When Will 8K Video Be Available on Mac?

cinealta

macrumors 6502
Original poster
Dec 9, 2012
487
6
Broadcasters are already testing 8K content (NHK, DirecTV etc). Any estimate on when 8K capability will be available on Mac (OSX handling, HDMI/DVI/DP connectors etc). 8K (7680 x 4320) has 16x the pixels as 1080p. Could we expect this by 2015?
 

ZnU

macrumors regular
May 24, 2006
171
0
Broadcasters are already testing 8K content (NHK, DirecTV etc). Any estimate on when 8K capability will be available on Mac (OSX handling, HDMI/DVI/DP connectors etc). 8K (7,680-by-4,320) has 16x the pixels as 1080p. Could we expect this by 2015?
Probably not. Field testing of HDTV started in 1994; these things percolate for quite a long time at the vendor R&D level (occasionally popping up for trade show demos) before they really go anywhere. 8K is also of fairly marginal value for applications short of wall-sized screens that you're viewing from three feet away. That might well prove useful for data visualization applications, etc. but I'm not sure it'll be useful for video content consumption until sometime after bionic eye upgrades hit the market :D
 

echoout

macrumors 6502a
Aug 15, 2007
600
16
Austin, Texas
4K happened in a fraction of the time of HD. None of my clients are interested yet but I do see 8K being readily available in 2-3 years.
 

osx11

macrumors 6502a
Jan 16, 2011
825
0
4K happened in a fraction of the time of HD. None of my clients are interested yet but I do see 8K being readily available in 2-3 years.
Couldn't be more wrong!

HD is not even fully here yet. Most cable TV is still in 1080i max. Most of the providers can't even bring live 1080P to their customers, and this after roughly 10 years of HD. 4K may be fine for the computer environment, but in terms of taking over the living room, this will take a LONG time. The key to this whole problem is content and as long as TV channels are not in 4K, this technology won't really take off. I could envision a scenario where the TVs/Monitors are here but the content is not. And for true 4K quality video to stream perfectly, broadband speeds and availability will have to increase in unimaginable amounts. But to say that 4K "happened" is not a serious comments. It's not even here yet. What's your definition of "4K happened" ?
 

Spinland

macrumors 6502
Jul 16, 2011
320
1
Utica, NY, USA
I don't even get much call for 1080p up here in the sticks, most gigs are 720p max. I'm also a little amused at so many of the locally-produced ads in "HD" that use up-sized bitmap images, jaggies and all. I'd be willing to bet there's a sizable percentage of the local population that doesn't even own an HD TV set.
 

Gav Mack

macrumors 68020
Jun 15, 2008
2,192
17
Sagittarius A*
From what I gather from those who attended IBC a few months ago the nMP is not capable - you need far more serious hardware to produce 8k. We're talking Tutor territory hardware - dual/quad socket Xeons, 128gb ram with SSD raid arrays with multiple GPU's. H265 encoding too.

More info will come out about it at NAB at Vegas next year.

No surprise it's Japan pushing it - South Korea will no doubt follow as they have far more fibre laid down to households or to local cabinets than anywhere else. For cable providers outside those two countries DOSCIS 3.1 will need to be rolled out which gives approximately 8x the bandwidth of 3.0 taking it into the 10Gbit territory. Means my current cable pipe will go from 120mb to nearly 1gb!
 
Last edited:

InuNacho

macrumors 65816
Apr 24, 2008
1,471
643
In that one place
Couldn't be more wrong!

HD is not even fully here yet. Most cable TV is still in 1080i max. Most of the providers can't even bring live 1080P to their customers, and this after roughly 10 years of HD. 4K may be fine for the computer environment, but in terms of taking over the living room, this will take a LONG time. The key to this whole problem is content and as long as TV channels are not in 4K, this technology won't really take off. I could envision a scenario where the TVs/Monitors are here but the content is not. And for true 4K quality video to stream perfectly, broadband speeds and availability will have to increase in unimaginable amounts. But to say that 4K "happened" is not a serious comments. It's not even here yet. What's your definition of "4K happened" ?
I agree, we will see affordable 4K TV/monitors long before content is actually rolled out for it. Unfortunately the Average Joe consumer isn't going to care much about 4K if their current 72 inch TV looks great to them, and it's going to be like that for a long time to come.
 

linuxcooldude

macrumors 68020
Mar 1, 2010
2,477
7,228
Most people view TV's as long term investments who normally don't upgrade until it goes out. We don't have enough 4K televisions & monitors out yet.

Only countries I've heard of broadcasting in 4K is UK & Japan. Japans going 4K in 2014. Even they don't expect broadcasting in 8K until 2020.
 

goMac

macrumors 604
Apr 15, 2004
7,179
1,183
Why would 8k even be a thing? Way beyond what consumers can even optically see.
 

WSR

macrumors regular
Jun 9, 2011
249
2
Why would 8k even be a thing? Way beyond what consumers can even optically see.
Depends on screen size. It would make since that 8K would be first, and maybe only, seen in theaters.
 

echoout

macrumors 6502a
Aug 15, 2007
600
16
Austin, Texas
Couldn't be more wrong!
Thanks for being so condescending. Good contribution.

The OP never mentioned public broadcast output. I was referring to "working" in 4K and 8K DI formats. You know, film scanners, cameras, etc. have supported 4K+ for years. I've been using After Effects since version 3.5 (1998) and it's had a 4K Cineon preset as long as I can remember. 6K and 8K cameras already exist. What we use in post production, film restoration, etc. isn't necessarily output to 8K.

