Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I normally dont watch TV that much, when I watch movies I watch them on my 24" HD computer monitor, the picture is perfect imo, but I still have a 42" flatscreen in the living room, I believe its a 1080p, bought it new 2 years ago and paid around $230.
It got me wondering what TV technology will be like in 10-20 years though...to be honest, I cannot really see how they can improve on the picture quality that much, some of the 4K TVs Ive seen at Best buy, are like 'looking out a window', in other words, it looks THAT real.
I read about some kind of TV awhile back, not sure what its called, it sounded like a cross between virtual reality headset and a tv, but the movie or show would have to be filmed in this format, for it to work like it should...I can only describe it as being like...you sit down and turn a movie or show on, except the tv screen is 360 degrees, it looks like you are sitting right in the middle of the movie/show, (this seems more like VR to me), but no headset is required. I guess it would be more like holographic images, but in order for this to work, they would have to film the movie/show with every scene 360 degrees, at all times. (does this sound familiar to anyone?)
Another thing I hear every so often is 'smell o vision', where odors can be put out by the tv. I think they tried this back in the 80s, but it never went anywhere, not sure if this technology has improved or not.
It got me wondering what TV technology will be like in 10-20 years though...to be honest, I cannot really see how they can improve on the picture quality that much,
4K TV's are pretty much the pinnacle, in most cases they are going to be beyond the vision capabilities of most humans. For the size TV you have you'd have to be sitting something like 4 feet or closer to see any difference with 4K.
Quote:
I read about some kind of TV awhile back, not sure what its called, it sounded like a cross between virtual reality headset and a tv,
I would suggest the next big thing in 10 to 20 years is going to eliminate TV's or VR as we know it. Certainly not something where you will be surrounded by displays and will not require a headset. I really don't see anything else they can do with current tech to improve it dramatically.
Quote:
they would have to film the movie/show with every scene 360 degrees, at all times. (does this sound familiar to anyone?)
I would suggest the age of human actors and "filming" is coming to an end... Carrie Fisher was supposed to play a huge role in the final Star Wars film, her passing of course put an end to that however if they wanted to include her in the film there is no technological reason they couldn't.
Imax domes used the 360 degree immersive concept. The media is highly restrictive in subject matter, to the point that the immersive domes are now largely abandoned in favor of giant flat screens. Storytelling with film or television works best as a virtual window. The reasons are many and complex, but the 1: 1.85 aspect ratio fits most subject matter best.
The future undoubtedly holds fads, but the real issues with television are the ad saturation levels and shorter attention spans of viewers. Increasing market shares will be lost to games and phone aps.
4K TV's are pretty much the pinnacle, in most cases they are going to be beyond the vision capabilities of most humans. For the size TV you have you'd have to be sitting something like 4 feet or closer to see any difference with 4K.
I would suggest the next big thing in 10 to 20 years is going to eliminate TV's or VR as we know it. Certainly not something where you will be surrounded by displays and will not require a headset. I really don't see anything else they can do with current tech to improve it dramatically.
I would suggest the age of human actors and "filming" is coming to an end... Carrie Fisher was supposed to play a huge role in the final Star Wars film, her passing of course put an end to that however if they wanted to include her in the film there is no technological reason they couldn't.
It wanst so much about numerous 'screens' surrounding the person...it was more like holographic images, 360 degrees, to the point, where it would look and feel like you were actually 'IN' the movie, sort of watching it take place all around you.
This is probably closer to 100 yrs out the more I think about it!!
Imax domes used the 360 degree immersive concept. The media is highly restrictive in subject matter, to the point that the immersive domes are now largely abandoned in favor of giant flat screens. Storytelling with film or television works best as a virtual window. The reasons are many and complex, but the 1: 1.85 aspect ratio fits most subject matter best.
The future undoubtedly holds fads, but the real issues with television are the ad saturation levels and shorter attention spans of viewers. Increasing market shares will be lost to games and phone aps.
Actually, Imax screens are the flat screens. The 360 degree screens are not 360 degrees but a distorted 180 degrees filmed with a fisheye lens and are called Omnimax and yes they are mostly obsolete. Ceasars palace in Las Vegas used to have one. The Aquarium in Seattle as well.
