Apple TV tvOS Simulator Shown Running in 4K Resolution

[DaveOP]

No. Watch the video, do the test yourself.

Also, here is an additional blog post from Yedlin http://www.yedlin.net/BigK_2014.html

Your video does not speak to the theme of this thread. He compared 3k to 4k to 6k. 3K is probably good enough to not notice pixelation, but 1080P on larger TV's is very noticeable. 1080P content on my TV is not crisp and sharp, so the move to 4k is very notable. He even says "we have to make pixels small enough that they can't be seen, but once we achieve that goal, then making them even smaller has no appreciable effect for the audience". His theory is that resolution is equally important as other factors, and resolution should not outweigh quality. Did you watch the whole video? Start around 5:30, and you'll see what I mean.

Do you have a video, similar to this, where the filmmaker uses 1080 to 4k?

 

[lunarworks]

Let's drop the angry bickering over pointless things and be happy we're finally getting a 4K HDR Apple TV.

 

[Sethp]

That would be nice - but probably not likely. There isn't a current streamer out yet that does auto resolution switching. It's on the wishlists of lots of people.

As for matching UHD discs, doubt that as well. I think I've read that Vudu UHD is around 25Mbps whereas I think the Ultra HD BR spec is around 35Mbps. At this point you'll always get the best picture overall with physical media - especially with your 90" screen (which sounds like an awesome experience BTW).

The VUDU bitrate doesn't sound that bad, I think Netflix 4K is like 15mbps?

In the nordics we have HBO Nordic a lame streaming service. Buying the episodes of game of thrones on iTunes has way better quality

I've watched parts of the revenant on uhd and it looks amazing

 

[X--X]

He compared 3k to 4k to 6k.

Nope. In Part 2 he's comparing 2k (1080p) with 4k as well.

 

[DaveOP]

Nope. In Part 2 he's comparing 2k (1080p) with 4k as well.

Choosing not to address the rest of my post, where he contradicts you?

 

[intofx]

Experts have found that for you to see a difference between 1080p and 4k, you need a giant 80" TV and sit as close as 6.5 feet.

Short: Nobody needs 4k, you can't see it. It's a marketing gimmick.

HDR on the other hand, makes a real difference.

Buy a LG 4K OLED - enough said. I will never go back to anything less

 

[X--X]

he contradicts you

He doesn't. If you can't comprehend his assertions that's ok. I'm done with this now.

 

[EugW]

On an iMac 5K, 4K makes a ginormous difference. It's instantly obvious. This alone should justify 4K iTunes content.

On a TV, it depends on a multitude of factors. For SDR material, if you have a perfect 1080p signal and compare that to 4K, for a lot of material you may not notice much difference on a smaller display and/or from a bigger seating distance.

However, by "perfect 1080p" I mean top-of-the-line Blu-ray, or else store demo videos and such. Streaming 1080p is vastly inferior. OTOH, streaming 4K can be significantly better, reasons such as higher bitrate actually delivered in combination with lower bit rate requirements at the same quality. For example, Netflix 1080p is usually 5.8 Gbps h.264. In contrast, Netflix 4K may be 15.6 Mbps h.265. 15.6 Mbps h.265 would be roughly equivalent to 25 Mbps h.264.

iTunes 1080p is acceptable quality, but it's not exactly good, which is not a surprise because it's streaming h.264 and mediocre bitrates. One can only hope that Apple will eventually change 1080p delivery to h.265 too, while keeping bitrates high enough to improve quality for its 1080p offerings.

And let's not forget the benefits of HDR. 1080p HDR would be nice, but it doesn't really exist. If you want HDR in the real world, you need 4K.

 

[DaveOP]

He doesn't. If you can't comprehend his assertions that's ok. I'm done with this now.

That's fine. Please don't respond further. I quoted sections of his video that seem to point to resolution being important, just as much as other factors are. If you choose not to listen, you should exit this thread.

 

[netnothing]

The VUDU bitrate doesn't sound that bad, I think Netflix 4K is like 15mbps?