Even then, you can work in 4K on current computers, go to Best Buy and get 4K TVs, and home theater components and then go to the movies and watch them projected in 4K. You think that new content makes itself?

What a short-sighted response, osx11.

----------

Why would 8k even be a thing? Way beyond what consumers can even optically see.
Seriously? You ever been to an IMAX?
 

puckhead193

macrumors G3
May 25, 2004
9,319
556
NY
depends. I think 4K or higher will be for films, special effects/green screens etc.
For broadcast, not for a while. A lot of stations just finally finished the HD conversion recently and just spent millions converting/upgrading. Some local stations are still in SD.
I still believe that 4k is still a specialty area and "standard"
 

thekev

macrumors 604
Aug 5, 2010
6,835
2,473
The human eye can resolve in far greater resolution than IMAX (8K).
That may be true, but 4K displays are just starting to gain hype. I wouldn't call preliminary pipeline tests a good indication that this kind of content will be available soon. There are just too many areas where even 4K is not yet cost effective. It's not just shooting. Any effects have to be rendered at appropriate resolution for the footage.
 

osx11

macrumors 6502a
Jan 16, 2011
825
0
Thanks for being so condescending. Good contribution.

The OP never mentioned public broadcast output. I was referring to "working" in 4K and 8K DI formats. You know, film scanners, cameras, etc. have supported 4K+ for years. I've been using After Effects since version 3.5 (1998) and it's had a 4K Cineon preset as long as I can remember. 6K and 8K cameras already exist. What we use in post production, film restoration, etc. isn't necessarily output to 8K.

Even then, you can work in 4K on current computers, go to Best Buy and get 4K TVs, and home theater components and then go to the movies and watch them projected in 4K. You think that new content makes itself?

What a short-sighted response, osx11.

----------



Seriously? You ever been to an IMAX?
We'll you can't not explain yourself and then complain that someone didn't understand what you were trying to say. And I said 4K will take off in the computer environment but NOT in the live tv market! Yes we have 4K cameras and 4K monitors. We also have computers that can display them but we DON'T have the broadband infrastructure to send 4K live TV to your living room.
 

osx11

macrumors 6502a
Jan 16, 2011
825
0
Probably not. Field testing of HDTV started in 1994.....
And now, almost 20 years later, we still don't have mainstream 1080p signals from cable providers.

----------

Why would 8k even be a thing? Way beyond what consumers can even optically see.
Well the problem is that eventually 4K displays will come down in price and they need something new and expensive to charge customers higher premiums and so they'll release 8K monitors. As for the visual difference, I don't think the human eye could tell when viewing a "normal" sized monitor.
 

echoout

macrumors 6502a
Aug 15, 2007
600
16
Austin, Texas
We'll you can't not explain yourself and then complain that someone didn't understand what you were trying to say. And I said 4K will take off in the computer environment but NOT in the live tv market! Yes we have 4K cameras and 4K monitors. We also have computers that can display them but we DON'T have the broadband infrastructure to send 4K live TV to your living room.
Wow, still condescending even when arguing with yourself. Happy holidays!
 

handsome pete

macrumors 68000
Aug 15, 2008
1,722
257
The human eye can resolve in far greater resolution than IMAX (8K).
That statement means nothing without some qualification. What's the pixel size? What's the viewing distance? There are practically no limitations to what the human eye can resolve under the right circumstances.



8k is already here and it's going to be great for post work, but nothing is going to be finished in it. We'll be lucky if 4k has taken substantially in the next 5 years.
 

osx11

macrumors 6502a
Jan 16, 2011
825
0
Wow, still condescending even when arguing with yourself. Happy holidays!
LOL

It's funny how some people can't take criticism. :D Had your first response been a bit more clear we would have avoided this whole mess. Calm down a bit! I'm was actually looking for a serious discussions about the evolution of HD and 4K. Once you explained that you were talking about "working" in 4K your comment made sense and I agree. But you can't fault me for not understanding your comments if they are not fully explained. It's all good....
 

JesterJJZ

macrumors 68020
Jul 21, 2004
2,425
773
8K won't be mainsteam for a very long time. 8K acquisition will be coming along soon in the professional world, but even then it's still aimed at 4k delivery. 4K will be the standard for a long long time. We will be moving from improving pixel count to improving things like dynamic range, noise and phasing out 8 bit.
 

ZnU

macrumors regular
May 24, 2006
171
0
Thanks for the info.
You might be interested in the Wikipedia page for Rec. 2020, the emerging set of standards for UHDTV. Interlaced formats are gone. 8-bit is gone, replaced with 10-bit and 12-bit. And the biggest deal, perhaps, is that the new color space is huge. Here it is next to Rec. 709 (current HD):



It covers ~76% of CIE 1931 (basically, the visible color range) compared with Rec. 709's ~36%. Current LCD panels can't come anywhere close to this; new backlight technology is needed. OLED can handle it. We have some gear here that supports DCI-P3 cinema color (~54% of CIE) and even that's quite eye opening next to Rec. 709 color. Rec. 2020 color is going to be insane.

Mind you, this stuff isn't quite as far out as 8K, but it's still going to be a fairly long time coming.
 

steveOooo

macrumors 6502a
Jun 30, 2008
737
89
UK
1 hr of pro ress lt is 30gb ish (-lt) is 70gb ish - how much is 4k - the new sony codec I think?

Hard enough managing 4tb raid and 4-8tb of externals with old footage on em!
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.