The FCC is currently experimenting, in a few cities, with OTA full uncompressed 4k. To receive the signal, the TV must have a 3.0 tuner or a converter box. If OTA 4k is adopted, it will be voluntary for TV stations to broadcast, unlike 2009 when digital 720 and 1080 was mandatory. Half the stations in the Tampa viewing area are only 720 and all the sub channels are only 480. So, will a majority of TV stations be 4k in 10 years since it's voluntary? I doubt it.
Until we have holographic technology I just don't see us getting away from headsets for a VR experience. Sitting someone in front of a giant screen isn't going to give the illusion of 3d. You need the stereoscopic effect that will give you the depth and perception. Yes stereoscopic is a little gimmicky but only because of current tech. Once we have small screens capable of higher resolutions (16K/eye needed for true life like visuals) and the graphical power to push them we will then approach what VR could do.
As for TV tech I think as OLED continues to mature it'll become the new standard like LCD is now. Higher resolutions will continue to be pushed, even if we don't necessarily need it but for the sake of progressing the tech. The trend will also move towards ultra thin and foldable screens.
Until we have holographic technology I just don't see us getting away from headsets for a VR experience. Sitting someone in front of a giant screen isn't going to give the illusion of 3d. You need the stereoscopic effect that will give you the depth and perception. Yes stereoscopic is a little gimmicky but only because of current tech. Once we have small screens capable of higher resolutions (16K/eye needed for true life like visuals) and the graphical power to push them we will then approach what VR could do.
As for TV tech I think as OLED continues to mature it'll become the new standard like LCD is now. Higher resolutions will continue to be pushed, even if we don't necessarily need it but for the sake of progressing the tech. The trend will also move towards ultra thin and foldable screens.
Holographic won't do it either. The latest iteration of 3-D was better than most past ones, but it didn't catch on for physiological, psychological and physical reasons.
Physiologically, not everyone has pupil spacing of 64mm, not every camera shot works with fixed lenses and lengthy shots that allow the eye to range for depth and establish relationships. Unless a story revolves around a single fixed point-of-view of a scene, the transitions and cuts become a problem. If you notice at movie theatres, most of a 3-D movie is flattened into fewer than half a dozen depth planes, with only a few trick shots to establish that, why yes, it IS 3-D. That problem won't go away with holography.
Psychologically, every story or setup is shorthand that eliminates distraction to focus on details. In the language of film that we all are used to, the bedroom scene starts with a wide shot and then a close-up of faces, or in the case of porn naughty bits. Keeping the initial wide shot allows distraction and irritates audiences wanting a closer look. With holography, suddenly the closer shot becomes invasion of psychological spaces, and uncomfortable and a distraction of its own.
Physical work setting a scene, establishing camera angles and lighting, and matching in any CGI is more costly with 3-D. If that doesn't translate to increased revenues it is dropped.
I won't even go into the concept of an orthographic viewing position that might make viewing 3-D better.
There have been impressive systems throughout the history of movies and tv that have fallen by the wayside. The best is not always what works.
The current future of tv is all about information gathering, to create targeted content and sell product. The technologies now only recognize the viewer as PART of the system, and not the end user that must be satisfied.
The Chinese owners of Sony will know your sexual preferences, political leanings, income, and exploitable weaknesses. In return, you get inexpensive TV sets with fancy gadgetry that show you broken up stories with lots of interruptions and commercials. Enjoy.
Until we have holographic technology I just don't see us getting away from headsets for a VR experience. Sitting someone in front of a giant screen isn't going to give the illusion of 3d. You need the stereoscopic effect that will give you the depth and perception. Yes stereoscopic is a little gimmicky but only because of current tech. Once we have small screens capable of higher resolutions (16K/eye needed for true life like visuals) and the graphical power to push them we will then approach what VR could do.
As for TV tech I think as OLED continues to mature it'll become the new standard like LCD is now. Higher resolutions will continue to be pushed, even if we don't necessarily need it but for the sake of progressing the tech. The trend will also move towards ultra thin and foldable screens.
I keep reading how great strides are being made in holography, but not seeing being available yet. it was said to be coming soon in cell phones, but thats still not here.
Im waiting for the days of completely holographic displays and interfaces.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
