Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Community Discussion' started by mcarnes, Jan 14, 2008.
7680 x 4320 pixels. 22.2 channel surround sound.
It never ends.
Oh for god's sake. Does anyone even need this?
I think it would be cool for looking at your photos. DSLRs will have resolution like that in a few years. The 22.2 channel surround is a bit overkill.
Its a nice idea but cramming all that into a 'useable' screen size is a waste of time and effort. There must be a certain point where the human eye cannot differentiate between x amount of pixels and any more is a waste of time. Pretty much like colours. The human eye can only really differentiate between thousands of colours so millions of colours is overkill. The only way so many pixels would be beneficial is on larger and larger screens.
The same rings true for sound. Somehow I doubt my two ears are going to benefit from an audio assault from 24 speakers.
Yes, if you bought a 150 inch panasonic plasma and covered your walls with speakers. 22.1 surround LOL
this will never be out by 2015... will it?
It would be great as a motion picture camera. Also as resolution becomes more and more detailed, we could reach a new level of realism. Yet another step in our artistic evolution. Whoa.
Actually, this is not a bad thing. I'd love to see a super-high resolution as a broadcast standard, and it just downscales to a smaller TV; that leaves TV resolutions room to grow.
As far as movie formats, well, a single-layer Blu-ray movie is 25 GB. That is more than enough for an HD movie in MPEG-4. We've got dual-layer Blu-ray disks at 50 GB and in theory IIRC the format could expand to 8 layers- 200 GB per disk.
That should easily fit this movie on an existing disk.
The ridiculous thing about that resolution is that most movies are shot for theater-quality screens IIRC; meaning this resolution is actually probably higher than most cameras used in movies.
Now I want that resolution in an iPod
Yea, please stop for a bit whilst HD becomes common in households.
Or is current HD just another flash in the pan technology as we wait for UHDTV.
With 22 speakers in the room, where would I sit?
IMAX is already so awesome, I can't believe that more pixels is going to help me......not unless they add more pixels and make every movie 3D-capable.
Besides, if this is for home use, isn't this better than what the human eye can record? We will get to a point where increasing resolution/pixel density doesn't matter to our eyes, and we're already quite close.
yeah, i really don't see this by 2015. i mean, we haven't gotten 1080P everywhere yet
This is obviously targeted at movie theaters.
Well if the Blu-ray doesn't have enough capacity they can always make the HVD "Holographic Versatile Disk" with up to 1TB+ of storage.
This isn't going to be out any time soon. 2025 maybe.
The human eye has a resolution of about 100 megapixels.
It really depends on the size of the screen, but on anything much smaller than a theater screen this will be useless.
Me want, me want *drools*
Heck, I have both 720p and 1080p screens in the house (both less than 50"), and it's impossible to tell the difference unless you're close. Might have some applications in theaters or something, but at home I don't see the point.
Well of course! You bought your movies on VHS, then DVD, then Blu-Ray, didn't you? How else are they gonna get you to buy your movies a fourth time if they don't come out with another format?
Don't forget digital downloads as well.
Do I need it? No. Do I want it? HELL YES!
So I could play nintendo on it?