Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

SoylentNews is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop. Only 15 submissions in the queue.
posted by martyb on Wednesday January 16 2019, @12:00PM   Printer-friendly
from the bigger-is-better? dept.

Here's a roundup of four very large format TVs displayed (heh!) at the 2019 Consumer Electronics Show (CES).

Samsung Expands 8K TV to 98 Inches at CES, Because Why the Hell Not

Samsung expands 8K TV to 98 inches at CES, because why the hell not

8K resolution might be so much overkill, but if you ask the TV makers, they'll tell you all those extra pixels are worthwhile in really big TVs.

The 98-inch Samsung Q900 QLED unveiled here at CES is one the most massive 8K TVs announced so far, outgunning Samsung's own 85-inch member of the Q900 series -- first introduced in late 2018 -- as well as LG's new 88-inch 8K OLED TV. It's no 219-inch MicroLED TV, however.

Samsung says more sizes of the Q900 series will come to the US in 2019, complete with the "AI upconversion" it introduced on the 85-incher. Other markets, such as the UK and Europe, already have 8K QLED TVs at 65, 75 and 82 inches, so it's a fair bet that those sizes will be in the mix stateside.

LG introduces OLED TV that can roll up and disappear when you’re not watching it

Watch the video of LG's stage presentation to see the R in action, if you can stomach some intense marketing speak.

[...] OK, so it's just a TV. And the R is not even a totally new concept; I saw an earlier prototype of a rollable OLED display back at CES 2009. But that display was 13-inches, had major limitations, and did not yet look like a consumer product. This time, we're looking at a full-featured, 65-inch TV that's actually coming to market this year.

LG says to expect picture quality on par with its just-announced 2019 4K OLED lineup. That means 120Hz and AI image processing using LG's new Alpha 9 Gen 2 CPU. The TV's base—the same one it rolls into—houses a 4.2-channel, 100-watt soundbar with Dolby Atmos support.

LG hasn't announced a price for the TV R yet, though TechCrunch reports that the company said it would cost more than the 8K TV announced last week—that TV's price hasn't been announced either, but given that the 8K LG will compete directly with Samsung's $15,000 8K offering, we're betting the rollable TV won't be within most people's reach. LG says the Signature OLED TV R will be available for purchase in the second half of 2019.

-- submitted from IRC

Sony's First 8K TVs Get Supersized to 85 and 98 Inches at CES 2019

Sony's first 8K TVs get supersized to 85 and 98 inches at CES 2019

Nothing says CES 2019 like obnoxiously large 8K TVs. And Sony is throwing down some serious screen real estate with its latest models.

The Z9G Master Series LCD comes in just two sizes: 85 inches as well as a whopping 98-inch model. The latter ties Samsung for the largest 8K TV introduced at the show so far. No pricing was announced, but for reference, Samsung's current 85-inch 8K TV costs 15 grand. 'Nuff said.

8K resolution promises improved detail compared to standard 4K, but at this early stage in the game there's no actual 8K TV shows and movies to take advantage of it. That's why Sony and other TV makers tout their sets' video processing, which takes 4K and lower-resolution video and converts it to 8K for display.

[...] The new 8K sets also have full-spec HDMI 2.1 inputs complete with 48Gbps capability, which means they're compatible with higher frame rates and resolutions that could come down the pike soon, like 4K at 120 frames per second or 8K at 60fps. They also support variable refresh rate (VRR) and automatic low latency mode (ALLM, or auto game mode) for as well as enhanced audio return channel (eARC).

Like the current smaller, 4K resolution Z9D models, the new 85- and 98-inchers have fancier full-array local dimming LCD backlights. They utilize "ultra-dense LED modules that are independently controlled" and can "intelligently boost the brightness in the areas where it needs to be boosted."

