NanoTech Entertainment Inc (NTEK)

[NummyNums]

CNET on 4K TV and the Seiki 50" 4K TV:

I do a lot of reading on CNET (amongst other online sites) when I purchase something because they do a decent job of providing "objective" info on stuff that I am interested in from time to time. I know they make money on advertisements, etc. so I take the articles with a grain of salt.

I saw someone post the following article here on the NTEK board: Why Ultra HD 4K TVs are still stupid

Article: January 28, 2013

http://reviews.cnet.com/8301-33199_7-57566079-221/why-ultra-hd-4k-tvs-are-still-stupid/

Why Ultra HD 4K TVs are still stupid
The flood of TVs with higher resolution than 1080p is inevitable, but at typical TV sizes, quadruple the pixels makes no difference in picture quality and are not worth the extra price.

One thing I find interesting is you don't really hear about #s 12 in the article:

12. 4K TV is inevitable
When I first starting pointing out most people didn't need 1080p TVs (in the age of 720p flat panels), I knew -- and said at the time -- that 1080p was inevitable. I was just trying to save people some money. That's all I'm trying to do here. Nothing I say will have any effect on what the corporate giants decide to force on us mortals. I'm just trying to point out that increasing resolution in itself is not the improvement in picture quality it "appears" on paper. I'm trying to point out that even when these TVs come out, your money is better spent elsewhere. What I want is better, cheaper TVs and better picture quality for everyone. So thank you to everyone who made personal attacks against me for pointing out what should be obvious (that your favorite TV company is not your boyfriend).

Bottom line
Nothing I say will stop Ultra HD. Look no further than our own CES coverage for proof of that. TV manufactures are smelling margin like blood in the water. This is something they can do, now, and for a profit. So it's happening, whether it's necessary or not. Instead of improving aspects of the image that need fixing, we get 4K because it's easy to do, easy to sell, and easy to demo. Awesome.
So before you jump down my throat for being "anti-technology" or "anti-innovation," understand I just want better picture quality in the home, for less money, and Ultra HD 4K is not the best way to do it.

Regardless of what anyone says about 4K TV - IT'S COMIIIIING!!! And when you factor into the NP-1's giving the public access to quality 4K content --- wow.



So, we here all know Seiki 4K tv's can be had for SIGNIFICANTLY LOWER PRICES than their counterparts. And bashers like to post this review article on the Seiki 50" 4K tv:

http://reviews.cnet.com/flat-panel-tvs/seiki-se50uy04-4k-uhd/4505-6482_7-35757100.html

Article: 5/8/13

The TV got 2.5 out of 5 stars. DID YOU SEE HOW THEY ARRIVED AT THIS CONCLUSION??!!

THEY BASED THE RESULTS ON STILL PHOTOS AND A FEW SHORT CLIPS!

4K testing
I've divided my testing into two parts, with 4K and non-4K content, below. It's worth stressing that many of the problems I saw in non-4K content, for example in black level and uniformity, are visible with 4K sources as well.

The Seiki is the first 4K TV I've reviewed, and at this point actual 4K content is exceedingly rare. Aside from a few test patterns, I don't have any 4K video in my test arsenal. Seiki, to its credit, provided me a small server with three short 4K clips on it and a couple of high-resolution photos. Unfortunately, the video wasn't up to the standards I saw from Sony during another 4K hands-on, for example. Two of Seiki's clips, one the "Sintel" trailer and another a montage of clips from StockFootage.com, didn't look much better than HD to my eye, and in some cases looked softer and noisier.

The third and best was a short clip of scenes from Tokyo, with a highly detailed cityscape and a shot of pedestrians on one of the city's many bustling crosswalks. Even this shot, however, didn't seem to pop with the same detail I remembered from the Sony material, and I saw some softness and compression artifacts when I got what I considered close enough to appreciate the extra resolution of 4K. I'd wager that the same clip in 1080p would look almost as good, and compared with superb 1080p like the "Samsara" Blu-ray, it was disappointing.

Of course content is everything, and I'm sure the Seiki playing good 4K content can look extremely detailed, as long as you sit close enough to appreciate the difference. According to my favorite calculator on the subject, assuming 20/20 vision you have to sit 3 feet, 8 inches away to get the full benefit of 4K from a TV of this size. To get a 1 percent or higher improvement in visible resolution compared with a normal 50-inch 1080p set, you have to sit 7 feet, 3 inches or closer to the Seiki. Of course that range of possible perceived benefit assumes the best-case scenario, of superb 4K material without much movement.

GAMING?

[from same article]

I decided to do just that when I played BioShock Infinite at 4K resolution. The results were excellent. High-end PC gaming is the main reason I can see wanting to buy a 4K display like this. At about 4 feet, the closest I could hack it, the image was sumptuous, with an unreal sharpness to the graphics, like the clothing and textured straw hat of the guy getting a shoeshine on the Options page. I flipped back and forth between that and 1080p and the difference was obvious -- 4K looked much smoother and more detailed, while 1080p from this distance appeared with jagged edges and much less overall crispness. Yes, certain graphics tricks like anti-aliasing can help those issues, but it's tough to argue that from 4 feet, games that can take advantage of 4K resolution will look better than at 1080p.

Hey, do I need a High End PC to enjoy gaming in 4K?

Oh wait,

NP-1.

Can't wait to see what CNET and other big tech magazines write about 4K TV, Nuvola Products and Seiki 4K tv's - good or bad actually. 2014, year of 4K.

NTEK on the cutting edge of technology - awesomeness.