this still seems like a complete trolljob to me when exactly

*crickets*

When the 95% of the population who can't tell the difference between 720p and 1080p can somehow tell the difference between what we have now and 4k. Why spend more on streaming 4k over Cable / Netflix etc. when most people won't care?

>>51585316
precisely.
no one cares, and no one will for a few years.

Heres my prediction..

4k on Netflix/Amazon is already here.. They use h264 because h265 is too demanding for 99% of pcs.. Also h265 has royalty bs.

Porn 4k is here but suffers same problems as above.

4k blurays are probably next but i dont see a single player in the market right now.. not sure why

4k ota/cable.. forget about it.. i dont see networks upgrading all of their equipment for at least another 5 years

4K won't be relevant until around 2020.

Until then we're waiting for the corrupt cable companies to figure out that technology has surpassed 720p already.

>>51585293
>where is the content for this shit?
Video games, youtube and netflix.

>>51585293
I bought a 4k monitor for the sole purpose of nice looking text and games. For normies though they have no reason to upgrade.

>>51585293
>trolljob
nice meme there bud

>4k over the air tv
never

>4k blurays
going to be very sparse unless they use triple-layer

>4k cable tv?
comcast will be one of the first

File: 72e.jpg (2MB, 3619x3549px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 3619x3549px

But dat super sharp text is da best when coding fizz buzzes and animu downloader scripts. Also I can watch 4 animes at the same time. So productive. Normies and vidya gaym children wouldn't understand. Does Windows even support 4k?

I sell 4Ks at work quite often. The picture is amazing *if you have content to display*

I never tell people that unless they wamt to watch breaking bad on netflix, theres no real content. Upscaling is good but not a huge difference

Though i believe i saw 4k blurays are going to start to become mainstream 2016

>>51585293
>>51585316
You do not suppose people said the same about 1080p?

>>51585293
http://store.steampowered.com/hwsurvey

>3840x2160
>0.07%

This is why 4K is completely irrelevant right now, and will still be for a long time.

Even 2560x1440 is still a small niche with just 1.27% of users.

>>51585497
>streaming

even people with good connections and large amounts of monthly data would destroy it streaming 4k stuff. If you are on a cap or below about 15mbps down forget about it. Not many people overall would be able to do it. The way ISPs in so many fucking countries are greedy lazy jew rat fuckheads I really doubt we'll see the average household get internet good enough in the next 5 years, or even 10. 4K is going to have to be a traditional broadcast thing for some time, it might even revitalise the physical rental service for 4k movies.

>mfw 100 gigs for a single movie

lord have mercy, I just built an 8tb media server and thought I was going to be sweet for a few years too.

Most movies shot prior to digital don't have enough detail in them (other than more grain) to be worthy of 4K. I have seen a few movies that don't even offer 1080 detail. The crap spewed about celluloid holding huge amounts of pixel detail is relative to how well it was shot and on what filmstock at the time and how well it has aged in the film can.
It will only really benefit recent movies that have been digitally shot. Heck even Interstellar (shot on film because Nolan is a fag) is often out of focus and looks soft as fuck.

BTW Avatar was shot at digital 2K so will always be upscaled.

Those Netflix 4K are over compressed garbage. Some of the TrollUHD rips are interesting though (Not from Netflix) and come in hefty file sizes. Jessica Jones episodes at over 12GB. Movies as high as 90GB

>>51585336
Not to mention that you need a 4K monitor, which almost no one has.

People should be more concerned with 60FPS, which makes a significant increase in quality with no need for new hardware.

Maybe just me but 4k on a 24' or smaller screen looks too sharp for me. Hell, in some games even 1080p is too sharp for my taste

why are even 1080p and 4K Televisions being made? 95% of downloadable TV content is ultrawide 21:9

>>51585293
>when exactly are we getting 4k over the air tv

2017

>4k blurays

Already out

>4k cable tv

Quite possibly 2016. Netflix and Youtube already support 4K, next year all major on-line streaming services will offer content in 4K.

Not to mention productivity programs such as working with spreadsheets and text benefit from 4K, so do image/video editing and games.

>>51589228

>4k blurays
>Already out

The current '4k' discs are just standard blu rays mastered in 4k. A player has been announced but it's not on sale until next year and no titles have been announced.

File: nhk 8k.jpg (171KB, 950x534px) Image search: [Google]

171KB, 950x534px

Meanwhile in japan...

File: 6510_tn.jpg (37KB, 383x383px) Image search: [Google]

37KB, 383x383px

>>51589285
>The current '4k' discs are just standard blu rays mastered in 4k. A player has been announced but it's not on sale until next year and no titles have been announced.

All the major companies have titles announced. Some examples:

http://www.engadget.com/2015/11/10/sony-4k-ultra-hd-blu-ray-2016/
http://www.blu-ray.com/news/?id=17520

If you were around when BD/HDDVD came to market it was the same melody, first a few titles came onto the market, then the flood gates opened and soon DVD became trash. The same will happen this time.

>>51589361
My bad. This HDR stuff really interests me but I think I'll play it safe until one standard rises to the top.

Can you get 1080p video without paying your television provider extra money? I don't have satellite anymore, but when I did, they wanted to charge me more money for HD.

>>51589807
>paying for television

you probably had cable, which is totally different,

>>51589844
I'm pretty sure it was a satellite provider. They wanted to charge me extra every month for a HD receiver too. I stopped watching television after that.

>>51589291
who is the toy in the bottom left corner? I've been searching him for six years now.

>>51585336
More to do with network of infrastructure. Need dat fibe doe. Rg6 can't handle 4k bands, neither can satellite (obviously).

>>51589941
Domo

>>51588263
just get yify 4k.

>>51589361
Wow, one turd sandwich of a movie at 4k.

Where are my nature, science and nature documentaries shot at 4k? I want to watch tigers and count their whiskers while learning shit. And have it be crisp and life-like as possible.

I don't care for most movies at all. Pretty uninspired display of computer tricks, with mediocre acting with stuff I don't relate to or care about.

But man, planet earth in 4k I can watch all day long. I wish.

#4Klivesmatters

>>51585293
>where is the content for this shit?
On your PC, it's always been there and it doesn't stop at 4k.

4k for TVs is a stupid meme.
4k for movies doesn't matter unless you have a theater size screen.

>>51589953
Thank you

>>51589987
lel

>>51585293
games

>>51590114
easily the most fedora thing I've read all week and it's sunday night.

What's the resolution of our eyes anyway? Isn't it lower than 4K rending anything above this useless?

>>51590114
>And have it be crisp and life-like as possible.

Then you should also demand 120fps videos and screens with accurate colors.

But I guess the jews didn't tell you that you need that.
So go ahead and buy into muh 4k while ignoring that the picture still looks like shit.

>>51590713
eyes aren't digital

>>51590713
Eyes don't work in pixels mongloid

File: REDLINE1.jpg (217KB, 1280x720px) Image search: [Google]

217KB, 1280x720px

>>51589361
When are we getting 4k animes though

>>51590713
It's true that the eyes don't work in pixels. But the monitor size and distance needs to be right before you can see the difference.

I built a new computer just for Dota 2. Dota 2 supports 4k. So I bought a 4k monitor.