pirate 100% of their content and cant be assed downloading 10+gig files. they are too cheap for even the 15$ usb sticks. heaps of 4k content exist your just a poor dickhead.

>sky "1080p" is actually 2mbps video

LMAOOOO

Imagine being a good buyfag goy

But unrelated to 4k

the resolution bumps will only make picture quality worse. i bet that they will stop releasing blurays soon too so the only option left would be bitstarved streams.

My point

Fix bandwidth, not resolution

wont happen because the stream provider does not want to pay for that extra bandwidth

Also because normalfags don't care

Sky is now selling "superhd" which is 1080p but higher bitrate but nobody cares, so they're shooting for 4k

4k has less interest because the difference isn't as noticeable as the difference between SD and HD.

Things really went to shit once we got ride of net neutrality. Fuck Drumpf.

>tfw local bbc news is still broadcasting in standard definition

kek

>HD Broadcast TV is widely available in 2010/2011
>2018
>still just 720p

4k is pretty much standard now and dirt cheap. If you're paying for 1080p you're just wasting your money.

in all fairness there upscaling tech is really good, i hoked my dreamcast to a x850c with just straight up composite input, and i did a very impressive job, better than a lot of composite to hdmi converters people keep recommending.

Are you implying that upscaling is a bad thing? 720p upscaled to 4k looks much better than 720p on a native 720p display.

Attached: 1525552374.png (666x344, 184K)

upscaled 4k isn't 4k. it's 1080p with averaged pixels multiplied by 4.

and driving actual 4k screens with actual 4k signal is still prohibitively difficult and expensive.

dont forget that until 2006 some game consoles already had line ups producing 720p and 1080i resolution. The newer ones came out in 05/06 with hdmi and most games at 720 and even 1080p.

>and driving actual 4k screens with actual 4k signal is still prohibitively difficult and expensive.
You can get $40 chink SBCs that decode HEVC and output 4k60hz.

You completely missed the entire point of my post. If you are paying for 1080 in 2018 you are a literal retard getting ripped off and paying more for old shit.

is this the true life?

Getting a tv capable of 4k still isn't a terrible idea though, actual 4k will be a normal thing sooner than later. Also with how cheap some companies are selling 50" 4k LED displays, I dont see why not. $300-$500 isn't too bad for a tv. The panels are still decent, its just the cheaper ones have kind of laggy interfaces for their "smart" features which all basically amount to doing what any laptop could handle easily

1080p is where it's at right now. anything more is just marketting hype

heres a more accurate 4k time line

>2012-2014 the first 4k tvs begin being relased to the public
>Little content except for sony obscure media player device, and computing not being able to produce 4k games, although some hi end smart phones can record 4k.

>by 2016 4k blu rays are released, many streaming services offer 4k content, and computing technology begins to at least allow for some 4k gaming. Also affordable 4k tv's are common place, satellite tv companies begin offering 4k channels

>in 2018, 4k blu ray is still going strong, a bigger push is being made for 4k gaming, almost all major streaming services offer 4k content, and more and more content is being offered in 4k

>however we still dont have large scale cable access to 4k yet

I say by 2022 we will have large scale access to 4k, but you may have to stream/ use satellite to get channels.

this

There are ZERO, NOTHING, over-the-air television networks broadcasting in 4K, of course that Bravia need upscale everything.

>"but Netflix and Youtube"

For 4K video in netflix your need the fastest internet connection in the world.

Attached: [HorribleSubs] Lostorage Conflated WIXOSS - 02 [720p].mkv_snapshot_10.13_[2018.04.14_17.30.11].jpg (753x717, 120K)

In my country all television stations are 4:3 with black spaces in sides.

sounds like you live in hell

atsc 3.0 is coming user

>what is madvr

>For 4K video in netflix your need the fastest internet connection in the world.
ummmmmmm no sweetie, Netflix uses between 15 and 20 Mbps for 4K video

>720p upscaled to 4k looks much better than 720p on a native 720p display.
No. No, it doesn't.

Forget about resolution, I want more 60fps content. 24fps is garbage. TV at least used to be 30 frames/60 fields per second but now most TV shows have fallen for the "cinematic framerate" meme.

Which looks better, left or right?

>which looks better, this scaling algorithm or that scaling algorithm?

720p on 720p is the equivalent of nearest neighbor for 720p on 4k, which is absolutely shit.

There's at least a few differences.

At the advent of HD, we still used physical media. The new technology (blu-ray) was developed, and was rolled out. Old DVDs didn't need to be replaced. Old DVD players needed to be replaced, but the process of replacing them is easy enough once you've actually bought one.

