Welcome, Autel Pilots!
Join our free Autel drone community today!
Sign up

Do We Really Need 8K Video?

macoman

Well-Known Member
Joined
Dec 27, 2018
Messages
652
Reaction score
362
Age
44
Saw the video last night... Very straight forward and very true to his word.
 
  • Like
Reactions: HiloHawaiian

HiloHawaiian

Well-Known Member
Joined
Aug 19, 2017
Messages
1,676
Reaction score
1,021
Location
Carefree AZ
My Friday morning too much coffee rant...

I agree with him. I’m more interested in the 1” sensor’s dynamic range for still shots and low-light video (waiting for reviews). Big stills won’t tax my Mac like 8K video will. He’s right, the major reason to shoot 8K is the ability to digitally zoom w/o much loss. 6K is enough for me, if that sensor shows improvement in other areas. Even when 8K TV’s are the norm in 5 yrs, you’ll struggle to see the difference, just like you struggle to see 4K from good 1080p on a TV under 65”.

Go to a Best Buy and pit an 8K TV vs a good 4K and see if you can find a significant improvement. Remember, the demo video is produced to the highest standards, unlike 99% of the content we view. My local store had a Samsung Q900 75” 8K next to a similar 4K model. No one in the demo room could tell the difference.

Well-rendered TV shows shot in 4K, displayed at 1080p via settings on your streamer (Bosch on Amazon Prime, is regarded as one of the best) — automatically upscaled to 4K by your 4K TV — look incredibly good. Switch the stream to 4K, and I challenge you to tell the difference. 8K might be more relevant when average TV’s are 100”, but until then, it’s just another marketing ploy...

 

mozso

Member
Joined
Jan 7, 2020
Messages
12
Reaction score
5
Age
42
Usually - IF optics + sensor + image processing trio is producing a good quality video stream without limitations/artifacts (like with low bandwidth video compression codec) at a given resolution like 4K, THEN it makes sense to use higher resolution even when target resolution for final production video will be lower, like 1080p.

In this case video stream is resized in post production using some good software.

Final result will be (if all the IFs are properly handled) better then native 1080p recording coming from the device.

However if you need to make compromise when shooting in larger resolution, like codec limitation, image sensor sampling limitation, artifacts, etc, then this theory is broken. As the higher resolution recording already makes trade-offs in possible maximum quality or framerate or storage space/memory card writing speed.

The sweet point is different case by case.

Did some tests myself:
GoPro Hero7 Black Action camera - I wanted 60fps that was the baseline. After that maximum video quality possible. As I have only 1080p displays at this time I don’t need larger resolution. Targeted video audience also using 4K displays rarely.

[email protected] disabled image stabilization in the camera so despite good baseline video quality (no trade off in recording bandwidth or sensor sampling) it was disregarded.

[email protected] and [email protected] were identical In everything except resolution.
Post production (software) downscaled 2.7K -> 1080p video shows significantly better details all around, then 1080p video directly from the camera. This is logical as the post production processing doesn’t need to be realtime, you have more time and more processing power to use more sophisticated processing algorythms.

Same excercise on my DJI Mavic Pro resulted shooting in 1080p only. This device has a 65Mbps codec bandwidth which introduces artifacts in all modes above 1080p (due to compression) and also image processing and coding engine make tricks at 2.7K / 4K to be able to process video coding in real time with onboard limits of SOC resources provided by Ambarella A9. This is a fairly weak SOC also used in GoPro 3.

So this is always case by case what and how the manufacturer implemented using which hardware and what is the desired expectation of the user.

If properly implemented, despite using the Sony Exmor 583 sensor (and its limitations) an EVO2 8K post production downscaled video can have better quality than a 4K native video from device. Or if the post processing zoom possibility is interesting, than it gives 8K some edge, the way OriginaldoBo used this on the helicopter scene.

TBH I'm really interested in the EVO2 6K model and if it will be capable shooting videos without those tricks what DJI Mavic 2 Pro has to use to process 4K videos onboard in real time.
 
Last edited:

mozso

Member
Joined
Jan 7, 2020
Messages
12
Reaction score
5
Age
42
Just downloaded his sample footage in 8K and give it a try in a program he used as well. I have a bit stronger system (3900x vs 3700x), but playback of 8K is still stressing 13 of my CPU threads almost fully from available 24. However in my case I did not use proxy files to have fluid playback. :) OriginaldoBo had to use proxy files though.

Well I was expecting that, 8K data is heavy. Nonetheless in certain scenarios it makes sense to record in higher resolution at that excent and zoom/downscale.
 

Attachments

mozso

Member
Joined
Jan 7, 2020
Messages
12
Reaction score
5
Age
42
However MPC-HC is a lot less resource hungry for playback. 6 threads stressed only. Software development quality does matter.

8k2.png
 

Nightbat2

Well-Known Member
Joined
Feb 28, 2019
Messages
479
Reaction score
162
Age
70
Technology is moving quickly. Now, we even have 360 cameras and consumer video cameras that can record in 8k. I’ve no doubt this will soon bring about reasonably priced computers that can handle it. However, I’m holding out for the 1inch, for one simple reason: there are too many dumbclucks in marketing who won’t entertain anything less, even if it’s a real estate job or a simple clip destined for the internet. They don’t want to know that the Evo (1) will blow the socks off a Mavic2 Pro when it comes to video.
 
Joined
Jan 20, 2020
Messages
17
Reaction score
2
Website
northwoodmediaworks.com
Personally, I find 2k enough. My retina display on the MacBook Pro is basically 2k, videos look stunning. My plan, if I get an evo2 is to do most stuff in 4k and then render it down to 2k. If and when I get a 4k TV I will probably change my ways. Or, just shoot in 2k. Sure, the MavicMini would take me there for far less money, but the wind woud surely take that away at some point... I want something that holds its place in the big winds we get up our way. Beafuort 8 sounds pretty decent to me.
 
  • Like
Reactions: HiloHawaiian

TravisPNW

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jun 10, 2019
Messages
67
Reaction score
50
Age
45
Location
Renton, WA
I've had my 4K 65" LG OLED for almost 2 years now. 4500 hours on it which is a whole lot of 4K and 1080p discs. It's truly a top quality cinematic experience.

For that reason I'm not rushing out to buy 8K OLEDs even if they are available. The content isn't. Bottom line. I'd also argue that the difference between 4K and 8K will be hard to notice... if at all.

My Evo footage @ 4K60 looks gorgeous as do the discs in my movie collection.

 
  • Like
Reactions: HiloHawaiian

HiloHawaiian

Well-Known Member
Joined
Aug 19, 2017
Messages
1,676
Reaction score
1,021
Location
Carefree AZ
I've had my 4K 65" LG OLED for almost 2 years now. 4500 hours on it which is a whole lot of 4K and 1080p discs. It's truly a top quality cinematic experience.

For that reason I'm not rushing out to buy 8K OLEDs even if they are available. The content isn't. Bottom line. I'd also argue that the difference between 4K and 8K will be hard to notice... if at all.

My Evo footage @ 4K60 looks gorgeous as do the discs in my movie collection.

Heck, my 4K/30 from my XSP looks fantastic on my 75”QLED. I really think you’ll have to get above 100” to (maybe) notice a difference...
 

Vagabond

Member
Joined
Feb 6, 2019
Messages
10
Reaction score
2
Age
50
As an amateur, I'm not wasting my time editing 8K videos.

Sounds cool, but in the end, no one will really care.
 
  • Love
Reactions: macoman

Latest threads

Members online

Forum statistics

Threads
4,927
Messages
47,097
Members
3,186
Latest member
jesmo5