HP Omen Gaming Gear at CES 2019 Includes $5K Emperium 65 BFGD Monitor

HP Omen gaming gear at CES 2019 includes $5K Emperium 65 BFGD monitor

After a year of waiting, the first Nvidia-partner Big Format Gaming Displays are ready for prime time. HP gave us [cnet] a tour around its version, the Omen X Emperium 65, slated for February for $5,000.

[...] In addition to a built-in Nvidia Shield streaming/gaming system, which lets you play Android and PC games via GeForce Now, the Emperium comes with a gaming-optimized sound bar designed to obviate the need for a separate subwoofer and to minimize vibration transferring to the display.

It also offers a 144Hz refresh rate -- better than the 120Hz available on TVs like the Vizio mentioned above -- which is essential to minimize motion artifacts in games, and 4 millisecond gray-to-gray pixel response.

[...] For $5,000, though, you'd think it would incorporate the latest version of HDMI, 2.1, which is better for gaming. The same goes for the connectivity, 802.11ac wireless (aka Wi-Fi 5) rather than 802.11ax (aka Wi-Fi 6) and Gigabit Ethernet rather than 10Gb for better cloud gaming. While adoption is in the very early stages for all of those, if you're plunking down that much money you'd kind of like it to be future-ready.


Original Submission #1Original Submission #2Original Submission #3Original Submission #4

This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
(1)
  • (Score: 2) by JoeMerchant on Wednesday January 16 2019, @02:10PM (3 children)

    by JoeMerchant (3937) on Wednesday January 16 2019, @02:10PM (#787369)

    If your average "HiDef" security camera is 720p resolution, an 8K screen can host 32 security images simultaneously in full resolution in an 8x4 matrix with space left over for meta-data display outside each image...

    --
    🌻🌻 [google.com]
    • (Score: 2) by drussell on Wednesday January 16 2019, @03:19PM

      by drussell (2678) on Wednesday January 16 2019, @03:19PM (#787393) Journal

      Indeed, there have always been applications with the requirement for the best possible, very high resolution images, for example, medical imaging.

      The question is whether one of those applications is the displays for general home television or home theater type applications. The sheer size of the source material required to actually make use of extreme-resolution screens for regular "video" applications vs. the perceived quality increase is the main issue for such use cases.

      At this point, it would seem to be mostly expensive, unnecessary "bling". :)

    • (Score: 3, Informative) by Immerman on Wednesday January 16 2019, @05:18PM (1 child)

      by Immerman (3985) on Wednesday January 16 2019, @05:18PM (#787455)

      Umm, check your math. 720p (1280x720) and 8k(7680x4320) resolutions have the same aspect ratio (1.777...), so the 36-image matrix will be a 6x6 square: width = 7680/1280 = 6, height = 4320/720 = 6

      Even if you assume an old-school 4:3 resolution (960x720, which is NOT what is normally meant by 720p), that only changes the horizontal size of the matrix: 7680/960 = 8, for a 8x6 matrix of 48 images.

      • (Score: 2) by JoeMerchant on Wednesday January 16 2019, @08:58PM

        by JoeMerchant (3937) on Wednesday January 16 2019, @08:58PM (#787562)

        Thanks, assumed a bit, assumed wrong. Still can fit 32 images with space leftover...

        --
        🌻🌻 [google.com]
  • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday January 16 2019, @03:32PM

    by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday January 16 2019, @03:32PM (#787402)

    because we can't have hi-res stereo monitors less then a inch from our main visual-data gathering organs. sheesh.
    "loooook! i am sooooo rich, i had to build a extra structure to proof to you how much stupid money i could spend to look at ... nothing interesting ... in flat 2D ... but it's really big. maybe you need to take a few steps back so you can take it all in."

  • (Score: 1) by khallow on Wednesday January 16 2019, @03:36PM

    by khallow (3766) Subscriber Badge on Wednesday January 16 2019, @03:36PM (#787405) Journal

    Samsung Expands 8K TV to 98 Inches at CES, Because Why the Hell Not

    I see the ten blades on the thing which is pretty metal, but where are the aloe strips? Are these guys completely incompetent? Nobody is going to put that near their face, if they're not getting aloe strips too. Gillette will rock [theonion.com] these fools.

