• bdonvr@thelemmy.club
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    4 days ago

    8k has no place in the home. Anywhere, really.

    When a single movie is hundreds of gigabytes it doesn’t fit on existing home media standards and the marked for physical media is dying too much for anyone to make a new one. Plus, streaming services are definitely not gonna jump on that kind of bandwidth usage. Unless they compress the shit out of it and lower the bitrate at which point while technically 8k you would probably see a decent 4k Bluray exceed the quality.

    • Mongostein@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      3 days ago

      8k would be useful for giant screens that people are going to see up close.

      Also, if your target is a lower resolution you can shoot wide and adjust your framing later without missing your target res. Probably most useful for nature programs.

      But yeah, you don’t need it at home.

      • MonkderVierte@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        3 days ago

        8k would be useful for giant screens that people are going to see up close.

        You mean a video wall. Can’t put all the resolution in your viewpoint; either it’s too high res, to the point it could be 4k and you notice no difference or it’s too wide and you have to look around.

        • Mongostein@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          3 days ago

          I’m thinking for more like an interactive display at a museum or something of the sort… something you’re not meant to see the whole picture at once.

          Maybe an “aquarium” “full” of extinct species that you could walk around. 🤷‍♂️

    • Altima NEO@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      3 days ago

      8k just doesn’t make sense. I can understand it as a monitor if it has some good upscaling capabilities. But yeah, 8k content just seems silly.

      • Avieshek@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        3 days ago

        It makes sense for VR headsets or Theatre screens instead of your regular laptop or mobile displays but… if you’ve a large TV which also acts as a monitor then the pixel density can also see an improvement from the current 90-120PPI. I would give it a go for movies but not for YouTube, now whether those movies are action film or 3D porn is upto you~

    • neomachino@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      3 days ago

      I for the life of me don’t even care about 4k. 1080p to me is as good as it gets, sometimes I watch shows in 720p and occasionally even 480p if it’s a significantly smaller file.

      • Lord Wiggle@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        3 days ago

        The higher the quality, the more fake CGI and special effects look. All the insane contrast, colors, details, it’s all so extremity fake and unreal. Plus, when you’re used to 4k and see something in 1080p, it looks shit. If you’re used to 1080p, it looks great.

    • hydrashok@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      4 days ago

      Honestly a decent 1080p presentation is still more than adequate for the vast majority of content consumed at most homes. Otherwise completely agree.

      • undefined@lemmy.hogru.ch
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        edit-2
        3 days ago

        I used to heavily disagree with this, but since I started ripping both 1080p and UHD Blu-rays losslessly (AKA, just dump their decrypted contents) I’ve been blown away with what can be done in 1080p — my most recent example would be Severance. My only gripe is that it isn’t HDR10+ but I can live with it.

      • snooggums@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        4 days ago

        I can’t tell if you got down voted for explaining the joke or before those people don’t understand the joke.

        Probably best to assume they are morons.

        • bobs_monkey@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          edit-2
          4 days ago

          I dunno, I’ve just come to accept some people are cranky and down vote because they feel like it, but also too that while something makes sense to me it may not be as palatable across the board ¯\(ツ)

    • bran_buckler@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      4 days ago

      8k is a screen resolution, so his New Year’s resolution is 8k as though maybe they just upgraded their tv/monitor (or they’re just rubbing it in as 8k is a higher res than most people have), where normally a New Year’s resolution is something where someone is trying to improve themselves in the new year (such as walking 10k steps every day, losing 10lbs, eating out less often, or learning a new skill, etc)

        • Avieshek@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          edit-2
          3 days ago

          Destroy Dick December just passed, so it’s Ultra Healthy Dick resolution with all those nerves of steel.

      • FeelzGoodMan420@eviltoast.org
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        edit-2
        4 days ago

        I thought maybe it was because 8K is mostly useful for TVs that are like 77" and larger, and for 99% of people 4k is higher than they’d ever practically need. Also, good luck driving video games at 8K res. Thus it is a shit post.