12k video

Support for 12k video.
Sample

Is 12k even practica at this point? 4k is almost never used since most computers don’t even have resolutions larger than FHD. 8k is nearly never used unless you are crazy into super big tv screens.

I personally find 4k to be pretty useless. I have to be like three feet away from the screen to make out all the extra details—and at that range I have to move my head around to view different quadrants. Maybe if I had a screen that takes up the whole wall… I think we’re still 10+ years away from having that be a practical option.

Exactly! The only reason I think 4k or even 8k is practical is in the scientific field where resolution is key.

If 12K was supported, we would probably use it. But the problem is the limitation of Prores, I guess. Please consider integrating the amazing NotchLC codec to do that: a GPU=based format, 10bits, better quality than ProRes4444, and no limits, practically, in resolution. And readable in real time (thanks GPU): it is moreand more used in the mapping business.
They have a SDK for devleoppers (see here: https://notchlc.notch.one/) who want to integrate NotchLC in their sorftware. That would be a killer feature for us, we would probably buy more licences for our render farm, and or workflow would be considerably faster.

If you don’t have a 4K display sure… but 4K is pretty mainstream at this point, most of the Youtube content is 4K, and almost all movies/shows are being released in 4K. Only TV is still not 4K, but it’s s different story there.

You know this, or is that what they told you?

Without empirical statistics preformed by a third party but with full access to YouTube view data, that statement might not mean anything. (I have 1gb fiber and wired internet, so no wifi slowdowns, yet YouTube offers me obviously compressed 480p if I leave it on auto.) Having 4K available vs people watching in 4K are not the same thing. I would like to see the numbers.
Hehe, the xBox 360 rendered games at 720p and ballooned them up to 1080p, but not many people I asked about it seemed to notice. They usually told me it was normal full 1080p.
The rumors I hear around the internet are that Blu-rays are not sold very often compared to how many people use streaming services. Streaming services do everything they can to reduce their bandwidth usage. Again, without those unbiased numbers stating how many streams are actually 4K, it really could be just marketing claims.

To me, 4K the same play they made with music formats, but less snake-oily since you can actually get something out of the format. Music above 16 bit 48kHz, not so much. It’s just good for more pure processing or mixing.

With a screen that is the right size, and placed at the right distance, 4K can be absolutely better than 1080p. I seriously doubt that that’s happening most of the time though, considering my work laptop has a 4K screen that is physically smaller than my personal laptop. The screen on my personal laptop is a bit to small to need that much detail, but I can live with it. My work laptop though… Well it’s stupid they even did that.

TL;DR
I lost faith in the judgement of 4K promoters a long time ago. (Specifically the ones that stand to make money from it.)

One area where 4K is far too small and even 8K is barely sufficient: VR. 8K over a 360 sphere is barely better than 1080p per each 16:9 section. So 8K/12K support is essentially fundamental. It’s the entire reason I bought the product, taking 6K 360 video to upscale to 8 & 12k.