In the nordics we have HBO Nordic a lame streaming service. Buying the episodes of game of thrones on iTunes has way better quality

I've watched parts of the revenant on uhd and it looks amazing

Yeah nothing I've ever found that confirms that.....just some people that tend to be in the know. Yeah, Netflix 4K tops out around 15.5Mbps. Overall I have found Vudu's bitrates for UHD to be really nice. Now only wish they would finally implement HDR10, as they are Dolby Vision only right now and I don't have a DV set. Hoping that once iTunes starts selling UHD titles, they'll offer them in both DV and HDR10 to give Vudu a push! Or I can just go get that OLED ;-)

 

[pj-uk]

I have seen two high quality large TV sets, 4K and 1080P in a store next to each other, and the there was no Night and day difference. Unless I got very close. At normal viewing angles/distance, the difference was minor for me. Money better spend on OLED.

Good job my 4k TV is OLED too.

 

[X--X]

I quoted sections of his video...

To avoid confusion for others, we're talking about these videos from cinematographer Steve Yedlin (Star Wars: The Last Jedi, Looper, Carrie).

The first part is more of an the intro, the second part is a very technical and direct comparison.

PART 2 is a MUST SEE for everyone who claims to see a difference on their TV.

 

[elvislives]

Happy days if we get a 4k HDR Dolby Vision! Apple TV
one thing thats a bit of a con, is the most Films out there were shot on 2k, and they are up scaling them for 4k... thats not true 4k.
Its becoming a bit of a mess.

 

[mmm1345]

Let's drop the angry bickering over pointless things and be happy we're finally getting a 4K HDR Apple TV.

I don't even know why people are so angry about this. If you can't tell the difference between 4K and 1080p, then fine, move on with your life. If you don't want an XBox One X then move on with your life. If you don't watch X show or whatever, then move on. But people seem to take some weird personal offense to people not liking what they like and make it their mission in life to trash everything and the people who like something they don't.

 

[EugW]

For streaming video I'd rather have top-of-the-line Blu-ray quality 1080p than streaming 4K in some instances.

However, NOBODY streams top-of-the-line Blu-ray quality 1080p. Therefore, the comparison of top-of-the-line Blu-ray 1080p to UHD discs in controlled environments for example is completely pointless when talking about streaming video.

 

[Tech198]

Either its the same users posting that have multiple personalities that go from one extreme to the next,, or different users that don't want 4K...

 

[wlossw]

All the content i download is so low quality, I don't even need 1080p... Just sayin...

 

[DaveOP]

To avoid confusion for others, we're talking about these videos from cinematographer Steve Yedlin (Star Wars: The Last Jedi, Looper, Carrie).

The first part is more of an the intro, the second part is a very technical and direct comparison.

MUST SEE for everyone who claims to see a difference on their TV.

Yes, and to quote the filmmaker, at the end of the second video:

"The dominant narrative seems to be, whatever size we are mastering for, the camera has to have higher pixel count than the display format....I actually think thats a problematic way of thinking about it. It makes more sense that displays have more pixels than cameras."

Even in the examples you keep noting, where things are mastered in 2k, he asserts that the display you watch them on should be higher resolution.

 

[X--X]

This is the same BS people spouted when we went from 720p to 1080p, and I remember a time when we went from VHS to DVD at SD.

Not the same, from SD to HD is BIG visible difference you can also see that in PART 2 of this demonstration video.

1080p -> 4K is not the same as SD -> HD....and that's a big misconception

Absolutely correct.

 

[DaveOP]

Not the same, from SD to HD is BIG visible difference you can also see that in PART 2 of this demonstration video.



Absolutely correct.

Yes, please watch the video, and listen to the conclusion where a 4k display makes sense to watch content mastered at any resolution below 4k


"The dominant narrative seems to be, whatever size we are mastering for, the camera has to have higher pixel count than the display format....I actually think thats a problematic way of thinking about it. It makes more sense that displays have more pixels than cameras."

 

[Tech198]

On an iMac 5K, 4K makes a ginormous difference. It's instantly obvious. This alone should justify 4K iTunes content.

