Bookmark and Share


A number of consumer electronics giants, including Sony Corp., Samsung Electronics, LG and others have invested heavily into development of current stereo-3D tech as well as 4K ultra-high-definition format. However, Japan Broadcasting Corp. (NHK, Nippon Hoso Kyokai), the leading developer of 8K format, claims that true three-dimensional pictures require resolutions simply impossible today. For 2D images, 8K (7320*4320) resolution is maximum needed.

“One of the main reasons we carried out research into 8K TV is due to the characteristics of human perception. Our conclusion is that 8K will be the final two-dimensional television format. The resolution involved is the highest that the human eye can process. Any further developments will be in 3D,” said Kimio Hamasaki, a senior research engineer at NHK science & technology research laboratories in Japan, in an interview with The Hollywood Reporter.

NHK began developing 8K technology also known as Super Hi-Vision (SHV) in 1995. The 8K format has resolution of 7680*4320 pixels – four times the resolution of 4K and 16 times that of current HD – as well as 22.2-channel audio. The equipment for 8K was designed in partnership with Japanese leading manufacturers of electronics, including Fujitsu, JVC, Panasonic and Sharp. The annual R&D budget of NHK is around $77 million, yet it is unclear how much the company has spent on 8K/SHV development. Having spent well-over a billion of dollars on R&D since 1995, NHK has developed plethora of technologies not only for 8K/SHV, but also for other applications.

Demonstration of 7680*4320 UHDTV with 22.2 multichannel sound using 85" LCD at ITU HQ by ITU staff and NHK. Only two 8K UHDTV prototypes have been presented to the press so far.

Unlike many other consumer electronics companies, NHK skipped stereo-3D in its current form. Today, the company is well into development of next-generation video output technology, which will be three-dimensional and will emerge only in a very distant future. As it appears, a true stereoscopic 3D technology requires considerably higher resolution that is possible to display these days.

“The current stereoscopic 3D format just provides a different image to the left and right eye to create a 3D image in the brain. The integral photographic 3D that we are researching creates actual spatial images in front of the screen. Integral 3-D requires a lot of pixels. Super Hi-Vision needs about 33 million pixels, and integral 3D will take 10 to 100 times as many as that,” said Mr. Hamasaki.

With requirement to boost display resolution to at least 330MPixel and all the hassles with standardization and introduction to market, the advanced spatial 3D is at least a decade away.



Comments currently: 10
Discussion started: 05/17/13 05:45:35 AM
Latest comment: 05/20/13 12:51:17 AM
Expand all threads | Collapse all threads


8K pixel is the limit for human being eye but at what size of screen ?
5 0 [Posted by: Atlastiamhere  | Date: 05/17/13 05:45:35 AM]
- collapse thread

I think that size alone would not answer that question. The resolution limit for the human eye also depends on distance from the object. I think they mean the human eye's field of vision maxes out at about 8k resolution at any distance. Take a 40" and a 70" screen at 8k resolution for example. If you sat close enough to 40" screen so that it covered your entire (non-peripheral I'm assuming) field of vision, it would hit that limit. Then if you sat far enough back from a 70" screen to also cover your entire field of vision, again you would hit that limit.
0 0 [Posted by: Kashim  | Date: 05/18/13 10:48:50 AM]

well considering 4k TV's are 25,000 right now and no format even supports that as of yet let alone broadcast stations which seems to be content displaying resolution at 720p and 1080i, maybe by the time 2020 roles around we might see formats actually start to really take advantage of 4k displays, but board cast stations will prob still only broadcasting in 720p or 1080i. lol So 8k seems like a pipe dream right now considering how slow everything is to adapt to higher resolutions beyond 720p or 1080i
0 0 [Posted by: SteelCity1981  | Date: 05/18/13 11:04:53 AM]
- collapse thread

No, Not 25k at all. Sony Bravia 4k Ultra HD TV XBR X900A starts at $5k for a 55inch which is large enough for most lounge rooms, The ridiculous $25k price would be for screens like 80inches. 4k will be here a lot sooner than most people think, Faster than 1080p and prices will drop faster as well. The only issue is the lack of content not the technology. All I am after is a new pc monitor that can do true 120hz at higher than 1080p resolutions, Taking a while to develop them.
0 1 [Posted by: ozegamer  | Date: 05/18/13 08:55:40 PM]
not really considering companies have research and development fees that take 2 to 3 years to pay off. the price of 4k TV's are't going to lower anytime soon.

it better be a 55 inch screen cause anything lower you won't notice a diff in contrast and you will be wasting your money over 1080p.

yes this is the main reason behind 4k's slow adaptation, because a lot of content esp broadcast content hasn't even gotten to 1080p yet. Both Dish and Directv receivers only handle up to 1080i content. I asked one of the dish techs why that is and he told me that the vast majority of broadcast HD stations only broadcast in 720p or 1080i and that's why their receivers only handle to that resolution. So it's not the cable providers lagging behind higher resolutions it's the broadcast stations.
1 0 [Posted by: SteelCity1981  | Date: 05/19/13 12:17:07 AM]
Japan will start directly with 8K instead of 4K in the next years. The irony is that at the beginning will be 8K transmission but only 4K television sets! )
0 0 [Posted by: TAViX  | Date: 05/19/13 08:29:46 PM]

for the best view, you have to be away from the screen at a distance equal to twice the size of it and the eyes should be at the same level with bottom line of the screen
1 0 [Posted by: mm  | Date: 05/18/13 12:21:56 PM]

Take 3 42" TVs. One is 1080p, one is 2160p and one is 4320p. Now stay at least 2 meters away from them, and run on each a movie at native resolution and encoding. Do you wanna bet 1 million bucks that you won't see any difference between those 3??/
3 0 [Posted by: TAViX  | Date: 05/18/13 11:26:33 PM]
- collapse thread

If you had 20/8 or 20/10 eyesight you would see a difference.
0 2 [Posted by: Vampire36  | Date: 05/19/13 12:20:17 PM]
With 20/8 or 20/10 you will see a difference, but since most people are blind anyway and with no diploma in optics with 20/20 - eyesight at 2 meters you will see no difference.
0 0 [Posted by: Vampire36  | Date: 05/20/13 12:51:17 AM]


Add your Comment

Related news

Latest News

Wednesday, November 5, 2014

10:48 pm | LG’s Unique Ultra-Wide Curved 34” Display Finally Hits the Market. LG 34UC97 Available in the U.S. and the U.K.

Wednesday, October 8, 2014

12:52 pm | Lisa Su Appointed as New CEO of Advanced Micro Devices. Rory Read Steps Down, Lisa Su Becomes New CEO of AMD

Thursday, August 28, 2014

4:22 am | AMD Has No Plans to Reconsider Recommended Prices of Radeon R9 Graphics Cards. AMD Will Not Lower Recommended Prices of Radeon R9 Graphics Solutions

Wednesday, August 27, 2014

1:09 pm | Samsung Begins to Produce 2.13GHz 64GB DDR4 Memory Modules. Samsung Uses TSV DRAMs for 64GB DDR4 RDIMMs

Tuesday, August 26, 2014

10:41 am | AMD Quietly Reveals Third Iteration of GCN Architecture with Tonga GPU. AMD Unleashes Radeon R9 285 Graphics Cards, Tonga GPU, GCN 1.2 Architecture