DirecTV Now Does 4K Ultra HD Video On Demand, With Caveats

Status
Not open for further replies.

Christopher1

Distinguished
Aug 29, 2006
663
2
19,015
5
Too bad there aren't even 19 people with 4K tvs to enjoy this yet.
Actually there are quite a few people with 4K TV's to enjoy this. The bigger issue is that 4K TV takes UBER-bandwidth in the real world so most will not have the capability to view it.
 

gaaah

Distinguished
Sep 13, 2013
110
3
18,715
6
So those movies listed, they were shot with a 4K camera? Forrest Gump? If not, are you really going to get any more detail?
 

gbair

Distinguished
Mar 1, 2011
22
0
18,510
0
So those movies listed, they were shot with a 4K camera? Forrest Gump? If not, are you really going to get any more detail?
They were shot on 35mm film which has an equivalent resolution of 4-6K, so yes, there is detail to be had with a good remastering into a 4K format. Even movies made in the 50s and earlier can gain significant detail in 4K.
 

alchemy69

Distinguished
Jul 4, 2008
205
0
18,680
0
4K in a TV is an idiot tax. There are always gullible fools out there who believe a bigger number must be "better" because a salesman tells them so and are willing to spend ridiculous money on the Emperor's new clothes.
 

aramisathei

Honorable
Aug 25, 2012
303
0
10,810
19
"4K in a TV is an idiot tax. There are always gullible fools out there who believe a bigger number must be 'better'"

That's only true if you don't have or use 4k content. The same was said of 1080p--which was true at first, but again only because most people didn't have HD content.
The proliferation of HD devices spurred that drive, which is effectively what's happening here (there's already a good deal of UHD content, even if it isn't with DirectTV).

It's fine if you don't want or have a use for it, but that doesn't make it true for others.
 

Duckhunt

Honorable
Sep 22, 2012
339
0
10,810
10
I got a 4k TV and I love it. I can sit up close or far away and it looks good. I think my eyes feel better about it.

I totally recommend 4k over 1080p. I use to think 1080p was the best and anything above that was just marketing but no it is great. The tv upscales to the 4k res for some content and makes lower quality stuff look better with some pvr or dvrs. Try to look for these features.
 

alidan

Splendid
Aug 5, 2009
5,303
0
25,780
0
@aramisathei
there is a difference here, the difference between 480p and 720p was massive, and something anyone could see the benefit from, personally in out living room we have a 1080p 60~ inch tv, and to be able to see 1080p for all its worth we would need to move everything close than it already is... 4k for even the closest we sit to the tv the extra data would be lost because of distance... its is something that just 720p or 1080p did not have...

also, 4k at least at the consumer level is exactly 4X 1080p, meaning that scaling up from 1080p to 4k doesn't look like hell, a stark difference between from 480i to 1080p where even though the hd screen is better and clearer, the picture looks worlds better on a sd tv.

BUT some homes are small enough to have the seating close enough to take advantage of 4k, and in the pc realm you are close enough... even though i find 4k at anything lower than 48 inches to be to high a dpi to be useful.
 

Alsone

Distinguished
Dec 30, 2006
219
0
18,680
0
The biggest problem is that a final 4K viewing standard hasn't been agreed.

They say the wow from 4K comes not from the resolution but the expanded colour space which I'm 99% sure no current tv's support as it hasn't been agreed yet. The EU has just agreed a phase 1 interim standard, but the full potential of 4k won't be unlocked until Phase II which could render most current 4K tv's obsolete in effect due to their inability to process and display the new colour space.

I think most existing 4K tv's don't even comply with Phase I.

http://www.techradar.com/news/television/hdtv/everything-you-know-about-4k-ultra-hd-is-probably-wrong-thanks-to-hdcp-2-2-1256763

 

yumri

Distinguished
Sep 5, 2010
703
0
19,160
69
Thus why it sucks to be on the "Bleeding edge" of technology as those 4k TVs will have a big chance to be incompatiable with 4k TV content not streamed over the internet and much even streamed over the net too but games will still support them thankfully and well that will be about it though
 

alidan

Splendid
Aug 5, 2009
5,303
0
25,780
0


i highly doubt they would kill 4k entirely just by changing the standard. in all likelihood it would be additional data that your tv just doesn't understand and not a all or nothing...

people are already moving away from tv as it stands, them screwing over the 4k people would hurt them more than anything else.
 

master9716

Distinguished
Jul 27, 2006
271
0
18,780
0
Exactly why I switched to direct tv, 4k Is fkn awesome, Even Makes 1080p content from Netflix only so far look close to 4k on my Vizio P series 70" therefore you got a ton more than just a few Native 4k tittles.
 

epobirs

Distinguished
Jul 18, 2011
189
5
18,695
1
It's early days yet and 4K has come much farther in the short time since it launched than HD did in the 90s. I expect very few of the existing installed base and available models will become orphans. At worst, they'll need external boxes to convert material in the eventual standard to what they understand input-wise. Since the almost sole market for the product right now is those wealthy enough to buy without concern of practicality or obsolescence, there should be little fallout. Those indulgences for the affluent are footing the bill for getting the product refined into its eventual mainstream form.

It wasn't that long ago, as a lifetime is measured, that the value of 1080p was being debated. It represented such a significant investment for most that many chose absurd claims to deny its desirability rather than feel the need to spend. Nowadays, 1080p displays are so cheap and common those debates seem silly. I expect 4K to follow the same arc but in somewhat more than half the time.
 

yumri

Distinguished
Sep 5, 2010
703
0
19,160
69


i am mostly sure that 4k will die when the 8k media upgrades are done as many cable and sallite networks are just skipping over 4k for 8k so they wont have to upgrade it 2 times so close together and a single upgrade is very expenive.
 

lzthunder

Reputable
Dec 1, 2014
1
0
4,510
0
I have a Samsung 2014 UHD TV. I had Direct TV installed yesterday and have ordered it today to be removed tomorrow. They simply are not ready to provide quality 4k service. The equipment change produced a lower quality 4k picture than when I had their Genie playing 4k movies from Netflix. Which by the way cost less than the $12 per month membership fee. I paid almost $12 for a single DTV UHD movie and the quality was less than 1080p upscaled by the Samsung UHD TV. Should I even mention the debacle it took to get their 4k service installed in the first place. 8 calls with service reps and three installers. In the end it was I calling DTV to get them to tell their sub contractors how to install their equipment. Had I listened to my better instincts I would have stopped the process when I realized their service people had not a clue.
 

yumri

Distinguished
Sep 5, 2010
703
0
19,160
69


That is because no one is able to stream 4k as of yet mainly because of codec problems so either they will need to expand the speclum for wave transmitions on DirectTV, have more wires used for cable, or compress it even more so making it so the 4k picture or 8k picture can transfer over the same medium without modications.
I also think buying the 4k UHD TVs atm is a bad idea mainly because they are not all compatable with all the color spaces and some of them are not even compatable with what is being discussed for the standard for 4k color space.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

ASK THE COMMUNITY