Now, we stream pretty much everything. This time, it isn't as simple as replacing one kind of DVD with another. Now, you're fighting bandwidth. That deals with shit that's buried underground, in paths that go for miles, crossing homes, roads, and businesses. Replacing infrastructure is a lot more difficult than replacing a DVD, even if the new technology (in this case, fiber) is already there.

Not to mention, the difference isn't nearly as profound as the 480p-1080p difference was. It was like night and day. For the first time, boomers with their sunday night football could see the game in incredible detail, even down to details in the grass. Sure, with 4k you now can see every last fucking blade of grass in impeccable detail, but the detail of 1080p is more than sufficient to provide a pleasant viewing experience in most cases. The difference between 1080p and 4K is objectively large, but it doesn't feel as significant as the difference between 480p and 1080p.

Attached: 1527752244074.jpg (1536x2048, 324K)

>TV at least used to be 30 frames/60 fields per second
The signal was, but the content was 24fps with 3:2 pulldown.

No, 720p on 720p is the equivalent of 720p. 720p content on a native 720p display doesn't give you pixels that are 3 pixels wide and tall.
This kind of comparison is flawed garbage even worse than cherry picking.

A pixel on a 720p TV is 3x as wide and 3x as tall as a pixel on a 4k TV of the same size. You are literally fucking retarded.

Good luck finding a 720p TV at a decent size (45"+) today.
Spoilers: You can't, because they don't exist on the market anymore.

I have a 27 inch 4K monitor. I can easily tell the difference. And the same argument applies for 1080p, where they still make giant TVs. There is literally no excuse for blocky pixels in 2018.

>HD broadcasts widely available in 2010
Lmao that shit is still like bit starved 720p, you get better quality off youtube than that garbage. Cable is dead, only old fucks give a shit about it anymore so they have no reason to improve it and can just milk them for the next 2 decades till they die off.

>Plenty of movies are on UHD bluray
Hardly any are really, unless all you watch is the latest big budget trashfests. There are tons more 1080p Blu-rays being released even now than UHD ones. None of the "premium" companies like Criterion have touched it either. Hell, there are still tons of great movies that don't even have a regular Blu-ray release and are stuck on DVD.

UHD Blu-rays are also MASSIVELY variable in terms of quality. Many of them aren't even real 4K transfers and are 2K upscaled garbage. Even brand new films are being released with sub-4K upscales.

realorfake4k.com/list/

The discs are priced absurdly too. Meme format that will never take off.

Daily reminder that if you want a decent quality tv, you have to buy 4k.

atleast for vidya you can stop at 4k because you can just use FXAA and get a great picture

"Fake" 4K is still better than 1080p blurays in quality. Everything in the past 2 years has been released on 4K bluray for the most part, many old movies shot on film are being re-released on 4k bluray because their original film captured more detail than what 1080p bluray can recreate. The only era of movies that is missing out is late 90s and 00s where people thought it was a good idea to film on 1080p digital cameras.
>Hell, there are still tons of great movies that don't even have a regular Blu-ray release and are stuck on DVD.
Look at this hipster shit, basically everyhing noteworthy has had a blu-ray release at this point.

movies shot on 35mm can be properly converted to 4k. That means any classic movie made before the year 2000 can get a proper 4k release.

And you only paid $100000000 USD for it!

Rose-tinted glasses: the post

In America the internet infrastructure can barely handle 1080p let alone 4k

>not watching your movies on VHS

Attached: 2049vhs.png (1274x545, 441K)

>"Fake" 4K is still better than 1080p blurays in quality.
That's not the point, you fucking retarded shill. It's still completely unacceptable for a format promoting itself as 4K and charging the prices they are. Especially when 99.9% of people don't give a flying fuck about the minor improvement in perceived image quality from a regular viewing distance over regular Blu-ray. Videophiles are the only audience they have to sell these things to, and they're screwing the pooch with the fact that at least 50% of "UHD" releases so far have been faux-K.

>Everything in the past 2 years has been released on 4K bluray for the most part
Not even close to being true. Only the lowest common denominator trash has gotten UHD releases "for the most part". Well, """""UHD""""" in many cases.

>The only era of movies that is missing out is late 90s and 00s where people thought it was a good idea to film on 1080p digital cameras.
More clueless bullshit. There have been hardly any releases of catalogue titles on UHD to date. We're talking 10-15 films per decade at most, and of course starting with the shit that people have already seen a million times anyway and probably own three copies of.

And the 90s and 00s are two of the best-represented decades for releases so far. Stop making shit up off the top of your head.