  • (Score: 2) by Spamalope on Wednesday January 16 2019, @04:33PM (1 child)

    by Spamalope (5233) on Wednesday January 16 2019, @04:33PM (#787435) Homepage

    I still see this as the step that'll allow huge screens to be shipped.
    There is nothing wrong with wall screens. They had 98 inch screens at the 2016 CES and they were glorious.
    And having a credenza/buffet with the screen built in would look nice for decor.

    The article though - wtf would you need 10Gb ethernet for cloud gaming? The 'net speed won't be more than 1G. Maybe for local streaming, but not cloud...

    • (Score: 2) by takyon on Wednesday January 16 2019, @06:25PM

      by takyon (881) <takyonNO@SPAMsoylentnews.org> on Wednesday January 16 2019, @06:25PM (#787483) Journal

      The article though - wtf would you need 10Gb ethernet for cloud gaming? The 'net speed won't be more than 1G. Maybe for local streaming, but not cloud...

      You can get 10 Gbps fiber in some places.

      I suppose that if you were streaming high framerate 8K, maybe you could blow through 1 Gbps (125 MB/s).

      Yeah, it doesn't make too much sense and I'm wary of cloud gaming (and most gaming) anyway.

      --
      [SIG] 10/28/2017: Soylent Upgrade v14 [soylentnews.org]
  • (Score: 2) by JoeMerchant on Wednesday January 16 2019, @09:05PM

    by JoeMerchant (3937) on Wednesday January 16 2019, @09:05PM (#787564)

    We have a 4K 55" screen that spends most of its time on "photo album" showing a selection of high resolution WebCam images from the past few days at various beaches. We also sometimes throw on a (lower res) webcam video feed from various mildly interesting places around the world. It's not Hollywood blockbuster production quality, but it's much more entertaining than watching dry paint.

    Bumping that to 8K 98" would indeed be better - better still would be to setup a live 8K video feed in a few interesting places around the world and have a 98" window to them.

    --
    🌻🌻 [google.com]
  • (Score: 2) by slap on Thursday January 17 2019, @03:54AM

    by slap (5764) on Thursday January 17 2019, @03:54AM (#787768)

    At most viewing distances there is little to no advantage to 4K over regular HD.

    3D is now considered a fad - no new TVs are made with 3D capability - but at least it could provide a real difference over the regular 2D viewing.

  • (Score: 1) by LAV8.ORg on Thursday January 17 2019, @07:09AM

    by LAV8.ORg (6653) on Thursday January 17 2019, @07:09AM (#787810)

    The standard formula for angular resolving power of eyesight (borrowed from film photography) as used to characterize "retina" resolution is readily, demonstrably false for square pixels: put a single pixel wide black line on a white background and set it at a slight slope; step back until you can no longer resolve the pixel jumps aka jaggies, measure the distance, and compare to the formula. With a 4k 28" screen, my experimental distance was near 3x the theoretical prediction given 20/20 acuity, and my vision isn't that good.
    For my experience with digital art and photo inkjet printers, I can tell you that jaggies are still resolvable in particular cases at a pixel density equivalent to 16k on a 28" screen (600 PPI). Simply put, pixel density is only part of the problem; at this point, using a Cartesian grid for image data is a major limiting factor, even if the last step is some other pixel geometry like a printer or a non-standard display a la PenTile RG-B-GR

  • (Score: 2) by DavePolaschek on Thursday January 17 2019, @01:52PM

    by DavePolaschek (6129) on Thursday January 17 2019, @01:52PM (#787885) Homepage Journal

    I found it interesting that as all these big-ass monitors were being announced, I was hooking up a seven-inch 1024x600 monitor (bought for about USD 50) to my Raspberry Pi. Guess I'm just not the target market for damned near anything any more.

(1)