On a TV, it depends on a multitude of factors. For SDR material, if you have a perfect 1080p signal and compare that to 4K, for a lot of material you may not notice much difference on a smaller display and/or from a bigger seating distance.

However, by "perfect 1080p" I mean top-of-the-line Blu-ray, or else store demo videos and such. Streaming 1080p is vastly inferior. OTOH, streaming 4K can be significantly better, reasons such as higher bitrate actually delivered in combination with lower bit rate requirements at the same quality. For example, Netflix 1080p is usually 5.8 Gbps h.264. In contrast, Netflix 4K may be 15.6 Mbps h.265. 15.6 Mbps h.265 would be roughly equivalent to 25 Mbps h.264.

iTunes 1080p is acceptable quality, but it's not exactly good, which is not a surprise because it's streaming h.264 and mediocre bitrates. One can only hope that Apple will eventually change 1080p delivery to h.265 too, while keeping bitrates high enough to improve quality for its 1080p offerings.

And let's not forget the benefits of HDR. 1080p HDR would be nice, but it doesn't really exist. If you want HDR in the real world, you need 4K.

1080/4k where available..... "a choice" is better than just sticking only with the best, as being only 1080p or 4k world is always gonna limit you to what's available. even some movies today only newer movies 1080 is an option.... if u want older firms. u gottta stick is lessor quality, or just hope they will be converted at one point


Forget all older movies going to 4K.. that will never happen when they can't even get to 1080p

I always like to base it on resolution... not BY resolution.

 

[Chupa Chupa]

Oh no... I LOVE technology and I LOVE science, which means provable facts and studies not just subjective perception.

It's like saying there is no climate change because I was cold the other day.

OH. Good. Lord. Please do not conflate climate change with one's subjective perception of a TV screen. You gave me good laugh. You know once upon a time "experts," medical doctors, scientists, testified in congress, among other places, that cigarettes were not only not dangerous, they were healthy or healthy people! And people who enjoyed smoking would quote these experts and damn anyone who was skeptical of these experts.

So yeah, experts are not gods or all knowing. They are humans. Some may be sincere, but that doesn't make their research factual. Some may have ulterior motives and turn out to be right even still. So let's stop toss the "experts say" around to prove a point. It proves nothing other than some "expert" said something, especially when we are talking about TV resolution. It's just silly.

 

[CrzyP]

iTunes 1080p is acceptable quality, but it's not exactly good, which is not a surprise because it's streaming h.264 and mediocre bitrates. One can only hope that Apple will eventually change 1080p delivery to h.265 too, while keeping bitrates high enough to improve quality for its 1080p offerings.

I hope for this too. I don't own a 4K TV or own any hardware to support it. So I hope this new tvOS or Apple TV has some better quality 1080p content due to h.265.

Also, to chime in on the 4K debate--someone mentioned less artifacts on 4K TVs. This, IMO, makes a huge difference and on eye strain. Colors, objects, etc just look more "filled in," which make my eyes happy. I like my 1080p TV, but watching a 4K TV is a more relaxed experience.

 

[Peter K.]

Wow, just WOW. Who are these experts??????

Just because YOU can't see the difference doesn't mean NOBODY can. Your post is everything that is wrong with the internet. Arrogant people commenting on stuff they clearly know NOTHING about.

The larger the display size the better the viewing experience, but that's also true of 1080P. So yes, clearly an 80 inch TV will really show it off, but in REALITY 4K is amazing on TVs generally 50 inch and above. If you watch ANYTHING from 6.5 feet it will look "good."

I personally have a very nice 55 Inch 4K HDR TV and I can say I CAN see the difference. Depending on what I'm watching it is NIGHT AND DAY different and BETTER. So please don't tell me what MY experience is and what I need and do a little research before spreading your "forceful," "self-assured" ignorance.

Sheer brilliance!

I was going to bold the parts that I really like, but would've ended up bolding the whole thing.

 

[Mr Dobey]

Apple, Please support HDR10+ with the 5th generation TV. That is all.