Why is there no 4k content out there other than pr0n?

File: 1465517297525.jpg (27KB, 480x259px) Image search: [Google]

27KB, 480x259px

>>55658720

There's content out there other than pr0n?

>>55658720
Because there's not many people who can view 4k right now.

>You will never fuck a tiny teen when you were young.

File: 1458517516965.jpg (53KB, 1024x578px) Image search: [Google]

53KB, 1024x578px

Porn is bad and wrong.

>>55658753
Better masturbate to children and loli then :')

File: 1465520202581.png (245KB, 450x349px) Image search: [Google]

245KB, 450x349px

>>55658753
Well... your idea might be a little imprison-able.

>>55658720
>>>/hr/ desu familam

Because 4k is a meme, just like 3d was. TV manufacturers got greedy during the switch to digital. They are desperate to get those kind of sales numbers again so they trying to come up with new shit to push, hoping for a mass exodus again.

The thing is consumers are not biting because they aren't keen to drop that kind of money on new electronics again, and content creators see that consumers aren't bother so they aren't either.

It's the same reason DvDs are still around too. The jump from DVD to Bluray just wasn't as noticeable as the jump from VHS to DVD, and people didn't want to play to replace the DVDs that they had already paid to replace VHS.

>>55658720

Porn is always the first to get the new techology. 3D, 4k, VR. Porn always has it first.

>>55658762

Uuuh... That's still porn anon.

>>55658841
Actually there's a huge jump from 480i/576i to 1080p

>>55658841
I have a 4k monitor with dual 980tis
die poorfag

>>55659179
He isn't saying there isn't, he's saying it's not as huge as VHS > DVD.
And he does got a point, while we do get it most people really don't bother. Specially nowdays where everyone's concept of 1080p is low-bitrate yify rips.

File: 895713e1gw1f5qb7nlbxsj22801hbnph.jpg (1MB, 2880x1919px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 2880x1919px

https://youtu.be/pN1yuIT1yBM?t=417

There's quite a lot of 4k k-pop fancams

Don't know why they don't release music videos in 4k now when youtube allows it

File: tailgater-dimensions222.jpg (124KB, 883x814px) Image search: [Google]

124KB, 883x814px

Let's stop for a second, and look at something basic.
Most TV Channels Broadcast in either 720p (mostly Fox & Disney channels for sports) or 1080i.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/High-definition_television_in_the_United_States

Why do they do this? Because that is what the old cable lines/satellites can handle when shooting media for 500 or so channels. Naturally, this means most content made for TV is shot in that format. Problem number 2. The death of film has led to people not just being able to scan the film into a higher definition. Now you have to upscale anything that was shot digitally. Thus you only have a limited amount of new films and a few other things.

>>55658720
People have their priorities straight

>>55658841
>the jump from dvd wasnt as noticeable as from vhs to dvd
Maybe if you're legally blind. I'd dare say that dvd>bluray was a considerably more noticeable quality improvement, because many many people didnt have hi def TVs at the time of dvd adoption (~2002 in earnest if memory serves) so it was still scanline analogue CRTs they were watching.

>>55659350
This guy gets it.

>>55658720

Webm of this, please!

>>55659500
>replying to yourself
Truly a cancer. Couldnt even change your bad grammar and typing style

>>55658753
Kill yourself, faggot

>>55659459
You can rescan film no problem stfu

Porn has to keep innovating to give people a reason to pay for it.

>>55659000
is it?

>>55659000
No, Porn is porn, children and Loli in themselves are not porn
BTFO
T
F
O

>>55659613
The second film in this sentence
>The death of film has led to people not just being able to scan the film into a higher definition
Was meant to be newer movies or tv shows. You know stuff that was digitally recorded. For some reason I didn't write that clearly.

>>55658720
Because porn is always ahead of the game

>>55658720
Same reason there is little VR content besides porn.

It's beyond consumer needs. Nobody is going to pay for a premium product with no use. Don't confuse that with consumers not knowing what they want, that's a totally different issue.

>>55658720
Is her video cute?