>Look at this hipster shit, basically everyhing noteworthy has had a blu-ray release at this point.
Yeah, I'm thinking you're a clueless retard who only watches Pedowood blockbusters. Just stick to Netflix, buddy. It's got you covered.

Wow, thanks for the info, buddy! I had no idea about that!!! I'm slightly confused as to what it has to do with the discussion at hand though - namely that these proper 4K transfers aren't being done, or that in some cases even when they are, they're being reduced to 2K and then upscaled in a true show of retardation.

Attached: pepcorn.png (320x615, 272K)

at least it isn't dolby atmos. does anyone even care about that shit?

Attached: 1513058902069.jpg (500x501, 83K)

well yeah, you can't even buy a decent tv anymore that isn't 4k hdr. they just don't make 1080p ones anymore except in super small sizes.

tcl sells decent 4k lcds for 800 bucks

There are tons of 4k rips of everything including porn.
t.pirate

they sell decent 4k's for 400 bucks. the S405 is selling like hot cakes.

*steals your idea*
Sony already offered me a billion dollars for 4k vhs. Tough like next time kid

...

how do they suddenly put more data on the disc when even 1080p used to fill it?

i have never seen a high quality vhs movie. it was all grainy shit sometimes with lines going through te screen.

Nope

They use BDXL, triple layer holds 100GB and quad layer holds 128GB. Also 4K movies use h.265 instead of h.264, it takes longer to encode but has a much smaller filesize.

>being this retarded about how resolution works

Based

Stop lying

I try to be positive because I know I'm probably gonna off myself one day but I'm trying to prolong the waiting period before that happens

I mean, it's still dishonest advertising, at least to some degree. That said, IIRC plenty of classic movies have been upscaled to 1080p. Maybe there should be a special label for upscaled 4K, like 4K-U or something.

The default VHS is pretty bad, it's about 240x480i but that's being generous since the chroma sampling rate is abysmal and everything tends to blend together, especially on a CRT. (VHS and even Laserdiscs are composite formats, using better cables won't help without a good comb filter.) However just like cassette tapes prerecorded tapes use the lowest quality since Hollywood are Jews. An SP recording on high quality home recording tape with a good source will look much better than a Hollywood recording.

They came out with SVHS which looked a lot better but it completely failed outside of home movie makers.

Please learn what your talking about before trying to argue.

Uncompressed 4k ("true" 4k) is 100Mbps+. Your shit netflix/youtube is severely downgraded in terms of colour quality.

BOTNET

Don't give it ethernet or wifi.

small filesize sounds like low quality to me. its always visible when you have complex colors and lots of fast movement

>my shithole country still in digital television transition.
flipbros why stick to inferior ISDB-T, when DVB-T2 is much better.

i forgot, we are still in standard definition. fucking philippines.

literally only netflix will stream 4k and only select content

Amazon and hulu both don't offer 4k streaming despite offering vey streaming format than netflix

Why are cunts who talk about video encoding SO fucking miserable 24/7?
Why don't you buy a DSLR and make some good well-encoded video yourself if you're SO fucking angery about pixels?
Every goddamn website, every goddamn thread, always the same endless grousing.
Mediaphiles are fucking cancer.

>too early
Retard

>a 27 inch 4K monitor.
Congratulations you are retarded.
It will lose clarity over 1080p as close as 30cm (10") from it.

Sorry my eyes aren't as damaged as yours.

Your brain is damaged
It's just math

Yeah until they split up all their bandwidth to make room for shit-tier spinoff and ad channels. HD tv in aus has severely regressed user, don't lie on the internet.

Attached: 1280397915606.jpg (317x300, 15K)

nobody streams uncompressed video, silly

Because PPI didn't stay the same and also faggots invented 4k before inventing an appropriate compression technique and just made it a "standard". Netflix will provide you 4k content with dogshit bitrate, so FHD and UHD contents look almost the same. Also as I mentioned PPI, true UHD content is supposed to look better on 4k TVs with much higher inches than a FHD TV. Otherwise there is no point.

>and also faggots invented 4k before inventing an appropriate compression technique and just made it a "standard

They thought physical media would still be major

>Only just purchased a 4K in 2018
Yes, you're poor.

2016 actually
Too early indeed

>Only just
>in 2018
By the way I never wrote these words
I don't know why you implied it was a recent purchase.

It was actually 2001 when we started getting 1080i services (one on each DVB multiplex, each network has their own Multiplex)
Nah, I paid AUD$2200 for my 36" HD CRT in 2005.
Shit was so cash.