Bottom Line
My final thoughts on Sony’s XBR-84X900 Ultra HD TV? The extra resolution brought about by 4K content does make a difference, though it’s not one I’d necessarily benefit from in my viewing room where the sofa sits 10 feet from the TV. But as someone who watches 3D movies at home from time to time, the XBR-84X900 would make an immediate positive difference since its 4K display enables full 1080p-rez 3D viewing using passive glasses.
However, something that might make me twitch before dropping $25K (like I could!) on Sony’s 84-incher is that it doesn’t support extended color — the other side of the Ultra HD coin. An extended color gamut is something we can expect to see in future 4K content, whether it’s encoded on software or streamed. (For more info on the topic, check out S+V contributor Geoffrey Morrison’s excellent article here.) Sony’s CES press materials make reference to its 4K transfers having “expanded color showcasing more of the wide range of rich color contained in the original source.” This leads me to wonder if its forthcoming 4K download service will take advantage of xvYCC, an extended-gamut color space originally proposed by Sony (they call it x.v.Color) and supported by its PlayStation 3 — and presumably PlayStation 4 —console. Sony says it plans to include xvYCC support in future Ultra HD TVs starting with the 65- and 55-inch X900A Series models due out in spring, but it would have been nice to see that feature in the 84X900 as well.
It’s obvious that 4K content and Ultra HD screens represent the future of high-end video: You can expect to see many more such sets in a range of screen sizes — everywhere from 50 inches to 110 inches — going forward. Sony’s XBR-84X900 is a good example of the direction that TV is headed. As such, it makes an impressive statement.
I can see Sony adding support for xvYCC via a software upgrade in this set. I have a calibrated 65VT50 PDP now but have always wanted a much larger screen (no smaller than 75"). I'm looking forward to 4k sets being more affordable and to native 4k movies. I hope they don't give up on disc based distribution of movies though as I like physical media.
Film - yes, "old fashioned" analog/photochemical technology - is far superior to digital movies/HDTV, even 4K - even upcoming 8K. A 35mm film has the equivalent resolution of approximately 40 million pixels - 70mm large format film (IMAX, for example) has the equivalent of over 75 million. You think a mere 2, 4, or 8 million pixels is the same thing? Well, it isn't. Additionally, the regular pixel structure of a digital image is far more objectionable to the human eye/brain than the random grain structure of film, which changes from frame to frame. Digital is cheap compared to film - that's it. It's too bad that the least common denominator will prevail though, and what is better but "old fashioned" will not.
Michael, Ph.D., Consulting engineer (communications, video signal processing, imaging).