>>55658738
wtf is that creepy green text anon.
>>55658841
>Because 4k is a meme
>4x image quality and resolution
>meme
No
>>55659343
This guy knows whats up.
>>55659429
It bugs me that massive music labels still only upload in 720p24fps

>>55658720
Because Cameras capable of capturing even steady 30FPS 4K video are still expensive as fuck and most people are fine with the 720p/1080p HD channels their providers offer since 4K TVs are still pretty expensive for the average joe.

Basically there just isn't a market for 4K content yet especially when most consumers are consuming 720p content upscaled on their 1080p TVs they were barely able to afford on the last black friday.

Netflix.
But you gotta have a fiber connection and a 4k TV, also something that plays 4k content, heh.

>>55660208

>Because Cameras capable of capturing even steady 30FPS 4K video are still expensive as fuck
>a cheap tape camera that experts agree films in a quality that would be equivalent to 38K if it was digital and that is 40 year old technology is expensive as fuck

You're retarded.

>>55660208
This. No one has any money anymore. We are rapidly approaching a consumer electronic bottleneck due to economic stagnation.

>>55658720
There are demo reels here

http://demo-uhd3d.com/

A few real 4k releases out there, but mostly through streaming channels and it doesn't take full advantage of the format.

By the way you can watch those 4k clips on your 1440p or even 1080p monitor and they will still look really, really, really fucking good.

>>55658753
Well porn drives technology forward, if you made a secure online purchase recently, remember to thank your porn site overlords.

>>55660260
>>a cheap tape camera that experts agree films in a quality that would be equivalent to 38K if it was digital and that is 40 year old technology is expensive as fuck
Can I get the onion link to this? Sound funny AF.

>>55658841
>The jump from DVD to Bluray just wasn't as noticeable as the jump from VHS to DVD

You're full of shit you full of shit shitbag.

A 4-head good quality VCR's reading a commercial VHS release looked very good in comparison to a DVD release of the same thing. They are in the same resolution after all.

Blu-ray was capable of 1080p and blows DVD out of the water on anything bigger than a 32" TV.

>>55660208
You can buy chinkphones for ~$130 that do 4k 30fps or 1080p 60fps...

>>55660299
They have shit bitrates.

File: 1281402288835.png (123KB, 520x477px) Image search: [Google]

123KB, 520x477px

>>55658720
>Alaina
Good taste, OP.

>>55660294
Pretty clear you weren't even alive at that point. VHS tapes wore out the more you watched them, so even even the resolution was the same, you would have all sorts of problems with the actual picture, such as the distortion at the top of the picture and such.

File: 1080p_camera.png (192KB, 1074x472px) Image search: [Google]

192KB, 1074x472px

>>55660299
This isn't the same a studio quality camera that records in super crystal clear quality.

Pic related is a entry level 1080p camera they might use to make a show with.

I wish I had bought a 21:9 1440p 120Hz monitor.
t. owner of a 4k monitor and a 144Hz monitor.

>>55660419
really?
I had to make the same decision and I'm quite happy with 4k so far. is >120hz that good (outside of fps games)?

>>55660328
Unless you watched them dozens of times you would not see degradation. The distortion at the top of the picture is not visible on good VCRs.

>le "you weren't even born yet" meme
kys

File: maxresdefault[1].jpg (198KB, 1920x1080px) Image search: [Google]

198KB, 1920x1080px

>Internally, the 4K video at 60p has an impressive 800 Mbps bit rate, while 24/30p have a 500 Mbps bit rate, ensuring sharp footage with minimal artifacting.

Canon EOS-1dx Mark II's capabilities.

Very few people around right now have PCs capable of playing back 4k video with a 800mbps bit rate. How does this camera even record it with its extremely modest CPU?

Thanks for the heads-up OP, great scene

>>55660581
>800mbps bitrate
Holy shit

>>55660606
>thinking this means quality
How gullible

>>55660581
It's actually dual ASIC (like with bitcoin miners) and uses an extremely optimized image processor.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DIGIC#Dual_DIGIC_6.2B

>>55660629
I didn't say that, it's just impressive is all

>>55660581
>800mbps
100MB/s isn't amazing

>>55660629
This is the Canon's flagship top-of-the-line camera and it costs $6,000. So yeah, it's going to look really fucking good.

>>55660539
>not watching your VHS tapes dozens of times
Why even own them if you're not going to watch them?

>>55660655
For video it is. I've seen some 100mbps videos and they were amazing. The highest quality demo on this site >>55660271 is only about 100mbps

If you were running 30 fps and had 100MB/ps you'd be getting 3.33 megabytes for every single frame of the video. That's really really good.

>>55660696
Why are you equating bitrate to quality? Do you think a bitrate of 100,000 Mbps is better than 100 Mbps for 1080p 30fps video?

>>55660696
>100MB/ps you'd be getting 3.33 megabytes for every single frame of the video
I'll be impressed when it's at 40MB RAW quality each frame.

>>55660680
Most non-10 year olds don't watch the same movie over and over again.

>>55660711
RAW is the dumbest meme there is. Lossless CRF 0 H264 is all you need not pointless uncompressed video.

>>55660731
If you aren't going to rewatch them then you are better of just renting them, and a rented VHS will have been watched "dozens" or times or more.

>>55660710
Because it is a good rough equivalent way of stating the amount of information in the image.
>Do you think a bitrate of 100,000 Mbps is better than 100 Mbps for 1080p 30fps video?
It would be if the video actually included that much information and wasn't just inflated to that number through phoney encoding.

>>55660711
That's a long ways off, anon. You have to step up to stuff like RED to get to that level. Reminds me, a while back I tried to find some original straight-from-the-camera highest-quality RED sample files and had no luck.

>>55660731
>tfw I used to watch the burton batman movies constantly as a child
sometimes I miss rewinding VHS tapes

>>55660737
you obviously have never met a colourist before.
they would slap you the fuck out for saying shit like that.

>>55660737
>RAW is the dumbest meme there is
Fucking kek.
Have you ever done any colour correction? Or general editing actually.

File: 20 KB.jpg (20KB, 441x420px) Image search: [Google]

20KB, 441x420px

>>55660758
>not exclusively renting new releases
Are you one of those weirdos who only rented the old "cult" horror movies 75 times in a row?

>>55660781
>Are you one of those weirdos who only rented the old "cult" horror movies 75 times in a row?
I loved me some showa Godzilla.

>>55660780
>>55660775
>>55660737

He's confusing confusing raw and uncompressed
raw files are often still compressed
storing uncompressed video is silly

>>55660419
do those even exist?

>>55660775
>>55660780
He mentioned lossless H264 you dumb fucks. Yes H264 has legit lossless video encoding.

>>55660853
100hz, close enough
https://www.amazon.com/Curved-3440x1440-G-SYNC-Gaming-Monitor/dp/B01C83BE6U?ie=UTF8&ref_=cm_cr_arp_d_product_top

>>55660865
And I >>55660711 didn't you dumb fuck

>>55660812
RAW is uncompressed video though, I've never heard of compressed raw video. That doesn't even make any sense.

>>55659480
The VHS to DVD switch was about so much more than just a fidelity upgrade.

>higher res
>clean digital picture
>clean digital sound
>smaller media
>menus with chapters
>hours of special features
>multiple audio languages/subtitles
>commentary
>no need to rewind
>much faster seeking
>never loses quality over time
>skippable previews
>original aspect ratio if so desired

Meanwhile the only benefits BluRay has over DVD is higher fidelity video/sound, 3D and menus that are prelooded into RAM for instant access. It isn't worth it for a lot of people still.

>>55660916
You forgot slow as shit loading times (for most Bluray players).

>>55660294
see
>>55660916

>>55660912
Please read up on raw image format
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Raw_image_format
Your uncompressed or losslessly compressed video does not store the same level of information as the raw sensor data has, its simply not practical with most current hardware
We're talking a gigabyte per second just for 30fps

>>55660304
No they don't

>>55658738
But i did :)

>>55658720
Disgusting roastie ew.

File: sliced_beef[1].jpg (64KB, 786x410px) Image search: [Google]

64KB, 786x410px

>>55660327
You disgust me.